Search Results

Search found 29887 results on 1196 pages for 'object construction'.

Page 3/1196 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Domain Models (PHP)

    - by Calum Bulmer
    I have been programming in PHP for several years and have, in the past, adopted methods of my own to handle data within my applications. I have built my own MVC, in the past, and have a reasonable understanding of OOP within php but I know my implementation needs some serious work. In the past I have used an is-a relationship between a model and a database table. I now know after doing some research that this is not really the best way forward. As far as I understand it I should create models that don't really care about the underlying database (or whatever storage mechanism is to be used) but only care about their actions and their data. From this I have established that I can create models of lets say for example a Person an this person object could have some Children (human children) that are also Person objects held in an array (with addPerson and removePerson methods, accepting a Person object). I could then create a PersonMapper that I could use to get a Person with a specific 'id', or to save a Person. This could then lookup the relationship data in a lookup table and create the associated child objects for the Person that has been requested (if there are any) and likewise save the data in the lookup table on the save command. This is now pushing the limits to my knowledge..... What if I wanted to model a building with different levels and different rooms within those levels? What if I wanted to place some items in those rooms? Would I create a class for building, level, room and item with the following structure. building can have 1 or many level objects held in an array level can have 1 or many room objects held in an array room can have 1 or many item objects held in an array and mappers for each class with higher level mappers using the child mappers to populate the arrays (either on request of the top level object or lazy load on request) This seems to tightly couple the different objects albeit in one direction (ie. a floor does not need to be in a building but a building can have levels) Is this the correct way to go about things? Within the view I am wanting to show a building with an option to select a level and then show the level with an option to select a room etc.. but I may also want to show a tree like structure of items in the building and what level and room they are in. I hope this makes sense. I am just struggling with the concept of nesting objects within each other when the general concept of oop seems to be to separate things. If someone can help it would be really useful. Many thanks

    Read the article

  • Good Literature for "Object oriented programming in C"

    - by Dipan Mehta
    This is not a debate question about whether or not C is a good candidate for Object oriented programming or not. Quite often C is the primary platform where the development is happening. I have seen, and hopefully learnt through crawling many open source and commercial projects - that while the language inherently doesn't stop you if you create "non-object" code. However, you can still think in the "Object" way and reasonably write code that captures this designs thinking. For those who has done this, OO way is still the best way to write code even when you are programming in C. While, I have learnt most of it through the hard way, are there any deep literature that can help educate the relatively young guys about how to do OO programming in C?

    Read the article

  • Objected oriented approach to structure inside structure

    - by RishiD
    This is for C++ but should apply to any OO language. Trying to figure out the correct object oriented apporach to do the following (this is what I do in C). struct Container { enum type; union { TypeA a; TypeB b; }; } The type field determines if it TypeA or TypeB object. I am using this to handle responses coming back from a connection, they get parsed and get put into this structure and then based on the message type the appropriate fields get filled in. e.g. struct Container parseResponse(bufferIn, bufferLength); Is there an OO approach for doing this?

    Read the article

  • What is a good design model for my new class?

    - by user66662
    I am a beginning programmer who, after trying to manage over 2000 lines of procedural php code, now has discovered the value of OOP. I have read a few books to get me up to speed on the beginning theory, but would like some advice on practical application. So,for example, let's say there are two types of content objects - an ad and a calendar event. what my application does is scan different websites (a predefined list), and, when it finds an ad or an event, it extracts the data and saves it to a database. All of my objects will share a $title and $description. However, the Ad object will have a $price and the Event object will have $startDate. Should I have two separate classes, one for each object? Should I have a 'superclass' with the $title and $description with two other Ad and Event classes with their own properties? The latter is at least the direction I am on now. My second question about this design is how to handle the logic that extracts the data for $title, $description, $price, and $date. For each website in my predefined list, there is a specific regex that returns the desired value for each property. Currently, I have an extremely large switch statement in my constructor which determines what website I am own, sets the regex variables accordingly, and continues on. Not only that, but now I have to repeat the logic to determine what site I am on in the constructor of each class. This doesn't feel right. Should I create another class Algorithms and store the logic there for each site? Should the functions of to handle that logic be in this class? or specific to the classes whos properties they set? I want to take into account in my design two things: 1) I will add different content objects in the future that share $title and $description, but will have their own properties, so, I want to be able to easily grow these as needed. 2) I will add more websites constantly (each with their own algorithms for data extraction) so I would like to plan efficienty managing and working with these now. I thought about extending the Ad or Event class with 'websiteX' class and store its functions there. But, this didn't feel right either as now I have to manage 100s of little website specific class files. Note, I didn't know if this was the correct site or stackoverflow was the better choice. If so, let me know and I'll post there.

    Read the article

  • Is the "impossible object" possible in computer graphics?

    - by CPP_Person
    This may be a silly question but I want to know the answer to it. I saw this thing called the "impossible object", while they're many different images of this online, it's suppost to be impossible geometry. Here is an example: Now as far as logic goes, I know you don't have to obey it in games, such as a flying cow, or an impossible object. So that's out of the way, but what stands in my way is whether or not there is a way to draw this onto a 3D scene. Like is there a way to represent it as a 3D object? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • redoing object model construction to fit with asynchronous data fetching

    - by Andrew Patterson
    I have a modeled a set of objects that correspond with some real world concepts. TradeDrug, GenericDrug, TradePackage, DrugForm Underlying the simple object model I am trying to provide is a complex medical terminology that uses numeric codes to represent relationships and concepts, all accessible via a REST service - I am trying to hide away some of that complexity with an object wrapper. To give a concrete example I can call TradeDrug d = Searcher.FindTradeDrug("Zoloft") or TradeDrug d = new TradeDrug(34) where 34 might be the code for Zoloft. This will consult a remote server to find out some details about Zoloft. I might then call GenericDrug generic = d.EquivalentGeneric() System.Out.WriteLine(generic.ActiveIngredient().Name) in order to get back the generic drug sertraline as an object (again via a background REST call to the remote server that has all these drug details), and then perhaps find its ingredient. This model works fine and is being used in some applications that involve data processing. Recently however I wanted to do a silverlight application that used and displayed these objects. The silverlight environment only allows asynchronous REST/web service calls. I have no problems with how to make the asychhronous calls - but I am having trouble with what the design should be for my object construction. Currently the constructors for my objects do some REST calls sychronously. public TradeDrug(int code) { form = restclient.FetchForm(code) name = restclient.FetchName(code) etc.. } If I have to use async 'events' or 'actions' in order to use the Silverlight web client (I know silverlight can be forced to be a synchronous client but I am interested in asychronous approaches), does anyone have an guidance or best practice for how to structure my objects. I can pass in an action callback to the constructor public TradeDrug(int code, Action<TradeDrug> constructCompleted) { } but this then allows the user to have a TradeDrug object instance before what I want to construct is actually finished. It also doesn't support an 'event' async pattern because the object doesn't exist to add the event to until it is constructed. Extending that approach might be a factory object that itself has an asynchronous interface to objects factory.GetTradeDrugAsync(code, completedaction) or with a GetTradeDrugCompleted event? Does anyone have any recommendations?

    Read the article

  • Javascript object list sorting by object property

    - by Constructor
    I need to do this: (sorry not in javascript syntax-still learning object language :) ) object=car attibutes:top-speed, brand.... now I want to sort the list of those cars in order by top-speed, brand... How do I do this (please note the solution must be javascript only, no php or other stuff) ?

    Read the article

  • Nhibernate/Hibernate, lookup tables and object design

    - by Simon G
    Hi, I've got two tables. Invoice with columns CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID (CustomerID and InvoiceDate make up a composite key) and InvoiceType with InvoiceTypeID and InvoiceTypeName columns. I know I can create my objects like: public class Invoice { public virtual int CustomerID { get; set; } public virtual DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; } public virtual decimal Value { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceType InvoiceType { get; set; } } public class InvoiceType { public virtual InvoiceTypeID { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeName { get; set; } } So the generated sql would look something like: SELECT CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID FROM Invoice WHERE CustomerID = x AND InvoiceDate = y SELECT InvoiceTypeID, InvoiceTypeName FROM InvoiceType WHERE InvoiceTypeID = z But rather that having two select queries executed to retrieve the data I would rather have one. I would also like to avoid using child object for simple lookup lists. So my object would look something like: public class Invoice { public virtual int CustomerID { get; set; } public virtual DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; } public virtual decimal Value { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeID { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeName { get; set; } } And my sql would look something like: SELECT CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID FROM Invoice INNER JOIN InvoiceType ON Invoice.InvoiceTypeID = InvoiceType.InvoiceTypeID WHERE CustomerID = x AND InvoiceDate = y My question is how do I create the mapping for this? I've tried using join but this tried to join using CustomerID and InvoiceDate, am I missing something obvious? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Getting my head around object oriented programing

    - by nLL
    I am entry level .Net developer and using it to develop web sites. I started with classic asp and last year jumped on the ship with a short C# book. As I developed I learned more and started to see that coming from classic asp I always used C# like scripting language. For example in my last project I needed to encode video on the webserver and wrote a code like public class Encoder { Public static bool Encode(string videopath) { ...snip... return true; } } While searching samples related to my project I’ve seen people doing this public class Encoder { Public static Encode(string videopath) { EncodedVideo encoded = new EncodedVideo(); ...snip... encoded.EncodedVideoPath = outputFile; encoded.Success = true; ...snip... } } public class EncodedVideo { public string EncodedVideoPath { get; set; } public bool Success { get; set; } } As I understand second example is more object oriented but I don’t see the point of using EncodedVideo object. Am I doing something wrong? Does it really necessary to use this sort of code in a web app?

    Read the article

  • Designing a class in such a way that it doesn't become a "God object"

    - by devoured elysium
    I'm designing an application that will allow me to draw some functions on a graphic. Each function will be drawn from a set of points that I will pass to this graphic class. There are different kinds of points, all inheriting from a MyPoint class. For some kind of points it will be just printing them on the screen as they are, others can be ignored, others added, so there is some kind of logic associated to them that can get complex. How to actually draw the graphic is not the main issue here. What bothers me is how to make the code logic such that this GraphicMaker class doesn't become the so called God-Object. It would be easy to make something like this: class GraphicMaker { ArrayList<Point> points = new ArrayList<Point>(); public void AddPoint(Point point) { points.add(point); } public void DoDrawing() { foreach (Point point in points) { if (point is PointA) { //some logic here else if (point is PointXYZ) { //...etc } } } } How would you do something like this? I have a feeling the correct way would be to put the drawing logic on each Point object (so each child class from Point would know how to draw itself) but two problems arise: There will be kinds of points that need to know all the other points that exist in the GraphicObject class to know how to draw themselves. I can make a lot of the methods/properties from the Graphic class public, so that all the points have a reference to the Graphic class and can make all their logic as they want, but isn't that a big price to pay for not wanting to have a God class?

    Read the article

  • Is it better to return NULL or empty values from functions/methods where the return value is not present?

    - by P B
    I am looking for a recommendation here. I am struggling with whether it is better to return NULL or an empty value from a method when the return value is not present or cannot be determined. Take the following two methods as an examples: string ReverseString(string stringToReverse) // takes a string and reverses it. Person FindPerson(int personID) // finds a Person with a matching personID. In ReverseString(), I would say return an empty string because the return type is string, so the caller is expecting that. Also, this way, the caller would not have to check to see if a NULL was returned. In FindPerson(), returning NULL seems like a better fit. Regardless of whether or not NULL or an empty Person Object (new Person()) is returned the caller is going to have to check to see if the Person Object is NULL or empty before doing anything to it (like calling UpdateName()). So why not just return NULL here and then the caller only has to check for NULL. Does anyone else struggle with this? Any help or insight is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to build Object Oriented Skills?

    - by cedar715
    Being a core developer for couple of years, coding applications seeing the class diagrams, sequence diagrams, I decided to improve my self, taking the next step of designing. As I'm an OO developer, I'm interested in improving my design skills. For Example, I had a hard time designing a currency converter. My questions to the SO: Is it by experience the design skills can be acquired? Will learning books/blog/material over internet etc help? Is it that one needs the domain knowledge of the application being developed? Knowing Design patterns, principles? Studying 'Code Complete' book ? Need to have Problem-solving skills? In short, given a problem, I just want to solve it in Object-oriented way??

    Read the article

  • HTG Reviews the CODE Keyboard: Old School Construction Meets Modern Amenities

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    There’s nothing quite as satisfying as the smooth and crisp action of a well built keyboard. If you’re tired of  mushy keys and cheap feeling keyboards, a well-constructed mechanical keyboard is a welcome respite from the $10 keyboard that came with your computer. Read on as we put the CODE mechanical keyboard through the paces. What is the CODE Keyboard? The CODE keyboard is a collaboration between manufacturer WASD Keyboards and Jeff Atwood of Coding Horror (the guy behind the Stack Exchange network and Discourse forum software). Atwood’s focus was incorporating the best of traditional mechanical keyboards and the best of modern keyboard usability improvements. In his own words: The world is awash in terrible, crappy, no name how-cheap-can-we-make-it keyboards. There are a few dozen better mechanical keyboard options out there. I’ve owned and used at least six different expensive mechanical keyboards, but I wasn’t satisfied with any of them, either: they didn’t have backlighting, were ugly, had terrible design, or were missing basic functions like media keys. That’s why I originally contacted Weyman Kwong of WASD Keyboards way back in early 2012. I told him that the state of keyboards was unacceptable to me as a geek, and I proposed a partnership wherein I was willing to work with him to do whatever it takes to produce a truly great mechanical keyboard. Even the ardent skeptic who questions whether Atwood has indeed created a truly great mechanical keyboard certainly can’t argue with the position he starts from: there are so many agonizingly crappy keyboards out there. Even worse, in our opinion, is that unless you’re a typist of a certain vintage there’s a good chance you’ve never actually typed on a really nice keyboard. Those that didn’t start using computers until the mid-to-late 1990s most likely have always typed on modern mushy-key keyboards and never known the joy of typing on a really responsive and crisp mechanical keyboard. Is our preference for and love of mechanical keyboards shining through here? Good. We’re not even going to try and hide it. So where does the CODE keyboard stack up in pantheon of keyboards? Read on as we walk you through the simple setup and our experience using the CODE. Setting Up the CODE Keyboard Although the setup of the CODE keyboard is essentially plug and play, there are two distinct setup steps that you likely haven’t had to perform on a previous keyboard. Both highlight the degree of care put into the keyboard and the amount of customization available. Inside the box you’ll find the keyboard, a micro USB cable, a USB-to-PS2 adapter, and a tool which you may be unfamiliar with: a key puller. We’ll return to the key puller in a moment. Unlike the majority of keyboards on the market, the cord isn’t permanently affixed to the keyboard. What does this mean for you? Aside from the obvious need to plug it in yourself, it makes it dead simple to repair your own keyboard cord if it gets attacked by a pet, mangled in a mechanism on your desk, or otherwise damaged. It also makes it easy to take advantage of the cable routing channels in on the underside of the keyboard to  route your cable exactly where you want it. While we’re staring at the underside of the keyboard, check out those beefy rubber feet. By peripherals standards they’re huge (and there is six instead of the usual four). Once you plunk the keyboard down where you want it, it might as well be glued down the rubber feet work so well. After you’ve secured the cable and adjusted it to your liking, there is one more task  before plug the keyboard into the computer. On the bottom left-hand side of the keyboard, you’ll find a small recess in the plastic with some dip switches inside: The dip switches are there to switch hardware functions for various operating systems, keyboard layouts, and to enable/disable function keys. By toggling the dip switches you can change the keyboard from QWERTY mode to Dvorak mode and Colemak mode, the two most popular alternative keyboard configurations. You can also use the switches to enable Mac-functionality (for Command/Option keys). One of our favorite little toggles is the SW3 dip switch: you can disable the Caps Lock key; goodbye accidentally pressing Caps when you mean to press Shift. You can review the entire dip switch configuration chart here. The quick-start for Windows users is simple: double check that all the switches are in the off position (as seen in the photo above) and then simply toggle SW6 on to enable the media and backlighting function keys (this turns the menu key on the keyboard into a function key as typically found on laptop keyboards). After adjusting the dip switches to your liking, plug the keyboard into an open USB port on your computer (or into your PS/2 port using the included adapter). Design, Layout, and Backlighting The CODE keyboard comes in two flavors, a traditional 87-key layout (no number pad) and a traditional 104-key layout (number pad on the right hand side). We identify the layout as traditional because, despite some modern trapping and sneaky shortcuts, the actual form factor of the keyboard from the shape of the keys to the spacing and position is as classic as it comes. You won’t have to learn a new keyboard layout and spend weeks conditioning yourself to a smaller than normal backspace key or a PgUp/PgDn pair in an unconventional location. Just because the keyboard is very conventional in layout, however, doesn’t mean you’ll be missing modern amenities like media-control keys. The following additional functions are hidden in the F11, F12, Pause button, and the 2×6 grid formed by the Insert and Delete rows: keyboard illumination brightness, keyboard illumination on/off, mute, and then the typical play/pause, forward/backward, stop, and volume +/- in Insert and Delete rows, respectively. While we weren’t sure what we’d think of the function-key system at first (especially after retiring a Microsoft Sidewinder keyboard with a huge and easily accessible volume knob on it), it took less than a day for us to adapt to using the Fn key, located next to the right Ctrl key, to adjust our media playback on the fly. Keyboard backlighting is a largely hit-or-miss undertaking but the CODE keyboard nails it. Not only does it have pleasant and easily adjustable through-the-keys lighting but the key switches the keys themselves are attached to are mounted to a steel plate with white paint. Enough of the light reflects off the interior cavity of the keys and then diffuses across the white plate to provide nice even illumination in between the keys. Highlighting the steel plate beneath the keys brings us to the actual construction of the keyboard. It’s rock solid. The 87-key model, the one we tested, is 2.0 pounds. The 104-key is nearly a half pound heavier at 2.42 pounds. Between the steel plate, the extra-thick PCB board beneath the steel plate, and the thick ABS plastic housing, the keyboard has very solid feel to it. Combine that heft with the previously mentioned thick rubber feet and you have a tank-like keyboard that won’t budge a millimeter during normal use. Examining The Keys This is the section of the review the hardcore typists and keyboard ninjas have been waiting for. We’ve looked at the layout of the keyboard, we’ve looked at the general construction of it, but what about the actual keys? There are a wide variety of keyboard construction techniques but the vast majority of modern keyboards use a rubber-dome construction. The key is floated in a plastic frame over a rubber membrane that has a little rubber dome for each key. The press of the physical key compresses the rubber dome downwards and a little bit of conductive material on the inside of the dome’s apex connects with the circuit board. Despite the near ubiquity of the design, many people dislike it. The principal complaint is that dome keyboards require a complete compression to register a keystroke; keyboard designers and enthusiasts refer to this as “bottoming out”. In other words, the register the “b” key, you need to completely press that key down. As such it slows you down and requires additional pressure and movement that, over the course of tens of thousands of keystrokes, adds up to a whole lot of wasted time and fatigue. The CODE keyboard features key switches manufactured by Cherry, a company that has manufactured key switches since the 1960s. Specifically the CODE features Cherry MX Clear switches. These switches feature the same classic design of the other Cherry switches (such as the MX Blue and Brown switch lineups) but they are significantly quieter (yes this is a mechanical keyboard, but no, your neighbors won’t think you’re firing off a machine gun) as they lack the audible click found in most Cherry switches. This isn’t to say that they keyboard doesn’t have a nice audible key press sound when the key is fully depressed, but that the key mechanism isn’t doesn’t create a loud click sound when triggered. One of the great features of the Cherry MX clear is a tactile “bump” that indicates the key has been compressed enough to register the stroke. For touch typists the very subtle tactile feedback is a great indicator that you can move on to the next stroke and provides a welcome speed boost. Even if you’re not trying to break any word-per-minute records, that little bump when pressing the key is satisfying. The Cherry key switches, in addition to providing a much more pleasant typing experience, are also significantly more durable than dome-style key switch. Rubber dome switch membrane keyboards are typically rated for 5-10 million contacts whereas the Cherry mechanical switches are rated for 50 million contacts. You’d have to write the next War and Peace  and follow that up with A Tale of Two Cities: Zombie Edition, and then turn around and transcribe them both into a dozen different languages to even begin putting a tiny dent in the lifecycle of this keyboard. So what do the switches look like under the classicly styled keys? You can take a look yourself with the included key puller. Slide the loop between the keys and then gently beneath the key you wish to remove: Wiggle the key puller gently back and forth while exerting a gentle upward pressure to pop the key off; You can repeat the process for every key, if you ever find yourself needing to extract piles of cat hair, Cheeto dust, or other foreign objects from your keyboard. There it is, the naked switch, the source of that wonderful crisp action with the tactile bump on each keystroke. The last feature worthy of a mention is the N-key rollover functionality of the keyboard. This is a feature you simply won’t find on non-mechanical keyboards and even gaming keyboards typically only have any sort of key roller on the high-frequency keys like WASD. So what is N-key rollover and why do you care? On a typical mass-produced rubber-dome keyboard you cannot simultaneously press more than two keys as the third one doesn’t register. PS/2 keyboards allow for unlimited rollover (in other words you can’t out type the keyboard as all of your keystrokes, no matter how fast, will register); if you use the CODE keyboard with the PS/2 adapter you gain this ability. If you don’t use the PS/2 adapter and use the native USB, you still get 6-key rollover (and the CTRL, ALT, and SHIFT don’t count towards the 6) so realistically you still won’t be able to out type the computer as even the more finger twisting keyboard combos and high speed typing will still fall well within the 6-key rollover. The rollover absolutely doesn’t matter if you’re a slow hunt-and-peck typist, but if you’ve read this far into a keyboard review there’s a good chance that you’re a serious typist and that kind of quality construction and high-number key rollover is a fantastic feature.  The Good, The Bad, and the Verdict We’ve put the CODE keyboard through the paces, we’ve played games with it, typed articles with it, left lengthy comments on Reddit, and otherwise used and abused it like we would any other keyboard. The Good: The construction is rock solid. In an emergency, we’re confident we could use the keyboard as a blunt weapon (and then resume using it later in the day with no ill effect on the keyboard). The Cherry switches are an absolute pleasure to type on; the Clear variety found in the CODE keyboard offer a really nice middle-ground between the gun-shot clack of a louder mechanical switch and the quietness of a lesser-quality dome keyboard without sacrificing quality. Touch typists will love the subtle tactile bump feedback. Dip switch system makes it very easy for users on different systems and with different keyboard layout needs to switch between operating system and keyboard layouts. If you’re investing a chunk of change in a keyboard it’s nice to know you can take it with you to a different operating system or “upgrade” it to a new layout if you decide to take up Dvorak-style typing. The backlighting is perfect. You can adjust it from a barely-visible glow to a blazing light-up-the-room brightness. Whatever your intesity preference, the white-coated steel backplate does a great job diffusing the light between the keys. You can easily remove the keys for cleaning (or to rearrange the letters to support a new keyboard layout). The weight of the unit combined with the extra thick rubber feet keep it planted exactly where you place it on the desk. The Bad: While you’re getting your money’s worth, the $150 price tag is a shock when compared to the $20-60 price tags you find on lower-end keyboards. People used to large dedicated media keys independent of the traditional key layout (such as the large buttons and volume controls found on many modern keyboards) might be off put by the Fn-key style media controls on the CODE. The Verdict: The keyboard is clearly and heavily influenced by the needs of serious typists. Whether you’re a programmer, transcriptionist, or just somebody that wants to leave the lengthiest article comments the Internet has ever seen, the CODE keyboard offers a rock solid typing experience. Yes, $150 isn’t pocket change, but the quality of the CODE keyboard is so high and the typing experience is so enjoyable, you’re easily getting ten times the value you’d get out of purchasing a lesser keyboard. Even compared to other mechanical keyboards on the market, like the Das Keyboard, you’re still getting more for your money as other mechanical keyboards don’t come with the lovely-to-type-on Cherry MX Clear switches, back lighting, and hardware-based operating system keyboard layout switching. If it’s in your budget to upgrade your keyboard (especially if you’ve been slogging along with a low-end rubber-dome keyboard) there’s no good reason to not pickup a CODE keyboard. Key animation courtesy of Geekhack.org user Lethal Squirrel.       

    Read the article

  • Does this copy the reference or the object?

    - by Water Cooler v2
    Sorry, I am being both thick and lazy, but mostly lazy. Actually, not even that. I am trying to save time so I can do more in less time as there's a lot to be done. Does this copy the reference or the actual object data? public class Foo { private NameValueCollection _nvc = null; public Foo( NameValueCollection nvc) { _nvc = nvc; } } public class Bar { public static void Main() { NameValueCollection toPass = new NameValueCollection(); new Foo( toPass ); // I believe this only copies the reference // so if I ever wanted to compare toPass and // Foo._nvc (assuming I got hold of the private // field using reflection), I would only have to // compare the references and wouldn't have to compare // each string (deep copy compare), right? } I think I know the answer for sure: it only copies the reference. But I am not even sure why I am asking this. I guess my only concern is, if, after instantiating Foo by calling its parameterized ctor with toPass, if I needed to make sure that the NVC I passed as toPass and the NVC private field _nvc had the exact same content, I would just need to compare their references, right?

    Read the article

  • controlling an object through another object ?

    - by Stefano Borini
    Today I've seen the following pattern: you have an object A and an object B. Object B accepts a pointer to A at its constructor. Once B is created, there's a method B.doCalc() that performs a calculation (internally using A's information). The result is obtained with method B.getResult(). In order to perform another calculation, A is modified, and B.doCalc() is called again. What is your opinion on this choice ? I would have designed it differently, but I want to hear your voice. Edit : note that my main objection is to modify A to have a different result from B, without touching B. Although similar, I think that just this discipline expresses a much better feeling of what's going on. Instead of a = new A a.whatever = 5 b = new B(a) b.doCalc() res = b.getResult() a.whatever = 6 b.doCalc() res = b.getResult() You get the a pointer object from b itself. a = new A a.whatever = 5 b = new B(a) b.doCalc() res = b.getResult() a = b.getAPointer() a.whatever = 6 b.doCalc() res = b.getResult() because it makes more explicit the fact that a is taken from b and then modified. I still don't like it, though...

    Read the article

  • Uncaught TypeError: Object [object Object] has no method 'onAdded'

    - by user3604227
    I am using ExtJS4 with Java servlets. I am following the MVC architecture for ExtJS. I am trying a simple example of displaying a border layout but it doesnt work and I get the following error in ext-all.js in the javascript console: Uncaught TypeError: Object [object Object] has no method 'onAdded' Here is my code: app.js Ext.Loader.setConfig({ enabled : true }); Ext.application({ name : 'IN', appFolder : 'app', controllers : [ 'Items' ], launch : function() { console.log('in LAUNCH-appjs'); Ext.create('Ext.container.Viewport', { items : [ { xtype : 'borderlyt' } ] }); } }); Items.js (controller) Ext.define('IN.controller.Items', { extend : 'Ext.app.Controller', views : [ 'item.Border' ], init : function() { this.control({ 'viewport > panel' : { render : this.onPanelRendered } }); }, onPanelRendered : function() { console.log('The panel was rendered'); } }); Border.js (view) Ext.define('IN.view.item.Border',{extend : 'Ext.layout.container.Border', alias : 'widget.borderlyt', title : 'Border layout' , autoShow : true, renderTo : Ext.getBody(), defaults : { split : true, layout : 'border', autoScroll : true, height : 800, width : 500 }, items : [ { region : 'north', html : "Header here..", id : 'mainHeader' }, { region : 'west', width : 140, html : "Its West..", }, { region : 'south', html : "This is my temp footer content", height : 30, margins : '0 5 5 5', bodyPadding : 2, id : 'mainFooter' }, { id : 'mainContent', collapsible : false, region : 'center', margins : '5', border : true, } ] }); The folder structure for the Webcontent is as follows: WebContent app controller Items.js model store view item Border.js ext_js resources src ext_all.js index.html app.js Can someone help me resolve this error? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • wcf web service in post method, object properties are null, although the object is not null

    - by Abdalhadi Kolayb
    i have this problem in post method when i send object parameter to the method, then the object is not null, but all its properties have the default values. here is data module: [DataContract] public class Products { [DataMember(Order = 1)] public int ProdID { get; set; } [DataMember(Order = 2)] public string ProdName { get; set; } [DataMember(Order = 3)] public float PrpdPrice { get; set; } } and here is the interface: [OperationContract] [WebInvoke( Method = "POST", UriTemplate = "AddProduct", ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.WrappedRequest, RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json)] string AddProduct([MessageParameter(Name = "prod")]Products prod); public string AddProduct(Products prod) { ProductsList.Add(prod); return "return string"; } here is the json request: Content-type:application/json {"prod":[{"ProdID": 111,"ProdName": "P111","PrpdPrice": 111}]} but in the server the object received: {"prod":[{"ProdID": 0,"ProdName": NULL,"PrpdPrice": 0}]}

    Read the article

  • Returning a mock object from a mock object

    - by Songo
    I'm trying to return an object when mocking a parser class. This is the test code using PHPUnit 3.7 //set up the result object that I want to be returned from the call to parse method $parserResult= new ParserResult(); $parserResult->setSegment('some string'); //set up the stub Parser object $stubParser=$this->getMock('Parser'); $stubParser->expects($this->any()) ->method('parse') ->will($this->returnValue($parserResult)); //injecting the stub to my client class $fileHeaderParser= new FileWriter($stubParser); $output=$fileParser->writeStringToFile(); Inside my writeStringToFile() method I'm using $parserResult like this: writeStringToFile(){ //Some code... $parserResult=$parser->parse(); $segment=$parserResult->getSegment();//that's why I set the segment in the test. } Should I mock ParserResult in the first place, so that the mock returns a mock? Is it good design for mocks to return mocks? Is there a better approach to do this all?!

    Read the article

  • Object-Oriented Operating System

    - by nmagerko
    As I thought about writing an operating system, I came across a point that I really couldn't figure out on my own: Can an operating system truly be written in an Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) Language? Being that these types of languages do not allow for direct accessing of memory, wouldn't this make it impossible for a developer to write an entire operating system using only an OOP Language? Take, for example, the Android Operating System that runs many phones and some tablets in use around the world. I believe that this operating system uses only Java, an Object-Oriented language. In Java, I have been unsuccessful in trying to point at and manipulate a specific memory address that the run-time environment (JRE) has not assigned to my program implicitly. In C, C++, and other non-OOP languages, I can do this in a few lines. So this makes me question whether or not an operating system can be written in an OOP, especially Java. Any counterexamples or other information is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Object Oriented programming on 8-bit MCU Case Study

    - by Calvin Grier
    I see that there's a lot of questions related to OO Programming here. I'm actually trying to find a specific resource related to embedded OO approaches for an 8 bit MCU. Several years back (maybe 6) I was looking for material related to Object Oriented programming for resource constrained 8051 microprocessors. I found an article/website with a case history of a design group that used a very small RAM part, and implemented many Object based constructs during their C design and development. I believe it was an 8051. The project was a success, and managed to stay inside the very small ROM/RAM they had available. I'm attempting to find it again, but Google can't locate it. The article was well written, and recommended a "mixed" approach using C methods for inheritance and encapsulation - if I recall correctly. Can anyone help me locate this article?

    Read the article

  • What is Object Oriented Programming ill-suited for?

    - by Richard JP Le Guen
    In Martin Fowler's book Refactoring, Fowler speaks of how when developers learn something new, they don't consider when it's inappropriate for the job: Ten years ago it was like that with objects. If someone asked me when not to use objects, it was hard to answer. [...] It was just that I didn't know what those limitations were, although I knew what the benefits were. Reading this, it occurred to me I don't know what the limitations or potential disadvantages of Object-Oriented Programming are. What are the limitations of Object Oriented Programming? When should one look at a project and think "OOP is not best suited for this"?

    Read the article

  • Is there really Object-relational impedance mismatch?

    - by user52763
    It is always stated that it is hard to store applications objects in relational databases - the object-relational impedance mismatch - and that is why Document databases are better. However, is there really an impedance mismatch? And object has a key (albeit it may be hidden away by the runtime as a pointer to memory), a set of values, and foreign keys to other objects. Objects are as much made up of tables as it is a document. Neither really fit. I can see a use for databases to model the data into specific shapes for scenarios in the application - e.g. to speed up database lookup and avoid joins, etc., but won't it be better to keep the data as normalized as possible at the core, and transform as required?

    Read the article

  • In which object should I implement wait()/notify()?

    - by Christopher Francisco
    I'm working in an Android project with multithreading. Basically I have to wait to the server to respond before sending more data. The data sending task is delimited by the flag boolean hasServerResponded so the Thread will loop infinitely without doing anything until the flag becomes true. Since this boolean isn't declared as volatile (yet), and also looping without doing anything wastes resources, I thought maybe I should use AtomicBoolean and also implement wait() / notify() mechanism. Should I use the AtomicBoolean object notify() and wait() methods or should I create a lock Object?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >