Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'implementations'.

Page 50/64 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

• What's the best way to retrieve two pieces of data from an XML file?

  - by Morinar

  I've got an XML document that is in either a pre or post FO transformed state that I need to extract some information from. In the pre-case, I need to pull out two tags that represent the pageWidth and pageHeight and in the post case I need to extract the page-height and page-width parameters from a specific tag (I forget which one it is off the top of my head). What I'm looking for is an efficient/easily maintainable way to grab these two elements. I'd like to only read the document a single time fetching the two things I need. I initially started writing something that would use BufferedReader + FileReader, but then I'm doing string searching and it gets messy when the tags span multiple lines. I then looked at the DOMParser, which seems like it would be ideal, but I don't want to have to read the entire file into memory if I could help it as the files could potentially be large and the tags I'm looking for will nearly always be close to the top of the file. I then looked into SAXParser, but that seems like a big pile of complicated overkill for what I'm trying to accomplish. Anybody have any advice? Or simple implementations that would accomplish my goal? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Conditionally overriding a system method via categories in Objective-C?

  - by adib

  Hi Is there a way to provide a method implementation (that bears the exact same name of a method defined by the framework) only when the method isn't already defined in the system? For example method [NSSomeClass someMethod:] exists only in Mac OS X 10.6 and if my app runs in 10.5, I will provide that method's definition in a category. But when the app runs in 10.6, I want the OS-provided method to run. Background: I'm creating an app targeted for both 10.5 and 10.6. The problem is that I recently realized that method +[NSSortDescriptor sortDescriptorWithKey:ascending:] only exists in 10.6 and my code is already littered by that method call. I could provide a default implementation for it (since this time it's not too difficult to implement it myself), but I want the "native" one to be called whenever my app runs on 10.6. Furthermore if I encounter similar problems in the future (with more difficult-to-implement-myself methods), I might not be able to get away with providing a one-liner replacement. This question vaguely similar to Override a method via ObjC Category and call the default implementation? but the difference is that I want to provide implementations only when the system doesn't already has one. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Looking for pros/cons of using GWT or JSF

  - by cliff.meyers

  I'm a long time Java developer who has been building UI with Adobe Flex for the past few years. I'm looking to broaden my repertoire with a RIA technology that runs in a plain-old browser, no plug-ins required. I've read a lot about GWT but don't know much about JSF, especially given the varying implementations. Below are some criteria that are important to me as a developer. I'm hoping that the community might be able to tell me about the strengths and weaknesses of GWT and JSF in each: Layout: is it declarative, programmatic or a mix of both? Control library: how rich is the available control library? How easy is it to extend or write custom controls that "play nice" with the built-ins? Javascript: how much of it do I need to write in order to be successful with the framework? Cross-browser: assuming I'm not writing a lot of my own HTML and JS, do the frameworks function equally well in all modern browsers? Tooling: is a rapid edit/refresh cycle available? How easy is it to debug the client and server code? Bookmarking / Browser Navigation: this is a common problem in Flex; does the framework play nicely with these? I would love to hear any other important pros / cons I might not have covered. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Improving field get and set performance with ASM

  - by ng

  I would like to avoid reflection in an open source project I am developing. Here I have classes like the following. public class PurchaseOrder { @Property private Customer customer; @Property private String name; } I scan for the @Property annotation to determine what I can set and get from the PurchaseOrder reflectively. There are many such classes all using java.lang.reflect.Field.get() and java.lang.reflect.Field.set(). Ideally I would like to generate for each property an invoker like the following. public interface PropertyAccessor<S, V> { public void set(S source, V value); public V get(S source); } Now when I scan the class I can create a static inner class of PurchaseOrder like so. static class customer_Field implements PropertyAccessor<PurchaseOrder, Customer> { public void set(PurchaseOrder order, Customer customer) { order.customer = customer; } public Customer get(PurchaseOrder order) { return order.customer; } } With these I totally avoid the cost of reflection. I can now set and get from my instances with native performance. Can anyone tell me how I would do this. A code example would be great. I have searched the net for a good example but can find nothing like this. The ASM examples are pretty poor also. The key here is that I have an interface that I can pass around. So I can have various implementations, perhaps one with Java Reflection as a default, one with ASM, and maybe one with Javassist? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• NUnit integration programmatically with spring

  - by harkon

  Hi! I have a component based architecture framework designed and I use NUnit for isolated testing - okay so far. Now I want to enable integration tests. Therefore the tests use real implementations of the existing components. Each element of the component has a life cycle (init, start and stop) and I created a NUnit component. In the start section the Console runner of the NUnit will be executed. Okay - now if I have a test fixture class in my dlls in the execution path the runner exectues them - fine! But: And this is crucial! Each to be tested implementation exists so far in the process and I want to use this instances for testing. If I use NUnit runner in the current way each instance will be created twice - and above all: I have a spring container and a implementation registry. Via this registry I can get access to all instances in the processes. But how do I give the test fixture access to the existing registry? Good: I can start the component architecture framework in the startup of the nunit runner - but this is not what I want. My guide is the apache Cactus framework (with JUnit and tomcat, JBoss etc.) Can someone help? Thanks a lot! Check: http://cone.codeplex.com

  Read the article

• Is XMLReader a SAX parser, a DOM parser, or neither?

  - by Renesis

  I am testing various methods to read (possibly large, and very often) XML configuration files in PHP. No writing is ever needed. I have two successful implementations, one using SimpleXML (which I know is a DOM parser) and one using XMLReader. I know that a DOM reader must read the whole tree and therefore uses more memory. My tests reflect that. I also know that A SAX parser is an "event-based" parser that uses less memory because it reads each node from the stream without checking what is next. XMLReader also reads from a stream with the cursor providing data about the node it is currently at. So, it definitely sounds like XMLReader (http://us2.php.net/xmlreader) is not a DOM parser, but my question is, is it a SAX parser, or something else? It seems like XMLReader behaves the way a SAX parser does but does not throw the events themselves (in other words, can you construct a SAX parser with XMLReader?) If it is something else, does the classification it's in have a name?

  Read the article

• Should java try blocks be scoped as tightly as possible?

  - by isme

  I've been told that there is some overhead in using the Java try-catch mechanism. So, while it is necessary to put methods that throw checked exception within a try block to handle the possible exception, it is good practice performance-wise to limit the size of the try block to contain only those operations that could throw exceptions. I'm not so sure that this is a sensible conclusion. Consider the two implementations below of a function that processes a specified text file. Even if it is true that the first one incurs some unnecessary overhead, I find it much easier to follow. It is less clear where exactly the exceptions come from just from looking at statements, but the comments clearly show which statements are responsible. The second one is much longer and complicated than the first. In particular, the nice line-reading idiom of the first has to be mangled to fit the readLine call into a try block. What is the best practice for handling exceptions in a funcion where multiple exceptions could be thrown in its definition? This one contains all the processing code within the try block: void processFile(File f) { try { // construction of FileReader can throw FileNotFoundException BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(f)); // call of readLine can throw IOException String line; while ((line = in.readLine()) != null) { process(line); } } catch (FileNotFoundException ex) { handle(ex); } catch (IOException ex) { handle(ex); } } This one contains only the methods that throw exceptions within try blocks: void processFile(File f) { FileReader reader; try { reader = new FileReader(f); } catch (FileNotFoundException ex) { handle(ex); return; } BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(reader); String line; while (true) { try { line = in.readLine(); } catch (IOException ex) { handle(ex); break; } if (line == null) { break; } process(line); } }

  Read the article

• How can I properly handle 404s in ASP.NET MVC?

  - by Brian

  I am just getting started on ASP.NET MVC so bear with me. I've searched around this site and various others and have seen a few implementations of this. EDIT: I forgot to mention I am using RC2 Using URL Routing: routes.MapRoute( "Error", "{*url}", new { controller = "Errors", action = "NotFound" } //404s ); The above seems to take care of requests like this (assuming default route tables setup by initial MVC project): "/blah/blah/blah/blah" Overriding HandleUnknownAction() in the controller itself: //404s - handle here (bad action requested protected override void HandleUnknownAction(string actionName) { ViewData["actionName"] = actionName; View("NotFound").ExecuteResult(this.ControllerContext); } However the previous strategies do not handle a request to a Bad/Unknown controller. For example, I do not have a "/IDoNotExist", if I request this I get the generic 404 page from the web server and not my 404 if I use routing + override. So finally, my question is: Is there any way to catch this type of request using a route or something else in the MVC framework itself? OR should I just default to using Web.Config customErrors as my 404 handler and forget all this? I assume if I go with customErrors I'll have to store the generic 404 page outside of /Views due to the Web.Config restrictions on direct access. Anyway any best practices or guidance is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Tips on designing a .NET API for future use with F#

  - by Drew Noakes

  I'm in the process of designing a .NET API to allow developers to create RoboCup agents for the 3D simulated soccer league. I'm pretty happy with how the API work with C# code, however I would like to use this project to improve my F# skill (which is currently based on reading rather than practice). So I would like to ask what kinds of things I should consider when designing an API that is to be consumed by both C# and F# code. Some points. I make fairly heavy use of matrix and vector math. These are currently immutable classes/structs. The API currently defines a few interfaces with the consumer implements (eg: IAgent), using instances of their implementations (eg: MyAgent) to construct other API classes (eg: new Client(myAgent)). The API fires events. The API exposes a few delegate types. The API includes several enums. I'd like to release a version of the API as soon as possible and don't want to make major changes to it later if I realise it's too difficult to work with from F#. Any advice is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Semantically linking to code snippets

  - by Tim

  What's the most simple and semantic way of presenting code snippets in HTML? Possible XHTML syntax <a href="code_sample.php" type="text/x-php"> Example of widget creation </a> Example of linked file (code_sample.php): // Create a new widget $widget = new widget(); Pros: Semantically uses title to describe the source code being referenced Up to the client to render snippet Having very many custom server-side implementations tells me it should be standardized Browsers can have plug-ins for copy+paste, download, etc Seems to me this is where it belongs (not in Javascript) Degradation: non-compliant browsers receive a link to the associated content Cons: Not semantic enough? Seems wrong to replace hyperlinks with source code for presentation <object> might be better, but wouldn't degrade as nicely. Background I'm trying to create a "personal" XHTML standard for storing notes (wow, this is probably among the nerdiest things I've said). Since notes are just "scratch" it needs to be very lightweight. SO's markdown is very lightweight but not semantic enough for my needs. Plus, now I'm just curious. What's the most ideal syntax for linking to client-rendered code-snippets?

  Read the article

• Visual Studio IntelliSense - IHideObjectMembers trick doesn't work. What am I missing?

  - by stakx

  The IHideObjectMembers trick can be used e.g. in fluent interface implementations to hide System.Object members from IntelliSense. (If you don't know this trick, you can read up on it via the above link; I'm just repeating the interface's usual declaration here:) using System; using System.ComponentModel; [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] public interface IHideObjectMembers { [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] Type GetType(); [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] int GetHashCode(); [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] string ToString(); [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] bool Equals(object obj); } I'm now supposed to be able to hide System.Object members on another type as follows: public class SomeClass : IHideObjectMembers { ... } or: public class ISomeInterface : IHideObjectMembers { ... } I tried this in both VS 2008 Express and VS 2008 Standard. However, no members are hidden from IntelliSense at all. I have used the EditorBrowsableAttribute in different projects and it always worked well; however, it doesn't work in this particular scenario. If things had worked as expected, I would only have seen the SomeMethodTwo method. Am I missing something?

  Read the article

• CORBA on MacOS X (Cocoa)

  - by user8472

  I am currently looking into different ways to support distributed model objects (i.e., a computational model that runs on several different computers) in a project that initially focuses on MacOS X (using Cocoa). As far as I know there is the possibility to use the class cluster around NSProxy. But there also seem to be implementations of CORBA around with Objective-C support. At a later time there may be the need to also support/include Windows machines. In that case I would need to use something like Gnustep on the Windows side (which may be an option, if it works well) or come up with a combination of both technologies. Or write something manually (which is, of course, the least desirable option). My questions are: If you have experience with both technologies (Cocoa native infrastructure vs. CORBA) can you point out some key features/issues of either approach? Is it possible to use Gnustep with Cocoa in the way explained above? Is it possible (and reasonably feasible, i.e. simpler than writing a network layer manually) to communicate among all MacOS clients using Cocoa's technology and with Windows clients through CORBA?

  Read the article

• Using StructureMap to create classes by a name?

  - by Bevan

  How can I use StructureMap to resolve to an appropriate implementation of an interface based on a name stored in an attribute? In my project, I have many different kinds of widgets, each descending from IWidget, and each decorated with an attribute specifying the kind of associated element. To illustrate: [Configuration("header")] public class HeaderWidget : IWidget { } [Configuration("linegraph")] public class LineGraphWidget : IWidget { } When processing my (XML) configuration file, I want to obtain an instance of the appropriate concrete class based on the name of the element I'm processing. public IWidget CreateWidget(XElement definition) { var kind = definition.Name.LocalName; var widget = // What goes here? widget.Configure(definition); return widget; } Each definition should result in a different widget being created - I don't need or want the instances to be shared. In the past I've written plenty of code to do this kind of thing manually, including writing a custom "roll-your-own" IoC container for one project. However, one of my goals with this project is to become proficient with StructureMap instead of reinventing the wheel. I think I've already managed to set up automatic scanning of assemblies so that StructureMap knows about all my IWidget implementations: public class WidgetRegistration : Registry { public WidgetRegistration() { Scan( scanner => { scanner.AssembliesFromApplicationBaseDirectory(); scanner.AddAllTypesOf<IWidget>(); }); } } However, this isn't registering the names of my widgets with StructureMap. What do I need to add to make my scenario work? (While I am trying to use StructureMap in this project, an answer showing me how to solve this problem with a different DI/IoC tool would still be valuable.)

  Read the article

• What should I do if i have a factory method which requires different parameters for different implem

  - by Sam Holder

  I have an interface, IMessage and a class which have several methods for creating different types of message like so: class MessageService { IMessage TypeAMessage(param 1, param 2) IMessage TypeBMessage(param 1, param 2, param 3, param 4) IMessage TypeCMessage(param 1, param 2, param 3) IMessage TypeDMessage(param 1) } I don't want this class to do all the work for creating these messages so it simply delegates to a MessageCreatorFactory which produces an IMessageCreator depending on the type given (an enumeration based on the type of the message TypeA, TypeB, TypeC etc) interface IMessageCreator { IMessage Create(MessageParams params); } So I have 4 implementations of IMessageCreator: TypeAMessageCreator, TypeBMessageCreator, TypeCMessageCreator, TypeDMessageCreator I ok with this except for the fact that because each type requires different parameters I have had to create a MessageParams object which contains 4 properties for the 4 different params, but only some of them are used in each IMessageCreator. Is there an alternative to this? One other thought I had was to have a param array as the parameter in the Create emthod, but this seems even worse as you don't have any idea what the params are. Or to create several overloads of Create in the interface and have some of them throw an exception if they are not suitable for that particular implementation (ie you called a method which needs more params, so you should have called one of the other overloads.) Does this seem ok? Is there a better solution?

  Read the article

• Natural problems to solve using closures

  - by m.u.sheikh

  I have read quite a few articles on closures, and, embarassingly enough, I still don't understand this concept! Articles explain how to create a closure with a few examples, but I don't see any point in paying much attention to them, as they largely look contrived examples. I am not saying all of them are contrived, just that the ones I found looked contrived, and I dint see how even after understanding them, I will be able to use them. So in order to understand closures, I am looking at a few real problems, that can be solved very naturally using closures. For instance, a natural way to explain recursion to a person could be to explain the computation of n!. It is very natural to understand a problem like computing the factorial of a number using recursion. Similarly, it is almost a no-brainer to find an element in an unsorted array by reading each element, and comparing with the number in question. Also, at a different level, doing Object-oriented programming also makes sense. So I am trying to find a number of problems that could be solved with or without closures, but using closures makes thinking about them and solving them easier. Also, there are two types to closures, where each call to a closure can create a copy of the environment variables, or reference the same variables. So what sort of problems can be solved more naturally in which of the closure implementations?

  Read the article

• How to model has_many with polymorphism?

  - by Daniel Abrahamsson

  I've run into a situation that I am not quite sure how to model. Suppose I have a User class, and a user has many services. However, these services are quite different, for example a MailService and a BackupService, so single table inheritance won't do. Instead, I am thinking of using polymorphic associations together with an abstract base class: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :services end class Service < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :user_id, :implementation_id, :implementation_type belongs_to :user belongs_to :implementation, :polymorphic = true delegate :common_service_method, :name, :to => :implementation end #Base class for service implementations class ServiceImplementation < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :user_id, :on => :create has_one :service, :as => :implementation has_one :user, :through => :service after_create :create_service_record #Tell Rails this class does not use a table. def self.abstract_class? true end #Default name implementation. def name self.class.name end protected #Sets up a service object def create_service_record service = Service.new(:user_id => user_id) service.implementation = self service.save! end end class MailService < ServiceImplementation #validations, etc... def common_service_method puts "MailService implementation of common service method" end end #Example usage MailService.create(..., :user_id => user.id) BackupService.create(...., :user_id => user.id) user.services.each do |s| puts "#{user.name} is using #{s.name}" end #Daniel is using MailService, Daniel is using BackupService So, is this the best solution? Or even a good one? How have you solved this kind of problem?

  Read the article

• Free utility which runs in Linux to create a UML class diagram from Java source files

  - by DeletedAccount

  I prefer to jot down UML-diagrams on paper and then implement them using Java. It would be nice to have a utility which could create UML-diagrams for me which I may share on-line and include in the digital documentation. In other words: I want to create UML diagrams from Java source code. The utility must be able to: Run in Linux. Handle Generics, i.e show List<Foo correctly in parameters and return type. Show class inheritance and interface implementations. It's nice if the utility is able to: Run in Windows and Mac OS X. Display enums in some nice manner. Generate output in a diagram format which I may modify using some other utility. Run from the command line. Restrict the UML generation to a set of packages which I may specify. Handle classes/interfaces which are not part of my source code. It could include the first class/interface which is external in the UML diagram. Perhaps in another color to indicate it being a library/framework created by someone else. Focuses on this task and doesn't try to solve the whole issue of documentation.

  Read the article

• Generating a field setter and getter with ASM

  - by ng

  I would like to avoid reflection in an open source project I am developing. Here I have classes like the following. public class PurchaseOrder { @Property private Customer customer; @Property private String name; } I scan for the @Property annotation to determine what I can set and get from the PurchaseOrder reflectively. There are many such classes all using java.lang.reflect.Field.get() and java.lang.reflect.Field.set(). Ideally I would like to generate for each property an invoker like the following. public interface PropertyAccessor<S, V> { public void set(S source, V value); public V get(S source); } Now when I scan the class I can create a static inner class of PurchaseOrder like so. static class customer_Field implements PropertyAccessor<PurchaseOrder, Customer> { public void set(PurchaseOrder order, Customer customer) { order.customer = customer; } public Customer get(PurchaseOrder order) { return order.customer; } } With these I totally avoid the cost of reflection. I can now set and get from my instances with native performance. Can anyone tell me how I would do this. A code example would be great. I have searched the net for a good example but can find nothing like this. The ASM examples are pretty poor also. The key here is that I have an interface that I can pass around. So I can have various implementations, perhaps one with Java Reflection as a default, one with ASM, and maybe one with Javassist? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Utility of List<T>.Sort() versus List<T>.OrderBy() for a member of a custom container class

  - by ccomet

  I've found myself running back through some old 3.5 framework legacy code, and found some points where there are a whole bunch of lists and dictionaries that must be updated in a synchronized fashion. I've determined that I can make this process infinitely easier to both utilize and understand by converging these into custom container classes of new custom classes. There are some points, however, where I came to concerns with organizing the contents of these new container classes by a specific inner property. For example, sorting by the ID number property of one class. As the container classes are primarily based around a generic List object, my first instinct was to write the inner classes with IComparable, and write the CompareTo method that compares the properties. This way, I can just call items.Sort() when I want to invoke the sorting. However, I've been thinking instead about using items = items.OrderBy(Func) instead. This way it is more flexible if I need to sort by any other property. Readability is better as well, since the property used for sorting will be listed in-line with the sort call rather than having to look up the IComparable code. The overall implementation feels cleaner as a result. I don't care for premature or micro optimization, but I like consistency. I find it best to stick with one kind of implementation for as many cases as it is appropriate, and use different implementations where it is necessary. Is it worth it to convert my code to use the LINQ OrderBy instead of using List.Sort? Is it a better practice to stick with the IComparable implementation for these custom containers? Are there any significant mechanical advantages offered by either path that I should be weighing the decision on? Or is their end-functionality equivalent to the point that it just becomes coder's preference?

  Read the article

• PHP package manager

  - by Mathias

  Hey, does anyone know a package manager library for PHP (as e.g. apt or yum for linux distros) apart from PEAR? I'm working on a system which should include a package management system for module management. I managed to get a working solution using PEAR, but using the PEAR client for anything else than managing a PEAR installation is not really the optimal solution as it's not designed for that. I would have to modify/extend it (e.g. to implement actions on installation/upgrade or to move PEAR specific files like lockfiles away from the system root) and especially the CLI client code is quite messy and PHP4. So maybe someone has some suggestions for an alternative PEAR client library which is easy to use and extend (the server side has some nice implementations like Pirum and pearhub) for completely different package management systems written in PHP (ideally including dependency tracking and different channels) for some general ideas how to implement such a PM system (yes, I'm still tinkering with the idea of implementing such a system from scratch) I know that big systems like Magento and symfony use PEAR for their PM. Magento uses a hacked version of the original PEAR client (which I'd like to avoid), symfony's implementation seems quite integrated with the framework, but would be a good starting point to at least write the client from scratch. Anyway, if anybody has suggestions: please :)

  Read the article

• What's the recommended implementation for hashing OLE Variants?

  - by Barry Kelly

  OLE Variants, as used by older versions of Visual Basic and pervasively in COM Automation, can store lots of different types: basic types like integers and floats, more complicated types like strings and arrays, and all the way up to IDispatch implementations and pointers in the form of ByRef variants. Variants are also weakly typed: they convert the value to another type without warning depending on which operator you apply and what the current types are of the values passed to the operator. For example, comparing two variants, one containing the integer 1 and another containing the string "1", for equality will return True. So assuming that I'm working with variants at the underlying data level (e.g. VARIANT in C++ or TVarData in Delphi - i.e. the big union of different possible values), how should I hash variants consistently so that they obey the right rules? Rules: Variants that hash unequally should compare as unequal, both in sorting and direct equality Variants that compare as equal for both sorting and direct equality should hash as equal It's OK if I have to use different sorting and direct comparison rules in order to make the hashing fit. The way I'm currently working is I'm normalizing the variants to strings (if they fit), and treating them as strings, otherwise I'm working with the variant data as if it was an opaque blob, and hashing and comparing its raw bytes. That has some limitations, of course: numbers 1..10 sort as [1, 10, 2, ... 9] etc. This is mildly annoying, but it is consistent and it is very little work. However, I do wonder if there is an accepted practice for this problem.

  Read the article

• OO model for nsxmlparser when delegate is not self

  - by richard

  Hi, I am struggling with the correct design for the delegates of nsxmlparser. In order to build my table of Foos, I need to make two types of webservice calls; one for the whole table and one for each row. It's essentially a master-query then detail-query, except the master-query-result-xml doesn't return enough information so i then need to query the detail for each row. I'm not dealing with enormous amounts of data. Anyway - previously I've just used NSXMLParser *parser = [[NSXMLParser alloc]init]; [parser setDelegate:self]; [parser parse]; and implemented all the appropriate delegate methods in whatever class i'm in. In attempt at cleanliness, I've now created two separate delegate classes and done something like: NSXMLParser *xp = [[NSXMLParser alloc]init]; MyMasterXMLParserDelegate *masterParserDelegate = [[MyMasterXMLParser]alloc]init]; [xp setDelegate:masterParserDelegate]; [xp parse]; In addition to being cleaner (in my opinion, at least), it also means each of the -parser:didStartElement implementations don't spend most of the time trying to figure out which xml they're parsing. So now the real crux of the problem. Before i split out the delegates, i had in the main class that was also implementing the delegate methods, a class-level NSMutableArray that I would just put my objects-created-from-xml in when -parser:didEndElement found the 'end' of each record. Now the delegates are in separate classes, I can't figure out how to have the -parser:didEndElement in the 'detail' delegate class "return" the created object to the calling class. At least, not in a clean OO way. I'm sure i could do it with all sorts of nasty class methods. Does the question make sense? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Good data structure for efficient insert/querying on arbitrary properties

  - by Juliet

  I'm working on a project where Arrays are the default data structure for everything, and every query is a linear search in the form of: Need a customer with a particular name? customer.Find(x => x.Name == name) Need a customer with a particular unique id? customer.Find(x => x.Id == id) Need a customer of a particular type and age? customer.Find(x => x is PreferredCustomer && x.Age >= age) Need a customer of a particular name and age? customer.Find(x => x.Name == name && x.Age == age) In almost all instances, the criteria for lookups is well-defined. For example, we only search for customers by one or more of the properties Id, Type, Name, or Age. We rarely search by anything else. Is a good data structure to support arbitrary queries of these types with lookup better than O(n)? Any out-of-the-box implementations for .NET?

  Read the article

• OOP, Interface Design and Encapsulation

  - by Mau

  C# project, but it could be applied to any OO languages. 3 interfaces interacting: public interface IPublicData {} public /* internal */ interface IInternalDataProducer { string GetData(); } public interface IPublicWorker { IPublicData DoWork(); IInternalDataProducer GetInternalProducer(); } public class Engine { Engine(IPublicWorker worker) {} IPublicData Run() { DoSomethingWith(worker.GetInternalProducer().GetData()); return worker.DoWork(); } } Clearly Engine is parametric in the actual worker that does the job. A further source of parametrization is how we produce the 'internal data' via IInternalDataProducer. This implementation requires IInternalDataProducer to be public because it's part of the declaration of the public interface IPublicWorker. However, I'd like it to be internal since it's only used by the engine. A solution is make the IPublicWorker produce the internal data itself, but that's not very elegant since there's only a couple of ways of producing it (while there are many more worker implementations), therefore it's nice to delegate to a couple of separate concrete classes. Moreover, the IInternalDataProducer is used in more places inside the engine, so it's good for the engine to pass around the actual object. I'm looking for elegant ideas/patterns. Cheers :-)

  Read the article

• Circular dependency with generics

  - by devoured elysium

  I have defined the following interface: public interface IStateSpace<State, Action> where State : IState where Action : IAction<State, Action> // <-- this is the line that bothers me { void SetValueAt(State state, Action action); Action GetValueAt(State state); } Basically, an IStateSpace interface should be something like a chess board, and in each position of the chess board you have a set of possible movements to do. Those movements here are called IActions. I have defined this interface this way so I can accommodate for different implementations: I can then define concrete classes that implement 2D matrix, 3D matrix, graphs, etc. public interface IAction<State, Action> { IStateSpace<State, Action> StateSpace { get; } } An IAction, would be to move up(this is, if in (2, 2) move to (2, 1)), move down, etc. Now, I'll want that each action has access to a StateSpace so it can do some checking logic. Is this implementation correct? Or is this a bad case of a circular dependence? If yes, how to accomplish "the same" in a different way? Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >