Search Results

Search found 658 results on 27 pages for 'oo'.

Page 2/27 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• PHP (A few questions) OO, refactoring, eclipse

  - by jax

  I am using PHP in eclipse. It works ok, I can connect to my remote site, there is colour coding of code elements and some code hints. I realise this may be too long to answer all questions, if you have a good answer for one part, answering just that is ok. Firstly General Coding I have found that it is easy to loose track of included files and their variables. For example if there was a database $cursor it is difficult to remember or even know that it was declared in the included file (this becomes much worse the more files you include). How are people dealing with this? How are people documenting their code - in particular the required GET and POST data? Secondly OO Development: Should I be going full OO in my development. Currently I have a functions library which I can include and have separated each "task" into a separate file. It is a bit nasty but it works. If I go OO how do I structure the directories in PHP, java uses packages - what about php? How should I name my files, should I use all lower case with _ for spaces "hello_world.php"? Should I name classes with Uppercase like Java "HelloWorld.php"? Is there a different naming convention for Classes and regular function files? Thirdly Refactoring I must say this is a real pain. If I change the name of a variable in one place I have to go through whole document and each file that included this file and change the name their too. Of course, errors everywhere is what results. How are people dealing with this problem? In Java if you change the name in one place it changes everywhere. Are there any plugins to improve php refactoring? I am using the official PHP version of Eclipse from their website. thanks

  Read the article

• Is OO design's strength in semantics or encapsulation?

  - by Phil H

  Object-oriented design (OOD) combines data and its methods. This, as far as I can see, achieves two great things: it provides encapsulation (so I don't care what data there is, only how I get values I want) and semantics (it relates the data together with names, and its methods consistently use the data as originally intended). So where does OOD's strength lie? In constrast, functional programming attributes the richness to the verbs rather than the nouns, and so both encapsulation and semantics are provided by the methods rather than the data structures. I work with a system that is on the functional end of the spectrum, and continually long for the semantics and encapsulation of OO. But I can see that OO's encapsulation can be a barrier to flexible extension of an object. So at the moment, I can see the semantics as a greater strength. Or is encapsulation the key to all worthwhile code?

  Read the article

• What's the benefits of SOA over OO?

  - by ghedas

  I want to know the differences between SOA and OO, and why SOA is going to popular?

  Read the article

• Is duck typing a subset of polymorphism

  - by Raynos

  From Polymorphism on WIkipedia In computer science, polymorphism is a programming language feature that allows values of different data types to be handled using a uniform interface. From duck typing on Wikipedia In computer programming with object-oriented programming languages, duck typing is a style of dynamic typing in which an object's current set of methods and properties determines the valid semantics, rather than its inheritance from a particular class or implementation of a specific interface. My interpretation is that based on duck typing, the objects methods/properties determine the valid semantics. Meaning that the objects current shape determines the interface it upholds. From polymorphism you can say a function is polymorphic if it accepts multiple different data types as long as they uphold an interface. So if a function can duck type, it can accept multiple different data types and operate on them as long as those data types have the correct methods/properties and thus uphold the interface. (Usage of the term interface is meant not as a code construct but more as a descriptive, documenting construct) What is the correct relationship between ducktyping and polymorphism ? If a language can duck type, does it mean it can do polymorphism ?

  Read the article

• Introducing Visual WebGui's XAML programming model extension for web developers

  - by Visual WebGui

  While ASP.NET provides an event base approach it is completely dismissed when working with AJAX and the richness of the server is lost and replaced with JavaScript programming and couple with a very high security risk. Visual WebGui reinstates the power of the server to AJAX development and provides a statefull yet scalable, server centric architecture that provides the benefits and user productivity of AJAX with the security and developer productivity we had before AJAX stormed into our lives. When...(read more)

  Read the article

• Embedded SQL in OO languages like Java

  - by Steve De Caux

  One of the things that annoys me working with SQL in OO languages is having to define SQL statements in strings. When I used to work on IBM mainframes, the languages used an SQL preprocessor to parse SQL statements out of the native code, so the statements could be written in cleartext SQL without the obfuscation of strings, for instance in Cobol there is a EXEC SQL .... END-EXEC syntax construct that allows pure SQL statements to be embedded in the Cobol code. <pure cobol code, including assignment of value to local variable HOSTVARIABLE> EXEC SQL SELECT COL_A, COL_B, COL_C INTO :COLA, :COLB, :COLC FROM TAB_A WHERE COL_D = :HOSTVARIABLE END_EXEC <more cobol code, variables COLA, COLB, COLC have been set> ...this makes the SQL statement really easy to read & check for errors. Between the EXEC SQL .... END-EXEC tokens there are no constraints on indentation, linebreaking etc., so you can format the SQL statement according to taste. Note that this example is for a single-row select, when a multiple-row resultset is expected, the coding is different (but still v. easy to read). So, taking Java as an example What made the "old COBOL" approach undesirable ? Not only SQL, but system calls could be made much more readable with that approach. Let's call it the embedded foreign language preprocessor approach. Would an embedded foreign language preprocessor for SQL be useful to implement ? Would you see a benefit in being able to write native SQL statements inside java code ? Edit I'm really asking if you think SQL in OO languages is a throwback, and if not then what could be done to make it better.

  Read the article

• Are factors such as Intellisense support and strong typing enough to justify the use of an 'Anaemic Domain Model'?

  - by David Osborne

  It's easy to accept that objects should be used in all layers except a layer nominated as a data layer. However, it's just as easy to end-up with an 'anaemic domain model' that is just an object representation of data with no real functionality ( http://martinfowler.com/bliki/AnemicDomainModel.html ). However, using objects in this fashion brings the benefit of factors such as Intellisense support, strong typing, readability, discoverability, etc. Are these factors strong arguments for an otherwise, anaemic domain model?

  Read the article

• OO vs Simplicity when it comes to user interaction

  - by Oetzi

  Firstly, sorry if this question is rather vague but it's something I'd really like an answer to. As a project over summer while I have some downtime from Uni I am going to build a monopoly game. This question is more about the general idea of the problem however, rather than the specific task I'm trying to carry out. I decided to build this with a bottom up approach, creating just movement around a forty space board and then moving on to interaction with spaces. I realised that I was quite unsure of the best way of proceeding with this and I am torn between two design ideas: Giving every space its own object, all sub-classes of a Space object so the interaction can be defined by the space object itself. I could do this by implementing different land() methods for each type of space. Only giving the Properties and Utilities (as each property has unique features) objects and creating methods for dealing with the buying/renting etc in the main class of the program (or Board as I'm calling it). Spaces like go and super tax could be implemented by a small set of conditionals checking to see if player is on a special space. Option 1 is obviously the OO (and I feel the correct) way of doing things but I'd like to only have to handle user interaction from the programs main class. In other words, I don't want the space objects to be interacting with the player. Why? Errr. A lot of the coding I've done thus far has had this simplicity but I'm not sure if this is a pipe dream or not for larger projects. Should I really be handling user interaction in an entirely separate class? As you can see I am quite confused about this situation. Is there some way round this? And, does anyone have any advice on practical OO design that could help in general?

  Read the article

• Object desing problem for simple school application

  - by Aragornx

  I want to create simple school application that provides grades,notes,presence,etc. for students,teachers and parents. I'm trying to design objects for this problem and I'm little bit confused - because I'm not very experienced in class designing. Some of my present objects are : class PersonalData() { private String name; private String surename; private Calendar dateOfBirth; [...] } class Person { private PersonalData personalData; } class User extends Person { private String login; private char[] password; } class Student extends Person { private ArrayList<Counselor> counselors = new ArrayList<>(); } class Counselor extends Person { private ArrayList<Student> children = new ArrayList<>(); } class Teacher extends Person { private ArrayList<ChoolClass> schoolClasses = new ArrayList<>(); private ArrayList<Subject> subjects = new ArrayList<>(); } This is of course a general idea. But I'm sure it's not the best way. For example I want that one person could be a Teacher and also a Parent(Counselor) and present approach makes me to have two Person objects. I want that user after successful logging in get all roles that it has (Student or Teacher or (Teacher & Parent) ). I think I should make and use some interfaces but I'm not sure how to do this right. Maybe like this: interface Role { } interface TeacherRole implements Role { void addGrade( Student student, Grade grade, [...] ); } class Teacher implements TeacherRole { private Person person; [...] } class User extends Person{ ArrayList<Role> roles = new ArrayList<>(); } Please if anyone could help me to make this right or maybe just point me to some literature/article that covers practical objects design.

  Read the article

• How can I switch off the insertion of wiki references automatically in OO Writer

  - by cscsaba242

  Hello, I have a pure text and it is inserted into open office writer. After the insertion the openoffice writer replaces the text with wiki references. I could not find where I can switch of this annoying feature. (I have already switched 'autocorrection - url recognition' off) see the pic below http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/402/clipboard02qzn.jpg Thanks the tips in advance. csaba

  Read the article

• Getters and Setters are bad OO design?

  - by Dan

  Getters and Setters are bad Briefly reading over the above article I find that getters and setters are bad OO design and should be avoided as they go against Encapsulation and Data Hiding. As this is the case how can it be avoided when creating objects and how can one model objects to take this into account. In cases where a getter or setter is required what other alternatives can be used? Thanks.

  Read the article

• MySQLi -- OO or Procedural?

  - by Kerry

  I know OO is the "way to go" but I'm thinking procedural might be easier to use in the wrapper I'm making. Any difference in performance between MySQLi Object Oriented vs Procedural?

  Read the article

• Data Application based on OO Concepts

  - by The King

  Hi... I'm looking for an application developed in C# with following qualities, which is available as source code... Based on OO Architecture Must connect to DB. Must handle atleast a "one to many master child" relationship (eg: Order and items ordered) Should display the data using Datagrid or other similar controls. Reports (either with report buider or otherwise) I want to understand the layering of objects better... Do you have any links... Thanks.

  Read the article

• Do Java or C++ lack any OO features?

  - by tsv

  I am interested in understanding object-oriented programming in a more academic and abstract way than I currently do, and want to know if there are any object-oriented concepts Java and C++ fail to implement. I realise neither of the languages are "pure" OO, but I am interested in what (if anything) they lack, not what they have extra.

  Read the article

• Is OO-programming really as important as hiring companies place it?

  - by ale

  I am just finishing my masters degree (in computing) and applying for jobs.. I've noticed many companies specifically ask for an understanding of object orientation. Popular interview questions are about inheritance, polymorphism, accessors etc. Is OO really that crucial? I even had an interview for a programming job in C and half the interview was OO. In the real world, developing real applications, is object orientation nearly always used? Are key features like polymorphism used A LOT? I think my question comes from one of my weaknesses.. although I know about OO.. I don't seem to be able to incorporate it a great deal into my programs. I would be really interested to get peoples' thoughts on this!

  Read the article

• Are ORM's counterproductive to OO design?

  - by Jeremiah

  In OOD, design of an object is said to be characterized by its identity and behavior. Having used OR/M's in the past, the primary purpose, in my opinion, revolves around the ability to store/retrieve data. That is to say, OR/M objects are not design by behavior, but rather data (i.e. database tables). Case and point: Many OR/M tools come with a point-to-a-database-table-and-click-object-generator. If objects are no longer characterized by behavior this will, in my opinion, muddy the identity and responsibility of the objects. Subsequently, if objects are not defined by a responsibility this could lend a hand to having tightly coupled classes and overall poor design. Furthermore, I would think that in an application setting, you would be heading towards scalability issues. So, my question is, do you think that ORM's are counterproductive to OO design? Perhaps the underlying question would be whether or not they are counterproductive to application development.

  Read the article

• OO and Writing Drupal Modules

  - by Aaron

  Preface: Yes, I've read: http://drupal.org/node/547518 I am writing 'foo' module for Drupal6, where I am organizing the code in an OO fashion. There's a class called Foo that has a bunch of setters and accessors, and it is working quite well at abstracting some pretty nasty code and SQL. The question is is it common practice to expose a class for other modules, or is it better to wrap things in the more typical foo_myfnname()? For example, if I am writing the module's docs, should I tell people to do this: $foo = new Foo(); $something = $foo->get_something(); or tell them to call: foo_get_something(); which under the hood does: function foo_get_something() { $foo = new Foo(); return $foo->get_something(); }

  Read the article

• Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

  - by Roman A. Taycher

  If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

  Read the article

• a completely decoupled OO system ?

  - by shrini1000

  To make an OO system as decoupled as possible, I'm thinking of the following approach: 1) we run an RMI/directory like service where objects can register and discover each other. They talk to this service through an interface 2) we run a messaging service to which objects can publish messages, and register subscription callbacks. Again, this happens through interfaces 3) when object A wants to invoke a method on object B, it discovers the target object's unique identity through #1 above, and publishes a message on the message service for object B 4) message services invokes B's callback to give it the message 5) B processes the request and sends the response for A on message service 6) A's callback is called and it gets the response. I feel this system is as decoupled as practically possible, but it has the following problems: 1) communication is typically asynchronous 2) hence it's non real time 3) the system as a whole is less efficient. Are there any other practical problems where this design obviously won't be applicable ? What are your thoughts on this design in general ?

  Read the article

• new controller in oo php

  - by pradeep

  Hi , I have a practical doubt , I am using OO php , and i am new to it. I am using zend framework to be clear. I am writing controllers(class) and actions(methods) with in it say PatientMapper.php which has all single mysql table related actions and Patient.php which has all setter and getter functions. I get a doubt that when should i write a new controller. Should i write a controller for all the actions on a single mysql table . or a single controller for all actions related to a module.

  Read the article

• OO Design - polymorphism - how to design for handing streams of different file types

  - by Kache4

  I've little experience with advanced OO practices, and I want to design this properly as an exercise. I'm thinking of implementing the following, and I'm asking if I'm going about this the right way. I have a class PImage that holds the raw data and some information I need for an image file. Its header is currently something like this: #include <boost/filesytem.hpp> #include <vector> namespace fs = boost::filesystem; class PImage { public: PImage(const fs::path& path, const unsigned char* buffer, int bufferLen); const vector<char> data() const { return data_; } const char* rawData() const { return &data_[0]; } /*** other assorted accessors ***/ private: fs::path path_; int width_; int height_; int filesize_; vector<char> data_; } I want to fill the width_ and height_ by looking through the file's header. The trivial/inelegant solution would be to have a lot of messy control flow that identifies the type of image file (.gif, .jpg, .png, etc) and then parse the header accordingly. Instead of using vector<char> data_, I was thinking of having PImage use a class, RawImageStream data_ that inherits from vector<char>. Each type of file I plan to support would then inherit from RawImageStream, e.g. RawGifStream, RawPngStream. Each RawXYZStream would encapsulate the respective header-parsing functions, and PImage would only have to do something like height_ = data_.getHeight();. Am I thinking this through correctly? How would I create the proper RawImageStream subclass for data_ to be in the PImage ctor? Is this where I could use an object factory? Anything I'm forgetting?

  Read the article

• “if” statement vs OO Design - 2

  - by hilal

  I encountered similar problem “if” statement vs OO Design - 1 but it is slightly different. Here is the problem that open the popup (different objects/popups) onValueChange of listbox Popup1 p1; // different objects Popup2 p2; // different objects Popup3 p3; ... listbox.add("p1"); listbox.add("p2"); listbox.add("p3"); ... listbox.addChangeHandler() { if(getSelectedItem().equals("p1")){ p1 = new Popup1(); p1.show(); } else if() {...} .... } I don't want to write "if" that if p1 then p1 = new Popup1(); p1.center(); How I can handle this situation? Any design-pattern? Here is my solution but it is so costly map() { map.put("p1", new Popup1()); map.put("p2", new Popup2()); map.put("p3", new Popup3()); } onValueChange() { map.get(selectedItem).show(); } One drawback is initialization all the popups. but it is require only when valueChange

  Read the article

• Objective-C Simple Inheritance and OO Principles

  - by bleeckerj

  I have a subclass SubClass that inherits from baseclass BaseClass. BaseClass has an initializer, like so: -(id)init { self = [super init]; if(self) { [self commonInit]; } return self; } -(void)commonInit { self.goodStuff = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; } SubClass does its initializer, like so: -(id)init { self = [super init]; if(self) { [self commonInit]; } return self; } -(void)commonInit { self.extraGoodStuff = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; } Now, I've *never taken a proper Objective-C course, but I'm a programmer more from the Electrical Engineering side, so I make do. I've developed server-side applications mostly in Java though, so I may be seeing the OO world through Java principles. When SubClass is initialized, it calls the BaseClass init and my expectation would be — because inheritance to me implies that characteristics of a BaseClass pass through to SubClass — that the commonInit method in BaseClass would be called during BaseClass init. It is not. I can *sorta understand maybe-possibly-stretch-my-imagination why it wouldn't be. But, then — why wouldn't it be based on the principles of OOP? What does "self" represent if not the instance of the class of the running code? Okay, so — I'm not going to argue that what a well-developed edition of Objective-C is doing is wrong. So, then — what is the pattern I should be using in this case? I want SubClass to have two main bits — the goodStuff that BaseClass has as well as the extraGoodStuff that it deserves as well. Clearly, I've been using the wrong pattern in this type of situation. Am I meant to expose commonInit (which makes me wonder about encapsulation principles — why expose something that, in the Java world at least, would be considered "protected" and something that should only ever be called once for each instance)? I've run into a similar problem in the recent past and tried to muddle through it, but now — I'm really wondering if I've got my principles and concepts all straight in my head. Little help, please.

  Read the article

• OO model for nsxmlparser when delegate is not self

  - by richard

  Hi, I am struggling with the correct design for the delegates of nsxmlparser. In order to build my table of Foos, I need to make two types of webservice calls; one for the whole table and one for each row. It's essentially a master-query then detail-query, except the master-query-result-xml doesn't return enough information so i then need to query the detail for each row. I'm not dealing with enormous amounts of data. Anyway - previously I've just used NSXMLParser *parser = [[NSXMLParser alloc]init]; [parser setDelegate:self]; [parser parse]; and implemented all the appropriate delegate methods in whatever class i'm in. In attempt at cleanliness, I've now created two separate delegate classes and done something like: NSXMLParser *xp = [[NSXMLParser alloc]init]; MyMasterXMLParserDelegate *masterParserDelegate = [[MyMasterXMLParser]alloc]init]; [xp setDelegate:masterParserDelegate]; [xp parse]; In addition to being cleaner (in my opinion, at least), it also means each of the -parser:didStartElement implementations don't spend most of the time trying to figure out which xml they're parsing. So now the real crux of the problem. Before i split out the delegates, i had in the main class that was also implementing the delegate methods, a class-level NSMutableArray that I would just put my objects-created-from-xml in when -parser:didEndElement found the 'end' of each record. Now the delegates are in separate classes, I can't figure out how to have the -parser:didEndElement in the 'detail' delegate class "return" the created object to the calling class. At least, not in a clean OO way. I'm sure i could do it with all sorts of nasty class methods. Does the question make sense? Thanks.

  Read the article

• OO Design: use Properties or Overloaded methods?

  - by Robert Frank

  Question about OO design. Suppose I have a base object vehicle. And two descendants: truck and automobile. Further, suppose the base object has a base method: FixFlatTire(); abstract; When the truck and automobile override the base object's, they require different information from the caller. Am I better off overloading FixFlatTire like this in the two descendant objects: Procedure Truck.FixFlatTire( OfficePhoneNumber: String; NumberOfAxles: Integer): Override; Overload; Procedure Automobile.FixFlatTire( WifesPhoneNumber: String; AAAMembershipID: String): Override; Overload; Or introducing new properties in each of the descendants and then setting them before calling FixFlatTire, like this: Truck.OfficePhoneNumber := '555-555-1212'; Truck.NumberOfAxles := 18; Truck.FixFlatTire(); Automobile.WifesPhoneNumber := '555-555-2323'; Automobile.AAAMembershipID := 'ABC'; Automobile.FixFlatTire();

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >