Search Results

Search found 25405 results on 1017 pages for 'document oriented db'.

Page 32/1017 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

• How to publishing access DB to https SharePoint2010 site with self-signed certificate

  - by ybbest

  If you are having troubles (shown below) when you publish your access database to https SharePoint2010 site with self-signed certificate. Problem: First you are getting a warning see the screenshot below: And then getting the error message: Solution: The error “The name of the security certificate is invalid or does not match the name of the site” comes when the ‘common name’ in the certificate doesn’t match the address you provided in browser to access the site. To fix the problem , you need to use script to generate the certificate rather than using the IIS UI, this is because it will default the common name to the server name and you will have the above problem when using that certificate to a different host-name web application. You can use SelfSSl.exe (IIS 6.0 only), you have to specify common name(cn), for example as: selfssl.exe /T /N:cn=testsharepoint.com /K:1024 /V:7 /S:1 /P:443 OR you can use makecert (IIS7.0 and above) makecert -r -pe -n 'CN=my.domain.here' -b 01/01/2000 -e 01/01/2036 -eku 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.1 -ss my -sr localMachine -sky exchange -sp "Microsoft RSA SChannel Cryptographic Provider" -sy 12 After you have created the certificate, you then need to add that self-signed certificate to your IIS web site and to the Trusted Root Certification Authorities. (To get to there, Key-in Windows + R and Type mmc.exe and add the certifications console) I have compiled the solution from the questions I have asked in sharepointstackexchange

  Read the article

• Is there any reason to use "container" classes?

  - by Michael

  I realize the term "container" is misleading in this context - if anyone can think of a better term please edit it in. In legacy code I occasionally see classes that are nothing but wrappers for data. something like: class Bottle { int height; int diameter; Cap capType; getters/setters, maybe a constructor } My understanding of OO is that classes are structures for data and the methods of operating on that data. This seems to preclude objects of this type. To me they are nothing more than structs and kind of defeat the purpose of OO. I don't think it's necessarily evil, though it may be a code smell. Is there a case where such objects would be necessary? If this is used often, does it make the design suspect?

  Read the article

• How do game programmers design their classes to reuse in AI, network and play and pass mode?

  - by Amogh Talpallikar

  For a two player game where, your opponent could be on the network, CPU itself or near you where you would play turn by turn on the same machine. How do people design classes for re-use ? I am in a similar situation and have no experience in making such complex games. But here is what I have thought, If I am a player object , I should only be interacting with the GameManager or GameEngine Singleton , from which I will get various notifications about the game status. I dont care where and who my opponent is, this GameManager depending upon the game mode, will interact with gameNetworkManager , or AI tell me what the opponent played. I am not sure about the scenario where we play and pass [turn by turn on same machine]. Hoping for a brief but clear explanation or at least a link to a similar resource.:)

  Read the article

• Explanation on how "Tell, Don't Ask" is considered good OO

  - by Pubby

  This blogpost was posted on Hacker News with several upvotes. Coming from C++, most of these examples seem to go against what I've been taught. Such as example #2: Bad: def check_for_overheating(system_monitor) if system_monitor.temperature > 100 system_monitor.sound_alarms end end versus good: system_monitor.check_for_overheating class SystemMonitor def check_for_overheating if temperature > 100 sound_alarms end end end The advice in C++ is that you should prefer free functions instead of member functions as they increase encapsulation. Both of these are identical semantically, so why prefer the choice that has access to more state? Example 4: Bad: def street_name(user) if user.address user.address.street_name else 'No street name on file' end end versus good: def street_name(user) user.address.street_name end class User def address @address || NullAddress.new end end class NullAddress def street_name 'No street name on file' end end Why is it the responsibility of User to format an unrelated error string? What if I want to do something besides print 'No street name on file' if it has no street? What if the street is named the same thing? Could someone enlighten me on the "Tell, Don't Ask" advantages and rationale? I am not looking for which is better, but instead trying to understand the author's viewpoint.

  Read the article

• Question about SDLC. How to answer this?

  - by pirzada

  I have seen this asked many times in job interviews but I am still not sure how to answer this. I am a web developer for quite some time but I still have problem with explaining OOP and SDLC (Familiar with system development life cycle) . How to prepare for above 2 topics for an interview point of view. Still I use both all the time during development. I am not clear on OOP SDLC Is there any simplest answer to both of these? Thanks

  Read the article

• Describe business logic with diagrams

  - by Nikos M.

  I am currently developing a web application for my thesis.I was asked by my professor to make diagrams to describe the business logic. Since I don't have a prior experience, I am pretty confused with all the terminology. I managed to clarify,I think, what business rules and business logic are, but I can't find out how you describe the business logic. Is it something particular or is it something more general? Do I need to learn UML? Does the fact that I use MVC affects the way I'll describe it?

  Read the article

• Does command/query separation apply to a method that creates an object and returns its ID?

  - by Gilles

  Let's pretend we have a service that calls a business process. This process will call on the data layer to create an object of type A in the database. Afterwards we need to call again on another class of the data layer to create an instance of type B in the database. We need to pass some information about A for a foreign key. In the first method we create an object (modify state) and return it's ID (query) in a single method. In the second method we have two methods, one (createA) for the save and the other (getId) for the query. public void FirstMethod(Info info) { var id = firstRepository.createA(info); secondRepository.createB(id); } public void SecondMethod(Info info) { firstRepository.createA(info); var key = firstRepository.getID(info); secondRepository.createB(key); } From my understanding the second method follows command query separation more fully. But I find it wasteful and counter-intuitive to query the database to get the object we have just created. How do you reconcile CQS with such a scenario? Does only the second method follow CQS and if so is it preferable to use it in this case?

  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

• how do you read from system.out in Java [closed]

  - by Dan

  I'm trying to create a word scramble game and so far I have taken a vector of randomly assorted strings that contains both words and hints and split them into two vectors. I have randomly scrambled the word and set this all up in text boxes. Right now I'm stuck because I have a text box that takes input but I'm not sure how to read that in? I want the user to type the unscrambled word into the text box and have it calculate as correct and move on to the next word immediately. I also don't know how to get the keys working. I want the "?" character to be the hint button that shows the hint. At the moment the hint box works if I type the question mark in using the System.in but it doesn't work if I type it directly in to the text box. The characters are showing up in the text box but nothing is working after that.

  Read the article

• what's the point of method overloading?

  - by David

  I am following a textbook in which I have just come across method overloading. It briefly described method overloading as: when the same method name is used with different parameters its called method overloading. From what I've learned so far in OOP is that if I want different behaviors from an object via methods, I should use different method names that best indicate the behavior, so why should I bother with method overloading in the first place?

  Read the article

• Good Software Architecture book or material?

  - by Inder Kumar Rathore

  I am a programmer and there is always a word going around about the architecture of the application/software. I want to gain some knowledge about how to develop good architecture. I know it is something that comes with the experience but I need some start so that I can practice it and get some good experience. So Please refer a good book for architecture. I know "Head first design patterns" is there, should I go for it or is there some good books also. Thanks

  Read the article

• Any language where every class instance is a class too?

  - by Dokkat

  Taking inspiration from Javascript prototypes, I had the idea of a language where every instance can be used as a class. Before I potentially reinvent the wheel, I would like to ask if there is a language already using this concept: //To declare a Class, extend the base class (in this case, Type) Type(Weapon,{price:0}); //Same syntax to inherit; simply extend the parent: Weapon(Sword,{price:3}); Weapon(Axe,{price:4}); Sword(Katana,{price:7}); Sword(Dagger,{price:3}); //And the same to create an instance: Katana(myKatana,{nickname:"Leon"}); myKatana.price; // 7 myKatana.nickname; // Leon // An operator to return children of a class; Sword_; // [Katana, Dagger] // An operator to return array of descendants; Sword__; // [Katana, Dagger, myKatana] // An operator to return array of parents; Sword^; // Weapon // Arrays can be used as elements Sword__.price += 1; //increases price of Sword's descendants by 1 mySword.price; //8 // And to access specific element (using its name instead of index) var name = "mySword" Katana_[name]; // [mySword] Katana_[name].nickname; // Leon Has this kind of approach been already studied/implemented?

  Read the article

• Something similar to Objective-C categories in other languages?

  - by adig

  I understand Objective-C categories and how they become useful, but I always have a hard time explaining the concept to other programmers that are not familiar with Objective C. Maybe I'm just bad at explaining things, but I was thinking at another way to explain it by comparing to similar features offered by other (more popular) languages. (ex : I can explain the similarities between Objective C protocols and Java Interfaces) Any examples similar to Categories ?

  Read the article

• Explanation of the definition of interface inheritance as described in GoF book

  - by Geek

  I am reading the first chapter of the Gof book. Section 1.6 discusses about class vs interface inheritance: Class versus Interface Inheritance It's important to understand the difference between an object's class and its type. An object's class defines how the object is implemented.The class defines the object's internal state and the implementation of its operations.In contrast,an object's type only refers to its interface--the set of requests on which it can respond. An object can have many types, and objects of different classes can have the same type. Of course, there's a close relationship between class and type. Because a class defines the operations an object can perform, it also defines the object's type . When we say that an object is an instance of a class, we imply that the object supports the interface defined by the class. Languages like c++ and Eiffel use classes to specify both an object's type and its implementation. Smalltalk programs do not declare the types of variables; consequently,the compiler does not check that the types of objects assigned to a variable are subtypes of the variable's type. Sending a message requires checking that the class of the receiver implements the message, but it doesn't require checking that the receiver is an instance of a particular class. It's also important to understand the difference between class inheritance and interface inheritance (or subtyping). Class inheritance defines an object's implementation in terms of another object's implementation. In short, it's a mechanism for code and representation sharing. In contrast,interface inheritance(or subtyping) describes when an object can be used in place of another. I am familiar with the Java and JavaScript programming language and not really familiar with either C++ or Smalltalk or Eiffel as mentioned here. So I am trying to map the concepts discussed here to Java's way of doing classes, inheritance and interfaces. This is how I think of of these concepts in Java: In Java a class is always a blueprint for the objects it produces and what interface(as in "set of all possible requests that the object can respond to") an object of that class possess is defined during compilation stage only because the class of the object would have implemented those interfaces. The requests that an object of that class can respond to is the set of all the methods that are in the class(including those implemented for the interfaces that this class implements). My specific questions are: Am I right in saying that Java's way is more similar to C++ as described in the third paragraph. I do not understand what is meant by interface inheritance in the last paragraph. In Java interface inheritance is one interface extending from another interface. But I think the word interface has some other overloaded meaning here. Can some one provide an example in Java of what is meant by interface inheritance here so that I understand it better?

  Read the article

• Restore SQL Server 2008 db without affecting users

  - by Chris Moschini

  When I restore a db in Sql Server 2008 R2 from data on another server, it makes a mess of the users. I have a Windows User and MsSql Login named Web_SqlA on both machines. Before the Restore, Web_SqlA is properly mapped to the right Windows user in the database. After the Restore, Web_SqlA is still listed as a user for the db, but it's no longer tied to the Windows user, causing Trusted Connections to it to fail. How can I Restore the db without breaking this user each time? I see that this: Sql Server Database Restore And this: Sql Server Database Restore Address fixing these orphaned users after the fact; I'm looking to prevent overwriting the users during the Restore in the first place - everything else should be restored, but leave my users be. How can I go about that?

  Read the article

• Should main method be only consists of object creations and method calls?

  - by crucified soul

  A friend of mine told me that, the best practice is class containing main method should be named Main and only contains main method. Also main method should only parse inputs, create other objects and call other methods. The Main class and main method shouldn't do anything else. Basically what he is saying that class containing main method should be like: public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { //parse inputs //create other objects //call methods } } Is it the best practice?

  Read the article

• How to refactor an OO program into a functional one?

  - by Asik

  I'm having difficulty finding resources on how to write programs in a functional style. The most advanced topic I could find discussed online was using structural typing to cut down on class hierarchies; most just deal with how to use map/fold/reduce/etc to replace imperative loops. What I would really like to find is an in-depth discussion of an OOP implementation of a non-trivial program, its limitations, and how to refactor it in a functional style. Not just an algorithm or a data structure, but something with several different roles and aspects - a video game perhaps. By the way I did read Real-World Functional Programming by Tomas Petricek, but I'm left wanting more.

  Read the article

• When following SRP, how should I deal with validating and saving entities?

  - by Kristof Claes

  I've been reading Clean Code and various online articles about SOLID lately, and the more I read about it, the more I feel like I don't know anything. Let's say I'm building a web application using ASP.NET MVC 3. Let's say I have a UsersController with a Create action like this: public class UsersController : Controller { public ActionResult Create(CreateUserViewModel viewModel) { } } In that action method I want to save a user to the database if the data that was entered is valid. Now, according to the Single Responsibility Principle an object should have a single responsibility, and that responsibility should be entirely encapsulated by the class. All its services should be narrowly aligned with that responsibility. Since validation and saving to the database are two separate responsibilities, I guess I should create to separate class to handle them like this: public class UsersController : Controller { private ICreateUserValidator validator; private IUserService service; public UsersController(ICreateUserValidator validator, IUserService service) { this.validator = validator; this.service= service; } public ActionResult Create(CreateUserViewModel viewModel) { ValidationResult result = validator.IsValid(viewModel); if (result.IsValid) { service.CreateUser(viewModel); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } else { foreach (var errorMessage in result.ErrorMessages) { ModelState.AddModelError(String.Empty, errorMessage); } return View(viewModel); } } } That makes some sense to me, but I'm not at all sure that this is the right way to handle things like this. It is for example entirely possible to pass an invalid instance of CreateUserViewModel to the IUserService class. I know I could use the built in DataAnnotations, but what when they aren't enough? Image that my ICreateUserValidator checks the database to see if there already is another user with the same name... Another option is to let the IUserService take care of the validation like this: public class UserService : IUserService { private ICreateUserValidator validator; public UserService(ICreateUserValidator validator) { this.validator = validator; } public ValidationResult CreateUser(CreateUserViewModel viewModel) { var result = validator.IsValid(viewModel); if (result.IsValid) { // Save the user } return result; } } But I feel I'm violating the Single Responsibility Principle here. How should I deal with something like this?

  Read the article

• software architecture (OO design) refresher course

  - by PeterT

  I am lead developer and team lead in a small RAD team. Deadlines are tight and we have to release often, which we do, and this is what keep the business happy. While we (the development team) are trying to maintain the quality of the code (clean and short methods), I can't help but notice that the overall quality of the OO design&architecture is getting worse over the time - the library we are working on is gradually reducing itself to a "bag of functions". Well, we try to use the design patterns, but since we don't really have much time for a design as such we are mostly using the creational ones. I have read Code Complete / Design Patterns (GOF & enterprise) / Progmatic Programmer / and many books from Effective XXX series. Should I re-read them again as I have read them a long time ago and forgotten quite a lot, or there are other / better OO design / software architeture books been published since then which I should definitely read? Any ideas, recommendations on how can I get the situation under control and start improving the architecture. The way I see it - I will start improving the architectural / design quality of software components I am working on and then will start helping other team members once I find what is working for me.

  Read the article

• Which paradigm to use for writing chess engine?

  - by poke

  If you were going to write a chess game engine, what programming paradigm would you use (OOP, procedural, etc) and why whould you choose it ? By chess engine, I mean the portion of a program that evaluates the current board and decides the computer's next move. I'm asking because I thought it might be fun to write a chess engine. Then it occured to me that I could use it as a project for learning functional programming. Then it occured to me that some problems aren't well suited to the functional paradigm. Then it occured to me that this might be good discussion fodder.

  Read the article

• OOP - Composition, Components and Composites Example?

  - by coder3

  I've been reading a bit about OOP in relation to Composition, Components and Composites. I believe I understand the fundamental principle (not sure). Can some one please provide a code example of a person or car (both have many properties) using Composition, Components and Composites. I think seeing it in code would clear up the confusion I have regarding this pattern. Preferably in Java or PHP - many thanks!

  Read the article

• Questioning the motivation for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

  - by oberlies

  Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So dependency injection may really be an advantage in advanced use cases, but I don't need it for easy construction and testability, do I?

  Read the article

• How to explain OOP to a matlab programmer?

  - by Oak

  I have a lot of friends who come from electrical / physical / mechanical engineering background, and are curious about what is "OOP" all about. They all know Matlab quite well, so they do have basic programming background; but they have a very hard time grasping a complex type system which can benefit from the concepts OOP introduces. Can anyone propose a way I can try to explain it to them? I'm just not familiar with Matlab myself, so I'm having troubles finding parallels. I think using simple examples like shapes or animals is a bit too abstract for those engineers. So far I've tried using a Matrix interface vs array-based / sparse / whatever implementations, but that didn't work so well, probably because different matrix types are already well-supported in Matlab.

  Read the article

• DDD and filtering

  - by tikhop

  I am developing an app in ddd maner. So I have a complex domain model. Suppose I have a Fare object and Airline. Each Airline should contain several or much more Fares. My UI should represent Model (only small part of complex model) as a list of Airline, when the user select the Airline, I must show the list of Fares. User can filtering the Fares (by travel time, cost, etc.). What is the appropriate place for filtering Fares and Airlines? I am assuming that I should do it in ViewModel. Like: My domain model has wrapped with Service Layer - UI works with ViewModel - ViewModel obtain data from Service Layer filtering it and create DTO objects for UI. Or I'm wrong?

  Read the article

• OOP concept: is it possible to update the class of an instantiated object?

  - by Federico

  I am trying to write a simple program that should allow a user to save and display sets of heterogeneous, but somehow related data. For clarity sake, I will use a representative example of vehicles. The program flow is like this: The program creates a Garage object, which is basically a class that can contain a list of vehicles objects Then the users creates Vehicles objects, these Vehicles each have a property, lets say License Plate Nr. Once created, the Vehicle object get added to a list within the Garage object --Later on--, the user can specify that a given Vehicle object is in fact a Car object or a Truck object (thus giving access to some specific attributes such as Number of seats for the Car, or Cargo weight for the truck) At first sight, this might look like an OOP textbook question involving a base class and inheritance, but the problem is more subtle because at the object creation time (and until the user decides to give more info), the computer doesn't know the exact Vehicle type. Hence my question: how would you proceed to implement this program flow? Is OOP the way to go? Just to give an initial answer, here is what I've came up until now. There is only one Vehicle class and the various properties/values are handled by the main program (not the class) through a dictionary. However, I'm pretty sure that there must be a more elegant solution (I'm developing using VB.net): Public Class Garage Public GarageAdress As String Private _ListGarageVehicles As New List(Of Vehicles) Public Sub AddVehicle(Vehicle As Vehicles) _ListGarageVehicles.Add(Vehicle) End Sub End Class Public Class Vehicles Public LicensePlateNumber As String Public Enum VehicleTypes Generic = 0 Car = 1 Truck = 2 End Enum Public VehicleType As VehicleTypes Public DictVehicleProperties As New Dictionary(Of String, String) End Class NOTE that in the example above the public/private modifiers do not necessarily reflect the original code

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >