Search Results

Search found 1449 results on 58 pages for 'oop'.

Page 43/58 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

• How can be data oriented programming applied for GUI system?

  - by Miro

  I've just learned basics of Data oriented programming design, but I'm not very familiar with that yet. I've also read Pitfalls of Object Oriented Programming GCAP 09. It seems that data oriented programming is much better idea for games, than OOP. I'm just creating my own GUI system and it's completely OOP. I'm thinking if is data oriented programming design applicable for structured things like GUI. The main problem I see is that every type widget has different data, so I can hardly group them into arrays. Also every type of widget renders differently so I still need to call virtual functions.

  Read the article

• Am I getting paid a reasonable wage for web engineering?

  - by sailtheworld

  I've been doing some research and it looks like most people in my line of work - WEB ENGINEERING/WEB APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT - that get paid hourly, make anywhere from $30-80 an hour for their work. With that said, I have SEVEN years of experience with web development including OOP-PHP, MySQL, jQuery, OOP-JS, interface design, ajax, database architecture, etc. I am also very strong with visual design and workflow - thus, I've made some really high quality interactive interfaces. I also have a lot of experience with Zend Framework, Symfony, Wordpress, Drupal, etc and a really strong portfolio to show for it. Here's the catch: I'm 20 years old, haven't graduated from college yet (I'm doing part time school and ~30 hours a week of web development.) But I've literally been doing web apps since I was 13 years old. So my question is: is $14 an hour a reasonable starting wage for working at a company part time?

  Read the article

• Search and Replace in MVC

  - by danip

  What would be a good MVC/OOP/GRASP/SOLID structure for a search/replace functionality. Methods: search/searchNext/replace/replaceAll. I'm interested only in the PHP arhitecture and how a professional developer would implement this in it's OWN FRAMEWORK. What names would you use for the classes? What subfolders would you used in your MODEL folder? How would you connect the MODELS/CONTROLLER? This is just a arhitecture question to understand better the principles of good OOP in practice. My current implementation is very simplistic using a service model: /controller/SearchReplaceController.php /models/services/SearchReplaceService.php The problem with this is I know I'm breaking SRP in the service but I found this somehow acceptable. Also creating a service does not feel like the best solution for this.

  Read the article

• What should I learn next?

  - by Krysten

  I am a CS major. I've taken 2 courses in C (Intro to C and CS1) and 1 introductory course to OOP with Java. I really like Java and feel that I have a firm understanding of OOP concepts. I am really interested in web development and would like to learn a programming language that can be used to build dynamic web applications. My question is what language should I learn? I've narrowed it down to python or ruby. Also, I want to learn a programming language that will help me get a job upon graduating. So essentially, I will use this particular language to build applications that will help me get a job in the future.

  Read the article

• How to design shape class

  - by Tomek Tarczynski

  I want to design shape class. I need to distinguish several different shapes: -Point -Line -Triangle -Circle -Polygons The main purpose of this class is to calculate distance between two shapes. I've all methods for calculating those distances, but I want to have a single method that can be used, it should looks like this: float Distance(Shape a, Shape b) Simplest way to do it is to put a lot of if statements and then invoke proper method but this is deffinitely not OOP. How to design such class in OOP style?

  Read the article

• Too complex/too many objects?

  - by Mike Fairhurst

  I know that this will be a difficult question to answer without context, but hopefully there are at least some good guidelines to share on this. The questions are at the bottom if you want to skip the details. Most are about OOP in general. Begin context. I am a jr dev on a PHP application, and in general the devs I work with consider themselves to use many more OO concepts than most PHP devs. Still, in my research on clean code I have read about so many ways of using OO features to make code flexible, powerful, expressive, testable, etc. that is just plain not in use here. The current strongly OO API that I've proposed is being called too complex, even though it is trivial to implement. The problem I'm solving is that our permission checks are done via a message object (my API, they wanted to use arrays of constants) and the message object does not hold the validation object accountable for checking all provided data. Metaphorically, if your perm containing 'allowable' and 'rare but disallowed' is sent into a validator, the validator may not know to look for 'rare but disallowed', but approve 'allowable', which will actually approve the whole perm check. We have like 11 validators, too many to easily track at such minute detail. So I proposed an AtomicPermission class. To fix the previous example, the perm would instead contain two atomic permissions, one wrapping 'allowable' and the other wrapping 'rare but disallowed'. Where previously the validator would say 'the check is OK because it contains allowable,' now it would instead say '"allowable" is ok', at which point the check ends...and the check fails, because 'rare but disallowed' was not specifically okay-ed. The implementation is just 4 trivial objects, and rewriting a 10 line function into a 15 line function. abstract class PermissionAtom { public function allow(); // maybe deny() as well public function wasAllowed(); } class PermissionField extends PermissionAtom { public function getName(); public function getValue(); } class PermissionIdentifier extends PermissionAtom { public function getIdentifier(); } class PermissionAction extends PermissionAtom { public function getType(); } They say that this is 'not going to get us anything important' and it is 'too complex' and 'will be difficult for new developers to pick up.' I respectfully disagree, and there I end my context to begin the broader questions. So the question is about my OOP, are there any guidelines I should know: is this too complicated/too much OOP? Not that I expect to get more than 'it depends, I'd have to see if...' when is OO abstraction too much? when is OO abstraction too little? how can I determine when I am overthinking a problem vs fixing one? how can I determine when I am adding bad code to a bad project? how can I pitch these APIs? I feel the other devs would just rather say 'its too complicated' than ask 'can you explain it?' whenever I suggest a new class.

  Read the article

• Why can't I send SOAP requests to Ebay finding API with this php?

  - by Jay

  This is my code: <?php error_reporting(E_ALL); //new instance of soapClient pointing to Ebay finding api $client = new SoapClient("http://developer.ebay.com/webservices/finding/latest/FindingService.wsdl"); //attach required parameters to soap message header $header_arr = array(); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-MESSAGE-PROTOCOL", "SOAP11"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-SERVICE-NAME", "FindingService"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-OPERATION-NAME", "findItemsByKeywords"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-SERVICE-VERSION", "1.0.0"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-GLOBAL-ID", "EBAY-GB"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-SECURITY-APPNAME", "REMOVED"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-REQUEST-DATA-FORMAT", "XML"); $header_arr[] = new SoapHeader("X-EBAY-SOA-MESSAGE-PROTOCOL", "XML"); $test = $client->__setSoapHeaders($header_arr); $client->__setLocation("http://svcs.ebay.com/services/search/FindingService/v1");//endpoint $FindItemsByKeywordsRequest = array( "keywords" => "potter" ); $result = $client->__soapCall("findItemsByKeywords", $FindItemsByKeywordsRequest); //print_r($client->__getFunctions()); //print_r($client->__getTypes()); //print_r($result); ? And this is the error I receive: Fatal error: Uncaught SoapFault exception: [axis2ns2:Server] Missing SOA operation name header in C:\xampplite\htdocs\OOP\newfile.php:25 Stack trace: #0 C:\xampplite\htdocs\OOP\newfile.php(25): SoapClient-__soapCall('findItemsByKeyw...', Array) #1 {main} thrown in C:\xampplite\htdocs\OOP\newfile.php on line 25 It doesnt make sense, I have already set the operation name in the header of the request... Does anyone know what is wrong here?

  Read the article

• Handling incremental Data Modeling Changes in Functional Programming

  - by Adam Gent

  Most of the problems I have to solve in my job as a developer have to do with data modeling. For example in a OOP Web Application world I often have to change the data properties that are in a object to meet new requirements. If I'm lucky I don't even need to programmatically add new "behavior" code (functions,methods). Instead I can declarative add validation and even UI options by annotating the property (Java). In Functional Programming it seems that adding new data properties requires lots of code changes because of pattern matching and data constructors (Haskell, ML). How do I minimize this problem? This seems to be a recognized problem as Xavier Leroy states nicely on page 24 of "Objects and Classes vs. Modules" - To summarize for those that don't have a PostScript viewer it basically says FP languages are better than OOP languages for adding new behavior over data objects but OOP languages are better for adding new data objects/properties. Are there any design pattern used in FP languages to help mitigate this problem? I have read Phillip Wadler's recommendation of using Monads to help this modularity problem but I'm not sure I understand how?

  Read the article

• Can parser combinators be made efficient?

  - by Jon Harrop

  Around 6 years ago, I benchmarked my own parser combinators in OCaml and found that they were ~5× slower than the parser generators on offer at the time. I recently revisited this subject and benchmarked Haskell's Parsec vs a simple hand-rolled precedence climbing parser written in F# and was surprised to find the F# to be 25× faster than the Haskell. Here's the Haskell code I used to read a large mathematical expression from file, parse and evaluate it: import Control.Applicative import Text.Parsec hiding ((<|>)) expr = chainl1 term ((+) <$ char '+' <|> (-) <$ char '-') term = chainl1 fact ((*) <$ char '*' <|> div <$ char '/') fact = read <$> many1 digit <|> char '(' *> expr <* char ')' eval :: String -> Int eval = either (error . show) id . parse expr "" . filter (/= ' ') main :: IO () main = do file <- readFile "expr" putStr $ show $ eval file putStr "\n" and here's my self-contained precedence climbing parser in F#: let rec (|Expr|) (P(f, xs)) = Expr(loop (' ', f, xs)) and loop = function | ' ' as oop, f, ('+' | '-' as op)::P(g, xs) | (' ' | '+' | '-' as oop), f, ('*' | '/' as op)::P(g, xs) -> let h, xs = loop (op, g, xs) let op = match op with | '+' -> (+) | '-' -> (-) | '*' -> (*) | '/' -> (/) loop (oop, op f h, xs) | _, f, xs -> f, xs and (|P|) = function | '('::Expr(f, ')'::xs) -> P(f, xs) | c::xs when '0' <= c && c <= '9' -> P(int(string c), xs) My impression is that even state-of-the-art parser combinators waste a lot of time back tracking. Is that correct? If so, is it possible to write parser combinators that generate state machines to obtain competitive performance or is it necessary to use code generation?

  Read the article

• Have I taken a wrong path in programming by being excessively worried about code elegance and style?

  - by Ygam

  I am in a major stump right now. I am a BSIT graduate, but I only started actual programming less than a year ago. I observed that I have the following attitude in programming: I tend to be more of a purist, scorning unelegant approaches to solving problems using code I tend to look at anything in a large scale, planning everything before I start coding, either in simple flowcharts or complex UML charts I have a really strong impulse on refactoring my code, even if I miss deadlines or prolong development times I am obsessed with good directory structures, file naming conventions, class, method, and variable naming conventions I tend to always want to study something new, even, as I said, at the cost of missing deadlines I tend to see software development as something to engineer, to architect; that is, seeing how things relate to each other and how blocks of code can interact (I am a huge fan of loose coupling) i.e the OOP thinking I tend to combine OOP and procedural coding whenever I see fit I want my code to execute fast (thus the elegant approaches and refactoring) This bothers me because I see my colleagues doing much better the other way around (aside from the fact that they started programming since our first year in college). By the other way around I mean, they fire up coding, gets the job done much faster because they don't have to really look at how clean their codes are or how elegant their algorithms are, they don't bother with OOP however big their projects are, they mostly use web APIs, piece them together and voila! Working code! CLients are happy, they get paid fast, at the expense of a really unmaintainable or hard-to-read code that lacks structure and conventions, or slow executions of certain actions (which the common reasoning against would be that internet connections are much faster these days, hardware is more powerful). The excuse I often receive is clients don't care about how you write the code, but they do care about how long you deliver it. If it works then all is good. Now, did my "purist" approach to programming may have been the wrong way to start programming? Should I just dump these purist concepts and just code the hell up because I have seen it: clients don't really care how beautifully coded it is?

  Read the article

• How I May Have Taken A Wrong Path in Programming

  - by Ygam

  I am in a major stump right now. I am a BSIT graduate, but I only started actual programming less than a year ago. I observed that I have the following attitude in programming: I tend to be more of a purist, scorning unelegant approaches to solving problems using code I tend to look at anything in a large scale, planning everything before I start coding, either in simple flowcharts or complex UML charts I have a really strong impulse on refactoring my code, even if I miss deadlines or prolong development times I am obsessed with good directory structures, file naming conventions, class, method, and variable naming conventions I tend to always want to study something new, even, as I said, at the cost of missing deadlines I tend to see software development as something to engineer, to architect; that is, seeing how things relate to each other and how blocks of code can interact (I am a huge fan of loose coupling) i.e the OOP thinking I tend to combine OOP and procedural coding whenever I see fit I want my code to execute fast (thus the elegant approaches and refactoring) This bothers me because I see my colleagues doing much better the other way around (aside from the fact that they started programming since our first year in college). By the other way around I mean, they fire up coding, gets the job done much faster because they don't have to really look at how clean their codes are or how elegant their algorithms are, they don't bother with OOP however big their projects are, they mostly use web APIs, piece them together and voila! Working code! CLients are happy, they get paid fast, at the expense of a really unmaintainable or hard-to-read code that lacks structure and conventions, or slow executions of certain actions (which the common reasoning against would be that internet connections are much faster these days, hardware is more powerful). The excuse I often receive is clients don't care about how you write the code, but they do care about how long you deliver it. If it works then all is good. Now, did my "purist" approach to programming may have been the wrong way to start programming? Should I just dump these purist concepts and just code the hell up because I have seen it: clients don't really care how beautifully coded it is?

  Read the article

• So, "Are Design Patterns Missing Language Features"?

  - by Eduard Florinescu

  I saw the answer to this question: How does thinking on design patterns and OOP practices change in dynamic and weakly-typed languages? There it is a link to an article with an outspoken title: Are Design Patterns Missing Language Features. But where you can get snippets that seem very objective and factual and that can be verified from experience like: PaulGraham said "Peter Norvig found that 16 of the 23 patterns in Design Patterns were 'invisible or simpler' in Lisp." and a thing that confirms what I recently seen with people trying to simulate classes in javascript: Of course, nobody ever speaks of the "function" pattern, or the "class" pattern, or numerous other things that we take for granted because most languages provide them as built-in features. OTOH, programmers in a purely PrototypeOrientedLanguage? might well find it convenient to simulate classes with prototypes... I am taking into consideration also that design patterns are a communcation tool and because even with my limited experience participating in building applications I can see as an anti-pattern(ineffective and/or counterproductive) for example forcing a small PHP team to learn GoF patterns for small to medium intranet app, I am aware that scale, scope and purpose can determine what is effective and/or productive. I saw small commercial applications that mixed functional with OOP and still be maintainable, and I don't know if many would need for example in python to write a singleton but for me a simple module does the thing. patterns So are there studies or hands on experience shared that takes into consideration, all this, scale and scope of project, dynamics and size of the team, languages and technologies, so that you don't feel that a (difficult for some)design pattern is there just because there isn't a simpler way to do it or that it cannot be done by a language feature?

  Read the article

• How much Ruby should I learn before moving to Rails?

  - by Kevin

  Just a quick question.. I can never get a definitive answer when googling this, either. Some people say you can learn Rails without knowing any Ruby, but at some point you'll run into a brick wall and wish you knew Ruby and will have to go back to learn it..and some say to learn the "basics" of Ruby before learning Rails and it will make your life that much easier.. My current knowledge is low. I'm not a beginner, but I'm not pro, either. I went through the Learn Python The Hard Way online book in about a month, but I stopped once I got to the OOP side of Python (I know booleans, elif/if/else/statements, for loops, while loops, functions) I agree with learning the "basics" of Ruby before learning Rails, but what exactly are the "basics" of Ruby? Would I need to learn the whole OOP side of Ruby before I went on to Rails? Or would I just need to learn the Ruby syntax up to where I learned Python (booleans, elif/if/else/statements, for loops, while loops, functions) before I went on to Rails? Thanks!

  Read the article

• DAO/Webservice Consumption in Web Application

  - by Gavin

  I am currently working on converting a "legacy" web-based (Coldfusion) application from single data source (MSSQL database) to multi-tier OOP. In my current system there is a read/write database with all the usual stuff and additional "read-only" databases that are exported daily/hourly from an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system by SSIS jobs with business product/item and manufacturing/SCM planning data. The reason I have the opportunity and need to convert to multi-tier OOP is a newer more modern ERP system is being implemented business wide that will be a complete replacement. This newer ERP system offers several interfaces for third party applications like mine, from direct SQL access to either a dotNet web-service or a SOAP-like web-service. I have found several suitable frameworks I would be happy to use (Coldspring, FW/1) but I am not sure what design patterns apply to my data access object/component and how to manage the connection/session tokens, with this background, my question has the following three parts: Firstly I have concerns with moving from the relative safety of a SSIS job that protects me from downtime and speed of the ERP system to directly connecting with one of the web services which I note seem significantly slower than I expected (simple/small requests often take up to a whole second). Are there any design patterns I can investigate/use to cache/protect my data tier? It is my understanding data access objects (the component that connects directly with the web services and convert them into the data types I can then work with in my Domain Objects) should be singletons (and will act as an Adapter/Facade), am I correct? As part of the data access object I have to setup a connection by username/password (I could set up multiple users and/or connect multiple times with this) which responds with a session token that needs to be provided on every subsequent request. Do I do this once and share it across the whole application, do I setup a new "connection" for every user of my application and keep the token in their session scope (might quickly hit licensing limits), do I set the "connection" up per page request, or is there a design pattern I am missing that can manage multiple "connections" where a requests/access uses the first free "connection"? It is worth noting if the ERP system dies I will need to reset/invalidate all the connections and start from scratch, and depending on which web-service I use might need manually close the "connection/session"

  Read the article

• Can I assume interface oriented programming as a good object oriented programming?

  - by david

  I have been programming for decades but I have not been used to object oriented programming. But for recenet years, I had a great opportunity to learn OOP, its principles, and a lot of patterns that are great. Since I've learned OOP, I tried to apply them to a couple of projects and found those projects successful. Unfortunately I didn't follow extreme programming that suggests writing test first, mainly because their time frame were tight. What I did for those projects were Identify all necessary classes and create them with proper properties and methods whenever there is dependency between classes, write interface between them see if there is any patterns for certain relationships between classes to replace By successful, I meant that it was quick development effort, the classes can be reused better, and flexible enough so that another programmer does not have to change something else to fix another part. But I wonder if this is a good practice. Of course, I know I need to put writing unit tests first in my work process. But other than that, is there any problem with this approach - creating lots of interfaces - in long term?

  Read the article

• Avoiding Object Oriented Pitfalls, Migrating from C, What Worked for You?

  - by Stephen

  I've been programming in procedural languages for quite some time now, and my first reaction to a problem is to start breaking it down into tasks to perform rather than to consider the different entities (objects) that exist and their relationships. I have had a university course in OOP, and understand the fundamentals of encapsulation, data abstraction, polymorphism, modularity and inheritance. I read Learning to think in the Object Oriented Way and Learning object oriented thinking, and will be looking at some of the books pointed to in those answers. I think that several of my medium to large sized projects will benefit from effective use of OOP but as a novice I would like to avoid time consuming, common errors. Based on your experiences, what are these pitfalls and what are reasonable ways around them? If you could explain why they are pitfalls, and how your suggestion is effective in addressing the issue it'd be appreciated. I'm thinking along the lines of something like "Is it common to have a fair number of observer and modifier methods and use private variables or are there techniques for consolidating/reducing them?" I'm not worried about using C++ as a pure OO language, if there are good reasons to mix methods. (Reminiscent of the reasons to use GOTOs, albeit sparingly.) Thank you!

  Read the article

• How to understand computer science as a whole?

  - by MrCellophane

  I am a college student in Computer Science, I have been studying CS for a long time. But even till today, I still feel so confused about a lot of things. First of all, I have solid foundation in alg, data structure, and OOP, but I don't have a clear understanding of the whole system of the subject. I studied database, alg, data structure, OOP, network, software engineering, OS, and a lot of courses. I know what they are, but I don't know how to connect them together. Is there a way to have a clear understanding of the architecture of the subject? And is there a way to know what technology is used to do what? For example, in interviews, when people ask me alg, data str, Java, OS or any other specific field, I could answer, but when they ask some other very general about the field, I have no idea. Well, I know my question maybe a little bit confusing, but what my situation is I don't even know how to ask a clear question. I don't know my question, it's totally a mess in my head. Is there a way to make it clear?

  Read the article

• Prefer class members or passing arguments between internal methods?

  - by geoffjentry

  Suppose within the private portion of a class there is a value which is utilized by multiple private methods. Do people prefer having this defined as a member variable for the class or passing it as an argument to each of the methods - and why? On one hand I could see an argument to be made that reducing state (ie member variables) in a class is generally a good thing, although if the same value is being repeatedly used throughout a class' methods it seems like that would be an ideal candidate for representation as state for the class to make the code visibly cleaner if nothing else. Edit: To clarify some of the comments/questions that were raised, I'm not talking about constants and this isn't relating to any particular case rather just a hypothetical that I was talking to some other people about. Ignoring the OOP angle for a moment, the particular use case that I had in mind was the following (assume pass by reference just to make the pseudocode cleaner) int x doSomething(x) doAnotherThing(x) doYetAnotherThing(x) doSomethingElse(x) So what I mean is that there's some variable that is common between multiple functions - in the case I had in mind it was due to chaining of smaller functions. In an OOP system, if these were all methods of a class (say due to refactoring via extracting methods from a large method), that variable could be passed around them all or it could be a class member.

  Read the article

• Java desktop programmer starting to learn Android development: how different is it?

  - by Prog

  I'm a Java programmer. All of my experience is on desktop applications, using Swing for the GUI. I spend a lot of time studying OOP, I have decent understanding of OO concepts and I design and program by the OO approach. I'm thinking of starting to learn Android development soon, and I'm wondering how different it is from desktop development. Obviously the GUI libraries will be different (not Swing), but other than that, I want to know if there are significant differences. I will divide this question to two parts: Apart from the GUI libraries, am I still going to use the standard Java libarary I'm used to? Aka same data structues, same utility classes, etc.? If not, what are the main differences between the libraries I'm used to and the libraries I'll be using? How different is Android development in regard to OO design? Are all of the familiar principles, design patterns, techniques and best pratices just as valid and used? Or is OOP and OOD in Android development significantly different than OO in desktop development? To summarize: apart from GUI design, how different is Java Android development than Java desktop development?

  Read the article

• REST API wrapper - class design for 'lite' object responses

  - by sasfrog

  I am writing a class library to serve as a managed .NET wrapper over a REST API. I'm very new to OOP, and this task is an ideal opportunity for me to learn some OOP concepts in a real-life situation that makes sense to me. Some of the key resources/objects that the API returns are returned with different levels of detail depending on whether the request is for a single instance, a list, or part of a "search all resources" response. This is obviously a good design for the REST API itself, so that full objects aren't returned (thus increasing the size of the response and therefore the time taken to respond) unless they're needed. So, to be clear: .../car/1234.json returns the full Car object for 1234, all its properties like colour, make, model, year, engine_size, etc. Let's call this full. .../cars.json returns a list of Car objects, but only with a subset of the properties returned by .../car/1234.json. Let's call this lite. ...search.json returns, among other things, a list of car objects, but with minimal properties (only ID, make and model). Let's call this lite-lite. I want to know what the pros and cons of each of the following possible designs are, and whether there is a better design that I haven't covered: Create a Car class that models the lite-lite properties, and then have each of the more detailed responses inherit and extend this class. Create separate CarFull, CarLite and CarLiteLite classes corresponding to each of the responses. Create a single Car class that contains (nullable?) properties for the full response, and create constructors for each of the responses which populate it to the extent possible (and maybe include a property that returns the response type from which the instance was created). I expect among other things there will be use cases for consumers of the wrapper where they will want to iterate through lists of Cars, regardless of which response type they were created from, such that the three response types can contribute to the same list. Happy to be pointed to good resources on this sort of thing, and/or even told the name of the concept I'm describing so I can better target my research.

  Read the article

• OpenGL Wrapper in .Net

  - by Ngu Soon Hui

  This question is similar to the one here. But I feel that the answers recommended ( such as Tao and OpenTK) are not good enough because they are just a direct port from OpenGL, with no OOP design, and hard to use. What I'm looking for is a .Net OpenGL wrapper that is written in clear OOP principles, easy to use ( easy to apply textual and lighting, easy to debug etc), able to rotate the 3D diagram with mouse ( a feature that is critically missing from OpenGL and TAO), and the ability to export to other file formats ( such as dwg or dxf or Google Map file format). Any suggestion? Both Open source or commercial components would do.

  Read the article

• Tricks to avoid losing motivation?

  - by AareP

  Motivation is a tricky thing to upkeep. Once I thought that ambitious projects will keep programmer motivated, and too simple tasks will hinder his motivation. Now I have plenty of experience with small and large projects, desktop/web/database programming, c++/c#/java/php languages, oop/non-oop paradigms, day-job/free-time programming.. but I still can't answer the question of motivation. Which programming tasks I like, and which don't? It seems to depend on too many variables. One thing remains constant though. It's that starting everything from scratch is always more motivating than extending some existing system. Unfortunately it's hard to use this trick in productive programming. :) So my question is, what tricks programmer can use to stay motivated? For example should we use pen and paper as much as possible, in order not to get fed up with monitor and keyboard?

  Read the article

• what is duck typing?

  - by ashish yadav

  I recently read an article about duck-typing.It said about calling functions of different classes using object of any class. Is it true?And how will the compiler do it on runtime? I apologize if i am not clear.But it really fascinates me , if we could do it dynamically. So if u people got any idea.I am all ears. thank you!! how will the function be accessed by object of any other class. that violates the basic principle of OOP.and that too dynamically during runtime. And is this feature possible in case of OOP languages?

  Read the article

• The difference between traditional DLL and COM DLL.

  - by smwikipedia

  I am currently studying COM. I found that COM DLL is kind of built upon the traditional DLL infrastructure. When we build COM DLLs, we still rely on the traditional DLL export methods to lead us to the internal COM co-classes. If COM is for component reusing at the binary level, I think the traditional DLL can achieve the same thing. They both expose functions, they are both binary, so what's the point of turning to COM approach? Currently, I have the feeling that the traditional DLL expose methods in a "flat" manner, while the COM DLL expose methods in an "OOP" hierarchy manner. And the OOP manner seems to be a better approach. Could this be the reason why COM prevails? Many thanks.

  Read the article

• Error Handling for Application in PHP

  - by Zubair1

  I was wondering if someone can show me a good way to handle errors in my PHP app, that i am also easily able to reuse in my codes. So far i have been using the following functions: Inline Errors function display_errors_for($fieldname) { global $errors; if (isset($errors[$fieldname])) { return '<label for="' .$fieldname. '" class="error">' . ucfirst($errors[$fieldname]). '</label>'; } else { return false; } } All Errrors function display_all_errors($showCounter = true) { global $errors; $counter = 0; foreach ($errors as $errorFieldName => $errorText) { if ($showCounter == true) { $counter++; echo '<li>' . $counter . ' - <label for="' .$errorFieldName. '">' .$errorText. '</label></li>'; } else { echo '<li><label for="' .$errorFieldName. '">' .$errorText. '</label></li>'; } } } I have a $errors = array(); defined on the top of my global file, so it is appended to all files. The way i use it is that if i encounter an error, i push a new error key/value to the $errors array holder, something like the following: if (strlen($username) < 3) { $errors['username'] = "usernames cannot be less then 3 characters."; } This all works great and all, But i wondering if some one has a better approach for this? with classes? i don't think i want to use Exceptions with try/catch seems like an overkill to me. I'm planning to make a new app, and i'll be getting my hands wet with OOP alot, though i have already made apps using OOP but this time i'm planning to go even deeper and use OOP approach more extensively. What i have in mind is something like this, though its just a basic class i will add further detail to it as i go deeper and deeper in my app to see what it needs. class Errors { public $errors = array(); public function __construct() { // Initialize Default Values // Initialize Methods } public function __destruct() { //nothing here too... } public function add($errorField, $errorDesc) { if (!is_string($errorField)) return false; if (!is_string($errorDesc)) return false; $this->errors[$errorField] = $errorDesc; } public function display($errorsArray) { // code to iterate through the array and display all errors. } } Please share your thoughts, if this is a good way to make a reusable class to store and display errors for an entire app, or is getting more familiar with exceptions and try/catch my only choice?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >