Search Results

Search found 16838 results on 674 pages for 'writing patterns dita cms'.

Page 46/674 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

• Implementing the transport layer for a SIP UAC

  - by Jonathan Henson

  I have a somewhat simple, but specific, question about implementing the transport layer for a SIP UAC. Do I expect the response to a request on the same socket that I sent the request on, or do I let the UDP or TCP listener pick up the response and then route it to the correct transaction from there? The RFC does not seem to say anything on the matter. It seems that especially using UDP, which is connection-less, that I should just let the listeners pick up the response, but that seems sort of counter intuitive. Particularly, I have seen plenty of UAC implementations which do not depend on having a Listener in the transport layer. Also, most implementations I have looked at do not have the UAS receiving loop responding on the socket at all. This would tend to indicate that the client should not be expecting a reply on the socket that it sent the request on. For clarification: Suppose my transport layer consists of the following elements: TCPClient (Sends Requests for a UAC via TCP) UDPClient (Sends Requests for a UAC vid UDP) TCPSever (Loop receiving Requests and dispatching to transaction layer via TCP) UDPServer (Loop receiving Requests and dispatching to transaction layer via UDP) Obviously, the *Client sends my Requests. The question is, what receives the Response? The *Client waiting on a recv or recvfrom call on the socket it used to send the request, or the *Server? Conversely, the *Server receives my requests, What sends the Response? The *Client? doesn't this break the roles of each member a bit?

  Read the article

• Object oriented EDI handling in PHP

  - by Robert van der Linde

  I'm currently starting a new sub project where I will: Retrieve the order information from our mainframe Save the order information to our web-apps' database Send the order as EDI (either D01b or D93a) Receive the order response, despatch advice and invoice messages Do all kinds of fun things with the resulting datasets. However I am struggling with my initial class designs. The order information will be retrieved from the mainframe which will result in a "AOrder" class, this isn't a problem, I am not sure about how to mold this local object into an EDI string. Should I create EDIOrder/EDIOrderResponse/etc classes with matching decorators (EDIOrderD01BDecorator, EDIOrderD93ADecorator)? Do I need builder objects or can I do: // $myOrder is instance of AOrder $myOrder->toEDIOrder(); $decorator = new EDIOrderD01BDecorator($myOrder); $edi = $decorator->getEDIString(); And it'll have to work the other way around as well. Is the following code a good way of handling this problem or should I go about this differently? $ediString = $myEDIMessageBroker->fetch(); $ediOrderResponse = EDIOrderResponse::fromString($ediString); I'm just not so sure about how I should go about designing the classes and interactions between them. Thanks for reading and helping.

  Read the article

• How to use DI and DI containers

  - by Pinetree

  I am building a small PHP mvc framework (yes, yet another one), mostly for learning purposes, and I am trying to do it the right way, so I'd like to use a DI container, but I am not asking which one to use but rather how to use one. Without going into too much detail, the mvc is divided into modules which have controllers which render views for actions. This is how a request is processed: a Main object instantiates a Request object, and a Router, and injects the Request into the Router to figure out which module was called. then it instantiates the Module object and sends the Request to that the Module creates a ModuleRouter and sends the Request to figure out the controller and action it then creates the Controller and the ViewRenderer, and injects the ViewRenderer into the Controller (so that the controller can send data to the view) the ViewRenderer needs to know which module, controller and action were called to figure out the path to the view scripts, so the Module has to figure out this and inject it to the ViewRenderer the Module then calls the action method on the controller and calls the render method on the ViewRenderer For now, I do not have any DI container set up, but what I do have are a bunch of initX() methods that create the required component if it is not already there. For instance, the Module has the initViewRenderer() method. These init methods get called right before that component is needed, not before, and if the component was already set it will not initialize it. This allows for the components to be switched, but it does not require manually setting them if they are not there. Now, I'd like to do this by implementing a DI container, but still keep the manual configuration to a bare minimum, so if the directory structure and naming convention is followed, everything should work, without even touching the config. If I use the DI container, do I then inject it into everything (the container would inject itself when creating a component), so that other components can use it? When do I register components with the DI? Can a component register other components with the DI during run-time? Do I create a 'common' config and use that? How do I then figure out on the fly which components I need and how they need to be set up? If Main uses Router which uses Request, Main then needs to use the container to get Module (or does the module need to be found and set beforehand? How?) Module uses Router but needs to figure out the settings for the ViewRenderer and the Controller on the fly, not in advance, so my DI container can't be setting those on the Module before the module figures out the controller and action... What if the controller needs some other service? Do I inject the container into every controller? If I start doing that, I might just inject it into everything... Basically I am looking for the best practices when dealing with stuff like this. I know what DI is and what DI containers do, but I am looking for guidance to using them in real life, and not some isolated examples on the net. Sorry for the lengthy post and many thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• What is required for a scope in an injection framework?

  - by johncarl

  Working with libraries like Seam, Guice and Spring I have become accustomed to dealing with variables within a scope. These libraries give you a handful of scopes and allow you to define your own. This is a very handy pattern for dealing with variable lifecycles and dependency injection. I have been trying to identify where scoping is the proper solution, or where another solution is more appropriate (context variable, singleton, etc). I have found that if the scope lifecycle is not well defined it is very difficult and often failure prone to manage injections in this way. I have searched on this topic but have found little discussion on the pattern. Is there some good articles discussing where to use scoping and what are required/suggested prerequisites for scoping? I interested in both reference discussion or your view on what is required or suggested for a proper scope implementation. Keep in mind that I am referring to scoping as a general idea, this includes things like globally scoped singletons, request or session scoped web variable, conversation scopes, and others. Edit: Some simple background on custom scopes: Google Guice custom scope Some definitions relevant to above: “scoping” - A set of requirements that define what objects get injected at what time. A simple example of this is Thread scope, based on a ThreadLocal. This scope would inject a variable based on what thread instantiated the class. Here's an example of this: “context variable” - A repository passed from one object to another holding relevant variables. Much like scoping this is a more brute force way of accessing variables based on the calling code. Example: methodOne(Context context){ methodTwo(context); } methodTwo(Context context){ ... //same context as method one, if called from method one } “globally scoped singleton” - Following the singleton pattern, there is one object per application instance. This applies to scopes because there is a basic lifecycle to this object: there is only one of these objects instantiated. Here's an example of a JSR330 Singleton scoped object: @Singleton public void SingletonExample{ ... } usage: public class One { @Inject SingeltonExample example1; } public class Two { @Inject SingeltonExample example2; } After instantiation: one.example1 == two.example2 //true;

  Read the article

• Writing to a D3DFMT_R32F render target clamps to 1

  - by Mike

  I'm currently implementing a picking system. I render some objects in a frame buffer, which has a render target, which has the D3DFMT_R32F format. For each mesh, I set an integer constant evaluator, which is its material index. My shader is simple: I output the position of each vertex, and for each pixel, I cast the material index in float, and assign this value to the Red channel: int ObjectIndex; float4x4 WvpXf : WorldViewProjection< string UIWidget = "None"; >; struct VS_INPUT { float3 Position : POSITION; }; struct VS_OUTPUT { float4 Position : POSITION; }; struct PS_OUTPUT { float4 Color : COLOR0; }; VS_OUTPUT VSMain( const VS_INPUT input ) { VS_OUTPUT output = (VS_OUTPUT)0; output.Position = mul( float4(input.Position, 1), WvpXf ); return output; } PS_OUTPUT PSMain( const VS_OUTPUT input, in float2 vpos : VPOS ) { PS_OUTPUT output = (PS_OUTPUT)0; output.Color.r = float( ObjectIndex ); output.Color.gba = 0.0f; return output; } technique Default { pass P0 { VertexShader = compile vs_3_0 VSMain(); PixelShader = compile ps_3_0 PSMain(); } } The problem I have, is that somehow, the values written in the render target are clamped between 0.0f and 1.0f. I've tried to change the rendertarget format, but I always get clamped values... I don't know what the root of the problem is. For information, I have a depth render target attached to the frame buffer. I disabled the blend in the render state the stencil is disabled Any ideas?

  Read the article

• How do we keep dependent data structures up to date?

  - by Geo

  Suppose you have a parse tree, an abstract syntax tree, and a control flow graph, each one logically derived from the one before. In principle it is easy to construct each graph given the parse tree, but how can we manage the complexity of updating the graphs when the parse tree is modified? We know exactly how the tree has been modified, but how can the change be propagated to the other trees in a way that doesn't become difficult to manage? Naturally the dependent graph can be updated by simply reconstructing it from scratch every time the first graph changes, but then there would be no way of knowing the details of the changes in the dependent graph. I currently have four ways to attempt to solve this problem, but each one has difficulties. Nodes of the dependent tree each observe the relevant nodes of the original tree, updating themselves and the observer lists of original tree nodes as necessary. The conceptual complexity of this can become daunting. Each node of the original tree has a list of the dependent tree nodes that specifically depend upon it, and when the node changes it sets a flag on the dependent nodes to mark them as dirty, including the parents of the dependent nodes all the way down to the root. After each change we run an algorithm that is much like the algorithm for constructing the dependent graph from scratch, but it skips over any clean node and reconstructs each dirty node, keeping track of whether the reconstructed node is actually different from the dirty node. This can also get tricky. We can represent the logical connection between the original graph and the dependent graph as a data structure, like a list of constraints, perhaps designed using a declarative language. When the original graph changes we need only scan the list to discover which constraints are violated and how the dependent tree needs to change to correct the violation, all encoded as data. We can reconstruct the dependent graph from scratch as though there were no existing dependent graph, and then compare the existing graph and the new graph to discover how it has changed. I'm sure this is the easiest way because I know there are algorithms available for detecting differences, but they are all quite computationally expensive and in principle it seems unnecessary so I'm deliberately avoiding this option. What is the right way to deal with these sorts of problems? Surely there must be a design pattern that makes this whole thing almost easy. It would be nice to have a good solution for every problem of this general description. Does this class of problem have a name?

  Read the article

• Are there any examples of a temporal field/object updater?

  - by Bryan Agee

  The system in question has numerous examples of temporal objects and fields--ones which are a certain variable at a certain point in time. An example of this would be someone's rate of pay--there are different answers depending on when you ask and what the constraints might be; eg, can there ever be more than one of a certain temporal object concurrently, etc. Ideally, there would be an object that handles those constraints when a new state/stateful object is introduced; when a new value is set, it would prevent creating negative ranges and overlaps. Martin Fowler has written some great material on this (such as this description of Temporal Objects) , but what I've found of it tends to be entirely theoretic, with no concrete implementations. PHP is the target language, but examples in any language would be most helpful.

  Read the article

• Identifying the best pattern

  - by Daniel Grillo

  I'm developing a software to program a device. I have some commands like Reset, Read_Version, Read_memory, Write_memory, Erase_memory. Reset and Read_Version are fixed. They don't need parameters. Read_memory and Erase_memory need the same parameters that are Length and Address. Write_memory needs Lenght, Address and Data. For each command, I have the same steps in sequence, that are something like this sendCommand, waitForResponse, treatResponse. I'm having difficulty to identify which pattern should I use. Factory, Template Method, Strategy or other pattern.

  Read the article

• Understanding how texCUBE works and writing cubemaps properly into a cube rendertarget

  - by cubrman

  My goal is to create accurate reflections, sampled from a dynamic cubemap, for specific 3d objects (mostly lights) in XNA 4.0. To sample the cubemap I compute the 3d reflection vector in a classic way: half3 ReflectionVec = reflect(-directionToCamera, Normal.rgb); I then use the vector to get the actual reflected color: half3 ReflectionCol = texCUBElod(ReflectionSampler, float4(ReflectionVec, 0)); The cubemap I am sampling from is a RenderTarget with 6 flat faces. So my question is, given the 3d world position of an arbitrary 3d object, how can I make sure that I get accurate reflections of this object, when I re-render the cubemap. Should I build the ViewProjection matrix in a specific way? Or is there any other approach?

  Read the article

• Software Architecture - From design to sucessful implementation

  - by user20358

  As the subject goes; once a software architect puts down the high level design and approach to a software that is to be developed from scratch, how does the team ensure that it is implemented successfully? To my mind the following things will need to be done Proper understanding of requirements Setting down coding practices and guidelines Regular code reviews to ensure the guidelines are being adhered to Revisiting the requirements phase and making necessary changes to design based on client inputs if there are any changes to requirements Proper documentation of what is being done in code Proper documentation of requirements and changes to them Last but not the least, implementing the design via object oriented code where appropriate Did I miss anything? Would love to hear any mistakes that you have learned from in your project experiences. What went wrong, what could have been done better. Thanks for taking the time..

  Read the article

• How to manage long running background threads and report progress with DDD

  - by Mr Happy

  Title says most of it. I have found surprising little information about this. I have a long running operation of which the user wants to see the progress (as in, item x of y processed). I also need to be able to pause and stop the operation. (Stopping doesn't rollback the items already processed.) The thing is, it's not that each item takes a long time to get processed, it's that that there are usually a lot of items. And what I've read about so far is that it's somewhat of an anti-pattern to put something like a queue in the DB. I currently don't have any messaging system in place, and I've never worked with one either. Another thing I read somewhere is that progress reporting is something that belongs in the application layer, but it didn't go into the details. So having said all this, what I have in mind is the following. User request with list of items enters the application layer. Application layer gets some information from the domain needed to process the items. Application layer passes the items and the information off to some domain service (should the implementation of this service belong in the infrastructure layer?) This service spins up a worker thread with callbacks for both progress reporting and pausing/stopping it. This worker thread will process each item in it's own UoW. This means the domain information from earlier needs to be stored in some DTO. Since nothing is really persisted, the service should be singleton and thread safe Whenever a user requests a progress report or wants to pause/stop the operation, the application layer will ask the service. Would this be a correct solution? Or am I at least on the right track with this? Especially the singleton and thread safe part makes the whole thing feel icky.

  Read the article

• How to have operations with character/items in binary with concrete operations?

  - by Piperoman

  I have the next problem. A item can have a lot of states: NORMAL = 0000000 DRY = 0000001 HOT = 0000010 BURNING = 0000100 WET = 0001000 COLD = 0010000 FROZEN = 0100000 POISONED= 1000000 A item can have some states at same time but not all of them Is impossible to be dry and wet at same time. If you COLD a WET item, it turns into FROZEN. If you HOT a WET item, it turns into NORMAL A item can be BURNING and POISON Etc. I have tried to set binary flags to states, and use AND to combine different states, checking before if it is possible or not to do it, or change to another status. Does there exist a concrete approach to solve this problem efficiently without having an interminable switch that checks every state with every new state? It is relatively easy to check 2 different states, but if there exists a third state it is not trivial to do.

  Read the article

• Pattern for a class that does only one thing

  - by Heinzi

  Let's say I have a procedure that does stuff: void doStuff(initalParams) { ... } Now I discover that "doing stuff" is quite a compex operation. The procedure becomes large, I split it up into multiple smaller procedures and soon I realize that having some kind of state would be useful while doing stuff, so that I need to pass less parameters between the small procedures. So, I factor it out into its own class: class StuffDoer { private someInternalState; public Start(initalParams) { ... } // some private helper procedures here ... } And then I call it like this: new StuffDoer().Start(initialParams); or like this: new StuffDoer(initialParams).Start(); And this is what feels wrong. When using the .NET or Java API, I always never call new SomeApiClass().Start(...);, which makes me suspect that I'm doing it wrong. Sure, I could make StuffDoer's constructor private and add a static helper method: public static DoStuff(initalParams) { new StuffDoer().Start(initialParams); } But then I'd have a class whose external interface consists of only one static method, which also feels weird. Hence my question: Is there a well-established pattern for this type of classes that have only one entry point and have no "externally recognizable" state, i.e., instance state is only required during execution of that one entry point?

  Read the article

• How do I handle priority and propagation in an event system?

  - by Peeter

  Lets say I have a simple event system with the following syntax: object = new Object(); object.bind("my_trigger", function() { print "hello"; }); object.bind("my_trigger", function() { print "hello2"; }); object.trigger("my_trigger"); How could I make sure hello2 is printed out first (I do not want my code to depend on which order the events are binded). Ontop of that, how would I prevent my events from propagating (e.g. I want to stop every other event from being executed)

  Read the article

• How do I know when should I package my classes in Ruby?

  - by Omega

  In Ruby, I'm creating a small game development framework. Just some personal project - a very small group of friends helping. Now I am in need of handling geometric concepts. Rectangles, Circles, Polygons, Vectors, Lines, etc. So I made a class for each of these. I'm stuck deciding whether I should package such classes in a module, such as Geometry. So I'd access them like Geometry::Rectangle, or just Rectangle if I include the module. Now then, my question isn't about this specific scenario. I'd like to know, when is it suitable to package similar classes into one module in Ruby? What factors should I consider? Amount of classes? Usage frequency? Complexity?

  Read the article

• The Human Significance of Article Writing in Link Building

  Internet marketing is highly dependent on good content. It goes without saying that for any website the content that is presented on it is just as important as anything other element of link building. Not only does good content help establish credibility but also carries many responsibilities also.

  Read the article

• Algorithm to Solve Most of a Problem

  - by Mike G

  I need an Algorithm/Design Pattern that allows me to try to get the maximum number of rules followed. So I have a couple teams and I need to pair them with a referee and against each other into a round robin. There a rules on who can compete with who and who can judge who so I need to find the configuration that satisfies the most of these. Some rules are more important than others and are "worth more" when evaluating "what satisfies the most of them" There probably isn't a algorithm for this, but is there a design pattern that could help me maximize my chances of finding this configuration?

  Read the article

• Is there a Design Pattern for preventing dangling references?

  - by iFreilicht

  I was thinking about a design for custom handles. The thought is to prevent clients from copying around large objects. Now a regular handle class would probably suffice for that, but it doesn't solve the "dangling reference problem"; If a client has multiple handles of the same object and deletes the object via one of them, all the others would be invalid, but not know it, so the client could write or read parts of the memory he shouldn't have access to. Is there a design pattern to prevent this from happening? Two ideas: An observer-like pattern where the destructor of an object would notify all handles. "Handle handles" (does such a thing even exist?). All the handles don't really point to the object, but to another handle. When the object gets destroyed, this "master-handle" invalidates itself and therefore all that point to it.

  Read the article

• Can you point me to a nontrivial strategy pattern implementation?

  - by Eugen Martynov

  We are faced implementing a registration workflow with many branches. There are three main flows which in some conditions lead to one another. Each flow has at least four different steps; some steps interact with the server, and every step adds more information to the state. Also the requirement is to have it persistent between sessions, so if the user closes the app (this is a mobile app), it will restore the process from the last completed step with the state from the previous session. I think this could benefit from the use of the strategy pattern, but I've never had to implement it for such a complex case. Does anyone know of any examples in open source or articles from which I could find inspiration? Preferably the examples would be from a live/working/stable application. I'm interested in Java implementation mostly; we are developing for Java mobile phones: android, blackberry and J2ME. We have an SDK which is quite well separated from platform specific implementations, but examples in C++, C#, Objective-C or Python would be acceptable.

  Read the article

• Content Writing - A Stepping Stone to a Successful SEO Strategy

  SEO and content goes hand in hand. A good SEO strategy and campaigning also include good and precise content. Because it's the content which is going to determine what the brand, product, and service is all about.

  Read the article

• Is is common to use the command pattern for property get/sets?

  - by k rey

  Suppose I have a controller class with a bunch of properties. Each time a property is changed, I would like to update the model. Now also suppose that I use the command pattern to perform model updates. Is it common to use command classes within property get and sets of the controller class or is there a better way? Here is an example of what I am currently using: class MyController { private int _myInt; public int MyInt { get { return _myInt; } set { MyCommand cmd = new MyCommand(); cmd.Argument = _myInt; cmd.Execute(); // Command object updates the model } } }

  Read the article

• Better solution then simple factory method when concrete implementations have different attributes

  - by danip

  abstract class Animal { function eat() {..} function sleep() {..} function isSmart() } class Dog extends Animal { public $blnCanBark; function isSmart() { return $this->blnCanBark; } } class Cat extends Animal { public $blnCanJumpHigh; function isSmart() { return $this->blnCanJumpHigh; } } .. and so on up to 10-20 animals. Now I created a factory using simple factory method and try to create instances like this: class AnimalFactory { public static function create($strName) { switch($strName) { case 'Dog': return new Dog(); case 'Cat': return new Cat(); default: break; } } } The problem is I can't set the specific attributes like blnCanBark, blnCanJumpHigh in an efficient way. I can send all of them as extra params to create but this will not scale to more then a few classes. Also I can't break the inheritance because a lot of the basic functionality is the same. Is there a better pattern to solve this?

  Read the article

• Relative encapsulation design

  - by taher1992

  Let's say I am doing a 2D application with the following design: There is the Level object that manages the world, and there are world objects which are entities inside the Level object. A world object has a location and velocity, as well as size and a texture. However, a world object only exposes get properties. The set properties are private (or protected) and are only available to inherited classes. But of course, Level is responsible for these world objects, and must somehow be able to manipulate at least some of its private setters. But as of now, Level has no access, meaning world objects must change its private setters to public (violating encapsulation). How to tackle this problem? Should I just make everything public? Currently what I'm doing is having a inner class inside game object that does the set work. So when Level needs to update an objects location it goes something like this: void ChangeObject(GameObject targetObject, int newX, int newY){ // targetObject.SetX and targetObject.SetY cannot be set directly var setter = new GameObject.Setter(targetObject); setter.SetX(newX); setter.SetY(newY); } This code feels like overkill, but it doesn't feel right to have everything public so that anything can change an objects location for example.

  Read the article

• Ecommerce Content: Writing a Good Privacy Policy

  There are a number of ways that a small business can obtain a privacy policy for its website. If you choose the &#147;in-house method&#148;, we offer eight tips to get you started.

  Read the article

• Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion

  - by user2158382

  I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >