Search Results

Search found 7954 results on 319 pages for 'behavior driven developme'.

Page 33/319 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • how to avoid returning mocks from a mocked object list

    - by koen
    I'm trying out mock/responsibility driven design. I seem to have problems to avoid returning mocks from mocks in the case of finder objects. An example could be an object that checks whether the bills from last month are paid. It needs a service that retrieves a list of bills for that. So I need to mock that service that retrieves the bills. At the same time I need that mock to return mocked Bills (since I don't want my test to rely on the correctness bill implementation). Is my design flawed? Is there a better way to test this? Or is this the way it will need to be when using finder objects (the finding of the bills in this case)?

    Read the article

  • Where and how to validate and map ViewModel?

    - by chobo
    Hi, I am trying to learn Domain Driven Design and recently read that lots of people advocate creating a ViewModels for your views that store all the values you want to display in a given view. My question is how should I do the form validation? should I create separate validation classes for each view, or group them together? I'm also confused on what this would look like in code. This is how I currently think validation and viewmodels fit in to the scheme of things: View (some user input) - Controller - FormValidation(of ViewModel) - (If valid map to ViewModel to Domain Model) - Domain Layer Service - Infrastructure Thanks! P.S. I use Asp.net MVC with C#

    Read the article

  • OOP App Architecture: Which layer does a lazy loader sit in?

    - by JW
    I am planning the implemention an Inheritance Mapper pattern for an application component http://martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/inheritanceMappers.html One feature it needs to have is for a domain object to reference a large list of aggreageted items (10,000 other domain objects) So I need some kind of lazy loading collection to be passed out of the aggregate root domain object to other domain objects. To keep my (php) model scripts organised i am storing them in two folders: MyComponent\ controllers\ models\ domain\ <- domain objects, DDD repository, DDD factory daccess\ <- PoEAA data mappers, SQL queries etc views\ But now I am racking my brains wondering where my lazy loading collection sits. Any suggestions / justifications for putting it in one place over another another? DDD = Domain Driven Design Patterns, Eric Evans - book PoEAA = Patterns of Application Architecture Patterns, Martin Fowler - book

    Read the article

  • "Mail merge"-like functionality in Dreamweaver, or in any other web editing tool?

    - by Chris Farmer
    I have inherited several related, low-traffic web sites to manage and edit. These sites are implemented with static html, and they've accrued lots of stray tags and other cruft. I want to try to clean these up and migrate them to some common page template framework to simplify design and data changes and improve overall consistency. The pages will change on the timescale of weeks, and since the current web hosting plan does not support any dynamic server technologies, I was hoping to just use Dreamweaver or some other tool to merge my content data with some templating structure. I'd like to do content updates every several days and then run the content back through my templates, resulting in new static html that I can upload to the host. Do any tools support this kind of poor-man's data-driven web application? Are there better ways to approach this problem, aside from moving to a new hosting plan and using ASP.NET or PHP?

    Read the article

  • Recommendation for tool/framework that follows the naked objects pattern?

    - by Marcus Munzert
    I am searching for a tool/framework that follows the naked objects pattern and is written in Java. I know about tools like for instance JMatter, Naked Objects and Domain Object Explorer. That's not exactly what I am searching for, though. Open source would be great, but doesn't need to be. My intention is to use that tool/framework for the purpose of model-driven software development to do the modeling part. Ideally, such a tool/framework would provide the option to use JPA to store/load objects.

    Read the article

  • In TDD, should tests be written by the person who implemented the feature under test?

    - by martin
    We run a project in which we want to solve with test driven development. I thought about some questions that came up when initiating the project. One question was: Who should write the unit-test for a feature? Should the unit-test be written by the feature-implementing programmer? Or should the unit test be written by another programmer, who defines what a method should do and the feature-implementing programmer implements the method until the tests runs? If I understand the concept of TDD in the right way, the feature-implementing programmer has to write the test by himself, because TDD is procedure with mini-iterations. So it would be too complex to have the tests written by another programmer? What would you say? Should the tests in TDD be written by the programmer himself or should another programmer write the tests that describes what a method can do?

    Read the article

  • Does Test Driven Development (TDD) improve Quality and Correctness? (Part 1)

    - by David V. Corbin
    Since the dawn of the computer age, various methodologies have been introduced to improve quality and reduce cost. In this posting, I will by sharing my experiences with Test Driven Development; both its benefits and limitations. To start this topic, we need to agree on what TDD is. The first is to define each of the three words as used in this context. Test - An item or action which measures something in some quantifiable form. Driven - The primary motivation or focus of a series of activities (process) Development - All phases of a software project/product from concept through delivery. The above are very simple definitions that result in the following: "TDD is a process where the primary focus is on measuring and quantifying all aspects of the creation of a (software) product." There are many places where TDD is used outside of software development, even though it is not known by this name. Consider the (conventional) education process that most of us grew up on. The focus was to get the best grades as measured by different tests. Many of these tests measured rote memorization and not understanding of the subject matter. The result of this that many people graduated with high scores but without "quality and correctness" in their ability to utilize the subject matter (of course, the flip side is true where certain people DID understand the material but were not very good at taking this type of test). Returning to software development, let us look at some common scenarios. While these items are generally applicable regardless of platform, language and tools; the remainder of this post will utilize Microsoft Visual Studio and Team Foundation Server (TFS) for examples. It should be realized that everyone does at least some aspect of TDD. At the most rudimentary level, getting a program to compile involves a "pass/fail" measurement (is the syntax valid) that drives their ability to proceed further (run the program). Other developers may create "Unit Tests" in the belief that having a test for every method/property of a class and good code coverage is the goal of TDD. These items may be helpful and even important, but really only address a small aspect of the overall effort. To see TDD in a bigger view, lets identify the various activities that are part of the Software Development LifeCycle. These are going to be presented in a Waterfall style for simplicity, but each item also occurs within Iterative methodologies such as Agile/Scrum. the key ones here are: Requirements Gathering Architecture Design Implementation Quality Assurance Can each of these items be subjected to a process which establishes metrics (quantified metrics) that reflect both the quality and correctness of each item? It should be clear that conventional Unit Tests do not apply to all of these items; at best they can verify that a local aspect (e.g. a Class/Method) of implementation matches the (test writers perspective of) the appropriate design document. So what can we do? For each of area, the goal is to create tests that are quantifiable and durable. The ability to quantify the measurements (beyond a simple pass/fail) is critical to tracking progress(eventually measuring the level of success that has been achieved) and for providing clear information on what items need to be addressed (along with the appropriate time to address them - in varying levels of detail) . Durability is important so that the test can be reapplied (ideally in an automated fashion) over the entire cycle. Returning for a moment back to our "education example", one must also be careful of how the tests are organized and how the measurements are taken. If a test is in a multiple choice format, there is a significant statistical probability that a correct answer might be the result of a random guess. Also, in many situations, having the student simply provide a final answer can obscure many important elements. For example, on a math test, having the student simply provide a numeric answer (rather than showing the methodology) may result in a complete mismatch between the process and the result. It is hard to determine which is worse: The student who makes a simple arithmetric error at one step of a long process (resulting in a wrong answer) or The student who (without providing the "workflow") uses a completely invalid approach, yet still comes up with the right number. The "Wrong Process"/"Right Answer" is probably the single biggest problem in software development. Even very simple items can suffer from this. As an example consider the following code for a "straight line" calculation....Is it correct? (for Integral Points)         int Solve(int m, int b, int x) { return m * x + b; }   Most people would respond "Yes". But let's take the question one step further... Is it correct for all possible values of m,b,x??? (no fair if you cheated by being focused on the bolded text!)  Without additional information regarding constrains on "the possible values of m,b,x" the answer must be NO, there is the risk of overflow/wraparound that will produce an incorrect result! To properly answer this question (i.e. Test the Code), one MUST be able to backtrack from the implementation through the design, and architecture all the way back to the requirements. And the requirement itself must be tested against the stakeholder(s). It is only when the bounding conditions are defined that it is possible to determine if the code is "Correct" and has "Quality". Yet, how many of us (myself included) have written such code without even thinking about it. In many canses we (think we) "know" what the bounds are, and that the code will be correct. As we all know, requirements change, "code reuse" causes implementations to be applied to different scenarios, etc. This leads directly to the types of system failures that plague so many projects. This approach to TDD is much more holistic than ones which start by focusing on the details. The fundamental concepts still apply: Each item should be tested. The test should be defined/implemented before (or concurrent with) the definition/implementation of the actual item. We also add concepts that expand the scope and alter the style by recognizing: There are many things beside "lines of code" that benefit from testing (measuring/evaluating in a formal way) Correctness and Quality can not be solely measured by "correct results" In the future parts, we will examine in greater detail some of the techniques that can be applied to each of these areas....

    Read the article

  • Pros and cons of making database IDs consistent and "readable"

    - by gmale
    Question Is it a good rule of thumb for database IDs to be "meaningless?" Conversely, are there significant benefits from having IDs structured in a way where they can be recognized at a glance? What are the pros and cons? Background I just had a debate with my coworkers about the consistency of the IDs in our database. We have a data-driven application that leverages spring so that we rarely ever have to change code. That means, if there's a problem, a data change is usually the solution. My argument was that by making IDs consistent and readable, we save ourselves significant time and headaches, long term. Once the IDs are set, they don't have to change often and if done right, future changes won't be difficult. My coworkers position was that IDs should never matter. Encoding information into the ID violates DB design policies and keeping them orderly requires extra work that, "we don't have time for." I can't find anything online to support either position. So I'm turning to all the gurus here at SA! Example Imagine this simplified list of database records representing food in a grocery store, the first set represents data that has meaning encoded in the IDs, while the second does not: ID's with meaning: Type 1 Fruit 2 Veggie Product 101 Apple 102 Banana 103 Orange 201 Lettuce 202 Onion 203 Carrot Location 41 Aisle four top shelf 42 Aisle four bottom shelf 51 Aisle five top shelf 52 Aisle five bottom shelf ProductLocation 10141 Apple on aisle four top shelf 10241 Banana on aisle four top shelf //just by reading the ids, it's easy to recongnize that these are both Fruit on Aisle 4 ID's without meaning: Type 1 Fruit 2 Veggie Product 1 Apple 2 Banana 3 Orange 4 Lettuce 5 Onion 6 Carrot Location 1 Aisle four top shelf 2 Aisle four bottom shelf 3 Aisle five top shelf 4 Aisle five bottom shelf ProductLocation 1 Apple on aisle four top shelf 2 Banana on aisle four top shelf //given the IDs, it's harder to see that these are both fruit on aisle 4 Summary What are the pros and cons of keeping IDs readable and consistent? Which approach do you generally prefer and why? Is there an accepted industry best-practice?

    Read the article

  • How can I effectively test against the Windows API?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'm still having issues justifying TDD to myself. As I have mentioned in other questions, 90% of the code I write does absolutely nothing but Call some Windows API functions and Print out the data returned from said functions. The time spent coming up with the fake data that the code needs to process under TDD is incredible -- I literally spend 5 times as much time coming up with the example data as I would spend just writing application code. Part of this problem is that often I'm programming against APIs with which I have little experience, which forces me to write small applications that show me how the real API behaves so that I can write effective fakes/mocks on top of that API. Writing implementation first is the opposite of TDD, but in this case it is unavoidable: I do not know how the real API behaves, so how on earth am I going to be able to create a fake implementation of the API without playing with it? I have read several books on the subject, including Kent Beck's Test Driven Development, By Example, and Michael Feathers' Working Effectively with Legacy Code, which seem to be gospel for TDD fanatics. Feathers' book comes close in the way it describes breaking out dependencies, but even then, the examples provided have one thing in common: The program under test obtains input from other parts of the program under test. My programs do not follow that pattern. Instead, the only input to the program itself is the system upon which it runs. How can one effectively employ TDD on such a project?

    Read the article

  • Configure WebLogic MDB to listen to Foreing AMQ Server

    - by eliel.lobo
    I'm trying to create an MDB(EJB 3.0) on WebLogic 10.3.5. to listen to a Queue in an external AMQ server. but after much work and combination of tutorials i get the followin error when deployin on WwebLogic. [EJB:015027]The Message-Driven EJB is transactional but JMS connection factory referenced by the JNDI name: ActiveMQXAConnectionFactory is not a JMS XA connection factory. Here is a brief of the work i have done: I have added the corresponding libraries to my WLS classpath (following thos tuturial http://amadei.com.br/blog/index.php/connecting-weblogic-and-activemq) and I have created the corresponding JMS Modules as indicated in the tutorial. As connection factory I have used ActiveMQConnectionFactory initially and ActiveMQXAConnectionFactory later, I also ignome the jms. notation an just put plain names as testQueue. Then create a simple MDB whit the following structure. I explicitly defined "connectionFactoryJndiName" property because otherwise it assumes a WebLogic connection factory which is not found an then raises an error. @MessageDriven( activationConfig = { @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "destinationType", propertyValue = "javax.jms.Queue"), @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "destination", propertyValue = "testQueue"), @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "connectionFactoryJndiName", propertyValue = "ActiveMQXAConnectionFactory") }, mappedName = "testQueue") public class ROMELReceiver implements MessageListener { /** * Default constructor. */ public ROMELReceiver() { // TODO Auto-generated constructor stub } /** * @see MessageListener#onMessage(Message) */ public void onMessage(Message message) { System.out.println("Message received"); } } At this point I'm stuck with the error mentioned above. Even though I use ActiveMQXAConnectionFactory instead of simply ActiveMQConnectionFactory, JNDI resources tree in web logic server shows org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory as class for my configured connection factory. am i missing something? or is this just a completely wrong way to connect WebLogic whith AMQ? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Is there any way to provide custom factory for .Net Framework creation Entities from EF4 ?

    - by ILICH
    There are a lot of posts about how cool POCO objects are and how Entity Framework 4 supports them. I decided to try it out with domain driven development oriented architecture and finished with domain entities that has dependencies from services. So far so good. Imagine my Products are POCO objects. When i query for objects like this: NorthwindContext db = new NorthwindContext(); var products = db.Products.ToList(); EF creates instances of products for me. Now I want to inject dependencies in my POCO objects (products) The only way I see is make some method within NorthwindContext that makes something like pseudo-code below: public List<Product> GetProducts(){ var products = database.Products.ToList(); container.BuildUp(products); //inject dependencies return products; } But what if i want to make my repository to be more flexible like this: public ObjectSet<Product> GetProducts() { ... } So, I really need a factory to make it more lazy and linq friendly. Please help !

    Read the article

  • AJAX driven "page complete" function? Am I doing it right?

    - by Julian H. Lam
    This one might get me slaughtered, since I'm pretty sure it's bad coding practice, so here goes: I have an AJAX driven site which loads both content and javascript in one go using Mootools' Request.HTML. Since I have initialization scripts that need to be run to finish "setting up" the template, I include those in a function called pageComplete(), on every page Visiting one page to another causes the previous pageComplete() function to no longer apply, since a new one is defined. The javascript function that loads pages dynamically calls pageComplete() blindly when the AJAX call is completed and is loaded onto the page: function loadPage(page, params) { // page is a string, params is a javascript object if (pageRequest && pageRequest.isRunning) pageRequest.cancel(); pageRequest = new Request.HTML({ url: '<?=APPLICATION_LINK?>' + page, evalScripts: true, onSuccess: function(tree, elements, html) { // Empty previous content and insert new content $('content').empty(); $('content').innerHTML = html; pageComplete(); pageRequest = null; } }).send('params='+JSON.encode(params)); } So yes, if pageComplete() is not defined in one the pages, the old pageComplete() is called, which could potentially be disastrous, but as of now, every single page has pageComplete() defined, even if it is empty. Good idea, bad idea?

    Read the article

  • How do I develop database-utilizing application in an agile/test-driven-development way?

    - by user39019
    I want to add databases (traditional client/server RDBMS's like Mysql/Postgresql as opposed to NoSQL, or embedded databases) to my toolbox as a developer. I've been using SQLite for simpler projects with only 1 client, but now I want to do more complicated things (ie, db-backed web development). I usually like following agile and/or test-driven-development principles. I generally code in Perl or Python. Questions: How do I test my code such that each run of the test suite starts with a 'pristine' state? Do I run a separate instance of the database server every test? Do I use a temporary database? How do I design my tables/schema so that it is flexible with respect to changing requirements? Do I start with an ORM for my language? Or do I stick to manually coding SQL? One thing I don't find appealing is having to change more than one thing (say, the CREATE TABLE statement and associated crud statements) for one change, b/c that's error prone. On the other hand, I expect ORM's to be a low slower and harder to debug than raw SQL. What is the general strategy for migrating data between one version of the program and a newer one? Do I carefully write ALTER TABLE statements between each version, or do I dump the data and import fresh in the new version?

    Read the article

  • translating specifications into query predicates

    - by Jeroen
    I'm trying to find a nice and elegant way to query database content based on DDD "specifications". In domain driven design, a specification is used to check if some object, also known as the candidate, is compliant to a (domain specific) requirement. For example, the specification 'IsTaskDone' goes like: class IsTaskDone extends Specification<Task> { boolean isSatisfiedBy(Task candidate) { return candidate.isDone(); } } The above specification can be used for many purposes, e.g. it can be used to validate if a task has been completed, or to filter all completed tasks from a collection. However, I want to re-use this, nice, domain related specification to query on the database. Of course, the easiest solution would be to retrieve all entities of our desired type from the database, and filter that list in-memory by looping and removing non-matching entities. But clearly that would not be optimal for performance, especially when the entity count in our db increases. Proposal So my idea is to create a 'ConversionManager' that translates my specification into a persistence technique specific criteria, think of the JPA predicate class. The services looks as follows: public interface JpaSpecificationConversionManager { <T> Predicate getPredicateFor(Specification<T> specification, Root<T> root, CriteriaQuery<?> cq, CriteriaBuilder cb); JpaSpecificationConversionManager registerConverter(JpaSpecificationConverter<?, ?> converter); } By using our manager, the users can register their own conversion logic, isolating the domain related specification from persistence specific logic. To minimize the configuration of our manager, I want to use annotations on my converter classes, allowing the manager to automatically register those converters. JPA repository implementations could then use my manager, via dependency injection, to offer a find by specification method. Providing a find by specification should drastically reduce the number of methods on our repository interface. In theory, this all sounds decent, but I feel like I'm missing something critical. What do you guys think of my proposal, does it comply to the DDD way of thinking? Or is there already a framework that does something identical to what I just described?

    Read the article

  • When does logic belong in the Business Object/Entity, and when does it belong in a Service?

    - by Casey
    In trying to understand Domain Driven Design I keep returning to a question that I can't seem to definitively answer. How do you determine what logic belongs to a Domain entity, and what logic belongs to a Domain Service? Example: We have an Order class for an online store. This class is an entity and an aggregate root (it contains OrderItems). Public Class Order:IOrder { Private List<IOrderItem> OrderItems Public Order(List<IOrderItem>) { OrderItems = List<IOrderItem> } Public Decimal CalculateTotalItemWeight() //This logic seems to belong in the entity. { Decimal TotalWeight = 0 foreach(IOrderItem OrderItem in OrderItems) { TotalWeight += OrderItem.Weight } return TotalWeight } } I think most people would agree that CalculateTotalItemWeight belongs on the entity. However, at some point we have to ship this order to the customer. To accomplish this we need to do two things: 1) Determine the postage rate necessary to ship this order. 2) Print a shipping label after determining the postage rate. Both of these actions will require dependencies that are outside the Order entity, such as an external webservice to retrieve postage rates. How should we accomplish these two things? I see a few options: 1) Code the logic directly in the domain entity, like CalculateTotalItemWeight. We then call: Order.GetPostageRate Order.PrintLabel 2) Put the logic in a service that accepts IOrder. We then call: PostageService.GetPostageRate(Order) PrintService.PrintLabel(Order) 3) Create a class for each action that operates on an Order, and pass an instance of that class to the Order through Constructor Injection (this is a variation of option 1 but allows reuse of the RateRetriever and LabelPrinter classes): Public Class Order:IOrder { Private List<IOrderItem> OrderItems Private RateRetriever _Retriever Private LabelPrinter _Printer Public Order(List<IOrderItem>, RateRetriever Retriever, LabelPrinter Printer) { OrderItems = List<IOrderItem> _Retriever = Retriever _Printer = Printer } Public Decimal GetPostageRate { _Retriever.GetPostageRate(this) } Public void PrintLabel { _Printer.PrintLabel(this) } } Which one of these methods do you choose for this logic, if any? What is the reasoning behind your choice? Most importantly, is there a set of guidelines that led you to your choice?

    Read the article

  • What XMonad Configuration Best Replicates Default Ion3 Behavior and Feature Set?

    - by mtp
    Not being very familiar with Haskell and lamenting that Ion 3 is now abandonware, I am curious if anyone out there has found a way of replicating the default Ion 3 behavior and aesthetics in XMonad. If I can't have a near-exact replica of Ion 3-style behavior in XMonad, here is what would be critical to me: Virtual desktops that are empty by default and that spawn full-screen applications, which can be split horizontally or vertically evenly, leaving an empty adjacent pane. The panes, which house open windows, are manually resizable, preferably via keyboard. The panes exhibit tabbed behavior, meaning that they can house multiple windows. Windows can be tagged and moved between panes / virtual desktops via keyboard sequence. A given window may be temporarily exploded into full-screen mode via keyboard sequence. Each new virtual desktop starts in the same state—i.e., with one pane. Each virtual desktop may have its panes divided independently of other virtual desktops. From my investigation, it appears that there are several configurations that provide #3. For as much as I want to spend the time to familiarize myself with Haskell, I just simply don't have time. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. As far as I can tell, Ion has no conception of master pane or window, so this behavior is not desired.

    Read the article

  • Do I must expose the aggregate children as public properties to implement the Persistence ignorance?

    - by xuehua
    Hi all, I'm very glad that i found this website recently, I've learned a lot from here. I'm from China, and my English is not so good. But i will try to express myself what i want to say. Recently, I've started learning about Domain Driven Design, and I'm very interested about it. And I plan to develop a Forum website using DDD. After reading lots of threads from here, I understood that persistence ignorance is a good practice. Currently, I have two questions about what I'm thinking for a long time. Should the domain object interact with repository to get/save data? If the domain object doesn't use repository, then how does the Infrastructure layer (like unit of work) know which domain object is new/modified/removed? For the second question. There's an example code: Suppose i have a user class: public class User { public Guid Id { get; set; } public string UserName { get; set; } public string NickName { get; set; } /// <summary> /// A Roles collection which represents the current user's owned roles. /// But here i don't want to use the public property to expose it. /// Instead, i use the below methods to implement. /// </summary> //public IList<Role> Roles { get; set; } private List<Role> roles = new List<Role>(); public IList<Role> GetRoles() { return roles; } public void AddRole(Role role) { roles.Add(role); } public void RemoveRole(Role role) { roles.Remove(role); } } Based on the above User class, suppose i get an user from the IUserRepository, and add an Role for it. IUserRepository userRepository; User user = userRepository.Get(Guid.NewGuid()); user.AddRole(new Role() { Name = "Administrator" }); In this case, i don't know how does the repository or unit of work can know that user has a new role? I think, a real persistence ignorance ORM framework should support POCO, and any changes occurs on the POCO itself, the persistence framework should know automatically. Even if change the object status through the method(AddRole, RemoveRole) like the above example. I know a lot of ORM can automatically persistent the changes if i use the Roles property, but sometimes i don't like this way because of the performance reason. Could anyone give me some ideas for this? Thanks. This is my first question on this site. I hope my English can be understood. Any answers will be very appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Has test driven development (TDD) actually benefited a real world project?

    - by James
    I am not new to coding. I have been coding (seriously) for over 15 years now. I have always had some testing for my code. However, over the last few months I have been learning test driven design/development (TDD) using Ruby on Rails. So far, I'm not seeing the benefit. I see some benefit to writing tests for some things, but very few. And while I like the idea of writing the test first, I find I spend substantially more time trying to debug my tests to get them to say what I really mean than I do debugging actual code. This is probably because the test code is often substantially more complicated than the code it tests. I hope this is just inexperience with the available tools (RSpec in this case). I must say though, at this point, the level of frustration mixed with the disappointing lack of performance is beyond unacceptable. So far, the only value I'm seeing from TDD is a growing library of RSpec files that serve as templates for other projects/files. Which is not much more useful, maybe less useful, than the actual project code files. In reading the available literature, I notice that TDD seems to be a massive time sink up front, but pays off in the end. I'm just wondering, are there any real world examples? Does this massive frustration ever pay off in the real world? I really hope I did not miss this question somewhere else on here. I searched, but all the questions/answers are several years old at this point. It was a rare occasion when I found a developer who would say anything bad about TDD, which is why I have spent as much time on this as I have. However, I noticed that nobody seems to point to specific real-world examples. I did read one answer that said the guy debugging the code in 2011 would thank you for have a complete unit testing suite (I think that comment was made in 2008). So, I'm just wondering, after all these years, do we finally have any examples showing the payoff is real? Has anybody actually inherited or gone back to code that was designed/developed with TDD and has a complete set of unit tests and actually felt a payoff? Or did you find that you were spending so much time trying to figure out what the test was testing (and why it was important) that you just tossed out the whole mess and dug into the code?

    Read the article

  • What's the best Communication Pattern for EJB3-based applications?

    - by Hank
    I'm starting a JEE project that needs to be strongly scalable. So far, the concept was: several Message Driven Beans, responsible for different parts of the architecture each MDB has a Session Bean injected, handling the business logic a couple of Entity Beans, providing access to the persistence layer communication between the different parts of the architecture via Request/Reply concept via JMS messages: MDB receives msg containing activity request uses its session bean to execute necessary business logic returns response object in msg to original requester The idea was that by de-coupling parts of the architecture from each other via the message bus, there is no limit to the scalability. Simply start more components - as long as they are connected to the same bus, we can grow and grow. Unfortunately, we're having massive problems with the request-reply concept. Transaction Mgmt seems to be in our way plenty. It seams that session beans are not supposed to consume messages?! Reading http://blogs.sun.com/fkieviet/entry/request_reply_from_an_ejb and http://forums.sun.com/message.jspa?messageID=10338789, I get the feeling that people actually recommend against the request/reply concept for EJBs. If that is the case, how do you communicate between your EJBs? (Remember, scalability is what I'm after) Details of my current setup: MDB 1 'TestController', uses (local) SLSB 1 'TestService' for business logic TestController.onMessage() makes TestService send a message to queue XYZ and requests a reply TestService uses Bean Managed Transactions TestService establishes a connection & session to the JMS broker via a joint connection factory upon initialization (@PostConstruct) TestService commits the transaction after sending, then begins another transaction and waits 10 sec for the response Message gets to MDB 2 'LocationController', which uses (local) SLSB 2 'LocationService' for business logic LocationController.onMessage() makes LocationService send a message back to the requested JMSReplyTo queue Same BMT concept, same @PostConstruct concept all use the same connection factory to access the broker Problem: The first message gets send (by SLSB 1) and received (by MDB 2) ok. The sending of the returning message (by SLSB 2) is fine as well. However, SLSB 1 never receives anything - it just times out. I tried without the messageSelector, no change, still no receiving message. Is it not ok to consume message by a session bean? SLSB 1 - TestService.java @Resource(name = "jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactory") private javax.jms.ConnectionFactory connectionFactory; @PostConstruct public void initialize() { try { jmsConnection = connectionFactory.createConnection(); session = jmsConnection.createSession(false, Session.AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE); System.out.println("Connection to JMS Provider established"); } catch (Exception e) { } } public Serializable sendMessageWithResponse(Destination reqDest, Destination respDest, Serializable request) { Serializable response = null; try { utx.begin(); Random rand = new Random(); String correlationId = rand.nextLong() + "-" + (new Date()).getTime(); // prepare the sending message object ObjectMessage reqMsg = session.createObjectMessage(); reqMsg.setObject(request); reqMsg.setJMSReplyTo(respDest); reqMsg.setJMSCorrelationID(correlationId); // prepare the publishers and subscribers MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer(reqDest); // send the message producer.send(reqMsg); System.out.println("Request Message has been sent!"); utx.commit(); // need to start second transaction, otherwise the first msg never gets sent utx.begin(); MessageConsumer consumer = session.createConsumer(respDest, "JMSCorrelationID = '" + correlationId + "'"); jmsConnection.start(); ObjectMessage respMsg = (ObjectMessage) consumer.receive(10000L); utx.commit(); if (respMsg != null) { response = respMsg.getObject(); System.out.println("Response Message has been received!"); } else { // timeout waiting for response System.out.println("Timeout waiting for response!"); } } catch (Exception e) { } return response; } SLSB 2 - LocationService.Java (only the reply method, rest is same as above) public boolean reply(Message origMsg, Serializable o) { boolean rc = false; try { // check if we have necessary correlationID and replyTo destination if (!origMsg.getJMSCorrelationID().equals("") && (origMsg.getJMSReplyTo() != null)) { // prepare the payload utx.begin(); ObjectMessage msg = session.createObjectMessage(); msg.setObject(o); // make it a response msg.setJMSCorrelationID(origMsg.getJMSCorrelationID()); Destination dest = origMsg.getJMSReplyTo(); // send it MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer(dest); producer.send(msg); producer.close(); System.out.println("Reply Message has been sent"); utx.commit(); rc = true; } } catch (Exception e) {} return rc; } sun-resources.xml <admin-object-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.LocationControllerRequest" res-type="javax.jms.Queue" res-adapter="jmsra"> <property name="Name" value="mvs.LocationControllerRequestQueue"/> </admin-object-resource> <admin-object-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.LocationControllerResponse" res-type="javax.jms.Queue" res-adapter="jmsra"> <property name="Name" value="mvs.LocationControllerResponseQueue"/> </admin-object-resource> <connector-connection-pool name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactoryPool" connection-definition-name="javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory" resource-adapter-name="jmsra"/> <connector-resource enabled="true" jndi-name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactory" pool-name="jms/mvs.MVSControllerFactoryPool" />

    Read the article

  • Warehouse Management per Endeca: disponibili i video su Youtube

    - by Claudia Caramelli-Oracle
    12.00 Il team di gestione del prodotto WMS ha registrato quattro video sulle estensioni Warehouse Management per Endeca – il programma che gestisce in tempo reale le operazioni di magazzino. Quasi un'ora di contenuti che copre: Introduzione alle estensioni WMS per Endeca Plan and Track Fulfillment Space Utilization Labor Utilization Tutti e quattro i video possono essere trovati cliccando qui. v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} 12.00 Normal 0 14 false false false IT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} 12.00 Normal 0 14 false false false IT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} 12.00 Normal 0 14 false false false IT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} Normal 0 14 false false false IT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}

    Read the article

  • Using Event Driven Programming in games, when is it beneficial?

    - by Arthur Wulf White
    I am learning ActionScript 3 and I see the Event flow adheres to the W3C recommendations. From what I learned events can only be captured by the dispatcher unless, the listener capturing the event is a DisplayObject on stage and a parent of the object firing the event. You can capture the events in the capture(before) or bubbling(after) phase depending on Listner and Event setup you use. Does this system lend itself well for game programming? When is this system useful? Could you give an example of a case where using events is a lot better than going without them? Are they somehow better for performance in games? Please do not mention events you must use to get a game running, like Event.ENTER_FRAME Or events that are required to get input from the user like, KeyboardEvent.KEY_DOWN and MouseEvent.CLICK. I am asking if there is any use in firing events that have nothing to do with user input, frame rendering and the likes(that are necessary). I am referring to cases where objects are communicating. Is this used to avoid storing a collection of objects that are on the stage? Thanks Here is some code I wrote as an example of event behavior in ActionScript 3, enjoy. package regression { import flash.display.Shape; import flash.display.Sprite; import flash.events.Event; import flash.events.EventDispatcher; import flash.events.KeyboardEvent; import flash.events.MouseEvent; import flash.events.EventPhase; /** * ... * @author ... */ public class Check_event_listening_1 extends Sprite { public const EVENT_DANCE : String = "dance"; public const EVENT_PLAY : String = "play"; public const EVENT_YELL : String = "yell"; private var baby : Shape = new Shape(); private var mom : Sprite = new Sprite(); private var stranger : EventDispatcher = new EventDispatcher(); public function Check_event_listening_1() { if (stage) init(); else addEventListener(Event.ADDED_TO_STAGE, init); } private function init(e:Event = null):void { trace("test begun"); addChild(mom); mom.addChild(baby); stage.addEventListener(EVENT_YELL, onEvent); this.addEventListener(EVENT_YELL, onEvent); mom.addEventListener(EVENT_YELL, onEvent); baby.addEventListener(EVENT_YELL, onEvent); stranger.addEventListener(EVENT_YELL, onEvent); trace("\nTest1 - Stranger yells with no bubbling"); stranger.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_YELL, false)); trace("\nTest2 - Stranger yells with bubbling"); stranger.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_YELL, true)); stage.addEventListener(EVENT_PLAY, onEvent); this.addEventListener(EVENT_PLAY, onEvent); mom.addEventListener(EVENT_PLAY, onEvent); baby.addEventListener(EVENT_PLAY, onEvent); stranger.addEventListener(EVENT_PLAY, onEvent); trace("\nTest3 - baby plays with no bubbling"); baby.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_PLAY, false)); trace("\nTest4 - baby plays with bubbling"); baby.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_PLAY, true)); trace("\nTest5 - baby plays with bubbling but is not a child of mom"); mom.removeChild(baby); baby.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_PLAY, true)); mom.addChild(baby); stage.addEventListener(EVENT_DANCE, onEvent, true); this.addEventListener(EVENT_DANCE, onEvent, true); mom.addEventListener(EVENT_DANCE, onEvent, true); baby.addEventListener(EVENT_DANCE, onEvent); trace("\nTest6 - Mom dances without bubbling - everyone is listening during capture phase(not target and bubble phase)"); mom.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_DANCE, false)); trace("\nTest7 - Mom dances with bubbling - everyone is listening during capture phase(not target and bubble phase)"); mom.dispatchEvent(new Event(EVENT_DANCE, true)); } private function onEvent(e : Event):void { trace("Event was captured"); trace("\nTYPE : ", e.type, "\nTARGET : ", objToName(e.target), "\nCURRENT TARGET : ", objToName(e.currentTarget), "\nPHASE : ", phaseToString(e.eventPhase)); } private function phaseToString(phase : int):String { switch(phase) { case EventPhase.AT_TARGET : return "TARGET"; case EventPhase.BUBBLING_PHASE : return "BUBBLING"; case EventPhase.CAPTURING_PHASE : return "CAPTURE"; default: return "UNKNOWN"; } } private function objToName(obj : Object):String { if (obj == stage) return "STAGE"; else if (obj == this) return "MAIN"; else if (obj == mom) return "Mom"; else if (obj == baby) return "Baby"; else if (obj == stranger) return "Stranger"; else return "Unknown" } } } /*result : test begun Test1 - Stranger yells with no bubbling Event was captured TYPE : yell TARGET : Stranger CURRENT TARGET : Stranger PHASE : TARGET Test2 - Stranger yells with bubbling Event was captured TYPE : yell TARGET : Stranger CURRENT TARGET : Stranger PHASE : TARGET Test3 - baby plays with no bubbling Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : Baby PHASE : TARGET Test4 - baby plays with bubbling Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : Baby PHASE : TARGET Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : Mom PHASE : BUBBLING Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : MAIN PHASE : BUBBLING Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : STAGE PHASE : BUBBLING Test5 - baby plays with bubbling but is not a child of mom Event was captured TYPE : play TARGET : Baby CURRENT TARGET : Baby PHASE : TARGET Test6 - Mom dances without bubbling - everyone is listening during capture phase(not target and bubble phase) Event was captured TYPE : dance TARGET : Mom CURRENT TARGET : STAGE PHASE : CAPTURE Event was captured TYPE : dance TARGET : Mom CURRENT TARGET : MAIN PHASE : CAPTURE Test7 - Mom dances with bubbling - everyone is listening during capture phase(not target and bubble phase) Event was captured TYPE : dance TARGET : Mom CURRENT TARGET : STAGE PHASE : CAPTURE Event was captured TYPE : dance TARGET : Mom CURRENT TARGET : MAIN PHASE : CAPTURE */

    Read the article

  • Is there a language where collections can be used as objects without altering the behavior?

    - by Dokkat
    Is there a language where collections can be used as objects without altering the behavior? As an example, first, imagine those functions work: function capitalize(str) //suppose this *modifies* a string object capitalizing it function greet(person): print("Hello, " + person) capitalize("pedro") >> "Pedro" greet("Pedro") >> "Hello, Pedro" Now, suppose we define a standard collection with some strings: people = ["ed","steve","john"] Then, this will call toUpper() on each object on that list people.toUpper() >> ["Ed","Steve","John"] And this will call greet once for EACH people on the list, instead of sending the list as argument greet(people) >> "Hello, Ed" >> "Hello, Steve" >> "Hello, John"

    Read the article

  • Issues with the intended behavior of a Service layer?

    - by Rafael Cichocki
    This analysis makes sense, and states anything that avoids code duplication and simplifies maintenance speaks for a service layer. What is the technical behavior? When a service client references a service, does it do so at runtime, or does it happen at compile time? When I change something in the service layer code, will this change be automatically taken into account in all it's clients, or do they need to be individually recompiled? How does this make sense from a testing point of view - I have working code, based on some code from a service, but if that service changes, my code might break?!

    Read the article

  • Reassessment: What's a good analytics package to use for tracking user behavior in a native iOS app?

    - by BeachRunnerJoe
    Hello. I've been poking around google and SO for answers on this, but it doesn't seem to be very well discussed, so I thought I revisit the question. Is anyone using any analytics packages (like Google Analytics or Mixpanel) to track user behavior in their native iOS apps? The three I've come across are Flurry, Mixpanel, and Google Analytics. It sounds like Apple is still peeved at Flurry, so I don't want to mess with that. Mixpanel looks simple and easy to use, but I'd first like to hear from someone who has used it. Same goes with Google Analytics for the iPhone. I've just finished building an iPhone game and I'd like to begin tweaking it based on how the users are playing it. Does anyone have any recommendations or experience with any of these analytics packages? Thanks so much!

    Read the article

  • How do I revert Alt-tab behavior to switch between windows on the current workspace?

    - by chris.ritsen
    Enabling Bias alt-tab sorting to prefer windows on the current viewport as described here made no difference. How can I get back the exact same behavior as 11.04, so that alt-tab only switches between windows on the current workspace? Simply disabling the alt-tab and shift-alt-tab keybindings on the unity switcher seems to have helped, but it still switches workspaces on me sometimes. For example, if I give a terminal window focus then press alt-tab, it switches to another terminal window on any workspace before trying to switch on the same workspace. Also, the Unity switcher still shows up when I alt-tab then hold alt even though I removed its alt-tab keybinding.

    Read the article

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