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 >

  • 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

  • Undo/Redo using Memento: Stack, Queue or just LinkedList?

    - by serhio
    What is the best having when implementing Memento pattern (for Undo/Redo) in witch collection to Keep Mementos? Basically, I need this(c = change, u = undo, r = redo): 0 *c -1 0 *c -2 -1 0 *c -3 -2 -1 0 <u -2 -1 0 1 *c -3 -2 -1 0 Variants: LinkedList - possible in principle, maybe not optimized. Queue - not adapted for this task, IMO. Stack - not adapted for undo AND redo; Double Stack - maybe optimal, but can't control the undo maximum size.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Routing redirection decision

    - by programming late night
    I have really no idea why I'm asking this as this a really completely irrelevant question for which I should have figured out an answer within milliseconds, yet I'm doing it. So in my project I have a Router class which splits up the request and selects the right page to be loaded. Fine so far. Now I have a page displayed when the user requests a page that doesn't exist, you know, 404. So theoretically, if the user entered mydomain.com/404 (I use mod_rewrite with a requests collector via index.php?req=*) the 404 error would be shown to him, but in fact there was no error - the 404 page would be displayed as a perfectly normal page. So if someone would try out requesting the 404 page via /404, he would be shown the page but he can't tell if the 404 page he requested doesn't exist and he is actually getting a, you guessed it, 404 error or if he actually found some flaw in the system that makes him able to see an error page when there is no error. I don't know how dumb this whole thing here is but I'm sure some of you have in fact ran into this problem already. Short version: If the user enters mydomain.com/404 the 404 page is shown even though there is no 404 error. I know this is a completely irrelevant question, please don't tell me, but I just spontaneously wanted to hear your thoughts on it. Strange eh? Should I redirect direct access to my 404-page to the home page? Should I do nothing? Should I just go to bed and stop asking irrelevant stuff?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • ASP.NET MVC Filters: How to set Viewdata for Dropdown based on action paramter

    - by CRice
    Hi, Im loading an entity 'Member' from its id in route data. [ListItemsForMembershipType(true)] public ActionResult Edit(Member someMember) {...} The attribute on the action loads the membership type list items for a dropdown box and sticks it in viewdata. This is fine for add forms, and search forms (it gets all active items) but I need the attribute to execute BASED ON THE VALUE someMember.MembershipTypeId, because its current value must always be present when loading the item (i.e. all active items, plus the one from the loaded record). So the question is, what is the standard pattern for this? How can my attribute accept the value or should I be loading the viewdata for the drop down in a controller supertype or during model binding or something else? It is in an attribute now because the code to set the viewdata would otherwise be duplicated in each usage in each action.

    Read the article

  • Stateless singleton VS Static methods

    - by Sebastien Lorber
    Hey, Don't find any good answer to this simple question about helper/utils classes: Why would i create a singleton (stateless) rather than static methods? Why an object instance could be needed while the object has no state? Sometimes i really don't know what to use...

    Read the article

  • Approaching Java from a Ruby perspective

    - by Travis
    There are plenty of resources available to a Java developer for getting a jump-start into Ruby/Rails development. The reverse doesn't appear to be true. What resources would you suggest for getting up-to-date on the current state of java technologies? How about learning how to approach DRY (don't repeat yourself) without the use of metaprogramming? Or how to approach various scenarios where a ruby developer is used to passing in a function (proc/lambda/block) as an argument (callbacks, etc)?

    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 >