Search Results

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

Page 19/348 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

• What are the general factors, that a developer should consider when he starts developing an applicat

  - by Oden

  Hey, I'm new to the development business, and I'm interested in the way, how other programmers start to develop, design an application. What are the main factors that I should consider when sitting down and starting to think about the app? How do you start planning a project?

  Read the article

• Should Factories Persist Entities?

  - by mxmissile

  Should factories persist entities they build? Or is that the job of the caller? Pseudo Example Incoming: public class OrderFactory { public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); .... return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public OrderController(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); repository.Insert(order); ... } } or public class OrderFactory { public OrderFactory(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); ... repository.Insert(order); return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); ... } } Is there a recommended practice here?

  Read the article

• With MVVM, does each UI window have its own ViewModel?

  - by j0rd4n

  When I'm designing multiple views under the MVVM pattern, does each view get its own ViewModel or do they all share the same one? I understand that this is ultimately a flexible decision, but what is the best practice? My gut tells me to have a ViewModel for each view (i.e. each separate UI window). All of the blog examples of MVVM show a single view but not much beyond that.

  Read the article

• How to use a 3rd party control inside the viewmodel?

  - by Sander

  I have a 3rd party control which among other things performs loading of some data. I want my viewmodel to keep track of this load operation and adjust its own state accordingly. If it were up to me, I'd do the data loading far away from the view, but it is not. So, I seem to be in the situation where my viewmodel depends on my view. How do I best handle this? I feel rather dirty making the view publish events to the viewmodel but I don't see any other reasonable way to get this info into the viewmodel. A similar situation might crop up with standard controls, too - imagine if your viewmodel depends on the events coming from a MediaElement - how do you properly model this? Do you put the MediaElement into the viewmodel? That doesn't sound right. If publishing the events to the viewmodel is indeed the most reasonable way, is there some common pattern used for this? How do you do it?

  Read the article

• Configuration and Model-View

  - by HH

  I am using the Model-View pattern on a small application I'm writing. Here's the scenario: The model maintains a list of directories from where it can extract the data that it needs. The View has a Configuration or a Setting dialog where the user can modify this list of directories (the dialog has a JList displaying the list in addition to add and remove buttons). I need some advice from the community: The View needs to communicate these changes to the model. I thought first of adding to the model these methods: addDirectory() and removeDirectory(). But I am trying to limit the number of methods (or channels) that the View can use to communicate with and manipulate the model. Is there any good practice for this? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Observer pattern and violation of Single Responsibility Principle

  - by Devil Jin

  I have an applet which repaints itself once the text has changed Design 1: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet implements Listener{ private DynamicText text = null; public void init(){ text = new DynamicText("Welcome"); } public void paint(Graphics g){ g.drawString(text.getText(), 50, 30); } //implement Listener update() method public void update(){ repaint(); } } //DynamicText.java public class DynamicText implements Publisher{ // implements Publisher interface methods //notify listeners whenever text changes } Isn't this a violation of Single Responsibility Principle where my Applet not only acts as Applet but also has to do Listener job. Same way DynamicText class not only generates the dynamic text but updates the registered listeners. Design 2: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet{ private AppletListener appLstnr = null; public void init(){ appLstnr = new AppletListener(this); // applet stuff } } // AppletListener.java public class AppletListener implements Listener{ private Applet applet = null; public AppletListener(Applet applet){ this.applet = applet; } public void update(){ this.applet.repaint(); } } // DynamicText public class DynamicText{ private TextPublisher textPblshr = null; public DynamicText(TextPublisher txtPblshr){ this.textPblshr = txtPblshr; } // call textPblshr.notifyListeners whenever text changes } public class TextPublisher implments Publisher{ // implements publisher interface methods } Q1. Is design 1 a SPR violation? Q2. Is composition a better choice here to remove SPR violation as in design 2.

  Read the article

• Error handling inside or out of class?

  - by Rin

  Usually I do all what I can inside a class, in every method (try and catch). Am I doing it wrong? Recently I heard better way is handle error in program body... What is good habit?

  Read the article

• When are global variables acceptable?

  - by dsimcha

  Everyone here seems to hate global variables, but I see at least one very reasonable use for them: They are great for holding program parameters that are determined at program initialization and not modified afterwords. Do you agree that this is an exception to the "globals are evil" rule? Is there any other exception that you can think of, besides in quick and dirty throwaway code where basically anything goes? If not, why are globals so fundamentally evil that you do not believe that there are any exceptons?

  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

• 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

• Communication with different social networks, strategy pattern?

  - by bclaessens

  Hi For the last few days I've been thinking how I can solve the following programming problem and find the ideal, flexible programming structure. (note: I'm using Flash as my platform technology but that shouldn't matter since I'm just looking for the ideal design pattern). Our Flash website has multiple situations in which it has to communicate with different social networks (Facebook, Netlog and Skyrock). Now, the communication strategy doesn't have to change multiple times over one "run". The strategy should be picked once (at launch time) for that session. The real problem is the way the communication works between each social network and our website. Some networks force us to ask for a token, others force us to use a webservice, yet another forces us to set up its communication through javascript. The problem becomes more complicated when our website has to run in each network's canvas. Which results in even more (different) ways of communicating. To sum up, our website has to work in the following cases: standalone on the campaign website url (user chooses their favourite network) communicate with netlog OR communicate with facebook OR communicate with skyrock run in a netlog canvas and log in automatically (website checks for netlog parameters) run in a facebook canvas and log in automatically (website checks for facebook params) run in a skyrock canvas and log in automatically (website checks for skyrock params) As you can see, our website needs 6 different ways to communicate with a social network. To be honest, the actual significant difference between all communication strategies is the way they have to connect to their individual network (as stated above in my example). Posting an image, make a comment, ... is the same whether it runs standalone or in the canvas url. WARNING: posting an image, posting a comment DOES differ from network to network. Should I use the strategy pattern and make 6 different communication strategies or is there a better way? An example would be great but isn't required ;) 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

• 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

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

  - 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

• Repository Design Pattern Guidance

  - by thefactor

  Let's say you have an MVVM CRM application. You have a number of customer objects in memory, through a repository. What would be the appropriate place to handle tasks that aren't associated with traditional MVVM tasks from a GUI? For example, let's say every few minutes you want to check to see if their address is valid and pop up a notification if it is not. Or you want to send out an hourly e-mail update. Or you want a window to pop up to remind you to call a customer at a specific time. Where does this logic go? It's not GUI/action-oriented, and it's not logic that would be appropriate for a repository, I think.

  Read the article

• Find recipes that can be cooked from provided ingridients

  - by skaurus

  Sorry for bad English :( Suppose i can preliminary organize recipes and ingredients data in any way. How can i effectively conduct search of recipes by user-provided ingredients, preferably sorted by max match - so, first going recipes that use maximum of provided ingridients and do not contain any other ingrs, after them recipes that uses less of provided set and still not any other ingrs, after them recipes with minimum additional requirements and so on? All i can think about is represent recipe ingridients like bitmasks, and compare required bitmask with all recipes, but it is obviously a bad way to go. And related things like Levenstein distance i don't see how to use here. I believe it should be quite common task...

  Read the article

• C++ Singleton design pattern.

  - by Artem Barger

  Recently I've bumped into realization/implementation of Singleton design pattern for C++. It has looked in the following way (I have adopted it from real life example): // a lot of methods is omitted here class Singleton { public: static Singleton* getInstance( ); ~Singleton( ); private: Singleton( ); static Singleton* instance; }; From this declaration I can deduce that instance field is initiated on the heap, that means there is a memory allocation. That is completely unclear for me is when does exactly memory is going to be deallocated? Or there is a bug and memory leak? It seems like there is a problem in implementation. PS. And main question how to implement it in the right way?

  Read the article

• Domain-Driven-Design question

  - by Michael

  Hello everyone, I have a question about DDD. I'm building a application to learn DDD and I have a question about layering. I have an application that works like this: UI layer calls = Application Layer - Domain Layer - Database Here is a small example of how the code looks: //****************UI LAYER************************ //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface and implementation for Shopping Cart service would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); //This is the UI layer, //Calling into Application Layer //to get the shopping cart for a user. //Interface for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll //and implementation for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.Model. IShoppingCart shoppingCart = service.GetShoppingCartByUserName(userName); //Show shopping cart information. //For example, items bought, price, taxes..etc ... //Pressed Purchase button, so even for when //button is pressed. //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory again. IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); service.Purchase(shoppingCart); //**********************Application Layer********************** public class ShoppingCartService : IShoppingCartService { public IShoppingCart GetShoppingCartByUserName(string userName) { //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface for repository would be in MyApp.Infrastructure.dll //but implementation would by in MyApp.Model.dll IShoppingCartRepository repository = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartRepository>(); IShoppingCart shoppingCart = repository.GetShoppingCartByUserName(username); //Do shopping cart logic like calculating taxes and stuff //I would put these in services but not sure? ... return shoppingCart; } public void Purchase(IShoppingCart shoppingCart) { //Do Purchase logic and calling out to repository ... } } I've seem to put most of my business rules in services rather than the models and I'm not sure if this is correct? Also, i'm not completely sure if I have the laying correct? Do I have the right pieces in the correct place? Also should my models leave my domain model? In general I'm I doing this correct according DDD? Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to see "anti if" movement and its gaol?

  - by Vijay Shanker

  I have a developer for last 3 years, have been using if-else or if-else if statements a lot in my programing habit. And today, I found This link. One obvious sample i put here public void doSomthing(String target, String object){ //validate requests if(target != null && target.trim().length() < 1){ //invalid request; } //further logic } Now, I have seen this sort of check all over the places, libraries. So, I wanted to have a discussion about the worthiness of such a movement. Please let me know your views.

  Read the article

• Is there a case for parameterising using Abstract classes rather than Interfaces?

  - by Chris

  I'm currently developing a component based API that is heavily stateful. The top level components implement around a dozen interfaces each. The stock top-level components therefore sit ontop of a stack of Abstract implementations which in turn contain multiple mixin implementations and implement multiple mixin interfaces. So far, so good (I hope). The problem is that the base functionality is extremely complex to implement (1,000s of lines in 5 layers of base classes) and therefore I do not wish for component writers to implement the interfaces themselves but rather to extend my base classes (where all the boiler plate code is already written). If the API therefore accepts interfaces rather than references to the Abstract implementation that I wish for component writers to extends, then I have a risk that the implementer will not perform the validation that is both required and assumed by other areas of code. Therefore, my question is, is it sometimes valid to paramerise API methods using an abstract implementation reference rather than a reference to the interface(s) that it implements? Do you have an example of a well-designed API that uses this technique or am I trying to talk myself into bad-practice?

  Read the article

• Application wide messaging... without singletons?

  - by StormianRootSolver

  So, I want to go for a more Singleton - less design in the future. However, there seem to be a lot of tasks in an application that can't be done in meaningful way without singletons. I call them "application wide services", but they also fall into the same category as the cross cutting concerns, which I usually fix via AOP. Lets take an example: I want an application wide message queue that dispatches messages to components, every component can subscribe and publish there, it's a very nice multicast thing. The message queue and dispatching system are usually a (rather short) singleton class, which is very easy to implement in, say, C#. You can even use double dispatching and utilize message type metadata and the like, it's all so easy to do, it's almost trivial. However, having singletons is not really "object oriented design" (it introduces global variables) and it makes testing harder. Do you have any ideas? I'm asking this question because I'm willing to learn more about this topic, a LOT more. :-)

  Read the article

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