Search Results

Search found 41035 results on 1642 pages for 'object oriented design'.

Page 264/1642 | < Previous Page | 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271  | Next Page >

  • When is a good time to start thinking about scaling?

    - by Slokun
    I've been designing a site over the past couple days, and been doing some research into different aspects of scaling a site horizontally. If things go as planned, in a few months (years?) I know I'd need to worry about scaling the site up and out, since the resources it would end up consuming would be huge. So, this got me to thinking, when is the best time to start thinking about, and designing for, scalability? If you start too early on, you could easily over complicate your design, and make it impossible to actually build. You could also get too caught up in the details, the architecture, whatever, and wind up getting nothing done. Also, if you do get it working, but the site never takes off, you may have wasted a good chunk of extra effort. On the other hand, you could be saving yourself a ton of effort down the road. Designing it from the ground up to be big would make it much easier later on to let it grow big, with very little rewriting going on. I know for what I'm working on, I've decided to make at least a few choices now on the side of scaling, but I'm not going to do a complete change of thinking to get it to scale completely. Notably, I've redesigned my database from a conventional relational design to one similar to what was suggested on the Reddit site linked below, and I'm going to give memcache a try. So, the basic question, when is a good time to start thinking or worrying about scaling, and what are some good designs, tips, etc. for when doing so? A couple of things I've been reading, for those who are interested: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/06/scaling-up-vs-scaling-out-hidden-costs.html http://highscalability.com/blog/2010/5/17/7-lessons-learned-while-building-reddit-to-270-million-page.html http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html

    Read the article

  • OO vs Simplicity when it comes to user interaction

    - by Oetzi
    Firstly, sorry if this question is rather vague but it's something I'd really like an answer to. As a project over summer while I have some downtime from Uni I am going to build a monopoly game. This question is more about the general idea of the problem however, rather than the specific task I'm trying to carry out. I decided to build this with a bottom up approach, creating just movement around a forty space board and then moving on to interaction with spaces. I realised that I was quite unsure of the best way of proceeding with this and I am torn between two design ideas: Giving every space its own object, all sub-classes of a Space object so the interaction can be defined by the space object itself. I could do this by implementing different land() methods for each type of space. Only giving the Properties and Utilities (as each property has unique features) objects and creating methods for dealing with the buying/renting etc in the main class of the program (or Board as I'm calling it). Spaces like go and super tax could be implemented by a small set of conditionals checking to see if player is on a special space. Option 1 is obviously the OO (and I feel the correct) way of doing things but I'd like to only have to handle user interaction from the programs main class. In other words, I don't want the space objects to be interacting with the player. Why? Errr. A lot of the coding I've done thus far has had this simplicity but I'm not sure if this is a pipe dream or not for larger projects. Should I really be handling user interaction in an entirely separate class? As you can see I am quite confused about this situation. Is there some way round this? And, does anyone have any advice on practical OO design that could help in general?

    Read the article

  • C++ interpreter conceptual problem

    - by Jan Wilkins
    I've built an interpreter in C++ for a language created by me. One main problem in the design was that I had two different types in the language: number and string. So I have to pass around a struct like: class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int intValue; string strValue; } Objects of this class are passed around million times a second during e.g.: a countdown loop in my language. Profiling pointed out: 85% of the performance is eaten by the allocation function of the string template. This is pretty clear to me: My interpreter has bad design and doesn't use pointers enough. Yet, I don't have an option: I can't use pointers in most cases as I just have to make copies. How to do something against this? Is a class like this a better idea? vector<string> strTable; vector<int> intTable; class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int locationInTable; } So the class only knows what type it represents and the position in the table This however again has disadvantages: I'd have to add temporary values to the string/int vector table and then remove them again, this would eat a lot of performance again. Help, how do interpreters of languages like Python or Ruby do that? They somehow need a struct that represents a value in the language like something that can either be int or string.

    Read the article

  • Question about decorator pattern and the abstract decorator class?

    - by es11
    This question was asked already here, but rather than answering the specific question, descriptions of how the decorator pattern works were given instead. I'd like to ask it again because the answer is not immediately evident to me just by reading how the decorator pattern works (I've read the wikipedia article and the section in the book Head First Design Patterns). Basically, I want to know why an abstract decorator class must be created which implements (or extends) some interface (or abstract class). Why can't all the new "decorated classes" simply implement (or extend) the base abstract object themselves (instead of extending the abstract decorator class)? To make this more concrete I'll use the example from the design patterns book dealing with coffee beverages: There is an abstract component class called Beverage Simple beverage types such as HouseBlend simply extend Beverage To decorate beverage, an abstract CondimentDecorator class is created which extends Beverage and has an instance of Beverage Say we want to add a "milk" condiment, a class Milk is created which extends CondimentDecorator I'd like to understand why we needed the CondimentDecorator class and why the class Milk couldn't have simply extended the Beverage class itself and been passed an instance of Beverage in its constructor. Hopefully this is clear...if not I'd simply like to know why is the abstract decorator class necessary for this pattern? Thanks. Edit: I tried to implement this, omitting the abstract decorator class, and it seems to still work. Is this abstract class present in all descriptions of this pattern simply because it provides a standard interface for all of the new decorated classes?

    Read the article

  • database structure

    - by jindalsyogesh
    I have a table named ActivityRecording. This table currently has 500,000 records. I need to add a lot of new inputs that relates to activityrecording table. The relation of activityrecording with these new input fields is 1 to 0,1. So, what's going to happen on screen is when user fills the ActivityRecording data, he will then be taken to a new page and this page will show a form based on the user's input (from a dropdown named service) in activityrecording. There will 6 different kinds of form (each form will have 7-8 inputs which includes textareas of size 5kb, textboxes and checkboxes). So, for one activityrecording user will fill one out of 6 forms. There are two ways I know (there could be more), I can design the data structure: Add all the inputs from all these 6 forms into the activityrecording table. So, columns belonging to 5 of these forms will be null in this table, only columns belonging to one of the forms will have values The other way would be add 6 new tables (one for each form) and add 6 foreign key columns to activityrecording table. So, out of 6 foreign keys, 5 will be null and one will actually point to a table Which approach is a better data structure design? Please take into consideration that number of rows in this table are 500,000 and are expected to grow at a faster rate now.

    Read the article

  • Best practice - logging events (general) and changes (database)

    - by b0x0rz
    need help with logging all activities on a site as well as database changes. requirements: * should be in database * should be easily searchable by initiator (user name / session id), event (activity type) and event parameters i can think of a database design but either it involves a lot of tables (one per event) so i can log each of the parameters of an event in a separate field OR it involves one table with generic fields (7 int numeric and 7 text types) and log everything in one table with event type field determining what parameter got written where (and hoping that i don't need more than 7 fields of a certain type, or 8 or 9 or whatever number i choose)... example of entries (the usual things): [username] login failed @datetime [username] login successful @datetime [username] changed password @datetime, estimated security of password [low/ok/high/perfect] @datetime [username] clicked result [result number] [result id] after searching for [search string] and got [number of results] @datetime [username] clicked result [result number] [result id] after searching for [search string] and got [number of results] @datetime [username] changed profile name from [old name] to [new name] @datetime [username] verified name with [credit card type] credit card @datetime datbase table [table name] purged of old entries @datetime via automated process etc... so anyone dealt with this before? any best practices / links you can share? i've seen it done with the generic solution mentioned above, but somehow that goes against what i learned from database design, but as you can see the sheer number of events that need to be trackable (each user will be able to see this info) is giving me headaches, BUT i do LOVE the one event per table solution more than the generic one. any thoughts? edit: also, is there maybe an authoritative list of such (likely) events somewhere? thnx stack overflow says: the question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed. my answer: probably is subjective, but it is directly related to my issue i have with designing a database / writing my code, so i'd welcome any help. also i tried narrowing down the ideas to 2 so hopefully one of these will prevail, unless there already is an established solution for these kinds of things.

    Read the article

  • best practice - loging events (general) and changes (database)

    - by b0x0rz
    need help with logging all activities on a site as well as database changes. requirements: * should be in database * should be easily searchable by initiator (user name / session id), event (activity type) and event parameters i can think of a database design but either it involves a lot of tables (one per event) so i can log each of the parameters of an event in a separate field OR it involves one table with generic fields (7 int numeric and 7 text types) and log everything in one table with event type field determining what parameter got written where (and hoping that i don't need more than 7 fields of a certain type, or 8 or 9 or whatever number i choose)... example of entries (the usual things): [username] login failed @datetime [username] login successful @datetime [username] changed password @datetime, estimated security of password [low/ok/high/perfect] @datetime [username] clicked result [result number] [result id] after searching for [search string] and got [number of results] @datetime [username] clicked result [result number] [result id] after searching for [search string] and got [number of results] @datetime [username] changed profile name from [old name] to [new name] @datetime [username] verified name with [credit card type] credit card @datetime datbase table [table name] purged of old entries @datetime etc... so anyone dealt with this before? any best practices / links you can share? i've seen it done with the generic solution mentioned above, but somehow that goes against what i learned from database design, but as you can see the sheer number of events that need to be trackable (each user will be able to see this info) is giving me headaches, BUT i do LOVE the one event per table solution more than the generic one. any thoughts? edit: also, is there maybe an authoritative list of such (likely) events somewhere? thnx stack overflow says: the question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed. my answer: probably is subjective, but it is directly related to my issue i have with designing a database / writing my code, so i'd welcome any help. also i tried narrowing down the ideas to 2 so hopefully one of these will prevail, unless there already is an established solution for these kinds of things.

    Read the article

  • how to model a follower stream in appengine?

    - by molicule
    I am trying to design tables to buildout a follower relationship. Say I have a stream of 140char records that have user, hashtag and other text. Users follow other users, and can also follow hashtags. I am outlining the way I've designed this below, but there are two limitaions in my design. I was wondering if others had smarter ways to accomplish the same goal. The issues with this are The list of followers is copied in for each record If a new follower is added or one removed, 'all' the records have to be updated. The code class HashtagFollowers(db.Model): """ This table contains the followers for each hashtag """ hashtag = db.StringProperty() followers = db.StringListProperty() class UserFollowers(db.Model): """ This table contains the followers for each user """ username = db.StringProperty() followers = db.StringListProperty() class stream(db.Model): """ This table contains the data stream """ username = db.StringProperty() hashtag = db.StringProperty() text = db.TextProperty() def save(self): """ On each save all the followers for each hashtag and user are added into a another table with this record as the parent """ super(stream, self).save() hfs = HashtagFollowers.all().filter("hashtag =", self.hashtag).fetch(10) for hf in hfs: sh = streamHashtags(parent=self, followers=hf.followers) sh.save() ufs = UserFollowers.all().filter("username =", self.username).fetch(10) for uf in ufs: uh = streamUsers(parent=self, followers=uf.followers) uh.save() class streamHashtags(db.Model): """ The stream record is the parent of this record """ followers = db.StringListProperty() class streamUsers(db.Model): """ The stream record is the parent of this record """ followers = db.StringListProperty() Now, to get the stream of followed hastags indexes = db.GqlQuery("""SELECT __key__ from streamHashtags where followers = 'myusername'""") keys = [k,parent() for k in indexes[offset:numresults]] return db.get(keys) Is there a smarter way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Unity in C# for Platform Specific Implementations

    - by DxCK
    My program has heavy interaction with the operating system through Win32API functions. now i want to migrate my program to run under Mono under Linux (No wine), and this requires different implementations to the interaction with the operating system. I started designing a code that can have different implementation for difference platform and is extensible for new future platforms. public interface ISomeInterface { void SomePlatformSpecificOperation(); } [PlatformSpecific(PlatformID.Unix)] public class SomeImplementation : ISomeInterface { #region ISomeInterface Members public void SomePlatformSpecificOperation() { Console.WriteLine("From SomeImplementation"); } #endregion } public class PlatformSpecificAttribute : Attribute { private PlatformID _platform; public PlatformSpecificAttribute(PlatformID platform) { _platform = platform; } public PlatformID Platform { get { return _platform; } } } public static class PlatformSpecificUtils { public static IEnumerable<Type> GetImplementationTypes<T>() { foreach (Assembly assembly in AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()) { foreach (Type type in assembly.GetTypes()) { if (typeof(T).IsAssignableFrom(type) && type != typeof(T) && IsPlatformMatch(type)) { yield return type; } } } } private static bool IsPlatformMatch(Type type) { return GetPlatforms(type).Any(platform => platform == Environment.OSVersion.Platform); } private static IEnumerable<PlatformID> GetPlatforms(Type type) { return type.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(PlatformSpecificAttribute), false) .Select(obj => ((PlatformSpecificAttribute)obj).Platform); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Type first = PlatformSpecificUtils.GetImplementationTypes<ISomeInterface>().FirstOrDefault(); } } I see two problems with this design: I can't force the implementations of ISomeInterface to have a PlatformSpecificAttribute. Multiple implementations can be marked with the same PlatformID, and i dont know witch to use in the Main. Using the first one is ummm ugly. How to solve those problems? Can you suggest another design?

    Read the article

  • Help a CRUD programmer think about an "approval workflow"

    - by gerdemb
    I've been working on a web application that is basically a CRUD application (Create, Read, Update, Delete). Recently, I've started working on what I'm calling an "approval workflow". Basically, a request is generated for a material and then sent for approval to a manager. Depending on what is requested, different people need to approve the request or perhaps send it back to the requester for modification. The approvers need to keep track of what to approve what has been approved and the requesters need to see the status of their requests. As a "CRUD" developer, I'm having a hard-time wrapping my head around how to design this. What database tables should I have? How do I keep track of the state of the request? How should I notify users of actions that have happened to their requests? Is their a design pattern that could help me with this? Should I be drawing state-machines in my code? I think this is a generic programing question, but if it makes any difference I'm using Django with MySQL.

    Read the article

  • Is this WPF error handling a good idea ?

    - by Adiel
    I have a multi threaded wpf application with various HW interfaces. I want to react to several HW failures that can happen. For example : one of the interfaces is a temperature sensor and i want that from a certain temp. a meesage would appear and notify the user that it happened. i came up with the follwing design : /// <summary> /// This logic reacts to errors that occur during the system run. /// The reaction is set by the component that raised the error. /// </summary> public class ErrorHandlingLogic : Logic { } the above class would consume ErrorEventData that holds all the information about the error that occurred. public class ErrorEventData : IEventData { #region public enum public enum ErrorReaction { } #endregion public enum #region Private Data Memebers and props private ErrorReaction m_ErrorReaction; public ErrorReaction ErrorReactionValue { get { return m_ErrorReaction; } set { m_ErrorReaction = value; } } private string m_Msg; public string Msg { get { return m_Msg; } set { m_Msg = value; } } private string m_ComponentName; public string ComponentName { get { return m_ComponentName; } set { m_ComponentName = value; } } #endregion Private Data Memebers and props public ErrorEventData(ErrorReaction reaction, string msg, string componenetName) { m_ErrorReaction = reaction; m_Msg = msg; m_ComponentName = componenetName; } } the above ErrorHandlingLogic would decide what to do with the ErrorEventData sent to him from various components of the application. if needed it would be forwarded to the GUI to display a message to the user. so what do you think is it a good design ? thanks, Adiel.

    Read the article

  • How to justify using a scripting language as part of a project

    - by sylvanaar
    I have a specific project in which I want to use either a scripting language + C, or as an alternative a 100% Java solution. The program adapts a legacy system for use with other moderns systems. Basically, I have few choices as to what language I can use. I have C/C++, Java 1.4, and I have also compiled the Lua for this environment. The program does 'screen scraping' and has to deal with alot of strings. That part of the code is highly variable. Most of the developers at my company use C, so - my original design was to write some portions in C, and use Lua for the part that dealt with strings and changed freqently. I was told 'You have to justify your use of the scripting language.' So i reworked my design using 100% Java, and was told - Java wont have enough performance. You should do the whole thing in C. I'm not controlling lasers or doing image processing - just some screen scraping. I still have to provide justification for using anything but C - so what justification can I provide?

    Read the article

  • 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

  • How to choose an integer linear programming solver ?

    - by Cassie
    Hi all, I am newbie for integer linear programming. I plan to use a integer linear programming solver to solve my combinatorial optimization problem. I am more familiar with C++/object oriented programming on an IDE. Now I am using NetBeans with Cygwin to write my applications most of time. May I ask if there is an easy use ILP solver for me? Or it depends on the problem I want to solve ? I am trying to do some resources mapping optimization. Please let me know if any further information is required. Thank you very much, Cassie.

    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

< Previous Page | 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271  | Next Page >