Search Results

Search found 12490 results on 500 pages for 'property injection'.

Page 4/500 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to model dependency injection in UML ?

    - by hjo1620
    I have a Contract class. The contract is valid 1 Jan 2010 - 31 Dec 2010. It can be in state Active or Passive, depending on which date I ask the instance for it's state. ex. if I ask 4 July 2010, it's in state Active, but if I ask 1 Jan 2011, it's in state Passive. Instances are created using constructor dependency injection, i.e. they are either Active or Passive already when created, null is not allowed as a parameter for the internal state member. One initial/created vertex is drawn in UML. I have two arrows, leading out from the initial vertex, one leading to state Active and the other to state Passive. Is this a correct representation of dependency injection in UML ? This is related to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2779922/how-model-statemachine-when-state-is-dependent-on-a-function which initiated the question on how to model DI in general, in UML.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection & Singleton Design pattern

    - by SysAdmin
    How do we identify when to use dependency injection or singleton pattern. I have read in lot of websites where they say "Use Dependency injection over singleton pattern". But I am not sure if I totally agree with them. For my small or medium scale projects I definitely see the use of singleton pattern straightforward. For example Logger. I could use Logger.GetInstance().Log(...) But, instead of this, why do I need to inject every class I create, with the logger's instance?.

    Read the article

  • How exactly does dependency injection reduce coupling?

    - by dotnetdev
    Hi, I've done plenty of reading on Dependency Injection, but I have no idea, how does it actually reduce coupling? The analogy I have of DI is that all components are registered with a container, so theyre are like in a treasure chest. To get a component, you obviously register it first, but then you would have to interrogate the treasure chest (which is like a layer of indirection). Is this the right analogy? It doesn't make obvious how the "injection" happens, though (how would that fit in with this analogy?). Thanks

    Read the article

  • PHP Security checklist (injection, sessions etc)

    - by NoviceCoding
    So what kind of things should a person using PHP and MySql be focused on to maximize security. Things I have done: -mysql_real_escape_string all inputs -validate all inputs after escaping em -Placed random alpha numerics before my table names -50character salt + Ripemd passwords Heres where I think I am slacking: -I know know nothing about sessions and securing them. How unsafe/safe is it if all you are doing is: session_start(); $_SESSION['login']= $login; and checking it with: session_start(); if(isset($_SESSION['login'])){ -I heard something about other forms of injection like cross site injection and what not... -And probably many other things I dont know about. Is there a "checklist"/Quicktut on making php secure? I dont even know what I should be worried about.I kinda regret now not building off cakephp since I am not a pro.

    Read the article

  • SQL Injection - some sense at last!

    - by TATWORTH
    I see various articles that proclaim means to guard against SQL injection. As individual steps they are of use but since they were often proclaimed as "the solution" they were potentially misleading. At http://www.simple-talk.com/sql/learn-sql-server/sql-injection-defense-in-depth/ there is an article entitled "SQL Injection: Defense in Depth" - this article argues what I have argued myself. Remember that however low-grade the information on your web site is, if your site is hacked, the public may percive the hacking as your most sensitive information was exposed.

    Read the article

  • SQL Injection Attacks are still occurring

    - by TATWORTH
    It should be of concern to all developers that SQL Injection attacks are still occurring. Here are some resources on the subject: http://www.darkreading.com/DatabaseSecurity/util/4576/download.html (needs free registration) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_injection http://www.unixwiz.net/techtips/sql-injection.html http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms161953.aspx http://www.sitepoint.com/sql-injection-attacks-safe/ And for a funny view on it see http://xkcd.com/327/ So what are you doing to harden your applications?

    Read the article

  • Contexts and Dependency Injection(CDI)??

    - by Masa Sasaki
    WebLogic Server?????????????WebLogic Server????????6?20?????????37?WebLogic Server???@????????Contexts and Dependency Injection(CDI)?(?????????? Fusion Middleware?????? ?? ?)?????????????????Java EE 6????????CDI???????DI(Dependency Injection)?Java EE 5????????????????????CDI??DI????????????????????????????????????????????????????????CDI????????????????????(?????? Fusion Middleware?????? ??? ??) CDI?? ???????CDI???Java EE 6???????JSR299: Contexts Dependency Injection????? ?????Dependency Injection (??????)?Aspect-Oriented Programming (AOP)?Interception ??????????????????????????? CDI?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????CDI?????????????? CDI?????????????2? ??1???CDI??????????Oracle WebLogic Server 12c????Java EE 6????????? ?????????????????2???beans.xml???????Web??????????WEB-INF/beans.xml? EJB??META-INF/beans.xml????????????CDI????????????????beans.xml???? ?????????????????????? Java EE 5?DI(Dependency Injection) Java EE 5??DI????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????(@EJB? @Resource?@WebServiceRef)??? Java EE 6?CDI Java EE 6?CDI?????????????????@Inject???????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? @Qualifier????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????@Qualifier? ????????????·??????????????????????@JPN??????????? @Produce???????? ???????????????????? ????????·?????????????? CDI?????????????????????????????????·??????? ????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????? EL(Expression Language) ???????? EL????????????JSF?ManagedBean?????????????·?????????????? ??? Java EE 6?????????CDI???????????Java EE 5?DI????AOP??? ???????????????????DI, AOP???????????????? ?????????????CDI?????????????????????????????? ?????CDI?????????????????????????????????? ?????? WebLogic Server??? WebLogic Server?????????WebLogic Server?????! WebLogic Server??????(???????????) WebLogic Server???????? WebLogic Server??????

    Read the article

  • WPF Property Data binding to negate the property

    - by azamsharp
    Is there any way to change the value of property at runtime in WPF data binding. Let's say my TextBox is bind to a IsAdmin property. Is there anyway I can change that property value in XAML to be !IsAdmin. I just want to negate the property so Valueconverter might be an overkill! NOTE: Without using ValueConverter

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection: At what point am I allowed to create a new object?

    - by Gaz_Edge
    I am refactoring a PHP application, and I am trying to do has much dependency injection (DI) as possible. I feel like I've got a good grasp of how it works, and I can certainly see my classes becoming a lot leaner and more robust. I'm refactoring so that I can inject a dependency rather than create a new object within the class, but at some point I am going to have to create some objects, that is, use the dreaded new keyword. The problem I have now run into is at what point can I actually create new objects? It's looking like I'll end up at a top level class, creating loads of new objects as there is no where else to go. This feels wrong. I've read some blogs that use factory classes to create all the objects, and then you inject the factory into other classes. You can then call the factory methods, and the factory creates the new object for you. My concern with doing this is now my factory classes are going to be a new free-for-all! I guess this may be OK as they are factory classes, but are there some rules to stick to when using a factory pattern and DI, or am I going way off the mark here?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: where to store dependencies used by only one method?

    - by simoneL
    I developing a project integrated with Dependency Injection (just for reference, I'm using Unity). The problem is that I have some Manager classes with several methods and in many cases I have dependencies used only in one method. public class UserManager : IUserManager { private UserRepository UserRepository {get;set;} private TeamRepository TeamRepository {get;set;} private CacheRepository CacheRepository {get;set;} private WorkgroupRepository WorkgroupRepository {get;set;} public UserManager(UserRepository userRepository, TeamRepository teamRepository, CacheRepository cacheRepository , WorkgroupRepository workgroupRepository, ... // Many other dependencies ) { UserRepository = userRepository; TeamRepository = teamRepository; CacheRepository = cacheRepository ; WorkgroupRepository = workgroupRepository; ... // Setting the remaining dependencies } public void GetLatestUser(){ // Uses only UserRepository } public void GetUsersByTeam(int teamID){ // Uses only TeamRepository } public void GetUserHistory(){ // Uses only CacheRepository } public void GetUsersByWorkgroup(int workgroupID){ // Uses only workgroupRepository } } The UserManager is instantiated in this way: DependencyFactory<IUserManager>(); Note: DependencyFactory is just a wrapper to simplify the access to the UnityContainer Is it OK to have classes like that in the example? Is there a better way to implement avoiding to instantiate all the unnecessary dependencies?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: What point am I allowed to create a new object?

    - by Gaz_Edge
    I am refactoring a php application and I am trying to do has much dependency injection as possible. I feel like I've got a good grasp of how it works, and I can certainly see my classes becoming a lot leaner and more robust. Im refactoring so that I can inject a dependency rather than create a new object within the class, but at some point I am going to have to create some objects i.e. use the dreaded new keyword. The problem I have now run into is at what point can I actually create new objects? Its looking like I'll end up at a top level class, creating loads of new objects as there is no where else to go. This feels wrong. I've read some blogs that use factory classes to create all the objects, and then you inject the factory into other classes. You can then call the factory methods, and the factory creates the new object for you. My concern with doing this is now my factory classes are going to be a new free-for-all! I guess this may be ok as they are factory classes, but are there some rules to stick to when using factory pattern and DI, or am I going way off the mark here.

    Read the article

  • Rhino Mocks, Dependency Injection, and Separation of Concerns

    - by whatispunk
    I am new to mocking and dependency injection and need some guidance. My application is using a typical N-Tier architecture where the BLL references the DAL, and the UI references the BLL but not the DAL. Pretty straight forward. Lets say, for example, I have the following classes: class MyDataAccess : IMyDataAccess {} class MyBusinessLogic {} Each exists in a separate assembly. I want to mock MyDataAccess in the tests for MyBusinessLogic. So I added a constructor to the MyBusinessLogic class to take an IMyDataAccess parameter for the dependency injection. But now when I try to create an instance of MyBusinessLogic on the UI layer it requires a reference to the DAL. I thought I could define a default constructor on MyBusinessLogic to set a default IMyDataAccess implementation, but not only does this seem like a codesmell it didn't actually solve the problem. I'd still have a public constructor with IMyDataAccess in the signature. So the UI layer still requires a reference to the DAL in order to compile. One possible solution I am toying with is to create an internal constructor for MyBusinessLogic with the IMyDataAccess parameter. Then I can use an Accessor from the test project to call the constructor. But there's still that smell. What is the common solution here. I must just be doing something wrong. How could I improve the architecture?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection and decoupling of software layers

    - by cs31415
    I am trying to implement Dependency Injection to make my app tester friendly. I have a rather basic doubt. Data layer uses SqlConnection object to connect to a SQL server database. SqlConnection object is a dependency for data access layer. In accordance with the laws of dependency injection, we must not new() dependent objects, but rather accept them through constructor arguments. Not wanting to upset the DI gods, I dutifully create a constructor in my DAL that takes in SqlConnection. Business layer calls DAL. Business layer must therefore, pass in SqlConnection. Presentation layer calls Business layer. Hence it too, must pass in SqlConnection to business layer. This is great for class isolation and testability. But didn't we just couple the UI and Business layers to a specific implementation of the data layer which happens to use a relational database? Why do the Presentation and Business layers need to know that the underlying data store is SQL? What if the app needs to support multiple data sources other than SQL server (such as XML files, Comma delimited files etc.) Furthermore, what if I add another object upon which my data layer is dependent on (say, a second database). Now, I have to modify the upper layers to pass in this new object. How can I avoid this merry-go-round and reap all the benefits of DI without the pain?

    Read the article

  • Simplifying Testing through design considerations while utilizing dependency injection

    - by Adam Driscoll
    We are a few months into a green-field project to rework the Logic and Business layers of our product. By utilizing MEF (dependency injection) we have achieved high levels of code coverage and I believe that we have a pretty solid product. As we have been working through some of the more complex logic I have found it increasingly difficult to unit test. We are utilizing the CompositionContainer to query for types required by these complex algorithms. My unit tests are sometimes difficult to follow due to the lengthy mock object setup process that must take place, just right, to allow for certain circumstances to be verified. My unit tests often take me longer to write than the code that I'm trying to test. I realize this is not only an issue with dependency injection but with design as a whole. Is poor method design or lack of composition to blame for my overly complex tests? I've tried base classing tests, creating commonly used mock objects and ensuring that I utilize the container as much as possible to ease this issue but my tests always end up quite complex and hard to debug. What are some tips that you've seen to keep such tests concise, readable, and effective?

    Read the article

  • Serializing Configurations for a Dependency Injection / Inversion of Control

    - by Joshua Starner
    I've been researching Dependency Injection and Inversion of Control practices lately in an effort to improve the architecture of our application framework and I can't seem to find a good answer to this question. It's very likely that I have my terminology confused, mixed up, or that I'm just naive to the concept right now, so any links or clarification would be appreciated. Many examples of DI and IoC containers don't illustrate how the container will connect things together when you have a "library" of possible "plugins", or how to "serialize" a given configuration. (From what I've read about MEF, having multiple declarations of [Export] for the same type will not work if your object only requires 1 [Import]). Maybe that's a different pattern or I'm blinded by my current way of thinking. Here's some code for an example reference: public abstract class Engine { } public class FastEngine : Engine { } public class MediumEngine : Engine { } public class SlowEngine : Engine { } public class Car { public Car(Engine e) { engine = e; } private Engine engine; } This post talks about "Fine-grained context" where 2 instances of the same object need different implementations of the "Engine" class: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2176833/ioc-resolve-vs-constructor-injection Is there a good framework that helps you configure or serialize a configuration to achieve something like this without hard coding it or hand-rolling the code to do this? public class Application { public void Go() { Car c1 = new Car(new FastEngine()); Car c2 = new Car(new SlowEngine()); } } Sample XML: <XML> <Cars> <Car name="c1" engine="FastEngine" /> <Car name="c2" engine="SlowEngine" /> </Cars> </XML>

    Read the article

  • PHP -- automatic SQL injection protection?

    - by ashgromnies
    I took over maintenance of a PHP app recently and I'm not super familiar with PHP but some of the things I've been seeing on the site are making me nervous that it could be vulnerable to a SQL injection attack. For example, see how this code for logging into the administrative section works: $password = md5(HASH_SALT . $_POST['loginPass']); $query = "SELECT * FROM `administrators` WHERE `active`='1' AND `email`='{$_POST['loginEmail']}' AND `password`='{$password}'"; $userInfo = db_fetch_array(db_query($query)); if($userInfo['id']) { $_SESSION['adminLoggedIn'] = true; // user is logged in, other junk happens here, not important The creators of the site made a special db_query method and db_fetch_array method, shown here: function db_query($qstring,$print=0) { return @mysql(DB_NAME,$qstring); } function db_fetch_array($qhandle) { return @mysql_fetch_array($qhandle); } Now, this makes me think I should be able to do some sort of SQL injection attack with an email address like: ' OR 'x'='x' LIMIT 1; and some random password. When I use that on the command line, I get an administrative user back, but when I try it in the application, I get an invalid username/password error, like I should. Could there be some sort of global PHP configuration they have enabled to block these attacks? Where would that be configured? Here is the PHP --version information: # php --version PHP 5.2.12 (cli) (built: Feb 28 2010 15:59:21) Copyright (c) 1997-2009 The PHP Group Zend Engine v2.2.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2009 Zend Technologies with the ionCube PHP Loader v3.3.14, Copyright (c) 2002-2010, by ionCube Ltd., and with Zend Optimizer v3.3.9, Copyright (c) 1998-2009, by Zend Technologies

    Read the article

  • Problem with UserControl with custom Dependency Property

    - by Mathias Koch
    Hi, I'm writing a user control with a dependency property for a search text called SearchText. It is a dependency property because I want to allow consumers of the control to use data binding. The user control contains a WPF TextBox where the user can enter the search text. I could use data binding to connect the SearchText dependency property of the user control with the Text dependency property of the TextBox, but this binding only fires when the text box looses input focus. What I want is SearchText to be updated after every change of Text. So I have added a TextChanged event handler to the user control where I set SearchText to the value of Text. My Problem is, the SearchText binding doesn't work, the source never gets updated. What am I doing wrong? Here's the relevant part of the user controls code-behind: public partial class UserControlSearchTextBox : UserControl { public string SearchText { get { return (string)GetValue(SearchTextProperty); } set { SetValue(SearchTextProperty, value); } } public static readonly DependencyProperty SearchTextProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("SearchText", typeof(string), typeof(UserControlSearchTextBox), new UIPropertyMetadata("")); private void TextBox_TextChanged(object sender, TextChangedEventArgs e) { SearchText = ((TextBox)sender).Text; } ... } The window that contains an instance of the user control has its DataContext set to an object that has a property also called SearchText. <uc:UserControlSearchTextBox SearchText="{Binding SearchText}" /> The data context of the Window: public class DataSourceUserManual : DataSourceBase { private string _searchText; public string SearchText { get { return _searchText; } set { _searchText = value; ... OnPropertyChanged("SearchText"); } } } Unfortunately, this setter is not called when I type into the text box. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Static Property losing its value intermittently ?

    - by joedotnot
    Is there something fundamentally wrong with the following design, or can anyone see why would the static properties sometimes loose their values ? I have a class library project containing a class AppConfig; this class is consumed by a Webforms project. The skeleton of AppConfig class is as follows: Public Class AppConfig Implements IConfigurationSectionHandler Private Const C_KEY1 As String = "WebConfig.Key.1" Private Const C_KEY2 As String = "WebConfig.Key.2" Private Const C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE as string = "Key1defaultVal" Private Const C_KEY2_DEFAULT_VALUE as string = "Key2defaultVal" Private Shared m_field1 As String Private Shared m_field2 As String Public Shared ReadOnly Property ConfigValue1() As String Get ConfigValue1= m_field1 End Get End Property Public Shared ReadOnly Property ConfigValue2() As String Get ConfigValue2 = m_field2 End Get End Property Public Shared Sub OnApplicationStart() m_field1 = ReadSetting(C_KEY1, C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE) m_field2 = ReadSetting(C_KEY2, C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE) End Sub Public Overloads Shared Function ReadSetting(ByVal key As String, ByVal defaultValue As String) As String Try Dim setting As String = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings(key) If setting Is Nothing Then ReadSetting = defaultValue Else ReadSetting = setting End If Catch ReadSetting = defaultValue End Try End Function Public Function Create(ByVal parent As Object, ByVal configContext As Object, ByVal section As System.Xml.XmlNode) As Object Implements System.Configuration.IConfigurationSectionHandler.Create Dim objSettings As NameValueCollection Dim objHandler As NameValueSectionHandler objHandler = New NameValueSectionHandler objSettings = CType(objHandler.Create(parent, configContext, section), NameValueCollection) Return 1 End Function End Class The Static Properties get set once on application start, from the Application_Start event of the Global.asax Sub Application_Start(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As EventArgs) //Fires when the application is started AppConfig.OnApplicationStart() End Sub Thereafter, whenever we want to access a value in the Web.Config from anywhere, e.g. aspx page code-behind or another class or referenced class, we simply call the static property. For example, AppConfig.ConfigValue1() AppConfig.ConfigValue2() This is turn returns the value stored in the static backing fields m_field1, m_field2 Problem is sometimes these values are empty string, when clearly the Web.Config entry has values. Is there something fundamentally wrong with the above design, or is it reasonable to expect the static properties would keep their value for the life of the Application session?

    Read the article

  • Concatenating Date Values - SQL Injection

    - by Kyle Rozendo
    Hi All, We currently receive parameters of values as VARCHAR's, and then build a date from them. I am wanting to confirm that the method would stop the possibility of SQL injection from this statement: select CONVERT(datetime, '2010' + '-' + '02' + '-' + '21' + ' ' + '15:11:38.990') Another note is that the actual parameters being passed through to the stored proc are length bound at (4, 2, 2, 10, 12) in correspondence to the above. Thanks a ton, Kyle

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >