Search Results

Search found 14326 results on 574 pages for 'design by contract'.

Page 198/574 | < Previous Page | 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205  | Next Page >

  • What is your custom exception hierrarchy?

    - by bonefisher
    My question is: how would you create exception hierarchy in your application? Designing the architecture of an application, from my perspective, we could have three types of exceptions: the built-in (e.g.: InvalidOperationException) custom internal system faults (DB transaction failed on commit, DbTransactionFailedException) custom business exceptions (BusinessRuleViolationException) Class hierarchy: Exception MyAppInternalException DbTransactionFailedException MyServerTimeoutException ... MyAppBusinessRuleViolationException UsernameAlreadyExistsException ... where only MyAppInternalException & MyAppBusinessRuleViolationException would be catched.

    Read the article

  • Building a many-to-many db schema using only an unpredictable number of foreign keys

    - by user1449855
    Good afternoon (at least around here), I have a many-to-many relationship schema that I'm having trouble building. The main problem is that I'm only working with primary and foreign keys (no varchars or enums to simplify things) and the number of many-to-many relationships is not predictable and can increase at any time. I looked around at various questions and couldn't find something that directly addressed this issue. I split the problem in half, so I now have two one-to-many schemas. One is solved but the other is giving me fits. Let's assume table FOO is a standard, boring table that has a simple primary key. It's the one in the one-to-many relationship. Table BAR can relate to multiple keys of FOO. The number of related keys is not known beforehand. An example: From a query FOO returns ids 3, 4, 5. BAR needs a unique key that relates to 3, 4, 5 (though there could be any number of ids returned) The usual join table does not work: Table FOO_BAR primary_key | foo_id | bar_id | Since FOO returns 3 unique keys and here bar_id has a one-to-one relationship with foo_id. Having two join tables does not seem to work either, as it still can't map foo_ids 3, 4, 5 to a single bar_id. Table FOO_TO_BAR primary_key | foo_id | bar_to_foo_id | Table BAR_TO_FOO primary_key | foo_to_bar_id | bar_id | What am I doing wrong? Am I making things more complicated than they are? How should I approach the problem? Thanks a lot for the help.

    Read the article

  • How to create a "facade" table?

    - by tputkonen
    A legacy database contains a join table which links tables table1 and table2, and contains just two foreign keys: TABLE_ORIG: table1_id table2_id In order to utilize this table using JPA I would need to create a surrogate primary key to the link table. However, the existing table must not be modified at all. I would like to create another table which would contain also a primary key in addition to the foreign keys: TABLE_NEW: id table1_id table2_id All changes to TABLE_ORIG should be reflected in TABLE_NEW, and vice versa. Is this doable in mysql?

    Read the article

  • Working with foreigh keys - cannot insert

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone! Doing my first tryouts with foreign keys in a mySQL database and are trying to do a insert, that fails for this reason: Integrity constraint violation: 1452 Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails Does this mean that foreign keys restrict INSERTS as well as DELETES and/or UPDATES on each table that is enforced with foreign keys relations? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Hibernate : Opinions in Composite PK vs Surrogate PK

    - by Albert Kam
    As i understand it, whenever i use @Id and @GeneratedValue on a Long field inside JPA/Hibernate entity, i'm actually using a surrogate key, and i think this is a very nice way to define a primary key considering my not-so-good experiences in using composite primary keys, where : there are more than 1 business-value-columns combination that become a unique PK the composite pk values get duplicated across the table details cannot change the business value inside that composite PK I know hibernate can support both types of PK, but im left wondering by my previous chats with experienced colleagues where they said that composite PK is easier to deal with when doing complex SQL queries and stored procedure processes. They went on saying that when using surrogate keys will complicate things when doing joining and there are several condition when it's impossible to do some stuffs when using surrogate keys. Although im sorry i cant explain the detail here since i was not clear enough when they explain it. Maybe i'll put more details next time. Im currently trying to do a project, and want to try out surrogate keys, since it's not getting duplicated across tables, and we can change the business-column values. And when the need for some business value combination uniqueness, i can use something like : @Table(name="MY_TABLE", uniqueConstraints={ @UniqueConstraint(columnNames={"FIRST_NAME", "LAST_NAME"}) // name + lastName combination must be unique But im still in doubt because of the previous discussion about the composite key. Could you share your experiences in this matter ? Thank you !

    Read the article

  • Program to find canonical cover or minimum number of functional dependencies

    - by Sev
    I would like to know if there is a program or algorithm to find canonical cover or minimum number of functional dependencies? For example: If you have: R = (A,B,C) <-- these are tables: A,B,C And dependencies: A ? BC B ? C A ? B AB ? C The canonical cover (or minimum number of dependencies) is: A ? B B ? C Is there a program that can accomplish this? If not, any code/pseudocode to help me write one would be appreciated. Prefer in Python or Java.

    Read the article

  • Using OpenGL drawing operations in an object-oriented setting?

    - by Lion Kabob
    I've been plowing through basic shaders and whatnot for an application I'm writing, and I've been having trouble figuring out a high-level organization for the drawing calls. I'm thinking of having a singleton class which implements a number of basic drawing operations, taking data from "user" classes and passing that to the appropriate opengl calls. I'm wondering how people do this when writing their own applications, as the internet is chock full of basic "Your first shader" tutorials, but very little on suggested organization of drawing code. My particular environment is targeted at iPad/OpenGL ES 2.0, but I think the question stands for most environments.

    Read the article

  • Anything similar to Hibernate in PHP?

    - by harigm
    I am a Java programmer and was working on a project using Hibernate and Struts for some time. Now For my new project, I am working on PHP and Mysql (learning PHP). Is there any technology which is similar to Hibernate for PHP? If yes, can anyone give me the link where I can understand and use it? Is there a POJO concept in PHP?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid using this in a constructor

    - by Paralife
    I have this situation: interface MessageListener { void onMessageReceipt(Message message); } class MessageReceiver { MessageListener listener; public MessageReceiver(MessageListener listener, other arguments...) { this.listener = listener; } loop() { Message message = nextMessage(); listener.onMessageReceipt(message); } } and I want to avoid the following pattern: (Using the this in the Client constructor) class Client implements MessageListener { MessageReceiver receiver; MessageSender sender; public Client(...) { receiver = new MessageReceiver(this, other arguments...); sender = new Sender(...); } . . . @Override public void onMessageReceipt(Message message) { if(Message.isGood()) sender.send("Congrtulations"); else sender.send("Boooooooo"); } } The reason why i need the above functionality is because i want to call the sender inside the onMessageReceipt() function, for example to send a reply. But I dont want to pass the sender into a listener, so the only way I can think of is containing the sender in a class that implements the listener, hence the above resulting Client implementation. Is there a way to achive this without the use of 'this' in the constructor? It feels bizare and i dont like it, since i am passing myself to an object(MessageReceiver) before I am fully constructed. On the other hand, the MessageReceiver is not passed from outside, it is constructed inside, but does this 'purifies' the bizarre pattern? I am seeking for an alternative or an assurance of some kind that this is safe, or situations on which it might backfire on me.

    Read the article

  • Factory Pattern: Determining concrete factory class instantiation?

    - by Chris
    I'm trying to learn patterns and I'm stuck on determining how or where a Factory Pattern determines what class to instanciate. If I have a Application that calls the factory and sends it, say, an xml config file to determine what type of action to take, where does that logic for interpreting the config file happen? THE FACTORY using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace myNamespace { public abstract class SourceFactory { abstract public UploadSource getUploadSource(); } public class TextSourceFactory : SourceFactory { public override UploadSource getUploadSource() { return new TextUploadSource(); } } public class XmlSourceFacotry : SourceFactory { public override UploadSource getUploadSource() { return new XmlUploadSource(); } } public class SqlSourceFactory : SourceFactory { public override UploadSource getUploadSource() { return new SqlUploadSource(); } } } THE CLASSES using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace myNamespace { public abstract class UploadSource { abstract public void Execute(); } public class TextUploadSource : UploadSource { public override void Execute() { Console.WriteLine("You executed a text upload source"); } } public class XmlUploadSource : UploadSource { public override void Execute() { Console.WriteLine("You executed an XML upload source"); } } public class SqlUploadSource : UploadSource { public override void Execute() { Console.WriteLine("You executed a SQL upload source"); } } }

    Read the article

  • best practices - multiple functions vs single function with switch case

    - by Amit
    I have a situation where I need to perform several small (but similar) tasks. I can think of two ways to achieve this. First Approach: function doTask1(); function doTask2(); function doTask3(); function doTask4(); Second Approach: // TASK1, TASK2, ... TASK4 are all constants function doTask(TASK) { switch(TASK) { case TASK1: // do task1 break; case TASK2: // do task2 break; case TASK3: // do task3 break; case TASK4: // do task4 break; } } A few more tasks may be added in future (though the chances are rare. but this cannot be ruled out) Please suggest which of the two approaches (or if any other) is a best practice in such a situation.

    Read the article

  • Providing multi-version databases for backward compatibility for production applications/databases.

    - by JavaRocky
    How can I manage multiple versions of a database easily? I have some data (as views as selects for data originating in tables from other schemas), which other database may reference using various means including database synonyms & links. I wish to provide a sort of interface/guarantee in-case future for applications/databases which use this data. All of this is for in the event i need to update the views for correctness or applicability inside my database. How can i achieve this in a maintained, controlled and easy way? I am using Oracle 10g if that matters.

    Read the article

  • Designer tool integration with TFS?

    - by reallyJim
    Are there good tools for professional designers to use that support source control integration with Team Foundation Server? I'm aware of the Expression tools, but curious to see if there is something else, as proper designer tools really aren't my area of expertise.

    Read the article

  • Sequence numbers best practice

    - by Abdullah Jibaly
    What's the best practice or well known methods to implement sequence numbers for business entities such as invoices, purchase orders, job numbers, etc? I want to be able to save the latest value in the database and be able to set it programatically. Is it OK to use a table for this purpose that has a SEQUENCE_NAME, SEQUENCE_NUMBER tuple? I know some databases have a first class sequence type but others (eg, MySQL) do not so it's not something I want to rely on. If a table is used to hold these sequences what is the right way to get and increment them in a synchronized fashion to ensure no data inconsistencies arise?

    Read the article

  • Best practice for DAO pattern ?

    - by Tony
    I've seen a lot of codes use a service-dao pattern , I don't know the origin of this pattern . It force the front layer call service , then delegates some of the service task to dao. I want to ask : Does DAO layer do purely data access related task ? What about exception encapsulation ? Is there other pattern can be used to replace this ?

    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

  • Refactoring a C# derived class with method dependancies

    - by drelihan
    Hi Folks, I want to get your opinion on this. I have a class which is derived from a base class. I don't have control over the code in the base class and it is critical to the system that I derive from it. In my class I inherite two methods that are critical to the system and are used in pretty much every function, many times. I intend to refactor this derived class and extract some classes from it - this won't be a problem. What I'm not sure about is, is it worth extracting class if I have to constantly make call backs to my main class to access the two methods (or public wrappers to the methods)??? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Performance Tricks for C# Logging

    - by Charles
    I am looking into C# logging and I do not want my log messages to spend any time processing if the message is below the logging threshold. The best I can see log4net does is a threshold check AFTER evaluating the log parameters. Example: _logger.Debug( "My complicated log message " + thisFunctionTakesALongTime() + " will take a long time" ) Even if the threshold is above Debug, thisFunctionTakesALongTime will still be evaluated. In log4net you are supposed to use _logger.isDebugEnabled so you end up with if( _logger.isDebugEnabled ) _logger.Debug( "Much faster" ) I want to know if there is a better solution for .net logging that does not involve a check each time I want to log. In C++ I am allowed to do LOG_DEBUG( "My complicated log message " + thisFunctionTakesALongTime() + " will take no time" ) since my LOG_DEBUG macro does the log level check itself. This frees me to have a 1 line log message throughout my app which I greatly prefer. Anyone know of a way to replicate this behavior in C#?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205  | Next Page >