Search Results

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

Page 381/1790 | < Previous Page | 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388  | Next Page >

  • How to easily substitute a Base class

    - by JTom
    Hi, I have the following hierarchy of classes class classOne { virtual void abstractMethod() = 0; }; class classTwo : public classOne { }; class classThree : public classTwo { }; All classOne, classTwo and classThree are abstract classes, and I have another class that is defining the pure virtual methods class classNonAbstract : public classThree { void abstractMethod(); // Couple of new methods void doIt(); void doItToo(); }; And right now I need it differently...I need it like class classNonAbstractOne : public classOne { void abstractMethod(); // Couple of new methods void doIt(); void doItToo(); }; class classNonAbstractTwo : public classTwo { void abstractMethod(); // Couple of new methods void doIt(); void doItToo(); }; and class classNonAbstractThree : public classThree { void abstractMethod(); // Couple of new methods void doIt(); void doItToo(); }; But all the nonAbstract classes have the same new methods, with the same code...and I would like to avoid copying all the methods and it's code to every nonAbstract class. How could I accomplish that? Hopefully it's understandable...

    Read the article

  • Is Form validation and Business validation too much?

    - by Robert Cabri
    I've got this question about form validation and business validation. I see a lot of frameworks that use some sort of form validation library. You submit some values and the library validates the values from the form. If not ok it will show some errors on you screen. If all goes to plan the values will be set into domain objects. Here the values will be or, better said, should validated (again). Most likely the same validation in the validation library. I know 2 PHP frameworks having this kind of construction Zend/Kohana. When I look at programming and some principles like Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) and single responsibility principle (SRP) this isn't a good way. As you can see it validates twice. Why not create domain objects that do the actual validation. Example: Form with username and email form is submitted. Values of the username field and the email field will be populated in 2 different Domain objects: Username and Email class Username {} class Email {} These objects validate their data and if not valid throw an exception. Do you agree? What do you think about this aproach? Is there a better way to implement validations? I'm confused about a lot of frameworks/developers handling this stuff. Are they all wrong or am I missing a point? Edit: I know there should also be client side kind of validation. This is a different ballgame in my Opinion. If You have some comments on this and a way to deal with this kind of stuff, please provide.

    Read the article

  • Refactor/rewrite code or continue?

    - by Dan
    I just completed a complex piece of code. It works to spec, it meets performance requirements etc etc but I feel a bit anxious about it and am considering rewriting and/or refactoring it. Should I do this (spending time that could otherwise be spent on features that users will actually notice)? The reasons I feel anxious about the code are: The class hierarchy is complex and not obvious Some classes don't have a well defined purpose (they do a number of unrelated things) Some classes use others internals (they're declared as friend classes) to bypass the layers of abstraction for performance, but I feel they break encapsulation by doing this Some classes leak implementation details (eg, I changed a map to a hash map earlier and found myself having to modify code in other source files to make the change work) My memory management/pooling system is kinda clunky and less-than transparent They look like excellent reasons to refactor and clean code, aiding future maintenance and extension, but could be quite time consuming. Also, I'll never be perfectly happy with any code I write anyway... So, what does stackoverflow think? Clean code or work on features?

    Read the article

  • In symfony/doctrine's schema.yml, where should I put onDelete: CASCADE for a many-to-many relationsh

    - by nselikoff
    I have a many-to-many relationship defined in my Symfony (using doctrine) project between Orders and Upgrades (an Order can be associated with zero or more Upgrades, and an Upgrade can apply to zero or more Orders). # schema.yml Order: columns: order_id: {...} relations: Upgrades: class: Upgrade local: order_id foreign: upgrade_id refClass: OrderUpgrade Upgrade: columns: upgrade_id: {...} relations: Orders: class: Order local: upgrade_id foreign: order_id refClass: OrderUpgrade OrderUpgrade: columns: order_id: {...} upgrade_id: {...} I want to set up delete cascade behavior so that if I delete an Order or an Upgrade, all of the related OrderUpgrades are deleted. Where do I put onDelete: CASCADE? Usually I would put it at the end of the relations section, but that would seem to imply in this case that deleting Orders would cascade to delete Upgrades. Is Symfony + Doctrine smart enough to know what I'm wanting if I put onDelete: CASCADE in the above relations sections of schema.yml?

    Read the article

  • actionscript-3: refactor interface inheritance to get rid of ambiguous reference error

    - by maxmc
    hi! imagine there are two interfaces arranged via composite pattern, one of them has a dispose method among other methods: interface IComponent extends ILeaf { ... function dispose() : void; } interface ILeaf { ... } some implementations have some more things in common (say an id) so there are two more interfaces: interface ICommonLeaf extends ILeaf { function get id() : String; } interface ICommonComponent extends ICommonLeaf, IComponent { } so far so good. but there is another interface which also has a dispose method: interface ISomething { ... function dispose() : void; } and ISomething is inherited by ICommonLeaf: interface ICommonLeaf extends ILeaf, ISomething { function get id() : String; } As soon as the dispose method is invoked on an instance which implements the ICommonComponent interface, the compiler fails with an ambiguous reference error because ISomething has a method called dispose and ILeaf also has a dispose method, both living in different interfaces (IComponent, ISomething) within the inheritace tree of ICommonComponent. I wonder how to deal with the situation if the IComponent, the ILeaf and the ISomething can't change. the composite structure must also work for for the ICommonLeaf & ICommonComponent implementations and the ICommonLeaf & ICommonComponent must conform to the ISomething type. this might be an actionscript-3 specific issue. i haven't tested how other languages (for instance java) handle stuff like this.

    Read the article

  • Two different tables or just one with bool column?

    - by Aidas
    We have two tables: OriginalDocument and ProcessedDocument. In the first one we put an original, not processed document. After it's validated and processed (converted to our xml format and parsed), it's put into Document table. Processed document can be valid or invalid. Which makes more sense: have two different tables for valid and invalid documents or just have one with 'Valid' column? Some of the columns (~5-7) are irrelevant for invalid document. Storing both invalid and valid documents would also make Document table filled with 'NULL' columns (if document is invalid, information like document number, receiver can be unknown). What else should we consider and weigh, when making this decision?

    Read the article

  • how do simple SQLAlchemy relationships work?

    - by Carson Myers
    I'm no database expert -- I just know the basics, really. I've picked up SQLAlchemy for a small project, and I'm using the declarative base configuration rather than the "normal" way. This way seems a lot simpler. However, while setting up my database schema, I realized I don't understand some database relationship concepts. If I had a many-to-one relationship before, for example, articles by authors (where each article could be written by only a single author), I would put an author_id field in my articles column. But SQLAlchemy has this ForeignKey object, and a relationship function with a backref kwarg, and I have no idea what any of it MEANS. I'm scared to find out what a many-to-many relationship with an intermediate table looks like (when I need additional data about each relationship). Can someone demystify this for me? Right now I'm setting up to allow openID auth for my application. So I've got this: from __init__ import Base from sqlalchemy.schema import Column from sqlalchemy.types import Integer, String class Users(Base): __tablename__ = 'users' id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True) username = Column(String, unique=True) email = Column(String) password = Column(String) salt = Column(String) class OpenID(Base): __tablename__ = 'openid' url = Column(String, primary_key=True) user_id = #? I think the ? should be replaced by Column(Integer, ForeignKey('users.id')), but I'm not sure -- and do I need to put openids = relationship("OpenID", backref="users") in the Users class? Why? What does it do? What is a backref?

    Read the article

  • Fowler Analysis Patterns lately?

    - by Berryl
    As much as I've always loved this one is how much I always wished there were more meaty examples of how to apply some of the concepts available. Is anyone aware of anything out there worth looking at that attempts to that? Cheers, Berryl

    Read the article

  • Learning Modelling

    - by me1234
    Is there a good book which I can follow to learn modelling/doing architecture? Good samples? What would you do if you have to learn modelling from very basics? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Bad method names and what it says about code structure.

    - by maxfridbe
    (Apologies in advance if this is a re-post but I didn't find similar posts) What bad method name patterns have you seen in code and what did it tell you about the code. For instance, I keep seeing: public void preform___X___IfNecessary(...); I believe that this is bad because the operation X has an inversion of conditions. Note that this is a public method because classes methods might legitimately require private helpers like this

    Read the article

  • Table with a lot of attributes

    - by Robert
    Hi, I'm planing to build some database project. One of the tables have a lot of attributes. My question is: What is better, to divide the the class into 2 separate tables or put all of them into one table. below is an example create table User { id, name, surname,... show_name, show_photos, ...) or create table User { id, name, surname,... ) create table UserPrivacy {usr_id, show_name, show_photos, ...) The performance i suppose is similar due to i can use index.

    Read the article

  • C#, weird optimization

    - by Snake
    Hi, I'm trying to read my compiled C# code. this is my code: using(OleDbCommand insertCommand = new OleDbCommand("...", connection)) { // do super stuff } But! We all know that a using gets translated to this: { OleDbCommand insertCommand = new OleDbCommand("...", connection) try { //do super stuff } finally { if(insertCommand != null) ((IDisposable)insertCommand).Dispose(); } } (since OleDbCommand is a reference type). But when I decompile my assembly (compiled with .NET 2.0) I get this in Resharper: try { insertCommand = new OleDbCommand("", connection); Label_0017: try { //do super stuff } finally { Label_0111: if ((insertCommand == null) != null) { goto Label_0122; } insertCommand.Dispose(); Label_0122:; } I'm talking about this line: if ((insertCommand == null) != null). True is not null, it never is, nor is false. So how is my object disposed properly? WTF? Thanks! -Kristof

    Read the article

  • In Ruby, can the coerce() method know what operator it is that requires the help to coerce?

    - by Jian Lin
    In Ruby, it seems that a lot of coerce() help can be done by def coerce(something) [self, something] end that's is, when 3 + rational is needed, Fixnum 3 doesn't know how to handle adding a Rational, so it asks Rational#coerce for help by calling rational.coerce(3), and this coerce instance method will tell the caller: # I know how to handle rational + something, so I will return you the following: [self, something] # so that now you can invoke + on me, and I will deal with Fixnum to get an answer So what if most operators can use this method, but not when it is (a - b) != (b - a) situation? Can coerce() know which operator it is, and just handle those special cases, while just using the simple [self, something] to handle all the other cases where (a op b) == (b op a) ? (op is the operator).

    Read the article

  • Twitter Bootstrap Collapsible Navbar Duplicating

    - by sixeightzero
    I am working on a project using Twitter Bootstrap. One thing that I noticed is that my pages have duplicate navbars when they are defined as collapsible and the page is resized smaller. Here is the duplicate NavBar: Here is the normal width NavBar: Code: <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <!--[if lt IE 7]> <html class="no-js lt-ie9 lt-ie8 lt-ie7"> <![endif]--> <!--[if IE 7]> <html class="no-js lt-ie9 lt-ie8"> <![endif]--> <!--[if IE 8]> <html class="no-js lt-ie9"> <![endif]--> <!--[if gt IE 8]><!--> <html class="no-js"> <!--<![endif]--> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1"> <title></title> <meta name="description" content=""> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/assets/css/bootstrap.css"> <style> body { padding-top: 60px; } </style> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/assets/css/bootstrap-responsive.min.css"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/assets/css/main.css"> <script>window.jQuery || document.write('<script src="/assets/js/vendor/jquery-1.8.1.min.js"><\/script>')</script> <script src="/assets/js/vendor/modernizr-2.6.1-respond-1.1.0.min.js"></script> </head> <body class="dark"> <!--[if lt IE 9]> <p class="chromeframe">You are using an outdated browser. <a href="http://browsehappy.com/">Upgrade your browser today</a> or <a href="http://www.google.com/chromeframe/?redirect=true">install Google Chrome Frame</a> to better experience this site.</p> <![endif]--> <div class="navbar navbar-inverse navbar-fixed-top"> <div class="navbar-inner"> <div class="container"> <a class="btn btn-navbar" data-toggle="collapse" data-target=".nav-collapse"> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> </a> <a class="brand" href="#">Project name</a> <div class="nav-collapse collapse"> <ul class="nav"> <li class="active"><a href="#">Home</a></li> <li><a href="#about">About</a></li> <li><a href="#contact">Contact</a></li> <li class="dropdown"> <a href="#" class="dropdown-toggle" data-toggle="dropdown">Dropdown <b class="caret"></b></a> <ul class="dropdown-menu"> <li><a href="#">Action</a></li> <li><a href="#">Another action</a></li> <li><a href="#">Something else here</a></li> <li class="divider"></li> <li class="nav-header">Nav header</li> <li><a href="#">Separated link</a></li> <li><a href="#">One more separated link</a></li> </ul> </li> </ul> </div><!--/.nav-collapse --> </div> </div> </div> Has anyone else run into this and have some pointers?

    Read the article

  • Pros and Cons on where to place business logic: app level or DB

    - by Juri
    Hi, I always again encounter discussions about where to place the business logic: inside a business layer in the application code or down in the DB in terms of stored procedures. Personally I'd tend to the 1st approach, but I'd like to hear some opinions from your part first, without influencing you with my personal views. I know there doesn't exist a one-size-fits-all solution and it often depends on many factors, but we can discuss about that. Btw, we are in the context of web applications and our current approach is to have UI layer which accepts UI input and does a first, client-side validation Business layer with a number of service-classes which contains the business logic including validation for user input (server-side) Data Access Layer which calls stored procedures from the DB for doing persistency/read operations Many people however tend to move the business layer stuff (especially regarding the validation) down to the DB in terms of stored procedures. What do you think about it? I'd like to discuss.

    Read the article

  • Need to work out database structure

    - by jim smith
    Hi, Just need a little kickstart with this. I have Mysql/PHP, and I have 5,000 products. I have 30 companies I need to store some data for those 30 companies for each product as follows: a) prices b) stock qty I also need to store data historically on a daily basis. So the table... It makes sense that the records will be the products because there's 5000, and if I put the companies as the columns, I can store the prices, but what about the stock quantities? I could create two columns for each compoany, one for prices, one for qty. Then make the tablename the date for that day...so theer would be a new table for every day with 5000 products in it? is this the correct way? Some idea on how I'll be retreiving data the top 5 lowest prices (and the company) by product for a certain date the price and stock changes in the past 7 days by product

    Read the article

  • Updating Linking Tables

    - by Sasha
    I've currently adding a bit of functionality that manages holiday lettings on top of a CMS that runs on PHP and MySQL. The CMS stores the property details on a couple of tables, and I'm adding a third table (letting_times) that will contain information about when people are staying at the property. Basic functionality would allow the user to add new times when a guest is staying, edit the times that the guest is staying and remove the booking if the guest no longer wants to stay at the property. Right now the best way that I can think of updating the times that the property is occupied is to delete all the times contained in the letting_times database and reinsert them again. The only other way that I can think to do this would be to include the table's primary key and do an update if that is present and has a value, otherwise do an insert, but this would not delete rows of data if they are removed. Is there a better way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • Making change recursively: How do I modify my algorithm to print all combinations?

    - by cb
    I have an algorithm that recursively makes change in the following manner: public static int makeChange(int amount, int currentCoin) { //if amount = zero, we are at the bottom of a successful recursion if (amount == 0){ //return 1 to add this successful solution return 1; //check to see if we went too far }else if(amount < 0){ //don't count this try if we went too far return 0; //if we have exhausted our list of coin values }else if(currentCoin < 0){ return 0; }else{ int firstWay = makeChange(amount, currentCoin-1); int secondWay = makeChange(amount - availableCoins[currentCoin], currentCoin); return firstWay + secondWay; } } However, I'd like to add the capability to store or print each combination as they successfully return. I'm having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around how to do this. The original algorithm was pretty easy, but now I am frustrated. Any suggestions? CB

    Read the article

  • What is an index in MySQL?

    - by Eric
    http://i.imgur.com/JdsUK.jpg I created a table like the picture above. What are the "Indexes"? primary key? unique? It works well without setting indexes.. What do they do? why do I need them? Also, I set all String fields to TEXT because I didn't know how many characters I need. Is this a good idea? I don't see any difference. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • mysql and trigger usage question

    - by dhruvbird
    I have a situation in which I don't want inserts to take place (the transaction should rollback) if a certain condition is met. I could write this logic in the application code, but say for some reason, it has to be written in MySQL itself (say clients written in different languages will be inserting into this MySQL InnoDB table) [that's a separate discussion]. Table definition: CREATE TABLE table1(x int NOT NULL); The trigger looks something like this: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN NEW.x = NULL; END IF; END; I am guessing it could also be written as(untested): CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 FOR EACH ROW IF (condition) THEN ROLLBACK; END IF; END; But, this doesn't work: CREATE TRIGGER t1 BEFORE INSERT ON table1 ROLLBACK; You are guaranteed that: Your DB will always be MySQL Table type will always be InnoDB That NOT NULL column will always stay the way it is Question: Do you see anything objectionable in the 1st method?

    Read the article

  • Sequence Diagram return a new constructed Object

    - by user256007
    I am drawing a Sequence Diagram where the scenario is. 1. an Actor calls :Table::query(query:String) :Table::query Calls :Connection::execute(query) :Connection::execute < a new :Row Object :Connection::execute calls :Row::fillData(result) :Connection::execute returns :Row ...... There are More But I am Stuck in Step 5 I cant Understand how to draw that, :Connection::execute returning the newly Constructed Row itself, in a Standard way.

    Read the article

  • Practical rules for premature optimization

    - by DougW
    It seems that the phrase "Premature Optimization" is the buzz-word of the day. For some reason, iphone programmers in particular seem to think of avoiding premature optimization as a pro-active goal, rather than the natural result of simply avoiding distraction. The problem is, the term is beginning to be applied more and more to cases that are completely inappropriate. For example, I've seen a growing number of people say not to worry about the complexity of an algorithm, because that's premature optimization (eg http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2190275/help-sorting-an-nsarray-across-two-properties-with-nssortdescriptor/2191720#2191720). Frankly, I think this is just laziness, and appalling to disciplined computer science. But it has occurred to me that maybe considering the complexity and performance of algorithms is going the way of assembly loop unrolling, and other optimization techniques that are now considered unnecessary. What do you think? Are we at the point now where deciding between an O(n^n) and O(n!) complexity algorithm is irrelevant? What about O(n) vs O(n*n)? What do you consider "premature optimization"? What practical rules do you use to consciously or unconsciously avoid it? This is a bit vague, but I'm curious to hear other peoples' opinions on the topic.

    Read the article

  • How to Prove that using subselect queries in SQL is killing performance of server

    - by adopilot
    One of my jobs it to maintain our database, usually we have troubles with lack of performance while getting reports and working whit that base. When I start looking at queries which our ERP sending to database I see a lot of totally needlessly subselect queries inside main queries. As I am not member of developers which is creator of program we using, they do not like much when I criticize they code and job. Let say they do not taking my review as serious statements. So I asking you few questions about subselect in SQL Does subselect is taking a lot of more time then left outer joins? Does exists any blog, article or anything where I subselect is recommended not to use ? How I can prove that if we avoid subselesct in query that query is going to be faster ? Our database server is MSSQL2005

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388  | Next Page >