Search Results

Search found 14602 results on 585 pages for 'objected oriented design'.

Page 260/585 | < Previous Page | 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267  | Next Page >

  • Web UI element to represent two different micro-views of data in the same spot?

    - by Chris McCall
    I've been tasked with laying out a portion of a screen for a customer care (call center) app that serves as sort of a header/summary block at the top of the screen. Here's what it looks like: The important part is in the red box. That little tooltip is the biz's vision for how to represent both the numeric SiteId and the textual Site Name all in the same piece of screen real estate. I asked, and the business thinks the Name is more important than the ID, but lists the Id by default, because the Name can't be truncated in the display, and there's only so much horizontal room to put the data. So they go with the Id, because it's fewer characters, and then they have the user mouse-over the Id to display the name (presumably because the tooltip can be of unlimited width and since it's floating over the rest of the screen, the full name will always be displayed. So, here's my question: Is there some better UI metaphor that I don't know about that could get this job done, while meeting the following constraints?: Does not require the mouse (uses a keyboard shortcut to do the "reveal") Allows the user to copy and paste the name Will not truncate the name Provides for the display of both the ID and name in the same spot Works with IE7

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to handle modules that use each other?

    - by Axeman
    What's the best way to handle modules that use each other? Let's say I have a module which has functions for hashes: # Really::Useful::Functions::On::Hash.pm use base qw<Exporter>; use strict; use warnings; use Really::Useful::Functions::On::List qw<transform_list>; our @EXPORT_OK = qw<transform_hash transform_hash_as_list ...>; #... sub transform_hash { ... } #... sub transform_hash_as_list { return transform_list( %{ shift() } ); } #... 1 And another module has been segmented out for lists: # Really::Useful::Functions::On::List.pm use base qw<Exporter>; use strict; use warnings; use Really::Useful::Functions::On::Hash qw<transform_hash>; our @EXPORT_OK = qw<transform_list some_func ...>; #... sub transform_list { ... } #... sub some_func { my %params = transform_hash @_; #... } #... 1 Suppose that enough of these utility functions are handy enough that I'll want to use them in BEGIN statements and import functions to process parameter lists or configuration data. I have been putting sub definitions into BEGIN blocks to make sure they are ready to use whenever somebody includes the module. But I have gotten into hairy race conditions where a definition is not completed in a BEGIN block. I put evolving code idioms into modules so that I can reuse any idiom I find myself coding over and over again. For instance: sub list_if { my $condition = shift; return unless $condition; my $more_args = scalar @_; my $arg_list = @_ > 1 ? \@_ : @_ ? shift : $condition; if (( reftype( $arg_list ) || '' ) eq 'ARRAY' ) { return wantarray ? @$arg_list : $arg_list; } elsif ( $more_args ) { return $arg_list; } return; } captures two idioms that I'm kind of tired of typing: @{ func_I_hope_returns_a_listref() || [] } and ( $condition ? LIST : ()) The more I define functions in BEGIN blocks, the more likely I'll use these idiom bricks to express the logic the more likely that bricks are needed in BEGIN blocks. Do people have standard ways of dealing with this sort of language-idiom-brick model? I've been doing mostly Pure-Perl; will XS alleviate some of this?

    Read the article

  • When to update audit fields? DDD

    - by user676767
    I have a Meeting Object: Meeting{id, name, time, CreatedBy, UpdatedBy} and a MeetingAssignee{id, MeetingID, EmployeeId, CreatedBy, UpdatedBy) Meeting, as Aggregate root, has a method AssignEmployee. I was about to pass in the current user to the Meeting object as I call AssignEmployee, so that it can update its audit fields accordingly. But this doesn't seem right - is it? Obviously I can keep the audit fields public and change them later - perhaps at service level? What is everyone's else preferred method for updating these fields? Please note: We are not using Nhibernate, but a custom ORM which does not have anything automatic in place. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Game Objects Talking To Each Other

    - by PhilCK
    What is a good way of dealing with objects and having them talk to each other? Up until now all my games hobby/student have been small so this problem was generally solved in a rather ugly way, which lead to tight integration and circular dependencies. Which was fine for the size of projects I was doing. However my projects have been getting bigger in size and complexity and now I want to start re-using code, and making my head a simpler place. The main problem I have is generally along the lines of Player needs to know about the Map and so does the Enemy, this has usually descended into setting lots of pointers and having lots of dependencies, and this becomes a mess quickly. I have thought along the lines of a message style system. but I cant really see how this reduces the dependencies, as I would still be sending the pointers everywhere. Thanks. PS: I guess this has been discussed before, but I don't know what its called just the need I have.

    Read the article

  • Multiple column foreign key contraints

    - by eugene4968
    I want to setup table constraints for the following scenario and I’m not sure how to do it or if it’s even possible in SQL Server 2005. I have three tables A,B,C. C is a child of B. B will have a optional foreign key(may be null) referencing A. For performance reasons I also want table C to have the same foreign key reference to table A. The constraint on table C should be that C must reference its parent (B) and also have the same foreign key reference to A as its parent. Anyone have any thoughts on how to do this?

    Read the article

  • How can I achieve this kind of relationship (inheritance, composition, something else)?

    - by Tim
    I would like to set up a foundation of classes for an application, two of which are person and student. A person may or may not be a student and a student is always a person. The fact that a student “is a” person led me to try inheritance, but I can't see how to make it work in the case where I have a DAO that returns an instance of person and I then want to determine if that person is a student and call student related methods for it. class Person { private $_firstName; public function isStudent() { // figure out if this person is a student return true; // (or false) } } class Student extends Person { private $_gpa; public function getGpa() { // do something to retrieve this student's gpa return 4.0; // (or whatever it is) } } class SomeDaoThatReturnsPersonInstances { public function find() { return new Person(); } } $myPerson = SomeDaoThatReturnsPersonInstances::find(); if($myPerson->isStudent()) { echo 'My person\'s GPA is: ', $myPerson->getGpa(); } This obviously doesn't work, but what is the best way to achieve this effect? Composition doesn't sond right in my mind because a person does not “have a” student. I'm not looking for a solution necessarily but maybe just a term or phrase to search for. Since I'm not really sure what to call what I'm trying to do, I haven't had much luck. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest language? [closed]

    - by Murtez
    I'm looking to make a site with a database, user accounts, and possibly more later on (subscriptions, bidding, payment, any any possible # of upgrades). Website speed is VERY important, what is the fastest secure language / method to make it in?

    Read the article

  • Session vs singleton pattern

    - by chobo
    Hi, I have a web application where I would like to pull user settings from a database and store them for Global access. Would it make more sense to store the data in a Singleton, or a Session object? What's the difference between the two? Is it better to store the data as an object reference or break it up into value type objects (ints and strings)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • C++ traits question

    - by duli
    I have a templated class template <typename Data> class C { ..... } In most situations, I depend on the compiler to let me substitute types for Data. I call methods foo(), goo() on objects of type Data, so what I substitute needs to provide that. I now need to substitute int and string for my Data type. I do not want to specialize because the class is already too big and would require specializing each method (with only small code change). My options (please tell me if there are more) 1) I can provide wrapper classes around int and string which implement the methods foo(), goo() etc 2) provide a traits class traits that calls foo() or goo() on objects of classes that provide foo(),goo() (these are my present substitutable classes) and specialize these classes for int and string. Questions 1) what are the relative merits of 1 vs 2? 2) My traits classes will have static methods. Can a traits class have non-static methods as well? I see most traits classes define constants in the STL. 3) Do I make the traits classes global or should I pass them in as a template parameter for class C?

    Read the article

  • What are provenly scalable data persistence solutions for consumer profiles?

    - by Hubbard
    Consumer profiles with analytical scores [ConsumerID, 1..n demographical variables, 1...n analytical scores e.g. "likely to churn" "likely to buy an item 100$ in worth" etc.] have to be possible to query fast if they are to be used in customizing web-sites, consumer communications etc. Well. If you have: Large number of consumers Large profiles with a huge set of variables (as profiles describing human behaviour are likely to be..) ...you are in trouble. If you really have a physical relational database to which you target a query and then a physical disk starts to rotate someplace to give you an individual profile or a set of profiles, the profile user (a web site customizing a page, a recommendation engine making a recommendation..) has died of boredom before getting any observable results. There is the possibility of having the profiles in memory, which would of course increase the performance hugely. What are the most proven solutions for a fast-response, scalable consumer profile storage? Is there a shootout of these someplace?

    Read the article

  • Python: How should I make instance variables available?

    - by swisstony
    Suppose I have: class myclass: def __init__(self): self.foo = "bar" where the value of foo needs to be available to users of myclass. Is it OK to just read the value of foo directly from an instance of myclass? Should I add a get_foo method to myclass or perhaps add a foo property? What's the best practice here?

    Read the article

  • How to handle product ratings in a database

    - by Mel
    Hello, I would like to know what is the best approach to storing product ratings in a database. I have in mind the following two (simplified, and assuming a MySQL db) scenarios: Scenario 1: Create two columns in the product table to store number of votes and the sum of all votes. Use columns to get an average on the product display page: products(productedID, productName, voteCount, voteSum) Pros: I will only need to access one table, and thus execute one query to display product data and ratings. Cons: Write operations will be executed in a table whose original purpose is only to furnish product data. Scenario 2: Create an additional table to store ratings. products(productID, productName) ratings(productID, voteCount, voteSum) Pros: Isolate ratings into a separate table, leaving the products table to furnish data on available products. Cons: I will have to execute two separate queries on product page requests (one for data and another for ratings). In terms of performance, which of the following two approaches is best: Allow users to execute an occasional write query to a table that will handle hundreds of read requests? Execute two queries at every product page, but isolate the write query into a separate table. I'm a novice to database development, and often find myself struggling with simple questions such as these. Many thanks,

    Read the article

  • Global State and Singletons Dependency injection

    - by Manu
    this is a problem i face lot of times when i am designing a new app i'll use a sample problem to explain this think i am writing simple game.so i want to hold a list of players. i have few options.. 1.use a static field in some class private static ArrayList<Player> players = new ArrayList<Integer>(); public Player getPlayer(int i){ return players.get(i); } but this a global state 2.or i can use a singleton class PlayerList{ private PlayerList instance; private PlayerList(){...} public PlayerList getInstance() { if(instance==null){ ... } return instance; } } but this is bad because it's a singleton 3.Dependency injection class Game { private PlayerList playerList; public Game(PlayerList list) { this.list = list; } public PlayerList getPlayerList() { return playerList; } } this seems good but it's not, if any object outside Game need to look at PlayerList (which is the usual case) i have to use one of the above methods to make the Game class available globally. so I just add another layer to the problem. didn't actually solve anything. what is the optimum solution ? (currently i use Singleton approach)

    Read the article

  • does anyone see any issues with this thread pattern?

    - by prmatta
    Here is a simple thread pattern that I use when writing a class that needs just one thread, and needs to a specific task. The usual requirements for such a class are that it should be startable, stopable and restartable. Does anyone see any issues with this pattern that I use? public class MyThread implements Runnable { private boolean _exit = false; private Thread _thread = null; public void start () { if (_thread == null) { _thread = new Thread(this, "MyThread"); _thread.start(); } } public void run () { while (_exit) { //do something } } public void stop () { _exit = true; if (_thread != null) { _thread.interrupt(); _thread = null; } } } I am looking for comments around if I am missing something, or if there is a better way to write this.

    Read the article

  • Conditional on WebClient

    - by CarryFlag
    Given: thin client (JS) model services client use services. services use model. Model consists of (for sample): Rect Circle ... Ellipse services: class CanvasProviger { public Canvas getCanvas() { return new Canvas(); } } model: class Canvas ... { private List < Figure > figures = new List < Figure >; ... } class Circle extends Figure { private int x, y, r; } class Rect extends Figure { private x, y, w, h; } client: ... var figure = MyJSRPCImpl.getCanvas().nextFigure(); if(figure == JSLocalModel.Rect) { drawRect(figure); } else if(figure == JSLocalModel.Circle) { drawCircle(figure); } ... How else can do way conditional? In rich client I used pattern Visitor. // my bad english, I know =(

    Read the article

  • How to model a relationship that NHibernate (or Hibernate) doesn’t easily support

    - by MylesRip
    I have a situation in which the ideal relationship, I believe, would involve Value Object Inheritance. This is unfortunately not supported in NHibernate so any solution I come up with will be less than perfect. Let’s say that: “Item” entities have a “Location” that can be in one of multiple different formats. These formats are completely different with no overlapping fields. We will deal with each Location in the format that is provided in the data with no attempt to convert from one format to another. Each Item has exactly one Location. “SpecialItem” is a subtype of Item, however, that is unique in that it has exactly two Locations. “Group” entities aggregate Items. “LocationGroup” is as subtype of Group. LocationGroup also has a single Location that can be in any of the formats as described above. Although I’m interested in Items by Group, I’m also interested in being able to find all items with the same Location, regardless of which group they are in. I apologize for the number of stipulations listed above, but I’m afraid that simplifying it any further wouldn’t really reflect the difficulties of the situation. Here is how the above could be diagrammed: Mapping Dilemma Diagram: (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/592ad48b1a.jpg) (I tried placing the diagram inline, but Stack Overflow won't allow that until I have accumulated more points. I understand the reasoning behind it, but it is a bit inconvenient for now.) Hmmm... Apparently I can't have multiple links either. :-( Analyzing the above, I make the following observations: I treat Locations polymorphically, referring to the supertype rather than the subtype. Logically, Locations should be “Value Objects” rather than entities since it is meaningless to differentiate between two Location objects that have all the same values. Thus equality between Locations should be based on field comparisons, not identifiers. Also, value objects should be immutable and shared references should not be allowed. Using NHibernate (or Hibernate) one would typically map value objects using the “component” keyword which would cause the fields of the class to be mapped directly into the database table that represents the containing class. Put another way, there would not be a separate “Locations” table in the database (and Locations would therefore have no identifiers). NHibernate (or Hibernate) do not currently support inheritance for value objects. My choices as I see them are: Ignore the fact that Locations should be value objects and map them as entities. This would take care of the inheritance mapping issues since NHibernate supports entity inheritance. The downside is that I then have to deal with aliasing issues. (Meaning that if multiple objects share a reference to the same Location, then changing values for one object’s Location would cause the location to change for other objects that share the reference the same Location record.) I want to avoid this if possible. Another downside is that entities are typically compared by their IDs. This would mean that two Location objects would be considered not equal even if the values of all their fields are the same. This would be invalid and unacceptable from the business perspective. Flatten Locations into a single class so that there are no longer inheritance relationships for Locations. This would allow Locations to be treated as value objects which could easily be handled by using “component” mapping in NHibernate. The downside in this case would be that the domain model becomes weaker, more fragile and less maintainable. Do some “creative” mapping in the hbm files in order to force Location fields to be mapped into the containing entities’ tables without using the “component” keyword. This approach is described by Colin Jack here. My situation is more complicated than the one he describes due to the fact that SpecialItem has a second Location and the fact that a different entity, LocatedGroup, also has Locations. I could probably get it to work, but the mappings would be non-intuitive and therefore hard to understand and maintain by other developers in the future. Also, I suspect that these tricky mappings would likely not be possible using Fluent NHibernate so I would use the advantages of using that tool, at least in that situation. Surely others out there have run into similar situations. I’m hoping someone who has “been there, done that” can share some wisdom. :-) So here’s the question… Which approach should be preferred in this situation? Why?

    Read the article

  • How important is it that models be consistent across project components?

    - by RonLugge
    I have a project with two components, a server-side component and a client-side component. For various reasons, the client-side device doesn't carry a fully copy of the database around. How important is it that my models have a 1:1 correlation between the two sides? And, to extend the question to my bigger concern, are there any time-bombs I'm going to run into down the line if they don't? I'm not talking about having different information on each side, but rather the way the information is encapsulated will vary. (Obviously, storage mechanisms will also vary) The server side will store each user, each review, each 'item' with seperate tables, and create links between them to gather data as necessary. The client side shouldn't have a complete user database, however, so rather than link against the user for gathering things like 'name', I'd store that on the review. In other words... --- Server Side --- Item: +id //Store stuff about the item User: +id +Name -Password Review: +id +itemId +rating +text +userId --- Device Side --- Item: +id +AverageRating Review: +id +rating +text +userId +name User: +id +Name //Stuff The basic idea is that certain 'critical' information gets moved one level 'up'. A user gets the list of 'items' relevant to their query, with certain review-orientation moved up (i. e. average rating). If they want more info, they query the detail view for the item, and the actual reviews get queried and added to the dataset (and displayed). If they query the actual review, the review gets queried and they pick up some additional user info along the way (maybe; I'm not sure if the user would have any use for any of the additional user information). My basic concern is that I don't wan't to glut the user's bandwidth or local storage with a huge variety of information that they just don't need, even if proper database normalizations suggests that information REALLY should be stored at a 'lower' level. I've phrased this as a fairly low-level conceptual issue because that's the level I'm trying to think / worry over, but if it matters I'm creating a PHP / MySQL server that provides data for a iOS / CoreData client.

    Read the article

  • Sql Server Development Server and Live

    - by Chris
    I have a database project that goes through iterations (only one so far) and I need to deploy a testing version to a live server. I'm not sure how to go about this. I can make all the changes in a copy and then remake those changes in the live version. That doesn't make sense. Is there a way to change a server name to an existing server? What's the best practice for this scenario?

    Read the article

  • Class structure for the proposed data and its containers ?

    - by Prix
    First I would like to wish a happy new year to everyone that may read this :) I am having trouble on how to make a container for some data that I am importing into my application, and I am not sure on how to explain this very well and my english is not really a that good so I hope you can bear with my mistake and help me with some guidance. Currently with a foreach I am importing the follow fields from the data I receive: guid, itemid, name, owner(optional, can be null), zoneid, titleid, subid, heading, x, y, z, typeA, typeB, typeC From the above fields I need to store a Waypoint list of all coords a given item has moved to BUT for each guid I have a new list of waypoints. And from the waypoint list the first entry is also my initial item start location which would be my item initial position (if you notice i have a separate list for it which I was not sure would be better or not) not all items have a waypoint list but all items have the first position. So the first idea I came with to store this data was a list with a class with 2 inner classes with their list: public List<ItemList> myList = new List<ItemList>(); public class ItemList { public int guid { get; set; } public int itemid { get; set; } public string name { get; set; } public int titleid { get; set; } public itemType status { get; set; } public class Waypoint { public float posX { get; set; } public float posY { get; set; } public float posZ { get; set; } } public List<Waypoint> waypoint = new List<Waypoint>(); public class Location { public int zone { get; set; } public int subid { get; set; } public int heading { get; set; } public float posX { get; set; } public float posY { get; set; } public float posZ { get; set; } } public List<Location> position = new List<Location>(); } So here is an example of how I would add a new waypoint to a GUID that exists in the list bool itemExists = myList.Exists(item => item.guid == guid && item.itemid == itemid); if (itemExists) { int lastDistance = 3; ItemList.Waypoint nextWaypoint; ItemList myItem = myList.Find(item => item.guid == guid && item.itemid == itemid); if (myItem.waypoint.Count == 0) { nextWaypoint = new ItemList.Waypoint(); nextWaypoint.posX = PosX; nextWaypoint.posY = PosY; nextWaypoint.posZ = PosZ; } else { ItemList.Waypoint lastWaypoint = myItem.waypoint[myItem.waypoint.Count - 1]; if (lastWaypoint != null) { lastDistance = getDistance(x, y, z, lastWaypoint.posX, lastWaypoint.posY, lastWaypoint.posZ); } if (lastDistance > 2) { nextWaypoint = new ItemList.Waypoint(); nextWaypoint.posX = PosX; nextWaypoint.posY = PosY; nextWaypoint.posZ = PosZ; } } myItem.waypoint.Add(nextWaypoint); } Then to register a new item I would take advantage of the itemExist above so I won't register the same GUID again: ItemList newItem = new ItemList(); newItem.guid = guid; newItem.itemid = itemid; newItem.name = name; newItem.status = status; newItem.titleid = titleid; // Item location ItemList.Location itemLocation = new ItemList.Location(); itemLocation.subid = 0; itemLocation.zone= zone; itemLocation.heading = convertHeading(Heading); itemLocation.posX = PosX; itemLocation.posY = PosY; itemLocation.posZ = PosZ; newItem.position.Add(itemLocation); myList.Add(newItem); Could you help me with advices on how my class structure and lists should look like ? Are there better ways to interate with the lists to get lastWaypoint of a GUID or verify wether an item exist or not ? What else would you advise me in general ? PS: If you have any questions or if there is something I missed to post please let me know and I will update it.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267  | Next Page >