Search Results

Search found 58985 results on 2360 pages for 'value object'.

Page 43/2360 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

  • Changing <object> height and width works in Chrome but not Firefox or IE. Why?

    - by Michael Hopkins
    I am making a site with two Youtube videos. These videos use the raw embed code from Youtube. The site's design doesn't work with any of the default Youtube sizes, so I am writing code to automatically resize the video. Here is my code. There will never be more than these two tags on the page, otherwise I'd do a better job selecting the videos. <script language='JavaScript' type='text/javascript'> var x=document.getElementsByTagName('object'); x.[0].width='350'; x.[0].height='350'; x.[1].width='350'; x.[1].height='350'; </script> For reference, here's a sample default Youtube embed that the code might alter: <object width="480" height="385"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/zSgiXGELjbc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param> <param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/zSgiXGELjbc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed> </object> In Chrome, the video players sit perfectly in a 350x350 box. In IE and FF (latest versions), the videos are the unchanged, normal size. I cannot find anything in Google that explans why this won't work. I have tried using setattribute, for loops, adjusting both and , single-quotes and double-quotes, etc. Any ideas what is going wrong?

    Read the article

  • can I add properties to a typo3 extbase domain model object?

    - by The Newbie Qs
    I want to store a username in a coupon object, each coupon object already has the uid of the user who created it. I can loop over the coupon objects and read the associated usernames from fe_users but how then will I save those usernames into the coupons so when they are passed to the template the usernames can be read like so coupon.username, or in some other easy way so each username will appear on the page with the right coupon as they are all printed out in a table? If I was doing basic php instead of typo3 i would just define a query but what is the typo3 v4.5 way? My code so far - which dies on the line where I try to assign the new property --creatorname -- to the $coup object. public function listAction() { $coupons = $this->couponRepository->findAll(); // @var Tx_Extbase_Domain_Repository_FrontendUserRepository $userRepository */ $userRepository = $this->objectManager->get("Tx_Extbase_Domain_Repository_FrontendUserRepository"); foreach ($coupons as $coup) { echo '<br />test '.$coup->getCreator(); echo '<br />count = '.$userRepository->countAll().'<br />'; $newObject = $userRepository->findByUid( intval($coup->getCreator())); //var_dump($newObject); var_dump($coup); echo '<br />getUsername '.$newObject->getUsername() ; $coup['creatorname'] = $newObject->getUsername(); echo '<br />creatorname '.$coup['creatorname'] ; } $this->view->assign('coupons', $coupons); }

    Read the article

  • How can I take advantage of IObservable/IObserver to get rid of my "god object"?

    - by Will
    In a system I'm currently working on, I have many components which are defined as interfaces and base classes. Each part of the system has some specific points where they interact with other parts of the system. For example, the data readying component readies some data which eventually needs to go to the data processing portion, the communications component needs to query different components for their status for relaying to the outside, etc. Currently, I glue these parts of the system together using a "god object", or an object with intimate knowledge of different parts of the system. It registers with events over here and shuttles the results to methods over there, creates a callback method here and returns the result of that method over there, and passes many requests through a multi-threaded queue for processing because it "knows" certain actions have to run on STA threads, etc. While its convenient, it concerns me that this one type knows so much about how everybody else in the system is designed. I'd much prefer a more generic hub that can be given instances which can expose events or methods or callbacks or that can consume these. I've been seeing more about the IObservable/IObserver features of the reactive framework and that are being rolled into .NET 4.0 (I believe). Can I leverage this pattern to help replace my "god object"? How should I go about doing this? Are there any resources for using this pattern for this specific purpose?

    Read the article

  • Value Chain Planning in Las Vegas

    - by Paul Homchick
    Several Oracle Value Chain Planning experts will be presenting at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center in Las Vegas, for Collaborate 2010- April 18th- 22nd, 2010. We have five sessions as follows: Monday, April 19, 1:15 pm - 2:15 pm, Breakers H, Roger Goossens VCP Vice President Leveraging Oracle Value Chain Planning for Your Planning Business Transformation Monday, April 19th, 2010- 1.15 pm-2.15 pm, Breakers D, Rich Caballero, CRM Vice President Delivering Superior Customer Service with Oracle's Siebel Service Applications Wednesday, April 21, 2:15 pm - 3:15 pm, Mandalay Bay Ballroom A, Roger Goossens VCP Vice President Value Chain Planning for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne We will also be in the demogrounds, so stop by to see the latest VCP innovations from Oracle and talk to our experts.

    Read the article

  • Value Chain Planning in Las Vegas

    - by Paul Homchick
    Several Oracle Value Chain Planning experts will be presenting at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center in Las Vegas, for Collaborate 2010- April 18th- 22nd, 2010. We have five sessions as follows: Monday, April 19, 1:15 pm - 2:15 pm, Breakers H, Roger Goossens Oracle VCP Vice President Leveraging Oracle Value Chain Planning for Your Planning Business Transformation Monday, April 19, 3:45 pm - 4:45 pm, Breakers I, Scott Malcolm, Oracle VCP Development Complex Supply Chain Planning Made Easy: Introducing Oracle Rapid Planning Tuesday, April 20, 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm, Breakers I, John Bermudez, Oracle VCP Strategy Synchronize Your Financial and Operating Plans with Oracle Integrated Business Planning Wednesday, April 21, 10:30 am - 11:30 am, Breakers I, Vikash Goyal, Oracle VCP Strategy Oracle Demantra: What's New? Wednesday, April 21, 2:15 pm - 3:15 pm, Mandalay Bay Ballroom A, Roger Goossens Oracle VCP Vice President Value Chain Planning for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne We will also be in the demogrounds, so stop by to see the latest VCP innovations from Oracle and talk to our experts.

    Read the article

  • BPM Business Value Patterns

    - by JuergenKress
    Together with Matthias Ziegler from Accenture we presented the BPM Business Value Patterns at the SOA & BPM Integration Days in Germany in October: BPM Business Value Patterns View more presentations by Jürgen Kress Please visit the website http://soa-bpm-days.de/  for the next SOA & BPM Integration Days III February 29th & March 1st in Munich If you'd like to learn more please feel free to contact us any time: Matthias Ziegler Jürgen Kress For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member of the SOA Partner Community. To register please visit  www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Technorati Tags: Matthias Ziegler,Jürgen Kress,SOA & BPM Integration Days,BPM,BPM Value Patterns,BPM ROI,Oracle,OPN,Accenture

    Read the article

  • Unique Business Value vs. Unique IT

    - by barry.perkins
    When the age of computing started, technology was new, exciting, full of potential and had a long way to grow. Vendor architectures were proprietary, and limited in function at first, growing in capability and complexity over time. There were few if any "standards", let alone "open standards" and the concepts of "open systems", and "open architectures" were far in the future. Companies employed intelligent, talented and creative people to implement the best possible solutions for their company. At first, those solutions were "unique" to each company. As time progressed, standards emerged, companies shared knowledge, business capability supplied by technology grew, and companies continued to expand their use of technology. Taking advantage of change required companies to struggle through periodic "revolutionary" change cycles, struggling through costly changes that were fraught with risk, resulted in solutions with an increasingly shorter half-life, and frequently required altering existing business processes and retraining employees and partner businesses. The pace of technological invention and implementation grew at an ever increasing rate, making the "revolutionary" approach based upon "proprietary" or "closed" architectures or technologies no longer viable. Concurrent with the advancement of technology, the rate of change in business increased, leading us to the incredibly fast paced, highly charged, and competitive global economy that we have today, where the most successful companies are companies that are good at implementing, leveraging and exploiting change. Fast forward to today, a world where dramatic changes in business and technology happen continually, a world where "evolutionary" change is crucial. Companies can no longer afford to build "unique IT", nor can they afford regular intervals of "revolutionary" change, with the associated costs and risks. Human ingenuity was once again up to the task, turning technology into a platform supporting business through evolutionary change, by employing "open": open standards; open systems; open architectures; and open solutions. Employing "open", enables companies to implement systems based upon technology, capability and standards that will evolve over time, providing a solid platform upon which a company can drive business needs, requirements, functions, and processes down into the technology, rather than exposing technology to the business, allowing companies to focus on providing "unique business value" rather than "unique IT". The big question! Does moving from "older" technology that no longer meets the needs of today's business, to new "open" technology require yet another "revolutionary change"? A "revolutionary" change with a short half-life, camouflaging reality with great marketing? The answer is "perhaps". With the endless options available to choose from, it is entirely possible to implement a solution that may work well today, but in 5 years time will become yet another albatross for the company to bear. Some solutions may look good today, solving a budget challenge by reducing cost, or solving a specific tactical challenge, but result in highly complex environments, that may be difficult to manage and maintain and limit the future potential of your business. Put differently, some solutions might push today's challenge into the future, resulting in a more complex and expensive solution. There is no such thing as a "1 size fits all" IT solution for business. If all companies implemented business solutions based upon technology that required, or forced the same business processes across all businesses in an industry, it would be extremely difficult to show competitive advantage through "unique business value". It would be equally difficult to "evolve" to meet or exceed business needs and keep up with today's rapid pace of change. How does one ensure that they do not jump from one trap directly into another? Or to put it positively, there are solutions available today that can address these challenges and issues. How does one ensure that the buying decision of today will serve the business well for years into the future? Intelligent & Informed decisions - "buying right" In a previous blog entry, we discussed the value of linking tactical to strategic The key is driving the focus to what is best for your business, handling today's tactical issues while also aligning with a roadmap/strategy that is tightly aligned with your strategic business objectives. When considering the plethora of possible options that provide various approaches to solving today's complex business problems, it is extremely important to ensure that vendors supplying those options, focus on what is best for your business, supplying sufficient information, providing adequate answers to questions, addressing challenges, issues, concerns and objections honestly and openly, and focus on supplying solutions that are tailored for, and deliver the most business value possible for your business. Here are a few questions to consider relative to the proposed options that should help ensure that today's solution doesn't become tomorrow's problem. Do the proposed solutions: Solve the problem(s) you are trying to address? Provide a solid foundation upon which to grow/enhance your business? Provide tactical gains that align with and enable your strategic business goals/objectives? Provide an infrastructure that can be leveraged with subsequent projects? Solve problems for the business overall, the lines of business, or just IT? Simplify your current environment Provide the basis for business: Efficiency Agility Clarity governance, risk, compliance real time business visibility and trend analysis Does your IT staff have the knowledge/experience to successfully manage the proposed systems once they are deployed in production? Done well, you will be presented with options tailored to your business, that enable you to drive the "unique business value" necessary to help your business stand out from others, creating a distinct competitive advantage, delivering what your customers need, when they need it, so you can attract new customers, new business, and grow top line revenue, all at a cost that provides a strong Return on Investment/Return on Assets. The net result is growth with managed cost providing significantly improved profit margin and shareholder value.

    Read the article

  • design pattern advice: graph -> computation

    - by csetzkorn
    I have a domain model, persisted in a database, which represents a graph. A graph consists of nodes (e.g. NodeTypeA, NodeTypeB) which are connected via branches. The two generic elements (nodes and branches will have properties). A graph will be sent to a computation engine. To perform computations the engine has to be initialised like so (simplified pseudo code): Engine Engine = new Engine() ; Object ID1 = Engine.AddNodeTypeA(TypeA.Property1, TypeA.Property2, …, TypeA.Propertyn); Object ID2 = Engine.AddNodeTypeB(TypeB.Property1, TypeB.Property2, …, TypeB.Propertyn); Engine.AddBranch(ID1,ID2); Finally the computation is performed like this: Engine.DoSomeComputation(); I am just wondering, if there are any relevant design patterns out there, which help to achieve the above using good design principles. I hope this makes sense. Any feedback would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Code Reuse and Abstraction in FP vs OOP

    - by Electric Coffee
    I've been told that code reuse and abstraction in OOP is far more difficult to do than it is in FP, and that all the claims that have been made about Object Orientedness (for lack of a better term) being great at reusing code have been flat out lies So I was wondering if anyone here could tell me why that is, and perhaps show me some code to back up these claims, I'm not saying I don't believe you Functional programmers, it's just that I've been "indoctrinated" to think Object Orientedly, and thus can't (yet) think Functionally enough to see it myself To quote Jimmy Hoffa (from an answer to one of my previous questions): The cake is a lie, code reuse in OO is far more difficult than in FP. For all that OO has claimed code reuse over the years, I have seen it follow through a minimum of times. (feel free to just say I must be doing it wrong, I'm comfortable with how well I write OO code having had to design and maintain OO systems for years, I know the quality of my own results) That quote is the basis of my question, I want to see if there's anything to the claim or not

    Read the article

  • Implementing a "state-machine" logic for methods required by an object in C++

    - by user827992
    What I have: 1 hypothetical object/class + other classes and related methods that gives me functionality. What I want: linking this object to 0 to N methods in realtime on request when an event is triggered Each event is related to a single method or a class, so a single event does not necessarily mean "connect this 1 method only" but can also mean "connect all the methods from that class or a group of methods" Avoiding linked lists because I have to browse the entire list to know what methods are linked, because this does not ensure me that the linked methods are kept in a particular order (let's say an alphabetic order by their names or classes), and also because this involve a massive amount of pointers usage. Example: I have an object Employee Jon, Jon acquires knowledge and forgets things pretty easily, so his skills may vary during a period of time, I'm responsible for what Jon can add or remove from his CV, how can I implement this logic?

    Read the article

  • Python C API return more than one value / object

    - by Grisu
    I got the following problem. I have written a C-Extension to Python to interface a self written software library. Unfortunately I need to return two values from the C function where the last one is optional. In Python the equivalent is def func(x,y): return x+y, x-y test = func(13,4) #only the first value is used In my C extension I use return Py_BuildValue("ii",x+y,x-y); which results in a tuple. If I now try to access the return value from Python via test2 = cfunc(13,4) print(test2) I got a tuple instead of only the first return value. How is possible to build the same behavior as in Python from C Extension?

    Read the article

  • When should a method of a class return the same instance after modifying itself?

    - by modiX
    I have a class that has three methods A(), B() and C(). Those methods modify the own instance. While the methods have to return an instance when the instance is a separate copy (just as Clone()), I got a free choice to return void or the same instance (return this;) when modifying the same instance in the method and not returning any other value. When deciding for returning the same modified instance, I can do neat method chains like obj.A().B().C();. Would this be the only reason for doing so? Is it even okay to modify the own instance and return it, too? Or should it only return a copy and leave the original object as before? Because when returning the same modified instance the user would maybe admit the returned value is a copy, otherwise it would not be returned? If it's okay, what's the best way to clarify such things on the method?

    Read the article

  • Mobile 3D engine renders alpha as full-object transparency

    - by Nils Munch
    I am running a iOS project using the isgl3d framework for showing pod files. I have a stylish car with 0.5 alpha windows, that I wish to render on a camera background, seeking some augmented reality goodness. The alpha on the windows looks okay, but when I add the object, I notice that it renders the entire object transparently, where the windows are. Including interior of the car. Like so (in example, keyboard can be seen through the dashboard, seats and so on. should be solid) The car interior is a seperate object with alpha 1.0. I would rather not show a "ghost car" in my project, but I haven't found a way around this. Have anyone encountered the same issue, and eventually reached a solution ?

    Read the article

  • 2D object-aligned bounding-box intersection test

    - by AshleysBrain
    Hi all, I have two object-aligned bounding boxes (i.e. not axis aligned, they rotate with the object). I'd like to know if two object-aligned boxes overlap. (Edit: note - I'm using an axis-aligned bounding box test to quickly discard distant objects, so it doesn't matter if the quad routine is a little slower.) My boxes are stored as four x,y points. I've searched around for answers, but I can't make sense of the variable names and algorithms in examples to apply them to my particular case. Can someone help show me how this would be done, in a clear and simple way? Thanks. (The particular language isn't important, C-style pseudo code is OK.)

    Read the article

  • Yet Yet Another Way To Create An Object

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Yep, there's still another one: FormatterServices. This one allows one to create an object without running it's constructor... it is used by some of our good friends serializers. Stopwatch watch = new Stopwatch(); for (Int32 i = 0; i Beware, though: because the constructor isn't run (and remember that all fields that are initialized inline are also in fact initialized in the constructor), the object's state may be invalid. Enough object construction for now... SyntaxHighlighter.config.clipboardSwf = 'http://alexgorbatchev.com/pub/sh/2.0.320/scripts/clipboard.swf'; SyntaxHighlighter.brushes.CSharp.aliases = ['c#', 'c-sharp', 'csharp']; SyntaxHighlighter.all();

    Read the article

  • Figuring a max repetitive sub-tree in an object tree

    - by bonomo
    I am trying to solve a problem of finding a max repetitive sub-tree in an object tree. By the object tree I mean a tree where each leaf and node has a name. Each leaf has a type and a value of that type associated with that leaf. Each node has a set of leaves / nodes in certain order. Given an object tree that - we know - has a repetitive sub-tree in it. By repetitive I mean 2 or more sub-trees that are similar in everything (names/types/order of sub-elements) but the values of leaves. No nodes/leaves can be shared between sub-trees. Problem is to identify these sub-trees of the max height. I know that the exhaustive search can do the trick. I am rather looking for more efficient approach.

    Read the article

  • Liskov principle: violation by type-hinting

    - by Elias Van Ootegem
    According to the Liskov principle, a construction like the one below is invalid, as it strengthens a pre-condition. I know the example is pointless/nonsense, but when I last asked a question like this, and used a more elaborate code sample, it seemed to distract people too much from the actual question. //Data models abstract class Argument { protected $value = null; public function getValue() { return $this->value; } abstract public function setValue($val); } class Numeric extends Argument { public function setValue($val) { $this->value = $val + 0;//coerce to number return $this; } } //used here: abstract class Output { public function printValue(Argument $arg) { echo $this->format($arg); return $this; } abstract public function format(Argument $arg); } class OutputNumeric extends Output { public function format(Numeric $arg)//<-- VIOLATION! { $format = is_float($arg->getValue()) ? '%.3f' : '%d'; return sprintf($format, $arg->getValue()); } } My question is this: Why would this kind of "violation" be considered harmful? So much so that some languages, like the one I used in this example (PHP), don't even allow this? I'm not allowed to strengthen the type-hint of an abstract method but, by overriding the printValue method, I am allowed to write: class OutputNumeric extends Output { final public function printValue(Numeric $arg) { echo $this->format($arg); } public function format(Argument $arg) { $format = is_float($arg->getValue()) ? '%.3f' : '%d'; return sprintf($format, $arg->getValue()); } } But this would imply repeating myself for each and every child of Output, and makes my objects harder to reuse. I understand why the Liskov principle exists, don't get me wrong, but I find it somewhat difficult to fathom why the signature of an abstract method in an abstract class has to be adhered to so much stricter than a non-abstract method. Could someone explain to me why I'm not allowed to hind at a child class, in a child class? The way I see it, the child class OutputNumeric is a specific use-case of Output, and thus might need a specific instance of Argument, namely Numeric. Is it really so wrong of me to write code like this?

    Read the article

  • What is the state of the art in OOP?

    - by Ollie Saunders
    I used to do a lot of object-oriented programming and found myself reading up a lot on how to do it well. When C++ was the dominant OOP language there was a very different set of best practices than have emerged since. Some of the newer ideas I know of are BDD, internal DSLs, and the importing of ideas from functional programming. My question is: is there any consensus on the best way to develop object-oriented software today in the more modern languages such as C#, Ruby, and Python? And what are those practices? For instance, I rather like the idea of stateless objects but how many are actually using that in practice? Or, is the state of the art to deemphasize the importance of OOP? This might be the case for some Python programmers but would be difficult for Rubyists.

    Read the article

  • Resolving an App-Relative URL without a Page Object Reference

    - by Damon
    If you've worked with ASP.NET before then you've almost certainly seen an application-relative URL like ~/SomeFolder/SomePage.aspx.  The tilde at the beginning is a stand in for the application path, and it can easily be resolved using the Page object's ResolveUrl method: string url = Page.ResolveUrl("~/SomeFolder/SomePage.aspx"); There are times, however, when you don't have a page object available and you need to resolve an application relative URL.  Assuming you have an HttpContext object available, the following method will accomplish just that: public static string ResolveAppRelativeUrl(string url) {      return url.Replace("~", System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Request.ApplicationPath); } It just replaces the tilde with the application path, which is essentially all the ResolveUrl method does.

    Read the article

  • In this context with views in a tree, which class should perform the task?

    - by Jhonny 8
    Imagine that I have this context: A main view containing a table containing some cells. Each one of them with their own controller and view files. In the main view, I have an object "Person", with 3 different IDs. Depending on certain conditions (let say, time of the day), I have to choose one of them and display it in the cell. My question is, should the main view pass the whole object to the table, and this one to the cell, and the cell will calculate the ID that it will be shown? or, The main view calculates this parameter, and send the result to the table and this to the cell? Is a question focused on OO design, which one of this approaches is more suitable in an OO design and why?

    Read the article

  • Finding closest object to a location within a specific perpendicular distance to direction vector

    - by Sniper
    I have a location and a direction vector indicating facing, I want to find the closest object to that location that is within some tolerance distance (perpendicular distance) to the ray formed by the location and direction vector. Basically I want to get the object that is being aimed at. I have thought about finding all objects within a box and then finding the closest object to my vector from them results, but I am sure that there is a more efficient way. The Z axis is optional, the objects are most likely within a few meters of the search vector.

    Read the article

  • Class as first-class object

    - by mrpyo
    Could a class be a first-class object? If yes, how would the implementation look? I mean, how could syntax for dynamically creating new classes look like? EDIT: I mean what example syntax could look like (I'm sorry, English is not my native language), but still I believe this question makes sense - how you give this functionality while keeping language consistent. For example how you create reference for new type. Do you make reference first-class object too and then use something like this: Reference<newType> r = new Reference<newType>(); r.set(value); Well this could get messy so you may just force user to use Object type references for dynamically created classes, but then you loose type-checking. I think creating concise syntax for this is interesting problem which solving could lead to better language design, maybe language which is metalanguage for itself (I wonder if this is possible).

    Read the article

  • Is OO-programming really as important as hiring companies place it?

    - by ale
    I am just finishing my masters degree (in computing) and applying for jobs.. I've noticed many companies specifically ask for an understanding of object orientation. Popular interview questions are about inheritance, polymorphism, accessors etc. Is OO really that crucial? I even had an interview for a programming job in C and half the interview was OO. In the real world, developing real applications, is object orientation nearly always used? Are key features like polymorphism used A LOT? I think my question comes from one of my weaknesses.. although I know about OO.. I don't seem to be able to incorporate it a great deal into my programs. I would be really interested to get peoples' thoughts on this!

    Read the article

  • should I extend or create instance of the class

    - by meWantToLearn
    I have two classes Class A and Class B in Class A, i have three methods that perform the save, delete and select operation based upon the object I pass them. in Class B I perform the logic operations, such as modification to the property of the object before being passed to the methods of Class A, My problem is in Class B, should it extend Class A, and call the methods of class A , by parent::methodName or create instance of class A and then call Class A does not includes any property just methods. class A{ public function save($obj){ //code here } public function delete($obj){ //code here } public function select($obj){ //code here } } //Should I extend class A, and call the method by parent::methodName($obj) or create an instance of class A, call the method $instanceOfA-methodName($obj); class B extends A{ public function checkIfHasSaved($obj){ if($obj->saved == 'Yes'){ parent::save($obj); //**should I call the method like this** $instanceOFA = new A(); //**or create instance of class A and call without extending class A** instanceOFA->save($obj); } //other logic operations here } }

    Read the article

  • Avoiding coupling

    - by Seralize
    It is also true that a system may become so coupled, where each class is dependent on other classes that depend on other classes, that it is no longer possible to make a change in one place without having a ripple effect and having to make subsequent changes in many places.[1] This is why using an interface or an abstract class can be valuable in any object-oriented software project. Quote from Wikipedia Starting from scratch I'm starting from scratch with a project that I recently finished because I found the code to be too tightly coupled and hard to refactor, even when using MVC. I will be using MVC on my new project aswell but want to try and avoid the pitfalls this time, hopefully with your help. Project summary My issue is that I really wish to keep the Controller as clean as possible, but it seems like I can't do this. The basic idea of the program is that the user picks wordlists which is sent to the game engine. It will pick random words from the lists until there are none left. Problem at hand My main problem is that the game will have 'modes', and need to check the input in different ways through a method called checkWord(), but exactly where to put this and how to abstract it properly is a challenge to me. I'm new to design patterns, so not sure whether there exist any might fit my problem. My own attempt at abstraction Here is what I've gotten so far after hours of 'refactoring' the design plans, and I know it's long, but it's the best I could do to try and give you an overview (Note: As this is the sketch, anything is subject to change, all help and advice is very welcome. Also note the marked coupling points): Wordlist class Wordlist { // Basic CRUD etc. here! // Other sample methods: public function wordlistCount($user_id) {} // Returns count of how many wordlists a user has public function getAll($user_id) {} // Returns all wordlists of a user } Word class Word { // Basic CRUD etc. here! // Other sample methods: public function wordCount($wordlist_id) {} // Returns count of words in a wordlist public function getAll($wordlist_id) {} // Returns all words from a wordlist public function getWordInfo($word_id) {} // Returns information about a word } Wordpicker class Wordpicker { // The class needs to know which words and wordlists to exclude protected $_used_words = array(); protected $_used_wordlists = array(); // Wordlists to pick words from protected $_wordlists = array(); /* Public Methods */ public function setWordlists($wordlists = array()) {} public function setUsedWords($used_words = array()) {} public function setUsedWordlists($used_wordlists = array()) {} public function getRandomWord() {} // COUPLING POINT! Will most likely need to communicate with both the Wordlist and Word classes /* Protected Methods */ protected function _checkAvailableWordlists() {} // COUPLING POINT! Might need to check if wordlists are deleted etc. protected function _checkAvailableWords() {} // COUPLING POINT! Method needs to get all words in a wordlist from the Word class } Game class Game { protected $_session_id; // The ID of a game session which gets stored in the database along with game details protected $_game_info = array(); // Game instantiation public function __construct($user_id) { if (! $this->_session_id = $this->_gameExists($user_id)) { // New game } else { // Resume game } } // This is the method I tried to make flexible by using abstract classes etc. // Does it even belong in this class at all? public function checkWord($answer, $native_word, $translation) {} // This method checks the answer against the native word / translation word, depending on game mode public function getGameInfo() {} // Returns information about a game session, or creates it if it does not exist public function deleteSession($session_id) {} // Deletes a game session from the database // Methods dealing with game session information protected function _gameExists($user_id) {} protected function _getProgress($session_id) {} protected function _updateProgress($game_info = array()) {} } The Game /* CONTROLLER */ /* "Guess the word" page */ // User input $game_type = $_POST['game_type']; // Chosen with radio buttons etc. $wordlists = $_POST['wordlists']; // Chosen with checkboxes etc. // Starts a new game or resumes one from the database $game = new Game($_SESSION['user_id']); $game_info = $game->getGameInfo(); // Instantiates a new Wordpicker $wordpicker = new Wordpicker(); $wordpicker->setWordlists((isset($game_info['wordlists'])) ? $game_info['wordlists'] : $wordlists); $wordpicker->setUsedWordlists((isset($game_info['used_wordlists'])) ? $game_info['used_wordlists'] : NULL); $wordpicker->setUsedWords((isset($game_info['used_words'])) ? $game_info['used_words'] : NULL); // Fetches an available word if (! $word_id = $wordpicker->getRandomWord()) { // No more words left - game over! $game->deleteSession($game_info['id']); redirect(); } else { // Presents word details to the user $word = new Word(); $word_info = $word->getWordInfo($word_id); } The Bit to Finish /* CONTROLLER */ /* "Check the answer" page */ // ?????????????????? ( http://pastebin.com/cc6MtLTR ) Make sure you toggle the 'Layout Width' to the right for a better view. Thanks in advance. Questions To which extent should objects be loosely coupled? If object A needs info from object B, how is it supposed to get this without losing too much cohesion? As suggested in the comments, models should hold all business logic. However, as objects should be independent, where to glue them together? Should the model contain some sort of "index" or "client" area which connects the dots? Edit: So basically what I should do for a start is to make a new model which I can more easily call with oneliners such as $model->doAction(); // Lots of code in here which uses classes! How about the method for checking words? Should it be it's own object? I'm not sure where I should put it as it's pretty much part of the 'game'. But on another hand, I could just leave out the 'abstraction and OOPness' and make it a method of the 'client model' which will be encapsulated from the controller anyway. Very unsure about this.

    Read the article

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