Search Results

Search found 40386 results on 1616 pages for 'object design'.

Page 254/1616 | < Previous Page | 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261  | Next Page >

  • How should rules for Aggregate Roots be enforced?

    - by MylesRip
    While searching the web, I came across a list of rules from Eric Evans' book that should be enforced for aggregates: The root Entity has global identity and is ultimately responsible for checking invariants Root Entities have global identity. Entities inside the boundary have local identity, unique only within the Aggregate. Nothing outside the Aggregate boundary can hold a reference to anything inside, except to the root Entity. The root Entity can hand references to the internal Entities to other objects, but they can only use them transiently (within a single method or block). Only Aggregate Roots can be obtained directly with database queries. Everything else must be done through traversal. Objects within the Aggregate can hold references to other Aggregate roots. A delete operation must remove everything within the Aggregate boundary all at once When a change to any object within the Aggregate boundary is committed, all invariants of the whole Aggregate must be satisfied. This all seems fine in theory, but I don't see how these rules would be enforced in the real world. Take rule 3 for example. Once the root entity has given an exteral object a reference to an internal entity, what's to keep that external object from holding on to the reference beyond the single method or block? (If the enforcement of this is platform-specific, I would be interested in knowing how this would be enforced within a C#/.NET/NHibernate environment.)

    Read the article

  • JavaScript Module Pattern - What about using "return this"?

    - by Rob
    After doing some reading about the Module Pattern, I've seen a few ways of returning the properties which you want to be public. One of the most common ways is to declare your public properties and methods right inside of the "return" statement, apart from your private properties and methods. A similar way (the "Revealing" pattern) is to provide simply references to the properties and methods which you want to be public. Lastly, a third technique I saw was to create a new object inside your module function, to which you assign your new properties before returning said object. This was an interesting idea, but requires the creation of a new object. So I was thinking, why not just use "this.propertyName" to assign your public properties and methods, and finally use "return this" at the end? This way seems much simpler to me, as you can create private properties and methods with the usual "var" or "function" syntax, or use the "this.propertyName" syntax to declare your public methods. Here's the method I'm suggesting: (function() { var privateMethod = function () { alert('This is a private method.'); } this.publicMethod = function () { alert('This is a public method.'); } return this; })(); Are there any pros/cons to using the method above? What about the others?

    Read the article

  • Still Confused About Identifying vs. Non-Identifying Relationships

    - by Jason
    So, I've been reading up on identifying vs. non-identifying relationships in my database design, and a number of the answers on SO seem contradicting to me. Here are the two questions I am looking at: What's the Difference Between Identifying and Non-Identifying Relationships Trouble Deciding on Identifying or Non-Identifying Relationship Looking at the top answers from each question, I appear to get two different ideas of what an identifying relationship is. The first question's response says that an identifying relationship "describes a situation in which the existence of a row in the child table depends on a row in the parent table." An example of this that is given is, "An author can write many books (1-to-n relationship), but a book cannot exist without an author." That makes sense to me. However, when I read the response to question two, I get confused as it says, "if a child identifies its parent, it is an identifying relationship." The answer then goes on to give examples such as SSN (is identifying of a Person), but an address is not (because many people can live at an address). To me, this sounds more like a case of the decision between primary key and non-primary key. My own gut feeling (and additional research on other sites) points to the first question and its response being correct. However, I wanted to verify before I continued forward as I don't want to learn something wrong as I am working to understand database design. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Database choices

    - by flobadob
    I have a prickly design issue regarding the choice of database technologies to use for a group of new applications. The final suite of applications would have the following database requirements... Central databases (more than one database) using mysql (myst be mysql due to justhost.com). An application to be written which accesses the multiple mysql databases on the web host. This application will also write to local serverless database (sqlite/firebird/vistadb/whatever). Different flavors of this application will be created for windows (.NET), windows mobile, android if possible, iphone if possible. So, the design task is to minimise the quantity of code to achieve this. This is going to be tricky since the languages used are already c# / java (android) and objc (iphone). Not too worried about that, but can the work required to implement the various database access layers be minimised? The serverless database will hold similar data to the mysql server, so some kind of inheritance in the DAL would be useful. Looking at hibernate/nhibernate and there is linq to whatever. So many choices!

    Read the article

  • Pattern for version-specific implementations of a Java class

    - by Mike Monkiewicz
    So here's my conundrum. I am programming a tool that needs to work on old versions of our application. I have the code to the application, but can not alter any of the classes. To pull information out of our database, I have a DTO of sorts that is populated by Hibernate. It consumes a data object for version 1.0 of our app, cleverly named DataObject. Below is the DTO class. public class MyDTO { private MyWrapperClass wrapper; public MyDTO(DataObject data) { wrapper = new MyWrapperClass(data); } } The DTO is instantiated through a Hibernate query as follows: select new com.foo.bar.MyDTO(t1.data) from mytable t1 Now, a little logic is needed on top of the data object, so I made a wrapper class for it. Note the DTO stores an instance of the wrapper class, not the original data object. public class MyWrapperClass { private DataObject data; public MyWrapperClass(DataObject data) { this.data = data; } public String doSomethingImportant() { ... version-specific logic ... } } This works well until I need to work on version 2.0 of our application. Now DataObject in the two versions are very similar, but not the same. This resulted in different sub classes of MyWrapperClass, which implement their own version-specific doSomethingImportant(). Still doing okay. But how does myDTO instantiate the appropriate version-specific MyWrapperClass? Hibernate is in turn instantiating MyDTO, so it's not like I can @Autowire a dependency in Spring. I would love to reuse MyDTO (and my dozens of other DTOs) for both versions of the tool, without having to duplicate the class. Don't repeat yourself, and all that. I'm sure there's a very simple pattern I'm missing that would help this. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How can I refactor this to work without breaking the pattern horribly?

    - by SnOrfus
    I've got a base class object that is used for filtering. It's a template method object that looks something like this. public class Filter { public void Process(User u, GeoRegion r, int countNeeded) { List<account> selected = this.Select(u, r, countNeeded); // 1 List<account> filtered = this.Filter(selected, u, r, countNeeded); // 2 if (filtered.Count > 0) { /* do businessy stuff */ } // 3 if (filtered.Count < countNeeded) this.SendToSuccessor(u, r, countNeeded - filtered) // 4 } } Select(...), Filter(...) are protected abstract methods and implemented by the derived classes. Select(...) finds objects in the based on x criteria, Filter(...) filters those selected further. If the remaining filtered collection has more than 1 object in it, we do some business stuff with it (unimportant to the problem here). SendToSuccessor(...) is called if there weren't enough objects found after filtering (it's a composite where the next class in succession will also be derived from Filter but have different filtering criteria) All has been ok, but now I'm building another set of filters, which I was going to subclass from this. The filters I'm building however would require different params and I don't want to just implement those methods and not use the params or just add to the param list the ones I need and have them not used in the existing filters. They still perform the same logical process though. I also don't want to complicated the consumer code for this (which looks like this) Filter f = new Filter1(); Filter f2 = new Filter2(); Filter f3 = new Filter3(); f.Sucessor = f2; f2.Sucessor = f3; /* and so on adding filters as successors to previous ones */ foreach (User u in users) { foreach (GeoRegion r in regions) { f.Process(u, r, ##); } } How should I go about it?

    Read the article

  • Modeling many-to-one with constraints?

    - by Greg Beech
    I'm attempting to create a database model for movie classifications, where each movie could have a single classification from each of one of multiple rating systems (e.g. BBFC, MPAA). This is the current design, with all implied PKs and FKs: TABLE Movie ( MovieId INT ) TABLE ClassificationSystem ( ClassificationSystemId TINYINT ) TABLE Classification ( ClassificationId INT, ClassificationSystemId TINYINT ) TABLE MovieClassification ( MovieId INT, ClassificationId INT, Advice NVARCHAR(250) -- description of why the classification was given ) The problem is with the MovieClassification table whose constraints would allow multiple classifications from the same system, whereas it should ideally only permit either zero or one classifications from a given system. Is there any reasonable way to restructure this so that a movie having exactly zero or one classifications from any given system is enforced by database constraints, given the following requirements? Do not duplicate information that could be looked up (i.e. duplicating ClassificationSystemId in the MovieClassification table is not a good solution because this could get out of sync with the value in the Classification table) Remain extensible to multiple classification systems (i.e. a new classification system does not require any changes to the table structure)? Note also the Advice column - each mapping of a movie to a classification needs to have a textual description of why that classification was given to that movie. Any design would need to support this.

    Read the article

  • How to translate the fields of a database model?

    - by Tõnis M
    I have some tables/models in a web app that will have multilingual content. For example a university, with it's description in a default language(english) and the user wants he can see the same information in another language( if the object has it's fields translated). If there were only a few languages then I would just add fields like name_en and name_de and so on, but the number of languages isn't fixed, so that' would create a mess. I could also just create a new object with the translated data but then foreign keys wouldn't work, and only some of the fields can be translated so that would create duplicate data. Storing the translations in a file and using gettext or something similar is also not an option since the objects fields can be translated by the website user, not only developers/admins. What would be the best way to design/architect such a database? Searching from the translated data should also be not too complex - as it should not require creating complex joins which would make the queries slower I'm using PostgreSQL and Ruby of Rails but I'm not looking for a technical solution but for a general idea how to design it.

    Read the article

  • Large Switch statements: Bad OOP?

    - by Mystere Man
    I've always been of the opinion that large switch statements are a symptom of bad OOP design. In the past, I've read articles that discuss this topic and they have provided altnerative OOP based approaches, typically based on polymorphism to instantiate the right object to handle the case. I'm now in a situation that has a monsterous switch statement based on a stream of data from a TCP socket in which the protocol consists of basically newline terminated command, followed by lines of data, followed by an end marker. The command can be one of 100 different commands, so I'd like to find a way to reduce this monster switch statement to something more manageable. I've done some googling to find the solutions I recall, but sadly, Google has become a wasteland of irrelevant results for many kinds of queries these days. Are there any patterns for this sort of problem? Any suggestions on possible implementations? One thought I had was to use a dictionary lookup, matching the command text to the object type to instantiate. This has the nice advantage of merely creating a new object and inserting a new command/type in the table for any new commands. However, this also has the problem of type explosion. I now need 100 new classes, plus I have to find a way to interface them cleanly to the data model. Is the "one true switch statement" really the way to go? I'd appreciate your thoughts, opinions, or comments.

    Read the article

  • Customer wants some data to appear after you later delete rows. System giant / not my creation. Fast

    - by John Sullivan
    This is a fairly common problem, it probably has a name, I just don't know what it is. A.) User sees obscure piece of information in Row B of L_OBSCURE_INFO displayed on some screen at a certain point. It is in table L_Obscure_info. B.) Under certain circumstances we want to correctly delete data in L_OBSCURE_INFO. Unfortunately, nobody accounted for the fact that the user might want to backtrack and see some random piece of information that was most recently in L_OBSCURE_INFO. C.) The system is enormous and L_OBSCURE_INFO is used all the time. You have no idea what the ramifications are of implementing some kind of hack and whatever you do, you don't want to introduce more bugs. I think the best approach would be to create an L_OBSCURE_INFO_HISTORY table and record a record in there every time you change data. But god help your ensuring it's accurate in this system where L_OBSCURE_INFO is being touched everywhere and you don't have time to implement L_OBSCURE_INFO_HISTORY. Is there a particularly easy, clever design solution for this kind of problem -- basically an elegant database hack? If not, is this kind of design problem under a particular class of problems or have a name?

    Read the article

  • The dynamic Type in C# Simplifies COM Member Access from Visual FoxPro

    - by Rick Strahl
    I’ve written quite a bit about Visual FoxPro interoperating with .NET in the past both for ASP.NET interacting with Visual FoxPro COM objects as well as Visual FoxPro calling into .NET code via COM Interop. COM Interop with Visual FoxPro has a number of problems but one of them at least got a lot easier with the introduction of dynamic type support in .NET. One of the biggest problems with COM interop has been that it’s been really difficult to pass dynamic objects from FoxPro to .NET and get them properly typed. The only way that any strong typing can occur in .NET for FoxPro components is via COM type library exports of Visual FoxPro components. Due to limitations in Visual FoxPro’s type library support as well as the dynamic nature of the Visual FoxPro language where few things are or can be described in the form of a COM type library, a lot of useful interaction between FoxPro and .NET required the use of messy Reflection code in .NET. Reflection is .NET’s base interface to runtime type discovery and dynamic execution of code without requiring strong typing. In FoxPro terms it’s similar to EVALUATE() functionality albeit with a much more complex API and corresponiding syntax. The Reflection APIs are fairly powerful, but they are rather awkward to use and require a lot of code. Even with the creation of wrapper utility classes for common EVAL() style Reflection functionality dynamically access COM objects passed to .NET often is pretty tedious and ugly. Let’s look at a simple example. In the following code I use some FoxPro code to dynamically create an object in code and then pass this object to .NET. An alternative to this might also be to create a new object on the fly by using SCATTER NAME on a database record. How the object is created is inconsequential, other than the fact that it’s not defined as a COM object – it’s a pure FoxPro object that is passed to .NET. Here’s the code: *** Create .NET COM InstanceloNet = CREATEOBJECT('DotNetCom.DotNetComPublisher') *** Create a Customer Object Instance (factory method) loCustomer = GetCustomer() loCustomer.Name = "Rick Strahl" loCustomer.Company = "West Wind Technologies" loCustomer.creditLimit = 9999999999.99 loCustomer.Address.StreetAddress = "32 Kaiea Place" loCustomer.Address.Phone = "808 579-8342" loCustomer.Address.Email = "[email protected]" *** Pass Fox Object and echo back values ? loNet.PassRecordObject(loObject) RETURN FUNCTION GetCustomer LOCAL loCustomer, loAddress loCustomer = CREATEOBJECT("EMPTY") ADDPROPERTY(loCustomer,"Name","") ADDPROPERTY(loCustomer,"Company","") ADDPROPERTY(loCUstomer,"CreditLimit",0.00) ADDPROPERTY(loCustomer,"Entered",DATETIME()) loAddress = CREATEOBJECT("Empty") ADDPROPERTY(loAddress,"StreetAddress","") ADDPROPERTY(loAddress,"Phone","") ADDPROPERTY(loAddress,"Email","") ADDPROPERTY(loCustomer,"Address",loAddress) RETURN loCustomer ENDFUNC Now prior to .NET 4.0 you’d have to access this object passed to .NET via Reflection and the method code to do this would looks something like this in the .NET component: public string PassRecordObject(object FoxObject) { // *** using raw Reflection string Company = (string) FoxObject.GetType().InvokeMember( "Company", BindingFlags.GetProperty,null, FoxObject,null); // using the easier ComUtils wrappers string Name = (string) ComUtils.GetProperty(FoxObject,"Name"); // Getting Address object – then getting child properties object Address = ComUtils.GetProperty(FoxObject,"Address");    string Street = (string) ComUtils.GetProperty(FoxObject,"StreetAddress"); // using ComUtils 'Ex' functions you can use . Syntax     string StreetAddress = (string) ComUtils.GetPropertyEx(FoxObject,"AddressStreetAddress"); return Name + Environment.NewLine + Company + Environment.NewLine + StreetAddress + Environment.NewLine + " FOX"; } Note that the FoxObject is passed in as type object which has no specific type. Since the object doesn’t exist in .NET as a type signature the object is passed without any specific type information as plain non-descript object. To retrieve a property the Reflection APIs like Type.InvokeMember or Type.GetProperty().GetValue() etc. need to be used. I made this code a little simpler by using the Reflection Wrappers I mentioned earlier but even with those ComUtils calls the code is pretty ugly requiring passing the objects for each call and casting each element. Using .NET 4.0 Dynamic Typing makes this Code a lot cleaner Enter .NET 4.0 and the dynamic type. Replacing the input parameter to the .NET method from type object to dynamic makes the code to access the FoxPro component inside of .NET much more natural: public string PassRecordObjectDynamic(dynamic FoxObject) { // *** using raw Reflection string Company = FoxObject.Company; // *** using the easier ComUtils class string Name = FoxObject.Name; // *** using ComUtils 'ex' functions to use . Syntax string Address = FoxObject.Address.StreetAddress; return Name + Environment.NewLine + Company + Environment.NewLine + Address + Environment.NewLine + " FOX"; } As you can see the parameter is of type dynamic which as the name implies performs Reflection lookups and evaluation on the fly so all the Reflection code in the last example goes away. The code can use regular object ‘.’ syntax to reference each of the members of the object. You can access properties and call methods this way using natural object language. Also note that all the type casts that were required in the Reflection code go away – dynamic types like var can infer the type to cast to based on the target assignment. As long as the type can be inferred by the compiler at compile time (ie. the left side of the expression is strongly typed) no explicit casts are required. Note that although you get to use plain object syntax in the code above you don’t get Intellisense in Visual Studio because the type is dynamic and thus has no hard type definition in .NET . The above example calls a .NET Component from VFP, but it also works the other way around. Another frequent scenario is an .NET code calling into a FoxPro COM object that returns a dynamic result. Assume you have a FoxPro COM object returns a FoxPro Cursor Record as an object: DEFINE CLASS FoxData AS SESSION OlePublic cAppStartPath = "" FUNCTION INIT THIS.cAppStartPath = ADDBS( JustPath(Application.ServerName) ) SET PATH TO ( THIS.cAppStartpath ) ENDFUNC FUNCTION GetRecord(lnPk) LOCAL loCustomer SELECT * FROM tt_Cust WHERE pk = lnPk ; INTO CURSOR TCustomer IF _TALLY < 1 RETURN NULL ENDIF SCATTER NAME loCustomer MEMO RETURN loCustomer ENDFUNC ENDDEFINE If you call this from a .NET application you can now retrieve this data via COM Interop and cast the result as dynamic to simplify the data access of the dynamic FoxPro type that was created on the fly: int pk = 0; int.TryParse(Request.QueryString["id"],out pk); // Create Fox COM Object with Com Callable Wrapper FoxData foxData = new FoxData(); dynamic foxRecord = foxData.GetRecord(pk); string company = foxRecord.Company; DateTime entered = foxRecord.Entered; This code looks simple and natural as it should be – heck you could write code like this in days long gone by in scripting languages like ASP classic for example. Compared to the Reflection code that previously was necessary to run similar code this is much easier to write, understand and maintain. For COM interop and Visual FoxPro operation dynamic type support in .NET 4.0 is a huge improvement and certainly makes it much easier to deal with FoxPro code that calls into .NET. Regardless of whether you’re using COM for calling Visual FoxPro objects from .NET (ASP.NET calling a COM component and getting a dynamic result returned) or whether FoxPro code is calling into a .NET COM component from a FoxPro desktop application. At one point or another FoxPro likely ends up passing complex dynamic data to .NET and for this the dynamic typing makes coding much cleaner and more readable without having to create custom Reflection wrappers. As a bonus the dynamic runtime that underlies the dynamic type is fairly efficient in terms of making Reflection calls especially if members are repeatedly accessed. © Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2010Posted in COM  FoxPro  .NET  CSharp  

    Read the article

  • IOC Container Handling State Params in Non-Default Constructor

    - by Mystagogue
    For the purpose of this discussion, there are two kinds of parameters an object constructor might take: state dependency or service dependency. Supplying a service dependency with an IOC container is easy: DI takes over. But in contrast, state dependencies are usually only known to the client. That is, the object requestor. It turns out that having a client supply the state params through an IOC Container is quite painful. I will show several different ways to do this, all of which have big problems, and ask the community if there is another option I'm missing. Let's begin: Before I added an IOC container to my project code, I started with a class like this: class Foobar { //parameters are state dependencies, not service dependencies public Foobar(string alpha, int omega){...}; //...other stuff } I decide to add a Logger service depdendency to the Foobar class, which perhaps I'll provide through DI: class Foobar { public Foobar(string alpha, int omega, ILogger log){...}; //...other stuff } But then I'm also told I need to make class Foobar itself "swappable." That is, I'm required to service-locate a Foobar instance. I add a new interface into the mix: class Foobar : IFoobar { public Foobar(string alpha, int omega, ILogger log){...}; //...other stuff } When I make the service locator call, it will DI the ILogger service dependency for me. Unfortunately the same is not true of the state dependencies Alpha and Omega. Some containers offer a syntax to address this: //Unity 2.0 pseudo-ish code: myContainer.Resolve<IFoobar>( new parameterOverride[] { {"alpha", "one"}, {"omega",2} } ); I like the feature, but I don't like that it is untyped and not evident to the developer what parameters must be passed (via intellisense, etc). So I look at another solution: //This is a "boiler plate" heavy approach! class Foobar : IFoobar { public Foobar (string alpha, int omega){...}; //...stuff } class FoobarFactory : IFoobarFactory { public IFoobar IFoobarFactory.Create(string alpha, int omega){ return new Foobar(alpha, omega); } } //fetch it... myContainer.Resolve<IFoobarFactory>().Create("one", 2); The above solves the type-safety and intellisense problem, but it (1) forced class Foobar to fetch an ILogger through a service locator rather than DI and (2) it requires me to make a bunch of boiler-plate (XXXFactory, IXXXFactory) for all varieties of Foobar implementations I might use. Should I decide to go with a pure service locator approach, it may not be a problem. But I still can't stand all the boiler-plate needed to make this work. So then I try this: //code named "concrete creator" class Foobar : IFoobar { public Foobar(string alpha, int omega, ILogger log){...}; static IFoobar Create(string alpha, int omega){ //unity 2.0 pseudo-ish code. Assume a common //service locator, or singleton holds the container... return Container.Resolve<IFoobar>( new parameterOverride[] {{"alpha", alpha},{"omega", omega} } ); } //Get my instance: Foobar.Create("alpha",2); I actually don't mind that I'm using the concrete "Foobar" class to create an IFoobar. It represents a base concept that I don't expect to change in my code. I also don't mind the lack of type-safety in the static "Create", because it is now encapsulated. My intellisense is working too! Any concrete instance made this way will ignore the supplied state params if they don't apply (a Unity 2.0 behavior). Perhaps a different concrete implementation "FooFoobar" might have a formal arg name mismatch, but I'm still pretty happy with it. But the big problem with this approach is that it only works effectively with Unity 2.0 (a mismatched parameter in Structure Map will throw an exception). So it is good only if I stay with Unity. The problem is, I'm beginning to like Structure Map a lot more. So now I go onto yet another option: class Foobar : IFoobar, IFoobarInit { public Foobar(ILogger log){...}; public IFoobar IFoobarInit.Initialize(string alpha, int omega){ this.alpha = alpha; this.omega = omega; return this; } } //now create it... IFoobar foo = myContainer.resolve<IFoobarInit>().Initialize("one", 2) Now with this I've got a somewhat nice compromise with the other approaches: (1) My arguments are type-safe / intellisense aware (2) I have a choice of fetching the ILogger via DI (shown above) or service locator, (3) there is no need to make one or more seperate concrete FoobarFactory classes (contrast with the verbose "boiler-plate" example code earlier), and (4) it reasonably upholds the principle "make interfaces easy to use correctly, and hard to use incorrectly." At least it arguably is no worse than the alternatives previously discussed. One acceptance barrier yet remains: I also want to apply "design by contract." Every sample I presented was intentionally favoring constructor injection (for state dependencies) because I want to preserve "invariant" support as most commonly practiced. Namely, the invariant is established when the constructor completes. In the sample above, the invarient is not established when object construction completes. As long as I'm doing home-grown "design by contract" I could just tell developers not to test the invariant until the Initialize(...) method is called. But more to the point, when .net 4.0 comes out I want to use its "code contract" support for design by contract. From what I read, it will not be compatible with this last approach. Curses! Of course it also occurs to me that my entire philosophy is off. Perhaps I'd be told that conjuring a Foobar : IFoobar via a service locator implies that it is a service - and services only have other service dependencies, they don't have state dependencies (such as the Alpha and Omega of these examples). I'm open to listening to such philosophical matters as well, but I'd also like to know what semi-authorative reference to read that would steer me down that thought path. So now I turn it to the community. What approach should I consider that I havn't yet? Must I really believe I've exhausted my options?

    Read the article

  • relational data from xml

    - by Beta033
    Our problem is this, we have a relational database to store objects in tables. As any relational database could, several of these tables have multiple foreign keys pointing to other tables (all pretty normal stuff) We've been trying to identify a solution to allow export of this relational data, ideally, only 1 of the objects in the model, to some sort of file (xml, text, ??). So it wouldn't be simple enough to just export 1 table as data stored in other tables would contribute to the complete model of the object. Something like the following picture: Toward this, i've written a routine to export the structure by following the foreign key paths which exports something similar to the following. <Tables> <TableA PK="1", val1, val2, val3> <TableC PK="1", FK_A="1", Val1, val2, val3> <TableC PK="2", FK_A="1", val1, val2, val3> <TableB PK="1", FK_A="1", FK_C="1", val1, val2, val3> <TableB PK="2", FK_A="1", FK_C="2", val1, val2, val3> <TableD PK="1", FK_B="1", FK_C="1", val1> <TableD PK="2", FK_B="2", FK_C="1", val1> </Tables> However, given this structure, it cannot be placed into a heirarchial format (ie D2 is a child of C1 and B2; and B2 is a child of C2) Which in turn, makes my life very difficult when trying to identify a methodology to reimport (and reKey) these objects. Has anybody done anything like this? how do you do it? are there tools or documentation on how this is best accomplished? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Classes, methods, and polymorphism in Python

    - by Morlock
    I made a module prototype for building complex timer schedules in python. The classe prototypes permit to have Timer objects, each with their waiting times, Repeat objects that group Timer and other Repeat objects, and a Schedule class, just for holding a whole construction or Timers and Repeat instances. The construction can be as complex as needed and needs to be flexible. Each of these three classes has a .run() method, permitting to go through the whole schedule. Whatever the Class, the .run() method either runs a timer, a repeat group for a certain number of iterations, or a schedule. Is this polymorphism-oriented approach sound or silly? What are other appropriate approaches I should consider to build such a versatile utility that permits to put all building blocks together in as complex a way as desired with simplicity? Thanks! Here is the module code: ##################### ## Importing modules from time import time, sleep ##################### ## Class definitions class Timer: """ Timer object with duration. """ def __init__(self, duration): self.duration = duration def run(self): print "Waiting for %i seconds" % self.duration wait(self.duration) chime() class Repeat: """ Repeat grouped objects for a certain number of repetitions. """ def __init__(self, objects=[], rep=1): self.rep = rep self.objects = objects def run(self): print "Repeating group for %i times" % self.rep for i in xrange(self.rep): for group in self.objects: group.run() class Schedule: """ Groups of timers and repetitions. Maybe redundant with class Repeat. """ def __init__(self, schedule=[]): self.schedule = schedule def run(self): for group in self.schedule: group.run() ######################## ## Function definitions def wait(duration): """ Wait a certain number of seconds. """ time_end = time() + float(duration) #uncoment for minutes# * 60 time_diff = time_end - time() while time_diff > 0: sleep(1) time_diff = time_end - time() def chime(): print "Ding!"

    Read the article

  • Run unittest in a Class

    - by chrissygormley
    Hello, I have a test suite to perform smoke tests. I have all my script stored in various classes but when I try and run the test suite I can't seem to get it working if it is in a class. The code is below: (a class to call the tests) from alltests import SmokeTests class CallTests(SmokeTests): def integration(self): self.suite() if __name__ == '__main__': run = CallTests() run.integration() And the test suite: class SmokeTests(): def suite(self): #Function stores all the modules to be tested modules_to_test = ('external_sanity', 'internal_sanity') alltests = unittest.TestSuite() for module in map(__import__, modules_to_test): alltests.addTest(unittest.findTestCases(module)) return alltests if __name__ == '__main__': unittest.main(defaultTest='suite') So I can see how to call a normal function defined but I'm finding it difficult calling in the suite. In one of the tests the suite is set up like so: class InternalSanityTestSuite(unittest.TestSuite): # Tests to be tested by test suite def makeInternalSanityTestSuite(): suite = unittest.TestSuite() suite.addTest(TestInternalSanity("BasicInternalSanity")) suite.addTest(TestInternalSanity("VerifyInternalSanityTestFail")) return suite def suite(): return unittest.makeSuite(TestInternalSanity) If I have def suite() inside the class SmokeTests the script executes but the tests don't run but if I remove the class the tests run. I run this as a script and call in variables into the tests. I do not want to have to run the tests by os.system('python tests.py'). I was hoping to call the tests through the class I have like any other function. This need's to be called from a class as the script that I'm calling it from is Object Oriented. If anyone can get the code to be run using Call Tests I would appreciate it alot. Thanks for any help in advance.

    Read the article

  • Call bindings for DependencyObject when DependencyProperites are changed

    - by melculetz
    Is there a way to notify a DependencyObject's bindinigs when the inner DependencyProperties have changed? For example, I have this class: public class BackgroundDef : DependencyObject { public static readonly DependencyProperty Color1Property = DependencyProperty.Register("Color1", typeof(Color), typeof(Background), new UIPropertyMetadata(Colors.White)); public static readonly DependencyProperty UseBothColorsProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("UseBothColors", typeof(bool), typeof(Background), new UIPropertyMetadata(false)); public static readonly DependencyProperty Color2Property = DependencyProperty.Register("Color2", typeof(Color), typeof(Background), new UIPropertyMetadata(Colors.White)); public Color Color1 { set { SetValue(Color1Property, value); } get { return (Color)GetValue(Color1Property); } } public bool UseBothColors { set { SetValue(UseBothColorsProperty, value); } get { return (bool)GetValue(UseBothColorsProperty); } } public Color Color2 { set { SetValue(Color2Property, value); } get { return (Color)GetValue(Color2Property); } } } For which I have 3 separate two-way bindings that set the values for Color1, Color2 and UseBothColors. But I also have a binding for a BackgroundDef instance, which should create a Brush and draw the background of a button (either a single color, or two gradient colors). My problem is that the two-way bindings for the DependencyProperties update the properties, but the binding for the class instance is not called, as apparently the entire object does not change. Any idea how I could call the bindings for the DependencyObject when the DependencyProperties are changed?

    Read the article

  • How to implement an offline reader writer lock

    - by Peter Morris
    Some context for the question All objects in this question are persistent. All requests will be from a Silverlight client talking to an app server via a binary protocol (Hessian) and not WCF. Each user will have a session key (not an ASP.NET session) which will be a string, integer, or GUID (undecided so far). Some objects might take a long time to edit (30 or more minutes) so we have decided to use pessimistic offline locking. Pessimistic because having to reconcile conflicts would be far too annoying for users, offline because the client is not permanently connected to the server. Rather than storing session/object locking information in the object itself I have decided that any aggregate root that may have its instances locked should implement an interface ILockable public interface ILockable { Guid LockID { get; } } This LockID will be the identity of a "Lock" object which holds the information of which session is locking it. Now, if this were simple pessimistic locking I'd be able to achieve this very simply (using an incrementing version number on Lock to identify update conflicts), but what I actually need is ReaderWriter pessimistic offline locking. The reason is that some parts of the application will perform actions that read these complex structures. These include things like Reading a single structure to clone it. Reading multiple structures in order to create a binary file to "publish" the data to an external source. Read locks will be held for a very short period of time, typically less than a second, although in some circumstances they could be held for about 5 seconds at a guess. Write locks will mostly be held for a long time as they are mostly held by humans. There is a high probability of two users trying to edit the same aggregate at the same time, and a high probability of many users needing to temporarily read-lock at the same time too. I'm looking for suggestions as to how I might implement this. One additional point to make is that if I want to place a write lock and there are some read locks, I would like to "queue" the write lock so that no new read locks are placed. If the read locks are removed withing X seconds then the write lock is obtained, if not then the write lock backs off; no new read-locks would be placed while a write lock is queued. So far I have this idea The Lock object will have a version number (int) so I can detect multi-update conflicts, reload, try again. It will have a string[] for read locks A string to hold the session ID that has a write lock A string to hold the queued write lock Possibly a recursion counter to allow the same session to lock multiple times (for both read and write locks), but not sure about this yet. Rules: Can't place a read lock if there is a write lock or queued write lock. Can't place a write lock if there is a write lock or queued write lock. If there are no locks at all then a write lock may be placed. If there are read locks then a write lock will be queued instead of a full write lock placed. (If after X time the read locks are not gone the lock backs off, otherwise it is upgraded). Can't queue a write lock for a session that has a read lock. Can anyone see any problems? Suggest alternatives? Anything? I'd appreciate feedback before deciding on what approach to take.

    Read the article

  • Should business objects be able to create their own DTOs?

    - by Sam
    Suppose I have the following class: class Camera { public Camera( double exposure, double brightness, double contrast, RegionOfInterest regionOfInterest) { this.exposure = exposure; this.brightness = brightness; this.contrast = contrast; this.regionOfInterest = regionOfInterest; } public void ConfigureAcquisitionFifo(IAcquisitionFifo acquisitionFifo) { // do stuff to the acquisition FIFO } readonly double exposure; readonly double brightness; readonly double contrast; readonly RegionOfInterest regionOfInterest; } ... and a DTO to transport the camera info across a service boundary (WCF), say, for viewing in a WinForms/WPF/Web app: using System.Runtime.Serialization; [DataContract] public class CameraData { [DataMember] public double Exposure { get; set; } [DataMember] public double Brightness { get; set; } [DataMember] public double Contrast { get; set; } [DataMember] public RegionOfInterestData RegionOfInterest { get; set; } } Now I can add a method to Camera to expose its data: class Camera { // blah blah public CameraData ToData() { var regionOfInterestData = regionOfInterest.ToData(); return new CameraData() { Exposure = exposure, Brightness = brightness, Contrast = contrast, RegionOfInterestData = regionOfInterestData }; } } or, I can create a method that requires a special IReporter to be passed in for the Camera to expose its data to. This removes the dependency on the Contracts layer (Camera no longer has to know about CameraData): class Camera { // beep beep I'm a jeep public void ExposeToReporter(IReporter reporter) { reporter.GetCameraInfo(exposure, brightness, contrast, regionOfInterest); } } So which should I do? I prefer the second, but it requires the IReporter to have a CameraData field (which gets changed by GetCameraInfo()), which feels weird. Also, if there is any even better solution, please share with me! I'm still an object-oriented newb.

    Read the article

  • Aren't Information Expert / Tell Don't Ask at odds with Single Responsibility Principle?

    - by moffdub
    It is probably just me, which is why I'm asking the question. Information Expert, Tell Don't Ask, and SRP are often mentioned together as best practices. But I think they are at odds. Here is what I'm talking about: Code that favors SRP but violates Tell Don't Ask, Info Expert: Customer bob = ...; // TransferObjectFactory has to use Customer's accessors to do its work, // violates Tell Don't Ask CustomerDTO dto = TransferObjectFactory.createFrom(bob); Code that favors Tell Don't Ask / Info Expert but violates SRP: Customer bob = ...; // Now Customer is doing more than just representing the domain concept of Customer, // violates SRP CustomerDTO dto = bob.toDTO(); If they are indeed at odds, that's a vindication of my OCD. Otherwise, please fill me in on how these practices can co-exist peacefully. Thank you. Edit: someone wants a definition of the terms - Information Expert: objects that have the data needed for the operation should host the operation Tell Don't Ask: don't ask objects for data in order to do work; tell the objects to do the work Single Responsibility Principle: each object should have a narrowly defined responsibility

    Read the article

  • Spaceship objects

    - by Jam
    I'm trying to make a program which creates a spaceship and I'm using the status() method to display the ship's name and fuel values. However, it doesn't seem to be working. I think I may have messed something up with the status() method. I'm also trying to make it so that I can change the fuel values, but I don't want to create a new method to do so. I think I've taken a horrible wrong turn somewhere in there. Help please! class Ship(object): def __init__(self, name="Enterprise", fuel=0): self.name=name self.fuel=fuel print "The spaceship", name, "has arrived!" def status(): print "Name: ", self.name print "Fuel level: ", self.fuel status=staticmethod(status) def main(): ship1=Ship(raw_input("What would you like to name this ship?")) fuel_level=raw_input("How much fuel does this ship have?") if fuel_level<0: self.fuel=0 else: self.fuel(fuel_level) ship2=Ship(raw_input("What would you like to name this ship?")) fuel_level2=raw_input("How much fuel does this ship have?") if fuel_level2<0: self.fuel=0 else: self.fuel(fuel_level2) ship3=Ship(raw_input("What would you like to name this ship?")) fuel_level3=raw_input("How much fuel does this ship have?") if fuel_level3<0: self.fuel=0 else: self.fuel(fuel_level3) Ship.status() main() raw_input("Press enter to exit.")

    Read the article

  • Updating join fields in an ORM command

    - by Jono
    I have a question about object relational updates on join fields. I am working on a project using codeigniter with datamapper dmz. But I think my problem is with general understanding of ORMs. So fell free to answer with any ORM you know. I have two tables, Goods and Tags. One good can have many tags. Everything is working, but I am looking for a way to merge tags. Meaning I decide I want to remove tag A and instead have everything that is tagged by it, now be tagged by tag B. I only have models for the goods and the tags. There is no separate model for the join relationship, as I believe these ORMs were designed to work. I know how to delete a tag. But I dont know how to reach into the join table to redirect the references since there is no model for the join table. I would rather use the ORM then issuing a raw SQL command.

    Read the article

  • iPhone OS: Why is my managedModelObject not complying with Key Value Coding?

    - by nickthedude
    Ok so I'm trying to build this stat tracker for my app and I have built a data model object called statTracker that keeps track of all the stuff I want it to. I can set and retrieve values using the selectors, but if I try and use KVC (ie setValue: forKey: ) everything goes bad and says my StatTracker class is not KVC compliant: valueForUndefinedKey:]: the entity StatTracker is not key value coding-compliant for the key "timesLauched".' 2010-05-18 15:55:08.573 here's the code that is triggering it: NSArray *statTrackerArray = [[NSArray alloc] init]; statTrackerArray = [[CoreDataSingleton sharedCoreDataSingleton] getStatTracker]; NSNumber *number1 = [[NSNumber alloc] init]; number1 = [NSNumber numberWithInt:(1 + [[(StatTracker *)[statTrackerArray objectAtIndex:0] valueForKey:@"timesLauched"] intValue])]; [(StatTracker *)[statTrackerArray objectAtIndex:0] setValue:number1 forKey:@"timesLaunched" ]; NSError *error; if (![[[CoreDataSingleton sharedCoreDataSingleton] managedObjectContext] save:&error]) { NSLog(@"error writing to db"); } Not sure if this is enough code for you folks let me know what you need if you do need more. This would be so sweet if I could use KVC because I could then abstract all this stat tracking stuff into a single method call with a string argument for the value in question. At least that is what I hope to accomplish here. I'm actually now understanding the power of KVC but now I'm just trying to figure out how to make it work. Thanks! Nick

    Read the article

  • Poor DB4O performance - What am I doing wrong?

    - by Jon
    I read Rob Conery's post about Object databases and thought I'd give it a go. I have a class lets say Book with 15 properties mostly string, some int, one Datetime and 2 decimals. I used Rob's code to open the database file etc to test on a Winforms project not a Web project. So I did the following: for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) { var Book = new Book(); //Assign variables s.Save(Book); } s.CommitChanges(); This took at least a couple of minutes. I then tried to retrieve all data to test speed: var spp = s.All<Passports>(); This one line was quick, however, then doing: sppp.Count() as well as a seperate test doing a foreach loop and incrementing a counter took a couple of minutes. This seems quite slow to me. Am I doing something wrong or am I expecting too much?

    Read the article

  • function objects versus function pointers

    - by kumar_m_kiran
    Hi All, I have two questions related to function objects and function pointers, Question : 1 When I read the different uses sort algorithm of STL, I see that the third parameter can be a function objects, below is an example class State { public: //... int population() const; float aveTempF() const; //... }; struct PopLess : public std::binary_function<State,State,bool> { bool operator ()( const State &a, const State &b ) const { return popLess( a, b ); } }; sort( union, union+50, PopLess() ); Question : Now, How does the statement, sort(union, union+50,PopLess()) work? PopLess() must be resolved into something like PopLess tempObject.operator() which would be same as executing the operator () function on a temporary object. I see this as, passing the return value of overloaded operation i.e bool (as in my example) to sort algorithm. So then, How does sort function resolve the third parameter in this case? Question : 2 Question Do we derive any particular advantage of using function objects versus function pointer? If we use below function pointer will it derive any disavantage? inline bool popLess( const State &a, const State &b ) { return a.population() < b.population(); } std::sort( union, union+50, popLess ); // sort by population PS : Both the above references(including example) are from book "C++ Common Knowledge: Essential Intermediate Programming" by "Stephen C. Dewhurst". I was unable to decode the topic content, thus have posted for help. Thanks in advance for your help.

    Read the article

  • How do I create efficient instance variable mutators in Matlab?

    - by Trent B
    Previously, I implemented mutators as follows, however it ran spectacularly slowly on a recursive OO algorithm I'm working on, and I suspected it may have been because I was duplicating objects on every function call... is this correct? %% Example Only obj2 = tripleAllPoints(obj1) obj.pts = obj.pts * 3; obj2 = obj1 end I then tried implementing mutators without using the output object... however, it appears that in MATLAB i can't do this - the changes won't "stick" because of a scope issue? %% Example Only tripleAllPoints(obj1) obj1.pts = obj1.pts * 3; end For application purposes, an extremely simplified version of my code (which uses OO and recursion) is below. classdef myslice properties pts % array of pts nROW % number of rows nDIM % number of dimensions subs % sub-slices end % end properties methods function calcSubs(obj) obj.subs = cell(1,obj.nROW); for i=1:obj.nROW obj.subs{i} = myslice; obj.subs{i}.pts = obj.pts(1:i,2:end); end end function vol = calcVol(obj) if obj.nROW == 1 obj.volume = prod(obj.pts); else obj.volume = 0; calcSubs(obj); for i=1:obj.nROW obj.volume = obj.volume + calcVol(obj.subs{i}); end end end end % end methods end % end classdef

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261  | Next Page >