Search Results

Search found 666 results on 27 pages for 'disadvantages'.

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

• Microsoft Ajax Control Toolkit vs. jQuery

  - by Juri

  Hi, we are currently developing a couple of custom asp.net server controls. Now we'd like to add some Ajax support to some of them. Now basically there would be two options Microsoft Ajax & Microsoft Ajax Control Toolkit jQuery I worked already with the Control Toolkit, writing a complete Extender and it was quite intuitive, once you understand the story behind. But I also like the simplicity of jQuery. So I'd like to hear some of you what you would like to go for (advantages/disadvantages of each of them), considering also that we're mainly dealing with Microsoft technologies. Would you go more for the toolkit or jQuery,...or both? //Edit: I just made some tests and I have to admit that at the moment I find the Toolkit better due to the integration. My purpose is mainly for using it on the server controls, so with the toolkit I have corresponding classes on the server-side where I can do something like CalendarExtender toolkitCalendarExtender = new CalendarExtender(); toolkitCalendarExtender.TargetControlID.... ... this.Controls.Add(toolkitCalendarExtender); This is really nice because in this way I don't have to deal with rendering predefined JavaScript which I construct somehow as string inside my custom server control. With jQuery I would have to do so (except for the toolkit Nicolas mentioned, but the support there is too weak for using it in a professional environment) Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

• Database Change Management - Setup for Initial Create Scripts, Subsequent Migration Scripts

  - by Martin Aatmaa

  I've got a database change management workflow in place. It's based on SQL scripts (so, it's not a managed code-based solution). The basic setup looks like this: Initial/ Generate Initial Schema.sql Generate Initial Required Data.sql Generate Initial Test Data.sql Migration 0001_MigrationScriptForChangeOne.sql 0002_MigrationScriptForChangeTwo.sql ... The process to spin up a database is to then run all the Initlal scripts, and then run the sequential Migration scripts. A tool takes case of the versioning requirements, etc. My question is, in this kind of setup, is it useful to also maintain this: Current/ Stored Procedures/ dbo.MyStoredProcedureCreateScript.sql ... Tables/ dbo.MyTableCreateScript.sql ... ... By "this" I mean a directory of scripts (separated by object type) that represents the create scripts for spinning up the current/latest version of the database. For some reason, I really like the idea, but I can't concretely justify it's need. Am I missing something? The advantages would be: For dev and source control, we would have the same object-per-file setup that we're used to For deployment, we can spin up a new DB instance to the latest version either by running the Initial+Migrate, or by running the scripts from Current/ For dev, we do not need a DB instance running in order to do development. We can do "offline" development on the Current/ folder. The disadvantages would be: For each change, we need to update the scripts in the Current/ folder, as well as create a Migration script (in the Migration/ folder) Thanks in advance for any input!

  Read the article

• Suggest a good method with least lookup time complexity

  - by Amrish

  I have a structure which has 3 identifier fields and one value field. I have a list of these objects. To give an analogy, the identifier fields are like the primary keys to the object. These 3 fields uniquely identify an object. Class { int a1; int a2; int a3; int value; }; I would be having a list of say 1000 object of this datatype. I need to check for specific values of these identity key values by passing values of a1, a2 and a3 to a lookup function which would check if any object with those specific values of a1, a2 and a3 is present and returns that value. What is the most effective way to implement this to achieve a best lookup time? One solution I could think of is to have a 3 dimensional matrix of length say 1000 and populate the value in it. This has a lookup time of O(1). But the disadvantages are. 1. I need to know the length of array. 2. For higher identity fields (say 20), then I will need a 20 dimension matrix which would be an overkill on the memory. For my actual implementation, I have 23 identity fields. Can you suggest a good way to store this data which would give me the best look up time?

  Read the article

• Difference between GL10 and GLES10 on Android

  - by kayahr

  The GLSurfaceView.Renderer interface of the Android SDK gives me a GL interface as parameter which has the type GL10. This interface is implemented by some private internal jni wrapper class. But there is also the class GLES10 where all the GL methods are available as static methods. Is there an important difference between them? So what if I ignore the gl parameter of onDrawFrame and instead use the static methods of GLES10 everywhere? Here is an example. Instead of doing this: void onDrawFrame(GL10 gl) { drawSomething(gl); } void drawSomething(GL10 gl) { gl.glLoadIdentity(); ... } I could do this: void onDrawFrame(GL10 gl) { drawSomething(); } void drawSomething() { GLES10.glLoadIdentity(); ... } The advantage is that I don't have to pass the GL context to all called methods. But even it it works (And it works, I tried it) I wonder if there are any disadvantages and reasons to NOT do it like that.

  Read the article

• Problems with Continuous Integration (CI) in TFS during Build Automation?

  - by Steve Johnson

  Hi all, I am using TFS 2008 and Visual Studio and my boss has instructed me to implement Build Automation for Development and Release builds for a web Project. I am a total newbie in Build Automation. There are multiple developers working on the project on different machines using Visual Studio 2008 team System. Source is already being maintained on TFS 2008. SQL Server in Use is SQL Server 2000 and hosted IIS is IIS 7.5 on Windows Server 2008 x64. I have searched over the net and found Continuous Integration and Nightly Builds as two important Build Automation techniques. I was just wondering of any disadvantages associated with both the methodologies (CI and Nightly Builds). If someone could guide me to a working tutorial that explains both techniques the it would be quite helpful. Please also tell the requirements of IIS, SQL Server and any other that might be pre-requisite to implement build automation. Also i would like to know whether there are other techniques that are better then CI? Replies and discussion much appreciated. Thanks

  Read the article

• The woes of (sometimes) storing "date only" in datetimes

  - by Heinzi

  We have two fields from and to (of type datetime), where the user can store the begin time and the end time of a business trip, e.g.: From: 2010-04-14 09:00 To: 2010-04-16 16:30 So, the duration of the trip is 2 days and 7.5 hours. Often, the exact times are not known in advance, so the user enters the dates without a time: From: 2010-04-14 To: 2010-04-16 Internally, this is stored as 2010-04-14 00:00 and 2010-04-16 00:00, since that's what most modern class libraries (e.g. .net) and databases (e.g. SQL Server) do when you store a "date only" in a datetime structure. Usually, this makes perfect sense. However, when entering 2010-04-16 as the to date, the user clearly did not mean 2010-04-16 00:00. Instead, the user meant 2010-04-16 24:00, i.e., calculating the duration of the trip should output 3 days, not 2 days. I can think of a few (more or less ugly) workarounds for this problem (add "23:59" in the UI layer of the to field if the user did not enter a time component; add a special "dates are full days" Boolean field; store "2010-04-17 00:00" in the DB but display "2010-04-16 24:00" to the user if the time component is "00:00"; ...), all having advantages and disadvantages. Since I assume that this is a fairly common problem, I was wondering: Is there a "standard" best-practice way of solving it? If there isn't, have you experienced a similar requirement, how did you solve it and what were the pros/cons of that solution?

  Read the article

• SQL Server CLR stored procedures in data processing tasks - good or evil?

  - by Gart

  In short - is it a good design solution to implement most of the business logic in CLR stored procedures? I have read much about them recently but I can't figure out when they should be used, what are the best practices, are they good enough or not. For example, my business application needs to parse a large fixed-length text file, extract some numbers from each line in the file, according to these numbers apply some complex business rules (involving regex matching, pattern matching against data from many tables in the database and such), and as a result of this calculation update records in the database. There is also a GUI for the user to select the file, view the results, etc. This application seems to be a good candidate to implement the classic 3-tier architecture: the Data Layer, the Logic Layer, and the GUI layer. The Data Layer would access the database The Logic Layer would run as a WCF service and implement the business rules, interacting with the Data Layer The GUI Layer would be a means of communication between the Logic Layer and the User. Now, thinking of this design, I can see that most of the business rules may be implemented in a SQL CLR and stored in SQL Server. I might store all my raw data in the database, run the processing there, and get the results. I see some advantages and disadvantages of this solution: Pros: The business logic runs close to the data, meaning less network traffic. Process all data at once, possibly utilizing parallelizm and optimal execution plan. Cons: Scattering of the business logic: some part is here, some part is there. Questionable design solution, may encounter unknown problems. Difficult to implement a progress indicator for the processing task. I would like to hear all your opinions about SQL CLR. Does anybody use it in production? Are there any problems with such design? Is it a good thing?

  Read the article

• Pros & Cons of Google App Engine

  - by Rishi

  Pros & Cons of Google App Engine [An Updated List 21st Aug 09] Help me Compile a List of all the Advantages & Disadvantages of Building an Application on the Google App Engine Pros: 1) No Need to buy Servers or Server Space (no maintenance). 2) Makes solving the problem of scaling much easier. Cons: 1) Locked into Google App Engine ?? 2)Developers have read-only access to the filesystem on App Engine. 3)App Engine can only execute code called from an HTTP request (except for scheduled background tasks). 4)Users may upload arbitrary Python modules, but only if they are pure-Python; C and Pyrex modules are not supported. 5)App Engine limits the maximum rows returned from an entity get to 1000 rows per Datastore call. 6)Java applications may only use a subset (The JRE Class White List) of the classes from the JRE standard edition. 7)Java applications cannot create new threads. Known Issues!! http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/list Hard limits Apps per developer - 10 Time per request - 30 sec Files per app - 3,000 HTTP response size - 10 MB Datastore item size - 1 MB Application code size - 150 MB Pro or Con? App Engine's infrastructure removes many of the system administration and development challenges of building applications to scale to millions of hits. Google handles deploying code to a cluster, monitoring, failover, and launching application instances as necessary. While other services let users install and configure nearly any *NIX compatible software, App Engine requires developers to use Python or Java as the programming language and a limited set of APIs. Current APIs allow storing and retrieving data from a BigTable non-relational database; making HTTP requests; sending e-mail; manipulating images; and caching. Most existing Web applications can't run on App Engine without modification, because they require a relational database.

  Read the article

• JAXB - Beans to XSD or XSD to beans?

  - by bajafresh4life

  I have an existing data model. I would like to express this data model in terms of XML. It looks like I have two options if I'm to use JAXB: Create an XSD that mirrors my data model, and use xjc to create binding objects. Marshalling and unmarshalling will involve creating a "mapping" class that would take my existing data objects and map them to the objects that xjc created. For example, in my data model I have a Doc class, and JAXB would create another Doc class with basically the same exact fields, and I would have to map from my Doc class to xjc's Doc class. Annotate my existing data model with JAXB annotations, and use schemagen to generate an XSD from my annotated classes. I can see advantanges and disadvantages of both approaches. It seems that most people using JAXB start with the XSD file. It makes sense that the XSD should be the gold standard truth, since it expresses the data model in a truly cross-platform way. I'm inclined to start with the XSD first, but it seems icky that I have to write and maintain a separate mapping class that shuttles data in between my world and JAXB world. Any recommendations?

  Read the article

• Templates vs. coded HTML

  - by Alan Harris-Reid

  I have a web-app consisting of some html forms for maintaining some tables (SQlite, with CherryPy for web-server stuff). First I did it entirely 'the Python way', and generated html strings via. code, with common headers, footers, etc. defined as functions in a separate module. I also like the idea of templates, so I tried Jinja2, which I find quite developer-friendly. In the beginning I thought templates were the way to go, but that was when pages were simple. Once .css and .js files were introduced (not necessarily in the same folder as the .html files), and an ever-increasing number of {{...}} variables and {%...%} commands were introduced, things started getting messy at design-time, even though they looked great at run-time. Things got even more difficult when I needed additional javascript in the or sections. As far as I can see, the main advantages of using templates are: Non-dynamic elements of page can easily be viewed in browser during design. Except for {} placeholders, html is kept separate from python code. If your company has a web-page designer, they can still design without knowing Python. while some disadvantages are: {{}} delimiters visible when viewed at design-time in browser Associated .css and .js files have to be in same folder to see effects in browser at design-time. Data, variables, lists, etc., must be prepared in advanced and either declared globally or passed as parameters to render() function. So - when to use 'hard-coded' HTML, and when to use templates? I am not sure of the best way to go, so I would be interested to hear other developers' views. TIA, Alan

  Read the article

• Direct invocation vs indirect invocation in C

  - by Mohit Deshpande

  I am new to C and I was reading about how pointers "point" to the address of another variable. So I have tried indirect invocation and direct invocation and received the same results (as any C/C++ developer could have predicted). This is what I did: int cost; int *cost_ptr; int main() { cost_ptr = &cost; //assign pointer to cost cost = 100; //intialize cost with a value printf("\nDirect Access: %d", cost); cost = 0; //reset the value *cost_ptr = 100; printf("\nIndirect Access: %d", *cost_ptr); //some code here return 0; //1 } So I am wondering if indirect invocation with pointers has any advantages over direct invocation or vice-versa. Some advantages/disadvantages could include speed, amount of memory consumed performing the operation (most likely the same but I just wanted to put that out there), safeness (like dangling pointers) , good programming practice, etc. 1Funny thing, I am using the GNU C Compiler (gcc) and it still compiles without the return statement and everything is as expected. Maybe because the C++ compiler will automatically insert the return statement if you forget.

  Read the article

• Implementing the ‘defer’ statement from Go in Objective-C?

  - by zoul

  Hello! Today I read about the defer statement in the Go language: A defer statement pushes a function call onto a list. The list of saved calls is executed after the surrounding function returns. Defer is commonly used to simplify functions that perform various clean-up actions. I thought it would be fun to implement something like this in Objective-C. Do you have some idea how to do it? I thought about dispatch finalizers, autoreleased objects and C++ destructors. Autoreleased objects: @interface Defer : NSObject {} + (id) withCode: (dispatch_block_t) block; @end @implementation Defer - (void) dealloc { block(); [super dealloc]; } @end #define defer(__x) [Defer withCode:^{__x}] - (void) function { defer(NSLog(@"Done")); … } Autoreleased objects seem like the only solution that would last at least to the end of the function, as the other solutions would trigger when the current scope ends. On the other hand they could stay in the memory much longer, which would be asking for trouble. Dispatch finalizers were my first thought, because blocks live on the stack and therefore I could easily make something execute when the stack unrolls. But after a peek in the documentation it doesn’t look like I can attach a simple “destructor” function to a block, can I? C++ destructors are about the same thing, I would create a stack-based object with a block to be executed when the destructor runs. This would have the ugly disadvantage of turning the plain .m files into Objective-C++? I don’t really think about using this stuff in production, I’m just interested in various solutions. Can you come up with something working, without obvious disadvantages? Both scope-based and function-based solutions would be interesting.

  Read the article

• css hover vs. javascript mouseover

  - by John

  There are times when I have a choice between using a css element:hover or javascript onmouseover to control the appearance of html elements on a page. Consider the following scenario where a DIV wraps an INPUT <div> <input id="input"> </div> I want the input to change background color when the mouse cursor hovers over the div. The CSS approach is <style> input {background-color:White;} div:hover input {background-color:Blue;} </style> <div><input></div> The javascript approach is <div onmouseover="document.getElementById('input').style.backgroundColor='Blue';"> <input id="input"> </div> What are the advantages and disadvantages of each approach? Does the CSS approach work well with most web browsers? Is javascript slower than css?

  Read the article

• Strategies for serializing an object for auditing/logging purpose in .NET?

  - by Jiho Han

  Let's say I have an application that processes messages. Messages are just objects in this case that implements IMessage interface which is just a marker. In this app, if a message fails to process, then I want to log it, first of all for auditing and troubleshooting purposes. Secondly I might want to use it for re-processing. Ideally, I want the message to be serialized into a format that is human-readable. The first candidate is XML although there are others like JSON. If I were to serialize the messages as XML, I want to know whether the message object is XML-serializable. One way is to reflect on the type and to see if it has a parameter-less constructor and the other is to require IXmlSerializable interface. I'm not too happy with either of these approaches. There is a third option which is to try to serialize it and catch exceptions. This doesn't really help - I want to, in some way, stipulate that IMessage (or a derived type) should be xml-serializable. The reflection route has obvious disadvantages such as security, performance, etc. IXmlSerializable route locks down my messages to one format, when in the future, I might want to change the serialization format to be JSON. The other thing is even the simplest objects now must implement ReadXml and WriteXml methods. Is there a route that involves the least amount of work that lets me serialize an arbitrary object (as long as it implements the marker interface) into XML but not lock future messages into XML?

  Read the article

• MVVM: Thin ViewModels and Rich Models

  - by Dan Bryant

  I'm continuing to struggle with the MVVM pattern and, in attempting to create a practical design for a small/medium project, have run into a number of challenges. One of these challenges is figuring out how to get the benefits of decoupling with this pattern without creating a lot of repetitive, hard-to-maintain code. My current strategy has been to create 'rich' Model classes. They are fully aware that they will be consumed by an MVVM pattern and implement INotifyPropertyChanged, allow their collections to be observed and remain cognizant that they may always be under observation. My ViewModel classes tend to be thin, only exposing properties when data actually needs to be transformed, with the bulk of their code being RelayCommand handlers. Views happily bind to either ViewModels or Models directly, depending on whether any data transformation is required. I use AOP (via Postsharp) to ease the pain of INotifyPropertyChanged, making it easy to make all of my Model classes 'rich' in this way. Are there significant disadvantages to using this approach? Can I assume that the ViewModel and View are so tightly coupled that if I need new data transformation for the View, I can simply add it to the ViewModel as needed?

  Read the article

• Legitimate uses of the Function constructor

  - by Marcel Korpel

  As repeatedly said, it is considered bad practice to use the Function constructor (also see the ECMAScript Language Specification, 5th edition, § 15.3.2.1): new Function ([arg1[, arg2[, … argN]],] functionBody) (where all arguments are strings containing argument names and the last (or only) string contains the function body). To recapitulate, it is said to be slow, as explained by the Opera team: Each time […] the Function constructor is called on a string representing source code, the script engine must start the machinery that converts the source code to executable code. This is usually expensive for performance – easily a hundred times more expensive than a simple function call, for example. (Mark ‘Tarquin’ Wilton-Jones) Though it's not that bad, according to this post on MDC (I didn't test this myself using the current version of Firefox, though). Crockford adds that [t]he quoting conventions of the language make it very difficult to correctly express a function body as a string. In the string form, early error checking cannot be done. […] And it is wasteful of memory because each function requires its own independent implementation. Another difference is that a function defined by a Function constructor does not inherit any scope other than the global scope (which all functions inherit). (MDC) Apart from this, you have to be attentive to avoid injection of malicious code, when you create a new Function using dynamic contents. Lots of disadvantages and it is intelligible that ECMAScript 5 discourages the use of the Function constructor by throwing an exception when using it in strict mode (§ 13.1). That said, T.J. Crowder says in an answer that [t]here's almost never any need for the similar […] new Function(...), either, again except for some advanced edge cases. So, now I am wondering: what are these “advanced edge cases”? Are there legitimate uses of the Function constructor?

  Read the article

• Why do mozilla and webkit prepend -moz- and -webkit- to CSS3 rules?

  - by egarcia

  CSS3 rules bring lots of interesting features. Take border-radius, for example. The standard says that if you write this rule: div.rounded-corners { border-radius: 5px; } I should get a 5px border radius. But neither mozilla nor webkit implement this. However, they implement the same thing, with the same parameters, with a different name (-moz-border-radius and -webkit-border-radius, respectively). In order to satisfy as many browsers as possible, you end up with this: div.rounded-corners { border-radius: 5px; -moz-border-radius: 5px; -webkit-border-radius: 5px; } I can see two obvious disadvantages: Copy-paste code. This has obvious risks that I will not discuss here. The W3C CSS validator will not validate these rules. At the same time, I don't see any obvious advantages. I believe that the people behind mozilla and webkit are more intelligent than myself. There must be some good reasons to have things structured this way. It's just that I can't see them. So, I must ask you people: why is this?

  Read the article

• Displaying tree path of record in SQL Server 2005

  - by jskiles1

  An example of my tree table is: ([id] is an identity) [id], [parent_id], [path] 1, NULL, 1 2, 1, 1-2 3, 1, 1-3 4, 3, 1-3-4 My goal is to query quickly for multiple rows of this table and view the full path of the node from its root, through its superiors, down to itself. The ultimate question is, should I generate this path on inserts and maintain it in its own column or generate this path on query to save disk space? I guess it depends if this table is write heavy or read heavy. I've been contemplating several approaches to using the "path" characteristic of this parent/child relationship and I just can't seem to settle on one. This "path" is simply for display purposes and serves absolutely no purpose other than that. Here is what I have done to implement this "path." AFTER INSERT TRIGGER - requires passing a NULL path to the insert and updating the path for the record at the inserted rows identity INSTEAD OF INSERT TRIGGER - does not require insert to have NULL path passed, but does require the trigger to insert with a NULL path and updating the path for the record at SCOPE_IDENTITY() STORED PROCEDURE - requiring all inserts into this table to be done through the stored procedure implementing the trigger logic VIEW - requires building the path in the view 1 and 2 seem annoying if massive amounts of data are entered at once. 3 seems annoying because all inserts must go through the procedure in order to have a valid path populated. 1, 2, and 3 require maintaining a path column on the table. 4 removes all the limitations of the above but require the view to perform the path logic and requires use of the view if a path is to be displayed. I have successfully implemented all of the above approaches and I'm mainly looking for some advice. Am I way off the mark here or are any of the above acceptable? Each has it's advantages and disadvantages.

  Read the article

• Java/XML: Good "Stream-based" Alternative to JAXB?

  - by Jan

  Hello Experts, JAXB makes working with XML so much easier, but I have currently a big problem, that the documents I have to process are too large for an in memory unmarshalling that JAXB does. The data can be up to 4GB per document. The datastructure I will have to process is very simple and flat: With a root element and millions of “elements”… <root> <element> _foo </element> <element> _foo </element> </root> May questions are: Does JAXB maybe somehow support unmarshalling in a “streambased” way, that does not require to build the whole objecttree in memory but rather gives me some kind of “Iterator” to the elements, element by element? (Maybe I just missed that somehow…) If not what are your proposals for an good alternative with a a. “flat learningcurve, ideally very similar to JAXB b. AND VERY IMPORTANT: Ideally with the possibility / tool for the generation of the unarshaller code from an XSD file OR annotated Java Class 3.(I have searched SO and those to library that ended up on my “watchlist” (without comparing them closer) were Apache XML Beans and Xstream… What other libraries are maybe even better for the purpose and what are the disadvantages, adavangaes… Thank you very much!!! Jan

  Read the article

• What's the best way to select max over multiple fields in SQL?

  - by allyourcode

  The I kind of want to do is select max(f1, f2, f3). I know this doesn't work, but I think what I want should be pretty clear (see update 1). I was thinking of doing select max(concat(f1, '--', f2 ...)), but this has various disadvantages. In particular, doing concat will probably slow things down. What's the best way to get what I want? update 1: The answers I've gotten so far aren't what I'm after. max works over a set of records, but it compares them using only one value; I want max to consider several values, just like the way order by can consider several values. update 2: Suppose I have the following table: id class_name order_by1 order_by_2 1 a 0 0 2 a 0 1 3 b 1 0 4 b 0 9 I want a query that will group the records by class_name. Then, within each "class", select the record that would come first if you ordered by order_by1 ascending then order_by2 ascending. The result set would consist of records 2 and 3. In my magical query language, it would look something like this: select max(* order by order_by1 ASC, order_by2 ASC) from table group by class_name

  Read the article

• C++ interpreter conceptual problem

  - by Jan Wilkins

  I've built an interpreter in C++ for a language created by me. One main problem in the design was that I had two different types in the language: number and string. So I have to pass around a struct like: class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int intValue; string strValue; } Objects of this class are passed around million times a second during e.g.: a countdown loop in my language. Profiling pointed out: 85% of the performance is eaten by the allocation function of the string template. This is pretty clear to me: My interpreter has bad design and doesn't use pointers enough. Yet, I don't have an option: I can't use pointers in most cases as I just have to make copies. How to do something against this? Is a class like this a better idea? vector<string> strTable; vector<int> intTable; class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int locationInTable; } So the class only knows what type it represents and the position in the table This however again has disadvantages: I'd have to add temporary values to the string/int vector table and then remove them again, this would eat a lot of performance again. Help, how do interpreters of languages like Python or Ruby do that? They somehow need a struct that represents a value in the language like something that can either be int or string.

  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

• Saving Abstract and Sub classes to database

  - by bretddog

  Hi, I have an abstract class "StrategyBase", and a set of sub classes, StrategyA/B/C etc. The sub classes use some of the properties of the base class, and have some individual properties. My question is how to save this to a database. I'm currently using SqlCE, and Linq-To-Sql by creating entity classes automatically with SqlMetal.exe. I've seen there are three solutions shown in this question, but I'm not able to see how these solutions will work or not with SqlMetal/entity classes. Though it seems to me the "concrete table inheritance" would probably work without any manual modifying. What about the other two, would they be problematic? For "Single Table Inheritance" wouldn't all classes get all variables, even though they don't need them? And for the "Class table inheritance" solution I can't really see at all how that will map into the entity-classes for a useful purpose. I may note that I extend these partial entity classes for making the classes of my business objects. I may also consider moving to EntityFramework instead of SqlMetal/Linq2Sql, so would be nice also to know if that makes any difference to what schema is easy to implement. One likely important thing to note is that I will constantly be develop new strategies, which makes me have to modify the program code, and probably the database shcema; when adding a new strategy. Sorry the question is a bit "all over the place", but hopefully it's some clear advantages/disadvantages here that you may be able to advice. ? Cheers!

  Read the article

• Advantages of Using Linux as primary developer desktop

  - by Nick N

  I want to get some input on some of the advantages of why developers should and need to use Linux as their primary development desktop on a daily basic as opposed to using Windows. This is particulary helpful when your Dev, QA, and Production environments are Linux. The current analogy that I keep coming back to is. If I build my demo car as a Ford Escort, but my project car is a Ford Mustang, it doesn't make sense at all. I'm currently at an IT department that allows dual boot with Windows and Linux, but some run Linux while the vast majority use Windows. Here's several advantages that I've came up with since using Linux as a primary desktop. Same Exact operating system as Dev, QA, and Production Same Scripts (.sh) instead of maintaining (.bat and *.sh). Somewhat mitigated by using cygwin, but still a bit different. Team learns simple commands such as: cd, ls, cat, top Team learns Advanced commands like: pkill, pgrep, chmod, su, sudo, ssh, scp Full access to installs typically for Linux, such as RPM, DEB installs just like the target environments. The list could go on and on, but I want to get some feedback of anything that I may have missed, or even any disadvantages (of course there are some). To me it makes sense to migrate an entire team over to using Linux, and using Virtual Box, running Windows XP VM's to test functional items that 95% of most of the world uses. This is similar but a little different thread going on here as well. link text

  Read the article

• Handles Comparison: empty classes vs. undefined classes vs. void*

  - by Nawaz

  Microsoft's GDI+ defines many empty classes to be treated as handles internally. For example, (source GdiPlusGpStubs.h) //Approach 1 class GpGraphics {}; class GpBrush {}; class GpTexture : public GpBrush {}; class GpSolidFill : public GpBrush {}; class GpLineGradient : public GpBrush {}; class GpPathGradient : public GpBrush {}; class GpHatch : public GpBrush {}; class GpPen {}; class GpCustomLineCap {}; There are other two ways to define handles. They're, //Approach 2 class BOOK; //no need to define it! typedef BOOK *PBOOK; typedef PBOOK HBOOK; //handle to be used internally //Approach 3 typedef void* PVOID; typedef PVOID HBOOK; //handle to be used internally I just want to know the advantages and disadvantages of each of these approaches. One advantage with Microsoft's approach is that, they can define type-safe hierarchy of handles using empty classes, which (I think) is not possible with the other two approaches. What else? EDIT: One advantage with the second approach (i.e using incomplete classes) is that we can prevent clients from dereferencing the handles (that means, this approach appears to support encapsulation strongly, I suppose). The code would not even compile if one attempts to dereference handles. What else?

  Read the article

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