Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 170/348 | < Previous Page | 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177  | Next Page >

  • Advanced text search in actionscript-return ALL nouns,adjectives and verbs..

    - by eco_bach
    Hi I know that as3 has some powerful new text search capabilities, especially when combined with regex. I don't even know if this is possible, but I would like to somehow, search any block of text, and return all nouns, adjectives and verbs. What would be the best(most efficent) way to do this? Is regex an option? or would I have to load in some sort of open sourced dictionary 9as used in spellcheckers) to compare with or?? After, I've pulled all the nouns, adjectives and verbs, I need to count and prioritize by their frequency. Any suggestions welcome...

    Read the article

  • Question about a possible design pattern...

    - by Aftershock
    I have such a design in my mind.... My aim is to reuse the program with some features included and without some features. What is it called in the literature? class feature1 { void feature1function1(); void feature1function2(); } class feature2 { void feature2function1(); void feature2function2(); } class program: feature1, feature2 { void function1() { feature2function1(); } void function2() { feature1function1(); feature2function1(); } void execute() { function1(); function2(); } }

    Read the article

  • Repository Pattern Standardization of methods

    - by Nix
    All I am trying to find out the correct definition of the repository pattern. My original understanding was this (extremely dubmed down) Separate your Business Objects from your Data Objects Standardize access methods in data access layer. I have really seen 2 different implementations. Implementation 1 : public Interface IRepository<T>{ List<T> GetAll(); void Create(T p); void Update(T p); } public interface IProductRepository: IRepository<Product> { //Extension methods if needed List<Product> GetProductsByCustomerID(); } Implementation 2 : public interface IProductRepository { List<Product> GetAllProducts(); void CreateProduct(Product p); void UpdateProduct(Product p); List<Product> GetProductsByCustomerID(); } Notice the first is generic Get/Update/GetAll, etc, the second is more of what I would define "DAO" like. Both share an extraction from your data entities. Which I like, but i can do the same with a simple DAO. However the second piece standardize access operations I see value in, if you implement this enterprise wide people would easily know the set of access methods for your repository. Am I wrong to assume that the standardization of access to data is an integral piece of this pattern ? Rhino has a good article on implementation 1, and of course MS has a vague definition and an example of implementation 2 is here.

    Read the article

  • Which user account to assign as owner when attaching an SQL Server database?

    - by FreshCode
    This is a simple database security & performance question, but I've always used either a special user (eg. mydbuser), or Windows' built-in NETWORK SECURITY account as the owner when attaching databases to my SQL Server instances. When deploying my database to a production server, is there a specific user I should stick to or avoid? I would think that using an account with a set password could open the database up to a potential security issue.

    Read the article

  • MemoryStream instance timing help

    - by rod
    Hi All, Is it ok to instance a MemoryStream at the top of my method, do a bunch of stuff to it, and then use it? For instance: public static byte[] TestCode() { MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream(); ... ... whole bunch of stuff in between ... ... //finally using(m) { return m.ToArray(); } } Updated code public static byte[] GetSamplePDF() { using (MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream()) { Document document = new Document(); PdfWriter.GetInstance(document, m); document.Open(); PopulateTheDocument(document); document.Close(); return m.ToArray(); } } private static void PopulateTheDocument(Document document) { Table aTable = new Table(2, 2); aTable.AddCell("0.0"); aTable.AddCell("0.1"); aTable.AddCell("1.0"); aTable.AddCell("1.1"); document.Add(aTable); for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) { document.Add(new Phrase("Hello World, Hello Sun, Hello Moon, Hello Stars, Hello Sea, Hello Land, Hello People. ")); } } My point was to try to reuse building the byte code. In other words, build up any kind of document and then send it to TestCode() method.

    Read the article

  • Should you always write code for else cases that "can never happen"?

    - by johnswamps
    Take some code like if (person.IsMale()) { doGuyStuff(); } else { doGirlOtherStuff(); } (Yes, I realize this is bad OO code, it's an example) Should this be written so that to explicitly check if person.isFemale(), and then add a new else that throws an exception? Or maybe you're checking values in an enum, or something like that. You think that no one will add new elements to the enum, but who knows? "Can never happen" sounds like famous last words.

    Read the article

  • What elegant method callback design should be used ?

    - by ereOn
    Hi, I'm surprised this question wasn't asked before on SO (well, at least I couldn't find it). Have you ever designed a method-callback pattern (something like a "pointer" to a class method) in C++ and, if so, how did you do it ? I know a method is just a regular function with some hidden this parameter to serve as a context and I have a pretty simple design in mind. However, since things are often more complex than they seem to, I wonder how our C++ gurus would implement this, preferably in an elegant and standard way. All suggestions are welcome !

    Read the article

  • What is the correct approach to using GWT with persistent objects?

    - by dankilman
    Hi, I am currently working on a simple web application through Google App engine using GWT. It should be noted that this is my first attempt at such a task. I have run into to following problem/dilema: I have a simple Class (getters/setters and nothing more. For the sake of clarity I will refer to this Class as DataHolder) and I want to make it persistent. To do so I have used JDO which required me to add some annotations and more specifically add a Key field to be used as the primary key. The problem is that using the Key class requires me to import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.Key which is ok on the server side, but then I can't use DataHolder on the client side, because GWT doesn't allow it (as far as I know). So I have created a sister Class ClientDataHolder which is almost identical, though it doesn't have all the JDO annotations nor the Key field. Now this actually works but It feels like I'm doing something wrong. Using this approach would require maintaining to separate classes for each entity I wish to have. So my question is: Is there a better way of doing this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Using an embedded DB (SQLite / SQL Compact) for Message Passing within an app?

    - by wk1989
    Hello, Just out of curiosity, for applications that have a fairly complicated module tree, would something like sqlite/sql compact edition work well for message passing? So if I have modules containing data such as: \SubsystemA\SubSubSysB\ModuleB\ModuleDataC, \SubSystemB\SubSubSystemC\ModuleA\ModuleDataX Using traditional message passing/routing, you have to go through intermediate modules in order to pass a message to ModuleB to request say ModuleDataC. Instead of doing that, if we we simply store "\SubsystemA\SubSubSysB\ModuleB\ModuleDataC" in a sqlite database, getting that data is as simple as a sql query and needs no routing and passing stuff around. Has anyone done this before? Even if you haven't, do you foresee any issues & performance impact? The only concern I have right now would be the passing of custom types, e.g. if ModuleDataC is a custom data structure or a pointer, I'll need some way of storing the data structure into the DB or storing the pointer into the DB. Thanks, JW EDIT One usage case I haven't thought about is when you want to send a message from ModuleA to ModuleB to get ModuleB to do something rather than just getting/setting data. Is it possible to do this using an embedded DB? I believe callback from the DB would be needed, how feasible is this?

    Read the article

  • Reference table values in a war against magic numbers

    - by Alex N.
    This question bugged me for years now and can't seem to find good solution still. I working in PHP and Java but it sounds like this maybe language-agnostic :) Say we have a standard status reference table that holds status ids for some kind of entity. Further let's assume the table will have just 5 values, and will remain like this for a long time, maybe edited occasionally with addition of a new status. When you fetch a row and need to see what status it is you have 2 options(as I see it at least) - put it straight ID values(magic numbers that is) or use a named constant. Latter seem much cleaner, the question though is where those named constants should leave? In a model class? In a class that uses this particular constant? Somewhere else?

    Read the article

  • How can I use Object Oriented Javascript to interact with HTML Objects

    - by Steve
    I am very new to object orientated javascript, with experience writing gui's in python and java. I am trying to create html tables that I can place in locations throughout a webpage. Each html table would have two css layouts that control if it is selected or not. I can write all of the interaction if I only have one table. It gets confusing when I have multiple tables. I am wondering how to place these tables throughout a blank webpage and then access the tables individually. I think I am having trouble understanding how inheritance and hierarchy works in javascript/html. NOTE: I am not asking how to make a table. I am trying to dynamically create multiple tables and place them throughout a webpage. Then access their css independently and change it (move them to different locations or change the way the look, independently of the other tables).

    Read the article

  • In Java how instance of and type cast(i.e (ClassName)) works on proxy object ?

    - by learner
    Java generates a proxy class for a given interface and provides the instance of the proxy class. But when we type cast the proxy object to our specific Object, how java handles this internally? Is this treated as special scenario? For example I have class 'OriginalClass' and it implements 'OriginalInterface', when I create proxy object by passing 'OriginalInterface' interface java created proxy class 'ProxyClass' using methods in the provided interface and provides object of this class(i.e ProxyClass). If my understanding is correct then can you please answer following queries 1) When I type cast object of ProxyClass to my class OriginalClass this works, but how java is allowing this? Same in case of instace of? 2) As my knowledge java creates a proxy class only with the methods, but what happen when I try to access attributes on this object? 3) Only interface methods are getting implemented in Proxy, but what happens when I try to access a method which not in interface and only mentioned in the class? Thanks, Student

    Read the article

  • How do you determine how coarse or fine-grained a 'responsibility' should be when using the single r

    - by Mark Rogers
    In the SRP, a 'responsibility' is usually described as 'a reason to change', so that each class (or object?) should have only one reason someone should have to go in there and change it. But if you take this to the extreme fine-grain you could say that an object adding two numbers together is a responsibility and a possible reason to change. Therefore the object should contain no other logic, because it would produce another reason for change. I'm curious if there is anyone out there that has any strategies for 'scoping', the single-responsibility principle that's slightly less objective?

    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

  • Documentation style: how do you differentiate variable names from the rest of the text within a comm

    - by Alix
    Hi, This is a quite superfluous and uninteresting question, I'm afraid, but I always wonder about this. When you're commenting code with inline comments (as opposed to comments that will appear in the generated documentation) and the name of a variable appears in the comment, how do you differentiate it from normal text? E.g.: // Try to parse type. parsedType = tryParse(type); In the comment, "type" is the name of the variable. Do you mark it in any way to signify that it's a symbol and not just part of the comment's text? I've seen things like this: // Try to parse "type". // Try to parse 'type'. // Try to parse *type*. // Try to parse <type>. // Try to parse [type]. And also: // Try to parse variable type. (I don't think the last one is very helpful; it's a bit confusing; you could think "variable" is an adjective there) Do you have any preference? I find that I need to use some kind of marker; otherwise the comments are sometimes ambiguous, or at least force you to reread them when you realise a particular word in the comment was actually the name of a variable. (In comments that will appear in the documentation I use the appropriate tags for the generator, of course: @code, <code></code>, etc) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Should I use a modified singleton design pattern that only allows one reference to its instance?

    - by Graham
    Hi, I have a class that would normally just generate factory objects, however this class should only used once throughout the program in once specifix place. What is the best design pattern to use in this instance? I throught that having a modified singleton design which only allows one reference to instance throughout the program would be the correct way to go. So only the first call to getInstance() returns the factory library. Is this a good or bad idea? Have I missed out another fundermental design pattern for solving this problem? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Best way to force Spring shutdown from a bean?

    - by xcut
    My application uses a Spring DefaultMessageListenerContainer to process incoming messages. The main method of the app already registers a shutdown hook. Question is this: what is the best way to force the application context to shut down? If I throw a RuntimeException in the message listener, it is handled by the container, and not passed on. Is calling System.exit acceptable? Do I pass along the ApplicationContext to every class that needs to shut down, so I can call close() on it?

    Read the article

  • Can I use the decorator pattern to wrap a method body?

    - by mgroves
    I have a bunch of methods with varying signatures. These methods interact with a fragile data connection, so we often use a helper class to perform retries/reconnects, etc. Like so: MyHelper.PerformCall( () => { doStuffWithData(parameters...) }); And this works fine, but it can make the code a little cluttery. What I would prefer to do is decorate the methods that interact with the data connection like so: [InteractsWithData] protected string doStuffWithData(parameters...) { // do stuff... } And then essentially, whenever doStuffWithData is called, the body of that method would be passed in as an Action to MyHelper.PerformCall(). How do I do this?

    Read the article

  • Preprocessor #define vs. function pointer - best practice?

    - by Dustin
    I recently started a small personal project (RGB value to BGR value conversion program) in C, and I realised that a function that converts from RGB to BGR can not only perform the conversion but also the inversion. Obviously that means I don't really need two functions rgb2bgr and bgr2rgb. However, does it matter whether I use a function pointer instead of a macro? For example: int rgb2bgr (const int rgb); /* * Should I do this because it allows the compiler to issue * appropriate error messages using the proper function name, * not to mention possible debugging benefits? */ int (*bgr2rgb) (const int bgr) = rgb2bgr; /* * Or should I do this since it is merely a convenience * and they're really the same function anyway? */ #define bgr2rgb(bgr) (rgb2bgr (bgr)) I'm not necessarily looking for a change in execution efficiency as it's more of a subjective question out of curiosity. I am well aware of the fact that type safety is neither lost nor gained using either method. Would the function pointer merely be a convenience or are there more practical benefits to be gained of which I am unaware?

    Read the article

  • Is Domain Anaemia appropriate in a Service Oriented Architecture?

    - by Stimul8d
    I want to be clear on this. When I say domain anaemia, I mean intentional domain anaemia, not accidental. In a world where most of our business logic is hidden away behind a bunch of services, is a full domain model really necessary? This is the question I've had to ask myself recently since working on a project where the "domain" model is in reality a persistence model; none of the domain objects contain any methods and this is a very intentional decision. Initially, I shuddered when I saw a library full of what are essentially type-safe data containers but after some thought it struck me that this particular system doesn't do much but basic CRUD operations, so maybe in this case this is a good choice. My problem I guess is that my experience so far has been very much focussed on a rich domain model so it threw me a little. The remainder of the domain logic is hidden away in a group of helpers, facades and factories which live in a separate assembly. I'm keen to hear what people's thoughts are on this. Obviously, the considerations for reuse of these classes are much simpler but is really that great a benefit?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177  | Next Page >