Search Results

Search found 13719 results on 549 pages for 'design evolution'.

Page 213/549 | < Previous Page | 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220  | Next Page >

  • Compiler doesn't find methods from base class

    - by Paul
    I am having a problem with my virtual methods in a derived class. Here are my (simplified) C++ classes. class Base virtual method accept( MyVisitor1* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; virtual method accept( MyVisitor2* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; virtual method accept( MyVisitor3* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; class DerivedClass virtual method accept( MyVisitor2* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; The following use causes VS 2005 to give: "error C2664: 'DerivedClass::accept' : cannot convert parameter 1 from 'Visitor1*' to 'Visitor2 *'". DerivedClass c; MyVisitor1 v1; c.accept(v1); I was expecting the compiler to find and call Base::accept(MyVisitor1) for my DerivedClass as well. Obviously this is not working, but I don't understand why. Any ideas? Thanks, Paul

    Read the article

  • Linq to sql Repository pattern , Some doubts

    - by MindlessProgrammer
    I am using repository pattern with linq to sql, I am using a repository class per table. I want to know , am i doing at good/standard way, ContactRepository Contact GetByID() Contact GetAll() COntactTagRepository List<ContactTag> Get(long contactID) List<ContactTag> GetAll() List<ContactTagDetail> GetAllDetails() class ContactTagDetail { public Contact Contact {get;set;} public ContactTag COntactTag {get;set;} } When i need a contact i call method in contactrepository, same for contacttag but when i need contact and tags together i call GetDetais() in ContactTag repository its not returning the COntactTag entity generated by the orm insted its returning ContactTagDetail entity conatining both COntact and COntactTag generated by the orm, i know i can simple call GetAll in COntactTag repository and can access Contact.ContactTag but as its linq to sql it will there is no option to Deferred Load in query level, so whenever i need a entity with a related entity i create a projection class Another doubt is where i really need to right the method i can do it in both contact & ContactTag repostitory like In contact repository GetALlWithTags() or something but i am doing it in in COntactTag repository Whats your suggestions ?

    Read the article

  • How to do a UITable cell with triangle indicator?

    - by zardon
    In the Linked in iphone application I noticed that they have a tableview, see the following picture with what appears to have a triangle indicator pointing upwards. Notice how the tableview cell has a little triangle pointing upwards and is part of a tableview cell. The triangle is the ---^--- part of the image. I'm wondering. How do you make a UITableView with this triangle indicator, and what is this effect called? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Are these jobs for developer or designers or for client itself? for a web-site projects

    - by jitendra
    Spell checking grammar checking Descriptive alt text for big chart , graph images, technical images To write Table summary and caption Descriptive Link text Color Contrast checking Deciding in content what should be H2 ,H3, H4... and what should be <strong> or <span class="boldtext"> Meta Description and keywords for each pages Image compression To decide Filenames for images,PDf etc To decide Page's <title> for each page

    Read the article

  • Code Contracts Vs. Object Initializers (.net 4.0)

    - by Mystagogue
    At face value, it would seem that object initializers present a problem for .net 4.0 "code contracts", where normally the invariant should be established by the time the object constructor is finished. Presumably, however, object-initializers require properties to be set after construction is complete. My question is if the invariants of "code contracts" are able to handle object initializers, "as if" the properties were set before the constructor completes? That would be very nice indeed!!

    Read the article

  • Better to use constructor or method factory pattern?

    - by devoured elysium
    I have a wrapper class for the Bitmap .NET class called BitmapZone. Assuming we have a WIDTH x HEIGHT bitmap picture, this wrapper class should serve the purpose of allowing me to send to other methods/classes itself instead of the original bitmap. I can then better control what the user is or not allowed to do with the picture (and I don't have to copy the bitmap lots of times to send for each method/class). My question is: knowing that all BitmapZone's are created from a Bitmap, what do you find preferrable? Constructor syntax: something like BitmapZone bitmapZone = new BitmapZone(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.From(originalBitmap, x , y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.FromBitmap(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Other? Why? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Natural vs surrogate keys on support tables

    - by Bugeo
    I have read many articles about the battle between natural versus surrogate primary keys. I agree in the use of surrogate keys to identify records of tables whose contents are created by the user. But in the case of supporting tables what should I use? For example, in a hypothetical table "orderStates". If you use a natural key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} If I use a surrogate key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: 1 CODE: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: 2 CODE: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: 3 CODE: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} Now let's take an example: a user enters a new order. In the case in which use natural keys, in the code I can write this: newOrder.StateOrderId = "NEW"; With the surrogate keys instead every time I have an additional step. stateOrderId_NEW = .... I retrieve the id corresponding to the recod code "NEW" newOrder.StateOrderId = stateOrderId_NEW; The same will happen every time I have to move the order in a new status. So, in this case, what are the reason to chose one key type vs the other one?

    Read the article

  • How can I make a family of singletons?

    - by Jay
    I want to create a set of classes that share a lot of common behavior. Of course in OOP when you think that you automatically think "abstract class with subclasses". But among the things I want these classes to do is to each have a static list of instances of the class. The list should function as sort of a singleton within the class. I mean each of the sub-classes has a singleton, not that they share one. "Singleton" to that subclass, not a true singleton. But if it's a static, how can I inherit it? Of course code like this won't work: public abstract A { static List<A> myList; public static List getList() { if (myList==null) myList=new ArrayList<A>(10); return myList; } public static A getSomethingFromList() { List listInstance=getList(); ... do stuff with list ... } public int getSomethingFromA() { ... regular code acting against current instance ... } } public class A1 extends A { ... } public class A2 extends A { ... } A1 somethingfromA1List=(A1) A1.getSomethingFromList(); A2 somethingfromA2List=(A2) A2.getSomethingFromList(); The contents of the list for each subclass would be different, but all the code to work on the lists would be the same. The problem with the above code is that I'd only have one list for all the subclasses, and I want one for each. Yes, I could replicate the code to declare the static list in each of the subclasses, but then I'd also have to replicate all the code that adds to the lists and searches the list, etc, which rather defeats the purpose of subclassing. Any ideas on how to do this without replicating code?

    Read the article

  • Risking the exception anti-pattern.. with some modifications

    - by Sridhar Iyer
    Lets say that I have a library which runs 24x7 on certain machines. Even if the code is rock solid, a hardware fault can sooner or later trigger an exception. I would like to have some sort of failsafe in position for events like this. One approach would be to write wrapper functions that encapsulate each api a: returnCode=DEFAULT; try { returnCode=libraryAPI1(); } catch(...) { returnCode=BAD; } return returnCode; The caller of the library then restarts the whole thread, reinitializes the module if the returnCode is bad. Things CAN go horribly wrong. E.g. if the try block(or libraryAPI1()) had: func1(); char *x=malloc(1000); func2(); if func2() throws an exception, x will never be freed. On a similar vein, file corruption is a possible outcome. Could you please tell me what other things can possibly go wrong in this scenario?

    Read the article

  • Singleton Pattern combine with a Decorator

    - by Mike
    Attached is a classic Decorator pattern. My question is how would you modify the below code so that you can wrap zero or one of each topping on to the Pizza Right now I can have a Pepporini - Sausage -- Pepporini -- Pizza class driving the total cost up to $10, charging twice for Pepporini. I don't think I want to use the Chain of Responsibility pattern as order does not matter and not all toppings are used? Thank you namespace PizzaDecorator { public interface IPizza { double CalculateCost(); } public class Pizza: IPizza { public Pizza() { } public double CalculateCost() { return 8.00; } } public abstract class Topping : IPizza { protected IPizza _pizzaItem; public Topping(IPizza pizzaItem) { this._pizzaItem = pizzaItem; } public abstract double CalculateCost(); } public class Pepporini : Topping { public Pepporini(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 0.50; } } public class Sausage : Topping { public Sausage(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 1.00; } } public class Onions : Topping { public Onions(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + .25; } } }

    Read the article

  • Data Modeling Help - Do I add another table, change existing table's usage, or something else?

    - by StackOverflowNewbie
    Assume I have the following tables and relationships: Person - Id (PK) - Name A Person can have 0 or more pets: Pet - Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name A person can have 0 or more attributes (e.g. age, height, weight): PersonAttribute _ Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name - Value PROBLEM: I need to represent pet attributes, too. As it turns out, these pet attributes are, in most cases, identical to the attributes of a person (e.g. a pet can have an age, height, and weight too). How do I represent pet attributes? Do I create a PetAttribute table? PetAttribute Id (PK) PetId (FK) Name Value Do I change PersonAttribute to GenericAttribute and have 2 foreign keys in it - one connecting to Person, the other connecting to Pet? GenericAttribute Id (PK) PersonId (FK) PetId (FK) Name Value NOTE: if PersonId is set, then PetId is not set. If PetId is set, PersonId is not set. Do something else?

    Read the article

  • Avoid loading unnecessary data from db into objects (web pages)

    - by GmGr
    Really newbie question coming up. Is there a standard (or good) way to deal with not needing all of the information that a database table contains loaded into every associated object. I'm thinking in the context of web pages where you're only going to use the objects to build a single page rather than an application with longer lived objects. For example, lets say you have an Article table containing id, title, author, date, summary and fullContents fields. You don't need the fullContents to be loaded into the associated objects if you're just showing a page containing a list of articles with their summaries. On the other hand if you're displaying a specific article you might want every field loaded for that one article and maybe just the titles for the other articles (e.g. for display in a recent articles sidebar). Some techniques I can think of: Don't worry about it, just load everything from the database every time. Have several different, possibly inherited, classes for each table and create the appropriate one for the situation (e.g. SummaryArticle, FullArticle). Use one class but set unused properties to null at creation if that field is not needed and be careful. Give the objects access to the database so they can load some fields on demand. Something else? All of the above seem to have fairly major disadvantages. I'm fairly new to programming, very new to OOP and totally new to databases so I might be completely missing the obvious answer here. :)

    Read the article

  • Immutability of big objects

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have some big (more than 3 fields) Objects which can and should be immutable. Every time I run into that case i tend to create constructor abominations with long parameter lists. It doesn't feel right, is hard to use and readability suffers. It is even worse if the fields are some sort of collection type like lists. A simple addSibling(S s) would ease the object creation so much but renders the object mutable. What do you guys use in such cases? I'm on Scala and Java, but i think the problem is language agnostic as long as the language is object oriented. Solutions I can think of: "Constructor abominations with long parameter lists" The Builder Pattern Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • Rails Full Engine using a Full Engine

    - by SirLenz0rlot
    I've got this full rails engine Foo with functionality X. I want to make another engine, engine Bar, that is pretty much the same, but override funcitonality x with y. (it basically does the same, but a few controller actions and views are differently implemented). (I might split this later in several mountable engines, but for now, this will be the setup: project Baz, using engine Bar, which uses engine Foo) I would like to know if there are any pitfalls. It doesn't seem like a pattern that is often used? Anybody else using this 'some sort of engine inheritance'?

    Read the article

  • Truly declarative language?

    - by gjvdkamp
    Hi all, Does anyone know of a truly declarative language? The behaviour I'm looking for is kind of what Excel does, where I can define variables and formulas, and have the formula's result change when the input changes (without having set the answer again myself) The behaviour I'm looking for is best shown with this pseudo code: X = 10 // define and assign two variables Y = 20; Z = X + Y // declare a formula that uses these two variables X = 50 // change one of the input variables ?Z // asking for Z should now give 70 (50 + 20) I've tried this in a lot of languages like F#, python, matlab etc, but every time i try this they come up with 30 instead of 70. Wich is correct from an imperative point of view, but i'm looking for a more declerative behaviour if you know what i mean. And this is just a very simple calculation. When things get more difficult it should handle stuff like recursion and memoization automagically. The code below would obviously work in C# but it's just so much code for the job, i'm looking for something a bit more to the point without all that 'technical noise' class BlaBla{ public int X {get;set;} // this used to be even worse before 3.0 public int Y {get;set;} public int Z {get{return X + Y;}} } static void main(){ BlaBla bla = new BlaBla(); bla.X = 10; bla.Y = 20; // can't define anything here bla.X = 50; // bit pointless here but I'll do it anyway. Console.Writeline(bla.Z);// 70, hurray! } This just seems like so much code, curly braces and semicolons that add nothing. Is there a language/ application (apart from Exel) that does this? Maybe I'm no doing it right in the mentioned langauges, or I've completely missed an app that does just this. I prototyped a language/ application that does this (along with some other stuff) and am thinking of productizing it. I just can't believe it's not there yet. Don't want to waste my time. Thanks in advance, Gert-Jan

    Read the article

  • Haskell: "how much" of a type should functions receive? and avoiding complete "reconstruction"

    - by L01man
    I've got these data types: data PointPlus = PointPlus { coords :: Point , velocity :: Vector } deriving (Eq) data BodyGeo = BodyGeo { pointPlus :: PointPlus , size :: Point } deriving (Eq) data Body = Body { geo :: BodyGeo , pict :: Color } deriving (Eq) It's the base datatype for characters, enemies, objects, etc. in my game (well, I just have two rectangles as the player and the ground right now :p). When a key, the characters moves right, left or jumps by changing its velocity. Moving is done by adding the velocity to the coords. Currently, it's written as follows: move (PointPlus (x, y) (xi, yi)) = PointPlus (x + xi, y + yi) (xi, yi) I'm just taking the PointPlus part of my Body and not the entire Body, otherwise it would be: move (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus (x, y) (xi, yi)) wh) col) = (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus (x + xi, y + yi) (xi, yi)) wh) col) Is the first version of move better? Anyway, if move only changes PointPlus, there must be another function that calls it inside a new Body. I explain: there's a function update which is called to update the game state; it is passed the current game state, a single Body for now, and returns the updated Body. update (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus xy (xi, yi)) wh) pict) = (Body (BodyGeo (move (PointPlus xy (xi, yi))) wh) pict) That tickles me. Everything is kept the same within Body except the PointPlus. Is there a way to avoid this complete "reconstruction" by hand? Like in: update body = backInBody $ move $ pointPlus body Without having to define backInBody, of course.

    Read the article

  • Need alternative field names for these reserved words

    - by MattSlay
    “type” and “class” are likely reserved or problematic words in C# and/or Ruby, two languages I may use to program against my new database schema in the future. So, in order to avoid potential conflicts with those languages, I’m looking for alternative names for these field names in my tables. In this case, it is from my Machines table, where I have: “class” field (values would be something like “manual” or “computerized”) and “type” field (values would be “lathe” or “mill”) I could call the fields “machineclass” and “machinetype”, but that is inconsistent with naming scheme in the rest of my schema (meaning, I do not re-use the table name in the field… For instance, I use Machine.name, not Machine.machinename) Any thought on this madness?

    Read the article

  • Method hiding with interfaces

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    interface IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; } } class Foo : IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; set; } } public IFoo GetFoo() { return new Foo { MyReadOnlyVar = 1 }; } Is the above an acceptable way of implementing a readonly/immutable object? The immutability of IFoo can be broken with a temporary cast to Foo. In general (non-critical) cases, is hiding functionality through interfaces a common pattern? Or is it considered lazy coding? Or even an anti-pattern?

    Read the article

  • CSS box around box technique

    - by webzide
    Dear Experts, I was trying to make an CSS division box with content in it as well as a border around it. Instead of using the box-border technique, I was trying out a new box to box technique instead. <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> #outer{ height: 20px; width: 20px; background-color:#233D78; } #inner{ height:18px; width: 18px; background-color: #FFF; font-size: 1em; text-align:center; font-family:'Bookman Old Style', serif; padding: 0px; margin-top: 1px; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-bottom:1px; vertical-align:middle; } </style> </head> <body> <div id="outer"><div id="inner">TEXT</div></div> </body> </html> Somehow the borders are just not showing up right with FireFox. I tried everything. Setting up the Paddings of both boxes, margin, and messing around with the width. TO be honest, it took me around 30min to do this and I still can't get it right :( I know that a way to achieve the same result would be setting up a border around just one box. But I just wanna learn this box around box background-color technique. THanks in advance

    Read the article

  • PHP: Best solution for links breaking in a mod_rewrite app

    - by psil
    I'm using mod rewrite to redirect all requests targeting non-existent files/directories to index.php?url=* This is surely the most common thing you do with mod_rewrite yet I have a problem: Naturally, if the page url is "mydomain.com/blog/view/1", the browser will look for images, stylesheets and relative links in the "virtual" directory "mydomain.com/blog/view/". Problem 1: Is using the base tag the best solution? I see that none of the PHP frameworks out there use the base tag, though. I'm currently having a regex replace all the relative links to point to the right path before output. Is that "okay"? Problem 2: It is possible that the server doesn't support mod_rewrite. However, all public files like images, stylesheets and the requests collector index.php are located in the directory /myapp/public. Normally mod_rewrite points all request to /public so it seems as if public was actually the root directory too all users. However if there is no mod_rewrite, I then have to point the users to /public from the root directory with a header() call. That means, however that all links are broken again because suddenly all images, etc. have to be called via /public/myimage.jpg Additional info: When there is no mod_rewrite the above request would look like this: mydomain.com/public/index.php/blog/view/1 What would be the best solutions for both problems?

    Read the article

  • C#: How to inherit constructors?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Imagine a base class with many constructors and a virtual method public class Foo { ... public Foo() {...} public Foo(int i) {...} ... public virtual void SomethingElse() {...} ... } and now I want to create a descendant class that overrides the virtual method: public class Bar : Foo { public override void SomethingElse() {...} } And another descendant that does some more stuff: public class Bah : Bar { public void DoMoreStuff() {...} } Do I really have to copy all constructors from Foo into Bar and Bah? And then if I change a constructor signature in Foo, do I have to update it in Bar and Bah? Is there no way to inherit constructors? Is there no way to encourage code reuse?

    Read the article

  • MVC pattern implementation. What is the n-relation between its components

    - by Srodriguez
    Dear all, I'm working in a C# project and we are , in order to get some unity across the different parts of our UI, trying to use the MVC pattern. The client is windows form based and I'm trying to create a simple MVC pattern implementation. It's been more challenging than expected, but I still have some questions regarding the MVC pattern. The problem comes mostly from the n-n relationships between its components: Here is what I've understood, but I'm not sure at all of it. Maybe someone can correct me? Model: can be shared among different Views. 1-n relationship between Model-View View: shows the state of the model. only one controller (can be shared among different views?). 1-1 relationship with the Model, 1-1 relationship with the controller Controller: handles the user actions on the view and updates the model. One controller can be shared among different views, a controller interacts only with one model? I'm not sure about the two last ones: Can a view have several controller? Or can a view share a controller with another view? Or is it only a 1:1 relationship? Can a controller handle several views? can it interact with several models? Also, I take advantage of this question to ask another MVC related question. I've suppressed all the synchronous calls between the different members of the MVC, making use of the events and delegates. One last call is still synchronous and is actually the most important one: The call between the view and the controller is still synchronous, as I need to know rather the controller has been able to handle the user's action or not. This is very bad as it means that I could block the UI thread (hence the client itself) while the controller is processing or doing some work. How can I avoid this? I can make use of the callback but then how do i know to which event the callback comes from? PS: I can't change the pattern at this stage, so please avoid answers of type "use MVP or MVVC, etc ;) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • MVC pattern implementation. What is the n-relation between its components

    - by Srodriguez
    Dear all, I'm working in a C# project and we are , in order to get some unity across the different parts of our UI, trying to use the MVC pattern. The client is windows form based and I'm trying to create a simple MVC pattern implementation. It's been more challenging than expected, but I still have some questions regarding the MVC pattern. The problem comes mostly from the n-n relationships between its components: Here is what I've understood, but I'm not sure at all of it. Maybe someone can correct me? Model: can be shared among different Views. 1-n relationship between Model-View View: shows the state of the model. only one controller (can be shared among different views?). 1-1 relationship with the Model, 1-1 relationship with the controller Controller: handles the user actions on the view and updates the model. One controller can be shared among different views, a controller interacts only with one model? I'm not sure about the two last ones: Can a view have several controller? Or can a view share a controller with another view? Or is it only a 1:1 relationship? Can a controller handle several views? can it interact with several models? Also, I take advantage of this question to ask another MVC related question. I've suppressed all the synchronous calls between the different members of the MVC, making use of the events and delegates. One last call is still synchronous and is actually the most important one: The call between the view and the controller is still synchronous, as I need to know rather the controller has been able to handle the user's action or not. This is very bad as it means that I could block the UI thread (hence the client itself) while the controller is processing or doing some work. How can I avoid this? I can make use of the callback but then how do i know to which event the callback comes from? PS: I can't change the pattern at this stage, so please avoid answers of type "use MVP or MVVC, etc ;) Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220  | Next Page >