Search Results

Search found 86 results on 4 pages for 'decouple'.

Page 2/4 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4  | Next Page >

• Why is a small fixed vocabulary seen as an advantage to RESTful services?

  - by Matt Esch

  So, a RESTful service has a fixed set of verbs in its vocabulary. A RESTful web service takes these from the HTTP methods. There are some supposed advantages to defining a fixed vocabulary, but I don't really grasp the point. Maybe someone can explain it. Why is a fixed vocabulary as outlined by REST better than dynamically defining a vocabulary for each state? For example, object oriented programming is a popular paradigm. RPC is described to define fixed interfaces, but I don't know why people assume that RPC is limited by these contraints. We could dynamically specify the interface just as a RESTful service dynamically describes its content structure. REST is supposed to be advantageous in that it can grow without extending the vocabulary. RESTful services grow dynamically by adding more resources. What's so wrong about extending a service by dynamically specifying a per-object vocabulary? Why don't we just use the methods that are defined on our objects as the vocabulary and have our services describe to the client what these methods are and whether or not they have side effects? Essentially I get the feeling that the description of a server side resource structure is equivalent to the definition of a vocabulary, but we are then forced to use the limited vocabulary in which to interact with these resources. Does a fixed vocabulary really decouple the concerns of the client from the concerns of the server? I surely have to be concerned with some configuration of the server, this is normally resource location in RESTful services. To complain at the use of a dynamic vocabulary seems unfair because we have to dynamically reason how to understand this configuration in some way anyway. A RESTful service describes the transitions you are able to make by identifying object structure through hypermedia. I just don't understand what makes a fixed vocabulary any better than any self-describing dynamic vocabulary, which could easily work very well in an RPC-like service. Is this just a poor reasoning for the limiting vocabulary of the HTTP protocol?

  Read the article

• Recommened design pattern to handle multiple compression algorithms for a class hierarchy

  - by sgorozco

  For all you OOD experts. What would be the recommended way to model the following scenario? I have a certain class hierarchy similar to the following one: class Base { ... } class Derived1 : Base { ... } class Derived2 : Base { ... } ... Next, I would like to implement different compression/decompression engines for this hierarchy. (I already have code for several strategies that best handle different cases, like file compression, network stream compression, legacy system compression, etc.) I would like the compression strategy to be pluggable and chosen at runtime, however I'm not sure how to handle the class hierarchy. Currently I have a tighly-coupled design that looks like this: interface ICompressor { byte[] Compress(Base instance); } class Strategy1Compressor : ICompressor { byte[] Compress(Base instance) { // Common compression guts for Base class ... // if( instance is Derived1 ) { // Compression guts for Derived1 class } if( instance is Derived2 ) { // Compression guts for Derived2 class } // Additional compression logic to handle other class derivations ... } } As it is, whenever I add a new derived class inheriting from Base, I would have to modify all compression strategies to take into account this new class. Is there a design pattern that allows me to decouple this, and allow me to easily introduce more classes to the Base hierarchy and/or additional compression strategies?

  Read the article

• In MVC , DAO should be called from Controller or Model

  - by tito

  I have seen various arguments against the DAO being called from the Controller class directly and also the DAO from the Model class.Infact I personally feel that if we are following the MVC pattern , the controller should not coupled with the DAO , but the Model class should invoke the DAO from within and controller should invoke the model class.Why because , we can decouple the model class apart from a webapplication and expose the functionalities for various ways like for a REST service to use our model class. If we write the DAO invocation in the controller , it would not be possible for a REST service to reuse the functionality right ? I have summarized both the approaches below. Approach #1 public class CustomerController extends HttpServlet { proctected void doPost(....) { Customer customer = new Customer("xxxxx","23",1); new CustomerDAO().save(customer); } } Approach #2 public class CustomerController extends HttpServlet { proctected void doPost(....) { Customer customer = new Customer("xxxxx","23",1); customer.save(customer); } } public class Customer { ........... private void save(Customer customer){ new CustomerDAO().save(customer); } } Note- Here is what a definition of Model is : Model: The model manages the behavior and data of the application domain, responds to requests for information about its state (usually from the view), and responds to instructions to change state (usually from the controller). In event-driven systems, the model notifies observers (usually views) when the information changes so that they can react. I would need an expert opinion on this because I find many using #1 or #2 , So which one is it ?

  Read the article

• Implementing a ILogger interface to log data

  - by Jon

  I have a need to write data to file in one of my classes. Obviously I will pass an interface into my class to decouple it. I was thinking this interface will be used for testing and also in other projects. This is my interface: //This could be used by filesystem, webservice public interface ILogger { List<string> PreviousLogRecords {get;set;} void Log(string Data); } public interface IFileLogger : ILogger { string FilePath; bool ValidFileName; } public class MyClassUnderTest { public MyClassUnderTest(IFileLogger logger) {....} } [Test] public void TestLogger() { var mock = new Mock<IFileLogger>(); mock.Setup(x => x.Log(Is.Any<string>).AddsDataToList()); //Is this possible?? var myClass = new MyClassUnderTest(mock.Object); myClass.DoSomethingThatWillSplitThisAndLog3Times("1,2,3"); Assert.AreEqual(3,mock.PreviousLogRecords.Count); } This won't work I don't believe as nothing is storing the items so is this possible using Moq and also what do you think of the design of the interface?

  Read the article

• How should I structure moving from overworld to menu system / combat?

  - by persepolis

  I'm making a text-based "Arena" game where the player is the owner of 5 creatures that battle other teams for loot, experience and glory. The game is very simple, using Python and a curses emulator. I have a static ASCII map of an "overworld" of sorts. My character, represented by a glyph, can move about this static map. There are locations all over the map that the character can visit, that break down into two types: 1) Towns, which are a series of menus that will allow the player to buy equipment for his team, hire new recruits or do other things. 2) Arenas, where the player's team will have a "battle" interface with actions he can perform, messages about the fight, etc. Maybe later, an ASCII representation of the fight but for now, just screens of information with action prompts. My main problem is what kind of design or structure I should use to implement this? Right now, the game goes through a master loop which waits for keyboard input and then moves the player about the screen. My current thinking is this: 1) Upon keyboard input, the Player coordinates are checked against a list of Location objects and if the Player coords match the Location coords then... 2) ??? I'm not sure if I should then call a seperate function to initiate a "menu" or "combat" mode. Or should I create some kind of new GameMode object that contains a method itself for drawing the screen, printing the necessary info? How do I pass my player's team data into this object? My main concern is passing around the program flow into all these objects. Should I be calling straight functions for different parts of my game, and objects to represent "things" within my game? I was reading about the MVC pattern and how this kind of problem might benefit - decouple the GUI from the game logic and user input but I have no idea how this applies to my game.

  Read the article

• Test-Driven Development with plain C: manage multiple modules

  - by Angelo

  I am new to test-driven development, but I'm loving it. There is, however, a main problem that prevents me from using it effectively. I work for embedded medical applications, plain C, with safety issues. Suppose you have module A that has a function A_function() that I want to test. This function call a function B_function, implemented in module B. I want to decouple the module so, as James Grenning teaches, I create a Mock module B that implements a mock version of B_function. However the day comes when I have to implement module B with the real version of B_function. Of course the two B_function can not live in the same executable, so I don't know how to have a unique "launcher" to test both modules. James Grenning way out is to replace, in module A, the call to B_function with a function pointer that can have the value of the mock or the real function according to the need. However I work in a team, and I can not justify this decision that would make no sense if it were not for the test, and no one asked me explicitly to use test-driven approach. Maybe the only way out is to generate different a executable for each module. Any smarter solution? Thank you

  Read the article

• problem in decoupling urls.py , while following a tutorial of django

  - by Nitin Garg

  http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/intro/tutorial03/ I was at the step Decoupling the URLconfs where the tutorial illustrates how to decouple urls.py. On doing exactly what it says, i get the following error- error at /polls/1/ nothing to repeat Request Method: GET Request URL: http://localhost:8000/polls/1/ Exception Type: error Exception Value: nothing to repeat Exception Location: C:\jython2.5.1\Lib\re.py in _compile, line 241 Python Executable: C:\jython2.5.1\jython.bat Python Version: 2.5.1 Python Path: ['E:\\Programming\\Project\\django_app\\mysite', 'C:\\jython2.5.1\\Lib\\site-packages\\setuptools-0.6c11-py2.5.egg', 'C:\\jython2.5.1\\Lib', '__classpath__', '__pyclasspath__/', 'C:\\jython2.5.1\\Lib\\site-packages'] Server time: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:02:56 +0530

  Read the article

• How can I use Moose with Test::Class?

  - by rassie

  I'm currently refactoring a test suite built up by a colleague and would like to use Test::Class[::Most] while doing so. As I started I figured out I could really use a couple of Moose roles to decouple code a little bit. However, it seems it's not quite possible -- I'm getting error messages like this one: Prototype mismatch: sub My::Test::Class::Base::blessed: none vs ($) at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Sub/Exporter.pm line 896 So the question is: can I use Moose together with Test::Class and if so, how? PS: The code goes like this: package My::Test::Class::Base; use Moose; use Test::Class::Most; with 'My::Cool::Role'; has attr => ( ... );

  Read the article

• Calling one DAO from another DAO?

  - by es11

  Can this ever make sense? Say I need to fetch an object from the DB which has a relation to another object (represented by a foreign key in the DB, and by a composition in my domain object). If in my first DAO I fetch the data for object 1, then call the dao for object 2, and finally (from within the first DAO, call the setter in object 1 and give it the previously fetched object 2). I know I could do a join instead, but it just seems more logical to me to decouple the functionality (which is why I am skeptical about calling one dao from another). Or should I move some of the logic to the service layer? Thanks Update: I think I solved the problem with help from the answers: all I needed to do was add the following to my mapping of Object 1: <one-to-one name="Object2" fetch="join" class="com...Object2"></one-to-one> I didn't have to change anything else. Thanks for the help!

  Read the article

• How can I use Moose with Test::Class?

  - by rassie

  I'm currently refactoring a test suite built up by a colleague and would like to use Test::Class[::Most] while doing so. As I started I figured out I could really use a couple of Moose roles to decouple code a little bit. However, it seems it's not quite possible -- I'm getting error messages like this one: Prototype mismatch: sub My::Test::Class::Base::blessed: none vs ($) at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Sub/Exporter.pm line 896 So the question is: can I use Moose together with Test::Class and if so, how? PS: The code goes like this: package My::Test::Class::Base; use Moose; use Test::Class::Most; with 'My::Cool::Role'; has attr => ( ... );

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC Routes

  - by MVCDummy09

  Can I see one example that would make this piece of code compile? public IEnumerable<RouteBase> Routes { get { return new List<Route>() { new Route(...) } } } What would you do if RouteCollection.MapRoute() didn't exist? I'm trying to put my Controller in charge of mapping routes, not Global.asax.cs. public IEnumerable<RouteBase> Routes is a member of my Controller. If the Controller is responsible for a Route, it's a bad idea to decouple the Route by using routes.MapRoute() in Global.asax.cs.

  Read the article

• C#, DI, IOC using Castle Windsor

  - by humblecoder

  Hi! Am working on a design of a project. I would like to move the implementation away hence to decouple am using interfaces. interface IFoo { void Bar(); void Baz(); } The assemblies which implemented the above interface would be drop in some predefined location say "C:\Plugins" for eg: project: A class A : IFoo { } when compiled produces A.dll project: B class A : IFoo { } when compiled produced B.dll Now I would like to provide a feature in my application to enable end use to configure the assembly to be loaded in the database.say C:\Plugins\A.dll or C:\Plugins\B.dll How it can be achieved using Castle Windsor. container.AddComponent("identifier",load assembly from specified location as configured in DB); I would like to do something like this: IFoo foo =container.Resolve("identifier"); foo.Bar(); //invoke method. Any hint would be highly appreciated. Thanks, Hamed.

  Read the article

• Is there a recommended way to use the Observer pattern in MVP using GWT?

  - by Tomislav Nakic-Alfirevic

  I am thinking about implementing a user interface according to the MVP pattern using GWT, but have doubts about how to proceed. These are (some of) my goals: - the presenter knows nothing about the UI technology (i.e. uses nothing from com.google.*) - the view knows nothing about the model or the presenter - the model knows nothing of the view or the presenter (...obviously) I would place an interface between the view and the presenter and use the Observer pattern to decouple the two: the view generates events and the presenter gets notified. What confuses me is that java.util.Observer and java.util.Observable are not supported in GWT. This suggests that what I'm doing is not the recommended way to do it, as far as GWT is concerned, which leads me to my questions: what is the recommended way to implement MVP using GWT, specifically with the above goals in mind? How would you do it?

  Read the article

• How to leverage Spring Integration in a real-world JMS distributed architecture?

  - by ngeek

  For the following scenario I am looking for your advices and tips on best practices: In a distributed (mainly Java-based) system with: many (different) client applications (web-app, command-line tools, REST API) a central JMS message broker (currently in favor of using ActiveMQ) multiple stand-alone processing nodes (running on multiple remote machines, computing expensive operations of different types as specified by the JMS message payload) How would one best apply the JMS support provided by the Spring Integration framework to decouple the clients from the worker nodes? When reading through the reference documentation and some very first experiments it looks like the configuration of an JMS inbound adapter inherently require to use a subscriber, which in a decoupled scenario does not exist. Small side note: communication should happen via JMS text messages (using a JSON data structure for future extensibility).

  Read the article

• load-views when running multiple noir servers

  - by Roth Michaels

  I'm experimenting with using noir to start three servers (each to handle a different aspect of the application). I am trying to do this so that I can run all three servers within one application while developing and easily decouple the project into three different applications for deployment. It is no problem to use noir.server/start and noir.server/stop to run the jetty servers I need. What I'm trying to figure out is some way to call load-views (or something like that) with a different set views for each server so that URI conflicts are handled by the correct defpage.

  Read the article

• Recommended Python publish/subscribe/dispatch module ?

  - by Eli Bendersky

  From PyPubSub: Pypubsub provides a simple way for your Python application to decouple its components: parts of your application can publish messages (with or without data) and other parts can subscribe/receive them. This allows message "senders" and message "listeners" to be unaware of each other: one doesn't need to import the other a sender doesn't need to know "who" gets the messages, what the listeners will do with the data, or even if any listener will get the message data. similarly, listeners don't need to worry about where messages come from. This is a great tool for implementing a Model-View-Controller architecture or any similar architecture that promotes decoupling of its components. There seem to be quite a few Python modules for publishing/subscribing floating around the web, from PyPubSub, to PyDispatcher to simple "home-cooked" classes. Can you recommend a module that works well in most cases ? Which modules have you had positive experience with ? Negative ? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Lightweight messaging (async invocations) in Java

  - by Sergey Mikhanov

  I am looking for lightweight messaging framework in Java. My task is to process events in a SEDA’s manner: I know that some stages of the processing could be completed quickly, and others not, and would like to decouple these stages of processing. Let’s say I have components A and B and processing engine (be this container or whatever else) invokes component A, which in turn invokes component B. I do not care if execution time of component B will be 2s, but I do care if execution time of component A is below 50ms, for example. Therefore, it seems most reasonable for component A to submit a message to B, which B will process at the desired time. I am aware of different JMS implementations and Apache ActiveMQ: they are too heavyweight for this. I searched for some lightweight messaging (with really basic features like messages serialization and simplest routing) to no avail. Do you have anything to recommend in this issue?

  Read the article

• Modular enterprise architecture using MVC and Orchard CMS

  - by MrJD

  I'm making a large scale MVC application using Orchard. And I'm going to be separating my logic into modules. I'm also trying to heavily decouple the application for maximum extensibility and testability. I have a rudimentary understanding of IoC, Repository Pattern, Unit of Work pattern and Service Layer pattern. I've made myself a diagram. I'm wondering if it is correct and if there is anything I have missed regarding an extensible application. Note that each module is a separate project.

  Read the article

• c++: Schedule function call in the future?

  - by User

  Using Visual C++ with MFC. When a certain event occurs in my code, I want to set a function to be called 10 seconds later to perform some activity. The handling of the event happens in a static library that doesn't have any direct links to MFC (and I'd like to keep it that way). How can I schedule a function to be called at some point in the future? Use a Timer I guess? How do I decouple the Timer (which is an MFC dependency) so my business code doesn't have a direct dependency on the GUI? Or maybe something else besides a timer?

  Read the article

• Avoid stuck calling callback

  - by andlomba

  Hello all, This is a question about generic c++ event driven applications design. Lets assume that we have two threads, a "Dispatcher" (or "Engine"...) and a "Listener" (or "Client"...). Let's assume that I write the Dispatcher code, and release it as a library. I also write the Listener interface, of course. When the Dispatcher executes (after Listener registration) listenerInstance.onSomeEvent(); the event handling code will actually be executed by the Dispatcher thread, so if the person that implements the Listener writes something like void Listener::onSomeEvent() { while(true) ; } The Dispatcher will stuck forever. Is there a "plain old c++" (I mean no boost or libsigc++) way to "decouple" the two classes, so I can be sure that my Dispatcher will work fine whatever the Listeners does in the callbacks? bye and thanks in advance, Andrea

  Read the article

• how to call a function to refresh GUI

  - by SWKK

  Hi Guys, I am refactoring some code to decouple GUI from some state. #include <StateObject> Class GUI{ ... StateObject A; void doSomething() { A->hullaballoo();} **void ReFreshMyGui() { //take state A and redraw }** }; State object is being shared by multiple classes to update the state but this Gui Object specializes in displaying the state. So I would like to call the Refresh function via StateObject whenever its modified. I am not sure how or if signals will provide the solution. Any hints?

  Read the article

• benefit os having a factory for object creation?

  - by ajsie

  im trying to understand the factory design pattern. i dont understand why it's good to have a middleman between the client and the product (object that the client wants). example with no factory: $mac = new Mac(); example with a factory: $appleStore = new AppleStore(); $mac = $appleStore->getProduct('mac'); how does the factory pattern decouple the client from the product? could someone give an example of a future code change that will impact on example 1 negative, but positive in example 2 so i understand the importance of decoupling? thanks

  Read the article

• View / ViewModel - what is the sense (in a WPF control)?

  - by TomTom

  Not as funny as it sounds. Normally the View / ViewModel should decouple the presentation from the business logic. Good. Now, a Control in WPF is basically invisible unless made different (with the exceptions of UserControl and Window that have XAML directly attached). The Style is putting in the "visual presentation" - which basically means a Control does not need a view mechanism as WPF already has one? In addition. the ViewModel is actually part of the Control, or? Just fighting with that stuff. I know in ASP.NET, WinForms the separation makes a lot of sense - but there, basically, controls HAVE an intrinsic look. In WPF, I have some where it makes sense (derived from UserControl), but for the majority of the controls I write, the View & ViewModel look like pretty much totally superflous thanks to the already presenting view mechanism.

  Read the article

• Design guidelines for cache mechanism

  - by Delashmate

  Hi All, I got assignment to write design for cache mechanism (this is work assignment, not homework), This is my first time writing a design document, Our program display images for doctors, and we want to reduce the parsing time of the images So we want to save the parsed data in advance (in files or inside database) Currently I have several design key ideas: Handle locks - each shared data structure should be handled, also files Test - add test to verify the data from the cache is equal to the data from the files To decouple the connection to the database- not to call directly to the database Cleanup mechanisem- to delete old files if the cahce directory exceed configurable threshold Support config file Support performance tool in the feature I will also add class diagram, data flow charts, and workflow What do you think I should add to the key ideas? Do you know good link to atricales about design? Thanks in advance, Dan

  Read the article

• benefit of having a factory for object creation?

  - by ajsie

  I'm trying to understand the factory design pattern. I don't understand why it's good to have a middleman between the client and the product (object that the client wants). example with no factory: $mac = new Mac(); example with a factory: $appleStore = new AppleStore(); $mac = $appleStore->getProduct('mac'); How does the factory pattern decouple the client from the product? Could someone give an example of a future code change that will impact on example 1 negative, but positive in example 2 so I understand the importance of decoupling? Thanks.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4  | Next Page >