Search Results

Search found 31582 results on 1264 pages for 'software design'.

Page 403/1264 | < Previous Page | 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410  | Next Page >

  • STLifying C++ classes

    - by shambulator
    I'm trying to write a class which contains several std::vectors as data members, and provides a subset of vector's interface to access them: class Mesh { public: private: std::vector<Vector3> positions; std::vector<Vector3> normals; // Several other members along the same lines }; The main thing you can do with a mesh is add positions, normals and other stuff to it. In order to allow an STL-like way of accessing a Mesh (add from arrays, other containers, etc.), I'm toying with the idea of adding methods like this: public: template<class InIter> void AddNormals(InIter first, InIter last); Problem is, from what I understand of templates, these methods will have to be defined in the header file (seems to make sense; without a concrete iterator type, the compiler doesn't know how to generate object code for the obvious implementation of this method). Is this actually a problem? My gut reaction is not to go around sticking huge chunks of code in header files, but my C++ is a little rusty with not much STL experience outside toy examples, and I'm not sure what "acceptable" C++ coding practice is on this. Is there a better way to expose this functionality while retaining an STL-like generic programming flavour? One way would be something like this: (end list) class RestrictedVector<T> { public: RestrictedVector(std::vector<T> wrapped) : wrapped(wrapped) {} template <class InIter> void Add(InIter first, InIter last) { std::copy(first, last, std::back_insert_iterator(wrapped)); } private: std::vector<T> wrapped; }; and then expose instances of these on Mesh instead, but that's starting to reek a little of overengineering :P Any advice is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Voting Script, Possiblity of Simplifying Database Queries

    - by Sev
    I have a voting script which stores the post_id and the user_id in a table, to determine whether a particular user has already voted on a post and disallow them in the future. To do that, I am doing the following 3 queries. SELECT user_id, post_id from votes_table where postid=? AND user_id=? If that returns no rows, then: UPDATE post_table set votecount = votecount-1 where post_id = ? Then SELECT votecount from post where post_id=? To display the new votecount on the web page Any better way to do this? 3 queries are seriously slowing down the user's voting experience

    Read the article

  • NoSQL vs Relational Coding Styles

    - by Chris Henry
    When building objects that make use of data stored in a RDBMS, it's normally pretty clear what you're getting back, as dictated by the tables and columns being queried. However, when dealing with NoSQL, document-based systems, it's less clear what is being retrieved. What are common methods of keeping track of structure in which data is stored?

    Read the article

  • correct technical term for this pattern

    - by Oliver A.
    sometimes I use a pattern which is very similar to the singleton pattern: There is one default instance which and a static get method to aces it. But you may create other instances and pass it as optional parameter and if you want to and you can even replace the default instance with a instance from a child class. So it is NO SINGLETON at all but it is used like one singleton in most cases. Anyone got an idea who to call something like this ? Maybe half*** singleton? domiton?

    Read the article

  • What pattern is this? php

    - by user151841
    I have several classes that are basically interfaces to database rows. Since the class assumes that a row already exists ( __construct expects a field value ), there is a public static function that allows creation of the row and returns an instance of the class. Here's an example ( without the actual database inserts ): class selfStarter { public $type; public function __construct( $type ) { $this->type = $type; } public static function create( $type ) { if ( ! empty($type) ) { $starter = & new selfStarter($type); return $starter; } } } $obj1 = selfStarter::create( "apple" ); $obj2 = & new selfStarter( "banana" ); What is this pattern called?

    Read the article

  • What considerations should be made when creating a reporting framework for a business?

    - by Andrew Dunaway
    It's a pretty classic problem. The company I work for has numerous business reports that are used to track sales, data feeds, and various other metrics. Of course this also means that there is a conglomerate of disparate frameworks, ASP.net pages, and areas where these reports can be found. There have been some attempts at consolidating these into a single entity, but nothing has stuck yet. Since this is a common problem, and I am sure solved innumerable times, I wanted to see what others have done. For the most part these can be boiled down to the following pieces: A SQL query against our database to gather data A presentation of data, generally in a data grid Filtering that can vary based on data types and the business needs Some way to organize the reports, a single drop down gets long and unmanageable quickly A method to download data to alter further, perhaps a csv file My first thought was to create a framework in Silverlight with Linq to Sql. Mainly just because I like it and want to play with it which probably is not the best reason. I also thought the controls grant a lot of functionality like sorting, dragging columns, etc. I was also curious about the printing in Silverlight 4. Which brings me around to my original question, what is the best way to do this? Is there a package out there I can just buy that will do it for me? The Silverlight approach seems pretty easy, after it's setup and templated, but maybe it's a bad idea and I can learn from someone else?

    Read the article

  • Global variable in a recursive function how to keep it at zero?

    - by Grammin
    So if I have a recursive function with a global variable var_: int var_; void foo() { if(var_ == 3) return; else var_++; foo(); } and then I have a function that calls foo() so: void bar() { foo(); return; } what is the best way to set var_ =0 everytime foo is called thats not from within itself. I know I could just do: void bar() { var_ =0; foo(); return; } but I'm using the recursive function a lot and I don't want to call foo and forget to set var_=0 at a later date. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to solve this? Thanks, Josh

    Read the article

  • Change object on client side or on server side

    - by Polina Feterman
    I'm not sure what is the best practice. I have some big and complex objects (NOT flat). In that object I have many related objects - for example Invoice is the main class and one of it's properties is invoiceSupervisor - a big class by it's own called User. User can also be not flat and have department property - also an object called Department. For example I want create new Invoice. First way: I can present to client several fields to fill in. Some of them will be combos that I will need to fill with available values. For example available invoiceSupervisors. Then all the chosen values I can send to server and on server I can create new Invoice and assign all chosen values to that new Invoice. Then I will need to assign new supervisor I will pull the chosen User by id that user picked up on server from combobox. I might do some verification on the User such as does the user applicable to be invoice supervisor. Then I will assign the User object to invoiceSupervisor. Then after filling all properties I will save the new invoice. Second way: In the beginning I can call to server to get a new Invoice. Then on client I can fill all chosen values , for example I can call to server to get new User object and then fill it's id from combobox and assign the User as invoiceSupervisor. After filling the Invoice object on client I can send it to server and then the server will save the new invoice. Before saving server can run some validations as well. So what is the best approach - to make the object on client and send it to server or to collect all values from client and to make a new object on server using those values ?

    Read the article

  • I built my rails app with sqlite and without specifying any db field sizes, Is my app now foobared for production?

    - by Tim Santeford
    I've been following a lot of good tutorials on building rails apps but I seem to be missing the whole specifying and validating db field sizes part. I love not needing to have to think about it when roughing out an app (I would have never done this with a PHP or ASP.net app). However, now that I'm ready to go to production, I think I might have done myself a disservice by not specifying field sizes as I went. My production db will be MySQL. What is the best practice here? Do I need to go through all of my migration files and specify sizes, update all the models with validation, and update all my form partial views with input max widths? or am I missing a critical step in my development process?

    Read the article

  • Using Multiple Databases

    - by sergiuoala
    A company is hired by another company for helping in a certain field. So I created the following tables: Companies: id, company name, company address Administrators: (in relation with companies) id, company_id, username, email, password, fullname Then, each company has some workers in it, I store data about workers. Hence, workers has a profession, Agreement Type signed and some other common things. Now, the parent tables and data in it for workers (Agreement Types, Professions, Other Common Things) are going to be the same for each company. Should I create 1 new database for each company? Or store All data into the same database? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What should layers in dotnet application ?

    - by haansi
    I am using layered architecture in dotnet (mostly I work on web projects). I am confuse what layers should I use ? I have small idea that there should be the following layers. user interface customer types (custom entities) business logic layer data access layer My purpose is sure quality of work and maximum re-usability of code. some one suggested to add common types layer in it. Please guide me what should be layers ? and in each layer what part should go ?

    Read the article

  • How important is it that models be consistent across project components?

    - by RonLugge
    I have a project with two components, a server-side component and a client-side component. For various reasons, the client-side device doesn't carry a fully copy of the database around. How important is it that my models have a 1:1 correlation between the two sides? And, to extend the question to my bigger concern, are there any time-bombs I'm going to run into down the line if they don't? I'm not talking about having different information on each side, but rather the way the information is encapsulated will vary. (Obviously, storage mechanisms will also vary) The server side will store each user, each review, each 'item' with seperate tables, and create links between them to gather data as necessary. The client side shouldn't have a complete user database, however, so rather than link against the user for gathering things like 'name', I'd store that on the review. In other words... --- Server Side --- Item: +id //Store stuff about the item User: +id +Name -Password Review: +id +itemId +rating +text +userId --- Device Side --- Item: +id +AverageRating Review: +id +rating +text +userId +name User: +id +Name //Stuff The basic idea is that certain 'critical' information gets moved one level 'up'. A user gets the list of 'items' relevant to their query, with certain review-orientation moved up (i. e. average rating). If they want more info, they query the detail view for the item, and the actual reviews get queried and added to the dataset (and displayed). If they query the actual review, the review gets queried and they pick up some additional user info along the way (maybe; I'm not sure if the user would have any use for any of the additional user information). My basic concern is that I don't wan't to glut the user's bandwidth or local storage with a huge variety of information that they just don't need, even if proper database normalizations suggests that information REALLY should be stored at a 'lower' level. I've phrased this as a fairly low-level conceptual issue because that's the level I'm trying to think / worry over, but if it matters I'm creating a PHP / MySQL server that provides data for a iOS / CoreData client.

    Read the article

  • One on One table relation - is it harmful to keep relation in both tables?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    I have 2 tables that their rows have one on one relation.. For you to understand the situation, suppose there is one table with user informations and there is another table that contains a very specific informations and each user can only link to one these specific kind of informations ( suppose second table as characters ) And that character can only assign to the user who grabs it, Is it against the rules of designing clean databases to hold the relation key in both tables? User Table: user_id, name, age, character_id Character Table: character_id, shape, user_id I have to do it for performance, how do you think about it?

    Read the article

  • Sharing class member data between sub components

    - by Tim Gradwell
    I have an aggregate 'main' class which contains some data which I wish to share. The main class also has other class members. I want to share the data with these other class members. What is the correct / neatest way to do this? The specific example I have is as follows. The main class is a .net Form. I have some controls (actually controls within controls) on the main form which need access to the shared data. Main Form - DataX - DataY - Control1 -- Subcontrol1 - Control2 -- SubControl2 SubControls 1 and 2 both wish to access DataX and DataY. The trouble is, I feel like better practice (to reduce coupling), would be that either subcontrols should not know about Main Form, or Main Form should not know about subcontrols - probably the former. For subcontrols not to know about Main Form, would probably mean Main Form passing references to both Controls 1 and 2, which in turn would pass the references on to SubControls 1 and 2. Lots of lines of code which just forward the references. If I later added DataZ and DataW, and Controls 3 and 4 and SubControls 3 and 4, I'd have to add lots more reference forwarding code. It seems simpler to me to give SubControls 1 and 2 member references to Main Form. That way, any sub control could just ask for MainForm.DataX or MainForm.DataY and if I ever added new data, I could just access it directly from the sub controls with no hassle. But it still involves setting the 'MainForm' member references every time I add a new Control or Subcontrol. And it gives me a gut feeling of 'wrong'. As you might be able to tell I'm not happy with either of my solutions. Is there a better way? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Static selection and Ruby on Rails objects

    - by Dave
    Hi all- I have a simple problem, but am having trouble wrapping my head around it. I have an video object that should have one or more "genres". This list of genres should be prepopulated and then the user should just select one or more using autocomplete or some such. Here is the question: Is it worth creating a table with genres for the static selection? Or should it just be included in the presentation layer? If there is a static table, how do we name it correctly. I envision something like this class Video < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :genres ... end class Genre < ... belongs_to :video ... end But then we get a table called genre, that basically maps all the selected genres to their parent videos. There would need to be some static table to reference the static genres. Is this the best way to do it? Sorry if this was rambl-y a little stream of conciousness. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What would be better, (1 database + 4 tables) or (2 databases + 2 tables each) ?

    - by griseldas
    Hi there, I would like to be advised on what would be better (in regards to performance) A) 1 DATABASE with 4 tables or B) 2 DATABASES (same server), each with 2 tables. The tables size and usage are more or less similar, so the 2 tables on Database 1 would be similar usage/size to the 2 tables on database 2 The tables could have +500,000 records and the 2 tables on each database are not related (no join queries etc between them) Thanks in advance for your comments

    Read the article

  • How to structure data... Sequential or Hierarchical?

    - by Ryan
    I'm going through the exercise of building a CMS that will organize a lot of the common documents that my employer generates each time we get a new sales order. Each new sales order gets a 5 digit number (12222,12223,122224, etc...) but internally we have applied a hierarchy to these numbers: + 121XX |--01 |--02 + 122XX |--22 |--23 |--24 In my table for sales orders, is it better to use the 5 digital number as an ID and populate up or would it be better to use the hierarchical structure that we use when referring to jobs in regular conversation? The only benefit to not populating sequentially seems to be formatting the data later on in my view, but that doesn't sound like a good enough reason to go through the extra work. Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410  | Next Page >