Search Results

Search found 6142 results on 246 pages for 'singleton pattern'.

Page 21/246 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Who needs singletons?

    - by sexyprout
    Imagine you access your MySQL database via PDO. You got some functions, and in these functions, you need to access the database. The first thing I thought of is global, like: $db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'root', 'pwd'); function some_function() { global $db; $db->query('...'); } But it's considered as a bad practice. So, after a little search, I ended up with the Singleton pattern, which "applies to situations in which there needs to be a single instance of a class." According to the example of the manual, we should do this: class Database { private static $instance, $db; private function __construct(){} static function singleton() { if(!isset(self::$instance)) self::$instance = new __CLASS__; return self:$instance; } function get() { if(!isset(self::$db)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd') return self::$db; } } function some_function() { $db = Database::singleton(); $db->get()->query('...'); } some_function(); But I just can't understand why you need that big class when you can do it merely with: class Database { private static $db; private function __construct(){} static function get() { if(!isset(self::$rand)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd'); return self::$db; } } function some_function() { Database::get()->query('...'); } some_function(); This last one works perfectly and I don't need to worry about $db anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting something. So, who's wrong, who's right?

    Read the article

  • Global State and Singletons Dependency injection

    - by Manu
    this is a problem i face lot of times when i am designing a new app i'll use a sample problem to explain this think i am writing simple game.so i want to hold a list of players. i have few options.. 1.use a static field in some class private static ArrayList<Player> players = new ArrayList<Integer>(); public Player getPlayer(int i){ return players.get(i); } but this a global state 2.or i can use a singleton class PlayerList{ private PlayerList instance; private PlayerList(){...} public PlayerList getInstance() { if(instance==null){ ... } return instance; } } but this is bad because it's a singleton 3.Dependency injection class Game { private PlayerList playerList; public Game(PlayerList list) { this.list = list; } public PlayerList getPlayerList() { return playerList; } } this seems good but it's not, if any object outside Game need to look at PlayerList (which is the usual case) i have to use one of the above methods to make the Game class available globally. so I just add another layer to the problem. didn't actually solve anything. what is the optimum solution ? (currently i use Singleton approach)

    Read the article

  • Singletons and constants

    - by devoured elysium
    I am making a program which makes use of a couple of constants. At first, each time I needed to use a constant, I'd define it as //C# private static readonly int MyConstant = xxx; //Java private static final int MyConstant = xxx; in the class where I'd need it. After some time, I started to realise that some constants would be needed in more than one class. At this time, I had 3 choises: To define them in the different classes that needed it. This leads to repetition. If by some reason later I need to change one of them, I'd have to check in all classes to replace them everywhere. To define a static class/singleton with all the constants as public. If I needed a constant X in ClassA, ClassB and ClassC, I could just define it in ClassA as public, and then have ClassB and ClassC refer to them. This solution doesn't seem that good to me as it introduces even more dependencies as the classes already have between them. I ended up implementing my code with the second option. Is that the best alternative? I feel I am probably missing some other better alternative. What worries me about using the singleton here is that it is nowhere clear to a user of the class that this class is using the singleton. Maybe I could create a ConstantsClass that held all the constants needed and then I'd pass it in the constructor to the classes that'd need it? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Design Pattern for Complex Data Modeling

    - by Aaron Hayman
    I'm developing a program that has a SQL database as a backing store. As a very broad description, the program itself allows a user to generate records in any number of user-defined tables and make connections between them. As for specs: Any record generated must be able to be connected to any other record in any other user table (excluding itself...the record, not the table). These "connections" are directional, and the list of connections a record has is user ordered. Moreover, a record must "know" of connections made from it to others as well as connections made to it from others. The connections are kind of the point of this program, so there is a strong possibility that the number of connections made is very high, especially if the user is using the software as intended. A record's field can also include aggregate information from it's connections (like obtaining average, sum, etc) that must be updated on change from another record it's connected to. To conserve memory, only relevant information must be loaded at any one time (can't load the entire database in memory at load and go from there). I cannot assume the backing store is local. Right now it is, but eventually this program will include syncing to a remote db. Neither the user tables, connections or records are known at design time as they are user generated. I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to design the backing store and the object model to best fit these specs. In my first design attempt on this, I had one object managing all a table's records and connections. I attempted this first because it kept the memory footprint smaller (records and connections were simple dicts), but maintaining aggregate and link information between tables became....onerous (ie...a huge spaghettified mess). Tracing dependencies using this method almost became impossible. Instead, I've settled on a distributed graph model where each record and connection is 'aware' of what's around it by managing it own data and connections to other records. Doing this increases my memory footprint but also let me create a faulting system so connections/records aren't loaded into memory until they're needed. It's also much easier to code: trace dependencies, eliminate cycling recursive updates, etc. My biggest problem is storing/loading the connections. I'm not happy with any of my current solutions/ideas so I wanted to ask and see if anybody else has any ideas of how this should be structured. Connections are fairly simple. They contain: fromRecordID, fromTableID, fromRecordOrder, toRecordID, toTableID, toRecordOrder. Here's what I've come up with so far: Store all the connections in one big table. If I do this, either I load all connections at once (one big db call) or make a call every time a user table is loaded. The big issue here: the size of the connections table has the potential to be huge, and I'm afraid it would slow things down. Store in separate tables all the outgoing connections for each user table. This is probably the worst idea I've had. Now my connections are 'spread out' over multiple tables (one for each user table), which means I have to make a separate DB called to each table (or make a huge join) just to find all the incoming connections for a particular user table. I've avoided making "one big ass table", but I'm not sure the cost is worth it. Store in separate tables all outgoing AND incoming connections for each user table (using a flag to distinguish between incoming vs outgoing). This is the idea I'm leaning towards, but it will essentially double the total DB storage for all the connections (as each connection will be stored in two tables). It also means I have to make sure connection information is kept in sync in both places. This is obviously not ideal but it does mean that when I load a user table, I only need to load one 'connection' table and have all the information I need. This also presents a separate problem, that of connection object creation. Since each user table has a list of all connections, there are two opportunities for a connection object to be made. However, connections objects (designed to facilitate communication between records) should only be created once. This means I'll have to devise a common caching/factory object to make sure only one connection object is made per connection. Does anybody have any ideas of a better way to do this? Once I've committed to a particular design pattern I'm pretty much stuck with it, so I want to make sure I've come up with the best one possible.

    Read the article

  • Design Patterns for Coordinating Change Event Listeners

    - by mkraken
    I've been working with the Observer pattern in JavaScript using various popular libraries for a number of years (YUI & jQuery). It's often that I need to observe a set of property value changes (e.g. respond only when 2 or more specific values change). Is there a elegant way to 'subscribe' the handler so that it is only called one time? Is there something I'm missing or doing wrong in my design?

    Read the article

  • How to properly implement the Strategy pattern in a web MVC framework?

    - by jboxer
    In my Django app, I have a model (lets call it Foo) with a field called "type". I'd like to use Foo.type to indicate what type the specific instance of Foo is (possible choices are "Number", "Date", "Single Line of Text", "Multiple Lines of Text", and a few others). There are two things I'd like the "type" field to end up affecting; the way a value is converted from its normal type to text (for example, in "Date", it may be str(the_date.isoformat())), and the way a value is converted from text to the specified type (in "Date", it may be datetime.date.fromtimestamp(the_text)). To me, this seems like the Strategy pattern (I may be completely wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am). My question is, what's the proper way to code this in a web MVC framework? In a client-side app, I'd create a Type class with abstract methods "serialize()" and "unserialize()", override those methods in subclasses of Type (such as NumberType and DateType), and dynamically set the "type" field of a newly-instantiated Foo to the appropriate Type subclass at runtime. In a web framework, it's not quite as straightforward for me. Right now, the way that makes the most sense is to define Foo.type as a Small Integer field and define a limited set of choices (0 = "Number", 1 = "Date", 2 = "Single Line of Text", etc.) in the code. Then, when a Foo object is instantiated, use a Factory method to look at the value of the instance's "type" field and plug in the correct Type subclass (as described in the paragraph above). Foo would also have serialize() and unserialize() methods, which would delegate directly to the plugged-in Type subclass. How does this design sound? I've never run into this issue before, so I'd really like to know if other people have, and how they've solved it.

    Read the article

  • How to efficiently implement a strategy pattern with spring ?

    - by Anth0
    I have a web application developped in J2EE 1.5 with Spring framework. Application contains "dashboards" which are simple pages where a bunch of information are regrouped and where user can modify some status. Managers want me to add a logging system in database for three of theses dashboards. Each dashboard has different information but the log should be traced by date and user's login. What I'd like to do is to implement the Strategy pattern kind of like this : interface DashboardLog { void createLog(String login, Date now); } // Implementation for one dashboard class PrintDashboardLog implements DashboardLog { Integer docId; String status; void createLog(String login, Date now){ // Some code } } class DashboardsManager { DashboardLog logger; String login; Date now; void createLog(){ logger.log(login,now); } } class UpdateDocAction{ DashboardsManager dbManager; void updateSomeField(){ // Some action // Now it's time to log dbManagers.setLogger = new PrintDashboardLog(docId, status); dbManagers.createLog(); } } Is it "correct" (good practice, performance, ...) to do it this way ? Is there a better way ? Note :I did not write basic stuff like constructors and getter/setter.

    Read the article

  • How to recall search pattern when writing replace regex pattern in Vim?

    - by Tom Morris
    Here's the scenario: I've got a big file filled with all sorts of eclectic rubbish that I want to regex. I fiddle around and come up with a perfect search pattern by using the / command and seeing what it highlights. Now I want to use that pattern to replace with. So, I start typing :%s/ and I cannot recall what the pattern was. Is there some magical keyboard command that will pull in my last search pattern here? If I'm writing a particularly complex regex, I have even opened up a new MacVim window, typed the regex from the first window into a buffer there, then typed it back into the Vim window when writing the replace pattern. There has got to be a better way of doing so.

    Read the article

  • CSS repeat pattern with linear gradient

    - by luca
    I'm on my first approach with photoshop patterns.I'm buildin a webpage where I want to use my pattern to give a nice effect to my webpage background. The pattern I found is 120x120 px If I was done here I should use this css: background-imag:url(mypattern.jpg); background-repeat:repeat; But Im not done.Id like to *add to my page's background a linear gradient(dir=top/down col=light-blue/green) with the pattern fill layer on top of it, with blending mode=darken *. This is the final effect: I come to the point. QUESTION: Combining linear vertical-gradient effect and my 120x120 pattern is it possible to find a pattern that I could use to repeat itself endlessly both vertical and horizontal??which is a common solution in this case? Hope It's clear thanks Luca

    Read the article

  • PHP preg_replace() pattern, string sanitization.

    - by Otar
    I have a regex email pattern and would like to strip all but pattern-matched characters from the string, in a short I want to sanitize string... I'm not a regex guru, so what I'm missing in regex? <?php $pattern = "/^([\w\!\#$\%\&\'\*\+\-\/\=\?\^\`{\|\}\~]+\.)*[\w\!\#$\%\&\'\*\+\-\/\=\?\^\`{\|\}\~]+@((((([a-z0-9]{1}[a-z0-9\-]{0,62}[a-z0-9]{1})|[a-z])\.)+[a-z]{2,6})|(\d{1,3}\.){3}\d{1,3}(\:\d{1,5})?)$/i"; $email = 'contact<>@domain.com'; // wrong email $sanitized_email = preg_replace($pattern, NULL, $email); echo $sanitized_email; // Should be [email protected] ?> Pattern taken from: http://fightingforalostcause.net/misc/2006/compare-email-regex.php (the very first one...)

    Read the article

  • How to lock Firefox tab to domain or URL pattern

    - by f3lix
    I know Firefox extensions that allow protecting (cannot be closed) and locking (cannot change URL) tabs. What I need is an extension that locks a tab to a certain domain or URL pattern. For example, I want to lock a tab to the domain example.com. As long as I follow links that are within this domain the tab should show normal (unlocked) behavior, but if I follow a link to another domain the link should be opened in new tab -- leaving the locked tab open with a URL within the locked domain. Even better would be the functionality to lock a tab to a URL pattern. If a URL matches the pattern it is opened in the current tab, otherwise it is opened in a new tab. Do you know something (preferably an extension for FF 8.0) that provides this kind of functionality.

    Read the article

  • Match exactly (and only) the pattern I specify in a grep command

    - by palswim
    Usually, grep searches for all lines containing a match for the pattern/parameter I specify. I would like to match just the pattern (i.e. not the whole line). So, if a file contains the lines: We said that we'll come. Unfortunately, we were delayed. Now, we're on our way. I want to find all contractions starting with "we" (regex pattern: we\'[a-z]+/i). And I'm looking for the output: we'll we're How do I do this (with grep or another Unix/Windows command-line tool)?

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between all-static-methods and applying a singleton pattern?

    - by shahensha
    I am making a database to store information about the users of my website (I am using stuts2 and hence Java EE technology). For the database I'll be making a DBManager. Should I apply singleton pattern here or rather make all it's methods static? I will be using this DBManager for basic things like adding, deleting and updating User profiles. Along with it, I'll use for all other querying purposes, for instance to find out whether a username already exists and to get all users for administrative purposes and stuff like that. My questions What is the benefit of singleton pattern? Which thing is most apt here? All static methods or a singleton pattern? Please compare both of them. P.S. The database is bigger than this. Here I am talking only about the tables which I'll be using for storing User Information.

    Read the article

  • Applying the Decorator Pattern to Forms

    - by devoured elysium
    I am trying to apply the Decorator Design Pattern to the following situation: I have 3 different kind of forms: Green, Yellow, Red. Now, each of those forms can have different set of attributes. They can have a minimize box disabled, a maximized box disabled and they can be always on top. I tried to model this the following way: Form <---------------------------------------FormDecorator /\ /\ |---------|-----------| |----------------------|-----------------| GreenForm YellowForm RedForm MinimizeButtonDisabled MaximizedButtonDisabled AlwaysOnTop Here is my GreenForm code: public class GreenForm : Form { public GreenForm() { this.BackColor = Color.GreenYellow; } public override sealed Color BackColor { get { return base.BackColor; } set { base.BackColor = value; } } } FormDecorator: public abstract class FormDecorator : Form { private Form _decoratorForm; protected FormDecorator(Form decoratorForm) { this._decoratorForm = decoratorForm; } } and finally NoMaximizeDecorator: public class NoMaximizeDecorator : FormDecorator { public NoMaximizeDecorator(Form decoratorForm) : base(decoratorForm) { this.MaximizeBox = false; } } So here is the running code: static void Main() { Application.EnableVisualStyles(); Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false); Application.Run(CreateForm()); } static Form CreateForm() { Form form = new GreenForm(); form = new NoMaximizeDecorator(form); form = new NoMinimizeDecorator(form); return form; } The problem is that I get a form that isn't green and that still allows me to maximize it. It is only taking in consideration the NoMinimizeDecorator form. I do comprehend why this happens but I'm having trouble understanding how to make this work with this Pattern. I know probably there are better ways of achieving what I want. I made this example as an attempt to apply the Decorator Pattern to something. Maybe this wasn't the best pattern I could have used(if one, at all) to this kind of scenario. Is there any other pattern more suitable than the Decorator to accomplish this? Am I doing something wrong when trying to implement the Decorator Pattern? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Game mechanics patterns database?

    - by Klaim
    Do you know http://tvtropes.org ? It's a kind of wiki/database with scenaristic tropes, patterns that you can find in tones of stories, in tv shows, games, books, etc. Each trope/pattern have a (funny) name and there are references to where it appears, and the other way arround : each book/game/etc. have a list of tropes that it contains. I'm looking for an equivalent but for game mechanics patterns, something like "Death is definitive", "Perfect physical control (no inertia)", "Excell table gameplay", etc. I think it would be really useful. I can't find an equivalent for game mechanics (tvtrope is oriented to scenario, not game mechanics). Do you know any?

    Read the article

  • Categories & singelton in cocoa

    - by Nava Carmon
    Hi, I have a SingletonClass, which has only one instance. I want to expand it and add to it a category (MoreFeatures). I created a source SingletonClass+MoreFeatures, which interface/implementation looks like that: @interface SingletonClass (MoreFeatures) - (void) feature; @end @implementation SingletonClass (MoreFeatures) - (void) feature() { } @end When I created my SingletonClass i followed the Apple's example of Singleton implementation in cocoa. This singleton resides in a project B, which is a dependency of a bigger project A. I can call for [[SingletonClass sharedInstance] foo] from a source in project A and it works in case that function foo is located in SingletonClass interface/implementation. When I try to call [[SingletonClass sharedInstance] feature] from a source in project A, I get a crash, which says that there is no method feature for class SingletonClass... Why it happens? Thanks a lot, Nava EDIT: The crash happens in a runtime. The category file source resides in project B along with a SingletonClass

    Read the article

  • Question about singleton property

    - by Jack
    I'm reading the java tutorial for enums located here and have a question: http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/enums.html#Card The part i'm confused about is as follows: "The Card class, above, contains a static factory that returns a deck, but there is no way to get an individual card from its rank and suit. Merely exposing the constructor would destroy the singleton property (that only a single instance of each card is allowed to exist). Here is how to write a static factory that preserves the singleton property, using a nested EnumMap: " Now as I understand, changing the original private "Card" constructor to public would allow us to instantiate an unlimited number of copies of a "Card" object with a given suit+rank. The solution as proposed was to create an EnumMap which would store four Maps (one for each suit), which themselves contained 13 Card objects with the rank as their keys. And so now if you wanted to retrieve a specific Card object from the deck, you would just call the "valueOf" method. My question now is, what's the prevent you with calling the valueOf method as many times as you like? Wouldn't that lead to the same problem as making the original private constructor public? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • are Hierarchical SIngletons in Java possible?

    - by Zach H
    I've been toying with an interesting idea (No idea if I'll include it in any code, but it's fun to think about) Let's say we have a program that requires a large number of classes, all of a certain subclass. And those classes all need to be singletons. Now, we could write the singleton pattern for each of those classes, but it seems wasteful to write the same code over and over, and we already have a common base class. It would be really nice to create a getSingleton method of A that when called from a subclass, returns a singleton of the B class (cast to class A for simplicity) class A{ public A getSingleton(){ //Wizardry } } class B extends A{ } A blargh = B.getSingleton() A gish = B.getSingleton() if(A == B) System.out.println("It works!") It seems to me that the way to do this would be to recognize and call B's default constructor (assuming we don't need to pass anything in.) I know a little of the black magic of reflection in Java, but i'm not sure if this can be done. Anyone interested in puzzling over this?

    Read the article

  • C# Unit Testing: How do I set a Lazy<T>.ValueCreated to false?

    - by michael paul
    Basically, I have a unit test that gets a singleton instance of a class. Some of my tests required me to mock this singleton, so when I do Foo.Instance I get a different type of instance. The problem is that my checks are passing individually, but failing overall because one test is interfering with another. I tried to do a TestCleanup where I set: Foo_Accessor._instance = null; but that didn't work. What I really need is Foo_Accessor._instance.IsValueCreated = false; (_instance is a Lazy). Any way to unset the Lazy object that I didn't think of?

    Read the article

  • What data (if any) persists across web-requests in Ruby on Rails?

    - by Daniel Beardsley
    I decided to use the singleton design pattern while creating a view helper class. This got me thinking; will the singleton instance survive across requests? This led to another question, Which variables (if any) survive across web requests and does that change depending on deployment? (Fastcgi, Mongrel, Passenger, ...) I know that Controller instance variables aren't persisted. I know Constants are persisted (or reloaded?). But I don't know about class variables, instance variables on a class, Eigenclasses, ...

    Read the article

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