Search Results

Search found 1449 results on 58 pages for 'oop'.

Page 21/58 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Is Form validation and Business validation too much?

    - by Robert Cabri
    I've got this question about form validation and business validation. I see a lot of frameworks that use some sort of form validation library. You submit some values and the library validates the values from the form. If not ok it will show some errors on you screen. If all goes to plan the values will be set into domain objects. Here the values will be or, better said, should validated (again). Most likely the same validation in the validation library. I know 2 PHP frameworks having this kind of construction Zend/Kohana. When I look at programming and some principles like Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) and single responsibility principle (SRP) this isn't a good way. As you can see it validates twice. Why not create domain objects that do the actual validation. Example: Form with username and email form is submitted. Values of the username field and the email field will be populated in 2 different Domain objects: Username and Email class Username {} class Email {} These objects validate their data and if not valid throw an exception. Do you agree? What do you think about this aproach? Is there a better way to implement validations? I'm confused about a lot of frameworks/developers handling this stuff. Are they all wrong or am I missing a point? Edit: I know there should also be client side kind of validation. This is a different ballgame in my Opinion. If You have some comments on this and a way to deal with this kind of stuff, please provide.

    Read the article

  • How Can I Learn when to build my own Interfaces

    - by BDotA
    I am using C# and I know what are the interfaces and how syntatically use them,etc. but what I have not learned yet is that when I am tasked to write a project, create a component,... How should I learn better about interfaces so when I want to do something I be able to Think about using them in my design...or for example I want to learn about dependency injection or even using mocking objects for testing, these are all related to good understanding of interfaces and know when and how to use them ... Can you plase provide me some good advice, reading,... then can help me with that?

    Read the article

  • How can you get a list or traversable tree of bookmarks from within a Firefox Extension?

    - by Nathan
    I am working on a simple Firefox Extension, and I need a list of the user's bookmarks. I have found the nsINavBookmarksService class which appears to be the recommended way of manipulating bookmarks since Firefox 3.0. Strangely I don't see a method that I could use to get a list of all the bookmarks in a folder. I need some way of creating a flat list of all the Bookmark URIs, but without any methods that return information about more than one bookmark I don't see a way to do it.

    Read the article

  • Use string value to create new instance

    - by Brian David Berman
    I have a few classes: SomeClass1, SomeClass2. How can I create a new instance of one of these classes by using the class name from a string? Normally, I would do: var someClass1 = new SomeClass1(); How can I create this instance from the following: var className = "SomeClass1"; I am assuming I should use Type.GetType() or something but I can't figure it out. Thanks.

    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

  • Why Directly Accesing property is not recommended in OOPs PHP?

    - by Parth
    If I have a class "person" with a property $name and its getter(get_name()) and setter(set_name()) methods, then after instantiating the objects and setting the property i.e. $paddy = new person(); $paddy->set_name("Padyster Dave"); echo "Paddy's full name: ".$paddy->name; //WHY THIS IS NOT RECOMMENDED... In the above code $paddy->name;WHY THIS IS NOT RECOMMENDED?

    Read the article

  • Single Responsibility Principle vs Anemic Domain Model anti-pattern

    - by Niall Connaughton
    I'm in a project that takes the Single Responsibility Principle pretty seriously. We have a lot of small classes and things are quite simple. However, we have an anemic domain model - there is no behaviour in any of our model classes, they are just property bags. This isn't a complaint about our design - it actually seems to work quite well During design reviews, SRP is brought out whenever new behaviour is added to the system, and so new behaviour typically ends up in a new class. This keeps things very easily unit testable, but I am perplexed sometimes because it feels like pulling behaviour out of the place where it's relevant. I'm trying to improve my understanding of how to apply SRP properly. It seems to me that SRP is in opposition to adding business modelling behaviour that shares the same context to one object, because the object inevitably ends up either doing more than one related thing, or doing one thing but knowing multiple business rules that change the shape of its outputs. If that is so, then it feels like the end result is an Anemic Domain Model, which is certainly the case in our project. Yet the Anemic Domain Model is an anti-pattern. Can these two ideas coexist? EDIT: A couple of context related links: SRP - http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/srp.pdf Anemic Domain Model - http://martinfowler.com/bliki/AnemicDomainModel.html I'm not the kind of developer who just likes to find a prophet and follow what they say as gospel. So I don't provide links to these as a way of stating "these are the rules", just as a source of definition of the two concepts.

    Read the article

  • In Ruby, how can I initialize instance variables in new objects of core classes created from literal

    - by Ollie Saunders
    class Object attr_reader :foo def initialize @foo = 'bar' end end Object.new.foo # => 'bar' ''.foo # => nil //.foo # => nil [].foo # => nil I want them all to return 'bar' Am aware that you can do this already: class Object def foo 'bar' end end But I specifically want to initialize a state variable. Also note that this doesn't work. class String alias_method :old_init, :initialize def initialize(*args) super old_init(*args) end end class Object attr_reader :foo def initialize @foo = 'bar' super end end ''.foo # => nil Nor does this: class String attr_reader :foo def initialize @foo = 'bar' end end ''.instance_variables # => [] I'm beginning to think that this isn't actually possible.

    Read the article

  • When should I use static methods in a class and what are the benefits?

    - by NAVEED
    I have concept of static variables but what are the benefits of static methods in a class. I have worked on some projects but I did not make a method static. Whenever I need to call a method of a class, I create an object of that class and call the desired method. Static variable in a method holds it's value even when method is executed but accessible only in its containing method but what is the best definition of static method? Is calling the static method without creating object of that class is the only benefit of static method? What is the accessible range for static method? What is the syntax to create and calling static method in php? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Constructor Overloading

    - by Mark Baker
    Normally when I want to create a class constructor that accepts different types of parameters, I'll use a kludgy overloading principle of not defining any args in the constructor definition: e.g. for an ECEF coordinate class constructor, I want it to accept either $x, $y and $z arguments, or to accept a single array argument containg x, y and z values, or to accept a single LatLong object I'd create a constructor looking something like: function __construct() { // Identify if any arguments have been passed to the constructor if (func_num_args() > 0) { $args = func_get_args(); // Identify the overload constructor required, based on the datatype of the first argument $argType = gettype($args[0]); switch($argType) { case 'array' : // Array of Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromArray'; break; case 'object' : // A LatLong object that needs converting to Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromLatLong'; break; default : // Individual Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromXYZ'; break; } // Call the appropriate overload constructor call_user_func_array(array($this,$overloadConstructor),$args); } } // function __construct() I'm looking at an alternative: to provide a straight constructor with $x, $y and $z as defined arguments, and to provide static methods of createECEFfromArray() and createECEFfromLatLong() that handle all the necessary extraction of x, y and z; then create a new ECEF object using the standard constructor, and return that Which option is cleaner from an OO purists perspective?

    Read the article

  • where to store helper functions?

    - by ajsie
    i've got a lot of functions i create or copy from the web. i wonder if i should store them in a file that i just include into the script or should i store each function as a static method in a class. eg. i've got a getCurrentFolder() and a isFilePhp() function. should they be stored in a file as they are or each in a class: Folder::getCurrent() File::isPhp(); how do you do? i know this is kinda a "as u want" question but it would be great with some advices/best practices thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to deal with class composition when components cannot be accessed from the outside?

    - by Chathuranga
    For example if I say I have three classes A, B, and C where B and C have a composition relation ship with A. That means the life of B and C is handled by A, and also B and C cannot access directly from the outside. For some reason my DataService class needs to return objects of B and C as It cant return a object of A as B and C cannot be initialized at the same time. (to be able to initializeC you have to initializeB first). So that I'm returning DataTables from DataService and then inside the class A those data tables are converted to B / C objects. If B and C objects cannot be initialized at the same time is it valid to say that B and C have a composition relationship with A? If its composition is it must to generate A with B and C inside? What is the proper way to handle this sort of a problem? EDIT: Following code explains the way I'm doing it now with DataTables. Example: class A { private List<B> B; private List <C> C; public A() { B= new List<B>(); C= new List<C>(); } public List<B> GetB( DataTable dt) { // Create a B list from dt return B; } } class Presenter { private void Show B() { _View.DataGrid = A.GetB(DataService.GetAListOfB()); } } The actual scenario is I have a class called WageInfo and classes Earning and Deduction having a composition relationship in the design. But for you to generate Deductions first you should Generate earnings and should be saved in a table. Then only you can generate deductions for the earnings to calculate balance wages. Also note that these contained classes have a one to many relationship with the containing class WageInfo. So actually WageInfo has a List<Earnings> and List<Deduction> My initial question was, is it ok if my DataService class returns Deductions / Earnings objects (actually lists) not a WageInfo? Still not clear?

    Read the article

  • wrapping aspx user controls commands in a transaction

    - by Hans Gruber
    I'm working on heavily dynamic and configurable CMS system. Therefore, many pages are composed of a dynamically loaded set of user controls. To enable loose coupling between containers (pages) and children (user controls), all user controls are responsible for their own persistence. Each User Control is wired up to its data/service layer dependencies via IoC. They also implement an IPersistable interface, which allows the container .aspx page to issue a Save command to its children without knowledge of the number or exact nature of these user controls. Note: what follows is only pseudo-code: public class MyUserControl : IPersistable, IValidatable { public void Save() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public bool IsValid() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public partial class MyPage { public void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { foreach (IValidatable control in Controls) { if (!control.IsValid) { throw new Exception("error"); } } foreach (IPersistable control in Controls) { if (!control.Save) { throw new Exception("error"); } } } } I'm thinking of using declarative transactions from the System.EnterpriseService namespace to wrap the btnSave_Click in a transaction in case of an exception, but I'm not sure how this might be achieved or any pitfalls to such an approach.

    Read the article

  • How to call the __del__ method?

    - by Verrtex
    I am reading a code. There is a class in which __del__ method is defined. I figured out that this method is used to destroy an instance of the class. However, I cannot find a place where this method is used. The main reason for that is that I do not know how this method is used, probably not like that: obj1.del(). So, my questions is how to call the __del__ method? Thank you for any help.

    Read the article

  • Create UML diagrams after or before coding?

    - by ajsie
    I can clearly see the benefits of having UML diagrams showing your infrastructure of the application (class names, their members, how they communicate with each other etc). I'm starting a new project right now and have already structured the database (with visual paradigm). I want to use some design patterns to guide me how to code the classes. I wonder, should I code the classes first before I create UML diagram of it (maybe out of the code... seems possible) or should I first create UML diagram and then code (or generate code from the UML, seems possible that too). What are you experiences telling you is the best way?

    Read the article

  • dynamic behavior of factory class

    - by manu1001
    I have a factory class that serves out a bunch of properties. Now, the properties might come either from a database or from a properties file. This is what I've come up with. public class Factory { private static final INSTANCE = new Factory(source); private Factory(DbSource source) { // read from db, save properties } private Factory(FileSource source) { // read from file, save properties } // getInstance() and getProperties() here } What's a clean way of switching between these behaviors based on the environment. I want to avoid having to recompile the class each time.

    Read the article

  • Calling a subclass method from a superclass

    - by Shaun
    Preface: This is in the context of a Rails application. The question, however, is specific to Ruby. Let's say I have a Media object. class Media < ActiveRecord::Base end I've extended it in a few subclasses: class Image < Media def show # logic end end class Video < Media def show # logic end end From within the Media class, I want to call the implementation of show from the proper subclass. So, from Media, if self is a Video, then it would call Video's show method. If self is instead an Image, it would call Image's show method. Coming from a Java background, the first thing that popped into my head was 'create an abstract method in the superclass'. However, I've read in several places (including Stack Overflow) that abstract methods aren't the best way to deal with this in Ruby. With that in mind, I started researching typecasting and discovered that this is also a relic of Java thinking that I need to banish from my mind when dealing with Ruby. Defeated, I started coding something that looked like this: def superclass_method # logic this_media = self.type.constantize.find(self.id) this_media.show end I've been coding in Ruby/Rails for a while now, but since this was my first time trying out this behavior and existing resources didn't answer my question directly, I wanted to get feedback from more-seasoned developers on how to accomplish my task. So, how can I call a subclass's implementation of a method from the superclass in Rails? Is there a better way than what I ended up (almost) implementing?

    Read the article

  • Where should I put contextual data related to an Object that is not really a property of the object?

    - by RenderIn
    I have a Car class. It has three properties: id, color and model. In a particular query I want to return all the cars and their properties, and I also want to return a true/false field called "searcherKnowsOwner" which is a field I calculate in my database query based on whether or not the individual conducting the search knows the owner. I have a database function that takes the ID of the searcher and the ID of the car and returns a boolean. My car class looks like this (pseudocode): class Car{ int id; Color color; Model model; } I have a screen where I want to display all the cars, but I also want to display a flag next to each car if the person viewing the page knows the owner of that car. Should I add a field to the Car class, a boolean searcherKnowsOwner? It's not a property of the car, but is actually a property of the user conducting the search. But this seems like the most efficient place to put this information.

    Read the article

  • Logic behind plugin system?

    - by Danijel
    I have an application in PHP (private CMS) that I would like to rewrite and add some new things - I would like to be able to extend my app in an easier way - through plugins But the problem is - I don't know how to achieve "pluggability", how to make system that recognizes plugins and injects them into the app? So, what's the logic of a simple plugin system?

    Read the article

  • Accessing Members of Containing Objects from Contained Objects.

    - by Bunkai.Satori
    If I have several levels of object containment (one object defines and instantiates another object which define and instantiate another object..), is it possible to get access to upper, containing - object variables and functions, please? Example: class CObjectOne { public: CObjectOne::CObjectOne() { Create(); }; void Create(); std::vector<ObjectTwo>vObejctsTwo; int nVariableOne; } bool CObjectOne::Create() { CObjectTwo ObjectTwo(this); vObjectsTwo.push_back(ObjectTwo); } class CObjectTwo { public: CObjectTwo::CObjectTwo(CObjectOne* pObject) { pObjectOne = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectOne* GetObjectOne(){return pObjectOne;}; std::vector<CObjectTrhee>vObjectsTrhee; CObjectOne* pObjectOne; int nVariableTwo; } bool CObjectTwo::Create() { CObjectThree ObjectThree(this); vObjectsThree.push_back(ObjectThree); } class CObjectThree { public: CObjectThree::CObjectThree(CObjectTwo* pObject) { pObjectTwo = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectTwo* GetObjectTwo(){return pObjectTwo;}; std::vector<CObjectsFour>vObjectsFour; CObjectTwo* pObjectTwo; int nVariableThree; } bool CObjectThree::Create() { CObjectFour ObjectFour(this); vObjectsFour.push_back(ObjectFour); } main() { CObjectOne myObject1; } Say, that from within CObjectThree I need to access nVariableOne in CObjectOne. I would like to do it as follows: int nValue = vObjectThree[index].GetObjectTwo()->GetObjectOne()->nVariable1; However, after compiling and running my application, I get Memory Access Violation error. What is wrong with the code above(it is example, and might contain spelling mistakes)? Do I have to create the objects dynamically instead of statically? Is there any other way how to achieve variables stored in containing objects from withing contained objects?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >