Search Results

Search found 17259 results on 691 pages for 'behaviour driven design'.

Page 244/691 | < Previous Page | 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251  | Next Page >

  • Are we using IoC effectively?

    - by Juliet
    So my company uses Castle Windsor IoC container, but in a way that feels "off": All the data types are registered in code, not the config file. All data types are hard-coded to use one interface implementation. In fact, for nearly all given interfaces, there is and will only ever be one implementation. All registered data types have a default constructor, so Windsor doesn't instantiate an object graph for any registered types. The people who designed the system insist the IoC container makes the system better. We have 1200+ public classes, so its a big system, the kind where you'd expect to find a framework like Windsor. But I'm still skeptical. Is my company using IoC effectively? Is there an advantage to new'ing objects with Windsor than new'ing objects with the new keyword?

    Read the article

  • implementing type inference

    - by deepblue
    well I see some interesting discussions here about static vs. dynamic typing I generally prefer static typing, due to compile type checking, better documented code,etc. However I do agree that they do clutter up the code if done the way Java does it, for example. so Im about to start building a language of my own and type inference is one of the things that I want to implement, in a functional style language... I do understand that it is a big subject, and Im not trying to create something that has not been done before, just basic inferencing... any pointers on what to read up that will help me with this? preferably something more pragmatic/practical as oppose to more theoretical category theory/type theory texts. If there's a implementation discussion text out here, with data structures/algorithms, that would just be lovely much appreciated

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing User Interface. What is an effective way ?

    - by pierocampanelli
    I have an accounting & payroll client/server application where there are several input form with complex data validation rules. I am finding an effective way to perform unit testing of user interface. For complex validation rules I mean: "Disable button X if I Insert a value in textfield Y" "Enable a combobox if I insert a value in a textfield" ...... ...... Most promising pattern i have found is suggested by M. Fowler (http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/ModelViewPresenter.html). Have you any experience about Unit Testing of User Interface? As technology stack I am using: .NET 3.5 & Windows Forms Widget Library.

    Read the article

  • What should go in each MVVM triad?

    - by Harry
    OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Configuration and Model-View

    - by HH
    I am using the Model-View pattern on a small application I'm writing. Here's the scenario: The model maintains a list of directories from where it can extract the data that it needs. The View has a Configuration or a Setting dialog where the user can modify this list of directories (the dialog has a JList displaying the list in addition to add and remove buttons). I need some advice from the community: The View needs to communicate these changes to the model. I thought first of adding to the model these methods: addDirectory() and removeDirectory(). But I am trying to limit the number of methods (or channels) that the View can use to communicate with and manipulate the model. Is there any good practice for this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • C# Virtual method call in constructor - how to refactor?

    - by Cristi Diaconescu
    I have an abstract class for database-agnostic cursor actions. Derived from that, there are classes that implement the abstract methods for handling database-specific stuff. The problem is, the base class ctor needs to call an abstract method - when the ctor is called, it needs to initialize the database-specific cursor. I know why this shouldn't be done, I don't need that explanation! This is my first implementation, that obviously doesn't work - it's the textbook "wrong way" of doing it. The overridden method accesses a field from the derived class, which is not yet instantiated: public abstract class CursorReader { private readonly int m_rowCount; protected CursorReader() { m_rowCount = CreateCursor(sqlCmd); //virtual call ! } protected abstract int CreateCursor(string sqlCmd); } public class SqlCursorReader : CursorReader { private SqlConnection m_sqlConnection; public SqlCursorReader(string sqlCmd, SqlConnection sqlConnection) { m_sqlConnection = sqlConnection; //field initialized here } protected override int CreateCursor(string sqlCmd) { //uses not-yet-initialized member *m_sqlConnection* //so this throws a NullReferenceException var cursor = new CustomCursor(sqlCmd, m_sqlConnection); return cursor.Count(); } } I will follow up with an answer on my attempts to fix this...

    Read the article

  • Element Content Versus Attribute for Simple XML Value

    - by MB
    I know the elements versus attributes debate has come up many times here and elsewhere (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here) but I haven't seen much discussion of elements versus attributes for simple property values. So which of the following approaches do you think is better for storing a simple value? A: Value in Element Content: <TotalCount>553</TotalCount> <CelsiusTemperature>23.5</CelsiusTemperature> <SingleDayPeriod>2010-05-29</SingleDayPeriod> <ZipCodeLocation>12203</ZipCodeLocation> or B: Value in Attribute: <TotalCount value="553"/> <CelsiusTemperature value="23.5"/> <SingleDayPeriod day="2010-05-29"/> <ZipCodeLocation code="12203"/> I suspect that putting the value in the element content (A) might look a little more familiar to most folks (though I'm not sure about that). Putting the value in an attribute (B) might use less characters, but that depends on the length of the element and attribute names. Putting the value in an attribute (B) might be more extensible, because you could potentially include all sorts of extra information as nested elements. Whereas, by putting the value inside the element content (A), you're restricting extensibility to adding more attributes. But then extensibility often isn't a concern for really simple properties - sometimes you know that you'll never need to add additional data. Bottom line might be that it simply doesn't matter, but it would still be great to hear some thoughts and see some votes for the two options.

    Read the article

  • Android 2.1 address bar causes change in viewport dimensions

    - by davehumyo
    Hi, I have a page that has a 100% width and height div in it (all surrounding elements are sized accordingly so that it does actually achieve 100% width and height). Below that div I have a second div with a fixed height. In mobile safari and blackberry everything is fine, when the page loads the dimensions are applied correctly (the top div filling the viewport) and the user can scroll down to reveal the second div. Android 2.1 also applies the dimensions correctly, but with an added quirk; when the user scrolls down and removes the address bar from the page, the dimensions of the div are recalculated to fill the viewport, causing the content to jump. Ideally I would like the dimensions of the div to remain static when the page is scrolled, but remain 100% so that it will fill the viewport regardless of device size or orientation. Does anyone know of any way to disable this recalculation? Thanks for any help you can provide.

    Read the article

  • Is there such a thing as a converter from php to html?

    - by 0plus1
    Don't think that I'm mad, I understand how php works! That being said. I develop personal website and I usually take advantage of php to avoid repetion during the development phase nothing truly dynamic, only includes for the menus, a couple of foreach and the likes. When the development phase ends I need to give the website in html files to the client. Is there a tool (crawler?) that can do this for me instead of visiting each page and saving the interpreted html?

    Read the article

  • Best approch to dynamically filter .net objects

    - by maxba
    The project i´m working currently on has a way to define a filter to filter objects from a database. This filter is a pretty straitforward class containing filtercriteria that will be combined to a sql where-clause. The goal now is to use this filter class to filter .net objects as well. So the filter for example defines, that the title property of the object that it is applied to must contain some userdefined string etc. What are ways to approch this problem? What should the filter return instead of the sql where-clause and how can it be applied to the object? I´m thinking about this for hours and don´t yet have even a slight idea how to solve this. Been thinking about reflection, dynamic code execution, building expressions but still haven´t found an acutal starting point.

    Read the article

  • How to handle customers with multiple addresses in CakePHP

    - by Ryan
    I'm putting together a system to track customer orders. Each order will have three addresses; a Main contact address, a billing address and a shipping address. I do not want to have columns in my orders table for the three addresses, I'd like to reference them from a separate table and have some way to enumerate the entry so I can determine if the addressing is main, shipping or billing. Does it make sense to create a column in the address table for AddressType and enumerate that or create another table - AddressTypes - that defines the address enumeration and link to that table? I have found other questions that touch on this topic and that is where I've taken my model. The problem I'm having is taking that into the cakePHP convention. I've been struggling to internalize the direction OneToMany relationships are formed - the way the documentation states feels backwards to me. Any help would be appreciated, Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is this physical collection class that contains only static methods an Anti-Pattern?

    - by Tj Kellie
    I'm trying to figure out if I should continue on with a current pattern in an application I'm working in, or refactor this into something else. I have a set of collection classes off a generic base of List. These classes have public constructors but contain only static methods that return collections. They look like this: public class UserObjCollection : BaseCollection<UserObj> { public static UserObjCollection GetAllUserObj() { UserObjCollection obj = new UserObjCollection(); obj.MapObjects(new UserObjDataService().GetAllUserObj()); return obj; } } Is this a Pattern or Anti-Pattern and what are the merits of this over a straight factory pattern?

    Read the article

  • C++ game designing & polymorphism question

    - by Kotti
    Hi! I'm trying to implement some sort of 'just-for-me' game engine and the problem's plot goes the following way: Suppose I have some abstract interface for a renderable entity, e.g. IRenderable. And it's declared the following way: interface IRenderable { // (...) // Suppose that Backend is some abstract backend used // for rendering, and it's implementation is not important virtual void Render(Backend& backend) = 0; }; What I'm doing right now is something like declaring different classes like class Ball : public IRenderable { virtual void Render(Backend& backend) { // Rendering implementation, that is specific for // the Ball object // (...) } }; And then everything looks fine. I can easily do something like std::vector<IRenderable*> items, push some items like new Ball() in this vector and then make a call similiar to foreach (IRenderable* in items) { item->Render(backend); } Ok, I guess it is the 'polymorphic' way, but what if I want to have different types of objects in my game and an ability to manipulate their state, where every object can be manipulated via it's own interface? I could do something like struct GameState { Ball ball; Bonus bonus; // (...) }; and then easily change objects state via their own methods, like ball.Move(...) or bonus.Activate(...), where Move(...) is specific for only Ball and Activate(...) - for only Bonus instances. But in this case I lose the opportunity to write foreach IRenderable* simply because I store these balls and bonuses as instances of their derived, not base classes. And in this case the rendering procedure turns into a mess like ball.Render(backend); bonus.Render(backend); // (...) and it is bad because we actually lose our polymorphism this way (no actual need for making Render function virtual, etc. The other approach means invoking downcasting via dynamic_cast or something with typeid to determine the type of object you want to manipulate and this looks even worse to me and this also breaks this 'polymorphic' idea. So, my question is - is there some kind of (probably) alternative approach to what I want to do or can my current pattern be somehow modified so that I would actually store IRenderable* for my game objects (so that I can invoke virtual Render method on each of them) while preserving the ability to easily change the state of these objects? Maybe I'm doing something absolutely wrong from the beginning, if so, please point it out :) Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

    - by Jeff
    I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring static inner class inside interface in java?

    - by Roman
    I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad in this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • designing an ASP.NET MVC partial view - showing user choices within a large set of choices

    - by p.campbell
    Consider a partial view whose job is to render markup for a pizza order. The desire is to reuse this partial view in the Create, Details, and Update views. It will always be passed an IEnumerable<Topping>, and output a multitude of checkboxes. There are lots... maybe 40 in all (yes, that might smell). A-OK so far. Problem The question is around how to include the user's choices on the Details and Update views. From the datastore, we've got a List<ChosenTopping>. The goal is to have each checkbox set to true for each chosen topping. What's the easiest to read, or most maintainable way to achieve this? Potential Solutions Create a ViewModel with the List and List. Write out the checkboxes as per normal. While writing each, check whether the ToppingID exists in the list of ChosenTopping. Create a new ViewModel that's a hybrid of both. Perhaps call it DisplayTopping or similar. It would have property ID, Name and IsUserChosen. The respective controller methods for Create, Update, and Details would have to create this new collection with respect to the user's choices as they see fit. The Create controller method would basically set all to false so that it appears to be a blank slate. The real application isn't pizza, and the organization is a bit different from the fakeshot, but the concept is the same. Is it wise to reuse the control for the 3 different scenarios? How better can you display the list of options + the user's current choices? Would you use jQuery instead to show the user selections? Any other thoughts on the potential smell of splashing up a whole bunch of checkboxes?

    Read the article

  • Implementing the procducer-consumer pattern with .NET 4.0

    - by bitbonk
    With alle the new paralell programming features in .NET 4.0, what would be a a simple and fast way to implement the producer-consumer pattern (where at least one thread is producing/enqueuing task items and another thread executes/dequeues these tasks). Can we benfit from all these new APIs? What is your preferred implementation of this pattern?

    Read the article

  • Looking for Programming Language that allows you to change true and false.

    - by Maushu
    For my curiosity sake I'm looking for a dynamic object oriented language that allows you to change true to false and vice versa. Something like this: true = false, false = true; This should also affect any conditional statements, therefore 42 == 42 should return False. Basically, with this premise, nothing in the language would be safe from the programmer. Is there any language like this?

    Read the article

  • How to use Unique Composite Key

    - by LifeH2O
    I have a table Item(ItemName*, ItemSize*, Price, Notes) I was making composite key of (ItemName,ItemSize) to uniquely identify item. And now after reading some answers on stackoverflow suggesting the use of UNIQUE i revised it as Item(ItemID*, ItemName, ItemSize, Price, Notes) But How to apply UNIQUE constraint on ItemName and ItemSize please correct if there is something wrong in question

    Read the article

  • Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

    - by MatthewMartin
    This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

    Read the article

  • What is so bad about Singletons

    - by Ewan Makepeace
    The Singleton pattern is a fully paid up member of the GoF Patterns Book but lately seems rather orphaned by the developer world. I still use quite a lot of singletons, especially for Factory classes, and while you have to be a bit careful about multithreading issues (like any class actually) fail to see why they are so awful. This site especially seems to assume that everyone agrees that Singletons are evil. Why?

    Read the article

  • wpf command pattern

    - by evan
    I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251  | Next Page >