Search Results

Search found 33758 results on 1351 pages for 'primary key design'.

Page 272/1351 | < Previous Page | 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279  | Next Page >

  • What is the right way to structure HTML and CSS?

    - by Meke
    So, I'm a script monkey at the core. Lately I seem to get stuffed into doing design too for some odd reason and, well, let's just say I should probably have studied better. Either way - What I ask is, what's the Right way to structure a website? This one has a header with links, then a block with tabs, right under another block which consists of two parts and under those a few others who I'm not at yet. However, the thing is, I need to make a block that consists of two parts that are in the same box but structured independently. I'll try to draw it up. Browser window..................-[]X ------------------------------------ |.................Header Links Here| ||Tab|Tab|Tab|_____________........| ||Tab content.............|Small...| ||........................|Section.| ||---Line signing new section------| ||........................|Another.| ||..Content Area..........|Small...| ||........................|Section.| ------------------------------------ My issue is in the division of small sections and tab/content areas. I tried using floats, making them as tables, aligning and whatnot. The putting float:left on both tables worked. Kinda. Until I tried to resize the window. So, how do you PROPERLY structure a site like this? three divs and tables? Something else? I'll clarify this again: It's the Code to use to create the look above that I'm trying to figure out the proper way to do, not the design As requested here's the current structure I have <div class="container"> <div class="topBlock"> //Header Links Here </div> <div class="inputBlock"> <ul id="tabs"> <li><a href="#strict">Strict</a></li> <li><a href="#flex">Flex</a></li> <li><a href="#multiStep">Multi-Step</a></li> </ul> <div id="strict" class="tabContent"> <table class="tableLeft"> <tr> <td>From</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockFrom" type="text" placeholder="FROM"/></td> </tr> <tr> <td>To</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockTo" type="text" placeholder="TO"/></td> </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight"> <tr> <td>Leave</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockLeave" type="text" name="leave" placeholder="LEAVE"/></td> <td><input id="inputBlockOne" type="radio" name="one"/></td> <td>One</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Return</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockReturn" type="text" name="return" placeholder="RETURN"/></td> <td><input id="inputBlockBut" type="radio" name="one" checked/></td> <td>Return</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockSubmit" type="submit" value="Search"/></td> </tr> </table> </div> <div id="flex" class="tabContent"> Test Two </div> <div id="multiStep" class="tabContent"> Test Three </div> </div> <div class="mapBlock tabContent"> <table class="tableLeft"> <tr><td> <div id="map" class="google_map"></div> </td></tr> </table> <table class="tableRight smallTable"> <tr> <td>Distance</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[-------------|------------]</td> //Slider to be </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight smallTable"> <tr> <td>Choice / Choice</td> </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight"> <tr> <td>Show:</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> <td>Price</td> <td><input type="radio"/></td> <td>Button!</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> </tr> </table> </div> </div> </body> Sorry if it's messed up in the whitespacing somewhere.. The CSS: body { font-size: 80%; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; background-color: #e2edff; } .container { margin: 5px 5px 5px 5px; padding: 5px 5px 5px 5px; } .pageBlock { /* To future me: This class is for One Full Screen ideas */ min-height: 300px; } .topBlock { text-align: right; color: #000000; } .topBlock a { text-decoration: none; color: #000000; } .tableLeft { width: 75%; float: left; border-right: dotted 2px black; } .tableRight { float: left; overflow: auto; } .smallTable { border-bottom: 1px dotted #c9c3ba; } .google_map { height: 270px; width: 100%; }

    Read the article

  • What makes MVVM uniquely suited to WPF?

    - by Reed Copsey
    The Model-View-ViewModel is very popular with WPF and Silverlight. I've been using this for my most recent projects, and am a very large fan. I understand that it's a refinement of MVP. However, I am wondering exactly what unique characteristics of WPF (and Silverlight) allow MVVM to work, and prevent (or at least make difficult) this pattern from working using other frameworks or technologies. I know MVVM has a strong dependency on the powerful data binding technology within WPF. This is the one feature which many articles and blogs seem to mention as being the key to WPF providing the means of the strong separation of View from ViewModel. However, data binding exists in many forms in other UI frameworks. There are even projects like Truss that provide WPF-style databinding to POCO in .NET. What features, other than data binding, make WPF and Silverlight uniquely suited to Model-View-ViewModel?

    Read the article

  • Best practices for managing limited client licenses/login

    - by MicSim
    I have a multi-user software solution (containing different applications, i.e. EXEs) that should allow only a limited number of concurrent users. It's designed to run in an intranet. I dont have a really good, satisfactory solution to the problem of counting the client licenses yet. The key requirements are: Multiple instances (starts) of the same application (= process) should count as only one client licence Starting different applications of the software solution should also count as only one (the same) client licence Application crash should not lead to orphaned used licences The above should work also for Terminal Server environments (all clients same IP, but different install folders) I'm looking for estabilished patterns, solutions, tips for managing used client licenses. Specific hints for the above sitaution are also welcome.

    Read the article

  • Multiple Tables or Multiple Schema

    - by Yan Cheng CHEOK
    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1152405/postgresql-is-better-using-multiple-databases-with-1-schema-each-or-1-database I am new in schema concept for PostgreSQL. For the above mentioned scenario, I was wondering Why don't we use a single database (with default schema named public) Why don't we have a single table, to store multiple users row? Other tables which hold users related information, with foreign key point to the user table. Can anyone provide me a real case scenario, which single database, multiple schema will be extremely useful, and can't solve by conventional single database, single schema.

    Read the article

  • Separating weakly linked database schemas

    - by jldugger
    I've been tasked with revisiting a database schema we designed and use internally for various ticketing and reporting systems. Currently there exists about 40 tables in one Oracle database schema supporting perhaps six webapps. However, there's one unifying relationship amongst them all: a rooms table describing the room. Room name, purpose and other data are thrown into a shared table for each app. My initial idea was to pull each of these applications into a separate database, and perform joins between a given database and the room database. But I've discovered this solution prevents foreign key constraints in SQL Server 2005. It seems silly to duplicate one table for each app and keep those multiple copies synchronized. Should I just leave everything in one large DB, or is there something else I can do separate the tables without losing FK constraints?

    Read the article

  • How to move an element in a sorted list and keep the CouchDb write "atomic"

    - by karlthorwald
    I have elements of a list in couchdb documents. Let's say these are 3 elements in 3 documents: { "id" : "783587346", "type" : "aList", "content" : "joey", "sort" : 100.0 } { "id" : "358734ff6", "type" : "aList", "content" : "jill", "sort" : 110.0 } { "id" : "abf587346", "type" : "aList", "content" : "jack", "sort" : 120.0 } A view retrieves all "aList" documents and displays them sorted by "sort". Now I want to move the elements, when I want to move "jack" to the middle, I could do this atomic in one write and change it's sort key to 105.0. The view now returns the documents in the new sort order. After a lot of sorting I could end up with sort keys like 50.99999 and 50.99998 after some years and in extreme situations run out of digits? What can you recommend, is there a better way to do this? I'd rather keep the elements in seperate documents. Different users might edit different elements in parallel (which also can get tricky). Maybe there is a much better way?

    Read the article

  • Active Record/ORM vs Normal Forms?

    - by Arsenal
    Hello, I've been playing around with Active Record a bit, and I have noticed that A.C./ORM always uses the following database model when creating a one-to-one relationship Person id | country_id | name | ... Country id | tld | name | ... No I wondered, isn't this a violiation of the third Normal Form? This clearly states "Every non-prime attribute is non-transitively dependent on every key of the table". Well this country_id isn't dependent of personid is it? So is this wrong or am I just not getting the point?

    Read the article

  • Shipping jar with default .properties file configurations

    - by Maxim Veksler
    Hello, I would like to include a default default.properties file in my .jar library. The idea is to allow the user to override my default is he so desires. I'm having trouble getting the classloader to play nicely with this setup, I've tried to look a at popular jars such as log4j, common-* and others and it seems that no one is implementing this idea. Am I going the wrong way? The second best thing is hard coding the values, and using the default if no .properties key has been found, but this sound oh so wrong. Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Passing an array for setting variable

    - by mathk
    Hi, I often see this idiom when reading php code: public function __construct($config) { if (array_key_exists('options', $config)) { ... } if (array_key_exists('driver_options', $config)) { ... } } Here I am concern with the way the parameter is used. If I were in lisp I would do: (defun ct (&key options driver_options) (do-something-with-option-and-driver_option)) But since I am in PHP I would rather have a constructor that take a list of parameter and let them be null if there a not require. So what do you guys think about having an array as parameter in other to do some initialization-or-whatever? In other to answer you have to take in account the point of view of the user of the function and the designer of the API. Also have you ever heard this has a code-smell? thanks

    Read the article

  • Revisions: algorithm and data structure

    - by SODA
    Hi, I need ideas for structuring and processing data with revisions. For example, I have a database of objects (e.g. cars). Each object has a number of properties, which can be arbitrary, so there's no a set schema to describe these objects. These objects are probably saved as key-value pairs. Now I need to change property of an object. I don't want to completely rewrite it - I want to be able to go back and see history of changes to these properties, that's why I want to add new property and keep the old one (so I guess a timestamp would do the job of telling which property is the latest). At the same time I want to be able to get info about any object in a snap, with only latest versions of each of the properties. Any ideas what would be the best approach? At least please point me in the right direction. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Best datastructure for frequently queried list of objects

    - by panzerschreck
    Hello, I have a list of objects say, List. The Entity class has an equals method,on few attributes ( business rule ) to differentiate one Entity object from the other. The task that we usually carry out on this list is to remove all the duplicates something like this : List<Entity> noDuplicates = new ArrayList<Entity>(); for(Entity entity: lstEntities) { int indexOf = noDuplicates.indexOf(entity); if(indexOf >= 0 ) { noDuplicates.get(indexOf).merge(entity); } else { noDuplicates.add(entity); } } Now, the problem that I have been observing is that this part of the code, is slowing down considerably as soon as the list has objects more than 10000.I understand arraylist is doing a o(N) search. Is there a faster alternative, using HashMap is not an option, because the entity's uniqueness is built upon 4 of its attributes together, it would be tedious to put in the key itself into the map ? will sorted set help in faster querying ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Does introducing foreign keys to MySQL reduce performance

    - by Tam
    I'm building Ruby on Rails 2.3.5 app. By default, Ruby on Rails doesn't provide foreign key contraints so I have to do it manually. I was wondering if introducing foreign keys reduces query performance on the database side enough to make it not worth doing. Performance in this case is my first priority as I can check for data consistency with code. What is your recommendation in general? do you recommend using foreign keys? and how do you suggest I should measure this?

    Read the article

  • Best way to model Customer <--> Address

    - by Jen
    Every Customer has a physical address and an optional mailing address. What is your preferred way to model this? Option 1. Customer has foreign key to Address Customer (id, phys_address_id, mail_address_id) Address (id, street, city, etc.) Option 2. Customer has one-to-many relationship to Address, which contains a field to describe the address type Customer (id) Address (id, customer_id, address_type, street, city, etc.) Option 3. Address information is de-normalized and stored in Customer Customer (id, phys_street, phys_city, etc. mail_street, mail_city, etc.) One of my overriding goals is to simplify the object-relational mappings, so I'm leaning towards the first approach. What are your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • One on One table relation - is it harmful to keep relation in both tables?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    I have 2 tables that their rows have one on one relation.. For you to understand the situation, suppose there is one table with user informations and there is another table that contains a very specific informations and each user can only link to one these specific kind of informations ( suppose second table as characters ) And that character can only assign to the user who grabs it, Is it against the rules of designing clean databases to hold the relation key in both tables? User Table: user_id, name, age, character_id Character Table: character_id, shape, user_id I have to do it for performance, how do you think about it?

    Read the article

  • How to Link VS2010 Database Project and LINQ to SQL

    - by Jason
    As I am working with the new database projects in VS2010, and as I am learning LINQ to SQL, I am curious as to the best way to link the two groups of information so that when I update one, the other updates along with it. From my research here at SO, as well as in Google, it appears the general rule of thumb is: "Build the database, and then create your LINQ to SQL classes." Of course, if I make a change in my database, the LINQ to SQL doesn't update automatically and I have to do it by hand. This is fairly simple right now as my database is small, but I am curious if there is an easier way for this to happen. In addition, the LINQ to SQL tool is pretty nice. The ability to create tables, add associations, and even create inheritance is very simple. As my second question, I am curious as to whether or not VS2010 can work the other way - I design the database in the DBLM file and then link it back to my database project. I appreciate any help with either of these two questions. I'm really interested in making this as easy as possible to reduce errors during development and improve the speed at which changes can be made.

    Read the article

  • ReSharper - Possible Null Assignment when using Microsoft.Contracts

    - by HVS
    Is there any way to indicate to ReSharper that a null reference won't occur because of Design-by-Contract Requires checking? For example, the following code will raise the warning (Possible 'null' assignment to entity marked with 'NotNull' attribute) in ReSharper on lines 7 and 8: private Dictionary<string, string> _Lookup = new Dictionary<string, string>(); public void Foo(string s) { Contract.Requires(!String.IsNullOrEmpty(s)); if (_Lookup.ContainsKey(s)) _Lookup.Remove(s); } What is really odd is that if you remove the Contract.Requires(...) line, the ReSharper message goes away. Update I found the solution through ExternalAnnotations which was also mentioned by Mike below. Here's an example of how to do it for a function in Microsoft.Contracts: Create a directory called Microsoft.Contracts under the ExternalAnnotations ReSharper directory. Next, Create a file called Microsoft.Contracts.xml and populate like so: <assembly name="Microsoft.Contracts"> <member name="M:System.Diagnostics.Contracts.Contract.Requires(System.Boolean)"> <attribute ctor="M:JetBrains.Annotations.AssertionMethodAttribute.#ctor"/> <parameter name="condition"> <attribute ctor="M:JetBrains.Annotations.AssertionConditionAttribute.#ctor(JetBrains.Annotations.AssertionConditionType)"> <argument>0</argument> </attribute> </parameter> </member> </assembly> Restart Visual Studio, and the message goes away!

    Read the article

  • Database structure - is mySQL the right choice?

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone, We are currently planning the database structure of a quite complex e-commerce web app that has flexibility as it's main cornerstone. Our app features a large amount of data (products) and we have run into a slight headache trying to keep performance high without compromizing normalization rules in the database, or leaving our highly beloved flexibility concept behind when integrating product options (also widely known as product attributes or parameters). Based on various references and sources available, we have made up lists on pros and cons of all major and well known database patterns to solve this. After comparing these, we have come up with two final alternatives: EAV (Entity-attribute-value model) : Pros: Database is used for all sorting. Cons: All related queries will include a number of joins between multiple tables in order to complete the collection of data. SLOB (Serialized LOB, also known as Facade?) : Pros: Very flexible. Keeping the number of necessary joins low compared to a EAV design pattern. Easy to update/add/remove data from each product. Cons: All sorting will be done by the application instead of the database. Will use lots of performance (memory?) when big datasets is processed by a large number of users. Our main questions: Which pattern/structure would you use, or maybe even a different solution? Is there better databases besides mySQL available nowadays to accomplish what we want? Thanks a lot! Reference: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/695752/product-table-many-kinds-of-product-each-product-has-many-parameters

    Read the article

  • Invoice & Invoice lines: How do you store customer address information?

    - by elviejo
    Hi I'm developing an invoicing application. So the general idea is to have two tables: Invoice (ID, Date, CustomerAddress, CustomerState, CustomerCountry, VAT, Total); InvoiceLine (Invoice_ID, ID, Concept, Units, PricePerUnit, Total); As you can see this basic design leads to a lot of repetiton of records where the client will have the same addrres, state and country. So the alternative is to have an address table and then make a relationship Address<-Invoice. However I think that an invoice is immutable document and should be stored just the way it was first made. Sometimes customers change their addresses, or states and if it was coming from an Address catalog that will change all the previously made invoices. So What is your experience? How is the customer address stored in an invoice? In the Invoice table? an Address Table? or something else? Can you provide pointers to a book, article or document where this is discussed in further detail?

    Read the article

  • DDD: Aggregate Roots

    - by Mosh
    Hello, I need help with finding my aggregate root and boundary. I have 3 Entities: Plan, PlannedRole and PlannedTraining. Each Plan can include many PlannedRoles and PlannedTrainings. Solution 1: At first I thought Plan is the aggregate root because PlannedRole and PlannedTraining do not make sense out of the context of a Plan. They are always within a plan. Also, we have a business rule that says each Plan can have a maximum of 3 PlannedRoles and 5 PlannedTrainings. So I thought by nominating the Plan as the aggregate root, I can enforce this invariant. However, we have a Search page where the user searches for Plans. The results shows a few properties of the Plan itself (and none of its PlannedRoles or PlannedTrainings). I thought if I have to load the entire aggregate, it would have a lot of overhead. There are nearly 3000 plans and each may have a few children. Loading all these objects together and then ignoring PlannedRoles and PlannedTrainings in the search page doesn't make sense to me. Solution 2: I just realized the user wants 2 more search pages where they can search for Planned Roles or Planned Trainings. That made me realize they are trying to access these objects independently and "out of" the context of Plan. So I thought I was wrong about my initial design and that is how I came up with this solution. So, I thought to have 3 aggregates here, 1 for each Entity. This approach enables me to search for each Entity independently and also resolves the performance issue in solution 1. However, using this approach I cannot enforce the invariant I mentioned earlier. There is also another invariant that states a Plan can be changed only if it is of a certain status. So, I shouldn't be able to add any PlannedRoles or PlannedTrainings to a Plan that is not in that status. Again, I can't enforce this invariant with the second approach. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Mosh

    Read the article

  • .NET Membership with Repository Pattern

    - by Zac
    My team is in the process of designing a domain model which will hide various different data sources behind a unified repository abstraction. One of the main drivers for this approach is the very high probability that these data sources will undergo significant change in the near future and we don't want to be re-writing business logic when this happens. One data source will be our membership database which was originally implemented using the default ASP.Net Membership Provider. The membership provider is tied to the System.Web.Security namespace but we have a design guideline requiring that our domain model layer is not dependent upon System.Web (or any other implementation/environment dependency) as it will be consumed in different environments - nor do we want our websites directly communicating with databases. I am considering what would be a good approach to reconciling the MembershipProvider approach with our abstracted n-tier architecture. My initial feeling is that we could create a "DomainMembershipProvider" which interacts with the domain model and then implement objects in the model which deal with the repository and handle validation/business logic. The repository would then implement data access using our (as-yet undecided) ORM/data access tool. Are there are any glaring holes in this approach - I haven't worked closely with the MembershipProvider class so may well be missing something. Alternatively, is there an approach that you think will better serve the requirements I described above? Thanks in advance for your thoughts and advice. Regards, Zac

    Read the article

  • Taking the data mapper approach in Zend Framework

    - by Seeker
    Let's assume the following tables setup for a Zend Framework app. user (id) groups (id) groups_users (id, user_id, group_id, join_date) I took the Data Mapper approach to models which basically gives me: Model_User, Model_UsersMapper, Model_DbTable_Users Model_Group, Model_GroupsMapper, Model_DbTable_Groups Model_GroupUser, Model_GroupsUsersMapper, Model_DbTable_GroupsUsers (for holding the relationships which can be seen as aentities; notice the "join_date" property) I'm defining the _referenceMap in Model_DbTable_GroupsUsers: protected $_referenceMap = array ( 'User' => array ( 'columns' => array('user_id'), 'refTableClass' => 'Model_DbTable_Users', 'refColumns' => array('id') ), 'App' => array ( 'columns' => array('group_id'), 'refTableClass' => 'Model_DbTable_Groups', 'refColumns' => array('id') ) ); I'm having these design problems in mind: 1) The Model_Group only mirrors the fields in the groups table. How can I return a collection of groups a user is a member of and also the date the user joined that group for every group? If I just added the property to the domain object, then I'd have to let the group mapper know about it, wouldn't I? 2) Let's say I need to fetch the groups a user belongs to. Where should I put this logic? Model_UsersMapper or Model_GroupsUsersMapper? I also want to make use of the referencing map (dependent tables) mechanism and probably use findManyToManyRowset or findDependentRowset, something like: $result = $this->getDbTable()->find($userId); $row = $result->current(); $groups = $row->findManyToManyRowset( 'Model_DbTable_Groups', 'Model_DbTable_GroupsUsers' ); This would produce two queries when I could have just written it in a single query. I will place this in the Model_GroupsUsersMapper class. An enhancement would be to add a getGroups method to the Model_User domain object which lazily loads the groups when needed by calling the appropriate method in the data mapper, which begs for the second question. Should I allow the domain object know about the data mapper?

    Read the article

  • Database migration pattern for Java?

    - by Eno
    Im working on some database migration code in Java. Im also using a factory pattern so I can use different kinds of databases. And each kind of database im using implements a common interface. What I would like to do is have a migration check that is internal to the class and runs some database schema update code automatically. The actual update is pretty straight forward (I check schema version in a table and compare against a constant in my app to decide whether to migrate or not and between which versions of schema). To make this automatic I was thinking the test should live inside (or be called from) the constructor. OK, fair enough, that's simple enough. My problem is that I dont want the test to run every single time I instantiate a database object (it runs a query so having it run on every construction is not efficient). So maybe this should be a class static method? I guess my question is, what is a good design pattern for this type of problem? There ought to be a clean way to ensure the migration test runs only once OR is super-efficient.

    Read the article

  • fluent nHibernate mapping of subclassed structure

    - by Codezy
    I have a workflow class that has a collection of phases, each phase has a collection of tasks. You can design a workflow that will be used by many engagements. When used in engagement I want to be able to add properties to each class (workflow, phase, and task). For example a task in the designer does not have people assigned, but a task in an engagement would need extra properties like who is assigned to it. I have tried many different approaches using subclasses or interfaces but I just can't get it to map the way I want. Currently I have the engagement level versions as subclasses, but I can't get Engagement phases to map to engagement workflows. Public Class WorkflowMapping Inherits ClassMap(Of Workflow) Sub New() Id(Function(x As Workflow) x.Id).Column("Workflow_Id").GeneratedBy.Identity() Map(Function(x As Workflow) x.Description) Map(Function(x As Workflow) x.Generation) Map(Function(x As Workflow) x.IsActive) HasMany(Function(x As Workflow) x.Phases).Cascade.All() End Sub End Class Public Class EngagementWorkflowMapping Inherits SubclassMap(Of EngagementWorkflow) Sub New() Map(Function(x As EngagementWorkflow) x.ClientNo) Map(Function(x As EngagementWorkflow) x.EngagementNo) End Sub End Class How would you approach mapping this in fluent (or hbm) so that you could load just the workflow base class when designing the flow, or the engagement subclass versions of each when being used by an engagement?

    Read the article

  • Flexible Decorator Pattern?

    - by Omar Kooheji
    I was looking for a pattern to model something I'm thinking of doing in a personal project and I was wondering if a modified version of the decorator patter would work. Basicly I'm thinking of creating a game where the characters attributes are modified by what items they have equiped. The way that the decorator stacks it's modifications is perfect for this, however I've never seen a decorator that allows you to drop intermediate decorators, which is what would happen when items are unequiped. Does anyone have experience using the decorator pattern in this way? Or am I barking up the wrong tree? Clarification To explain "Intermediate decorators" if for example my base class is coffe which is decorated with milk which is decorated with sugar (using the example in Head first design patterns) milk would be an intermediate decorator as it decorates the base coffee, and is decorated by the sugar. Yet More Clarification :) The idea is that items change stats, I'd agree that I am shoehorning the decorator into this. I'll look into the state bag. essentially I want a single point of call for the statistics and for them to go up/down when items are equiped/unequiped. I could just apply the modifiers to the characters stats on equiping and roll them back when unequiping. Or whenever a stat is asked for iterate through all the items and calculate the stat. I'm just looking for feedback here, I'm aware that I might be using a chainsaw where scissors would be more appropriate...

    Read the article

  • Generics with constraints hierarchy

    - by devoured elysium
    I am currently facing a very disturbing problem: interface IStateSpace<Position, Value> where Position : IPosition // <-- Problem starts here where Value : IValue // <-- and here as I don't { // know how to get away this // circular dependency! // Notice how I should be // defining generics parameters // here but I can't! Value GetStateAt(Position position); void SetStateAt(Position position, State state); } As you'll down here, both IPosition, IValue and IState depend on each other. How am I supposed to get away with this? I can't think of any other design that will circumvent this circular dependency and still describes exactly what I want to do! interface IState<StateSpace, Value> where StateSpace : IStateSpace where Value : IValue { StateSpace StateSpace { get; }; Value Value { get; set; } } interface IPosition { } interface IValue<State> where State : IState { State State { get; } } Basically I have a state space IStateSpace that has states IState inside. Their position in the state space is given by an IPosition. Each state then has one (or more) values IValue. I am simplifying the hierarchy, as it's a bit more complex than described. The idea of having this hierarchy defined with generics is to allow for different implementations of the same concepts (an IStateSpace will be implemented both as a matrix as an graph, etc). Would can I get away with this? How do you generally solve this kind of problems? Which kind of designs are used in these cases? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279  | Next Page >