Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 165/348 | < Previous Page | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >

  • design pattern for related inputs

    - by curiousMo
    My question is a design question : let's say i have a data entry web page with 4 drop down lists, each depending on the previous one, and a bunch of text boxes. ddlCountry (DropDownList) ddlState (DropDownList) ddlCity (DropDownList) ddlBoro (DropDownList) txtAddress (TxtBox) txtZipcode(TxtBox) and an object that represents a datarow with a value for each: countrySeqid stateSeqid citySeqid boroSeqid address zipCode naturally the country, state, city and boro values will be values of primary keys of some lookup tables. when the user chooses to edits that record, i would load it from database and load it into the page. the issue that I have is how to streamline loading the DropDownLists. i have some code that would grab the object,look thru its values and move them to their corresponding input controls in one shot. but in this case i will have to load the ddlCountry with possible values, then assign values, then do the same thing for the rest of the ddls. I guess i am looking for an elegant solution. i am using asp.net, but i think it is irrelevant to the question. i am looking more into a design pattern.

    Read the article

  • Is concatenating with an empty string to do a string conversion really that bad?

    - by polygenelubricants
    Let's say I have two char variables, and later on I want to concatenate them into a string. This is how I would do it: char c1, c2; // ... String s = "" + c1 + c2; I've seen people who say that the "" + "trick" is "ugly", etc, and that you should use String.valueOf or Character.toString instead. I prefer this construct because: I prefer using language feature instead of API call if possible In general, isn't the language usually more stable than the API? If language feature only hides API call, then even stronger reason to prefer it! More abstract! Hiding is good! I like that the c1 and c2 are visually on the same level String.valueOf(c1) + c2 suggests something is special about c1 It's shorter. Is there really a good argument why String.valueOf or Character.toString is preferrable to "" +? Trivia: in java.lang.AssertionError, the following line appears 7 times, each with a different type: this("" + detailMessage);

    Read the article

  • What is the MVC version of this code?

    - by Ian Boyd
    i'm trying to wrap my head around how to enterprise up my code: taking a simple routine and splitting it up into 5 or 6 methods in 3 or 4 classes. i quickly came up three simple examples of code how i currently write it. Could someone please convert these into an MVC/MVP obfuscated version? Example 1: The last name is mandatory. Color the text box red if nothing is entered. Color it green if stuff is entered: private void txtLastname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Lastname mandatory. //Color pinkish if nothing entered. Greenish if entered. if (txtLastname.Text.Trim() == "") { //Lastname is required, color pinkish txtLastname.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Lastname entered, remove the coloring txtLastname.BackColor = ControlGood; } } Example 2: The first name is optional, but try to get it. We'll add a bluish tint to this "try to get" field: private void txtFirstname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Firstname can be blank. //Hint them that they should *try* to get it with a bluish color. //If they do enter stuff: it better be not all spaces. if (txtFirstname.Text == "") { //Nothing there, hint it blue txtFirstname.BackColor = ControlRequired; } else if (txtFirstname.Text.Trim() == "") { //They entered spaces - bad user! txtFirstname.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Entered stuff, remove coloring txtFirstname.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } } Example 3 The age is totally optional. If an age is entered, it better be valid: private void txtAge_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Age is optional, but if entered it better be valid int nAge = 0; if (Int32.TryParse(txtAge.Text, out nAge)) { //Valid integer entered if (nAge < 0) { //Negative age? i don't think so txtAge.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Valid age entered, remove coloring txtAge.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } } else { //Whatever is in there: it's *not* a valid integer, if (txtAge.Text == "") { //Blank is okay txtAge.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } else { //Not a valid age, bad user txtAge.BackColor = ControlBad; } } } Every time i see MVC code, it looks almost like random splitting of code into different methods, classes, and files. i've not been able to determine a reason or pattern to their madness. Without any understanding of they why it's being one some way, it makes no sense. And using the words model, view, controller and presenter, like i'm supposed to know what that means, doesn't help. The model is your data. The view shows data on screen. The controller is used to carry out the users actions And oranges taste orangy. Here's my attempt at splitting things up in order to make the code more difficult to follow. Is this anywhere close to MVC? private void txtFirstname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { FirstnameTextChangedHandler(sender, e); } private void FirstnameTextChangedHandler(sender, e) { string firstname = GetFirstname(); Color firstnameTextBoxColor = GetFirstnameTextBoxColor(firstname); SetFirstNameTextBoxColor(firstnameTextBoxColor); } private string GetFirstname() { return txtFirstname.Text; } private Color GetFirstnameTextBoxColor(string firstname) { //Firstname can be blank. //Hint them that they should *try* to get it with a bluish color. //If they do enter stuff: it better be not all spaces. if (firstname == "") { //Nothing there, hint it blue return GetControlRequiredColor(); } else if (firstname.Trim() == "") { //They entered spaces - bad user! return GetControlBadColor(); } else { //Entered stuff, remove coloring return GetControlDefaultColor(); } } private Color GetControlRequiredColor() { return ControlRequired; } private Color GetControlBadColor() { return ControlBad; } private Color GetControlGoodColor() { return ControlGood; } //am i doin it rite i've obfuscated the code, but it's still altogether. The next step in the MVC obfuscation, i gather, is to hide the code in 3 or 4 different files. It's that next step that i don't understand. What is the logical separation of which functions are moved into what other classes? Can someone translate my 3 simple examples above into full fledged MVC obfuscation? Edit: Not ASP/ASP.NET/Online. Pretend it's on a desktop, handheld, surface, kiosk. And pretend it's language agnostic.

    Read the article

  • Command Query Separation validating for retries

    - by Neil Barnwell
    So I'm comfortable with the basic concept of CQS, where you might have a command that writes to one database, and that updates the query database that you read from. However, consider the scenario where you are entering data, and want to prevent duplicates. Using new employee data entry an employee register as an example, working through a pile of application forms to key in the new employees' details: Take top sheet. Key in employee name and unique payroll number to UI. Submit. Put paper in "completed pile". Repeat. How would you now prevent the user from keying in the same payroll number again, say for instance if they get distracted and can't remember whether they've keyed one in already and the "message" hasn't got all the way back to the query db for the user to search?

    Read the article

  • What are the constraints on Cocoa Framework version numbers?

    - by Joe
    We're distributing a Cocoa framework with regular updates. We'll be updating the version numbers with each release. The Apple documentation appears to suggest that version numbers should be consecutive incrementing integers. We are distributing output in several formats, and the framework is only one of them. We would rather not have to maintain a separate numbering system just for our frameworks. We don't really care about the precise format of the version numbers of the framework, so long as they change whenever the product changes, and behave in a correct and expected manner. I'm looking for a sensible and correct way of avoiding having to run a separate version number counter. One suggestion is that for product version 12.34.56 we could simply remove the dots and say the framework version is 123456. Is there a constraint on the type of number that can be represented (uint? long?) Does it have to be a number? Could it be a string? Do the numbers have to be consecutive? Is there a standard way of doing things in this situation?

    Read the article

  • Buffering db inserts in multithreaded program

    - by Winter
    I have a system which breaks a large taks into small tasks using about 30 threads as a time. As each individual thread finishes it persists its calculated results to the database. What I want to achieve is to have each thread pass its results to a new persisance class that will perform a type of double buffering and data persistance while running in its own thread. For example, after 100 threads have moved their data to the buffer the persistance class then the persistance class swaps the buffers and persists all 100 entries to the database. This would allow utilization of prepared statements and thus cut way down on the I/O between the program and the database. Is there a pattern or good example of this type of multithreading double buffering?

    Read the article

  • Where do you put your unit test?

    - by soulmerge
    I have found several conventions to housekeeping unit tests in a project and I'm not sure which approach would be suitable for our next PHP project. I am trying to find the best convention to encourage easy development and accessibility of the tests when reviewing the source code. I would be very interested in your experience/opinion regarding each: One folder for productive code, another for unit tests: This separates unit tests from the logic files of the project. This separation of concerns is as much a nuisance as it is an advantage: Someone looking into the source code of the project will - so I suppose - either browse the implementation or the unit tests (or more commonly: the implementation only). The advantage of unit tests being another viewpoint to your classes is lost - those two viewpoints are just too far apart IMO. Annotated test methods: Any modern unit testing framework I know allows developers to create dedicated test methods, annotating them (@test) and embedding them in the project code. The big drawback I see here is that the project files get cluttered. Even if these methods are separated using a comment header (like UNIT TESTS below this line) it just bloats the class unnecessarily. Test files within the same folders as the implementation files: Our file naming convention dictates that PHP files containing classes (one class per file) should end with .class.php. I could imagine that putting unit tests regarding a class file into another one ending on .test.php would render the tests much more present to other developers without tainting the class. Although it bloats the project folders, instead of the implementation files, this is my favorite so far, but I have my doubts: I would think others have come up with this already, and discarded this option for some reason (i.e. I have not seen a java project with the files Foo.java and FooTest.java within the same folder.) Maybe it's because java developers make heavier use of IDEs that allow them easier access to the tests, whereas in PHP no big editors have emerged (like eclipse for java) - many devs I know use vim/emacs or similar editors with little support for PHP development per se. What is your experience with any of these unit test placements? Do you have another convention I haven't listed here? Or am I just overrating unit test accessibility to reviewers?

    Read the article

  • How to handle recurring execution?

    - by ShaneC
    I am trying to validate the solution I came up for what I think is a fairly typical problem. I have a service running and every 10 minutes it should do something. I've ended up with the following: private bool isRunning = true; public void Execute() { while(isRunning) { if(isRunning) { DoSomething(); m_AutoResetEvent.WaitOne(new Timespan(0, 10, 0)); } } } public void Stop() { isRunning = false; m_AutoResetEvent.Set(); } The immediate potential problems I can see is that I'm not doing any sort of locking around the isRunning modification in Stop() which gets called by another thread but I'm not sure I really need to? The worst that I think could happen is that it runs one extra cycle. Beyond that are there any obvious problems with this code? Is there a better way to solve this problem that I'm unaware of?

    Read the article

  • Right design to validate attributes of a class instance

    - by systempuntoout
    Having a simple Python class like this: class Spam(object): __init__(self, description, value): self.description = description self.value = value Which is the correct approach to check these constraints: "description cannot be empty" "value must be greater than zero" Should i: 1.validate data before creating spam object ? 2.check data on __init__ method ? 3.create an is_valid method on Spam class and call it with spam.isValid() ? 4.create an is_valid static method on Spam class and call it with Spam.isValid(description, value) ? 5.check data on setters? 6.... Could you recommend a well designed\Pythonic\not verbose (on class with many attributes)\elegant approach?

    Read the article

  • How can I determine/use $(this) in js callback script

    - by Rabbott
    I am using Rails and jQuery, making an ajax call initiated by clicking a link. I setup my application.js file to look like the one proposed here and it works great. The problem I'm having is how can I use $(this) in my say.. update.js.erb file to represent the link I clicked? I don't want to have to assign an ID to every one, then recompile that id in the callback script.. EDIT To give a simple example of something similar to what I'm trying to do (and much easier to explain): If a user clicks on a link, that deletes that element from a list, the controller would handle the callback, and the callback (which is in question here) would delete the element I clicked on, so in the callback delete.js.erb would just say $(this).fadeOut(); This is why I want to use $(this) so that I dont have to assign an ID to every element (which would be the end of the world, just more verbose markup) application.js jQuery.ajaxSetup({ 'beforeSend': function(xhr) {xhr.setRequestHeader("Accept", "text/javascript,application/javascript,text/html")} }) function _ajax_request(url, data, callback, type, method) { if (jQuery.isFunction(data)) { callback = data; data = {}; } return jQuery.ajax({ type: method, url: url, data: data, success: callback, dataType: type }); } jQuery.extend({ put: function(url, data, callback, type) { return _ajax_request(url, data, callback, type, 'PUT'); }, delete_: function(url, data, callback, type) { return _ajax_request(url, data, callback, type, 'DELETE'); } }); jQuery.fn.submitWithAjax = function() { this.unbind('submit', false); this.submit(function() { $.post(this.action, $(this).serialize(), null, "script"); return false; }) return this; }; // Send data via get if <acronym title="JavaScript">JS</acronym> enabled jQuery.fn.getWithAjax = function() { this.unbind('click', false); this.click(function() { $.get($(this).attr("href"), $(this).serialize(), null, "script"); return false; }) return this; }; // Send data via Post if <acronym title="JavaScript">JS</acronym> enabled jQuery.fn.postWithAjax = function() { this.unbind('click', false); this.click(function() { $.post($(this).attr("href"), $(this).serialize(), null, "script"); return false; }) return this; }; jQuery.fn.putWithAjax = function() { this.unbind('click', false); this.click(function() { $.put($(this).attr("href"), $(this).serialize(), null, "script"); return false; }) return this; }; jQuery.fn.deleteWithAjax = function() { this.removeAttr('onclick'); this.unbind('click', false); this.click(function() { $.delete_($(this).attr("href"), $(this).serialize(), null, "script"); return false; }) return this; }; // This will "ajaxify" the links function ajaxLinks(){ $('.ajaxForm').submitWithAjax(); $('a.get').getWithAjax(); $('a.post').postWithAjax(); $('a.put').putWithAjax(); $('a.delete').deleteWithAjax(); } show.html.erb <%= link_to 'Link Title', article_path(a, :sentiment => Article::Sentiment['Neutral']), :class => 'put' %> The combination of the two things will call update.js.erb in rails, the code in that file is used as the callback of the ajax ($.put in this case) update.js.erb // user feedback $("#notice").html('<%= flash[:notice] %>'); // update the background color $(this OR e.target).attr("color", "red");

    Read the article

  • Where to put a recursive function when following MVC?

    - by Glibly
    Hello, I have a recursive function being used to generate a menu on my site. The function is calling a database for each level of children in the menu, and generating html for them. I've currently put this function in a Model part of the code, however, I feel that generating html in the model goes against the MVC. I didn't put it in a Controller because I didn't want to have database calls or HTML generation there. I didn't put it in a View because I didn't want database calls there either. Is the 'correct' way of tackling this problem to have a Controller call a recursive function in a Model that returns a 2d array representing the menu. Then pass the array to a view which has it's own recursive function for generating html from the array?

    Read the article

  • Function chaining depending on boolean result

    - by Markive
    This is just an efficiency question really.. I'm interested to know if there is a more efficient or logical way that people use to handle this sort of scenario. In my asp.net application I am running a script to generate a new project my code at the top level looks like this: Dim ok As Boolean = True ok = createFolderStructure() If ok Then ok = createMDB() If ok Then ok = createProjectConfig() If ok Then ok = updateCompanyConfig() I create a boolean and each function returns a boolean result, the next function in this chain will only run if the previous one was successful. I do this because an asp.net application will continue to run through the page life cycle unless there is an unhandled exception and I don't want my whole application to be screwed up if something in the chain goes wrong (there is a lot of copying and deleting of files etc.. in this example). I was just wondering how other people handle this scenario? the vb.net single line if statement is quite succinct but I'm wondering if there is a better way?

    Read the article

  • When NOT to use MVVM?

    - by Vitalij
    I have started using MVVM pattern recently. I have had several projects where I used it and with every new one, I start to see that it will fit great within that new project. And now I start to ask myself are there situation when it's better NOT to use MVVM. Or is it such a nice pattern which you can use anywhere? Could you please describe several scenarios where MVVM wouldn't be the best choice?

    Read the article

  • why copy and paste codes is dangerous

    - by Yigang Wu
    sometimes, my boss will complain us why we need so long time to implement a feature, actually, the feature has been implemented in other AP before, you just need to copy and paste codes from there. The cost should be low. It's really a hard question, because copy and paste codes is not a easy thing from my point. Do you have any good reason to explain your boss who doesn't know technology?

    Read the article

  • Continuous integration with multiple branch development

    - by ryanprayogo
    In the project that I'm working on, we are using SVN with 'Stable Trunk' strategy. What that means is that for each bug that is found, QA opens a bug ticket and assigns it to a developer. Then, a developer fixes that bug and checks it in a branch (off trunk, let's call this the bug branch) and that branch will only contain fixes for that particular bug ticket When we decided to do a release, for each bug fixes that we want to release to the customer, a developer will merge all the fixes from several bug branch to trunk and proceed with the normal QA cycle. The problem is that we use trunk as the codebase for our CI job (Hudson, specifically), and therefore, for all commits to the bug branch, it will miss the daily build until it gets merged to trunk when we decided to release the new version of the software. Obviously, that defeats the purpose of having CI. What is the proper way to fix this issue?

    Read the article

  • Getting up to speed on modern architecture

    - by Matt Thrower
    Hi, I don't have any formal qualifications in computer science, rather I taught myself classic ASP back in the days of the dotcom boom and managed to get myself a job and my career developed from there. I was a confident and, I think, pretty good programmer in ASP 3 but as others have observed one of the problems with classic ASP was that it did a very good job of hiding the nitty-gritty of http so you could become quite competent as a programmer on the basis of relatively poor understanding of the technology you were working with. When I changed on to .NET at first I treated it like classic ASP, developing stand-alone applications as individual websites simply because I didn't know any better at the time. I moved jobs at this point and spent the next several years working on a single site whose architecture relied heavily on custom objects: in other words I gained a lot of experience working with .NET as a middle-tier development tool using a quite old-fashioned approach to OO design along the lines of the classic "car" class example that's so often used to teach OO. Breaking down programs into blocks of functionality and basing your classes and methods around that. Although we worked under an Agile approach to manage the work the whole setup was classic client/server stuff. That suited me and I gradually got to grips with .NET and started using it far more in the manner that it should be, and I began to see the power inherent in the technology and precisely why it was so much better than good old ASP 3. In my latest job I have found myself suddenly dropped in at the deep end with two quite young, skilled and very cutting-edge programmers. They've built a site architecture which is modelling along a lot of stuff which is new to me and which, in truth I'm having a lot of trouble understanding. The application is built on a cloud computing model with multi-tenancy and the architecture is all loosely coupled using a lot of interfaces, factories and the like. They use nHibernate a lot too. Shortly after I joined, both these guys left and I'm now supposedly the senior developer on a system whose technology and architecture I don't really understand and I have no-one to ask questions of. Except you, the internet. Frankly I feel like I've been pitched in at the deep end and I'm sinking. I'm not sure if this is because I lack the educational background to understand this stuff, if I'm simply not mathematically minded enough for modern computing (my maths was never great - my approach to design is often to simply debug until it works, then refactor until it looks neat), or whether I've simply been presented with too much of too radical a nature at once. But the only way to find out which it is is to try and learn it. So can anyone suggest some good places to start? Good books, tutorials or blogs? I've found a lot of internet material simply presupposes a level of understanding that I just don't have. Your advice is much appreciated. Help a middle-aged, stuck in the mud developer get enthusastic again! Please!

    Read the article

  • Should I dive into ASP.NET MVC or start with ASP.NET Webforms?

    - by Sahat
    I plan to pick up Silverlight in the future. Possibility of going into Microsoft WPF. Currently learning Objective-C 2.0 w/ Cocoa. I already know Pros and Cons of ASP.NET MVC vs ASP.NET Webforms. What I want to know is what would be more "efficient" for me to learn given the circumstances above? By efficient I mean learning one design pattern once and then re-using it. Objective-C I believe uses MVC approach? What about Silverlight? WPF? So what do you think? Also as a side question is it true that ASP.NET Webforms is often used by freelancers/small companies and ASP.NET MVC in large enterprises?

    Read the article

  • pattern to transfer search model to dao

    - by zeroed
    We have a dao as a project (jar file). Clients use its interfaces and factories to operate with database. Using standard CRUD operations, dao allows you to search an entity by some search criteria. What is the best way to represent this criteria? Is transfer object appropriate pattern in this situation? How should client create SearchModel instance? Please, share. Regards.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >