Search Results

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

Page 386/1790 | < Previous Page | 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393  | Next Page >

  • Vertex Buffers in opengl

    - by JB
    I'm making a small 3d graphics game/demo for personal learning. I know d3d9 and quite a bit about d3d11 but little about opengl at the moment so I'm intending to abstract out the actual rendering of the graphics so that my scene graph and everything "above" it needs to know little about how to actually draw the graphics. I intend to make it work with d3d9 then add d3d11 support and finally opengl support. Just as a learning exercise to learn about 3d graphics and abstraction. I don't know much about opengl at this point though, and don't want my abstract interface to expose anything that isn't simple to implement in opengl. Specifically I'm looking at vertex buffers. In d3d they are essentially an array of structures, but looking at the opengl interface the equivalent seems to be vertex arrays. However these seem to be organised rather differently where you need a separate array for vertices, one for normals, one for texture coordinates etc and set the with glVertexPointer, glTexCoordPointer etc. I was hoping to be able to implement a VertexBuffer interface much like the the directx one but it looks like in d3d you have an array of structures and in opengl you need a separate array for each element which makes finding a common abstraction quite hard to make efficient. Is there any way to use opengl in a similar way to directx? Or any suggestions on how to come up with a higher level abstraction that will work efficiently with both systems?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to restrict access to a public method to only a specific class in C#?

    - by Anon
    I have a class A with a public method in C#. I want to allow access to this method to only class B. Is this possible? UPDATE: This is what i'd like to do: public class Category { public int NumberOfInactiveProducts {get;} public IList<Product> Products {get;set;} public void ProcessInactiveProduct() { // do things... NumberOfInactiveProducts++; } } public class Product { public bool Inactive {get;} public Category Category {get;set;} public void SetInactive() { this.Inactive= true; Category.ProcessInactiveProduct(); } } I'd like other programmers to do: var prod = Repository.Get<Product>(id); prod.SetInactive(); I'd like to make sure they don't call ProcessInactiveProduct manually: var prod = Repository.Get<Product>(id); prod.SetInactive(); prod.Category.ProcessInactiveProduct(); I want to allow access of Category.ProcessInactiveProduct to only class Product. Other classes shouldn't be able to call Category.ProcessInactiveProduct.

    Read the article

  • Linq to sql Repository pattern , Some doubts

    - by MindlessProgrammer
    I am using repository pattern with linq to sql, I am using a repository class per table. I want to know , am i doing at good/standard way, ContactRepository Contact GetByID() Contact GetAll() COntactTagRepository List<ContactTag> Get(long contactID) List<ContactTag> GetAll() List<ContactTagDetail> GetAllDetails() class ContactTagDetail { public Contact Contact {get;set;} public ContactTag COntactTag {get;set;} } When i need a contact i call method in contactrepository, same for contacttag but when i need contact and tags together i call GetDetais() in ContactTag repository its not returning the COntactTag entity generated by the orm insted its returning ContactTagDetail entity conatining both COntact and COntactTag generated by the orm, i know i can simple call GetAll in COntactTag repository and can access Contact.ContactTag but as its linq to sql it will there is no option to Deferred Load in query level, so whenever i need a entity with a related entity i create a projection class Another doubt is where i really need to right the method i can do it in both contact & ContactTag repostitory like In contact repository GetALlWithTags() or something but i am doing it in in COntactTag repository Whats your suggestions ?

    Read the article

  • Break a class in twain, or impose an interface for restricted access?

    - by bedwyr
    What's the best way of partitioning a class when its functionality needs to be externally accessed in different ways by different classes? Hopefully the following example will make the question clear :) I have a Java class which accesses a single location in a directory allowing external classes to perform read/write operations to it. Read operations return usage stats on the directory (e.g. available disk space, number of writes, etc.); write operations, obviously, allow external classes to write data to the disk. These methods always work on the same location, and receive their configuration (e.g. which directory to use, min disk space, etc.) from an external source (passed to the constructor). This class looks something like this: public class DiskHandler { public DiskHandler(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int space = getAvailableSpace(); ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } There's quite a bit more going on, but this will do to suffice. This class needs to be accessed differently by two external classes. One class needs access to the read operations; the other needs access to both read and write operations. public class DiskWriter { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskWriter() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { diskHandler.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskReader() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskHandler.getAvailableSpace(...); } } At this point, both classes share the same class, but the class which should only read has access to the write methods. Solution 1 I could break this class into two. One class would handle read operations, and the other would handle writes: // NEW "UTILITY" CLASSES public class WriterUtil { private ReaderUtil diskReader; public WriterUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... diskReader = new ReaderUtil(dir, minSpace); } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(); ... } } public class ReaderUtil { public ReaderUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } // MODIFIED EXTERNALLY-ACCESSING CLASSES public class DiskWriter { WriterUtil diskWriter; public DiskWriter() { diskWriter = new WriterUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { diskWriter.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { ReaderUtil diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new ReaderUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(...); } } This solution prevents classes from having access to methods they should not, but it also breaks encapsulation. The original DiskHandler class was completely self-contained and only needed config parameters via a single constructor. By breaking apart the functionality into read/write classes, they both are concerned with the directory and both need to be instantiated with their respective values. In essence, I don't really care to duplicate the concerns. Solution 2 I could implement an interface which only provisions read operations, and use this when a class only needs access to those methods. The interface might look something like this: public interface Readable { int getAvailableSpace(); } The Reader class would instantiate the object like this: Readable diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new DiskHandler(...); } This solution seems brittle, and prone to confusion in the future. It doesn't guarantee developers will use the correct interface in the future. Any changes to the implementation of the DiskHandler could also need to update the interface as well as the accessing classes. I like it better than the previous solution, but not by much. Frankly, neither of these solutions seems perfect, but I'm not sure if one should be preferred over the other. I really don't want to break the original class up, but I also don't know if the interface buys me much in the long run. Are there other solutions I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript inheritance

    - by Tower
    Hi, Douglas Crockford seems to like the following inheritance approach: if (typeof Object.create !== 'function') { Object.create = function (o) { function F() {} F.prototype = o; return new F(); }; } newObject = Object.create(oldObject); It looks OK to me, but how does it differ from John Resig's simple inheritance approach? Basically it goes down to newObject = Object.create(oldObject); versus newObject = Object.extend(); And I am interested in theories. Implementation wise there does not seem to be much difference.

    Read the article

  • correct approach to store in database

    - by John
    I'm developing an online website (using Django and Mysql). I have a Tests table and User table. I have 50 tests within the table and each user completes them at their own pace. How do I store the status of the tests in my DB? One idea that came to my mind is to create an additional column in User table. That column containing testid's separated by comma or any other delimiter. userid | username | testscompleted 1 john 1, 5, 34 2 tom 1, 10, 23, 25 Another idea was to create a seperate table to store userid and testid. So, I'll have only 2 columns but thousands of rows (no of tests * no of users) and they will always continue to increase. userid | testid 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 34 2 10

    Read the article

  • Howto write a class where a property can be accessed without naming it.

    - by SchlaWiener
    I have a (dump) question regarding VB/C# I often use third party classes where I can access a child object with only specifying the id or key. Example: Instead of writing: DataRow row = GetAPopulatedDataRowSomeWhere(); Object result = row.Items[1]; // DataRow has no Items property Object result = row.Items["colName"]; // Also not possible I use this code to access the members: DataRow row = GetAPopulatedDataRowSomeWhere(); Object result = row[1]; Object result = row["colName"]; Can someone tell me how a class has to look like to support this syntax? My own class has a Dictionary that I want to access this way. MyClass["key"]; // <- that's what I want MyClass.SubItems["key"]; // <- that's how I use it now

    Read the article

  • How to store data in mysql, to get the fastest performance?

    - by Oden
    Hey, I'm thinking about it, witch of the following two query types would give me the fastest performance for a user messaging module inside my site: The first one i thought about is a multi table setup, witch has a connection table, and a main table. The connection table holds the connection between accounts, and the messaging table. In this case a query would look like following, to get some data of the author, and the messages he has sent: SELECT m.*, a.username FROM messages AS m LEFT JOIN connection_table ON (message_id = m.id) LEFT JOIN accounts AS a ON (account_id = a.id) WHERE m.id = '32341' Inserting into it is a little bit more "complicated". My other idea, and in my thought the better solution of this problem is that i store the data i would use in a connection table in the same table where is store the data of the mail. Sounds like i would get lots of duplicated entries, but no, because i have a field witch has text type and holds user ids like this: *24*32*249* If I want to query them, i use the mysql LIKE method. Deleting is an other problem, but for this i have one more field where i store who has deleted the post. Sad about that i don't know how to join this. So what would you recommend? Are there other ways?

    Read the article

  • Interface vs Abstract Class (general OO)

    - by Kave
    Hi, I have had recently two telephone interviews where I've been asked about the differences between an Interface and an Abstract class. I have explained every aspect of them I could think of, but it seems they are waiting for me to mention something specific, and I dont know what it is. From my experience I think the following is true, if i am missing a major point please let me know: Interface: Every single Method declared in an Interface will have to be implemented in the subclass. Only Events, Delegates, Properties (C#) and Methods can exist in a Interface. A class can implement multiple Interfaces. Abstract Class Only Abstract methods have to be implemented by the subclass. An Abstract class can have normal methods with implementations. Abstract class can also have class variables beside Events, Delegates, Properties and Methods. A class can only implement one abstract class only due non-existence of Multi-inheritance in C#. 1) After all that the interviewer came up with the question What if you had an Abstract class with only abstract methods, how would that be different from an interface? I didnt know the answer but I think its the inheritance as mentioned above right? 2) An another interviewer asked me what if you had a Public variable inside the interface, how would that be different than in Abstract Class? I insisted you can't have a public variable inside an interface. I didn't know what he wanted to hear but he wasn't satisfied either. Many Thanks for clarification, Kave See Also: When to use an interface instead of an abstract class and vice versa Interfaces vs. Abstract Classes How do you decide between using an Abstract Class and an Interface?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: I don't get where to start!

    - by Andy
    I have several articles about Dependency Injection, and I can see the benefits, especially when it comes to unit testing. The units can me loosely coupled, and mocking of dependencies can be made. The trouble is - I just don't get where to start. Consider this snippet below of (much edited for the purpose of this post) code that I have. I am instantiating a Plc object from the main form, and passing in a communications mode via the Connect method. In it's present form it becomes hard to test, because I can't isolate the Plc from the CommsChannel to unit test it. (Can I?) The class depends on using a CommsChannel object, but I am only passing in a mode that is used to create this channel within the Plc itself. To use dependancy injection, I should really pass in an already created CommsChannel (via an 'ICommsChannel' interface perhaps) to the Connect method, or maybe via the Plc constructor. Is that right? But then that would mean creating the CommsChannel in my main form first, and this doesn't seem right either, because it feels like everything will come back to the base layer of the main form, where everything begins. Somehow it feels like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. Where do you start? You have to create an instance of something somewhere, but I'm struggling to understand where that should be. public class Plc() { public bool Connect(CommsMode commsMode) { bool success = false; // Create new comms channel. this._commsChannel = this.GetCommsChannel(commsMode); // Attempt connection success = this._commsChannel.Connect(); return this._connected; } private CommsChannel GetCommsChannel(CommsMode mode) { CommsChannel channel; switch (mode) { case CommsMode.RS232: channel = new SerialCommsChannel( SerialCommsSettings.Default.ComPort, SerialCommsSettings.Default.BaudRate, SerialCommsSettings.Default.DataBits, SerialCommsSettings.Default.Parity, SerialCommsSettings.Default.StopBits); break; case CommsMode.Tcp: channel = new TcpCommsChannel( TCPCommsSettings.Default.IP_Address, TCPCommsSettings.Default.Port); break; default: // Throw unknown comms channel exception. } return channel; } }

    Read the article

  • Naming remote proxy classes

    - by Tobbe
    What are some good names for the client and server side classes that communicate over the network when implementing a remote proxy? The classes are often called stub and skelleton but I don't find those names very "intention revealing". Are there any other (better) alternatives?

    Read the article

  • Compiler doesn't find methods from base class

    - by Paul
    I am having a problem with my virtual methods in a derived class. Here are my (simplified) C++ classes. class Base virtual method accept( MyVisitor1* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; virtual method accept( MyVisitor2* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; virtual method accept( MyVisitor3* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; class DerivedClass virtual method accept( MyVisitor2* v ) { /*implementation is here*/ }; The following use causes VS 2005 to give: "error C2664: 'DerivedClass::accept' : cannot convert parameter 1 from 'Visitor1*' to 'Visitor2 *'". DerivedClass c; MyVisitor1 v1; c.accept(v1); I was expecting the compiler to find and call Base::accept(MyVisitor1) for my DerivedClass as well. Obviously this is not working, but I don't understand why. Any ideas? Thanks, Paul

    Read the article

  • How to do a UITable cell with triangle indicator?

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

    Read the article

  • Truly declarative language?

    - by gjvdkamp
    Hi all, Does anyone know of a truly declarative language? The behaviour I'm looking for is kind of what Excel does, where I can define variables and formulas, and have the formula's result change when the input changes (without having set the answer again myself) The behaviour I'm looking for is best shown with this pseudo code: X = 10 // define and assign two variables Y = 20; Z = X + Y // declare a formula that uses these two variables X = 50 // change one of the input variables ?Z // asking for Z should now give 70 (50 + 20) I've tried this in a lot of languages like F#, python, matlab etc, but every time i try this they come up with 30 instead of 70. Wich is correct from an imperative point of view, but i'm looking for a more declerative behaviour if you know what i mean. And this is just a very simple calculation. When things get more difficult it should handle stuff like recursion and memoization automagically. The code below would obviously work in C# but it's just so much code for the job, i'm looking for something a bit more to the point without all that 'technical noise' class BlaBla{ public int X {get;set;} // this used to be even worse before 3.0 public int Y {get;set;} public int Z {get{return X + Y;}} } static void main(){ BlaBla bla = new BlaBla(); bla.X = 10; bla.Y = 20; // can't define anything here bla.X = 50; // bit pointless here but I'll do it anyway. Console.Writeline(bla.Z);// 70, hurray! } This just seems like so much code, curly braces and semicolons that add nothing. Is there a language/ application (apart from Exel) that does this? Maybe I'm no doing it right in the mentioned langauges, or I've completely missed an app that does just this. I prototyped a language/ application that does this (along with some other stuff) and am thinking of productizing it. I just can't believe it's not there yet. Don't want to waste my time. Thanks in advance, Gert-Jan

    Read the article

  • Planning a database app

    - by ChrisC
    I am in the planning stages of a database app for personal use. I have a good bit of the database structure planned, but as I think about how I'm going to write the program, it made me wonder if I'm doing this in the right order. Which should I be planning first, the db structure or the classes?

    Read the article

  • Immutability of big objects

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have some big (more than 3 fields) Objects which can and should be immutable. Every time I run into that case i tend to create constructor abominations with long parameter lists. It doesn't feel right, is hard to use and readability suffers. It is even worse if the fields are some sort of collection type like lists. A simple addSibling(S s) would ease the object creation so much but renders the object mutable. What do you guys use in such cases? I'm on Scala and Java, but i think the problem is language agnostic as long as the language is object oriented. Solutions I can think of: "Constructor abominations with long parameter lists" The Builder Pattern Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • MVC and conditional formatting - strategies for implementation

    - by Extrakun
    Right now I am writing a simulation program which output is formatted according to certain factors. The question is in a MVC architecture, where is the conditional formatting to be taken place? What are some strategies for implement this feature? FYI, The platform I am using is rather bare-bone in its GUI/front-end execution. To change color and formatting, it requires a change to the formatting state (much like OpenGL).

    Read the article

  • How do I create efficient instance variable mutators in Matlab?

    - by Trent B
    Previously, I implemented mutators as follows, however it ran spectacularly slowly on a recursive OO algorithm I'm working on, and I suspected it may have been because I was duplicating objects on every function call... is this correct? %% Example Only obj2 = tripleAllPoints(obj1) obj.pts = obj.pts * 3; obj2 = obj1 end I then tried implementing mutators without using the output object... however, it appears that in MATLAB i can't do this - the changes won't "stick" because of a scope issue? %% Example Only tripleAllPoints(obj1) obj1.pts = obj1.pts * 3; end For application purposes, an extremely simplified version of my code (which uses OO and recursion) is below. classdef myslice properties pts % array of pts nROW % number of rows nDIM % number of dimensions subs % sub-slices end % end properties methods function calcSubs(obj) obj.subs = cell(1,obj.nROW); for i=1:obj.nROW obj.subs{i} = myslice; obj.subs{i}.pts = obj.pts(1:i,2:end); end end function vol = calcVol(obj) if obj.nROW == 1 obj.volume = prod(obj.pts); else obj.volume = 0; calcSubs(obj); for i=1:obj.nROW obj.volume = obj.volume + calcVol(obj.subs{i}); end end end end % end methods end % end classdef

    Read the article

  • Why do Pascal control structures appear to be inconsistent?

    - by 70Mike
    Most Pascal control structures make sense to me, like: for ... do {statement}; if (condition) then {statement}; while (condition) do {statement}; where the {statement} is either a single statement, or a begin ... end block. I have a problem with: repeat {statement-list} until (expression); try {statement-list} except {statement-list} end; Wouldn't it be better that repeat and try have the same general structure, accepting only a single statement or a begin ... end block, instead of having a statement-list that's not formally blocked with a begin and an end?

    Read the article

  • GUI designers! - got suggestions for a GUI modelling diagram language?

    - by naugtur
    Refering to this question I asked a while ago: UI functionality modeling languages It looks like there is no good-enough solution. I decided to develop one. (and prepare a set of elements for DIA or something) I'm sure it will require a good insight in peoples' experiences and problems in designing functionally complicated GUIs. I've got some ideas already, but I'd like to hear from You what You'd expect from a GUI functionality modelling language. Clarification: It's functionality modelling, so it's not about where I put a button. It's about objects that have some events binded, and the interface behaviour logic. If You think (just as I do) that UML is far from useful for such purposes - feel free to put Your expectations here. I'll try to meet them. ( not necessarily in person;) ) Remember - there is no such thing as a wrong answer to this question

    Read the article

  • Java interface and abstract class issue

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am reading the book -- Hadoop: The Definitive Guide, http://www.amazon.com/Hadoop-Definitive-Guide-Tom-White/dp/0596521979/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273932107&sr=8-1 In chapter 2 (Page 25), it is mentioned "The new API favors abstract class over interfaces, since these are easier to evolve. For example, you can add a method (with a default implementation) to an abstract class without breaking old implementations of the class". What does it mean (especially what means "breaking old implementations of the class")? Appreciate if anyone could show me a sample why from this perspective abstract class is better than interface? thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • Meta Search Engine Architecture

    - by Loki
    The question wasn't clear enough, I think; here's an updated straight to the point question: What are the common architectures used in building a meta search engine and is there any libraries available to build that type of search engine? I'm looking at building an "enterprise" type of search engine where the indexed data could be coming from proprietary (like Autonomy or a Google Box) or public search engines (like Google Web or Yahoo Web).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393  | Next Page >