Search Results

Search found 18534 results on 742 pages for 'global design'.

Page 268/742 | < Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >

  • C#, Generic Lists and Inheritance

    - by Andy
    I have a class called Foo that defines a list of objects of type A: class Foo { List<A> Items = new List<A>(); } I have a class called Bar that can save and load lists of objects of type B: class Bar { void Save(List<B> ComplexItems); List<B> Load(); } B is a child of A. Foo, Bar, A and B are in a library and the user can create children of any of the classes. What I would like to do is something like the following: Foo MyFoo = new Foo(); Bar MyBar = new Bar(); MyFoo.Items = MyBar.Load(); MyBar.Save(MyFoo.Items); Obviously this won't work. Is there a clever way to do this that avoids creating intermediate lists? thanks, Andy

    Read the article

  • A better name for INeedSomething... ?

    - by Daniel Severin
    I was trying pick a name for an interface through which I can pass something into an object like: If the object is INeedX then SetX(some x) method will be called; If the object is INeedY then SetY(some y) method will be called; and so on. (funny as hell, I know :) ) I try to find a different name for this kind of interfaces but I can't figure this out. Does anybody have an idea how to name the INeedSomething interface ?

    Read the article

  • Domain model for an online WYSYWG webpage generator / runtime

    - by CharlieBrown
    Hi all, I'm using C#, MVC, NHibernate and StructureMap as my IoC container, and need some ideas regarding my domain model. The application I'm working has two parts: an Authoring part and a Runtime part. The idea is to allow the user to create a webpage in Authoring (mostly a form actually) by choosing from a set of predefined controls. That webpage will be later used as a form in a call center environment (Runtime part), or may be used in an intranet portal, etc. Basically something similar to what a CMS would do. The difference is, of course, that the webpage/form the author generates will be used and fulfilled in runtime, and that authros should be able to freely create the webpage they want without limitations. I have a draft working model that allows a RunController to iterate over the ScriptPage (my class for the "generated webpage") Controls collection and uses partial views to render each of them. Works kind of fine. Basically I have a common ScriptControl class, and then I can create for example a TextInputControl or a DropDownControl by inheriting from that base class. I can also figure out the Authoring part of the app, although that will surely be fun in itself for sure. :) The biggest problem I have now is persistance. In order to be flexible, I want to be able to add more controls, and template controls (think of an Address composite control) in sepparate DLLs, so I think having a relational model that handles very possible control is not the way to go. My current thinking is using a kind of ObjectStore: binary-serializing the ScriptPage object that contains the List collection and deserializing at Runtime, but I'm not sure how good will it work with NHibernate and how good the performance will be. Serializing a small "page" with 10 controls results in 7964 bytes, for example. Any ideas out there? Thanks in advance, excuse the length. ;)

    Read the article

  • When/Why to use Cascading in SQL Server?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    When setting up foreign keys in SQL Server, under what circumstances should you have it cascade on delete or update, and what is the reasoning behind it? This probably applies to other databases as well. I'm looking most of all for concrete examples of each scenario, preferably from someone who has used them successfully.

    Read the article

  • what is main focus for a developer when coding?

    - by ajsie
    i read a lot of books about how to code right and usually the are talking about all these techniques from a point of view i can't understand. eg. lets consider the singleton pattern. i'm restricting so the class can only be instantiated once. but since it's only me creating the application, if i know that the class only should be instantiated once, then why would i create it a second time? i feel like missing the big picture. what is my main goal when coding an application? how should i think? thanks

    Read the article

  • Storing information for drop-down menus

    - by Mark
    Suppose you're building an HTML form and you want to have 2 or more drop-down menus, where after picking an option from the first, the 2nd menu is populated, and so forth. For example, choosing a country would bring up a list of provinces for that country, which would in turn list the cities. How would you store that sort of information in a database? Would you have a table Countries(id, name), Provinces(id, country_id, name), Cities(id, province_id, name) or would you have just one big denormalized table Entries(country, province, city)? (Why?)

    Read the article

  • C#. Where struct methods code kept in memory?

    - by maxima120
    It is somewhat known where .NET keeps value types in memory (mostly in stack but could be in heap in certain circumstances etc)... My question is - where is the code of the struct? If I have say 16 byte of data fields in the struct and a massive computation method in it - I am presuming that 16 byte will be copied in stack and the method code is stored somewhere else and is shared for all instances of the struct. Are these presumptions correct?

    Read the article

  • Should I use a huge composite primary key or just a unique id?

    - by Jack
    I have been trying to do web scraping of a particular site and storing the results in a database. My original assumptions about the data allowed a schema where I could use fairly reasonable composite primary keys (usually containing only 2 or 3 fields) but as time went on, I realized that my original assumptions about the data were wrong and my primary keys were not as unique as I thought they were, so I have slowly been expanding them to contain more and more fields. In fact, I have recently come to believe that their database has no constraints whatsoever. Just today, I have finally expanded my a primary key for one of my tables to contain every field in that table and I thought now would be a good time to ask: is it better to add an auto-incrementing column that is just a unique id or just leave a composite primary key on the entire table?

    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

  • Applet networking patterns

    - by Kristoffersen
    Hi SO. I have an applet that connects to a server, it receives some commands and based on that it haves to draw (or move) different things. Which patterns should I use? I assume that the network connection and applet should run in two different threads? Thanks, Kristoffer

    Read the article

  • Do null SQLite Data fields take up extra memory?

    - by CSharperWithJava
    I'm using the built in sqlite library on the Android platform. I'm considering adding several general purpose fields that users will be able to use for their own custom applications, but these fields will be blank most of the time. My question is, how much overhead will these blank fields add to my database? Do null fields even take up per record memory in sqlite? If so, how much? I don't quite understand the inner workings of a sqlite database.

    Read the article

  • Too many columns to index - use mySQL Partitions?

    - by Christopher Padfield
    We have an application with a table with 20+ columns that are all searchable. Building indexes for all these columns would make write queries very slow; and any really useful index would often have to be across multiple columns increasing the number of indexes needed. However, for 95% of these searches, only a small subset of those rows need to be searched upon, and quite a small number - say 50,000 rows. So, we have considered using mySQL Partition tables - having a column that is basically isActive which is what we divide the two partitions by. Most search queries would be run with isActive=1. Most queries would then be run against the small 50,000 row partition and be quick without other indexes. Only issue is the rows where isActive=1 is not fixed; i.e. it's not based on the date of the row or anything fixed like that; we will need to update isActive based on use of the data in that row. As I understand it that is no problem though; the data would just be moved from one partition to another during the UPDATE query. We do have a PK on id for the row though; and I am not sure if this is a problem; the manual seemed to suggest the partition had to be based on any primary keys. This would be a huge problem for us because the primary key ID has no basis on whether the row isActive.

    Read the article

  • Explaining your system to a client

    - by Sir Graystar
    I'm currently developing a small Database Management System for a local company. How would you go about explaining how the system you have designed to a client? If they are non-technical and have no understanding of programming, how would you go about showing what the system will do and how it will do it? I guess some sort of visual representation of the system but this seems very patronising to me.

    Read the article

  • Unique visitor counting in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Max
    I'd like to do visitor tracking similar to how stackoverflow does it.. By reading through numerous posts, I've figured out some details already: Count only 1 IP hit per 15 minutes (if anonymous) Count only 1 unique user-Login (per day?) Now that leaves the question of the real implementation.. Should I log the two factors live into a table (and increase count) | IP | timestamp | pageurl | Or do the counting AFTERWARDS (e.g. using IIS log files - which don't include the user, right? I know there're some similar posts outside, but NONE really has a great solution in my opinion yet..

    Read the article

  • Mocking a namespace in a partial class.

    - by Nix
    I am messing around with Entity Framework 3.5 SP1 and I am trying to find a cleaner way to do the below. Basically I have an EF model and I am adding some Eager Loaded entities and i want to put them in the partial class context Eager namespace. Currently I am using composition but I feel like there is an easier way to do what I want. namespace Entities{ public partial class TestObjectContext { EagerExtensions Eager { get;set;} public TestObjectContext(){ Eager = new EagerExtensions (this); } } public partial class EagerExtensions { TestObjectContext context; public EagerExtensions(TestObjectContext _context){ context = _context; } public IQueryable<TestEntity> TestEntity { get { return context.TestEntity .Include("TestEntityType") .Include("Test.Attached.AttachedType") .AsQueryable(); } } } } public class Tester{ public void ShowHowIWantIt(){ TestObjectContext context= new TestObjectContext(); var query = from a in context.Eager.TestEntity select a; } }

    Read the article

  • Instantiate a javascript module only one time.

    - by Cedric Dugas
    Hey guys, I follow a module pattern where I instantiate components, however, a lot of time a component will only be instantiate one time (example: a comment system for an article). For now I instantiate in the same JS file. but I was wondering if it is the wrong approach? It kind of make no sense to instantiate in the same file and always only once. But at the same time, if this file is in the page I want to have access to my module without instantiate from elsewhere, and IF I need another instance, I just create another from elsewhere... Here is the pattern I follow: ApplicationNamespace.Classname = function() { // constructor function privateFunctionInit() { // private } this.privilegedFunction = function() { // privileged privateFunction(); }; privateFunctionInit() }; ApplicationNamespace.Classname.prototype = { Method: function(){} } var class = new ApplicationNamespace.Classname(); What do you think, wrong approach, or is this good?

    Read the article

  • What to do when using Contract.Assert(true) and the method must return something?

    - by devoured elysium
    I have a bit of code with the following logic: //pseudo-code foreach (element in elementList) { if (element is whatever) return element; } } In theory, there is always one element that is whatever, so this method should pose no problems. In any case, I've put an assertion on the end of the method just to be sure: //pseudo-code foreach (element in elementList) { if (element is whatever) return element; } } Contract.Assert(true, "Invalid state!"); The problem is that as this method has to return something, and the compiler doesn't understand that the assertion will break the program execution. Before using Contracts, in these kind of situations, I used to throw an Exception, which solved the problem. How would you handle this with Contract.Assert()? Returning null or default(element_type) after the Contract.Assert() call knowing it will never be called and shutting up the compiler? Or is there any other more elegant way of doing this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • When to use basic types (Integer, String), and when to write a new class?

    - by belgarat
    Stackoverflow users: A lot of things can be represented in programs by using the basic types, or we can create a new class for it. Example: A social security number can be a number, string or its own object. (Other common examples: Phone numbers, names, zip codes, user id, order id and other id's.) My question is: When should the basic types be used, and when should we write ourselves a new class? I see that when you need to add behavior, you'll want to create a class (example, social security number parsing, validation, formatting, etc). But is this the only criteria? I have come across cases where many of these things are represented as java Integers and/or Strings. We loose the benefit of type-checking, and I have often seen bugs caused by parameters being mixed in calls to function(Intever, Integer, Integer, Integer). On the other hand, some programmers are opposed to over-designing by creating classes for "eveything". Obviously, the answer is "it depends". But, what do you think, and what do you normally do?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >