Search Results

Search found 14545 results on 582 pages for 'design patterns'.

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 171/582 | < Previous Page | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178  | Next Page >

  • Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

    - by Roman A. Taycher
    If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

    Read the article

  • Regarding the ViewModel

    - by mizipzor
    Im struggling to understand the ViewModel part of the MVVM pattern. My current approach is to have a class, with no logic whatsoever (important), except that it implements INotifyPropertyChanged. The class is just a collection of properties, a struct if you like, describing an as small part of the data as possible. I consider this my Model. Most of the WPF code I write are settings dialogs that configure said Model. The code-behind of the dialog exposes a property which returns an instance of the Model. In the XAML code I bind to subproperties of that property, thereby binding directly to the Model's properties. Which works quite well since it implements the INotifyPropertyChanged. I consider this settings dialog the View. However, I havent really been able to figure out what in all this is the ViewModel. The articles Ive read suggests that the ViewModel should tie the View and the Model together, providing the logic the Model lacks but is still to complex to go directly into the View. Is this correct? Would, in my example, the code-behind of the settings dialog be considered the ViewModel? I just feel a bit lost and would like my peers to debunk some of my assumptions. Am I completely off track here?

    Read the article

  • anti-if campaign

    - by Andrew Siemer
    I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

    Read the article

  • Visitor Pattern can be replaced with Callback functions?

    - by getit
    Is there any significant benefit to using either technique? In case there are variations, the Visitor Pattern I mean is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_pattern And below is an example of using a delegate to achieve the same effect (at least I think it is the same) Say there is a collection of nested elements: Schools contain Departments which contain Students Instead of using the Visitor pattern to perform something on each collection item, why not use a simple callback (Action delegate in C#) Say something like this class Department { List Students; } class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student> actionDelegate) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu); } } } } School A = new School(); ...//populate collections A.Visit((student)=> { ...Do Something with student... }); *EDIT Example with delegate accepting multiple params Say I wanted to pass both the student and department, I could modify the Action definition like so: Action class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student, Department> actionDelegate, Action<Department> d2) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { d2(dep); //This performs a different process. //Using Visitor pattern would avoid having to keep adding new delegates. //This looks like the main benefit so far foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu, dep); } } } }

    Read the article

  • Pattern for creating a database schema using JDBC

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a Java-application that loads data from a legacy file format into an SQLite-Database using JDBC. If the database file specified does not exist, it is supposed to create a new one. Currently the schema for the database is hardcoded in the application. I would much rather have it in a separate file as an SQL-Script, but apparently there is now easy way to execute an SQL-Script though JDBC. Is there any other way or a pattern to achieve something like this?

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern [.net/c#]

    - by gsharp
    Hi We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-) Thanks for you help.

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern

    - by gsharp
    We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-)

    Read the article

  • In M-V-VM where does my code go?

    - by Nate Bross
    So, this is a pretty basic question I hope. I have a web service that I've added through Add Service Reference. It has some methods to get list and get detail of a perticular table in my database. What I'm trying to do is setup a UI as follows: App Load Load service proxy Call the GetList(); method display the results in a ListBox control User Double Clicks item in ListBox, display a modal dialog with a "detail" view I'm extremely new to using MVVM, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Additional information: // Service Interface (simplification): interface IService { IEnumerable<MyObject> GetList(); MyObject GetDetail(int id); } // Data object (simplification) class MyObject { public int ID { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } } I'm thinking I should have something like this: MainWindow MyObjectViewUserControl Displays list Opens modal window on double click Specific Questions: What would my ViewModel class look like? Where does the code to handle the double click go? Inside the UserControl? Sorry for the long details, but I'm very new to the whole thing and I'm not educated enough to ask the right questions. I checked out the MVVM Sample from wpf.codeplex.com and something isn't quite clicking for me yet, because it seems very confusing.

    Read the article

  • Improving MVP in Scala

    - by Alexey Romanov
    The classical strongly typed MVP pattern looks like this in Scala: trait IView { } trait Presenter[View <: IView] { // or have it as an abstract type member val view : View } case class View1(...) extends IView { ... } case object Presenter1 extends Presenter[View1] { val view = View1(...) } Now, I wonder if there is any nice way to improve on it which I am missing...

    Read the article

  • Data Application based on OO Concepts

    - by The King
    Hi... I'm looking for an application developed in C# with following qualities, which is available as source code... Based on OO Architecture Must connect to DB. Must handle atleast a "one to many master child" relationship (eg: Order and items ordered) Should display the data using Datagrid or other similar controls. Reports (either with report buider or otherwise) I want to understand the layering of objects better... Do you have any links... Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring Singleton Overuse

    - by drharris
    Today I had an epiphany, and it was that I was doing everything wrong. Some history: I inherited a C# application, which was really just a collection of static methods, a completely procedural mess of C# code. I refactored this the best I knew at the time, bringing in lots of post-college OOP knowledge. To make a long story short, many of the entities in code have turned out to be Singletons. Today I realized I needed 3 new classes, which would each follow the same Singleton pattern to match the rest of the software. If I keep tumbling down this slippery slope, eventually every class in my application will be Singleton, which will really be no logically different from the original group of static methods. I need help on rethinking this. I know about Dependency Injection, and that would generally be the strategy to use in breaking the Singleton curse. However, I have a few specific questions related to this refactoring, and all about best practices for doing so. How acceptable is the use of static variables to encapsulate configuration information? I have a brain block on using static, and I think it is due to an early OO class in college where the professor said static was bad. But, should I have to reconfigure the class every time I access it? When accessing hardware, is it ok to leave a static pointer to the addresses and variables needed, or should I continually perform Open() and Close() operations? Right now I have a single method acting as the controller. Specifically, I continually poll several external instruments (via hardware drivers) for data. Should this type of controller be the way to go, or should I spawn separate threads for each instrument at the program's startup? If the latter, how do I make this object oriented? Should I create classes called InstrumentAListener and InstrumentBListener? Or is there some standard way to approach this? Is there a better way to do global configuration? Right now I simply have Configuration.Instance.Foo sprinkled liberally throughout the code. Almost every class uses it, so perhaps keeping it as a Singleton makes sense. Any thoughts? A lot of my classes are things like SerialPortWriter or DataFileWriter, which must sit around waiting for this data to stream in. Since they are active the entire time, how should I arrange these in order to listen for the events generated when data comes in? Any other resources, books, or comments about how to get away from Singletons and other pattern overuse would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Interpreter in C++: Function table storage problem

    - by sub
    In my interpreter I have built-in functions available in the language like print exit input, etc. These functions can obviously be accessed from inside the language. The interpreter then looks for the corresponding function with the right name in a vector and calls it via a pointer stored with its name. So I gather all these functions in files like io.cpp, string.cpp, arithmetic.cpp. But I have to add every function to the function list in the interpreter in order for it to be found. So in these function files I have things like: void print( arg ) { cout << arg.ToString; } I'd add this print function to the interpreter function list with: interpreter.AddFunc( "print", print ); But where should I call the interpreter.AddFunc? I can't just put it there below the print function as it has to be in a function according to the C++ syntax. Where and how should all the functions be added to the list?

    Read the article

  • C++. How to define template parameter of type T for class A when class T needs a type A template parameter?

    - by jaybny
    Executor class has template of type P and it takes a P object in constructor. Algo class has a template E and also has a static variable of type E. Processor class has template T and a collection of Ts. Question how can I define Executor< Processor<Algo> > and Algo<Executor> ? Is this possible? I see no way to defining this, its kind of an "infinite recursive template argument" See code. template <class T> class Processor { map<string,T> ts; void Process(string str, int i) { ts[str].Do(i); } } template <class P> class Executor { Proc &p; Executor(P &p) : Proc(p) {} void Foo(string str, int i) { p.Process(str,i); } Execute(string str) { } } template <class E> class Algo { static E e; void Do(int i) {} void Foo() { e.Execute("xxx"); } } main () { typedef Processor<Algo> PALGO; // invalid typedef Executor<PALGO> EPALGO; typedef Algo<EPALGO> AEPALGO; Executor<PALGO> executor(PALGO()); AEPALGO::E = executor; }

    Read the article

  • Architecture of a single-page JavaScript web application?

    - by fig-gnuton
    How should a complex single-page JS web application be structured on the client-side? Specifically I'm curious about how to cleanly structure the application in terms of its model objects, UI components, any controllers, and objects handling server persistence. MVC seemed like a fit at first. But with UI components nested at various depths (each with their own way of acting on/reacting to model data, and each generating events which they themselves may or may not handle directly), it doesn't seem like MVC can be cleanly applied. (But please correct me if that's not the case.) -- (This question resulted in two suggestions of using ajax, which is obviously needed for anything other than the most trivial one-page app.)

    Read the article

  • What Is Utility Services ?

    - by query_bug
    Hai, I need some information about Utility Services Layer. Can someone Please help me in getting information on that as I am supposed to give a presentation on Utility Services Layer. Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • Generic Abstract Singleton with Custom Constructor in C#

    - by Heka
    I want to write a generic singleton with an external constructor. In other words the constructor can be modified. I have 2 designs in my mind but I don't know whether they are practical or not. First one is to enforce derived class' constructor to be non-public but I do not know if there is a way of it? Second one is to use a delegate and call it inside the constructor? It isn't necessarily to be a constructor. The reason I chose custom constructor is doing some custom initializations. Any suggestions would be appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • WPF binding to a boolean on a control

    - by Jose
    I'm wondering if someone has a simple succinct solution to binding to a dependency property that needs to be the converse of the property. Here's an example I have a textbox that is disabled based on a property in the datacontext e.g.: <TextBox IsEnabled={Binding CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> The requirement changes and I want to make it ReadOnly instead of disabled, so without changing my ViewModel I could do this: In the UserControl resources: <UserControl.Resources> <m:NotConverter x:Key="NotConverter"/> </UserControl.Resources> And then change the TextBox to: <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding CanEdit,Converter={StaticResource NotConverter}} Text={Binding MyText}/> Which I personally think is EXTREMELY verbose I would love to be able to just do this(notice the !): <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding !CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> But alas, that is not an option that I know of. I can think of two options. Create an attached property IsNotReadOnly to FrameworkElement(?) and bind to that property If I change my ViewModel then I could add a property CanEdit and another CannotEdit which I would be kind of embarrassed of because I believe it adds an irrelevant property to a class, which I don't think is a good practice. The main reason for the question is that in my project the above isn't just for one control, so trying to keep my project as DRY as possible and readable I am throwing this out to anyone feeling my pain and has come up with a solution :)

    Read the article

  • How can I refactor this to work without breaking the pattern horribly?

    - by SnOrfus
    I've got a base class object that is used for filtering. It's a template method object that looks something like this. public class Filter { public void Process(User u, GeoRegion r, int countNeeded) { List<account> selected = this.Select(u, r, countNeeded); // 1 List<account> filtered = this.Filter(selected, u, r, countNeeded); // 2 if (filtered.Count > 0) { /* do businessy stuff */ } // 3 if (filtered.Count < countNeeded) this.SendToSuccessor(u, r, countNeeded - filtered) // 4 } } Select(...), Filter(...) are protected abstract methods and implemented by the derived classes. Select(...) finds objects in the based on x criteria, Filter(...) filters those selected further. If the remaining filtered collection has more than 1 object in it, we do some business stuff with it (unimportant to the problem here). SendToSuccessor(...) is called if there weren't enough objects found after filtering (it's a composite where the next class in succession will also be derived from Filter but have different filtering criteria) All has been ok, but now I'm building another set of filters, which I was going to subclass from this. The filters I'm building however would require different params and I don't want to just implement those methods and not use the params or just add to the param list the ones I need and have them not used in the existing filters. They still perform the same logical process though. I also don't want to complicated the consumer code for this (which looks like this) Filter f = new Filter1(); Filter f2 = new Filter2(); Filter f3 = new Filter3(); f.Sucessor = f2; f2.Sucessor = f3; /* and so on adding filters as successors to previous ones */ foreach (User u in users) { foreach (GeoRegion r in regions) { f.Process(u, r, ##); } } How should I go about it?

    Read the article

  • Best practices for displaying large number of images as thumbnails in c#

    - by andySF
    I got to a point where it's very difficult to get answers by debugging and tracing object, so i need some help. What I'm trying to do: A history form for my screen capture pet project. The history must list all images as thumbnails (ex: picasa). What I've done: I created a HistoryItem:UserControl. This history item has a few buttons, a check box, a label and a picture box. The buttons are for delete/edit/copy image. The check box is used for selecting one or more images and the label is for some info text. The picture box is getting the image from a public property that is a path and a method creates a proportional thumbnail to display it when the control has been loaded. This user control has two public events. One for deleting the image and one for bubbling the events for mouse enter and mouse leave trough all controls. For this I use EventBroadcastProvider. The bubbling is useful because wherever I move the mouse over the control, the buttons appear. The dispose method has been extended and I manually remove the events. All images are loaded by looping a xml file that contains the path of all images. For each image in this XML I create a new HitoryItem that is added (after a little coding to sort and limit the amount of images loaded) to a flow layout panel. The problem: When I lunch the history form, and the flow layout panel is populated with my HistoryItem custom control, my memory usage increases drastically.From 14Mb to around 100MB with 100 images loaded. By closing the history form and disposing whatever I could dispose and even trying to call GC.Collect() the memory increase remain. I search for any object that could not be disposed properly like an image or event but wherever I used them they are disposed. The problem seams to be from multiple sources. One is that the events for bubbling are not disposing properly, and the other is from the picture box itself. All of this i could see by commenting all the code to a limited version when only the custom control without any image processing and even events is loaded. Without the events the memory consumption is reduced by axiomatically 20%. So my real question is if this logic, flow layout panels and custom controls with picture boxes, is the best solution for displaying large amounts of images as thumbnails. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Java - Calling all methods of a class

    - by Thomas Eschemann
    I'm currently working on an application that has to render several Freemarker templates. So far I have a Generator class that handles the rendering. The class looks more or less like this: public class Generator { public static void generate(…) { renderTemplate1(); renderTemplate2(); renderTemplate3(); } private static void render(…) { // renders the template } private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; … } This works, but it doesn't really feel right. What I would like to do is create a class that holds all the renderTemplate...() methods and then call them dynamically from my Generator class. This would make it cleaner and easier to extend. I was thinking about using something like reflection, but it doesn't really feel like a good solution either. Any idea on how to implement this properly ?

    Read the article

  • Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

    - by Luki
    I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

    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 | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178  | Next Page >