Search Results

Search found 5751 results on 231 pages for 'analysis patterns'.

Page 38/231 | < Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >

• Is OOP hard because it is not natural?

  - by zvrba

  One can often hear that OOP naturally corresponds to the way people think about the world. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: We (or at least I) conceptualize the world in terms of relationships between things we encounter, but the focus of OOP is designing individual classes and their hierarchies. Note that, in everyday life, relationships and actions exist mostly between objects that would have been instances of unrelated classes in OOP. Examples of such relationships are: "my screen is on top of the table"; "I (a human being) am sitting on a chair"; "a car is on the road"; "I am typing on the keyboard"; "the coffee machine boils water", "the text is shown in the terminal window." We think in terms of bivalent (sometimes trivalent, as, for example in, "I gave you flowers") verbs where the verb is the action (relation) that operates on two objects to produce some result/action. The focus is on action, and the two (or three) [grammatical] objects have equal importance. Contrast that with OOP where you first have to find one object (noun) and tell it to perform some action on another object. The way of thinking is shifted from actions/verbs operating on nouns to nouns operating on nouns -- it is as if everything is being said in passive or reflexive voice, e.g., "the text is being shown by the terminal window". Or maybe "the text draws itself on the terminal window". Not only is the focus shifted to nouns, but one of the nouns (let's call it grammatical subject) is given higher "importance" than the other (grammatical object). Thus one must decide whether one will say terminalWindow.show(someText) or someText.show(terminalWindow). But why burden people with such trivial decisions with no operational consequences when one really means show(terminalWindow, someText)? [Consequences are operationally insignificant -- in both cases the text is shown on the terminal window -- but can be very serious in the design of class hierarchies and a "wrong" choice can lead to convoluted and hard to maintain code.] I would therefore argue that the mainstream way of doing OOP (class-based, single-dispatch) is hard because it IS UNNATURAL and does not correspond to how humans think about the world. Generic methods from CLOS are closer to my way of thinking, but, alas, this is not widespread approach. Given these problems, how/why did it happen that the currently mainstream way of doing OOP became so popular? And what, if anything, can be done to dethrone it?

  Read the article

• A better alternative to incompatible implementations for the same interface?

  - by glenatron

  I am working on a piece of code which performs a set task in several parallel environments where the behaviour of the different components in the task are similar but quite different. This means that my implementations are quite different but they are all based on the relationships between the same interfaces, something like this: IDataReader -> ContinuousDataReader -> ChunkedDataReader IDataProcessor -> ContinuousDataProcessor -> ChunkedDataProcessor IDataWriter -> ContinuousDataWriter -> ChunkedDataWriter So that in either environment we have an IDataReader, IDataProcessor and IDataWriter and then we can use Dependency Injection to ensure that we have the correct one of each for the current environment, so if we are working with data in chunks we use the ChunkedDataReader, ChunkedDataProcessor and ChunkedDataWriter and if we have continuous data we have the continuous versions. However the behaviour of these classes is quite different internally and one could certainly not go from a ContinuousDataReader to the ChunkedDataReader even though they are both IDataProcessors. This feels to me as though it is incorrect ( possibly an LSP violation? ) and certainly not a theoretically correct way of working. It is almost as though the "real" interface here is the combination of all three classes. Unfortunately in the project I am working on with the deadlines we are working to, we're pretty much stuck with this design, but if we had a little more elbow room, what would be a better design approach in this kind of scenario?

  Read the article

• Which things instantly ring alarm bells when looking at code? [closed]

  - by FinnNk

  I attended a software craftsmanship event a couple of weeks ago and one of the comments made was "I'm sure we all recognize bad code when we see it" and everyone nodded sagely without further discussion. This sort of thing always worries me as there's that truism that everyone thinks they're an above average driver. Although I think I can recognize bad code I'd love to learn more about what other people consider to be code smells as it's rarely discussed in detail on people's blogs and only in a handful of books. In particular I think it'd be interesting to hear about anything that's a code smell in one language but not another. I'll start off with an easy one: Code in source control that has a high proportion of commented out code - why is it there? was it meant to be deleted? is it a half finished piece of work? maybe it shouldn't have been commented out and was only done when someone was testing something out? Personally I find this sort of thing really annoying even if it's just the odd line here and there, but when you see large blocks interspersed with the rest of the code it's totally unacceptable. It's also usually an indication that the rest of the code is likely to be of dubious quality as well.

  Read the article

• doing a full permutation search and replace on a string

  - by user73307

  I'm writing an app that does something like a custom number (licence) place generator tool where if I ask for the plate "robin" it will suggest I try: r0bin rob1n r0b1n Are there any published algorithms which can do this? It has to be able to handle replacing single letters with multiples, e.g. m with rn and vise-versa and not fall over if it replaces an i with an l then comes to check the l and replaces it back to an i. The list of what gets swapped with what is going to be user input but I'm not expecting a huge list, possibly 10 pairs at most. I'll be implementing this in Ruby or Python but I should be able to convert code from any other language.

  Read the article

• How to handle sorting of complex objects?

  - by AedonEtLIRA

  How would one sort a list of objects that have more than one sortable element? Suppose you have a simple object Car and car is a defined as such: class Car { public String make; public String model; public int year; public String color; // ... No methods, just a structure / container } I designed a simple framework that would allow for multiple SortOptions to be provided to a Sorter that would then sort the list. interface ISorter<T> { List<T> sort(List<T> items); void addSortOption(ISortOption<T> option); ISortOption<T>[] getSortOptions(); void setSortOption(ISortOption<T> option); } interface ISortOption<T> { String getLabel(); int compare(T t1, T t2); } Example use class SimpleStringSorter extends MergeSorter<String> { { addSorter(new AlphaSorter()); } private static final class AlphaSorter implements ISortOption<String> { // ... implementation of alpha compare and get label } } The issue with this solution is that it is not easily expandable. If car was to ever receive a new field, say, currentOwner. I would need to add the field, then track down the sorter class file, implement a new sort option class then recompile the application for redistribution. Is there an easier more expandable/practical way to sort data like this?

  Read the article

• What is MVC, really?

  - by NickC

  As a serious programmer, how do you answer the question What is MVC? In my mind, MVC is sort of a nebulous topic — and because of that, if your audience is a learner, then you're free to describe it in general terms that are unlikely to be controversial. However, if you are speaking to a knowledgeable audience, especially an interviewer, I have a hard time thinking of a direction to take that doesn't risk a reaction of "well that's not right!...". We all have different real-world experience, and I haven't truly met the same MVC implementation pattern twice. Specifically, there seem to be disagreements regarding strictness, component definition, separation of parts (what piece fits where), etc. So, how should I explain MVC in a way that is correct, concise, and uncontroversial?

  Read the article

• "Best fit" to avoid reuse of object instances in a collection

  - by Simon

  Imagine I have a collection of object instances which represent activities for a user to undertake. Dependent on user attributes, I have to randomly select instances to present activities to the user. For some users, I need to present more activities to them than there are available activities in which case, I want to use the following algorithm. If all available activities have already been presented to the user, then re-select a "used" activity, selecting the earliest presented activity ordered by frequency of use. In other words, try to reduce repetition and where repetition is unavoidable, use the instances which have been repeated less often and were presented furthest back in time. Before I go on to code that algorithm, I wondered if there is some existing pattern I can re-use? [EDIT] "Furthest back in time" is not relevant as I will pass the algorithm an ordered collection of used instances where the first entry is the first presented.

  Read the article

• The design of a generic data synchronizer, or, an [object] that does [actions] with the aid of [helpers]

  - by acheong87

  I'd like to create a generic data-source "synchronizer," where data-source "types" may include MySQL databases, Google Spreadsheets documents, CSV files, among others. I've been trying to figure out how to structure this in terms of classes and interfaces, keeping in mind (what I've read about) composition vs. inheritance and is-a vs. has-a, but each route I go down seems to violate some principle. For simplicity, assume that all data-sources have a header-row-plus-data-rows format. For example, assume that the first rows of Google Spreadsheets documents and CSV files will have column headers, a.k.a. "fields" (to parallel database fields). Also, eventually, I would like to implement this in PHP, but avoiding language-specific discussion would probably be more productive. Here's an overview of what I've tried. Part 1/4: ISyncable class CMySQL implements ISyncable GetFields() // sql query, pdo statement, whatever AddFields() RemFields() ... _dbh class CGoogleSpreadsheets implements ISyncable GetFields() // zend gdata api AddFields() RemFields() ... _spreadsheetKey _worksheetId class CCsvFile implements ISyncable GetFields() // read from buffer AddFields() RemFields() ... _buffer interface ISyncable GetFields() AddFields($field1, $field2, ...) RemFields($field1, $field2, ...) ... CanAddFields() // maybe the spreadsheet is locked for write, or CanRemFields() // maybe no permission to alter a database table ... AddRow() ModRow() RemRow() ... Open() Close() ... First Question: Does it make sense to use an interface, as above? Part 2/4: CSyncer Next, the thing that does the syncing. class CSyncer __construct(ISyncable $A, ISyncable $B) Push() // sync A to B Pull() // sync B to A Sync() // Push() and Pull() only differ in direction; factor. // Sync()'s job is to make sure that the fields on each side // match, to add fields where appropriate and possible, to // account for different column-orderings, etc., and of // course, to add and remove rows as necessary to sync. ... _A _B Second Question: Does it make sense to define such a class, or am I treading dangerously close to the "Kingdom of Nouns"? Part 3/4: CTranslator? ITranslator? Now, here's where I actually get lost, assuming the above is passable. Sometimes, two ISyncables speak different "dialects." For example, believe it or not, Google Spreadsheets (accessed through the Google Data API "list feed") returns column headers lower-cased and stripped of all spaces and symbols! That is, sys_TIMESTAMP is systimestamp, as far as my code can tell. (Yes, I am aware that the "cell feed" does not strip the name so; however cell-by-cell manipulation is too slow for what I'm doing.) One can imagine other hypothetical examples. Perhaps even the data itself can be in different "dialects." But let's take it as given for now, and not argue this if possible. Third Question: How would you implement "translation"? Note: Taking all this as an exercise, I'm more interested in the "idealized" design, rather than the practical one. (God knows that shipped sailed when I began this project.) Part 4/4: Further Thought Here's my train of thought to demonstrate I've thunk, albeit unfruitfully: First, I thought, primitively, "I'll just modify CMySQL::GetFields() to lower-case and strip field names so they're compatible with Google Spreadsheets." But of course, then my class should really be called, CMySQLForGoogleSpreadsheets, and that can't be right. So, the thing which translates must exist outside of an ISyncable implementor. And surely it can't be right to make each translation a method in CSyncer. If it exists outside of both ISyncable and CSyncer, then what is it? (Is it even an "it"?) Is it an abstract class, i.e. abstract CTranslator? Is it an interface, since a translator only does, not has, i.e. interface ITranslator? Does it even require instantiation? e.g. If it's an ITranslator, then should its translation methods be static? (I learned what "late static binding" meant, today.) And, dear God, whatever it is, how should a CSyncer use it? Does it "have" it? Is it, "it"? Who am I? ...am I, "I"? I've attempted to break up the question into sub-questions, but essentially my question is singular: How does one implement an object A that conceptually "links" (has) two objects b1 and b2 that share a common interface B, where certain pairs of b1 and b2 require a helper, e.g. a translator, to be handled by A? Something tells me that I've overcomplicated this design, or violated a principle much higher up. Thank you all very much for your time and any advice you can provide.

  Read the article

• Modular Architecture for Processing Pipeline

  - by anjruu

  I am trying to design the architecture of a system that I will be implementing in C++, and I was wondering if people could think of a good approach, or critique the approach that I have designed so far. First of all, the general problem is an image processing pipeline. It contains several stages, and the goal is to design a highly modular solution, so that any of the stages can be easily swapped out and replaced with a piece of custom code (so that the user can have a speed increase if s/he knows that a certain stage is constrained in a certain way in his or her problem). The current thinking is something like this: struct output; /*Contains the output values from the pipeline.*/ class input_routines{ public: virtual foo stage1(...){...} virtual bar stage2(...){...} virtual qux stage3(...){...} ... } output pipeline(input_routines stages); This would allow people to subclass input_routines and override whichever stage they wanted. That said, I've worked in systems like this before, and I find the subclassing and the default stuff tends to get messy, and can be difficult to use, so I'm not giddy about writing one myself. I was also thinking about a more STLish approach, where the different stages (there are 6 or 7) would be defaulted template parameters. Can anyone offer a critique of the pattern above, thoughts on the template approach, or any other architecture that comes to mind?

  Read the article

• Can the Abstract Factory pattern be considered as a case of polymorphism?

  - by rogcg

  I was looking for a pattern/solution that allows me call a method as a runtime exception in a group of different methods without using Reflection. I've recently become aware of the Abstract Factory Pattern. To me, it looks so much like polymorphism, and I thought it could be a case of polymorphism but without the super class WidgetFactory, as you can see in the example of the link above. Am I correct in this assumption?

  Read the article

• Design pattern: static function call with input/output containers?

  - by Pavlo Dyban

  I work for a company in software research department. We use algorithms from our real software and wrap them so that we can use them for prototyping. Every time an algorithm interface changes, we need to adapt our wrappers respectively. Recently all algorithms have been refactored in such a manner that instead of accepting many different inputs and returning outputs via referenced parameters, they now accept one input data container and one output data container (the latter is passed by reference). Algorithm interface is limited to a static function call like that: class MyAlgorithm{ static bool calculate(MyAlgorithmInput input, MyAlgorithmOutput &output); } This is actually a very powerful design, though I have never seen it in a C++ programming environment before. Changes in the number of parameters and their data types are now encapsulated and they don't change the algorithm callback. In the latest algorithm which I have developed I used the same scheme. Now I want to know if this is a popular design pattern and what it is called.

  Read the article

• Is the structure used for these web pages a design pattern?

  - by aspdotnetuser

  I want to know if the structure for an ASP.NET website I'm working on uses a design pattern for it's web pages. If it is a design pattern, what is it called? The web pages have the following structure: UserDetails page (UserDetails.aspx) - includes UserDetailsController.ascx user control. UserDetailsController.ascx includes sub user controls like UserAccountDetails.ascx and UserLoginDetails.ascx etc Each sub user control contains a small amount of code/logic, the 'controller' user controls that host these sub user controls (i.e UserDetailsController.ascx) appear to call the business rules code and pass the data to the sub user controls. Is this a design pattern? What is it called?

  Read the article

• Callbacks: when to return value, and when to modify parameter?

  - by MarkN

  When writing a callback, when is best to have the callback return a value, and when is it best to have the callback modify a parameter? Is there a difference? For example, if we wanted to grab a list of dependencies, when would you do this: function GetDependencies(){ return [{"Dep1" : 1.1}, {"Dept2": 1.2}, {"Dep3" : 1.3}]; } And when would you do this? function RegisterDependencies(register){ register.add("Dep1", 1.1); register.add("Dep2", 1.2); register.add("Dep3", 1.3); }

  Read the article

• EAV - is it really bad in all scenarios?

  - by Giedrius

  I'm thinking to use EAV for some of the stuff in one of the projects, but all questions about it in stackoverflow end up to answers calling EAV an anti pattern. But I'm wondering, if is it that wrong in all cases? Let's say shop product entity, it has common features, like name, description, image, price, etc., that take part in logic many places and has (semi)unique features, like watch and beach ball would be described by completely different aspects. So I think EAV would fit for storing those (semi)unique features? All this is assuming, that for showing product list, it is enough info in product table (that means no EAV is involved) and just when showing one product/comparing up to 5 products/etc. data saved using EAV is used. I've seen such approach in Magento commerce and it is quite popular, so may be there are cases, when EAV is reasonable?

  Read the article

• How can I design my classes to include calendar events stored in a database?

  - by Gianluca78

  I'm developing a web calendar in php (using Symfony2) inspired by iCal for a project of mine. At this moment, I have two classes: a class "Calendar" and a class "CalendarCell". Here you are the two classes properties and method declarations. class Calendar { private $month; private $monthName; private $year; private $calendarCellList = array(); private $translator; public function __construct($month, $year, $translator) {} public function getCalendarCellList() {} public function getMonth() {} public function getMonthName() {} public function getNextMonth() {} public function getNextYear() {} public function getPreviousMonth() {} public function getPreviousYear() {} public function getYear() {} private function calculateDaysPreviousMonth() {} private function calculateNumericDayOfTheFirstDayOfTheWeek() {} private function isCurrentDay(\DateTime $dateTime) {} private function isDifferentMonth(\DateTime $dateTime) {} } class CalendarCell { private $day; private $month; private $dayNameAbbreviation; private $numericDayOfTheWeek; private $isCurrentDay; private $isDifferentMonth; private $translator; public function __construct(array $parameters) {} public function getDay() {} public function getMonth() {} public function getDayNameAbbreviation() {} public function isCurrentDay() {} public function isDifferentMonth() {} } Each calendar day can includes many calendar events (such as appointments or schedules) stored in a database. My question is: which is the best way to manage these calendar events in my classes? I think to add a eventList property in CalendarCell and populate it with an array of CalendarEvent objects fetched by the database. This kind of solution doesn't allow other coders to reuse the classes without db (because I should inject at least a repository services also) just to create and visualize a calendar... so maybe it could be better to extend CalendarCell (for instance in CalendarCellEvent) and add the database features? I feel like I'm missing some crucial design pattern! Any suggestion will be very appreciated!

  Read the article

• How to solve cyclic dependencies in a visitor pattern

  - by Benjamin Rogge

  When programming at work we now and then face a problem with visitors and module/project dependencies. Say you have a class A in a module X. And there are subclasses B and C in module Y. That means that module Y is dependent on module X. If we want to implement a visitor pattern to the class hierarchy, thus introducing an interface with the handle Operations and an abstract accept method in A, we get a dependency from module Y to module X, which we cannot allow for architectural reasons. What we do is, use a direct comparison of the types (i.e. instanceof, since we program in Java), which is not satisfying. My question(s) would be: Do you encounter this kind of problem in your daily work (or do we make poor architectural choices) and if so, how is your approach to solve this?

  Read the article

• implementing dynamic query handler on historical data

  - by user2390183

  EDIT : Refined question to focus on the core issue Context: I have historical data about property (house) sales collected from various sources in a centralized/cloud data source (assume info collection is handled by a third party) Planning to develop an application to query and retrieve data from this centralized data source Example Queries: Simple : for given XYZ post code, what is average house price for 3 bed room house? Complex: What is estimated price for an house at "DD,Some Street,XYZ Post Code" (worked out from average values of historic data filtered by various characteristics of the house: house post code, no of bed rooms, total area, and other deeper insights like house building type, year of built, features)? In addition to average price, the application should support other property info ** maximum, or minimum price..etc and trend (graph) on a selected property attribute over a period of time**. Hence, the queries should not enforce the search based on a primary key or few fixed fields In other words, queries can be What is the change in 3 Bed Room house price (irrespective of location) over last 30 days? What kind of properties we can get for X price (irrespective of location or house type) The challenge I have is identifying the domain (BI/ Data Analytical or DB Design or DB Query Interface or DW related or something else) this problem (dynamic query on historic data) belong to, so that I can do further exploration My findings so far I could be wrong on the following, so please correct me if you think so I briefly read about BI/Data Analytics - I think it is heavy weight solution for my problem and has scalability issues. DB Design - As I understand RDBMS works well if you know Data model at design time. I am expecting attributes about property or other entity (user) that am going to bring in, would evolve quickly. hence maintenance would be an issue. As I am going to have multiple users executing query at same time, performance would be a bottleneck Other options like Graph DB (http://www.tinkerpop.com/) seems to be bit complex (they are good. but using those tools meant for generic purpose, make me think like assembly programming to solve my problem ) BigData related solution are to analyse data from multiple unrelated domains So, Any suggestion on the space this problem fit in ? (Especially if you have design/implementation experience of back-end for property listing or similar portals)

  Read the article

• Is there a name for this use of the State design pattern?

  - by Chris C

  I'm looking to see if there is a particular name for this style of programming a certain kind of behavior into a program. Said program runs in real time, in an update loop, and the program uses the State design pattern to do some work, but it's the specific way it does the work that I want to know about. Here's how it's used. - Object Foo constructed, with concrete StateA object in it - First loop runs --- Foo.Run function calls StateA.Bar --- in StateA.Bar replace Foo's state to StateB - Second loop runs --- Foo.Run calls StateB.Bar - Third loop runs --- Foo.Run calls StateB.Bar - Fourth loop --- etc. So in short, Foo doesn't have an explicit Initialize function. It will just have Run, but Run will do something unique in the first frame to initialize something for Foo and then replace it with a different action that will repeat in all the frames following it- thus not needing to check if Foo's already initialized. It's just a "press start and go" action. What would you call implementing this type of behavior?

  Read the article

• Seperation of drawing and logic in games

  - by BFree

  I'm a developer that's just now starting to mess around with game development. I'm a .Net guy, so I've messed with XNA and am now playing around with Cocos2d for the iPhone. My question really is more general though. Let's say I'm building a simple Pong game. I'd have a Ball class and a Paddle class. Coming from the business world development, my first instinct is to not have any drawing or input handling code in either of these classes. //pseudo code class Ball { Vector2D position; Vector2D velocity; Color color; void Move(){} } Nothing in the ball class handles input, or deals with drawing. I'd then have another class, my Game class, or my Scene.m (in Cocos2D) which would new up the Ball, and during the game loop, it would manipulate the ball as needed. The thing is though, in many tutorials for both XNA and Cocos2D, I see a pattern like this: //pseudo code class Ball : SomeUpdatableComponent { Vector2D position; Vector2D velocity; Color color; void Update(){} void Draw(){} void HandleInput(){} } My question is, is this right? Is this the pattern that people use in game development? It somehow goes against everything I'm used to, to have my Ball class do everything. Furthermore, in this second example, where my Ball knows how to move around, how would I handle collision detection with the Paddle? Would the Ball need to have knowledge of the Paddle? In my first example, the Game class would have references to both the Ball and the Paddle, and then ship both of those off to some CollisionDetection manager or something, but how do I deal with the complexity of various components, if each individual component does everything themselves? (I hope I'm making sense.....)

  Read the article

• What to do as a new team lead on a project with maintainability problems?

  - by Mr_E

  I have just been put in charge of a code project with maintainability problems. What things can I do to get the project on a stable footing? I find myself in a place where we are working with a very large multi-tiered .NET system that is missing a lot of the important things such as unit tests, IOC, MEF, too many static classes, pure datasets etc. I'm only 24 but I've been here for almost three years (this app has been in development for 5) and mostly due to time constraints we've been just adding in more crap to fit the other crap. After doing a number of projects in my free time I have begun to understand just how important all those concepts are. Also due to employee shifting I find myself to now be the team lead on this project and I really want to come up with some smart ways to improve this app. Ways where the value can be explained to management. I have ideas of what I would like to do but they all seem so overwhelming without much upfront gain. Any stories of how people have or would have dealt with this would be a very interesting read. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How can I implement a database TableView like thing in C++?

  - by Industrial-antidepressant

  How can I implement a TableView like thing in C++? I want to emulating a tiny relation database like thing in C++. I have data tables, and I want to transform it somehow, so I need a TableView like class. I want filtering, sorting, freely add and remove items and transforming (ex. view as UPPERCASE and so on). The whole thing is inside a GUI application, so datatables and views are attached to a GUI (or HTML or something). So how can I identify an item in the view? How can I signal it when the table is changed? Is there some design pattern for this? Here is a simple table, and a simple data item: #include <string> #include <boost/multi_index_container.hpp> #include <boost/multi_index/member.hpp> #include <boost/multi_index/ordered_index.hpp> #include <boost/multi_index/random_access_index.hpp> using boost::multi_index_container; using namespace boost::multi_index; struct Data { Data() {} int id; std::string name; }; struct row{}; struct id{}; struct name{}; typedef boost::multi_index_container< Data, indexed_by< random_access<tag<row> >, ordered_unique<tag<id>, member<Data, int, &Data::id> >, ordered_unique<tag<name>, member<Data, std::string, &Data::name> > > > TDataTable; class DataTable { public: typedef Data item_type; typedef TDataTable::value_type value_type; typedef TDataTable::const_reference const_reference; typedef TDataTable::index<row>::type TRowIndex; typedef TDataTable::index<id>::type TIdIndex; typedef TDataTable::index<name>::type TNameIndex; typedef TRowIndex::iterator iterator; DataTable() : row_index(rule_table.get<row>()), id_index(rule_table.get<id>()), name_index(rule_table.get<name>()), row_index_writeable(rule_table.get<row>()) { } TDataTable::const_reference operator[](TDataTable::size_type n) const { return rule_table[n]; } std::pair<iterator,bool> push_back(const value_type& x) { return row_index_writeable.push_back(x); } iterator erase(iterator position) { return row_index_writeable.erase(position); } bool replace(iterator position,const value_type& x) { return row_index_writeable.replace(position, x); } template<typename InputIterator> void rearrange(InputIterator first) { return row_index_writeable.rearrange(first); } void print_table() const; unsigned size() const { return row_index.size(); } TDataTable rule_table; const TRowIndex& row_index; const TIdIndex& id_index; const TNameIndex& name_index; private: TRowIndex& row_index_writeable; }; class DataTableView { DataTableView(const DataTable& source_table) {} // How can I implement this? // I want filtering, sorting, signaling upper GUI layer, and sorting, and ... }; int main() { Data data1; data1.id = 1; data1.name = "name1"; Data data2; data2.id = 2; data2.name = "name2"; DataTable table; table.push_back(data1); DataTable::iterator it1 = table.row_index.iterator_to(table[0]); table.erase(it1); table.push_back(data1); Data new_data(table[0]); new_data.name = "new_name"; table.replace(table.row_index.iterator_to(table[0]), new_data); for (unsigned i = 0; i < table.size(); ++i) std::cout << table[i].name << std::endl; #if 0 // using scenarios: DataTableView table_view(table); table_view.fill_from_source(); // synchronization with source table_view.remove(data_item1); // remove item from view table_view.add(data_item2); // add item from source table table_view.filter(filterfunc); // filtering table_view.sort(sortfunc); // sorting // modifying from source_able, hot to signal the table_view? // FYI: Table view is atteched to a GUI item table.erase(data); table.replace(data); #endif return 0; }

  Read the article

• Should I use the factory design pattern for every class?

  - by Frog

  I've been writing a website in PHP. As the code becomes more complex, I keep finding problems that can be solved using the factory design pattern. For example: I've a got a class Page which has subclasses HTMLPage, XMLPage, etc. Depending on some input I need to return an object of either one of these classes. I use the factory design pattern to do this. But as I encounter this problem in more classes, I keep having to change code which still initiates an object using its constructor. So now I'm wondering: is it a good idea to change all code so that it uses the factory design pattern? Or are there big drawbacks? I'm currently in a position to change this, so your answers would be really helpful.

  Read the article

• Is there a pattern or logical structure I can follow for Event Log Numbers?

  - by makerofthings7

  What are some ideas or structure I can use when assigning EventID to events that will be saved to the Event Log? Some options I've considered Sequential (0... int.Max) Multiple of 10, where the "0" is replaced with how noisy the debugLevel is set. xxx0 may represent exceptions, critical information, start, stop etc. ...? What numbering approach gives you the most insight when a user describes the event in an email or phone? What is the most useful to support staff?

  Read the article

• Earliest use of Comments as Semantically Meaningful Things in a Program?

  - by Alan Storm

  In certain corners of the PHP meta-programming world, it's become fashionable to use PHPDoc comments as a mechanism for providing semantically meaningful information to a program. That is, other code will parse the doc blocks and do something significant with the information encoded in those comments. Doctrine's annotations and code generation are an example of this. What's the earliest (or some early) use of this technique? I have vague memories of some early java Design by Contract implementations doing similar things, but I'm not sure of those folks were inventing the technique, or if they got it from somewhere. Mainly asking so I can provide some historical context for PHP developers who haven't come across the technique before, and are distrustful of it because it seems a little crazy pants.

  Read the article

• Structuring cascading properties - parent only or parent + entire child graph?

  - by SB2055

  I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >