Search Results

Search found 3283 results on 132 pages for 'aspect oriented'.

Page 33/132 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • XAML Binding to complex value objects

    - by Gus
    I have a complex value object class that has 1) a number or read-only properties; 2) a private constructor; and 3) a number of static singleton instance properties [so the properties of a ComplexValueObject never change and an individual value is instantiated once in the application's lifecycle]. public class ComplexValueClass { /* A number of read only properties */ private readonly string _propertyOne; public string PropertyOne { get { return _propertyOne; } } private readonly string _propertyTwo; public string PropertyTwo { get { return _propertyTwo; } } /* a private constructor */ private ComplexValueClass(string propertyOne, string propertyTwo) { _propertyOne = propertyOne; _propertyTwo = PropertyTwo; } /* a number of singleton instances */ private static ComplexValueClass _complexValueObjectOne; public static ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObjectOne { get { if (_complexValueObjectOne == null) { _complexValueObjectOne = new ComplexValueClass("string one", "string two"); } return _complexValueObjectOne; } } private static ComplexValueClass _complexValueObjectTwo; public static ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObjectTwo { get { if (_complexValueObjectTwo == null) { _complexValueObjectTwo = new ComplexValueClass("string three", "string four"); } return _complexValueObjectTwo; } } } I have a data context class that looks something like this: public class DataContextClass : INotifyPropertyChanged { private ComplexValueClass _complexValueClass; public ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObject { get { return _complexValueClass; } set { _complexValueClass = value; PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs("ComplexValueObject")); } } } I would like to write a XAML binding statement to a property on my complex value object that updates the UI whenever the entire complex value object changes. What is the best and/or most concise way of doing this? I have something like: <Object Value="{Binding ComplexValueObject.PropertyOne}" /> but the UI does not update when ComplexValueObject as a whole changes.

    Read the article

  • Implementation of a general-purpose object structure (property bag)

    - by Thomas Wanner
    We need to implement some general-purpose object structure, much like an object in dynamic languages, that would give us a possibility of creating the whole object graph on-the-fly. This class has to be serializable and somehow user friendly. So far we have made some experiments with class derived from Dictionary<string, object> using the dot notation path to store properties and collections in the object tree. We have also find an article that implements something similar, but it doesn't seem to fit completely into our picture either. Do you know about some good implementations / libraries that deal with a similar problem or do you have any (non-trivial) ideas that could help us with our own implementation ? Also, I probably have to say that we are using .NET 3.5, so we can't take advantage of the new features in .NET 4.0 like dynamic type etc. (as far as I know it's also not possible to use any subset of it in .NET 3.5 solution).

    Read the article

  • Attribute References in Python

    - by Jeune
    I do Java programming and recently started learning Python via the official documentation. I see that we can dynamically add data attributes to an instance object unlike in Java: class House: pass my_house = House() my_house.number = 40 my_house.rooms = 8 my_house.garden = 1 My question is, in what situations is this feature used? What are the advantages and disadvantages compared to the way it is done in Java?

    Read the article

  • Accessing the Private Constructor

    - by harigm
    I am java developer, went for an interview. I have been asked a question about the Private constructor 1) Can I access a Private Constructor of a Class and Instantiate the class. I was thinking and gave the answer directly--- "NO" But its wrong, can any one help Why NO? and How we can achieve this

    Read the article

  • Collaboration Diagrams: how to represent setting a variable's and attribute's value to a specified v

    - by devoured elysium
    Let's assume I have a class called MyClass with an attribute called MyAttribute and a method called MyMethod(). Inside that method I'd like to have a variable called MyVariable. I'd like to set the value of MyVariable to "MyVariable" and MyAttribute to "MyAttribute" inside the call to MyMethod(). How can I do this in a Collaboration Diagram? I can't find any info of this kind on the internet and the book I'm studying from (Applying UML and Patterns) is very vague in the details. Thanks

    Read the article

  • looking for automated modeling tool for ASP.Net class diagramming

    - by alchemical
    I'm walking into a project with 500+ classes, and am wondering if anyone has had good experiences with automated modeling tools that can import from ASP.Net /C#? It would be a bonus if I could get an automated model based on all the objects called to completely load a single ASP.Net page, with relationships indicating which objects are calling out to which other ones, etc. Thanks for sharing your thoughts or recomendations.

    Read the article

  • Example with Visitor Pattern

    - by devoured elysium
    public class Song { public string Genre { get; protected set; } public string Name { get; protected set; } public string Band { get; protected set; } public Song(string name, string band, string genre) { Name = name; Genre = genre; Band = band; } } public interface IMusicVisistor { void Visit(List<Song> items); } public class MusicLibrary { List<Song> _songs = new List<Song> { ...songs ... }; public void Accept(IMusicVisitor visitor) { visitor.Visit(_songs); } } and now here's one Visitor I made: public class RockMusicVisitor : IMusicVisitor { public List<Song> Songs { get; protected set; } public void Visit(List<Song> items) { Songs = items.Where(x => x.Genre == "Rock").ToList(); } } Why is this any better than just putting a public property Songs and then letting any kind of class do with it anything that it wants to? This example comes from this post.

    Read the article

  • fluent nHibernate mapping of subclassed structure

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

    Read the article

  • Wrappers/law of demeter seems to be an anti-pattern...

    - by Robert Fraser
    I've been reading up on this "Law of Demeter" thing, and it (and pure "wrapper" classes in general) seem to generally be anti patterns. Consider an implementation class: class Foo { void doSomething() { /* whatever */ } } Now consider two different implementations of another class: class Bar1 { private static Foo _foo = new Foo(); public static Foo getFoo() { return _foo; } } class Bar2 { private static Foo _foo = new Foo(); public static void doSomething() { _foo.doSomething(); } } And the ways to call said methods: callingMethod() { Bar1.getFoo().doSomething(); // Version 1 Bar2.doSomething(); // Version 2 } At first blush, version 1 seems a bit simpler, and follows the "rule of Demeter", hide Foo's implementation, etc, etc. But this ties any changes in Foo to Bar. For example, if a parameter is added to doSomething, then we have: class Foo { void doSomething(int x) { /* whatever */ } } class Bar1 { private static Foo _foo = new Foo(); public static Foo getFoo() { return _foo; } } class Bar2 { private static Foo _foo = new Foo(); public static void doSomething(int x) { _foo.doSomething(x); } } callingMethod() { Bar1.getFoo().doSomething(5); // Version 1 Bar2.doSomething(5); // Version 2 } In both versions, Foo and callingMethod need to be changed, but in Version 2, Bar also needs to be changed. Can someone explain the advantage of having a wrapper/facade (with the exception of adapters or wrapping an external API or exposing an internal one).

    Read the article

  • Are ORM's counterproductive to OO design?

    - by Jeremiah
    In OOD, design of an object is said to be characterized by its identity and behavior. Having used OR/M's in the past, the primary purpose, in my opinion, revolves around the ability to store/retrieve data. That is to say, OR/M objects are not design by behavior, but rather data (i.e. database tables). Case and point: Many OR/M tools come with a point-to-a-database-table-and-click-object-generator. If objects are no longer characterized by behavior this will, in my opinion, muddy the identity and responsibility of the objects. Subsequently, if objects are not defined by a responsibility this could lend a hand to having tightly coupled classes and overall poor design. Furthermore, I would think that in an application setting, you would be heading towards scalability issues. So, my question is, do you think that ORM's are counterproductive to OO design? Perhaps the underlying question would be whether or not they are counterproductive to application development.

    Read the article

  • Clear all class variables between instances

    - by ensnare
    This is probably a stupid question, but what's the best way to clear class variables between instances? I know I could reset each variable individually in the constructor; but is there a way to do this in bulk? Or am I doing something totally wrong that requires a different approach? Thanks for helping ... class User(): def __init__(self): #RESET ALL CLASS VARIABLES def commit(self): #Commit variables to database >>u = User() >>u.name = 'Jason' >>u.email = '[email protected]' >>u.commit() So that each time User is called the variables are fresh. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • read access violation error

    - by user293569
    class Node{ private: string name; Node** adjacent; int adjNum; public: Node(); Node(string, int adj_num); Node(const Node &); bool addAdjacent(const Node &); Node** getAdjacents(); string getName(); ~Node(); }; bool Node::addAdjacent(const Node &anode){ Node** temp; temp= new Node*[adjNum+1]; for(int i=0;i<adjNum+1;i++) temp[i]=adjacent[i]; temp[adjNum]=const_cast<Node *>(&anode); delete[] adjacent; adjacent=new Node*[adjNum+1]; adjacent=temp; delete[] temp; adjNum++; return true; } int main() { Node node1("A",0); Node node2("B",0); node1.getName(); node1.addAdjacent(node2); system("PAUSE"); return 0; } when the program comes to this part: for(int i=0;i<adjNum+1;i++) temp[i]=adjacent[i]; it says Access violation reading location 0xcccccccc. The class must allocate the memory fore adjacent, but I think it didn't how can I solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • inner class within Interface

    - by harigm
    is that possible to create a inner class within an interface? If yes, why do we create like that? Anyways we are not going to create any interface objects? Do they help in any Development process?

    Read the article

  • OOP Design for an Economy

    - by waiwai933
    Not sure where to start, so I'm just going to plow in. Let's say I'm trying to represent an economy in OOP. A basic design I've come up with is: class Person{ int $money; // Money someone has in wallet/purse int $bank_account_id; function getAmountOfMoney() function addMoney($amountToAdd) function subtractMoney($amountToSubtract) } class BankAccount{ int $money; // Money in Bank Account int $interest_per_year; function giveInterest() function depositMoney() // Calls $person->subtractMoney() function withdrawMoney() // Calls $person->addMoney() } Are there any design flaws here?

    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

  • Generics with constraints hierarchy

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

    Read the article

  • should I ever put a major version number into a C#/Java namespace?

    - by Andrew Patterson
    I am designing a set of 'service' layer objects (data objects and interface definitions) for a WCF web service (that will be consumed by third party clients i.e. not in-house, so outside my direct control). I know that I am not going to get the interface definition exactly right - and am wanting to prepare for the time when I know that I will have to introduce a breaking set of new data objects. However, the reality of the world I am in is that I will also need to run my first version simultaneously for quite a while. The first version of my service will have URL of http://host/app/v1service.svc and when the times comes by new version will live at http://host/app/v2service.svc However, when it comes to the data objects and interfaces, I am toying with putting the 'major' version of the interface number into the actual namespace of the classes. namespace Company.Product.V1 { [DataContract(Namespace = "company-product-v1")] public class Widget { [DataMember] string widgetName; } public interface IFunction { Widget GetWidgetData(int code); } } When the time comes for a fundamental change to the service, I will introduce some classes like namespace Company.Product.V2 { [DataContract(Namespace = "company-product-v2")] public class Widget { [DataMember] int widgetCode; [DataMember] int widgetExpiry; } public interface IFunction { Widget GetWidgetData(int code); } } The advantages as I see it are that I will be able to have a single set of code serving both interface versions, sharing functionality where possible. This is because I will be able to reference both interface versions as a distinct set of C# objects. Similarly, clients may use both interface versions simultaneously, perhaps using V1.Widget in some legacy code whilst new bits move on to V2.Widget. Can anyone tell why this is a stupid idea? I have a nagging feeling that this is a bit smelly.. notes: I am obviously not proposing every single new version of the service would be in a new namespace. Presumably I will do as many non-breaking interface changes as possible, but I know that I will hit a point where all the data modelling will probably need a significant rewrite. I understand assembly versioning etc but I think this question is tangential to that type of versioning. But I could be wrong.

    Read the article

  • iphone: caching and updating xml fields

    - by pJosh
    Thanks for your help. Here I have another question. I get the data through XMLParsing, now I want to store it in iphone's cache, and the XML Fields are updates every 12 hours.how can i check that XML Fields are change or not? and how can I store the data in iphone's cache memory so that evry it does not has to interact with web. Can anybody please help me???

    Read the article

  • Tinyxml Multi Task

    - by shaimagz
    I have a single xml file and every new thread of the program (BHO) is using the same Tinyxml file. every time a new window is open in the program, it runs this code: const char * xmlFileName = "C:\\browsarityXml.xml"; TiXmlDocument doc(xmlFileName); doc.LoadFile(); //some new lines in the xml.. and than save: doc.SaveFile(xmlFileName); The problem is that after the first window is adding new data to the xml and saves it, the next window can't add to it. although the next one can read the data in the xml, it can't write to it. I thought about two possibilities to make it work, but I don't know how to implement them: Destroy the doc object when I'm done with it. Some function in Tinyxml library to unload the file. Any help or better understanding of the problem will be great. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What is the equivalent of .NET events in Ruby?

    - by Gishu
    The problem is very simple. An object needs to notify some events that might be of interest to observers. When I sat to validate a design that I cooked up now in Ruby just to validate it.. I find myself stumped as to how to implement the object events. In .Net this would be a one-liner.. .Net also does handler method signature verification,etc. e.g. // Object with events public delegate void HandlerSignature(int a); public event HandlerSignature MyEvent; public event HandlerSignature AnotherCriticalEvent; // Client MyObject.MyEvent += new HandlerSignature(MyHandlerMethod); // MyHandlerMethod has same signature as delegate Is there an EventDispatcher module or something that I am missing that I can strap on to a Ruby class ? Hoping for an answer that plays along with Ruby's principle of least surprise. An event would be the name of the event plus a queue of [observer, methodName] objects that need to be invoked when the event takes place.

    Read the article

  • Create a Python User() class that both creates new users and modifies existing users

    - by ensnare
    I'm trying to figure out the best way to create a class that can modify and create new users all in one. This is what I'm thinking: class User(object): def __init__(self,user_id): if user_id == -1 self.new_user = True else: self.new_user = False #fetch all records from db about user_id self._populateUser() def commit(self): if self.new_user: #Do INSERTs else: #Do UPDATEs def delete(self): if self.new_user == False: return False #Delete user code here def _populate(self): #Query self.user_id from database and #set all instance variables, e.g. #self.name = row['name'] def getFullName(self): return self.name #Create a new user >>u = User() >>u.name = 'Jason Martinez' >>u.password = 'linebreak' >>u.commit() >>print u.getFullName() >>Jason Martinez #Update existing user >>u = User(43) >>u.name = 'New Name Here' >>u.commit() >>print u.getFullName() >>New Name Here Is this a logical and clean way to do this? Is there a better way? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Aren't Information Expert / Tell Don't Ask at odds with Single Responsibility Principle?

    - by moffdub
    It is probably just me, which is why I'm asking the question. Information Expert, Tell Don't Ask, and SRP are often mentioned together as best practices. But I think they are at odds. Here is what I'm talking about: Code that favors SRP but violates Tell Don't Ask, Info Expert: Customer bob = ...; // TransferObjectFactory has to use Customer's accessors to do its work, // violates Tell Don't Ask CustomerDTO dto = TransferObjectFactory.createFrom(bob); Code that favors Tell Don't Ask / Info Expert but violates SRP: Customer bob = ...; // Now Customer is doing more than just representing the domain concept of Customer, // violates SRP CustomerDTO dto = bob.toDTO(); If they are indeed at odds, that's a vindication of my OCD. Otherwise, please fill me in on how these practices can co-exist peacefully. Thank you. Edit: someone wants a definition of the terms - Information Expert: objects that have the data needed for the operation should host the operation Tell Don't Ask: don't ask objects for data in order to do work; tell the objects to do the work Single Responsibility Principle: each object should have a narrowly defined responsibility

    Read the article

  • Learning OOP Design

    - by waiwai933
    I've read Head First Java, and I understand how OOP works. Here's my problem: I'm a PHP programmer, and while I've used OOP in PHP, I'm having trouble figuring out what should be an object and what methods to give it. For example, let's say I have a app that allows people to log in and edit a document. Why should the document be an object if there will ever only be one instance? Should I give the deleteDocument() method to the document object or the admin object? The document is the one being deleted, but the admin is the one performing the action. So my real question is, coming from a procedural background, how do I figure out what should be objects and what should have what methods?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >