Search Results

Search found 11639 results on 466 pages for 'numerical methods'.

Page 247/466 | < Previous Page | 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254  | Next Page >

• Introducing Code Map for Visual Studio 2012 September CTP

  - by krislankford

  As part of the Visual Studio 2012 CTP for September, Visual Studio got a little sexier at helping you discover and visualize your code. The introduction of the Code Map feature helps compliment the variety of other tools that are included with Visual Studio to help you analyze and visualize your projects and solutions. Code Map leverages the dgml format within Visual Studio that is currently used b the Architecture and Modeling tools. This is a nice addition that gets us from point A to point B a little faster. The great thing about Code Map is that you can gain access to the functionality from directly within your code from the context menu. This Code Map functionality is also context specific based on your cursor. You can evaluate and add items such as methods and variables directly to the Code Map window. As you add items the Code Map surface is updated to show your new item plus any relationships and dependencies that have been introduced in your code. Something that is also very nice is that the Code Map surface is interactive and allows you to use the F12 button (Go To Definition) which can help you navigate your code especially is you are adding items that span multiple files or projects. To get started all you have to do is go out and download the September CTP for Visual Studio 2012 located here. Happy Coding!   Code Map Window

  Read the article

• TDD: Write a separate test for object initialization or relying on other tests exercising it

  - by DXM

  This seems to be the common pattern that's emerging in some of the tests I've worked on lately. We have a class, and quite often this is legacy code whose design can't be easily altered, which has a bunch of member variables. There's some kind of "Initialize" or "Load" function which would put an object into a valid state. Only after it is initialized/loaded, are the members in the proper state so that other methods can be exercised. So when we start writing tests, first test is "TestLoad" and all we put in there is exercising initialization logic. Then we might add one (or few) TestLoadFailureXXX tests and those are definitely valuable. Then we start writing tests to verify other behaviors but all of them require the object to be loaded. So they all start by running exactly the same code as "TestLoad". So my question: Is TestLoad even necessary? Do you take it and let other tests simply exercise the loading? Or leave it so things are more explicit? I know that each unit test function should have no (or as little as possible) overlap with other test functions, but it seems like in cases of loading, this is unavoidable. And whether we like it or not, if something in the loading code breaks, we will end up with a whole test suite of failures. Is there another approach that I might be missing here? Thank you for the responses. It definitely makes sense that you want to see "InitializationTest" and if that fails you know where to start looking. In case it matters, this question is mostly about C++ and we use CppUnit framework. And now, thanks to sleske, I'll be constantly wishing that CppUnit supported test dependencies. Might have to hack something in one of these days :)

  Read the article

• How to implement child-parent aggregation link in C++?

  - by Giorgio

  Suppose that I have three classes P, C1, C2, composition (strong aggregation) relations between P <>- C1 and P <>- C2, i.e. every instance of P contains an instance of C1 and an instance of C2, which are destroyed when the parent P instance is destroyed. an association relation between instances of C1 and C2 (not necessarily between children of the same P). To implement this, in C++ I normally define three classes P, C1, C2, define two member variables of P of type boost::shared_ptr<C1>, boost::shared_ptr<C2>, and initialize them with newly created objects in P's constructor, implement the relation between C1 and C2 using a boost::weak_ptr<C2> member variable in C1 and a boost::weak_ptr<C1> member variable in C2 that can be set later via appropriate methods, when the relation is established. Now, I also would like to have a link from each C1 and C2 object to its P parent object. What is a good way to implement this? My current idea is to use a simple constant raw pointer (P * const) that is set from the constructor of P (which, in turn, calls the constructors of C1 and C2), i.e. something like: class C1 { public: C1(P * const p, ...) : paren(p) { ... } private: P * const parent; ... }; class P { public: P(...) : childC1(new C1(this, ...)) ... { ... } private: boost::shared_ptr<C1> childC1; ... }; Honestly I see no risk in using a private constant raw pointer in this way but I know that raw pointers are often frowned upon in C++ so I was wondering if there is an alternative solution.

  Read the article

• Book Review: Professional ASP.Net MVC4

  - by Sam Abraham

  The past few weeks have been particularly busy as I continue to dedicate a bigger portion of my free time to refreshing my memory and enhancing my knowledge of best practices pertaining to technologies we plan on using for a major upcoming project. In this blog post, I will be providing a brief overview of my latest reading “Professional ASP.Net MVC4” by Jon Galloway, Phil Haack, Brad Wilson and K. Scott Allen. This book is a must read for web developers looking to enhance their MVC expertise with best practices and tips shared from recognized industry experts. This book takes the reader on a 16-chapter long journey towards being a better ASP.NET MVC developer with chapter 16 putting all information covered in practical context by dissecting the implementation of Nuget.org, a real-life open-source, ASP.NET MVC project.  All code samples referenced in this book are conveniently accessible via NuGet, a free, open-source Library package manager that installs as a Visual Studio Extension. Chapters 2, 3 and 4 thoroughly cover MVC’s various components: Controllers “C”, Views “V” and Models “M” respectively. Chapter 5 covers additional extension methods (Helpers) provided to speed and ease the use of common HTML elements such as forms, textboxes, grids, to name a few… Chapter 6 tackles built-in validation while providing examples and use cases on implementing custom validation that plugs into the MVC framework. Chapters 7 thru 13 discusses the latest on Membership, Ajax, Routing, NuGet and the ASP.Net Web API. Chapters 12 (Dependency Injection) and 13 (Unit Testing) demonstrate a big competitive advantage of MVC with its ease of test-ability and plug-ability. Chapters 14 and 15 targets the advanced developer showcasing how to extend MVC to customize and replace every piece in the framework.In conclusion, I strongly recommend Professional ASP.NET MVC 4 as an excellent read for both developers already using MVC as well as those getting started with the framework.   Many thanks to the Wiley/Wrox User Group Program for their support of our West Palm Beach Developers’ Group.  You can access my reviews of books I recently read: Professional ASP.NET Design Patterns Professional WCF 4.0 Inside Windows Communication Foundation Inside Microsoft SQL Server 2008 series

  Read the article

• How to implment the database for event conditions and item bonuses for a browser based game

  - by Saifis

  I am currently creating a browser based game, and was wondering what was the standard approach in making diverse conditions and status bonuses database wise. Currently considering two cases. Event Conditions Needs min 1000 gold Needs min Lv 10 Needs certain item. Needs fulfillment of another event Status Bonus Reduces damage by 20% +100 attack points Deflects certain type of attack I wish to be able to continually change these parameters during the process of production and operation, so having them hard-coded isn't the best way. All I could come up with are the following two methods. Method 1 Create a table that contains each conditions with needed attributes Have a model named conditions with all the attributes it would need to set them conditions condition_type (level, money_min, money_max item, event_aquired) condition_amount prerequisite_condition_id prerequisite_item_id Method 2 write it in a DSL form that could be interpreted later in the code Perhaps something like yaml, have a text area in the setting form and have the code interpret it. condition_foo: condition_type :level min_level: 10 condition_type :item item_id: 2 At current Method 2 looks to be more practical and flexible for future changes, trade off being that all the flex must be done on the code side. Not to sure how this is supposed to be done, is it supposed to be hard coded? separate config file? Any help would be appreciated. Added For additional info, it will be implemented with Ruby on Rails

  Read the article

• Methodologies for Managing Users and Access?

  - by MadBurn

  This is something I'm having a hard time getting my head around. I think I might be making it more complicated than it is. What I'm trying to do is develop a method to store users in a database with varying levels of access, throughout different applications. I know this has been done before, but I don't know where to find how they did it. Here is an example of what I need to accomplish: UserA - Access to App1, App3, App4 & can add new users to App3, but not 4 or 1. UserB - Access to App2 only with ReadOnly access. UserC - Access to App1 & App4 and is able to access Admin settings of both apps. In the past I've just used user groups. However, I'm reaching a phase where I need a bit more control over each individual user's access to certain parts of the different applications. I wish this were as cut and dry as being able to give a user a role and let each role inherit from the last. Now, this is what I need to accomplish. But, I don't know any methods of doing this. I could easily just design something that works, but I know this has been done and I know this has been studied and I know this problem has been solved by much better minds than my own. This is for a web application and using sql server 2008. I don't need to store passwords (LDAP) and the information I need to store is actually very limited. Basically just username and access.

  Read the article

• Everything has an Interface [closed]

  - by Shane

  Possible Duplicate: Do I need to use an interface when only one class will ever implement it? I am taking over a project where every single real class is implementing an Interface. The vast majority of these interfaces are implemented by a single class that share a similar name and the exact same methods (ex: MyCar and MyCarImpl). Almost no 2 classes in the project implement more than the interface that shares its name. I know the general recommendation is to code to an interface rather than an implementation, but isn't this taking it a bit too far? The system might be more flexible in that it is easier to add a new class that behaves very much like an existing class. However, it is significantly harder to parse through the code and method changes now require 2 edits instead of 1. Personally, I normally only create interfaces when there is a need for multiple classes to have the same behavior. I subscribe to YAGNI, so I don't create something unless I see a real need for it. Am I doing it all wrong or is this project going way overboard?

  Read the article

• Which Graphics/Geometry abstraction to choose?

  - by Robz

  I've been thinking about the design for a browser app on the HTML5 canvas that simulates a 2D robot zooming around, sensing the world around it. I decided to do this from scratch just for fun. I need shapes, like polygons, circles, and lines in order to model the robot and the world it lives in. These shapes need to be drawn with different appearance attributes, like border/fill style/width/color. I also need to have geometry functions to detect intersections and containment for the robot's sensors and so that the robot doesn't go inside stuff. One idea for functions is to have two totally separate libraries, one to implement graphics (like drawShape(context, shape)) and one for geometry operations (like shapeIntersectsShape(shape1, shape2)). Or, in a more object-oriented approach, the shape objects themselves could implement methods to do their own graphics (shape.draw(context)) and geometry operations (shape1.intersects(shape2)). Then there is the data itself: whether the data to draw a shape and the data to do geometric operations on that shape should be encapsulated within the same object, or be separate structures (where one would contain the other, or both be contained inside another structure). How do existing applications that do graphics/geometry stuff deal with this? Is there one model that is best, or is each good for certain applications? Should the fact that I'm using Javascript instead of a more classical language change how I approach the design?

  Read the article

• EMEA OTN Virtual Technology Summit - Hands-On Learning

  - by Thanos Terentes Printzios

  The Oracle Technology Network (OTN) is excited to invite you to our first Virtual Technology Summit. EMEA – Thursday July 10th / 9am to 1pm BST / 10am – 2pm CET / 12pm to 4pm MSK / GST - Register Now Learn first hand from Oracle ACEs, Java Champions, and Oracle product experts, as they share their insight and expertise on using Oracle technologies to meet today’s IT challenges. This interactive, online event offers four technical tracks, each with a unique focus on specific tools, technologies, and tips in these focus areas. Java – Big Trends and Technologies – Java lets you mine Big Data, build robust apps with HTML5, JavaScript and Java EE, and expand into the Internet of Things. Experts will present and you’ll be able to chat with them live online. Don’t miss out on this great opportunity to learn from some of the best minds in the Java community. Systems – OS Tips and Tricks for Sysadmins – Learn first hand how to configure Oracle Linux to run Oracle Database 11g and 12c, how to use the latest networking capabilities in Oracle Solaris 11, and how to troubleshoot networking problems in Unix and Linux systems. Database – Mastering Oracle Database Management & Development Techniques – Experts will present advanced features and management methods that will help you master your Oracle Database capabilities and drive greater performance, agility and manageability of your IT implementation. This track will build upon your skills with data management, migration, and performance. Middleware – The Architecture of Analytics: Big Time Big Data and Business Intelligence – This track will present a solution architect’s perspective on how business intelligence products in Oracle’s Fusion Middleware family and beyond fit into an effective big data architecture, and present insight and expertise from Oracle ACEs specializing in business Intelligence to help you meet your big data business intelligence challenges. This same content is being offered at 3 different dates listed below, at times convenient for all regions Americas - Wednesday July 9th EMEA – Thursday July 10th APAC English - July 16th 9am to 1pm PST12pm to 4pm  EST1 to 5 pm BRTRegister 9am to 1pm BST10am – 2pm CET12pm to 4pm MSK / GSTRegister IST – 10:00amSG – 12:30pmAEST – 2:30pmRegister The full event agenda is available at https://wikis.oracle.com/display/OTNVirtualTechSummit/Home

  Read the article

• Parallel Class/Interface Hierarchy with the Facade Design Pattern?

  - by Mike G

  About a third of my code is wrapped inside a Facade class. Note that this isn't a "God" class, but actually represents a single thing (called a Line). Naturally, it delegates responsibilities to the subsystem behind it. What ends up happening is that two of the subsystem classes (Output and Timeline) have all of their methods duplicated in the Line class, which effectively makes Line both an Output and a Timeline. It seems to make sense to make Output and Timeline interfaces, so that the Line class can implement them both. At the same time, I'm worried about creating parallel class and interface structures. You see, there are different types of lines AudioLine, VideoLine, which all use the same type of Timeline, but different types of Output (AudioOutput and VideoOutput, respectively). So that would mean that I'd have to create an AudioOutputInterface and VideoOutputInterface as well. So not only would I have to have parallel class hierarchy, but there would be a parallel interface hierarchy as well. Is there any solution to this design flaw? Here's an image of the basic structure (minus the Timeline class, though know that each Line has-a Timeline): NOTE: I just realized that the word 'line' in Timeline might make is sound like is does a similar function as the Line class. They don't, just to clarify.

  Read the article

• An alternative to multiple inheritance when creating an abstraction layer?

  - by sebf

  In my project I am creating an abstraction layer for some APIs. The purpose of the layer is to make multi-platform easier, and also to simplify the APIs to the feature set that I need while also providing some functionality, the implementation of which will be unique to each platform. At the moment, I have implemented it by defining and abstract class, which has methods which creates objects that implement interfaces. The abstract class and these interfaces define the capabilities of my abstraction layer. The implementation of these in my layer should of course be arbitrary from the POV view of my application, but I have done it, for my first API, by creating chains of subclasses which add more specific functionality as the features of the APIs they expose become less generic. An example would probably demonstrate this better: //The interface as seen by the application interface IGenericResource { byte[] GetSomeData(); } interface ISpecificResourceOne : IGenericResource { int SomePropertyOfResourceOne {get;} } interface ISpecificResourceTwo : IGenericResource { string SomePropertyOfResourceTwo {get;} } public abstract class MyLayer { ISpecificResourceOne CreateResourceOne(); ISpecificResourceTwo CreateResourceTwo(); void UseResourceOne(ISpecificResourceOne one); void UseResourceTwo(ISpecificResourceTwo two); } //The layer as created in my library public class LowLevelResource : IGenericResource { byte[] GetSomeData() {} } public class ResourceOne : LowLevelResource, ISpecificResourceOne { int SomePropertyOfResourceOne {get{}} } public class ResourceTwo : ResourceOne, ISpecificResourceTwo { string SomePropertyOfResourceTwo {get {}} } public partial class Implementation : MyLayer { override UseResourceOne(ISpecificResourceOne one) { DoStuff((ResourceOne)one); } } As can be seen, I am essentially trying to have two inheritance chains on the same object, but of course I can't do this so I simulate the second version with interfaces. The thing is though, I don't like using interfaces for this; it seems wrong, in my mind an interface defines a contract, any class that implements that interface should be able to be used where that interface is used but here that is clearly not the case because the interfaces are being used to allow an object from the layer to masquerade as something else, without the application needing to have access to its definition. What technique would allow me to define a comprehensive, intuitive collection of objects for an abstraction layer, while their implementation remains independent? (Language is C#)

  Read the article

• which style of member-access is preferable

  - by itwasntpete

  the purpose of oop using classes is to encapsulate members from the outer space. i always read that accessing members should be done by methods. for example: template<typename T> class foo_1 { T state_; public: // following below }; the most common doing that by my professor was to have a get and set method. // variant 1 T const& getState() { return state_; } void setState(T const& v) { state_ = v; } or like this: // variant 2 // in my opinion it is easier to read T const& state() { return state_; } void state(T const& v) { state_ = v; } assume the state_ is a variable, which is checked periodically and there is no need to ensure the value (state) is consistent. Is there any disadvantage of accessing the state by reference? for example: // variant 3 // do it by reference T& state() { return state_; } or even directly, if I declare the variable as public. template<typename T> class foo { public: // variant 4 T state; }; In variant 4 I could even ensure consistence by using c++11 atomic. So my question is, which one should I prefer?, Is there any coding standard which would decline one of these pattern? for some code see here

  Read the article

• Mocking concrete class - Not recommended

  - by Mik378

  I've just read an excerpt of "Growing Object-Oriented Software" book which explains some reasons why mocking concrete class is not recommended. Here some sample code of a unit-test for the MusicCentre class: public class MusicCentreTest { @Test public void startsCdPlayerAtTimeRequested() { final MutableTime scheduledTime = new MutableTime(); CdPlayer player = new CdPlayer() { @Override public void scheduleToStartAt(Time startTime) { scheduledTime.set(startTime); } } MusicCentre centre = new MusicCentre(player); centre.startMediaAt(LATER); assertEquals(LATER, scheduledTime.get()); } } And his first explanation: The problem with this approach is that it leaves the relationship between the objects implicit. I hope we've made clear by now that the intention of Test-Driven Development with Mock Objects is to discover relationships between objects. If I subclass, there's nothing in the domain code to make such a relationship visible, just methods on an object. This makes it harder to see if the service that supports this relationship might be relevant elsewhere and I'll have to do the analysis again next time I work with the class. I can't figure out exactly what he means when he says: This makes it harder to see if the service that supports this relationship might be relevant elsewhere and I'll have to do the analysis again next time I work with the class. I understand that the service corresponds to MusicCentre's method called startMediaAt. What does he mean by "elsewhere"? The complete excerpt is here: http://www.mockobjects.com/2007/04/test-smell-mocking-concrete-classes.html

  Read the article

• Using 12.04 installation as a persistent pen drive

  - by Cawas

  Disclaimer: I aim to build a self contained pen drive with my application inside, so no matter about updates. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong linux distribution to do this... Please let me know if you think so. I've tried knoppix and even lubuntu, but they don't come with enough "drivers" for Unity3D to work. Creating a custom live persistent pen drive is a real pain and I'm trying for 1 day without any success. Sure, being able to do it would probably be ideal and occupy the minimum space. Using the installation image on a pen drive, however, is good enough and is really easy to create. We can even do it from any OS, using UNetBootin, LiLi USB Creator or some other methods. Straight forward. Some recommend installing it on a pen drive. But that requires a lot of space and, I believe, it won't behave as good as something meant to be installed on a usb disk, because of memory management. So, there are only a few negative points on using the installation image that I can think of. Question here, is how to remove those drawbacks: Having to press "Try Ubuntu". That's the big one. Couldn't find how. Unable to load everything on memory and keep on running without the pen drive (like this) Unable to remove "Install Ubuntu 12.04 LTS" app. Setting the ISO to use maximum amount of space for the OS will leave pen drive with zero space left and any file saved within it from ubuntu is inaccessible from the outside (when plugin the pen drive and not booting from it). Am I missing something? Can those points be fixed?

  Read the article

• Mock the window.setTimeout in a Jasmine test to avoid waiting

  - by Aligned

  Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2014/08/21/mock-the-window.settimeout-in-a-jasmine-test-to-avoid-waiting.aspxJasmine has a clock mocking feature, but I was unable to make it work in a function that I’m calling and want to test. The example only shows using clock for a setTimeout in the spec tests and I couldn’t find a good example. Here is my current and slightly limited approach.   If we have a method we want to test: var test = function(){ var self = this; self.timeoutWasCalled = false; self.testWithTimeout = function(){ window.setTimeout(function(){ self.timeoutWasCalled = true; }, 6000); }; }; Here’s my testing code: var realWindowSetTimeout = window.setTimeout; describe('test a method that uses setTimeout', function(){ var testObject; beforeEach(function () { // force setTimeout to be called right away, no matter what time they specify jasmine.getGlobal().setTimeout = function (funcToCall, millis) { funcToCall(); }; testObject = new test(); }); afterEach(function() { jasmine.getGlobal().setTimeout = realWindowSetTimeout; }); it('should call the method right away', function(){ testObject.testWithTimeout(); expect(testObject.timeoutWasCalled).toBeTruthy(); }); }); I got a good pointer from Andreas in this StackOverflow question. This would also work for window.setInterval. Other possible approaches: create a wrapper module of setTimeout and setInterval methods that can be mocked. This can be mocked with RequireJS or passed into the constructor. pass the window.setTimeout function into the method (this could get messy)

  Read the article

• How to avoid game objects accidentally deleting themselves in C++

  - by Tom Dalling

  Let's say my game has a monster that can kamikaze explode on the player. Let's pick a name for this monster at random: a Creeper. So, the Creeper class has a method that looks something like this: void Creeper::kamikaze() { EventSystem::postEvent(ENTITY_DEATH, this); Explosion* e = new Explosion; e->setLocation(this->location()); this->world->addEntity(e); } The events are not queued, they get dispatched immediately. This causes the Creeper object to get deleted somewhere inside the call to postEvent. Something like this: void World::handleEvent(int type, void* context) { if(type == ENTITY_DEATH){ Entity* ent = dynamic_cast<Entity*>(context); removeEntity(ent); delete ent; } } Because the Creeper object gets deleted while the kamikaze method is still running, it will crash when it tries to access this->location(). One solution is to queue the events into a buffer and dispatch them later. Is that the common solution in C++ games? It feels like a bit of a hack, but that might just be because of my experience with other languages with different memory management practices. In C++, is there a better general solution to this problem where an object accidentally deletes itself from inside one of its methods?

  Read the article

• Announcing Oracle Receivables Generic Data Fix (GDF) for Refunds

  - by user793553

  Here's the first of what will be a series of Generic Data Fixes (GDF) to be released by Receivables Development. Generic Data Fix (GDF) are created by development to fix data issues caused by bugs/issues in the application code.  Other Generic Data Fix benefits/features include: Developed for bugs that can cause data issues. Provides a SELECT script that uses an identification/signature query to identify and report all data affected by issue/condition caused by a bug. Allow customers to view and modify what will be fixed. Provides a separate FIX script to fix the data reported by the SELECT script. The FIX script creates backup tables for the data that is fixed/updated. Available on My Oracle Support for download In Release 12, when creating a refund by either of the following methods: Applied a receipt to the Refund activity - which creates an Invoice in Payables Or you went directly into Payables to create a refund for an open Credit Memo in Receivables The Invoice in Payables that is associated to the refund is cancelled, the corresponding refund application or credit memo in Receivables is not properly re-instated. For the receipt application, it still remains applied to the Refund whereas this should be automatically unapplied. For the credit memo, it stays closed instead of getting re-opened. Doc ID 761993.1 includes the patch to make sure this doesn’t happen in the future as well as a GDF script to fix the current data (Script name: ar_std_refund_unapp.sql).  Download the script and run in READ_ONLY_MODE to identify 'refund' applications with this problem. Stay tuned for more GDF scripts coming soon...

  Read the article

• Control convention for circular movement?

  - by Christian

  I'm currently doing a kind of training project in Unity (still a beginner). It's supposed to be somewhat like Breakout, but instead of just going left and right I want the paddle to circle around the center point. This is all fine and dandy, but the problem I have is: how do you control this with a keyboard or gamepad? For touch and mouse control I could work around the problem by letting the paddle follow the cursor/finger, but with the other control methods I'm a bit stumped. With a keyboard for example, I could either make it so that the Left arrow always moves the paddle clockwise (it starts at the bottom of the circle), or I could link it to the actual direction - meaning that if the paddle is at the bottom, it goes left and up along the circle or, if it's in the upper hemisphere, it moves left and down, both times toward the outer left point of the circle. Both feel kind of weird. With the first one, it can be counter intuitive to press Left to move the paddle right when it's in the upper area, while in the second method you'd need to constantly switch buttons to keep moving. So, long story short: is there any kind of existing standard, convention or accepted example for this type of movement and the corresponding controls? I didn't really know what to google for (control conventions for circular movement was one of the searches I tried, but it didn't give me much), and I also didn't really find anything about this on here. If there is a Question that I simply didn't see, please excuse the duplicate.

  Read the article

• How to handle key in PhP array if the key contains japanese characters [migrated]

  - by Jim Thio

  I have this array: [ID] => ????????-???????????__35.79_139.72 [Email] => [InBuildingAddress] => [Price] => [Street] => [Title] => ???????? ??????????? [Website] => [Zip] => [Rating Star] => 0 [Rating Weight] => 0 [Latitude] => 35.7865334803033 [Longitude] => 139.716800710514 [Building] => [City] => Unknown_Japan [OpeningHour] => [TimeStamp] => 0000-00-00 00:00:00 [CountViews] => 0 Then I do something like this: $output[$info['ID']]=$info; //mess up here $tes=$info['ID']['Title']; Well guess what it messes up. Basically even though the content of an array in PhP can be Japanese. Is this true? What's wrong. The error I got is: Debug Warning: /sdfdsfdf/api/test2.php line 36 - Cannot find element ????????-???????????__35.79_139.72 in variable Debug Warning: /sdfdsfdf/api/test2.php line 36 - main() [function.main]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are required to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'Asia/Krasnoyarsk' for '7.0/no DST' instead So many question mark Why is this happening. What's really going on inside PhP? Where can I learn more of such things. Most importantly, what would be the best way to handle this situation. Should I tell PhP to internally always use UTF-8? Does PhP array inherenty cannot use non ascii id?

  Read the article

• I've been told that Exceptions should only be used in exceptional cases. How do I know if my case is exceptional?

  - by tieTYT

  My specific case here is that the user can pass in a string into the application, the application parses it and assigns it to structured objects. Sometimes the user may type in something invalid. For example, their input may describe a person but they may say their age is "apple". Correct behavior in that case is roll back the transaction and to tell the user an error occurred and they'll have to try again. There may be a requirement to report on every error we can find in the input, not just the first. In this case, I argued we should throw an exception. He disagreed, saying, "Exceptions should be exceptional: It's expected that the user may input invalid data, so this isn't an exceptional case" I didn't really know how to argue that point, because by definition of the word, he seems to be right. But, it's my understanding that this is why Exceptions were invented in the first place. It used to be you had to inspect the result to see if an error occurred. If you failed to check, bad things could happen without you noticing. Without exceptions every level of the stack needs to check the result of the methods they call and if a programmer forgets to check in one of these levels, the code could accidentally proceed and save invalid data (for example). Seems more error prone that way. Anyway, feel free to correct anything I've said here. My main question is if someone says Exceptions should be exceptional, how do I know if my case is exceptional?

  Read the article

• Is this method of writing Unit Tests correct?

  - by aspdotnetuser

  I have created a small C# project to help me learn how to write good unit tests. I know that one important rule of unit testing is to test the smallest 'unit' of code possible so that if it fails you know exactly what part of the code needs to fixed. I need help with the following before I continue to implement more unit tests for the project: If I have a Car class, for example, that creates a new Car object which has various attributes that are calculated when its' constructor method is called, would the two following tests be considered as overkill? Should there be one test that tests all calculated attributes of the Car object instead? [Test] public void CarEngineCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.GreaterOrEqual(car.Engine, 1); } [Test] public void CarNameCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.IsNotNull(car.Name); } Should I have the above two test methods to test these things or should I have one test method that asserts the Car object has first been created and then test these things in the same test method?

  Read the article

• Abstract Factory Method and Polymorphism

  - by Scotty C.

  Being a PHP programmer for the last couple of years, I'm just starting to get into advanced programming styles and using polymorphic patterns. I was watching a video on polymorphism the other day, and the guy giving the lecture said that if at all possible, you should get rid of if statements in your code, and that a switch is almost always a sign that polymorphism is needed. At this point I was quite inspired and immediately went off to try out these new concepts, so I decided to make a small caching module using a factory method. Of course the very first thing I have to do is create a switch to decide what file encoding to choose. DANG! class Main { public static function methodA($parameter='') { switch ($parameter) { case 'a': $object = new \name\space\object1(); break; case 'b': $object = new \name\space\object2(); break; case 'c': $object = new \name\space\object3(); break; default: $object = new \name\space\object1(); } return (sekretInterface $object); } } At this point I'm not really sure what to do. As far as I can tell, I either have to use a different pattern and have separate methods for each object instance, or accept that a switch is necessary to "switch" between them. What do you guys think?

  Read the article

• Object construction design

  - by James

  I recently started to use c# to interface with a database, and there was one part of the process that appeared odd to me. When creating a SqlCommand, the method I was lead to took the form: SqlCommand myCommand = new SqlCommand("Command String", myConnection); Coming from a Java background, I was expecting something more similar to SqlCommand myCommand = myConnection.createCommand("Command String"); I am asking, in terms of design, what is the difference between the two? The phrase "single responsibility" has been used to suggest that a connection should not be responsible for creating SqlCommands, but I would also say that, in my mind, the difference between the two is partly a mental one of the difference between a connection executing a command and a command acting on a connection, the latter of which seems less like what I have been lead to believe OOP should be. There is also a part of me wondering if the two should be completely separate, and should only come together in some sort of connection.execute(command) method. Can anyone help clear up these differences? Are any of these methods "more correct" than the others from an OO point of view? (P.S. the fact that c# is used is completely irrelevant. It just highlighted to me that different approaches were used)

  Read the article

• Will having multiple domains improve my seo?

  - by Anonymous12345

  Lets say I have a domain already, for example www.automobile4u.com (not mine), with a website fully running and all. The title of my "Website" says: <title>Used cars - buy and sell your used cars here</title> Also, lets say I have fully SEO the website so when people searching for the term buy used cars, I end up on the second or first page. Now, I want to end up higher, so I go to the google adwords page where you can check how many searches are made on specific terms. Lets say the term "used cars" has 20 million searches each month. Here comes the question, could I just go and buy that domain with the search terms adress, in this case www.usedcars.com and make a redirect to my original page, and this way when people search for "used cars", my newly bought domain name comes up redirecting people to my original website (www.automobile4u.com)? The reason I believe this benefits me is because it seems search engines first of all check website adresses matching the search, so the query "used cars" would automatically bring www.usedcars.com to the first result right? What are the downsides for this? I already know about google spiders not liking redirects, but there are many methods of redirecting... Is this a good idea generally?

  Read the article

• What is the best approach to solve a factory method problem which has to be an instance?

  - by Iago

  I have to add new funcionality in a web service legacy project and I'm thinking what is the best approach for a concrete situation. The web service is simple: It receives a XML file, unmarshalling, generates response's objects, marshalling and finally it sends the response as a XML file. For every XML files received, the web service always responds with the same XML structure. What I have to do is to generate a different XML file according to the XML received. So I have a controller class which has all marshalling/unmarshalling operations, but this controller class has to be an instance. Depending on XML received I need some marshalling methods or others. Trying to make few changes on legacy source, what is the best approach? My first approach was to do a factory method pattern with the controller class, but this class has to be an instance. I want to keep, as far as it goes, this structure: classController.doMarshalling(); I think this one is a bit smelly: if(XMLReceived.isTypeOne()) classController.doMarshallingOne(); else if(XMLReceived.isTypeTwo()) classController.doMarshallingTwo(); else if(XMLReceived.isTypeThree()) classController.doMarshallingThree(); else if ... I hope my question is well understood

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254  | Next Page >