Search Results

Search found 877 results on 36 pages for 'loose coupling'.

Page 25/36 | < Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >

• Have I taken a wrong path in programming by being excessively worried about code elegance and style?

  - by Ygam

  I am in a major stump right now. I am a BSIT graduate, but I only started actual programming less than a year ago. I observed that I have the following attitude in programming: I tend to be more of a purist, scorning unelegant approaches to solving problems using code I tend to look at anything in a large scale, planning everything before I start coding, either in simple flowcharts or complex UML charts I have a really strong impulse on refactoring my code, even if I miss deadlines or prolong development times I am obsessed with good directory structures, file naming conventions, class, method, and variable naming conventions I tend to always want to study something new, even, as I said, at the cost of missing deadlines I tend to see software development as something to engineer, to architect; that is, seeing how things relate to each other and how blocks of code can interact (I am a huge fan of loose coupling) i.e the OOP thinking I tend to combine OOP and procedural coding whenever I see fit I want my code to execute fast (thus the elegant approaches and refactoring) This bothers me because I see my colleagues doing much better the other way around (aside from the fact that they started programming since our first year in college). By the other way around I mean, they fire up coding, gets the job done much faster because they don't have to really look at how clean their codes are or how elegant their algorithms are, they don't bother with OOP however big their projects are, they mostly use web APIs, piece them together and voila! Working code! CLients are happy, they get paid fast, at the expense of a really unmaintainable or hard-to-read code that lacks structure and conventions, or slow executions of certain actions (which the common reasoning against would be that internet connections are much faster these days, hardware is more powerful). The excuse I often receive is clients don't care about how you write the code, but they do care about how long you deliver it. If it works then all is good. Now, did my "purist" approach to programming may have been the wrong way to start programming? Should I just dump these purist concepts and just code the hell up because I have seen it: clients don't really care how beautifully coded it is?

  Read the article

• Unit testing opaque structure based C API

  - by Nicolas Goy

  I have a library I wrote with API based on opaque structures. Using opaque structures has a lot of benefits and I am very happy with it. Now that my API are stable in term of specifications, I'd like to write a complete battery of unit test to ensure a solid base before releasing it. My concern is simple, how do you unit test API based on opaque structures where the main goal is to hide the internal logic? For example, let's take a very simple object, an array with a very simple test: WSArray a = WSArrayCreate(); int foo = 5; WSArrayAppendValue(a, &foo); int *bar = WSArrayGetValueAtIndex(a, 0); if(&foo != bar) printf("Eroneous value returned\n"); else printf("Good value returned\n"); WSRelease(a); Of course, this tests some facts, like the array actually acts as wanted with 1 value, but when I write unit tests, at least in C, I usualy compare the memory footprint of my datastructures with a known state. In my example, I don't know if some internal state of the array is broken. How would you handle that? I'd really like to avoid adding codes in the implementation files only for unit testings, I really emphasis loose coupling of modules, and injecting unit tests into the implementation would seem rather invasive to me. My first thought was to include the implementation file into my unit test, linking my unit test statically to my library. For example: #include <WS/WS.h> #include <WS/Collection/Array.c> static void TestArray(void) { WSArray a = WSArrayCreate(); /* Structure members are available because we included Array.c */ printf("%d\n", a->count); } Is that a good idea? Of course, the unit tests won't benefit from encapsulation, but they are here to ensure it's actually working.

  Read the article

• Problem implementing Interceptor pattern

  - by ph0enix

  I'm attempting to develop an Interceptor framework (in C#) where I can simply implement some interfaces, and through the use of some static initialization, register all my Interceptors with a common Dispatcher to be invoked at a later time. The problem lies in the fact that my Interceptor implementations are never actually referenced by my application so the static constructors never get called, and as a result, the Interceptors are never registered. If possible, I would like to keep all references to my Interceptor libraries out of my application, as this is my way of (hopefully) enforcing loose coupling across different modules. Hopefully this makes some sense. Let me know if there's anything I can clarify... Does anyone have any ideas, or perhaps a better way to go about implementing my Interceptor pattern? Update: I came across Spring.NET. I've heard of it before, but never really looked into it. It sounds like it has a lot of great features that would be very useful for what I'm trying to do. Does anyone have any experience with Spring.NET? TIA, Jeremy

  Read the article

• Can the Singleton be replaced by Factory?

  - by lostiniceland

  Hello Everyone There are already quite some posts about the Singleton-Pattern around, but I would like to start another one on this topic since I would like to know if the Factory-Pattern would be the right approach to remove this "anti-pattern". In the past I used the singleton quite a lot, also did my fellow collegues since it is so easy to use. For example, the Eclipse IDE or better its workbench-model makes heavy usage of singletons as well. It was due to some posts about E4 (the next big Eclipse version) that made me start to rethink the singleton. The bottom line was that due to this singletons the dependecies in Eclipse 3.x are tightly coupled. Lets assume I want to get rid of all singletons completely and instead use factories. My thoughts were as follows: hide complexity less coupling I have control over how many instances are created (just store the reference I a private field of the factory) mock the factory for testing (with Dependency Injection) when it is behind an interface In some cases the factories can make more than one singleton obsolete (depending on business logic/component composition) Does this make sense? If not, please give good reasons for why you think so. An alternative solution is also appreciated. Thanks Marc

  Read the article

• Spring 3.0 vs J2EE 6.0

  - by StudiousJoseph

  Hi everybody, I'm confronted with a situation... I've been asked to give an advise regarding which approach to take, in terms of J2EE development between Spring 3.0 and J2EE 6.0. I was, and still am, a promoter of Spring 2.5 over classic J2EE 5 development, specially with JBoss, I even migrated old apps to Spring and influenced the re-definition of the development policy here to include Spring specific APIs, and helped the development of a strategic plan to foster more lightweight solutions like Spring + Tomcat, instead of the heavier ones of JBoss, right now, we're using JBoss merely as a Web container, having what i call the "container inside the container paradox", that is, having Spring apps, with most of its APIs, running inside JBoss, So we're in the process of migrating to tomcat. However, with the coming of J2EE 6.0 many features, that made Spring attractive at that time, easy deployment, less-coupling, even some sort of D.I, etc, seems to have been mimicked, in one way or the other. JSF 2.0, JPA 2.0, WebBeans, WebProfiles, etc. So, the question goes... From your point of view, how save, and logical, it is to continue to invest in a non-standard J2EE development framework like Spring given the new perspectives offered by J2EE 6.0? Can we talk about maybe 3 or 4 more years of Spring development, or do you recommend early adoption of J2EE 6.0 APIs and it's practices? I'll appreciate any insights with this...

  Read the article

• How do I design a Wizard-based system with SoC in mind?

  - by Erik Forbes

  I'm building a Windows Forms system (in C# if it matters to anyone) that provides an application automation service. As this application is targeted at users who are not computer savvy, I've decided to break up the functions of the application into various tasks, and provide these tasks via a wizard UI. I'd like to avoid coupling the views and view engine (from which the Wizard will be built) to the automation engine. The problem I'm having is that the automation engine, which runs on a separate thread while it does its thing, needs to report status information back to the user, as well as listen for cancel or pause events from the user. Since I don't want the view engine or the automation engine to rely on each other, I'm having a hard time figuring out how to provide for this information conduit. Any insights into this issue I'm having would be greatly appreciated. I've been wracking my brain for a couple weeks now on this point, and I really don't want to give up and just couple everything together. If anyone needs additional details to help come up with some sort of idea please let me know and I'll be happy to provide them.

  Read the article

• wrapping user controls in a transaction

  - by Hans Gruber

  I'm working on heavily dynamic and configurable CMS system. Therefore, many pages are composed of a dynamically loaded set of user controls. To enable loose coupling between containers (pages) and children (user controls), all user controls are responsible for their own persistence. Each User Control is wired up to its data/service layer dependencies via IoC. They also implement an IPersistable interface, which allows the container .aspx page to issue a Save command to its children without knowledge of the number or exact nature of these user controls. Note: what follows is only pseudo-code: public class MyUserControl : IPersistable, IValidatable { public void Save() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public bool IsValid() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public partial class MyPage { public void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { foreach (IValidatable control in Controls) { if (!control.IsValid) { throw new Exception("error"); } } foreach (IPersistable control in Controls) { if (!control.Save) { throw new Exception("error"); } } } } I'm thinking of using declarative transactions from the System.EnterpriseService namespace to wrap the btnSave_Click in a transaction in case of an exception, but I'm not sure how this might be achieved or any pitfalls to such an approach.

  Read the article

• [Delphi] How would you refactor this code?

  - by Al C

  This hypothetical example illustrates several problems I can't seem to get past, even though I keep trying!! ... Suppose the original code is a long event handler, coded in the UI, triggered when a user clicks a cell in a grid. Expressed as pseudocode it's: if Condition1=true then begin //loop through every cell in row, //if aCell/headerCellValue>1 then //color aCell red end else if Condition2=true then begin //do some other calculation adding cell and headerCell values, and //if some other product>2 then //color the whole row green end else show an error message I look at this and say "Ah, refactor to the strategy pattern! The code will be easier to understand, easier to debug, and easier to later extend!" I get that. And I can easily break the code into multiple procedures. The problem is ultimately scope related. Assume the pseudocode makes extensive use of grid properties, values displayed in cells, maybe even built-in grid methods. How do you move all that to another unit, without referencing the grid component in the UI--which would break all the "rules" about loose coupling that make OOP valuable? ... I'm really looking forward to responses. Thanks, as always -- Al C.

  Read the article

• How should we setup up complex situations for tests?

  - by ShaneC

  I'm currently working on what I would call integration tests. I want to verify that if a WCF service is called it will do what I expect. Let's take a very simple scenario. Assume we have a contract object that we can put on hold or take off hold. Now writing the put on hold test is quite simple. You create a contract instance and execute the code that puts it on code. The question I have comes when we want to test the taking off hold service call. The problem is that putting a contract on hold can be actually quite complicated leading to various objects all be modified. So usually I would use the Builder pattern and do something like this.. var onHoldContract = new ContractBuilder().PutOnHold().Build(); The problem I have with this is now I have to pretty much replicate a large part of my put on hold service. Now when I change what putting something on hold means I have two places I have to modify. The other option that immediately jumps out at me is to just use the put on hold service as part of my test setup but now I'm coupling my test to the success of another piece of code which is something I don't like to do since it can lead to failures in one spot breaking unrelated tests elsewhere (if put on hold failed for example). Any other options I'm missing out here? or opinions on which method is preferable and why?

  Read the article

• how to implement enhanced session handling in PHP

  - by praksant

  Hi, i'm working with sessions in PHP, and i have different applications on single domain. Problem is, that cookies are domain specific, and so session ids are sent to any page on single domain. (i don't know if there is a way to make cookies work in different way). So Session variables are visible in every page on this domain. I'm trying to implement custom session manager to overcome this behavior, but i'm not sure if i'm thinking about it right. I want to completely avoid PHP session system, and make a global object, which would store session data and on the end of script save it to database. On first access i would generate unique session_id and create a cookie On the end of script save session data with session_id, timestamps for start of session and last access, and data from $_SERVER, such as REMOTE_ADDR, REMOTE_PORT, HTTP_USER_AGENT. On every access chceck database for session_id sent in cookie from client, check IP, Port and user agent (for security) and read data into session variable (if not expired). If session_id expired, delete from database. That session variable would be implemented as singleton (i know i would get tight coupling with this class, but i don't know about better solution). I'm trying to get following benefits: Session variables invisible in another scripts on the same server and same domain Custom management of session expiration Way to see open sessions (something like list of online users) i'm not sure if i'm overlooking any disadvantages of this solution. Is there any better way? Thank you!!

  Read the article

• Unit testing an MVC action method with a Cache dependency?

  - by Steve

  I’m relatively new to testing and MVC and came across a sticking point today. I’m attempting to test an action method that has a dependency on HttpContext.Current.Cache and wanted to know the best practice for achieving the “low coupling” to allow for easy testing. Here's what I've got so far... public class CacheHandler : ICacheHandler { public IList<Section3ListItem> StateList { get { return (List<Section3ListItem>)HttpContext.Current.Cache["StateList"]; } set { HttpContext.Current.Cache["StateList"] = value; } } ... I then access it like such... I'm using Castle for my IoC. public class ProfileController : ControllerBase { private readonly ISection3Repository _repository; private readonly ICacheHandler _cache; public ProfileController(ISection3Repository repository, ICacheHandler cacheHandler) { _repository = repository; _cache = cacheHandler; } [UserIdFilter] public ActionResult PersonalInfo(Guid userId) { if (_cache.StateList == null) _cache.StateList = _repository.GetLookupValues((int)ELookupKey.States).ToList(); ... Then in my unit tests I am able to mock up ICacheHandler. Would this be considered a 'best practice' and does anyone have any suggestions for other approaches? Thanks in advance. Cheers

  Read the article

• On the search for my next great .Net Read

  - by user127954

  Just got done with "The art of unit testing". It was a great read and i think everyone should go buy a copy. With that said i think the next book I'm like to read would be a architecture / Design type book that would focus heavily on building your objects / software in such a way that it would be: Low Coupling High Cohesion Easily Maintainable / Extended Easy to test Easy to Navigate / Debug The above characteristcs are the most important ones but also maybe it would also include (but not necessary) designing for: Performance - Don't want to design a system at at the end find out its dog slow :) Scalability - Again don't want to design something at the end find out it won't scale. I'd also prefer (but not necessary again): Something newer - Architectural principles seem to gradually evolve / improve over time and id like something with current thinking. .Net as illustrating language - like i said above its not mandatory but since its what i use every day id prefer it to be in .net. Doesn't really matter if its in vb.net or c# Some of the topics that would be talked about its how to minimize dependencies and using interfaces throughout your solution rather than concrete classes. Maybe it would constract /compare some of the newest design principles like DDD, Repository Pattern, Ect... I already have "Clean Code" (don't know if its this type of book or not) and "Working effectively with legacy code" on my radar but id like to read a book based upon the topic i talked about above first. Is there such a book?

  Read the article

• How I May Have Taken A Wrong Path in Programming

  - by Ygam

  I am in a major stump right now. I am a BSIT graduate, but I only started actual programming less than a year ago. I observed that I have the following attitude in programming: I tend to be more of a purist, scorning unelegant approaches to solving problems using code I tend to look at anything in a large scale, planning everything before I start coding, either in simple flowcharts or complex UML charts I have a really strong impulse on refactoring my code, even if I miss deadlines or prolong development times I am obsessed with good directory structures, file naming conventions, class, method, and variable naming conventions I tend to always want to study something new, even, as I said, at the cost of missing deadlines I tend to see software development as something to engineer, to architect; that is, seeing how things relate to each other and how blocks of code can interact (I am a huge fan of loose coupling) i.e the OOP thinking I tend to combine OOP and procedural coding whenever I see fit I want my code to execute fast (thus the elegant approaches and refactoring) This bothers me because I see my colleagues doing much better the other way around (aside from the fact that they started programming since our first year in college). By the other way around I mean, they fire up coding, gets the job done much faster because they don't have to really look at how clean their codes are or how elegant their algorithms are, they don't bother with OOP however big their projects are, they mostly use web APIs, piece them together and voila! Working code! CLients are happy, they get paid fast, at the expense of a really unmaintainable or hard-to-read code that lacks structure and conventions, or slow executions of certain actions (which the common reasoning against would be that internet connections are much faster these days, hardware is more powerful). The excuse I often receive is clients don't care about how you write the code, but they do care about how long you deliver it. If it works then all is good. Now, did my "purist" approach to programming may have been the wrong way to start programming? Should I just dump these purist concepts and just code the hell up because I have seen it: clients don't really care how beautifully coded it is?

  Read the article

• Breaking dependencies when you can't make changes to other files?

  - by codemuncher

  I'm doing some stealth agile development on a project. The lead programmer sees unit testing, refactoring, etc as a waste of resources and there is no way to convince him otherwise. His philosophy is "If it ain't broke don't fix it" and I understand his point of view. He's been working on the project for over a decade and knows the code inside and out. I'm not looking to debate development practices. I'm new to the project and I've been tasked with adding a new feature. I've worked on legacy projects before and used agile development practices with good result but those teams were more receptive to the idea and weren't afraid of making changes to code. I've been told I can use whatever development methodology I want but I have to limit my changes to only those necessary to add the feature. I'm using tdd for the new classes I'm writing but I keep running into road blocks caused by the liberal use of global variables and the high coupling in the classes I need to interact with. Normally I'd start extracting interfaces for these classes and make their dependence on the global variables explicit by injecting them as constructor arguments or public properties. I could argue that the changes are necessary but considering the lead never had to make them I doubt he would see it my way. What techniques can I use to break these dependencies without ruffling the lead developer's feathers? I've made some headway using: Extract Interface (for the new classes I'm creating) Extend and override the wayward classes with test stubs. (luckily most methods are public virtual) But these two can only get me so far.

  Read the article

• Business Tier | client state in desktop application- way around Stateful Session Beans?

  - by arthur

  I read positive inputs on the following posts concerning client state management: Stateful EJBs in web application?, here, and here. I want to know how implement such client state management for desktop applications (Swing, AWT, SWT, and other). let's assume there are n desktop clients supposed to use some (remote) services provided on an Application Server. How to maintain a separate and permanent data state for each client , distinct from the other without have to use using stateful session Beans (SFSB) ? is that even possible on this application type ? With Webapp(Servlets / JsSF and JSP) some can avoid using SFSB by HttpSession object and/or coupling it with stateless session beans (SLSB). HttpSession object would keep information for each (Web)client separate and the SLSB would play the business logic music. But HttpSession objects aren't present on desktop application and I go stuck with only SFSB and SLSB. Knowing the problems(Concurrency, Error Handling, usw ) of SFSB, I would have not wanted to use it. What would be the other options? is there only SFSB available? Thanks in advances

  Read the article

• Java: refactoring static constants

  - by akf

  We are in the process of refactoring some code. There is a feature that we have developed in one project that we would like to now use in other projects. We are extracting the foundation of this feature and making it a full-fledged project which can then be imported by its current project and others. This effort has been relatively straight-forward but we have one headache. When the framework in question was originally developed, we chose to keep a variety of constant values defined as static fields in a single class. Over time this list of static members grew. The class is used in very many places in our code. In our current refactoring, we will be elevating some of the members of this class to our new framework, but leaving others in place. Our headache is in extracting the foundation members of this class to be used in our new project, and more specifically, how we should address those extracted members in our existing code. We know that we can have our existing Constants class subclass this new project's Constants class and it would inherit all of the parent's static members. This would allow us to effect the change without touching the code that uses these members to change the class name on the static reference. However, the tight coupling inherent in this choice doesn't feel right. before: public class ConstantsA { public static final String CONSTANT1 = "constant.1"; public static final String CONSTANT2 = "constant.2"; public static final String CONSTANT3 = "constant.3"; } after: public class ConstantsA extends ConstantsB { public static final String CONSTANT1 = "constant.1"; } public class ConstantsB { public static final String CONSTANT2 = "constant.2"; public static final String CONSTANT3 = "constant.3"; } In our existing code branch, all of the above would be accessible in this manner: ConstantsA.CONSTANT2 I would like to solicit arguments about whether this is 'acceptable' and/or what the best practices are.

  Read the article

• What kind of data do I pass into a Django Model.save() method?

  - by poswald

  Lets say that we are getting POSTed a form like this in Django: rate=10 items= [23,12,31,52,83,34] The items are primary keys of an Item model. I have a bunch of business logic that will run and create more items based on this data, the results of some db lookups, and some business logic. I want to put that logic into a save signal or an overridden Model.save() method of another model (let's call it Inventory). The business logic will run when I create a new Inventory object using this form data. Inventory will look like this: class Inventory(models.Model): picked_items = models.ManyToManyField(Item, related_name="items_picked_set") calculated_items = models.ManyToManyField(Item, related_name="items_calculated_set") rate = models.DecimalField() ... other fields here ... New calculated_items will be created based on the passed in items which will be stored as picked_items. My question is this: is it better for the save() method on this model to accept: the request object (I don't really like this coupling) the form data as arguments or kwargs (a list of primary keys and the other form fields) a list of Items (The caller form or view will lookup the list of Items and create a list as well as pass in the other form fields) some other approach? I know this is a bit subjective, but I was wondering what the general idea is. I've looked through a lot of code but I'm having a hard time finding a pattern I like.

  Read the article

• Trouble deciding how to add popup menu to eclipse plugin using either action ObjectContributions or command handlers

  - by user1808408

  The issue is this: Most things I read on the web says that we should avoid actions when creating popup menus because the command framework allows for more decoupling. Example: http://wiki.eclipse.org/FAQ_What_is_the_difference_between_a_command_and_an_action%3F Fair enough. But I am having a heck of a time getting the command framework to add my menu when I right click on a .java file inside the editor, and only when I click inside the editor. I can get the menu to show (using 'with' and the activeEditor variable), but it also shows when I right click on the java file inside the package explorer, which I don't want. I suspect it's because the file is already open inside the editor. I also have a menu that gets added when I right click on the java file inside the package explorer, using IComplilationUnit. That works fine. So my problem is solved using a popup menu action for when I click inside the file. I also get access to to all the ISelection stuff there. But the coupling is to high and I lose the flexability of using handlers. I'm looking for either: Tell me I'm doing it the only way possible; or Tell me how to have my popup appear only when I right click on the java file editor. Regards

  Read the article

• data ownership and performance

  - by Ami

  We're designing a new application and we ran into some architectural question when thinking about data ownership. we broke down the system into components, for example Customer and Order. each of this component/module is responsible for a specific business domain, i.e. Customer deals with CRUD of customers and business process centered around customers (Register a n new customer, block customer account, etc.). each module is the owner of a set of database tables, and only that module may access them. if another module needs data that is owned by another module, it retrieves it by requesting it from that module. so far so good, the question is how to deal with scenarios such as a report that needs to show all the customers and for each customer all his orders? in such a case we need to get all the customers from the Customer module, iterate over them and for each one get all the data from the Order module. performance won't be good...obviously it would be much better to have a stored proc join customers table and orders table, but that would also mean direct access to the data that is owned by another module, creating coupling and dependencies that we wish to avoid. this is a simplified example, we're dealing with an enterprise application with a lot of business entities and relationships, and my goal is to keep it clean and as loosely coupled as possible. I foresee in the future many changes to the data scheme, and possibly splitting the system into several completely separate systems. I wish to have a design that would allow this to be done in a relatively easy way. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Sharing class member data between sub components

  - by Tim Gradwell

  I have an aggregate 'main' class which contains some data which I wish to share. The main class also has other class members. I want to share the data with these other class members. What is the correct / neatest way to do this? The specific example I have is as follows. The main class is a .net Form. I have some controls (actually controls within controls) on the main form which need access to the shared data. Main Form - DataX - DataY - Control1 -- Subcontrol1 - Control2 -- SubControl2 SubControls 1 and 2 both wish to access DataX and DataY. The trouble is, I feel like better practice (to reduce coupling), would be that either subcontrols should not know about Main Form, or Main Form should not know about subcontrols - probably the former. For subcontrols not to know about Main Form, would probably mean Main Form passing references to both Controls 1 and 2, which in turn would pass the references on to SubControls 1 and 2. Lots of lines of code which just forward the references. If I later added DataZ and DataW, and Controls 3 and 4 and SubControls 3 and 4, I'd have to add lots more reference forwarding code. It seems simpler to me to give SubControls 1 and 2 member references to Main Form. That way, any sub control could just ask for MainForm.DataX or MainForm.DataY and if I ever added new data, I could just access it directly from the sub controls with no hassle. But it still involves setting the 'MainForm' member references every time I add a new Control or Subcontrol. And it gives me a gut feeling of 'wrong'. As you might be able to tell I'm not happy with either of my solutions. Is there a better way? Thanks

  Read the article

• When my object is no longer referenced why do its events continue to run?

  - by Ryan Peschel

  Say I am making a game and have a base Buff class. I may also have a subclass named ThornsBuff which subscribes to the Player class's Damaged event. The Player may have a list of Buffs and one of them may be the ThornsBuff. For example: Test Class Player player = new Player(); player.ActiveBuffs.Add(new ThornsBuff(player)); ThornsBuff Class public ThornsBuff(Player player) { player.DamageTaken += player_DamageTaken; } private void player_DamageTaken(MessagePlayerDamaged m) { m.Assailant.Stats.Health -= (int)(m.DamageAmount * .25); } This is all to illustrate an example. If I were to remove the buff from the list, the event is not detached. Even though the player no longer has the buff, the event is still executed as if he did. Now, I could have a Dispel method to unregister the event, but that forces the developer to call Dispel in addition to removing the Buff from the list. What if they forget, increased coupling, etc. What I don't understand is why the event doesn't detatch itself automatically when the Buff is removed from the list. The Buff only existed in the list and that is its one reference. After it is removed shouldn't the event be detached? I tried adding the detaching code to the finalizer of the Buff but that didn't fix it either. The event is still running even after it has 0 references. I suppose it is because the garbage collector had not run yet? Is there any way to make it automatic and instant so that when the object has no references all its events are unregisted? Thanks.

  Read the article

• jqtouch / google maps api v3 issue

  - by Rigo Vides

  Hi everyone, I'm having a hard time triying to make jQtouch and Google Maps api V3 together. I've tried almost everything. It seems that the only source of information is here I checked every single post. I'm starting with jQuery and css... so there's a lot of stuff I don't understand. First of all, I'm using jQtouch framework to build a web app with google maps integration, the problem is that whenever I pan the map, strange flickering occurs. It's like jQtouch and the map are trying to fight for a callback. I'm using the latest revision out there. And have several bugs, regarding transition/animation functionality (since I don't wrap the map and all the element's divs within the #jqt wrapper) and css issues with some styling. Anyone has successfully achieve a functional setup build for this scenario? (google maps api v3 & jqtouch), I think is not necessary to paste you some code (But if you think is necessary please let me know and I'll do it), If you paste me a minimal example with a map (detailing jqtouch version, and modification to the styles/.js files), and some transition back and forth from the map to another div/section/page, you'll get the bounty. Thanks a lot in advance. And please, let me know if this is kind of 'legal' here, I mean, there's too loose information on the official wiki, and like 13 'solutions' but nothing concrete... I'm just triying to help anyone who step on in this problem in the future.

  Read the article

• Using jquery validate with multiple fields of the same name

  - by Matt H

  I am trying to get jquery validate to work on multiple fields. Reason being I have dynamically generated fields added and they are simply a list of numbers. So I thought I'd put together a basic example and followed the concept from the accepted answer in the following link: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/931687/using-jquery-validate-plugin-to-validate-multiple-form-fields-with-identical-name However, it's not doing anything useful. Why is it not working? <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <script src="http://code.jquery.com/jquery-latest.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://dev.jquery.com/view/trunk/plugins/validate/lib/jquery.delegate.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://dev.jquery.com/view/trunk/plugins/validate/jquery.validate.js"></script> <script> $("#submit").click(function(){ $("field").each(function(){ $(this).rules("add", { required: true, email: true, messages: { required: "Specify a valid email" } }); }) }); $(document).ready(function(){ $("#myform").validate(); }); </script> </head> <body> <form id="myform"> <label for="field">Required, email: </label> <input class="left" id="field" name="field" /> <input class="left" id="field" name="field" /> <input class="left" id="field" name="field" /> <input class="left" id="field" name="field" /> <br/> <input type="submit" value="Validate!" id="submit" name="submit" /> </form> </body> </html>

  Read the article

• "Admin module" taking over [Yii framework]

  - by Flavius

  Hi I have an "admin" module and I want it to serve "dynamic controllers", i.e. to provide a default behaviour for controllers which don't really exist ("virtual controllers"). I've invented a lightweight messaging mechanism for loose communication between modules. I'd like to use it such that when e.g. ?r=admin/users/index is requested, it will call the "virtual controller" "UserController" of AdminModule, which would, by default, use this messaging mechanism to notify the real module "UsersModule" it can answer to the request. I thought about simulating this behaviour in AdminModule::init(), but at that point I have no way of deciding whether the action can be processed by a real controller or not, or at least I don't know how to do it. This is because of the way Yii works: bottom-up, the controller is the one that renders the view AND the application layout (or the module's, if it exists), for example. I don't think the module even has a word to say about handling a given controller+action or not. To recap, I'm looking for a kind of CWebModule::missingController($controllerId,$actionId), just like CController::missingAction($actionId), or a workaround to simulate that. That would possibly be in CWebModule::init() or somewhere where I can find out whether the controller actually exists, in which case it's his job to handle it the $actionID and $controllerID whether the module $controllerID exists (I didn't type it wrong, in r=admin/users/index, "users" is the actual module, as specified in the application's config).

  Read the article

• Recover files from corrupt filesystem

  - by Emile 81

  My situation: I have an older 80GB IDE internal hdd, with a few files on that I would like very much to recover: some word documents some latex documents (text files) and pictures (png, jpg, eps files) some other text documents and visual studio project files I had backed them (not the latex ones though) up using svn, but have not committed lately, and would loose a lot of work if I cant recover. the hdd seems to have lost its filesystem, i have no idea how it came about. I know it has/had 3 NTFS partitions, i know the files i want are on the second or third partition. I read http://superuser.com/questions/81877/recover-hard-disk-data Partition Find and Mount did not see all the partitions using intelligent scan TestDisk does (i think), I followed the step by step instructions here, but when I try to list the files it says: "Can't open filesystem, filesystem seems damaged." I'm not sure how to proceed here, as TestDisks wiki does not contain this error message afaik. I don't know if the hdd is gonna fail, or some prog has caused the filesystem to be corrupt, the hdd doesnt make a sound, so i guess that's good. I would like some guidance so I don't accidentally cause more damage. (eg. is it ok to let testdisk write the filesystem to disk? I'm pretty the partitions are listed ok, but not 100%)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >