Search Results

Search found 60436 results on 2418 pages for 'application design'.

Page 19/2418 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • Design: classes with same implementation but different method names

    - by Dror Helper
    I have multiple classes that have similar implementation for different named methods: class MyClassX { public int MyClassXIntMethod(){} public string MyClassXStringMethod(){} } class MyClassY { public int MyClassYIntMethod(){} public string MyClassYStringMethod(){} } the methods inside the classes have similar implementation but because the method's names are different (due to 3rd party constraints) i cannot use inheritance. I'm looking for an elegant solution that would be better than implementing the same functionality over and over again.

    Read the article

  • Software design for non object oriented paradigm

    - by Dean
    I'm currently working on a project where I'm writing the firmware for an electronic system in C, and have been asked to produce documentation on the development/evolution of the software for the embedded devices. Having developed software in the object oriented paradigm I know to use UML to document the software such as class diagrams with objects, however this does not work for documenting the development of my embedded system. So what should I produce to document the development of my firmware?

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous update design/interaction patterns

    - by Andy Waite
    These days many apps support asynchronous updates. For example, if you're looking at a list of widgets and you delete one of them then rather than wait for the roundtrip to the server, the app can hide the one you deleted, giving immediate feedback. The actual deletion on the server will happen in the background. This can be seen in web apps, desktop apps, iOS apps, etc. But what about when the background operation fails. How should you feed back to the user? Should you restore the UI to the pre-deletion state? What about when multiple background operations fail together? Does this behaviour/pattern have a name? Perhaps something based on the Command pattern?

    Read the article

  • How to deal with Character body parts from Design to Cocos2d

    - by Edwin Soho
    I'm trying to figure out the pattern the game developers use together with game designers: See the picture below with the independent parts: Questions: 1) Should I create different image parts from different body parts or keep frame by frame animaton? (I know both can be used, but I'm trying to figure what is commonly used in the industry) 2) If I'm going to generate different image parts from different body parts (which is I thing is more logical) how would I export that to Cocos2d (Vector or Bitmap)?

    Read the article

  • Facebook Game database design

    - by facebook-100000781341887
    Hi, I'm currently develop a facebook mafia like PHP game(of course, a light weight version), here is a simplify database(MySQL) of the game id-a <int3> <for index> uid <chr15> <facebook uid> HP <int3> <health point> exp <int3> <experience> money <int3> <money> list_inventory <chr5> <the inventory user hold...some special here, talk next> ... and 20 other fields just like reputation, num of combat... *the number next to the type is the size(byte) of the type For the list_inventory, there have 40 inventorys in my game, (actually, I have 5 these kind of list in my database), and each user can only contain 1 qty of each inventory, therefore, I assign 5 char for this field and each bit of char as 1 item(5 char * 8 bit = 40 slot), and I will do some manipulation by PHP to extract the data from this 5 byte. OK, I was thinking on this, if this game contains 100,000 user, and only 10% are active, therefore, if use my method, for the space use, 5 byte * 100,000 = 500 KB if I use another method, create a table user_hold_inventory, if the user have the inventory, then insert a record into this table, so, for 10,000 active user, I assume they got all item, but for other, I assume they got no item, here is the fields of the new table id-b <int3> <for index> id-a <int3> <id of the user table> inv_no <int1> <inventory that user hold> for the space use, ([id] (3+3) byte + [inv_no] 1 byte ) * [active user] 10,000 * [all inventory] * 40 = 2.8 MB seems method 2 have use more space, but it consume less CPU power. Please comment these 2 method or please correct me if there have another better method rather than what I think. Another question is, my database contain 26 fields, but I counted 5 of them are not change frquently, should I need to separate it on the other table or not? So many words, thanks for reading :)

    Read the article

  • Design patterns for effects between actors and technology

    - by changelog
    I'm working on my first game, and taking the opportunity to brush up my C++ (I want to make as much of it as portable as I can.) Whilst working on the technology tree and how it affects actors (spaceships, planets, crew, buildings, etc) I can't find a pattern that decouples these entities enough to feel like a clean approach. Just as an idea, here's the type of effects these actors can have on one another (and techs too) An engineer inside a spaceship boosts its shield A hero in a spaceship in a fleet increases morale A technology improves spaceships' travel distance A building in a planet improves its production The best I can come up with is the Observer pattern, and basically manage it more or less manually (when a crew member enters a spaceship, fire the event; when a new building is built in a planet, fire the event, etc etc.) but it seems to be too tightly coupled to me. I would love to get some ideas about how to approach this better.

    Read the article

  • Optimal Database design regarding functionality of letting user share posts by other users

    - by codecool
    I want to implement functionality which let user share posts by other users similar to what Facebook and Google+ share button and twitter retweet. There are 2 choices: 1) I create duplicate copy of the post and have a column which keeps track of the original post id and makes clear this is a shared post. 2) I have a separate table shared post where I save the post id which is a foreign key to post id in post table. Talking in terms of programming basically I keep pointer to the original post in a separate table and when need to get post posted by user and also shared ones I do a left join on post and shared post table Post(post_id(PK), post_content, posted_by) SharedPost(post_id(FK to Post.post_id), sharing_user, sharedfrom(in case someone shares from non owners profile)) I am in favour of second choice but wanted to know the advice of experts out there? One thing more posts on my webapp will be more on the lines of facebook size not tweet size.

    Read the article

  • .Net Application & Database Modularity/Reuse

    - by Martaver
    I'm looking for some guidance on how to architect an app with regards to modularity, separation of concerns and re-usability. I'm working on an application (ASP.Net, C#) that has distinctly generic chunks of functionality, that I'd love to be able to lift out, all layers, into re-usable components. This means the module handles the database schema, data access, API, everything so that the next time I want to use it I can just register the module and hook into it. Developing modules of re-usable functionality is a no-brainer, but what is really confusing me is what to do when it comes to handling a core re-usable database schema that serves the module's functionality. In an ideal world, I would register a module and it would ensure that the associated database schema exists in the DB. I would code on the assumption that the tables exist, calling the module's functionality through the DLL, agnostic of the database layer. Kind of like Enterprise Library's Caching/Logging Application Block, which can create a DB schema in the target DB to use as a data store. My Questions is: What do you think is the best way to achieve this, firstly, in terms design architecture, and secondly solution structure. What patterns/frameworks do you know that exist & support this kind of thing? My thoughts so far: I mostly use Entity Framework and SQL Server DB Projects. I thought about a 'black box' approach to modules of functionality. I could use use a code-first approach in EF4, and use the ObjectContext to create a database when the module is initialized. However this means that all of the entities that my module encapsulates would be disconnected from the rest of the application because they belonged to an abstracted ObjectContext. Further - Creating appropriate indexes and references between domain entities and the module's entities would be impossible to do practically. I've thought of adopting Enterprise Library and creating my own Application Blocks. I'm not sure how this would play nice with Entity Framework (if at all) though. I like the idea of building on proven patterns & practices to encapsulate established, reusable functionality. I thought of abandoning Entity Framework for the Module, and just creating a separate DB schema for the module with its own set of stored procedures & ADO.Net. Then deploying the script at run-time if interrogation shows that it doesn't exist. But once again, for application developing outside of the application, I would want to use Entity Framework and I would have to use the module separately, disconnected from the domain ObjectContext. Has anyone had experience developing these sorts of full-stack modules? What advice can you offer? Am I biting off more than I can chew?

    Read the article

  • High Availability for IaaS, PaaS and SaaS in the Cloud

    - by BuckWoody
    Outages, natural disasters and unforeseen events have proved that even in a distributed architecture, you need to plan for High Availability (HA). In this entry I'll explain a few considerations for HA within Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). In a separate post I'll talk more about Disaster Recovery (DR), since each paradigm has a different way to handle that. Planning for HA in IaaS IaaS involves Virtual Machines - so in effect, an HA strategy here takes on many of the same characteristics as it would on-premises. The primary difference is that the vendor controls the hardware, so you need to verify what they do for things like local redundancy and so on from the hardware perspective. As far as what you can control and plan for, the primary factors fall into three areas: multiple instances, geographical dispersion and task-switching. In almost every cloud vendor I've studied, to ensure your application will be protected by any level of HA, you need to have at least two of the Instances (VM's) running. This makes sense, but you might assume that the vendor just takes care of that for you - they don't. If a single VM goes down (for whatever reason) then the access to it is lost. Depending on multiple factors, you might be able to recover the data, but you should assume that you can't. You should keep a sync to another location (perhaps the vendor's storage system in another geographic datacenter or to a local location) to ensure you can continue to serve your clients. You'll also need to host the same VM's in another geographical location. Everything from a vendor outage to a network path problem could prevent your users from reaching the system, so you need to have multiple locations to handle this. This means that you'll have to figure out how to manage state between the geo's. If the system goes down in the middle of a transaction, you need to figure out what part of the process the system was in, and then re-create or transfer that state to the second set of systems. If you didn't write the software yourself, this is non-trivial. You'll also need a manual or automatic process to detect the failure and re-route the traffic to your secondary location. You could flip a DNS entry (if your application can tolerate that) or invoke another process to alias the first system to the second, such as load-balancing and so on. There are many options, but all of them involve coding the state into the application layer. If you've simply moved a state-ful application to VM's, you may not be able to easily implement an HA solution. Planning for HA in PaaS Implementing HA in PaaS is a bit simpler, since it's built on the concept of stateless applications deployment. Once again, you need at least two copies of each element in the solution (web roles, worker roles, etc.) to remain available in a single datacenter. Also, you need to deploy the application again in a separate geo, but the advantage here is that you could work out a "shared storage" model such that state is auto-balanced across the world. In fact, you don't have to maintain a "DR" site, the alternate location can be live and serving clients, and only take on extra load if the other site is not available. In Windows Azure, you can use the Traffic Manager service top route the requests as a type of auto balancer. Even with these benefits, I recommend a second backup of storage in another geographic location. Storage is inexpensive; and that second copy can be used for not only HA but DR. Planning for HA in SaaS In Software-as-a-Service (such as Office 365, or Hadoop in Windows Azure) You have far less control over the HA solution, although you still maintain the responsibility to ensure you have it. Since each SaaS is different, check with the vendor on the solution for HA - and make sure you understand what they do and what you are responsible for. They may have no HA for that solution, or pin it to a particular geo, or perhaps they have a massive HA built in with automatic load balancing (which is often the case).   All of these options (with the exception of SaaS) involve higher costs for the design. Do not sacrifice reliability for cost - that will always cost you more in the end. Build in the redundancy and HA at the very outset of the project - if you try to tack it on later in the process the business will push back and potentially not implement HA. References: http://www.bing.com/search?q=windows+azure+High+Availability  (each type of implementation is different, so I'm routing you to a search on the topic - look for the "Patterns and Practices" results for the area in Azure you're interested in)

    Read the article

  • Android From Local DB (DAO) to Server sync (JSON) - Design issue

    - by Taiko
    I sync data between my local DB and a Server. I'm looking for the cleanest way to modelise all of this. I have a com.something.db package That contains a Data Helper and couple of DAO classes that represents objects stored in the db (I didn't write that part) com.something.db --public DataHelper --public Employee @DatabaseField e.g. "name" will be an actual column name in the DB -name @DatabaseField -salary etc... (all in all 50 fields) I have a com.something.sync package That contains all the implementation detail on how to send data to the server. It boils down to a ConnectionManager that is fed by different classes that implements a 'Request' interface com.something.sync --public interface ConnectionManager --package ConnectionManagerImpl --public interface Request --package LoginRequest --package GetEmployeesRequest My issue is, at some point in the sync process, I have to JSONise and de-JSONise my data (E.g. the Employee class). But I really don't feel like having the same Employee class be responsible for both his JSONisation and his actual representation inside the local database. It really doesn't feel right, because I carefully decoupled the rest, I am only stuck on this JSON thing. What should I do ? Should I write 3 Employee classes ? EmployeeDB @DatabaseField e.g. "name" will be an actual column name in the DB -name @DatabaseField -salary -etc... 50 fields EmployeeInterface -getName -getSalary -etc... 50 fields EmployeeJSON -JSON_KEY_NAME = "name" The JSON key happens to be the same as the table name, but it isn't requirement -name -JSON_KEY_SALARY = "salary" -salary -etc... 50 fields It feels like a lot of duplicates. Is there a common pattern I can use there ?

    Read the article

  • PyQt design issues

    - by Falmarri
    I've been working on a my first real project using PyQt lately. I've done just a little bit of work in Qt for C++ but nothing more than just messing around. I've found that the Qt python bindings are essentially just a straight port of C++ classes into python, which makes sense. The issue is that this creates a lot of messy, unpythonic code. For example if you look at QAbstractItemModel, there's a lot of hoops you have to go through that forces you to hide the actual python. I was just wondering if there's any intention of writing a python implementation of Qt that isn't necessarily just a wrapper? Either by Nokia or anyone else? I really like Qt but I would love to be able to write more pythonic code. I hope this is OK to ask here. I'm not trying to start a GUI war or anything.

    Read the article

  • Inventory management system design problem

    - by Steve F
    What are the conventions for item batch identifiers in inventory management systems? For example: A retail supermarket can order 'Item X' from either 'Supplier A' or 'Supplier B'. When it completes an order for the item from either supplier, it needs to store the record of the receipt. Inventory quantity for the item is increased upon receipt of the order. However it is also required to store some record of the supplier. Thus some sort of batch identifier is required. This batch identifier will uniquely identify the item received and the supplier from whom it is received. A new batch is created each time items are received in stock (for example, after an order). Hence, for purposes of accounting / auditing, information available to identify an item after it was sold comprises of ITEM_CODE, ITEM_NAME, BATCH_CODE. The BATCH_CODE is unique and is associated with DATE_RECEIVED, SUPPLIER_CODE, QTY_RECEIVED. Is this a complete system specification for the above scenario or has anything significant been left out?

    Read the article

  • How Would You Design This Table?

    - by sooprise
    I have to create a table where each row needs to store 50 number values. Each row will always need to store 50 number values. If this was a smaller number of values, I would just make fields for each of the values, but because there are 50, this approach seems a bit cumbersome (but since it will always be 50 values, maybe this is the correct approach?). Is there a way to store an array of values in a field? This seems like a nice solution, but the concept is almost identical to creating a relational database.

    Read the article

  • How to design brain games [on hold]

    - by samesky
    I will wonder if anybody has some information about designing games for brain improvement. Recently lumosity is into a gear. I guess they research a lot or have experts. But is there any other research paper that is publicly available for designing the brain games ? Any equation or data that can help? Or what characteristics a brain game should have ? I am getting interested on this and search internet a lot, but unfortunately I could not find the core structure of it. It will really a helpful for me if somebody can give some information. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Client-server application design issue

    - by user2547823
    I have a collection of clients on server's side. And there are some objects that need to work with that collection - adding and removing clients, sending message to them, updating connection settings and so on. They should perform these actions simultaneously, so mutex or another synchronization primitive is required. I want to share one instance of collection between these objects, but all of them require access to private fields of collection. I hope that code sample makes it more clear[C++]: class Collection { std::vector< Client* > clients; Mutex mLock; ... } class ClientNotifier { void sendMessage() { mLock.lock(); // loop over clients and send message to each of them } } class ConnectionSettingsUpdater { void changeSettings( const std::string& name ) { mLock.lock(); // if client with this name is inside collection, change its settings } } As you can see, all these classes require direct access to Collection's private fields. Can you give me an advice about how to implement such behaviour correctly, i.e. keeping Collection's interface simple without it knowing about its users?

    Read the article

  • Layering Design Pattern in Java clean code style

    - by zeraDev
    As a Java developer, I am developing trying to use the clean code rules. But in my team we are facing a concrete problem: We have a business layer offering a service called "createObject", this service makes a lot of operation which can result to problem. E.g: parentObjectDontExist, objectAlreadyExist, dontHaveAuthorizationToCreate, operationFailed... and we want the UI using this service to display different information messages depending which error occurred. In old java dev, we should have create all signed exception type and throw it in createObject. As Clean code says, it is forbidden to use Exception for business logic AND signed exceptions are evil... Why not...But i don't know how to solved this problem and i don't want to use return code. How do you do? Thanks for youre experience return.

    Read the article

  • Android design advice - services & broadcast receivers

    - by basudz
    I'm in the process of learning the Android SDK and creating some projects to get a grasp on the system. The current project I'm working with works just fine but I'd like to get some advice about other ways I can go about designing it. Here's what it needs to do. When a text message is received from a specific number, it should fire off a toast message that repeats at a certain interval for a specific duration. To make this work, I created an SMS BroadcastReceiver and checked the incoming messages for the number I'm looking for. If found, an IntentService would be started that would pull out the interval and duration from saved shared prefs. The IntentService would then fire off a broadcast. The BroadcastReceiver for this would catch it and use the AlarmManager to handle the toast message repetitions. This all works just fine, but I'm wondering if there's a cleaner or more efficient way of going about doing this? Any suggestions or advice?

    Read the article

  • What OO Design to use ( is there a Design Pattern )?

    - by Blundell
    I have two objects that represent a 'Bar/Club' ( a place where you drink/socialise). In one scenario I need the bar name, address, distance, slogon In another scenario I need the bar name, address, website url, logo So I've got two objects representing the same thing but with different fields. I like to use immutable objects, so all the fields are set from the constructor. One option is to have two constructors and null the other fields i.e: class Bar { private final String name; private final Distance distance; private final Url url; public Bar(String name, Distance distance){ this.name = name; this.distance = distance; this.url = null; } public Bar(String name, Url url){ this.name = name; this.distance = null; this.url = url; } // getters } I don't like this as you would have to null check when you use the getters In my real example the first scenario has 3 fields and the second scenario has about 10, so it would be a real pain having two constructors, the amount of fields I would have to declare null and then when the object are in use you wouldn't know which Bar you where using and so what fields would be null and what wouldn't. What other options do I have? Two classes called BarPreview and Bar? Some type of inheritance / interface? Something else that is awesome?

    Read the article

  • Advice needed on Process - Service Design

    - by user99314
    Need some advice from experts on designing a flow. Create a service that will read a csv file which may contain anywhere over 6000+ rows of individual ids as shown in the sample below. Need to read that file and go to oracle database and fetch a vname,vnumber,vid of each id in the csv and then go to document repository i.e. Oracle UCM and download all documents matching vname,vnumber,vid there can be =0 documents for each vname,vnumber,vid and save them on a file system. UCM exposes a webservice to dowload the documents. Finally create a new csv appending the filenames that are downloaded for each id. Need to keep track of any errors but need to make sure to go over the whole ids in the csv to download the documents and skip in case of errors. Need some advice on how to go about designing this as there may be over 6000+ rows in a csv file and looping it and hitting the database for each individual id and then hitting a UCM may be a bit expensive so open for any idea. How to go by designing this solution. Wondering if messaging can be helpful here or offloading process of getting the vname,vnumber,vid to pl/sql packages, creating staging tables etc. Initial csv that contains ids: **ID** 12345a 12s345 3456fr we9795 we9797 Final csv output: **ID Files Downloaded from UCM** 12345a a.pdf,b.doc,d.txt 12s345 a1.pdf,s2.pdf,f4.gif 3456fr b.xls we9795 we9797 x.doc Thanks

    Read the article

  • Options for keeping models and the UI in sync (in a desktop application context)

    - by Benju
    In my experience I have only had 2 patterns work for large-scale desktop application development when trying to keep the model and UI in sync. 1-An eventbus approach via a shared eventbus command objects are fired (ie:UserDemographicsUpdatedEvent) and have various parts of the UI update if they are bound to the same user object updated in this event. 2-Attempt to bind the UI directly to the model adding listeners to the model itself as needed. I find this approach rather clunky as it pollutes the domain model. Does anybody have other suggestions? In a web application with something like JSP binding to the model is easy as you ussually only care about the state of the model at the time your request comes in, not so in a desktop type application. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Would Using a PHP Framework Be Beneficial in My Context?

    - by Fractal
    I've just started work at a small start-up company who mainly uses PHP to develop their front-end apps. I had no prior PHP experience before joining, and this has led to my apps becoming large pieces of spaghetti code. I essentially started by adding code to implement an initial feature, and then continued to hack in more code to implement further features – without much thought for the overall design. The apps themselves output XML to render on small mobile devices. I recently started looking into frameworks that I could use. I reckon an advantage would be that they seem to force developers to modularise their programs using good-practice design patterns. This seems great for someone in my position. The extra functions they provide, for example: interfacing with databases in such a way as to make SQL injection impossible, would be very useful too. The downside I can see is that there will be a lot of overhead for me in terms of the time taken to learn the framework itself (while still getting to grips with PHP itself). I'm also worried that it will be overkill for the scale of the apps we develop. They tend to be programs that interface with a fairly simple back-end DB, and will generate about 5 different XML screens. Probably around 1 or 2 thousand lines of code. The time it takes just to configure the frameworks may not be worth it. The final problem I can see is that developers in the company – who have to go over my code, and who do not know the PHP framework I may use – will have a much harder time understanding it. Given those pros and cons, I'm still not sure on what the best course of action will be; so any advice will be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Checking preconditions or not

    - by Robert Dailey
    I've been wanting to find a solid answer to the question of whether or not to have runtime checks to validate input for the purposes of ensuring a client has stuck to their end of the agreement in design by contract. For example, consider a simple class constructor: class Foo { public: Foo( BarHandle bar ) { FooHandle handle = GetFooHandle( bar ); if( handle == NULL ) { throw std::exception( "invalid FooHandle" ); } } }; I would argue in this case that a user should not attempt to construct a Foo without a valid BarHandle. It doesn't seem right to verify that bar is valid inside of Foo's constructor. If I simply document that Foo's constructor requires a valid BarHandle, isn't that enough? Is this a proper way to enforce my precondition in design by contract? So far, everything I've read has mixed opinions on this. It seems like 50% of people would say to verify that bar is valid, the other 50% would say that I shouldn't do it, for example consider a case where the user verifies their BarHandle is correct, but a second (and unnecessary) check is also being done inside of Foo's constructor.

    Read the article

  • Confused about implementing Single Responsibility Principle

    - by HichemSeeSharp
    Please bear with me if the question looks not well structured. To put you in the context of my issue: I am building an application that invoices vehicles stay duration in a parking. In addition to the stay service there are some other services. Each service has its own calculation logic. Here is an illustration (please correct me if the design is wrong): public abstract class Service { public int Id { get; set; } public bool IsActivated { get; set; } public string Name { get; set } public decimal Price { get; set; } } public class VehicleService : Service { //MTM : many to many public virtual ICollection<MTMVehicleService> Vehicles { get; set; } } public class StayService : VehicleService { } public class Vehicle { public int Id { get; set; } public string ChassisNumber { get; set; } public DateTime? EntryDate { get; set; } public DateTime? DeliveryDate { get; set; } //... public virtual ICollection<MTMVehicleService> Services{ get; set; } } Now, I am focusing on the stay service as an example: I would like to know at invoicing time which class(es) would be responsible for generating the invoice item for the service and for each vehicle? This should calculate the duration cost knowing that the duration could be invoiced partially so the like is as follows: not yet invoiced stay days * stay price per day. At this moment I have InvoiceItemsGenerator do everything but I am aware that there is a better design.

    Read the article

  • A better alternative to incompatible implementations for the same interface?

    - by glenatron
    I am working on a piece of code which performs a set task in several parallel environments where the behaviour of the different components in the task are similar but quite different. This means that my implementations are quite different but they are all based on the relationships between the same interfaces, something like this: IDataReader -> ContinuousDataReader -> ChunkedDataReader IDataProcessor -> ContinuousDataProcessor -> ChunkedDataProcessor IDataWriter -> ContinuousDataWriter -> ChunkedDataWriter So that in either environment we have an IDataReader, IDataProcessor and IDataWriter and then we can use Dependency Injection to ensure that we have the correct one of each for the current environment, so if we are working with data in chunks we use the ChunkedDataReader, ChunkedDataProcessor and ChunkedDataWriter and if we have continuous data we have the continuous versions. However the behaviour of these classes is quite different internally and one could certainly not go from a ContinuousDataReader to the ChunkedDataReader even though they are both IDataProcessors. This feels to me as though it is incorrect ( possibly an LSP violation? ) and certainly not a theoretically correct way of working. It is almost as though the "real" interface here is the combination of all three classes. Unfortunately in the project I am working on with the deadlines we are working to, we're pretty much stuck with this design, but if we had a little more elbow room, what would be a better design approach in this kind of scenario?

    Read the article

  • Use decorator and factory together to extend objects?

    - by TheClue
    I'm new to OOP and design pattern. I've a simple app that handles the generation of Tables, Columns (that belong to Table), Rows (that belong to Column) and Values (that belong to Rows). Each of these object can have a collection of Property, which is in turn defined as an enum. They are all interfaces: I used factories to get concrete instances of these products, depending on circumnstances. Now I'm facing the problem of extending these classes. Let's say I need another product called "SpecialTable" which in turn has some special properties or new methods like 'getSomethingSpecial' or an extended set of Property. The only way is to extend/specialize all my elements (ie. build a SpecialTableFactory, a SpecialTable interface and a SpecialTableImpl concrete)? What to do if, let's say, I plan to use standard methods like addRow(Column column, String name) that doesn't need to be specialized? I don't like the idea to inherit factories and interfaces, but since SpecialTable has more methods than Table i guess it cannot share the same factory. Am I wrong? Another question: if I need to define product properties at run time (a Table that is upgraded to SpecialTable at runtime), i guess i should use a decorator. Is it possible (and how) to combine both factory and decorator design? Is it better to use a State or Strategy pattern, instead?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >