Search Results

Search found 40870 results on 1635 pages for 'database design'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 441/1635 | < Previous Page | 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448  | Next Page >

  • Use of (non) qualified names

    - by AProgrammer
    If I want to use the name baz defined in package foo|bar|quz, I've several choices: provide fbq as a short name for foo|bar|quz and use fbq|baz use foo|bar|quz|baz import baz from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz (or an alias given in the import process) import all public symbols from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz For the languages I know, my perception is that the best practice is to use the first two ways (I'll use one or the other depending on the specific package full name and the number of symbols I need from it). I'd use the third only in a language which doesn't provide the first and hunt for supporting tools to write the import statements. And in my opinion the fourth should be reserved to package designed with than import in mind, for instance if all exported symbols start with a prefix or contains the name of the package. My questions: what is in your opinion the best practice for your favorite languages? what would you suggest in a new language? what would you suggest in an old language adding such a feature?

    Read the article

  • [C++]Advantage of using a static member function instead of an equivalent non-static member function

    - by jonathanasdf
    I was wondering whether there's any advantages to using a static member function when there is a non-static equivalent. Will it result in faster execution (because of not having to care about all of the member variables), or maybe less use of memory (because of not being included in all instances)? Basically, the function I'm looking at is an utility function to rotate an integer array representing pixel colours an arbitrary number of degrees around an arbitrary centre point. It is placed in my abstract Bullet base class, since only the bullets will be using it and I didn't want the overhead of calling it in some utility class. It's a bit too long and used in every single derived bullet class, making it probably not a good idea to inline. How would you suggest I define this function? As a static member function of Bullet, of a non-static member function of Bullet, or maybe not as a member of Bullet but defined outside of the class in Bullet.h? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?

    Read the article

  • Method hiding with interfaces

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    interface IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; } } class Foo : IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; set; } } public IFoo GetFoo() { return new Foo { MyReadOnlyVar = 1 }; } Is the above an acceptable way of implementing a readonly/immutable object? The immutability of IFoo can be broken with a temporary cast to Foo. In general (non-critical) cases, is hiding functionality through interfaces a common pattern? Or is it considered lazy coding? Or even an anti-pattern?

    Read the article

  • Some questions regarding Flex

    - by Rachel
    For what real time scenarios/use cases one should go to Flex Technology ? What real time problems you have solved using Flex Technology ? What real time problems have you faced because of using Flex Technology and what was your work around for that use case ?

    Read the article

  • Natural vs surrogate keys on support tables

    - by Bugeo
    I have read many articles about the battle between natural versus surrogate primary keys. I agree in the use of surrogate keys to identify records of tables whose contents are created by the user. But in the case of supporting tables what should I use? For example, in a hypothetical table "orderStates". If you use a natural key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} If I use a surrogate key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: 1 CODE: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: 2 CODE: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: 3 CODE: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} Now let's take an example: a user enters a new order. In the case in which use natural keys, in the code I can write this: newOrder.StateOrderId = "NEW"; With the surrogate keys instead every time I have an additional step. stateOrderId_NEW = .... I retrieve the id corresponding to the recod code "NEW" newOrder.StateOrderId = stateOrderId_NEW; The same will happen every time I have to move the order in a new status. So, in this case, what are the reason to chose one key type vs the other one?

    Read the article

  • How should i organize authority code?

    - by acidzombie24
    I have users that fall into the following Not logged in Not Verified Verified Moderator Admin All code that only admin and moderators can access (like banning) is in ModeratorUser which inherits from verified which inherits from BaseUser. Some pages are accessible to all users such as public profiles. If a user is logged in he can leave a comment. To check this i use if (IsVerifiedUser). Now here is the problem. To avoid problems if a user is banned he is not recognized as a verified user. However in the rare case i need to know if he is verified i can use usertype & Verified. Should i not be doing this? I have a bunch of code in my VerifiedUser class and find i am moving tons of it to BaseUser. Is this something i help because a not logged in user can access the page? Should i handle the ban user in a different way and allow IsVerifiedUser to be true even if the user is banned?

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC best way to update cached table

    - by Eddy Mishiyev
    There are certain tables that get called often but updated rarely. One of these tables is Departments. So to save DB trips, I think it is ok to cache this table taking into consideration that the table has very small size. However, once you cached it an issue of keeping the table data fresh occurs. So what is the best way to determine that the table is dirty and therefore requires a reload and how that code should be invoked. I look for solution that will be scalable. So updating the cache right after inserting will not work. So if one machine inserted the record all other on network should get notified to reload the cache. I was thinking for calling corresponding web service from T-SQL but don't really like the idea of consuming recourses on sql server. So what are the best practices to resolve this type of problems. Thanks in advance Eddy

    Read the article

  • Singleton Properties

    - by coffeeaddict
    Ok, if I create a singleton class and expose the singleton object through a public static property...I understand that. But my singleton class has other properties in it. Should those be static? Should those also be private? I just want to be able to access all properties of my singleton class by doing this: MySingletonClass.SingletonProperty.SomeProperty2 Where SingletonProperty returns me the single singleton instance. I guess my question is, how do you expose the other properties in the singleton class..make them private and then access them through your public singleton static property?

    Read the article

  • Returning large collections from WCF Serivce

    - by Nate Bross
    I'm trying to determine the best approach for building a WCF Service, and the area I'm struggling with most is returning lists of objects. The built-in maxMessageSize of 64k seems pretty high, and I really don't want to bump it up (quick googling finds 100s of places bumping the maxMessageSize up to multi-gigabyte range which seems foolish). But, when I'm returning a collection of objects (~150 items) I am exceeding the default 64k. I'm almost to the point of returning my own class which inherits IEnumerable and has properties for hasNext, hasPrevious and PageSize so that I can implement paging on the client side -- this seems like alot of code. The other option is to jackup the maxMessageSize and hope for the best, but that feels wrong. All other aspects of my service are working great, its just returning large collectiosn where I'm having issues. For background, there are two types of consumers of this service, UI applications which will be primarly web and/or wpf applications, and data processing applications, .NET console apps, and maybe some other non-UI apps. For the UI applications, I would like to keep them responsive and keep the messageSize low, on the console apps it doesn't matter as much as they are just pulling data down to do processing and push it back up to the service.

    Read the article

  • Are these jobs for developer or designers or for client itself?

    - by jitendra
    Spell checking grammar checking Descriptive alt text for big chart , graph images, technical images To write Table summary and caption Descriptive Link text Color Contrast checking Deciding in content what should be H2 ,H3, H4... and what should be <strong> or <span class="boldtext"> Meta Description and keywords for each pages Image compression To decide Filenames for images,PDf etc To decide Page's <title> for each page

    Read the article

  • Using free function as pseudo-constructors to exploit template parameter deduction

    - by Poita_
    Is it a common pattern/idiom to use free functions as pseudo-constructors to avoid having to explicitly specify template parameters? For example, everyone knows about std::make_pair, which uses its parameters to deduce the pair types: template <class A, class B> std::pair<A, B> make_pair(A a, B b) { return std::pair<A, B>(a, b); } // This allows you to call make_pair(1, 2), // instead of having to type pair<int, int>(1, 2) // as you can't get type deduction from the constructor. I find myself using this quite often, so I was just wondering if many other people use it, and if there is a name for this pattern?

    Read the article

  • Migration solution for singletons in an OSGI environment

    - by Ido
    I'm working in a JEE Environment in which each application is in a war file of its own. In the WEB-INF/lib of each application war file there is a common jar that is shared by all applications. This common jar contains several Singletons which are accessed from many points in the code. Because of the war-file boundaries each application has its own instances of the Singletons. Which is how we operate today, since we want to configure some of the singletons differently in each application. Now we are moving towards an OSGi environment, where this solution will no longer work since each bundle has its own class loader, so if I try to access MySingleton which resides in bundle "common.jar" from bundle "appA.jar" or from bundle "appB.jar" I will get the same instance. Remember I "want" a different instance of a singleton per bundle. (as ironic as it sounds) Now I realize the ideal solution would be to fix the code to not rely on those singletons, however due to a tight schedule I was wondering if you guys can suggest some sort of a migration solution that would allow me to use bundle-wide singletons so each of them could be configured per bundle.

    Read the article

  • PHP: Best solution for links breaking in a mod_rewrite app

    - by psil
    I'm using mod rewrite to redirect all requests targeting non-existent files/directories to index.php?url=* This is surely the most common thing you do with mod_rewrite yet I have a problem: Naturally, if the page url is "mydomain.com/blog/view/1", the browser will look for images, stylesheets and relative links in the "virtual" directory "mydomain.com/blog/view/". Problem 1: Is using the base tag the best solution? I see that none of the PHP frameworks out there use the base tag, though. I'm currently having a regex replace all the relative links to point to the right path before output. Is that "okay"? Problem 2: It is possible that the server doesn't support mod_rewrite. However, all public files like images, stylesheets and the requests collector index.php are located in the directory /myapp/public. Normally mod_rewrite points all request to /public so it seems as if public was actually the root directory too all users. However if there is no mod_rewrite, I then have to point the users to /public from the root directory with a header() call. That means, however that all links are broken again because suddenly all images, etc. have to be called via /public/myimage.jpg Additional info: When there is no mod_rewrite the above request would look like this: mydomain.com/public/index.php/blog/view/1 What would be the best solutions for both problems?

    Read the article

  • Start thread with two parameters

    - by Matt
    I've got a method that gets called on an event, which presents me with two variables varA, varB (both strings). This method gets called with new information quite frequently, thus I have created a separate method that takes in the two parameters. I want to run this method in a thread, however have struck the issue that Thread.Start will not accept parameters. I've tried a few supposed methods, but have so far had no luck.. I think my best bet is to create a separate class, and handle it there.. However I have a List which I am inserting data into, and hit a dead end when the separate class tried to access that list, since it was in a different class. Can someone help me out here please?

    Read the article

  • Pros / Cons displaying list of users at login page

    - by Radu094
    We seem to have a lot of clients asking us to change the login screen in this manner: Display a list of all available users (thumbnail picture + name) User selects a username from the list A password prompt appears near the username User enters password then presses enter This sounds remarcably similar to the Windows XP login, which is probably where they got the ideea in the first place. There are only about 4 - 5 different users that can login at any given station, so implementing that list on one screen is feasable. So I was wondering if there are any usability experts with some word on this method of login. As far as I can tell, MS droped this behaviour in Vista/Win7, didn't they?

    Read the article

  • Creating combinations that have no more one intersecting element

    - by khuss
    I am looking to create a special type of combination in which no two sets have more than one intersecting element. Let me explain with an example: Let us say we have 9 letter set that contains A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I If you create the standard non-repeating combinations of three letters you will have 9C3 sets. These will contain sets like ABC, ABD, BCD, etc. I am looking to create sets that have at the most only 1 common letter. So in this example, we will get following sets: ABC, ADG, AEI, AFH, BEH, BFG, BDI, CFI, CDH, CEG, DEF, and GHI - note that if you take any two sets there are no more than 1 repeating letter. What would be a good way to generate such sets? It should be scalable solution so that I can do it for a set of 1000 letters, with sub set size of 4. Any help is highly appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Dealing with dependencies between WCF services when using Castle Windsor

    - by Georgia Brown
    I have several WCF services which use castle windsor to resolve their dependencies. Now I need some of these services to talk to each other. The typical structure is service -- Business Logic -- DAL The calls to the other services need to occur at Business Logic level. What is the best approach for implementing this? Should I simply inject a service proxy into the business logic? Is this wasteful if for example, only one of two method from my service need to use this proxy? What if the services need to talk to each other? - Will castle windsor get stuck in a loop trying to resolve each services dependencies?

    Read the article

  • Using inheritance and polymorphism to solve a common game problem

    - by Barry Brown
    I have two classes; let's call them Ogre and Wizard. (All fields are public to make the example easier to type in.) public class Ogre { int weight; int height; int axeLength; } public class Wizard { int age; int IQ; int height; } In each class I can create a method called, say, battle() that will determine who will win if an Ogre meets and Ogre or a Wizard meets a Wizard. Here's an example. If an Ogre meets an Ogre, the heavier one wins. But if the weight is the same, the one with the longer axe wins. public Ogre battle(Ogre o) { if (this.height > o.height) return this; else if (this.height < o.height) return o; else if (this.axeLength > o.axeLength) return this; else if (this.axeLength < o.axeLength) return o; else return this; // default case } We can make a similar method for Wizards. But what if a Wizard meets an Ogre? We could of course make a method for that, comparing, say, just the heights. public Wizard battle(Ogre o) { if (this.height > o.height) return this; else if (this.height < o.height) return o; else return this; } And we'd make a similar one for Ogres that meet Wizard. But things get out of hand if we have to add more character types to the program. This is where I get stuck. One obvious solution is to create a Character class with the common traits. Ogre and Wizard inherit from the Character and extend it to include the other traits that define each one. public class Character { int height; public Character battle(Character c) { if (this.height > c.height) return this; else if (this.height < c.height) return c; else return this; } } Is there a better way to organize the classes? I've looked at the strategy pattern and the mediator pattern, but I'm not sure how either of them (if any) could help here. My goal is to reach some kind of common battle method, so that if an Ogre meets an Ogre it uses the Ogre-vs-Ogre battle, but if an Ogre meets a Wizard, it uses a more generic one. Further, what if the characters that meet share no common traits? How can we decide who wins a battle?

    Read the article

  • C#: How to inherit constructors?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Imagine a base class with many constructors and a virtual method public class Foo { ... public Foo() {...} public Foo(int i) {...} ... public virtual void SomethingElse() {...} ... } and now I want to create a descendant class that overrides the virtual method: public class Bar : Foo { public override void SomethingElse() {...} } And another descendant that does some more stuff: public class Bah : Bar { public void DoMoreStuff() {...} } Do I really have to copy all constructors from Foo into Bar and Bah? And then if I change a constructor signature in Foo, do I have to update it in Bar and Bah? Is there no way to inherit constructors? Is there no way to encourage code reuse?

    Read the article

  • What do you choose, protected or internal?

    - by brickner
    If I have a class with a method I want protected and internal. I want that only derived classes in the assembly would be able to call it. Since protected internal means protected or internal, you have to make a choice. What do you choose in this case - protected or internal?

    Read the article

  • Better to use constructor or method factory pattern?

    - by devoured elysium
    I have a wrapper class for the Bitmap .NET class called BitmapZone. Assuming we have a WIDTH x HEIGHT bitmap picture, this wrapper class should serve the purpose of allowing me to send to other methods/classes itself instead of the original bitmap. I can then better control what the user is or not allowed to do with the picture (and I don't have to copy the bitmap lots of times to send for each method/class). My question is: knowing that all BitmapZone's are created from a Bitmap, what do you find preferrable? Constructor syntax: something like BitmapZone bitmapZone = new BitmapZone(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.From(originalBitmap, x , y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.FromBitmap(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Other? Why? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Languages and VMs: Features that are hard to optimize and why

    - by mrjoltcola
    I'm doing a survey of features in preparation for a research project. Name a mainstream language or language feature that is hard to optimize, and why the feature is or isn't worth the price paid, or instead, just debunk my theories below with anecdotal evidence. Before anyone flags this as subjective, I am asking for specific examples of languages or features, and ideas for optimization of these features, or important features that I haven't considered. Also, any references to implementations that prove my theories right or wrong. Top on my list of hard to optimize features and my theories (some of my theories are untested and are based on thought experiments): 1) Runtime method overloading (aka multi-method dispatch or signature based dispatch). Is it hard to optimize when combined with features that allow runtime recompilation or method addition. Or is it just hard, anyway? Call site caching is a common optimization for many runtime systems, but multi-methods add additional complexity as well as making it less practical to inline methods. 2) Type morphing / variants (aka value based typing as opposed to variable based) Traditional optimizations simply cannot be applied when you don't know if the type of someting can change in a basic block. Combined with multi-methods, inlining must be done carefully if at all, and probably only for a given threshold of size of the callee. ie. it is easy to consider inlining simple property fetches (getters / setters) but inlining complex methods may result in code bloat. The other issue is I cannot just assign a variant to a register and JIT it to the native instructions because I have to carry around the type info, or every variable needs 2 registers instead of 1. On IA-32 this is inconvenient, even if improved with x64's extra registers. This is probably my favorite feature of dynamic languages, as it simplifies so many things from the programmer's perspective. 3) First class continuations - There are multiple ways to implement them, and I have done so in both of the most common approaches, one being stack copying and the other as implementing the runtime to use continuation passing style, cactus stacks, copy-on-write stack frames, and garbage collection. First class continuations have resource management issues, ie. we must save everything, in case the continuation is resumed, and I'm not aware if any languages support leaving a continuation with "intent" (ie. "I am not coming back here, so you may discard this copy of the world"). Having programmed in the threading model and the contination model, I know both can accomplish the same thing, but continuations' elegance imposes considerable complexity on the runtime and also may affect cache efficienty (locality of stack changes more with use of continuations and co-routines). The other issue is they just don't map to hardware. Optimizing continuations is optimizing for the less-common case, and as we know, the common case should be fast, and the less-common cases should be correct. 4) Pointer arithmetic and ability to mask pointers (storing in integers, etc.) Had to throw this in, but I could actually live without this quite easily. My feelings are that many of the high-level features, particularly in dynamic languages just don't map to hardware. Microprocessor implementations have billions of dollars of research behind the optimizations on the chip, yet the choice of language feature(s) may marginalize many of these features (features like caching, aliasing top of stack to register, instruction parallelism, return address buffers, loop buffers and branch prediction). Macro-applications of micro-features don't necessarily pan out like some developers like to think, and implementing many languages in a VM ends up mapping native ops into function calls (ie. the more dynamic a language is the more we must lookup/cache at runtime, nothing can be assumed, so our instruction mix is made up of a higher percentage of non-local branching than traditional, statically compiled code) and the only thing we can really JIT well is expression evaluation of non-dynamic types and operations on constant or immediate types. It is my gut feeling that bytecode virtual machines and JIT cores are perhaps not always justified for certain languages because of this. I welcome your answers.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448  | Next Page >