Search Results

Search found 14074 results on 563 pages for 'programmers'.

Page 264/563 | < Previous Page | 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271  | Next Page >

  • How do you formulate the Domain Model in Domain Driven Design properly (Bounded Contexts, Domains)?

    - by lko
    Say you have a few applications which deal with a few different Core Domains. The examples are made up and it's hard to put a real example with meaningful data together (concisely). In Domain Driven Design (DDD) when you start looking at Bounded Contexts and Domains/Sub Domains, it says that a Bounded Context is a "phase" in a lifecycle. An example of Context here would be within an ecommerce system. Although you could model this as a single system, it would also warrant splitting into separate Contexts. Each of these areas within the application have their own Ubiquitous Language, their own Model, and a way to talk to other Bounded Contexts to obtain the information they need. The Core, Sub, and Generic Domains are the area of expertise and can be numerous in complex applications. Say there is a long process dealing with an Entity for example a Book in a core domain. Now looking at the Bounded Contexts there can be a number of phases in the books life-cycle. Say outline, creation, correction, publish, sale phases. Now imagine a second core domain, perhaps a store domain. The publisher has its own branch of stores to sell books. The store can have a number of Bounded Contexts (life-cycle phases) for example a "Stock" or "Inventory" context. In the first domain there is probably a Book database table with basically just an ID to track the different book Entities in the different life-cycles. Now suppose you have 10+ supporting domains e.g. Users, Catalogs, Inventory, .. (hard to think of relevant examples). For example a DomainModel for the Book Outline phase, the Creation phase, Correction phase, Publish phase, Sale phase. Then for the Store core domain it probably has a number of life-cycle phases. public class BookId : Entity { public long Id { get; set; } } In the creation phase (Bounded Context) the book could be a simple class. public class Book : BookId { public string Title { get; set; } public List<string> Chapters { get; set; } //... } Whereas in the publish phase (Bounded Context) it would have all the text, release date etc. public class Book : BookId { public DateTime ReleaseDate { get; set; } //... } The immediate benefit I can see in separating by "life-cycle phase" is that it's a great way to separate business logic so there aren't mammoth all-encompassing Entities nor Domain Services. A problem I have is figuring out how to concretely define the rules to the physical layout of the Domain Model. A. Does the Domain Model get "modeled" so there are as many bounded contexts (separate projects etc.) as there are life-cycle phases across the core domains in a complex application? Edit: Answer to A. Yes, according to the answer by Alexey Zimarev there should be an entire "Domain" for each bounded context. B. Is the Domain Model typically arranged by Bounded Contexts (or Domains, or both)? Edit: Answer to B. Each Bounded Context should have its own complete "Domain" (Service/Entities/VO's/Repositories) C. Does it mean there can easily be 10's of "segregated" Domain Models and multiple projects can use it (the Entities/Value Objects)? Edit: Answer to C. There is a complete "Domain" for each Bounded Context and the Domain Model (Entity/VO layer/project) isn't "used" by the other Bounded Contexts directly, only via chosen paths (i.e. via Domain Events). The part that I am trying to figure out is how the Domain Model is actually implemented once you start to figure out your Bounded Contexts and Core/Sub Domains, particularly in complex applications. The goal is to establish the definitions which can help to separate Entities between the Bounded Contexts and Domains.

    Read the article

  • Is it dangerous to substitute unit tests for user testing? [closed]

    - by MushinNoShin
    Is it dangerous to substitute unit tests for user testing? A co-worker believes we can reduce the manual user testing we need to do by adding more unit tests. Is this dangerous? Unit tests seem to have a very different purpose than user testing. Aren't unit tests to inform design and allow breaking changes to be caught early? Isn't that fundamentally different than determining if an aspect of the system is correct as a whole of the system? Is this a case of substituting apples for oranges?

    Read the article

  • Is swing components heavy weight

    - by Pramod PP
    By Adding multiple Panels into a Panel or Dialog, Will it become heavy weight ?. Is there any way to avoid it to make complex views in single panel ? I'm making a java Swing application, there has many controls, I'm placing multiple panel in a single panel and place that panel as the center pane of a dialog. I suspect that the application takes more memory (I don't know it actually takes. Its only a suspect). can anyone please advise on this.

    Read the article

  • What is the best C++ interview question?

    - by David Thielen
    If you could ask a C++ programmer one question to measure their C++ skills, what would it be? The question I think is best is: Can you call "delete this;" inside a member function? (I put this as a link so you can think it through first, then go to The Best C++ Interview Question – Ever! to see the correct answer.) I don't ask this because I expect most people to know the answer. If they did it would not be that useful a question. I ask to see if they can work their way to the correct answer and how they do so.

    Read the article

  • Syntax of passing lambda

    - by Astara
    Right now, I'm working on refactoring a program that calls its parts by polling to a more event-driven structure. I've created sched and task classes with the sced to become a base class of the current main loop. The tasks will be created for each meter so they can be called off of that instead of polling. Each of the events main calls are a type of meter that gather info and display it. When the program is coming up, all enabled meters get 'constructed' by a main-sub. In that sub, I want to store off the "this" pointer associated with the meter, as well as the common name for the "action routine. void MeterMaker::Meter_n_Task (Meter * newmeter,) { push(newmeter); // handle non-timed draw events Task t = new Task(now() + 0.5L); t.period={0,1U}; t.work_meter = newmeter; t.work = [&newmeter](){newmeter.checkevent();};<<--attempt at lambda t.flags = T_Repeat; t.enable_task(); _xos->sched_insert(t); } A sample call to it: Meter_n_Task(new CPUMeter(_xos, "CPU ")); 've made the scheduler a base class of the main routine (that handles the loop), and I've tried serveral variations to get the task class to be a base of the meter class, but keep running into roadblocks. It's alot like "whack-a-mole" -- pound in something to fix something one place, and then a new probl pops out elsewhere. Part of the problem, is that the sched.h file that is trying to hold the Task Q, includes the Task header file. The task file Wants to refer to the most "base", Meter class. The meter class pulls in the main class of the parent as it passes a copy of the parent to the children so they can access the draw routines in the parent. Two references in the task file are for the 'this' pointer of the meter and the meter's update sub (to be called via this). void *this_data= NULL; void (*this_func)() = NULL; Note -- I didn't really want to store these in the class, as I wanted to use a lamdba in that meter&task routine above to store a routine+context to be used to call the meter's action routine. Couldn't figure out the syntax. But am running into other syntax problems trying to store the pointers...such as g++: COMPILE lsched.cc In file included from meter.h:13:0, from ltask.h:17, from lsched.h:13, from lsched.cc:13: xosview.h:30:47: error: expected class-name before ‘{’ token class XOSView : public XWin, public Scheduler { Like above where it asks for a class, where the classname "Scheduler" is. !?!? Huh? That IS a class name. I keep going in circles with things that don't make sense... Ideally I'd get the lamba to work right in the Meter_n_Task routine at the top. I wanted to only store 1 pointer in the 'Task' class that was a pointer to my lambda that would have already captured the "this" value ... but couldn't get that syntax to work at all when I tried to start it into a var in the 'Task' class. This project, FWIW, is my teething project on the new C++... (of course it's simple!.. ;-))... I've made quite a bit of progress in other areas in the code, but this lambda syntax has me stumped...its at times like thse that I appreciate the ease of this type of operation in perl. Sigh. Not sure the best way to ask for help here, as this isn't a simple question. But thought I'd try!... ;-) Too bad I can't attach files to this Q.

    Read the article

  • How does one unit test an algorithm

    - by Asa Baylus
    I was recently working on a JS slideshow which rotates images using a weighted average algorithm. Thankfully, timgilbert has written a weighted list script which implements the exact algorithm I needed. However in his documentation he's noted under todos: "unit tests!". I'd like to know is how one goes about unit testing an algorithm. In the case of a weighted average how would you create a proof that the averages are accurate when there is the element of randomness? Code samples of similar would be very helpful to my understanding.

    Read the article

  • 0.00006103515625 GB of RAM. Is .NET MicroFramework part of Windows CE?

    - by Rocket Surgeon
    The .NET MicroFramework claims to work on 64K RAM and has list of compatible targets vendors. At the same time, same vendors who ship hardware and create Board Support Packages (vendors like Adeneo) keep releasing something named Windows 7 CE BSP for the same hardware targets. Obviously the OS as heavy as WinCE needs more than 64K RAM. So, somehow .NET MicroFramework is relevant to WinCE, but how ? Is it part of bigger OS or is it base of it, or are both mutually exclusive ? Background: 0.00006103515625 GByte of RAM is same as 64Kbyte of RAM. I am looking for possiblity to use Microsoft development tools for small target like BeagleBone. http://www.adeneo-embedded.com/About-Us/News/Release-of-TI-BeagleBone Nice. Now .. where is a MicroFramework for the same beaglebone ? Is it inside the released pile ?

    Read the article

  • Is conditional return type ever a good idea?

    - by qegal
    So I have a method that's something like this: -(BOOL)isSingleValueRecord And another method like this: -(Type)typeOfSingleValueRecord And it occurred to me that I could combine them into something like this: -(id)isSingleValueRecord And have the implementation be something like this: -(id)isSingleValueRecord { //If it is single value if(self.recordValue = 0) { //Do some stuff to determine type, then return it return typeOfSingleValueRecord; } //If its not single value else { //Return "NO" return [NSNumber numberWithBool:NO]; } } So combining the two methods makes it more efficient but makes the readability go down. In my gut, I feel like I should go with the two-method version, but is that really right? Is there any case that I should go with the combined version?

    Read the article

  • How to diagram custom programming languages, non textual?

    - by Adam
    I've used and created domain-specific languages before, plenty of times (e.g. using yacc/lex). Normally we'd start with grammar written in BNF, and a bunch of keywords. This is easy to do, easy to share. Recently, I've started working with diagrammatic programming languages - closest parallel is circuit-diagrams in electronics, where it's very difficult to express ideas in text, but very easy to express them in wiring-diagrams. This is a new and novel problem for me: how to efficiently express these mini-languages, and share concepts in them with colleagues? (i.e. how to whiteboard-program within them. Actual programming is easy - you have physical components to hand) Are there tools for this? Or good/best practices (e.g. equivalent of "always use BNF as starting point for your new DSL, and use tools like yacc to generate the parser, compiler, etc"). My googlefu is proving weak - all I get is false positives for wiring diagrams, and UML editors (since these are custom languages, UML doesn't seem to help)

    Read the article

  • Does heavy JavaScript use adversely impact Googleability?

    - by A T
    I've been developing the client-side for my web-app in JavaScript. The JavaScript can communicate with my server over REST (HTTP)[JSON, XML, CSV] or RPC (XML, JSON). I'm writing writing this decoupled client in order to use the same code for both my main website and my PhoneGap mobile apps. However recently I've been worrying that writing the website with almost no static content would prevent search-engines (like Google) from indexing my web-page. I was taught about this restriction about 4 years ago, which is why I'm asking here, to see if this restriction is still in-place. Does heavy JavaScript use adversely impact Googleability?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Where should you put constants and why?

    - by Tim Meyer
    In our mostly large applications, we usually have a only few locations for constants: One class for GUI and internal contstants (Tab Page titles, Group Box titles, calculation factors, enumerations) One class for database tables and columns (this part is generated code) plus readable names for them (manually assigned) One class for application messages (logging, message boxes etc) The constants are usually separated into different structs in those classes. In our C++ applications, the constants are only defined in the .h file and the values are assigned in the .cpp file. One of the advantages is that all strings etc are in one central place and everybody knows where to find them when something must be changed. This is especially something project managers seem to like as people come and go and this way everybody can change such trivial things without having to dig into the application's structure. Also, you can easily change the title of similar Group Boxes / Tab Pages etc at once. Another aspect is that you can just print that class and give it to a non-programmer who can check if the captions are intuitive, and if messages to the user are too detailed or too confusing etc. However, I see certain disadvantages: Every single class is tightly coupled to the constants classes Adding/Removing/Renaming/Moving a constant requires recompilation of at least 90% of the application (Note: Changing the value doesn't, at least for C++). In one of our C++ projects with 1500 classes, this means around 7 minutes of compilation time (using precompiled headers; without them it's around 50 minutes) plus around 10 minutes of linking against certain static libraries. Building a speed optimized release through the Visual Studio Compiler takes up to 3 hours. I don't know if the huge amount of class relations is the source but it might as well be. You get driven into temporarily hard-coding strings straight into code because you want to test something very quickly and don't want to wait 15 minutes just for that test (and probably every subsequent one). Everybody knows what happens to the "I will fix that later"-thoughts. Reusing a class in another project isn't always that easy (mainly due to other tight couplings, but the constants handling doesn't make it easier.) Where would you store constants like that? Also what arguments would you bring in order to convince your project manager that there are better concepts which also comply with the advantages listed above? Feel free to give a C++-specific or independent answer. PS: I know this question is kind of subjective but I honestly don't know of any better place than this site for this kind of question. Update on this project I have news on the compile time thing: Following Caleb's and gbjbaanb's posts, I split my constants file into several other files when I had time. I also eventually split my project into several libraries which was now possible much easier. Compiling this in release mode showed that the auto-generated file which contains the database definitions (table, column names and more - more than 8000 symbols) and builds up certain hashes caused the huge compile times in release mode. Deactivating MSVC's optimizer for the library which contains the DB constants now allowed us to reduce the total compile time of your Project (several applications) in release mode from up to 8 hours to less than one hour! We have yet to find out why MSVC has such a hard time optimizing these files, but for now this change relieves a lot of pressure as we no longer have to rely on nightly builds only. That fact - and other benefits, such as less tight coupling, better reuseability etc - also showed that spending time splitting up the "constants" wasn't such a bad idea after all ;-)

    Read the article

  • How do you KISS?

    - by Conor
    The KISS principle is a highly quoted design mantra. The aim of this principle is to stamp out unnecessary complexity on a project. This is a good thing, saving time, energy and money. It can lead to a relatively stress free implementation and a simple, elegant, maintainable end product. A lot of discussion on KISS provides mechanisms to simplify requirements, design and implementation. Things that spring to mind include: avoid scope creep; simple obvious design and code; minimal run-time dependencies; refactoring to maintain simplicity; etc. However there are a lot of implicit things that we do to KISS. Examples: small team sizes; minimal management layers; tidy desk; mastery of a single IDE; clear concise error messages; scripts to automate/encapsulate tasks; etc Why KISS practices do you apply? How have they been of benefit? I'm especially interested in non-obvious practices.

    Read the article

  • Web application deployment and Dependencies

    - by Reith
    I have a free software web application that using other free software scripts for appearance. I have trouble to decide whether should I copy source code of used scripts to my project main repository or list them as dependencies and ask user to install them himself? Since some of scripts solving browser compatibilities issues and I'm not a good web designer (i hate to check my web site on IE to see compatibility) using the newest version of scripts is preferable and second solution works here. But it has problem with scripts aren't backward-compatible with versions I've used them for development. Maybe another method is well-known for this issues that I don't know them.

    Read the article

  • Software design methods for Java or any other programming language

    - by IkerB
    I'm junior programmer and I would like to know how professionals write their code or which steps they follow when they are creating new software. I mean, which steps they follow, which programming methodology, software architecture design application software, etc. I would like to find a tutorial where they explain from the beginning which steps I have to follow from The Idea I have in my mind to the final version of the application in any language. Or perhaps how is your programming steps or rules that you used to follow. Because everytime I want to create the an application I spend few time on the design and a lot of time coding (I know, that's not good).

    Read the article

  • "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD." Why?

    - by Florents
    William Cook in a tweet wrote that: "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD. Fortunately many people now realize this ..." I would like to know the reasoning behind that claim (apparently, I'm not referring to his personal opinion). I've noticed that many people out there don't like UML that much. Also it is worth mentioning that he is in academia, where UML is preety much the holy grail of effective design and modelling.

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous update design/interaction patterns

    - by Andy Waite
    These days many apps support asynchronous updates. For example, if you're looking at a list of widgets and you delete one of them then rather than wait for the roundtrip to the server, the app can hide the one you deleted, giving immediate feedback. The actual deletion on the server will happen in the background. This can be seen in web apps, desktop apps, iOS apps, etc. But what about when the background operation fails. How should you feed back to the user? Should you restore the UI to the pre-deletion state? What about when multiple background operations fail together? Does this behaviour/pattern have a name? Perhaps something based on the Command pattern?

    Read the article

  • Layout of mathematical views (iOS)

    - by William Jockusch
    I am trying to figure out the right way to encapsulate graphical information about mathematical objects. It is not simple. For example, a matrix can include square brackets around its entries, or not. Some things carry down to sub-objects -- for example, a matrix might track the font size to be used by its entries. Similarly, the font color and the background color would carry down to the entries. Other things do not carry down. For example, the entries of the matrix do not need to know whether or not the matrix has those square brackets. Based on all of the above, I need to calculate sizes for everything, then frames. All of this can depend on the properties stored above. The size of a matrix depends on the sizes of its entries, and also on whether or not it has those brackets. What I am having a hard time with is not the individual ways to calculate sensible frames for this or that. It is the overall organizational structure of the whole thing. How can I keep track of it all without going crazy. One particular obstacle is worth mentioning -- for reasons I don't want to go into here, I need to calculate the sizes and frames for everything before I instantiate any actual views. So, for example, if I have a Matrix object, I need to calculate its size before I make a MatrixView. If I have an equation, I need to calculate the size of the view for the equation before I create the actual view. So I clearly need separate objects for those calculations. But I can't figure out a sensible class structure for those objects. If I put them all into a single class, I get some advantages because copying then becomes easy. But I also end up with a bloated class that contains info that is irrelevant for some objects -- such as whether or not to include those brackets around the matrix. But if I use a lot of different classes, copying properties becomes a real pain. If it matters, this is all in Objective C, for an iOS environment. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to improve testing your own code

    - by Peter
    Today I checked in a change on some code which turned out to be not working at all due to something rather stupid yet very crucial. I feel really bad about it and I hope I finally learn something from it. The stupid thing is, I've done these things before and I always tell myself, next time I won't be so stupid... Then it happens again and I feel even worse about it. I know you should keep your chin up and learn from your mistakes but here's the thing: I try to improve myself, I just don't see how I can prevent these things from happening. So, now I'm asking you guys: Do you have certain groundrules when testing your code?

    Read the article

  • What is the name of this tree?

    - by Daniel
    It has a single root and each node has 0..N ordered sub-nodes . The keys represent a distinct set of paths. Two trees can only be merged if they share a common root. It needs to support, at minimum: insert, merge, enumerate paths. For this tree: The +-------+----------------+ | | | cat cow dog + +--------+ + | | | | drinks jumps moos barks + | milk the paths would be: The cat drinks milk The cow jumps The cow moos The dog barks It's a bit like a trie. What is it?

    Read the article

  • Making LISPs manageable

    - by Andrea
    I am trying to learn Clojure, which seems a good candidate for a successful LISP. I have no problem with the concepts, but now I would like to start actually doing something. Here it comes my problem. As I mainly do web stuff, I have been looking into existing frameworks, database libraries, templating libraries and so on. Often these libraries are heavily based on macros. Now, I like very much the possibility of writing macros to get a simpler syntax than it would be possible otherwise. But it definitely adds another layer of complexity. Let me take an example of a migration in Lobos from a blog post: (defmigration add-posts-table (up [] (create clogdb (table :posts (integer :id :primary-key ) (varchar :title 250) (text :content ) (boolean :status (default false)) (timestamp :created (default (now))) (timestamp :published ) (integer :author [:refer :authors :id] :not-null)))) (down [] (drop (table :posts )))) It is very readable indeed. But it is hard to recognize what the structure is. What does the function timestamp return? Or is it a macro? Having all this freedom of writing my own syntax means that I have to learn other people's syntax for every library I want to use. How can I learn to use these components effectively? Am I supposed to learn each small DSL as a black box?

    Read the article

  • Is is common to use the command pattern for property get/sets?

    - by k rey
    Suppose I have a controller class with a bunch of properties. Each time a property is changed, I would like to update the model. Now also suppose that I use the command pattern to perform model updates. Is it common to use command classes within property get and sets of the controller class or is there a better way? Here is an example of what I am currently using: class MyController { private int _myInt; public int MyInt { get { return _myInt; } set { MyCommand cmd = new MyCommand(); cmd.Argument = _myInt; cmd.Execute(); // Command object updates the model } } }

    Read the article

  • Understanding Data Binding for Windows Phone 7

    - by nikhil
    I want to develop a simple app for the Windows Phone 7 platform. It's basically a vocabulary based game that involves the user moving word tiles from one area to another to score points. I want to know what is the best way of tying the UI to the game's backend? I saw the Windows Phone 7 jumpstart videos, there they touch up on Data Binding but don't really go into any depth. I'm a newbie and don't have any experience with designing the architecture for a phone app, It'd be great if someone could explain what steps I should be taking or guide me to a resource from where I could learn more.

    Read the article

  • Writing drivers for a printer?

    - by user828584
    My goal is to be able to fax 20 page pdf documents for free. I've looked online, and there are some free fax services, but all of them have their limits. I do have an old fax machine, but the documents that need to be faxed are on the computer, and to print them would be far from free. Unfortunately, the only way to send a fax with the machine is by scanning it. What's strange is that it can scan to the computer and print from it, but it won't fax from it... :(. Is it possible to write something (preferably C#, but it's going to take some learning anyway) that will allow me to send a fax from the computer? I have very little software experience, and none in anything like this, so I have no idea where to start. If it is possible, where can I find all the information needed to write the program?

    Read the article

  • SQL: empty string vs NULL value

    - by Jacek Prucia
    I know this subject is a bit controversial and there are a lot of various articles/opinions floating around the internet. Unfortunatelly, most of them assume the person doesn't know what the difference between NULL and empty string is. So they tell stories about surprising results with joins/aggregates and generally do a bit more advanced SQL lessons. By doing this, they absolutely miss the whole point and are therefore useless for me. So hopefully this question and all answers will move subject a bit forward. Let's suppose I have a table with personal information (name, birth, etc) where one of the columns is an email address with varchar type. We assume that for some reason some people might not want to provide an email address. When inserting such data (without email) into the table, there are two available choices: set cell to NULL or set it to empty string (''). Let's assume that I'm aware of all the technical implications of choosing one solution over another and I can create correct SQL queries for either scenario. The problem is even when both values differ on the technical level, they are exactly the same on logical level. After looking at NULL and '' I came to a single conclusion: I don't know email address of the guy. Also no matter how hard i tried, I was not able to sent an e-mail using either NULL or empty string, so apparently most SMTP servers out there agree with my logic. So i tend to use NULL where i don't know the value and consider empty string a bad thing. After some intense discussions with colleagues i came with two questions: am I right in assuming that using empty string for an unknown value is causing a database to "lie" about the facts? To be more precise: using SQL's idea of what is value and what is not, I might come to conclusion: we have e-mail address, just by finding out it is not null. But then later on, when trying to send e-mail I'll come to contradictory conclusion: no, we don't have e-mail address, that @!#$ Database must have been lying! Is there any logical scenario in which an empty string '' could be such a good carrier of important information (besides value and no value), which would be troublesome/inefficient to store by any other way (like additional column). I've seen many posts claiming that sometimes it's good to use empty string along with real values and NULLs, but so far haven't seen a scenario that would be logical (in terms of SQL/DB design). P.S. Some people will be tempted to answer, that it is just a matter of personal taste. I don't agree. To me it is a design decision with important consequences. So i'd like to see answers where opion about this is backed by some logical and/or technical reasons.

    Read the article

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