Search Results

Search found 44734 results on 1790 pages for 'model based design'.

Page 349/1790 | < Previous Page | 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356  | Next Page >

• Explaining the need to avoid horizontal scroll

  - by Bradley Herman

  I need help explaining to my boss why her design is poor on a client's website. She has no knowledge of the web, and it can be difficult as a web developer working with a woman who is a graphic designer (not even a web designer really). On a current site she has designed, an image bar "needs" to be ~1200px according to her, though it isn't necessary with the content. A quick sketch to illustrate what's going on: As you see, the banner spills out past the 960px of the content and as wide as 1200px. This creates a horizontal scroll when all the content is viewable within the 960px wide viewport. I need to make this an <img and not a CSS background because it's a jQuery slideshow that fades from image to image. I think this is a big problem because a lot of people are going to get a horizontal scroll bar imposed in their browser when they're still able to see all the relevant content. She thinks no one will notice and it'll be fine; I think it's very bad practice and confusing to the end user. How do I explain the problem to her?

  Read the article

• Naming convention for non-virtual and abstract methods

  - by eagle

  I frequently find myself creating classes which use this form (A): abstract class Animal { public void Walk() { // TODO: do something before walking // custom logic implemented by each subclass WalkInternal(); // TODO: do something after walking } protected abstract void WalkInternal(); } class Dog : Animal { protected override void WalkInternal() { // TODO: walk with 4 legs } } class Bird : Animal { protected override void WalkInternal() { // TODO: walk with 2 legs } } Rather than this form (B): abstract class Animal { public abstract void Walk(); } class Dog : Animal { public override void Walk() { // TODO: do something before walking // custom logic implemented by each subclass // TODO: walk with 4 legs // TODO: do something after walking } } class Bird : Animal { public override void Walk() { // TODO: do something before walking // custom logic implemented by each subclass // TODO: walk with 2 legs // TODO: do something after walking } } As you can see, the nice thing about form A is that every time you implement a subclass, you don't need to remember to include the initialization and finalization logic. This is much less error prone than form B. What's a standard convention for naming these methods? I like naming the public method Walk since then I can call Dog.Walk() which looks better than something like Dog.WalkExternal(). However, I don't like my solution of adding the suffix "Internal" for the protected method. I'm looking for a more standardized name. Btw, is there a name for this design pattern?

  Read the article

• Users in database server or database tables

  - by Batcat

  Hi all, I came across an interesting issue about client server application design. We have this browser based management application where it has many users using the system. So obvisously within that application we have an user management module within it. I have always thought having an user table in the database to keep all the login details was good enough. However, a senior developer said user management should be done in the database server layer if not then is poorly designed. What he meant was, if a user wants to use the application then a user should be created in the user table AND in the database server as a user account as well. So if I have 50 users using my applications, then I should have 50 database server user logins. I personally think having just one user account in the database server for this database was enough. Just grant this user with the allowed privileges to operate all the necessary operation need by the application. The users that are interacting with the application should have their user accounts created and managed within the database table as they are more related to the application layer. I don't see and agree there is need to create a database server user account for every user created for the application in the user table. A single database server user should be enough to handle all the query sent by the application. Really hope to hear some suggestions / opinions and whether I'm missing something? performance or security issues? Thank you very much.

  Read the article

• How can I place validating constraints on my method input parameters?

  - by rcampbell

  Here is the typical way of accomplishing this goal: public void myContractualMethod(final String x, final Set<String> y) { if ((x == null) || (x.isEmpty())) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("x cannot be null or empty"); } if (y == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("y cannot be null"); } // Now I can actually start writing purposeful // code to accomplish the goal of this method I think this solution is ugly. Your methods quickly fill up with boilerplate code checking the valid input parameters contract, obscuring the heart of the method. Here's what I'd like to have: public void myContractualMethod(@NotNull @NotEmpty final String x, @NotNull final Set<String> y) { // Now I have a clean method body that isn't obscured by // contract checking If those annotations look like JSR 303/Bean Validation Spec, it's because I borrowed them. Unfortunitely they don't seem to work this way; they are intended for annotating instance variables, then running the object through a validator. Which of the many Java design-by-contract frameworks provide the closest functionality to my "like to have" example? The exceptions that get thrown should be runtime exceptions (like IllegalArgumentExceptions) so encapsulation isn't broken.

  Read the article

• Struggling with a data modeling problem

  - by rpat

  I am struggling with a data model (I use MySQL for the database). I am uneasy about what I have come up with. If someone could suggest a better approach, or point me to some reference matter I would appreciate it. The data would have organizations of many types. I am trying to do a 3 level classification (Class, Category, Type). Say if I have 'Italian Restaurant', it will have the following classification Food Services Restaurants Italian However, an organization may belong to multiple groups. A restaurant may also serve Chinese and Italian. So it will fit into 2 classifications Food Services Restaurants Italian Food Services Restaurants Chinese The classification reference tables would be like the following: ORG_CLASS (RowId, ClassCode, ClassName) 1, FOOD, Food Services ORG_CATEGORY(RowId, ClassCode, CategoryCode, CategoryName) 1, FOOD, REST, Restaurants ORG_TYPE (RowId, ClassCode, CategoryCode, TypeCode, TypeName) 100, FOOD, REST, ITAL, Italian 101, FOOD, REST, CHIN, Chinese 102, FOOD, REST, SPAN, Spanish 103, FOOD, REST, MEXI, Mexican 104, FOOD, REST, FREN, French 105, FOOD, REST, MIDL, Middle Eastern The actual data tables would be like the following: I will allow an organization a max of 3 classifications. I will have 3 GroupIds each pointing to a row in ORG_TYPE. So I have my ORGANIZATION_TABLE ORGANIZATION_TABLE (OrgGroupId1, OrgGroupId2, OrgGroupId3, OrgName, OrgAddres) 100,103,NULL,MyRestaurant1, MyAddr1 100,102,NULL,MyRestaurant2, MyAddr2 100,104,105, MyRestaurant3, MyAddr3 During data add, a dialog could let the user choose the clssa, category, type and the corresponding GroupId could be populated with the rowid from the ORG_TYPE table. During Search, If all three classification are chosen, It will be more specific. For example, if Food Services Restaurants Italian is the criteria, the where clause would be 'where OrgGroupId1 = 100' If only 2 levels are chosen Food Services Restaurants I have to do 'where OrgGroupId1 in (100,101,102,103,104,105, .....)' - There could be a hundred in that list I will disallow class level search. That is I will force selection of a class and category The Ids would be integers. I am trying to see performance issues and other issues. Overall, would this work? or I need to throw this out and start from scratch.

  Read the article

• Explaining to boss why we need to avoid horizontal scroll

  - by Bradley Herman

  I need help explaining to my boss why her design is poor on a clients website. She has no knowledge of web and it can be difficult as a web developer working with a woman who is a graphic designer (not even a web designer really). On a current site she has designed, an image bar "needs" to be like 1200px according to her, though it isn't necessary with the content. I'll show a quick sketch to illustrate what's going on: http://imgur.com/MNGOT.jpg As you see, the banner spills out past the 960px of the content and as wide as 1200px. This creates a horizontal scroll when all the content is viewable within the 960px wide viewport. I need to make this an img and not a css background because it's a jquery slideshow that fades from image to image. I think this is a big problem because a lot of people are going to get a horizontal scroll bar imposed in their browser when they're still able to see all the relevant content. How do I help her explain it. She thinks no one will notice and it'll be fine, I think it's very bad practice and confusing to the end user. Any help?

  Read the article

• How do I use a modalViewController Identically in Two Controllers?

  - by Theory

  I'm using the Three20 TTMessageController in my app. I've figured out how to use it, adding on a bunch of other stuff (including TTMessageControllerDelegate methods and ABPeoplePickerNavigationControllerDelegate methods). It works great for me, after a bit of a struggle to figure it out. The trouble I'm having now is a design issue: I want to use it identically in two different places, including with the same delegate methods. My current approach is that I've put all the code into a single class inheriting from NSObject, called ComposerProxy, and I'm just having the two controllers that use it use the proxy, like so: ComposerProxy *proxy = [[ComposerProxy alloc] initWithController:this]; [proxy go]; The go method constructs the TTMessageController, configures it, adds it to a UINavigationController, and presents it: [self.controller presentModalViewController: navController animated: YES]; This works great, as I have all my code nicely encapsulated in ComposerProxy and I need only the above two lines anywhere I want to use it. The downside, though, is that I can't dealloc the proxy variable without getting crashes. I can't autorelease it, either: same problem. So I'm wondering if my proxy approach is a poor one. How does one normally encapsulate a bunch of behaviors like this without requiring a lot of duplicate code in the classes that use it? Do I need to add a delegate class to my ComposerProxy and make the controller responsible for dismissing the modal view controller in a hypothetical composerDidFinish method or some such? Many TIA!

  Read the article

• How to have a policy class implement a virtual function?

  - by dehmann

  I'm trying to design a policy-based class, where a certain interface is implemented by the policy itself, so the class derives from the policy, which itself is a template (I got this kind of thinking from Alexandrescu's book): #include <iostream> #include <vector> class TestInterface { public: virtual void test() = 0; }; class TestImpl1 { public: void test() {std::cerr << "Impl1" << std::endl;} }; template<class TestPolicy> class Foo : public TestInterface, TestPolicy { }; Then, in the main() function, I call test() on (potentially) various different objects that all implement the same interface: int main() { std::vector<TestInterface*> foos; foos.push_back(new Foo<TestImpl1>()); foos[0]->test(); delete foos[0]; return 0; } It doesn't compile, though, because the following virtual functions are pure within ‘Foo<TestImpl1>’: virtual void TestInterface::test() I thought TestInterface::test() is implemented because we derive from TestImpl1?

  Read the article

• Add multiple entities to Javascript namespace from different files

  - by Brian M. Hunt

  Given a namespaces ns used in two different files: abc.js ns = ns || (function () { foo = function() { ... }; return { abc : foo }; }()); def.js // is this correct? ns = ns || {} ns.def = ns.def || (function () { defoo = function () { ... }; return { deFoo: defoo }; }()); Is this the proper way to add def to the ns to a namespace? In other words, how does one merge two contributions to a namespace in javascript? If abc.js comes before def.js I'd expect this to work. If def.js comes before abc.js I'd expect ns.abc to not exist because ns is defined at the time. It seems there ought to be a design pattern to eliminate any uncertainty of doing inclusions with the javascript namespace pattern. I'd appreciate thoughts and input on how best to go about this sort of 'inclusion'. Thanks for reading. Brian

  Read the article

• SQL Concurrent test update question

  - by ptoinson

  Howdy Folks, I have a SQLServer 2008 database in which I have a table for Tags. A tag is just an id and a name. The definition of the tags table looks like: CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Tag]( [ID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Name] [varchar](255) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [PK_Tag] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [ID] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ) Name is also a unique index. further I have several processes adding data to this table at a pretty rapid rate. These processes use a stored proc that looks like: ALTER PROC [dbo].[lg_Tag_Insert] @Name varchar(255) AS DECLARE @ID int SET @ID = (select ID from Tag where Name=@Name ) if @ID is null begin INSERT Tag(Name) VALUES (@Name) RETURN SCOPE_IDENTITY() end else begin return @ID end My issues is that, other than being a novice at concurrent database design, there seems to be a race condition that is causing me to occasionally get an error that I'm trying to enter duplicate keys (Name) into the DB. The error is: Cannot insert duplicate key row in object 'dbo.Tag' with unique index 'IX_Tag_Name'. This makes sense, I'm just not sure how to fix this. If it where code I would know how to lock the right areas. SQLServer is quite a different beast. First question is what is the proper way to code this 'check, then update pattern'? It seems I need to get an exclusive lock on the row during the check, rather than a shared lock, but it's not clear to me the best way to do that. Any help in the right direction will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• archiving strategies and limitations of data in a table

  - by Samuel

  Environment: Jboss, Mysql, JPA, Hibernate Our web application will be catering to a large amount of users (~ 1,000,000) and there are a lots of child table where user specific data are stored (e.g. personal, health, forum contributions ...). What would be the best practice to archive user & user specific information. [a] Would it be wise to move the archived user & user specific information to their respective tables within the same database (e.g. user_archive, user_forum_comments_archive ...) OR [b] Would you just mark the database entries with a flag in the original table(s) and just query only non archived entries. We have a unique constraint on User.loginid, how do you handle this requirement if the users are archived via 1-[a] (i.e if a user with loginid 'samuel' gets moved into the archive table and if a new user gets added with the same name in the original table, how would you prevent this. What would be the best strategy to address the unique key constraints. We have a requirement to selectively archive records and bring it back if necessary, will you rely on database tools are would you handle this via your persistence APIs exposed by the JPA entity model.

  Read the article

• Horizontally align rows in multiple tables using web user control

  - by goku_da_master

  I need to align rows in different tables that are layed out horizontally. I'd prefer to put the html code in a single web user control so I can create as many instances of that control as I want and lay them out horizontally. The problem is, the text in the rows needs to wrap. So some rows may expand vertically and some may not (see the example below). When that happens, the rows in the other tables aren't aligned horizontally. I know I can accomplish all this by using a single table, but that would mean I'd have to duplicate the name, address and phone html code instead of dynamically creating new instances of my user control (in reality there are many more fields than this, but I'm keeping it simple). Is there any way to do this whether with div's, tables or something else? Here's the problem: Mary Jane's address field expands 2 lines, causing her phone field to not align properly with John's and Bob's. Name: John Doe Name: Mary Jane Name: Bob Smith Address: 123 broadway Address: Some really long address Address: Short address Phone: 123-456 that takes up multiple lines Phone: 111-2222 Phone: 456-789 I'm not restricted in any way how to do this (other than using asp.net), but I'd prefer to use a single web control that I instantiate X times at design time (in this example, it's 3 times). I'm using VS2008, and .Net 3.5

  Read the article

• How to store a list in a column of a database table.

  - by John Berryman

  Howdy! So, per Mehrdad's answer to a related question, I get it that a "proper" database table column doesn't store a list. Rather, you should create another table that effectively holds the elements of said list and then link to it directly or through a junction table. However, the type of list I want to create will be composed of unique items (unlike the linked question's fruit example). Furthermore, the items in my list are explicitly sorted - which means that if I stored the elements in another table, I'd have to sort them every time I accessed them. Finally, the list is basically atomic in that any time I wish to access the list, I will want to access the entire list rather than just a piece of it - so it seems silly to have to issue a database query to gather together pieces of the list. AKX's solution (linked above) is to serialize the list and store it in a binary column. But this also seems inconvenient because it means that I have to worry about serialization and deserialization. Is there any better solution? If there is no better solution, then why? It seems that this problem should come up from time to time. ... just a little more info to let you know where I'm coming from. As soon as I had just begun understanding SQL and databases in general, I was turned on to LINQ to SQL, and so now I'm a little spoiled because I expect to deal with my programming object model without having to think about how the objects are queried or stored in the database. Thanks All! John

  Read the article

• Modeling a Generic Relationship (expressed in C#) in a Database

  - by StevenH

  This is most likely one for all you sexy DBAs out there: How would I effieciently model a relational database whereby I have a field in an "Event" table which defines a "SportType"? This "SportsType" field can hold a link to different sports tables E.g. "FootballEvent", "RubgyEvent", "CricketEvent" and "F1 Event". Each of these Sports tables have different fields specific to that sport. My goal is to be able to genericly add sports types in the future as required, yet hold sport specific event data (fields) as part of my Event Entity. Is it possible to use an ORM such as NHibernate / Entity framework / DataObjects.NET which would reflect such a relationship? I have thrown together a quick C# example to express my intent at a higher level: public class Event<T> where T : new() { public T Fields { get; set; } public Event() { EventType = new T(); } } public class FootballEvent { public Team CompetitorA { get; set; } public Team CompetitorB { get; set; } } public class TennisEvent { public Player CompetitorA { get; set; } public Player CompetitorB { get; set; } } public class F1RacingEvent { public List<Player> Drivers { get; set; } public List<Team> Teams { get; set; } } public class Team { public IEnumerable<Player> Squad { get; set; } } public class Player { public string Name { get; set; } public DateTime DOB { get; set;} }

  Read the article

• How can we best represent the SDLC process as a board game?

  - by Innogetics

  I recently got interested in financial board games and saw how they can be very useful in educating children about certain concepts. It got me thinking whether it was also possible to represent certain aspects of executing a software project via a boardgame and make it fun. Here are a few things that I have come up so far: human resources and tools / techniques are represented as cards. requirements are also represented as cards, which are dealt equally to each player, and the objective is to move all requirement cards through an "SDLC" board (one per player) that represent a series of squares grouped according to phases (design all the way to deployment) the passage of time is represented in a main square board like monopoly, and completing a trip around the board (passing "Go") allows the player to move each of the requirement cards a number of steps through the SDLC board depending on the capability of the resource cards (senior programmer allows one requirement to move two squares in the dev phase, junior programmer only one, etc.) players will start with play money representing the project budget, and at every pass at "Go" is payday. the player is out of the game if he runs out of funds. the main board also has "chance" / "risk" cards, which represent things that can mess up a project. damage is applied at the roll of a die, and chance modifiers depend on whether the user has "bought" tools / techniques. I haven't implemented this idea yet as I'm still looking at more play elements that can make the game more engaging, as well as soliciting for more ideas. I am planning to release this under Creative Commons license but haven't decided on the exact license yet. Any more game play suggestions are welcome. UPDATE: This was posted in BoardGameGeek and there's now an active discussion thread there. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4436694

  Read the article

• Proper Usage of SqlConnection in .NET

  - by Jojo

  Hi guys, I just want an opinion on the proper usage or a proper design with regards to using SqlConnection object. Which of the 2 below is the best use: A data provider class whose methods (each of them) contain SqlConnection object (and disposed when done). Like: IList<Employee> GetAllEmployees() { using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(this.connectionString)) { // Code goes here... } } Employee GetEmployee(int id) { using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(this.connectionString)) { // Code goes here... } } or SqlConnection connection; // initialized in constructor IList<Employee> GetAllEmployees() { this.TryOpenConnection(); // tries to open member SqlConnection instance // Code goes here... this.CloseConnection(); // return } Employee GetEmployee(int id) { this.TryOpenConnection(); // tries to open member SqlConnection instance // Code goes here... this.CloseConnection(); // return } Or is there a better approach than this? I have a focused web crawler type of application and this application will crawl 50 or more websites simultaneously (multithreaded) with each website contained in a crawler object and each crawler object has an instance of a data provider class (above). Please advise. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Can the Singleton be replaced by Factory?

  - by lostiniceland

  Hello Everyone There are already quite some posts about the Singleton-Pattern around, but I would like to start another one on this topic since I would like to know if the Factory-Pattern would be the right approach to remove this "anti-pattern". In the past I used the singleton quite a lot, also did my fellow collegues since it is so easy to use. For example, the Eclipse IDE or better its workbench-model makes heavy usage of singletons as well. It was due to some posts about E4 (the next big Eclipse version) that made me start to rethink the singleton. The bottom line was that due to this singletons the dependecies in Eclipse 3.x are tightly coupled. Lets assume I want to get rid of all singletons completely and instead use factories. My thoughts were as follows: hide complexity less coupling I have control over how many instances are created (just store the reference I a private field of the factory) mock the factory for testing (with Dependency Injection) when it is behind an interface In some cases the factories can make more than one singleton obsolete (depending on business logic/component composition) Does this make sense? If not, please give good reasons for why you think so. An alternative solution is also appreciated. Thanks Marc

  Read the article

• Designing a general database interface in PHP

  - by lamas

  I'm creating a small framework for my web projects in PHP so I don't have to do the basic work over and over again for every new website. It is not my goal to create a second CakePHP or Codeigniter and I'm also not planning to build my websites with any of the available frameworks as I prefer to use things I've created myself in general. I have no problems in designing that framework when it comes to parts like the core structure, request handling, and so on but I'm getting stuck with designing the database interface for my modules. I've already thought about using the MVC pattern but thought that it would be a bit of a overkill. So the exact problem I'm facing is how my frameworks modules (viewCustomers could be a module, for example) should interact with the database. Is it a good idea to write SQL directly in PHP (mysql_query( 'SELECT firstname, lastname(.....))? How could I abstract a query like SELECT firstname, lastname FROM customers WHERE id=X Would MySQL helper functions like $this->db->get( array('firstname', 'lastname'), array('id'=>X) ) be a good idea? I suppose not because they actually make everything more complicated by requiring arrays to be created and passed. Is the Model pattern from MVC my only real option?

  Read the article

• Is it wise to use temporary tables?

  - by Industrial

  Hi guys, We have a mySQL database table for products. We are utilizing a cache layer to reduce database load, but we think that it's a good idea to minimize the actual data needed to be stored in the cache layer to speed up the application further. All the products in the database, that is visible to visitors have a price attached to them: The prices are stored in a different table, called prices . There are multiple price categories depending on which discount level each visitor (customer) applies to. From time to time, there are campaigns which means that a special price for each product is available. The special prices are stored in a table called specials. Is it a bad to make a temp table that binds the tables together? It would only have the neccessary information and would ofcourse be cached. -------------|-------------|------------ | productId | hasPrice | hasSpecial -------------|-------------|------------ 1 | 1 | 0 2 | 1 | 1 By doing such, it would be super easy to know if the specific product really has a price, without having to iterate through the complete prices or specials table each time a product should be listed or presented. Are temp tables a common thing for web applications or is it just bad design?

  Read the article

• C# using the "this" keyword in this situation?

  - by Alex

  Hi, I've completed a OOP course assignment where I design and code a Complex Number class. For extra credit, I can do the following: Add two complex numbers. The function will take one complex number object as a parameter and return a complex number object. When adding two complex numbers, the real part of the calling object is added to the real part of the complex number object passed as a parameter, and the imaginary part of the calling object is added to the imaginary part of the complex number object passed as a parameter. Subtract two complex numbers. The function will take one complex number object as a parameter and return a complex number object. When subtracting two complex numbers, the real part of the complex number object passed as a parameter is subtracted from the real part of the calling object, and the imaginary part of the complex number object passed as a parameter is subtracted from the imaginary part of the calling object. I have coded this up, and I used the this keyword to denote the current instance of the class, the code for my add method is below, and my subtract method looks similar: public ComplexNumber Add(ComplexNumber c) { double realPartAdder = c.GetRealPart(); double complexPartAdder = c.GetComplexPart(); double realPartCaller = this.GetRealPart(); double complexPartCaller = this.GetComplexPart(); double finalRealPart = realPartCaller + realPartAdder; double finalComplexPart = complexPartCaller + complexPartAdder; ComplexNumber summedComplex = new ComplexNumber(finalRealPart, finalComplexPart); return summedComplex; } My question is: Did I do this correctly and with good style? (using the this keyword)?

  Read the article

• Hierarchical/Nested Database Structure for Comments

  - by Stephen Melrose

  Hi, I'm trying to figure out the best approach for a database schema for comments. The problem I'm having is that the comments system will need to allow nested/hierarchical comments, and I'm not sure how to design this out properly. My requirements are, Comments can be made on comments, so I need to store the tree hierarchy I need to be able to query the comments in the tree hierarchy order, but efficiently, preferably in a fast single query, but I don't know if this is possible I'd need to make some wierd queries, e.g. pull out the latest 5 root comments, and a maximum of 3 children for each one of those I read an article on the MySQL website on this very subject, http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/hierarchical-data.html The "Nested Set Model" in theory sounds like it will do what I need, except I'm worried about querying the thing, and also inserting. If this is the right approach, How would I do my 3rd requirement above? If I have 2000 comments, and I add a new sub-comment on the first comment, that will be a LOT of updating to do. This doesn't seem right to me? Or is there a better approach for the type of data I'm wanting to store and query? Thank you

  Read the article

• Organizing Eager Queries in an ObjectContext

  - by Nix

  I am messing around with Entity Framework 3.5 SP1 and I am trying to find a cleaner way to do the below. I have an EF model and I am adding some Eager Loaded entities and i want them all to reside in the "Eager" property in the context. We originally were just changing the entity set name, but it seems a lot cleaner to just use a property, and keep the entity set name in tact. Example: Context - EntityType - AnotherType - Eager (all of these would have .Includes to pull in all assoc. tables) - EntityType - AnotherType Currently I am using composition but I feel like there is an easier way to do what I want. namespace Entities{ public partial class TestObjectContext { EagerExtensions Eager { get;set;} public TestObjectContext(){ Eager = new EagerExtensions (this); } } public partial class EagerExtensions { TestObjectContext context; public EagerExtensions(TestObjectContext _context){ context = _context; } public IQueryable<TestEntity> TestEntity { get { return context.TestEntity .Include("TestEntityType") .Include("Test.Attached.AttachedType") .AsQueryable(); } } } } public class Tester{ public void ShowHowIWantIt(){ TestObjectContext context= new TestObjectContext(); var query = from a in context.Eager.TestEntity select a; } }

  Read the article

• Generic FSM for game in C++ ?

  - by Mr.Gando

  Hello, I was wondering if there's a way I could code some kind of "generic" FSM for a game with C++?. My game has a component oriented design, so I use a FSM Component. my Finite State Machine (FSM) Component, looks more or less this way. class gecFSM : public gecBehaviour { public: //Constructors gecFSM() { state = kEntityState_walk; } gecFSM(kEntityState s) { state = s; } //Interface void setRule(kEntityState initialState, int inputAction, kEntityState resultingState); void performAction(int action); private: kEntityState fsmTable[MAX_STATES][MAX_ACTIONS]; }; I would love to hear your opinions/ideas or suggestions about how to make this FSM component, generic. With generic I mean: 1) Creating the fsmTable from an xml file is really easy, I mean it's just a bunch of integers that can be loaded to create an MAX_STATESxMAX_ACTION matrix. void gecFSM::setRule(kEntityState initialState, int inputAction, kEntityState resultingState) { fsmTable[initialState][inputAction] = resultingState; } 2) But what about the "perform Action" method ? void gecFSM::performAction(int action) { switch( smTable[ ownerEntity->getState() ][ action ] ) { case WALK: /*Walk action*/ break; case STAND: /*Stand action*/ break; case JUMP: /*Jump action*/ break; case RUN: /*Run action*/ break; } } What if I wanted to make the "actions" and the switch generic? This in order to avoid creating a different FSM component class for each GameEntity? (gecFSMZombie, gecFSMDryad, gecFSMBoss etc ?). That would allow me to go "Data Driven" and construct my generic FSM's from files for example. What do you people suggest?

  Read the article

• Is there an ORM that supports composition w/o Joins

  - by Ken Downs

  EDIT: Changed title from "inheritance" to "composition". Left body of question unchanged. I'm curious if there is an ORM tool that supports inheritance w/o creating separate tables that have to be joined. Simple example. Assume a table of customers, with a Bill-to address, and a table of vendors, with a remit-to address. Keep it simple and assume one address each, not a child table of addresses for each. These addresses will have a handful of values in common: address 1, address 2, city, state/province, postal code. So let's say I'd have a class "addressBlock" and I want the customers and vendors to inherit from this class, and possibly from other classes. But I do not want separate tables that have to be joined, I want the columns in the customer and vendor tables respectively. Is there an ORM that supports this? The closest question I have found on StackOverflow that might be the same question is linked below, but I can't quite figure if the OP is asking what I am asking. He seems to be asking about foregoing inheritance precisely because there will be multiple tables. I'm looking for the case where you can use inheritance w/o generating the multiple tables. Model inheritance approach with Django's ORM

  Read the article

• PHP Object References in Frameworks

  - by bigstylee

  Before I dive into the disscusion part a quick question; Is there a method to determine if a variable is a reference to another variable/object? For example $foo = 'Hello World'; $bar = &$foo; echo (is_reference($bar) ? 'Is reference' : 'Is orginal'; I have been using PHP5 for a few years now (personal use only) and I would say I am moderately reversed on the topic of Object Orientated implementation. However the concept of Model View Controller Framework is fairly new to me. I have looked a number of tutorials and looked at some of the open source frameworks (mainly CodeIgnitor) to get a better understanding how everything fits together. I am starting to appreciate the real benefits of using this type of structure. I am used to implementing object referencing in the following technique. class Foo{ public $var = 'Hello World!'; } class Bar{ public function __construct(){ global $Foo; echo $Foo->var; } } $Foo = new Foo; $Bar = new Bar; I was surprised to see that CodeIgnitor and Yii pass referencs of objects and can be accessed via the following method: $this->load->view('argument') The immediate advantage I can see is a lot less code and more user friendly. But I do wonder if it is more efficient as these frameworks are presumably optimised? Or simply to make the code more user friendly? This was an interesting article Do not use PHP references.

  Read the article

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