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 171/348 | < Previous Page | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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 do you handle multiple (overlapping) projects in trac?

    - by Oliver Giesen
    We are using trac and are really satisfied with it. However, out of the box, trac is best suited for single-project environments only. I'd be interested to hear about the various approaches people take to make it work with multiple projects nevertheless and their experiences with them. Are there any plugins to recommend? Any patches, tweaks or whatnots? Are you maybe even using an entirely different bug-tracking system that offers all of trac's functionality plus multi-project support? We recently started managing a second project ourselves which generally works okay but also has some drawbacks, especially where the two projects overlap because of common library code we wrote that is used in both projects. How do you handle this? (I'll attach our own current approach as an answer to this post.)

    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

  • How to send complete POST to Model in Code Igniter

    - by Constant M
    Hi there, What would be the best way to send a complete post to a model in Code Igniter? Methods I know are as follow: Name form elements as array, eg. <input type="text" name="contact[name]"> <input type="text" name="contact[surname]"> and then use: $this->Model_name->add_contact($this->input->post('contact')); The other would be to add each element to an array and then send it to the model as such: <input type="text" name="name"> <input type="text" name="surname"> and $contact_array = array('name' => $this->input->post('name'), 'surname' => $this->input->post('surname')); $this->Model_name->add_contact($this->input->post('contact')); Which one of these would be best practice, and is there a way to directly send a whole POST to a model (or a whole form maybe?)

    Read the article

  • What is the role of the Router Object in MVC based frameworks

    - by Saif Bechan
    In most MVC based framework I see a router object. If I look at it splits up the uri and decides what controller should be used, and which action should be fired. Even though this makes a lot of sense, I can not give this a place in the MVC patern. Is splitting up the uri not the job of the controller. And then the controller should just decide which class and function to run.

    Read the article

  • WCF. Robust big file transfer.

    - by Sharov
    Hello everybody! I want to transfer big files (1GB) over unreliable transport channels. When connection is interrupted, I don't want start file transfering from the begining. I can partially store it in a temp table and store last readed position, so when connection is reestablished I can request continue uploading of file from this position. Is there any best-practice for such kind of things. I'm currently use chunking channel. Thanks in advance.

    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

  • Is it a good idea to define a variable in a local block for a case of a switch statement?

    - by Paperflyer
    I have a rather long switch-case statement. Some of the cases are really short and trivial. A few are longer and need some variables that are never used anywhere else, like this: switch (action) { case kSimpleAction: // Do something simple break; case kComplexAction: { int specialVariable = 5; // Do something complex with specialVariable } break; } The alternative would be to declare that variable before going into the switch like this: int specialVariable = 5; switch (action) { case kSimpleAction: // Do something simple break; case kComplexAction: // Do something complex with specialVariable break; } This can get rather confusing since it is not clear to which case the variable belongs and it uses some unnecessary memory. However, I have never seen this usage anywhere else. Do you think it is a good idea to declare variables locally in a block for a single case?

    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

  • Returning back to the results after editing

    - by Parhs
    Hello, I am developing an application which has several CRUD actions... I am using Java and i am forced to use Struts framework. My problem is: I have a search page which returns some results.The user can click at a result and then he goes to another edit-page... He may apply changes or not...What i need is a way to return at the result page again and at the same scroll position.Javascript must be enabled for this project however.. I am wondering which is the best practice to achieve this effect... A solution would be to save the last search URL but i know that this wouldnt work if the user has multiple results. I know how to do it but i am lloking for a good practice!

    Read the article

  • Is there anything wrong with having a few private methods exposing IQueryable<T> and all public meth

    - by Nate Bross
    I'm wondering if there is a better way to approach this problem. The objective is to reuse code. Let’s say that I have a Linq-To-SQL datacontext and I've written a "repository style" class that wraps up a lot of the methods I need and exposes IQueryables. (so far, no problem). Now, I'm building a service layer to sit on top of this repository, many of the service methods will be 1<-1 with repository methods, but some will not. I think a code sample will illustrate this better than words. public class ServiceLayer { MyClassDataContext context; IMyRepository rpo; public ServiceLayer(MyClassDataContext ctx) { context = ctx; rpo = new MyRepository(context); } private IQueryable<MyClass> ReadAllMyClass() { // pretend there is some complex business logic here // and maybe some filtering of the current users access to "all" // that I don't want to repeat in all of the public methods that access // MyClass objects. return rpo.ReadAllMyClass(); } public IEnumerable<MyClass> GetAllMyClass() { // call private IQueryable so we can do attional "in-database" processing return this.ReadAllMyClass(); } public IEnumerable<MyClass> GetActiveMyClass() { // call private IQueryable so we can do attional "in-database" processing // in this case a .Where() clause return this.ReadAllMyClass().Where(mc => mc.IsActive.Equals(true)); } #region "Something my class MAY need to do in the future" private IQueryable<MyOtherTable> ReadAllMyOtherTable() { // there could be additional constrains which define // "all" for the current user return context.MyOtherTable; } public IEnumerable<MyOtherTable> GetAllMyOtherTable() { return this.ReadAllMyOtherTable(); } public IEnumerable<MyOtherTable> GetInactiveOtherTable() { return this.ReadAllMyOtherTable.Where(ot => ot.IsActive.Equals(false)); } #endregion } This particular case is not the best illustration, since I could just call the repository directly in the GetActiveMyClass method, but let’s presume that my private IQueryable does some extra processing and business logic that I don't want to replicate in both of my public methods. Is that a bad way to attack an issue like this? I don't see it being so complex that it really warrants building a third class to sit between the repository and the service class, but I'd like to get your thoughts. For the sake of argument, lets presume two additional things. This service is going to be exposed through WCF and that each of these public IEnumerable methods will be calling a .Select(m => m.ToViewModel()) on each returned collection which will convert it to a POCO for serialization. The service will eventually need to expose some context.SomeOtherTable which wont be wrapped into the repository.

    Read the article

  • When to rewrite vs. upgrade?

    - by MrGumbe
    All custom legacy software needs changing, or so say our users. Sometimes they want a feature or two added and all that is necessary to change a bit of code, add a control, or some other minor upgrade task. Sometimes they want to ditch their error-prone VB5 desktop solution and rewrite the whole thing as a rich Web 2.0 ASP.NET MVC application. More often, however, the scope of changes to legacy functionality lies somewhere between these two extremes. What rules of thumb to you use to decide whether you should upgrade an existing application or start from scratch?

    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

  • Where to put a piece of code in Ruby on Rails?

    - by yuval
    I have a post controller that has many comments. The post model has a field called has_comments which is a boolean (so I can quickly select from the database only posts that have comments). To create a new comment for a post, I use the create action of my comments controller. After I create the comment I need to update my post's has_comments field and set it to true. I can update this field from the create action of my comments controller, but that doesn't seem right - I feel that I should really be using the post's update action, but I'm not sure if it's right to call it (via send?) from the create action of the comments controller. Where should the code for updating the post be? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Is it ok to throw NotImplemented exception in virtual methods?

    - by Axarydax
    I have a base class for some plugin-style stuff, and there are some methods that are absolutely required to be implemented. I currently declare those in the base class as virtual, for example public virtual void Save { throw new NotImplementedException(); } and in the descendand I have a public override void Save() { //do stuff } Is it a good practice to throw a NotImplementedException there? The descendand classes could for example be the modules for handling different file formats. Thanks

    Read the article

  • where to store temporary data in MVC 2.0 project

    - by StuffHappens
    Hello! I'm starting to learn MVC 2.0 and I'm trying to create a site with a quiz: user is asked a question and given several options of answer. If he chooses the right answer he gets some points, if he doesn't, he looses them. I tried to do this the following way public class HomeController : Controller { private ITaskGenerator taskGenerator = new TaskGenerator(); private string correctAnswer; public ActionResult Index() { var task = taskGenerator .GenerateTask(); ViewData["Task"] = task.Task; ViewData["Options"] = task.Options; correctAnswer= task.CorrectAnswer; return View(); } public ActionResult Answer(string id) { if (id == correctAnswer) return View("Correct") return View("Incorrect"); } } But I have a problem: when user answers the cotroller class is recreated and I loose correct answer. So what is the best place to store correct answer? Should I create a static class for this purpose? Thanks for your help!

    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 >