Search Results

Search found 36081 results on 1444 pages for 'object expected'.

Page 30/1444 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • design pattern advice: graph -> computation

    - by csetzkorn
    I have a domain model, persisted in a database, which represents a graph. A graph consists of nodes (e.g. NodeTypeA, NodeTypeB) which are connected via branches. The two generic elements (nodes and branches will have properties). A graph will be sent to a computation engine. To perform computations the engine has to be initialised like so (simplified pseudo code): Engine Engine = new Engine() ; Object ID1 = Engine.AddNodeTypeA(TypeA.Property1, TypeA.Property2, …, TypeA.Propertyn); Object ID2 = Engine.AddNodeTypeB(TypeB.Property1, TypeB.Property2, …, TypeB.Propertyn); Engine.AddBranch(ID1,ID2); Finally the computation is performed like this: Engine.DoSomeComputation(); I am just wondering, if there are any relevant design patterns out there, which help to achieve the above using good design principles. I hope this makes sense. Any feedback would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Code Reuse and Abstraction in FP vs OOP

    - by Electric Coffee
    I've been told that code reuse and abstraction in OOP is far more difficult to do than it is in FP, and that all the claims that have been made about Object Orientedness (for lack of a better term) being great at reusing code have been flat out lies So I was wondering if anyone here could tell me why that is, and perhaps show me some code to back up these claims, I'm not saying I don't believe you Functional programmers, it's just that I've been "indoctrinated" to think Object Orientedly, and thus can't (yet) think Functionally enough to see it myself To quote Jimmy Hoffa (from an answer to one of my previous questions): The cake is a lie, code reuse in OO is far more difficult than in FP. For all that OO has claimed code reuse over the years, I have seen it follow through a minimum of times. (feel free to just say I must be doing it wrong, I'm comfortable with how well I write OO code having had to design and maintain OO systems for years, I know the quality of my own results) That quote is the basis of my question, I want to see if there's anything to the claim or not

    Read the article

  • Implementing a "state-machine" logic for methods required by an object in C++

    - by user827992
    What I have: 1 hypothetical object/class + other classes and related methods that gives me functionality. What I want: linking this object to 0 to N methods in realtime on request when an event is triggered Each event is related to a single method or a class, so a single event does not necessarily mean "connect this 1 method only" but can also mean "connect all the methods from that class or a group of methods" Avoiding linked lists because I have to browse the entire list to know what methods are linked, because this does not ensure me that the linked methods are kept in a particular order (let's say an alphabetic order by their names or classes), and also because this involve a massive amount of pointers usage. Example: I have an object Employee Jon, Jon acquires knowledge and forgets things pretty easily, so his skills may vary during a period of time, I'm responsible for what Jon can add or remove from his CV, how can I implement this logic?

    Read the article

  • Mobile 3D engine renders alpha as full-object transparency

    - by Nils Munch
    I am running a iOS project using the isgl3d framework for showing pod files. I have a stylish car with 0.5 alpha windows, that I wish to render on a camera background, seeking some augmented reality goodness. The alpha on the windows looks okay, but when I add the object, I notice that it renders the entire object transparently, where the windows are. Including interior of the car. Like so (in example, keyboard can be seen through the dashboard, seats and so on. should be solid) The car interior is a seperate object with alpha 1.0. I would rather not show a "ghost car" in my project, but I haven't found a way around this. Have anyone encountered the same issue, and eventually reached a solution ?

    Read the article

  • What should be allowed inside getters and setters?

    - by Botond Balázs
    I got into an interesting internet argument about getter and setter methods and encapsulation. Someone said that all they should do is an assignment (setters) or a variable access (getters) to keep them "pure" and ensure encapsulation. Am I right that this would completely defeat the purpose of having getters and setters in the first place and validation and other logic (without strange side-effects of course) should be allowed? When should validation happen? When setting the value, inside the setter (to protect the object from ever entering an invalid state - my opinion) Before setting the value, outside the setter Inside the object, before each time the value is used Is a setter allowed to change the value (maybe convert a valid value to some canonical internal representation)?

    Read the article

  • 2D object-aligned bounding-box intersection test

    - by AshleysBrain
    Hi all, I have two object-aligned bounding boxes (i.e. not axis aligned, they rotate with the object). I'd like to know if two object-aligned boxes overlap. (Edit: note - I'm using an axis-aligned bounding box test to quickly discard distant objects, so it doesn't matter if the quad routine is a little slower.) My boxes are stored as four x,y points. I've searched around for answers, but I can't make sense of the variable names and algorithms in examples to apply them to my particular case. Can someone help show me how this would be done, in a clear and simple way? Thanks. (The particular language isn't important, C-style pseudo code is OK.)

    Read the article

  • Yet Yet Another Way To Create An Object

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Yep, there's still another one: FormatterServices. This one allows one to create an object without running it's constructor... it is used by some of our good friends serializers. Stopwatch watch = new Stopwatch(); for (Int32 i = 0; i Beware, though: because the constructor isn't run (and remember that all fields that are initialized inline are also in fact initialized in the constructor), the object's state may be invalid. Enough object construction for now... SyntaxHighlighter.config.clipboardSwf = 'http://alexgorbatchev.com/pub/sh/2.0.320/scripts/clipboard.swf'; SyntaxHighlighter.brushes.CSharp.aliases = ['c#', 'c-sharp', 'csharp']; SyntaxHighlighter.all();

    Read the article

  • Figuring a max repetitive sub-tree in an object tree

    - by bonomo
    I am trying to solve a problem of finding a max repetitive sub-tree in an object tree. By the object tree I mean a tree where each leaf and node has a name. Each leaf has a type and a value of that type associated with that leaf. Each node has a set of leaves / nodes in certain order. Given an object tree that - we know - has a repetitive sub-tree in it. By repetitive I mean 2 or more sub-trees that are similar in everything (names/types/order of sub-elements) but the values of leaves. No nodes/leaves can be shared between sub-trees. Problem is to identify these sub-trees of the max height. I know that the exhaustive search can do the trick. I am rather looking for more efficient approach.

    Read the article

  • What is the state of the art in OOP?

    - by Ollie Saunders
    I used to do a lot of object-oriented programming and found myself reading up a lot on how to do it well. When C++ was the dominant OOP language there was a very different set of best practices than have emerged since. Some of the newer ideas I know of are BDD, internal DSLs, and the importing of ideas from functional programming. My question is: is there any consensus on the best way to develop object-oriented software today in the more modern languages such as C#, Ruby, and Python? And what are those practices? For instance, I rather like the idea of stateless objects but how many are actually using that in practice? Or, is the state of the art to deemphasize the importance of OOP? This might be the case for some Python programmers but would be difficult for Rubyists.

    Read the article

  • Resolving an App-Relative URL without a Page Object Reference

    - by Damon
    If you've worked with ASP.NET before then you've almost certainly seen an application-relative URL like ~/SomeFolder/SomePage.aspx.  The tilde at the beginning is a stand in for the application path, and it can easily be resolved using the Page object's ResolveUrl method: string url = Page.ResolveUrl("~/SomeFolder/SomePage.aspx"); There are times, however, when you don't have a page object available and you need to resolve an application relative URL.  Assuming you have an HttpContext object available, the following method will accomplish just that: public static string ResolveAppRelativeUrl(string url) {      return url.Replace("~", System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Request.ApplicationPath); } It just replaces the tilde with the application path, which is essentially all the ResolveUrl method does.

    Read the article

  • In this context with views in a tree, which class should perform the task?

    - by Jhonny 8
    Imagine that I have this context: A main view containing a table containing some cells. Each one of them with their own controller and view files. In the main view, I have an object "Person", with 3 different IDs. Depending on certain conditions (let say, time of the day), I have to choose one of them and display it in the cell. My question is, should the main view pass the whole object to the table, and this one to the cell, and the cell will calculate the ID that it will be shown? or, The main view calculates this parameter, and send the result to the table and this to the cell? Is a question focused on OO design, which one of this approaches is more suitable in an OO design and why?

    Read the article

  • Class as first-class object

    - by mrpyo
    Could a class be a first-class object? If yes, how would the implementation look? I mean, how could syntax for dynamically creating new classes look like? EDIT: I mean what example syntax could look like (I'm sorry, English is not my native language), but still I believe this question makes sense - how you give this functionality while keeping language consistent. For example how you create reference for new type. Do you make reference first-class object too and then use something like this: Reference<newType> r = new Reference<newType>(); r.set(value); Well this could get messy so you may just force user to use Object type references for dynamically created classes, but then you loose type-checking. I think creating concise syntax for this is interesting problem which solving could lead to better language design, maybe language which is metalanguage for itself (I wonder if this is possible).

    Read the article

  • Finding closest object to a location within a specific perpendicular distance to direction vector

    - by Sniper
    I have a location and a direction vector indicating facing, I want to find the closest object to that location that is within some tolerance distance (perpendicular distance) to the ray formed by the location and direction vector. Basically I want to get the object that is being aimed at. I have thought about finding all objects within a box and then finding the closest object to my vector from them results, but I am sure that there is a more efficient way. The Z axis is optional, the objects are most likely within a few meters of the search vector.

    Read the article

  • Is OO-programming really as important as hiring companies place it?

    - by ale
    I am just finishing my masters degree (in computing) and applying for jobs.. I've noticed many companies specifically ask for an understanding of object orientation. Popular interview questions are about inheritance, polymorphism, accessors etc. Is OO really that crucial? I even had an interview for a programming job in C and half the interview was OO. In the real world, developing real applications, is object orientation nearly always used? Are key features like polymorphism used A LOT? I think my question comes from one of my weaknesses.. although I know about OO.. I don't seem to be able to incorporate it a great deal into my programs. I would be really interested to get peoples' thoughts on this!

    Read the article

  • Avoiding coupling

    - by Seralize
    It is also true that a system may become so coupled, where each class is dependent on other classes that depend on other classes, that it is no longer possible to make a change in one place without having a ripple effect and having to make subsequent changes in many places.[1] This is why using an interface or an abstract class can be valuable in any object-oriented software project. Quote from Wikipedia Starting from scratch I'm starting from scratch with a project that I recently finished because I found the code to be too tightly coupled and hard to refactor, even when using MVC. I will be using MVC on my new project aswell but want to try and avoid the pitfalls this time, hopefully with your help. Project summary My issue is that I really wish to keep the Controller as clean as possible, but it seems like I can't do this. The basic idea of the program is that the user picks wordlists which is sent to the game engine. It will pick random words from the lists until there are none left. Problem at hand My main problem is that the game will have 'modes', and need to check the input in different ways through a method called checkWord(), but exactly where to put this and how to abstract it properly is a challenge to me. I'm new to design patterns, so not sure whether there exist any might fit my problem. My own attempt at abstraction Here is what I've gotten so far after hours of 'refactoring' the design plans, and I know it's long, but it's the best I could do to try and give you an overview (Note: As this is the sketch, anything is subject to change, all help and advice is very welcome. Also note the marked coupling points): Wordlist class Wordlist { // Basic CRUD etc. here! // Other sample methods: public function wordlistCount($user_id) {} // Returns count of how many wordlists a user has public function getAll($user_id) {} // Returns all wordlists of a user } Word class Word { // Basic CRUD etc. here! // Other sample methods: public function wordCount($wordlist_id) {} // Returns count of words in a wordlist public function getAll($wordlist_id) {} // Returns all words from a wordlist public function getWordInfo($word_id) {} // Returns information about a word } Wordpicker class Wordpicker { // The class needs to know which words and wordlists to exclude protected $_used_words = array(); protected $_used_wordlists = array(); // Wordlists to pick words from protected $_wordlists = array(); /* Public Methods */ public function setWordlists($wordlists = array()) {} public function setUsedWords($used_words = array()) {} public function setUsedWordlists($used_wordlists = array()) {} public function getRandomWord() {} // COUPLING POINT! Will most likely need to communicate with both the Wordlist and Word classes /* Protected Methods */ protected function _checkAvailableWordlists() {} // COUPLING POINT! Might need to check if wordlists are deleted etc. protected function _checkAvailableWords() {} // COUPLING POINT! Method needs to get all words in a wordlist from the Word class } Game class Game { protected $_session_id; // The ID of a game session which gets stored in the database along with game details protected $_game_info = array(); // Game instantiation public function __construct($user_id) { if (! $this->_session_id = $this->_gameExists($user_id)) { // New game } else { // Resume game } } // This is the method I tried to make flexible by using abstract classes etc. // Does it even belong in this class at all? public function checkWord($answer, $native_word, $translation) {} // This method checks the answer against the native word / translation word, depending on game mode public function getGameInfo() {} // Returns information about a game session, or creates it if it does not exist public function deleteSession($session_id) {} // Deletes a game session from the database // Methods dealing with game session information protected function _gameExists($user_id) {} protected function _getProgress($session_id) {} protected function _updateProgress($game_info = array()) {} } The Game /* CONTROLLER */ /* "Guess the word" page */ // User input $game_type = $_POST['game_type']; // Chosen with radio buttons etc. $wordlists = $_POST['wordlists']; // Chosen with checkboxes etc. // Starts a new game or resumes one from the database $game = new Game($_SESSION['user_id']); $game_info = $game->getGameInfo(); // Instantiates a new Wordpicker $wordpicker = new Wordpicker(); $wordpicker->setWordlists((isset($game_info['wordlists'])) ? $game_info['wordlists'] : $wordlists); $wordpicker->setUsedWordlists((isset($game_info['used_wordlists'])) ? $game_info['used_wordlists'] : NULL); $wordpicker->setUsedWords((isset($game_info['used_words'])) ? $game_info['used_words'] : NULL); // Fetches an available word if (! $word_id = $wordpicker->getRandomWord()) { // No more words left - game over! $game->deleteSession($game_info['id']); redirect(); } else { // Presents word details to the user $word = new Word(); $word_info = $word->getWordInfo($word_id); } The Bit to Finish /* CONTROLLER */ /* "Check the answer" page */ // ?????????????????? ( http://pastebin.com/cc6MtLTR ) Make sure you toggle the 'Layout Width' to the right for a better view. Thanks in advance. Questions To which extent should objects be loosely coupled? If object A needs info from object B, how is it supposed to get this without losing too much cohesion? As suggested in the comments, models should hold all business logic. However, as objects should be independent, where to glue them together? Should the model contain some sort of "index" or "client" area which connects the dots? Edit: So basically what I should do for a start is to make a new model which I can more easily call with oneliners such as $model->doAction(); // Lots of code in here which uses classes! How about the method for checking words? Should it be it's own object? I'm not sure where I should put it as it's pretty much part of the 'game'. But on another hand, I could just leave out the 'abstraction and OOPness' and make it a method of the 'client model' which will be encapsulated from the controller anyway. Very unsure about this.

    Read the article

  • should I extend or create instance of the class

    - by meWantToLearn
    I have two classes Class A and Class B in Class A, i have three methods that perform the save, delete and select operation based upon the object I pass them. in Class B I perform the logic operations, such as modification to the property of the object before being passed to the methods of Class A, My problem is in Class B, should it extend Class A, and call the methods of class A , by parent::methodName or create instance of class A and then call Class A does not includes any property just methods. class A{ public function save($obj){ //code here } public function delete($obj){ //code here } public function select($obj){ //code here } } //Should I extend class A, and call the method by parent::methodName($obj) or create an instance of class A, call the method $instanceOfA-methodName($obj); class B extends A{ public function checkIfHasSaved($obj){ if($obj->saved == 'Yes'){ parent::save($obj); //**should I call the method like this** $instanceOFA = new A(); //**or create instance of class A and call without extending class A** instanceOFA->save($obj); } //other logic operations here } }

    Read the article

  • How can a collection class instantiate many objects with one database call?

    - by Buttle Butkus
    I have a baseClass where I do not want public setters. I have a load($id) method that will retrieve the data for that object from the db. I have been using static class methods like getBy($property,$values) to return multiple class objects using a single database call. But some people say that static methods are not OOP. So now I'm trying to create a baseClassCollection that can do the same thing. But it can't, because it cannot access protected setters. I don't want everyone to be able to set the object's data. But it seems that it is an all-or-nothing proposition. I cannot give just the collection class access to the setters. I've seen a solution using debug_backtrace() but that seems inelegant. I'm moving toward just making the setters public. Are there any other solutions? Or should I even be looking for other solutions?

    Read the article

  • Where is the object browser in VS 2010

    - by Keltari
    I am teaching myself C# and Im using a book that references Visual Studio 2008. However, I am using VS 2010. The book wants me to look at the object browser by choosing View, Other Windows, Object Browser from the menu. However, the object browser is not there. I moused over the icons on the menu and nothing stood out. So, where is it? Also, am I going to run into more problems like this? Is it worth getting an updated book?

    Read the article

  • How to make a queue switches from FIFO mode to priority mode?

    - by enzom83
    I would like to implement a queue capable of operating both in the FIFO mode and in the priority mode. This is a message queue, and the priority is first of all based on the message type: for example, if the messages of A type have higher priority than the messages of the B type, as a consequence all messages of A type are dequeued first, and finally the messages of B type are dequeued. Priority mode: my idea consists of using multiple queues, one for each type of message; in this way, I can manage a priority based on the message type: just take first the messages from the queue at a higher priority and progressively from lower priority queues. FIFO mode: how to handle FIFO mode using multiple queues? In other words, the user does not see multiple queues, but it uses the queue as if it were a single queue, so that the messages leave the queue in the order they arrive when the priority mode is disabled. In order to achieve this second goal I have thought to use a further queue to manage the order of arrival of the types of messages: let me explain better with the following code snippet. int NUMBER_OF_MESSAGE_TYPES = 4; int CAPACITY = 50; Queue[] internalQueues = new Queue[NUMBER_OF_MESSAGE_TYPES]; Queue<int> queueIndexes = new Queue<int>(CAPACITY); void Enqueue(object message) { int index = ... // the destination queue (ie its index) is chosen according to the type of message. internalQueues[index].Enqueue(message); queueIndexes.Enqueue(index); } object Dequeue() { if (fifo_mode_enabled) { // What is the next type that has been enqueued? int index = queueIndexes.Dequeue(); return internalQueues[index].Dequeue(); } if (priority_mode_enabled) { for(int i=0; i < NUMBER_OF_MESSAGE_TYPES; i++) { int currentQueueIndex = i; if (!internalQueues[currentQueueIndex].IsEmpty()) { object result = internalQueues[currentQueueIndex].Dequeue(); // The following statement is fundamental to a subsequent switching // from priority mode to FIFO mode: the messages that have not been // dequeued (since they had lower priority) remain in the order in // which they were queued. queueIndexes.RemoveFirstOccurrence(currentQueueIndex); return result; } } } } What do you think about this idea? Are there better or more simple implementations?

    Read the article

  • Use unnamed object to invoke method or not?

    - by Chen OT
    If I have a class with only only public method. When I use this class, is it good to use unnamed object to invoke its method? normal: TaxFileParser tax_parser(tax_file_name); auto content = tax_parser.get_content(); or unnamed object version: auto content = TaxFileParser(tax_file_name).get_content(); Because I've told that we should avoid temporary as possible. If tax_parser object is used only once, can I call it a temporary and try to eliminate it? Any suggestion will be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Is OOP hard because it is not natural?

    - by zvrba
    One can often hear that OOP naturally corresponds to the way people think about the world. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: We (or at least I) conceptualize the world in terms of relationships between things we encounter, but the focus of OOP is designing individual classes and their hierarchies. Note that, in everyday life, relationships and actions exist mostly between objects that would have been instances of unrelated classes in OOP. Examples of such relationships are: "my screen is on top of the table"; "I (a human being) am sitting on a chair"; "a car is on the road"; "I am typing on the keyboard"; "the coffee machine boils water", "the text is shown in the terminal window." We think in terms of bivalent (sometimes trivalent, as, for example in, "I gave you flowers") verbs where the verb is the action (relation) that operates on two objects to produce some result/action. The focus is on action, and the two (or three) [grammatical] objects have equal importance. Contrast that with OOP where you first have to find one object (noun) and tell it to perform some action on another object. The way of thinking is shifted from actions/verbs operating on nouns to nouns operating on nouns -- it is as if everything is being said in passive or reflexive voice, e.g., "the text is being shown by the terminal window". Or maybe "the text draws itself on the terminal window". Not only is the focus shifted to nouns, but one of the nouns (let's call it grammatical subject) is given higher "importance" than the other (grammatical object). Thus one must decide whether one will say terminalWindow.show(someText) or someText.show(terminalWindow). But why burden people with such trivial decisions with no operational consequences when one really means show(terminalWindow, someText)? [Consequences are operationally insignificant -- in both cases the text is shown on the terminal window -- but can be very serious in the design of class hierarchies and a "wrong" choice can lead to convoluted and hard to maintain code.] I would therefore argue that the mainstream way of doing OOP (class-based, single-dispatch) is hard because it IS UNNATURAL and does not correspond to how humans think about the world. Generic methods from CLOS are closer to my way of thinking, but, alas, this is not widespread approach. Given these problems, how/why did it happen that the currently mainstream way of doing OOP became so popular? And what, if anything, can be done to dethrone it?

    Read the article

  • Replaceable parameter syntax meaning

    - by Alexander N.
    Replaceable parameter syntax for the console object in C#. I am taking the O'Reilly C# Course 1 and it is asking for a replaceable parameter syntax and it is not very clear on what that means. Currently I used this: double trouble = 99999.0009; double bubble = 11111.0001; Console.WriteLine(trouble * bubble); Am I missing the meaning of replaceable parameter syntax? Can someone provide an example for what I am looking for? Original question for the quiz: "Create two variables, both doubles, assign them numbers greater than 10,000, and include a decimal component. Output the result of multiplying the numbers together, but use replaceable parameter syntax of the Console object, and multiply the numbers within the call to the Console.WriteLine() method."

    Read the article

  • Unity: Render 2D textures on a 3D object's face

    - by www.Sillitoy.com
    I am not familiar with 3D graphics and I'd like to know what is the right way to render some 2D figures on different points of a wider face of a 3D object. My 3D object is just a cube representing a poker table. I have 2D png for players placeholders and I'd like to render these figures on the 3D object where needed. An alternative solution would be to render the whole face with a big picture containing all the placeholders figures. However it would be a waste of memory and thus less efficient. What do you suggest me?

    Read the article

  • Repelling a rigidbody in the direction an object is rotating

    - by ndg
    Working in Unity, I have a game object which I rotate each frame, like so: void Update() { transform.Rotate(new Vector3(0, 1, 0) * speed * Time.deltaTime); } However, I'm running into problems when it comes to applying a force to rigidbodies that collide with this game objects sphere collider. The effect I'm hoping to achieve is that objects which touch the collider are thrown in roughly the same direction as the object is rotating. To do this, I've tried the following: Vector3 force = ((transform.localRotation * Vector3.forward) * 2000) * Time.deltaTime; collision.gameObject.rigidbody.AddForce(force, ForceMode.Impulse); Unfortunately this doesn't always match the rotation of the object. To debug the issue, I wrote a simple OnDrawGizmos script, which (strangely) appears to draw the line correctly oriented to the rotation. void OnDrawGizmos() { Vector3 pos = transform.position + ((transform.localRotation * Vector3.forward) * 2); Debug.DrawLine(transform.position, pos, Color.red); } You can see the result of the OnDrawGizmos function below: What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Camera placement sphere for an always fully visible object

    - by BengtR
    Given an object: With the bounds [x, y, z, width, height, depth] And an orthographic projection [left, right, bottom, top, near, far] I want to determine the radius of a sphere which allows me to randomly place my camera on so that: The object is fully visible from all positions on this sphere The sphere radius is the smallest possible value while still satisfying 1. Assume the object is centered around the origin. How can I find this radius? I'm currently using sqrt(width^2 + height^2 + depth^2) but I'm not sure that's the correct value, as it doesn't take the camera into account. Thanks for any advice. I'm sorry for confusing a few things here. My comments below should clarify what I'm trying to do actually.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >