Search Results

Search found 69140 results on 2766 pages for 'design time'.

Page 349/2766 | < Previous Page | 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356  | Next Page >

  • How to do a UITable cell with triangle indicator?

    - by zardon
    In the Linked in iphone application I noticed that they have a tableview, see the following picture with what appears to have a triangle indicator pointing upwards. Notice how the tableview cell has a little triangle pointing upwards and is part of a tableview cell. The triangle is the ---^--- part of the image. I'm wondering. How do you make a UITableView with this triangle indicator, and what is this effect called? Thanks

    Read the article

  • MVC pattern implementation. What is the n-relation between its components

    - by Srodriguez
    Dear all, I'm working in a C# project and we are , in order to get some unity across the different parts of our UI, trying to use the MVC pattern. The client is windows form based and I'm trying to create a simple MVC pattern implementation. It's been more challenging than expected, but I still have some questions regarding the MVC pattern. The problem comes mostly from the n-n relationships between its components: Here is what I've understood, but I'm not sure at all of it. Maybe someone can correct me? Model: can be shared among different Views. 1-n relationship between Model-View View: shows the state of the model. only one controller (can be shared among different views?). 1-1 relationship with the Model, 1-1 relationship with the controller Controller: handles the user actions on the view and updates the model. One controller can be shared among different views, a controller interacts only with one model? I'm not sure about the two last ones: Can a view have several controller? Or can a view share a controller with another view? Or is it only a 1:1 relationship? Can a controller handle several views? can it interact with several models? Also, I take advantage of this question to ask another MVC related question. I've suppressed all the synchronous calls between the different members of the MVC, making use of the events and delegates. One last call is still synchronous and is actually the most important one: The call between the view and the controller is still synchronous, as I need to know rather the controller has been able to handle the user's action or not. This is very bad as it means that I could block the UI thread (hence the client itself) while the controller is processing or doing some work. How can I avoid this? I can make use of the callback but then how do i know to which event the callback comes from? PS: I can't change the pattern at this stage, so please avoid answers of type "use MVP or MVVC, etc ;) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Risking the exception anti-pattern.. with some modifications

    - by Sridhar Iyer
    Lets say that I have a library which runs 24x7 on certain machines. Even if the code is rock solid, a hardware fault can sooner or later trigger an exception. I would like to have some sort of failsafe in position for events like this. One approach would be to write wrapper functions that encapsulate each api a: returnCode=DEFAULT; try { returnCode=libraryAPI1(); } catch(...) { returnCode=BAD; } return returnCode; The caller of the library then restarts the whole thread, reinitializes the module if the returnCode is bad. Things CAN go horribly wrong. E.g. if the try block(or libraryAPI1()) had: func1(); char *x=malloc(1000); func2(); if func2() throws an exception, x will never be freed. On a similar vein, file corruption is a possible outcome. Could you please tell me what other things can possibly go wrong in this scenario?

    Read the article

  • How should i organize authority code?

    - by acidzombie24
    I have users that fall into the following Not logged in Not Verified Verified Moderator Admin All code that only admin and moderators can access (like banning) is in ModeratorUser which inherits from verified which inherits from BaseUser. Some pages are accessible to all users such as public profiles. If a user is logged in he can leave a comment. To check this i use if (IsVerifiedUser). Now here is the problem. To avoid problems if a user is banned he is not recognized as a verified user. However in the rare case i need to know if he is verified i can use usertype & Verified. Should i not be doing this? I have a bunch of code in my VerifiedUser class and find i am moving tons of it to BaseUser. Is this something i help because a not logged in user can access the page? Should i handle the ban user in a different way and allow IsVerifiedUser to be true even if the user is banned?

    Read the article

  • Better to use constructor or method factory pattern?

    - by devoured elysium
    I have a wrapper class for the Bitmap .NET class called BitmapZone. Assuming we have a WIDTH x HEIGHT bitmap picture, this wrapper class should serve the purpose of allowing me to send to other methods/classes itself instead of the original bitmap. I can then better control what the user is or not allowed to do with the picture (and I don't have to copy the bitmap lots of times to send for each method/class). My question is: knowing that all BitmapZone's are created from a Bitmap, what do you find preferrable? Constructor syntax: something like BitmapZone bitmapZone = new BitmapZone(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.From(originalBitmap, x , y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.FromBitmap(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Other? Why? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Generalized plugable caching pattern?

    - by BCS
    Given that it's one of the hard things in computer science, does anyone know of a way to set up a plugable caching strategy? What I'm thinking of would allow me to write a program with minimal thought as to what needs to be cached (e.i. use some sort of boiler-plate, low/no cost pattern that compiles away to nothing anywhere I might want caching) and then when things are further along and I know where I need caching I can add it in without making invasive code changes. As an idea to the kind of solution I'm looking for; I'm working with the D programing language (but halfway sane C++ would be fine) and I like template.

    Read the article

  • How do I recover from an unchecked exception?

    - by erickson
    Unchecked exceptions are alright if you want to handle every failure the same way, for example by logging it and skipping to the next request, displaying a message to the user and handling the next event, etc. If this is my use case, all I have to do is catch some general exception type at a high level in my system, and handle everything the same way. But I want to recover from specific problems, and I'm not sure the best way to approach it with unchecked exceptions. Here is a concrete example. Suppose I have a web application, built using Struts2 and Hibernate. If an exception bubbles up to my "action", I log it, and display a pretty apology to the user. But one of the functions of my web application is creating new user accounts, that require a unique user name. If a user picks a name that already exists, Hibernate throws an org.hibernate.exception.ConstraintViolationException (an unchecked exception) down in the guts of my system. I'd really like to recover from this particular problem by asking the user to choose another user name, rather than giving them the same "we logged your problem but for now you're hosed" message. Here are a few points to consider: There a lot of people creating accounts simultaneously. I don't want to lock the whole user table between a "SELECT" to see if the name exists and an "INSERT" if it doesn't. In the case of relational databases, there might be some tricks to work around this, but what I'm really interested in is the general case where pre-checking for an exception won't work because of a fundamental race condition. Same thing could apply to looking for a file on the file system, etc. Given my CTO's propensity for drive-by management induced by reading technology columns in "Inc.", I need a layer of indirection around the persistence mechanism so that I can throw out Hibernate and use Kodo, or whatever, without changing anything except the lowest layer of persistence code. As a matter of fact, there are several such layers of abstraction in my system. How can I prevent them from leaking in spite of unchecked exceptions? One of the declaimed weaknesses of checked exceptions is having to "handle" them in every call on the stack—either by declaring that a calling method throws them, or by catching them and handling them. Handling them often means wrapping them in another checked exception of a type appropriate to the level of abstraction. So, for example, in checked-exception land, a file-system–based implementation of my UserRegistry might catch IOException, while a database implementation would catch SQLException, but both would throw a UserNotFoundException that hides the underlying implementation. How do I take advantage of unchecked exceptions, sparing myself of the burden of this wrapping at each layer, without leaking implementation details?

    Read the article

  • Method hiding with interfaces

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    interface IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; } } class Foo : IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; set; } } public IFoo GetFoo() { return new Foo { MyReadOnlyVar = 1 }; } Is the above an acceptable way of implementing a readonly/immutable object? The immutability of IFoo can be broken with a temporary cast to Foo. In general (non-critical) cases, is hiding functionality through interfaces a common pattern? Or is it considered lazy coding? Or even an anti-pattern?

    Read the article

  • Rails Full Engine using a Full Engine

    - by SirLenz0rlot
    I've got this full rails engine Foo with functionality X. I want to make another engine, engine Bar, that is pretty much the same, but override funcitonality x with y. (it basically does the same, but a few controller actions and views are differently implemented). (I might split this later in several mountable engines, but for now, this will be the setup: project Baz, using engine Bar, which uses engine Foo) I would like to know if there are any pitfalls. It doesn't seem like a pattern that is often used? Anybody else using this 'some sort of engine inheritance'?

    Read the article

  • Singleton Pattern combine with a Decorator

    - by Mike
    Attached is a classic Decorator pattern. My question is how would you modify the below code so that you can wrap zero or one of each topping on to the Pizza Right now I can have a Pepporini - Sausage -- Pepporini -- Pizza class driving the total cost up to $10, charging twice for Pepporini. I don't think I want to use the Chain of Responsibility pattern as order does not matter and not all toppings are used? Thank you namespace PizzaDecorator { public interface IPizza { double CalculateCost(); } public class Pizza: IPizza { public Pizza() { } public double CalculateCost() { return 8.00; } } public abstract class Topping : IPizza { protected IPizza _pizzaItem; public Topping(IPizza pizzaItem) { this._pizzaItem = pizzaItem; } public abstract double CalculateCost(); } public class Pepporini : Topping { public Pepporini(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 0.50; } } public class Sausage : Topping { public Sausage(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 1.00; } } public class Onions : Topping { public Onions(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + .25; } } }

    Read the article

  • Tips on designing a .NET API for future use with F#

    - by Drew Noakes
    I'm in the process of designing a .NET API to allow developers to create RoboCup agents for the 3D simulated soccer league. I'm pretty happy with how the API work with C# code, however I would like to use this project to improve my F# skill (which is currently based on reading rather than practice). So I would like to ask what kinds of things I should consider when designing an API that is to be consumed by both C# and F# code. Some points. I make fairly heavy use of matrix and vector math. These are currently immutable classes/structs. The API currently defines a few interfaces with the consumer implements (eg: IAgent), using instances of their implementations (eg: MyAgent) to construct other API classes (eg: new Client(myAgent)). The API fires events. The API exposes a few delegate types. The API includes several enums. I'd like to release a version of the API as soon as possible and don't want to make major changes to it later if I realise it's too difficult to work with from F#. Any advice is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can I make a family of singletons?

    - by Jay
    I want to create a set of classes that share a lot of common behavior. Of course in OOP when you think that you automatically think "abstract class with subclasses". But among the things I want these classes to do is to each have a static list of instances of the class. The list should function as sort of a singleton within the class. I mean each of the sub-classes has a singleton, not that they share one. "Singleton" to that subclass, not a true singleton. But if it's a static, how can I inherit it? Of course code like this won't work: public abstract A { static List<A> myList; public static List getList() { if (myList==null) myList=new ArrayList<A>(10); return myList; } public static A getSomethingFromList() { List listInstance=getList(); ... do stuff with list ... } public int getSomethingFromA() { ... regular code acting against current instance ... } } public class A1 extends A { ... } public class A2 extends A { ... } A1 somethingfromA1List=(A1) A1.getSomethingFromList(); A2 somethingfromA2List=(A2) A2.getSomethingFromList(); The contents of the list for each subclass would be different, but all the code to work on the lists would be the same. The problem with the above code is that I'd only have one list for all the subclasses, and I want one for each. Yes, I could replicate the code to declare the static list in each of the subclasses, but then I'd also have to replicate all the code that adds to the lists and searches the list, etc, which rather defeats the purpose of subclassing. Any ideas on how to do this without replicating code?

    Read the article

  • smallest mysql type that accomodates single decimal

    - by donpal
    Database newbie here. I'm setting up a mysql table. One of the fields will accept a value in increment of a 0.5. e.g. 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, .... 200.5, etc. I've tried int but it doesn't capture the decimals. `value` int(10), What would be the smallest type that can accommodate this value, considering it's only a single decimal. I also was considering that because the decimal will always be 0.5 if at all, I could store it in a separate boolean field? So I would have 2 fields instead. Is this a stupid or somewhat over complicated idea? I don't know if it really saves me any memory, and it might get slower now that I'm accessing 2 fields instead of 1 `value` int(10), `half` bool, //or something similar to boolean What are your suggestions guys? Is the first option better, and what's the smallest data type in that case that would get me the 0.5?

    Read the article

  • Data Modeling Help - Do I add another table, change existing table's usage, or something else?

    - by StackOverflowNewbie
    Assume I have the following tables and relationships: Person - Id (PK) - Name A Person can have 0 or more pets: Pet - Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name A person can have 0 or more attributes (e.g. age, height, weight): PersonAttribute _ Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name - Value PROBLEM: I need to represent pet attributes, too. As it turns out, these pet attributes are, in most cases, identical to the attributes of a person (e.g. a pet can have an age, height, and weight too). How do I represent pet attributes? Do I create a PetAttribute table? PetAttribute Id (PK) PetId (FK) Name Value Do I change PersonAttribute to GenericAttribute and have 2 foreign keys in it - one connecting to Person, the other connecting to Pet? GenericAttribute Id (PK) PersonId (FK) PetId (FK) Name Value NOTE: if PersonId is set, then PetId is not set. If PetId is set, PersonId is not set. Do something else?

    Read the article

  • CSS box around box technique

    - by webzide
    Dear Experts, I was trying to make an CSS division box with content in it as well as a border around it. Instead of using the box-border technique, I was trying out a new box to box technique instead. <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> #outer{ height: 20px; width: 20px; background-color:#233D78; } #inner{ height:18px; width: 18px; background-color: #FFF; font-size: 1em; text-align:center; font-family:'Bookman Old Style', serif; padding: 0px; margin-top: 1px; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-bottom:1px; vertical-align:middle; } </style> </head> <body> <div id="outer"><div id="inner">TEXT</div></div> </body> </html> Somehow the borders are just not showing up right with FireFox. I tried everything. Setting up the Paddings of both boxes, margin, and messing around with the width. TO be honest, it took me around 30min to do this and I still can't get it right :( I know that a way to achieve the same result would be setting up a border around just one box. But I just wanna learn this box around box background-color technique. THanks in advance

    Read the article

  • C#: How to inherit constructors?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Imagine a base class with many constructors and a virtual method public class Foo { ... public Foo() {...} public Foo(int i) {...} ... public virtual void SomethingElse() {...} ... } and now I want to create a descendant class that overrides the virtual method: public class Bar : Foo { public override void SomethingElse() {...} } And another descendant that does some more stuff: public class Bah : Bar { public void DoMoreStuff() {...} } Do I really have to copy all constructors from Foo into Bar and Bah? And then if I change a constructor signature in Foo, do I have to update it in Bar and Bah? Is there no way to inherit constructors? Is there no way to encourage code reuse?

    Read the article

  • Need alternative field names for these reserved words

    - by MattSlay
    “type” and “class” are likely reserved or problematic words in C# and/or Ruby, two languages I may use to program against my new database schema in the future. So, in order to avoid potential conflicts with those languages, I’m looking for alternative names for these field names in my tables. In this case, it is from my Machines table, where I have: “class” field (values would be something like “manual” or “computerized”) and “type” field (values would be “lathe” or “mill”) I could call the fields “machineclass” and “machinetype”, but that is inconsistent with naming scheme in the rest of my schema (meaning, I do not re-use the table name in the field… For instance, I use Machine.name, not Machine.machinename) Any thought on this madness?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to use try catch inside finally?

    - by Hiral Lakdavala
    Hi, I am using a buffered writer and my code, closes the writer in the finally block. My code is like this. ........... BufferedWriter theBufferedWriter = null; try{ theBufferedWriter =..... .... ...... ..... } catch (IOException anException) { .... } finally { try { theBufferedWriter.close(); } catch (IOException anException) { anException.printStackTrace(); } } I have to use the try catch inside the clean up code in finally as theBufferedWriter might also throw an IOException. I do not want to throw this exception to the calling methos. Is it a good practice to use a try catch in finally? If not what is the alternative? Please suggest. Regards, Hiral

    Read the article

  • Haskell: "how much" of a type should functions receive? and avoiding complete "reconstruction"

    - by L01man
    I've got these data types: data PointPlus = PointPlus { coords :: Point , velocity :: Vector } deriving (Eq) data BodyGeo = BodyGeo { pointPlus :: PointPlus , size :: Point } deriving (Eq) data Body = Body { geo :: BodyGeo , pict :: Color } deriving (Eq) It's the base datatype for characters, enemies, objects, etc. in my game (well, I just have two rectangles as the player and the ground right now :p). When a key, the characters moves right, left or jumps by changing its velocity. Moving is done by adding the velocity to the coords. Currently, it's written as follows: move (PointPlus (x, y) (xi, yi)) = PointPlus (x + xi, y + yi) (xi, yi) I'm just taking the PointPlus part of my Body and not the entire Body, otherwise it would be: move (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus (x, y) (xi, yi)) wh) col) = (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus (x + xi, y + yi) (xi, yi)) wh) col) Is the first version of move better? Anyway, if move only changes PointPlus, there must be another function that calls it inside a new Body. I explain: there's a function update which is called to update the game state; it is passed the current game state, a single Body for now, and returns the updated Body. update (Body (BodyGeo (PointPlus xy (xi, yi)) wh) pict) = (Body (BodyGeo (move (PointPlus xy (xi, yi))) wh) pict) That tickles me. Everything is kept the same within Body except the PointPlus. Is there a way to avoid this complete "reconstruction" by hand? Like in: update body = backInBody $ move $ pointPlus body Without having to define backInBody, of course.

    Read the article

  • Where should I put contextual data related to an Object that is not really a property of the object?

    - by RenderIn
    I have a Car class. It has three properties: id, color and model. In a particular query I want to return all the cars and their properties, and I also want to return a true/false field called "searcherKnowsOwner" which is a field I calculate in my database query based on whether or not the individual conducting the search knows the owner. I have a database function that takes the ID of the searcher and the ID of the car and returns a boolean. My car class looks like this (pseudocode): class Car{ int id; Color color; Model model; } I have a screen where I want to display all the cars, but I also want to display a flag next to each car if the person viewing the page knows the owner of that car. Should I add a field to the Car class, a boolean searcherKnowsOwner? It's not a property of the car, but is actually a property of the user conducting the search. But this seems like the most efficient place to put this information.

    Read the article

  • How should I use color in my application? Single, Theme, or Chaos?

    - by CodeSlave
    How should I be using color in my application? I have over a 100 different forms (windows) in my application, and the default windows grey seems like a bad choice to me. One school of thought says pick one neutral color, and use the same one everywhere. Another school of thought says pick a set of neutral colors, and use them same ones within a group of form (e.g., shipping screens might be light green, receiving screens light orange, user administration screens light blue, etc.). The final school of thought says make every form different. We've got millions of colors, why not use them? What should I do and why?

    Read the article

  • Calling DI Container directly in method code (MVC Actions)

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    I'm playing with DI (using Unity). I've learned how to do Constructor and Property injection. I have a static container exposed through a property in my Global.asax file (MvcApplication class). I have a need for a number of different objects in my Controller. It doesn't seem right to inject these throught the constructor, partly because of the high quantity of them, and partly because they are only needed in some Actions methods. The question is, is there anything wrong with just calling my container directly from within the Action methods? public ActionResult Foo() { IBar bar = (Bar)MvcApplication.Container.Resolve(IBar); // ... Bar uses a default constructor, I'm not actually doing any // injection here, I'm just telling my conatiner to give me Bar // when I ask for IBar so I can hide the existence of the concrete // Bar from my Controller. } This seems the simplest and most efficient way of doing things, but I've never seen an example used in this way. Is there anything wrong with this? Am I missing the concept in some way?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356  | Next Page >