Search Results

Search found 3321 results on 133 pages for 'patterns'.

Page 50/133 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

• How to generate a Program template by generating an abstract class

  - by Byron-Lim Timothy Steffan

  i have the following problem. The 1st step is to implement a program, which follows a specific protocol on startup. Therefore, functions as onInit, onConfigRequest, etc. will be necessary. (These are triggered e.g. by incoming message on a TCP Port) My goal is to generate a class for example abstract one, which has abstract functions as onInit(), etc. A programmer should just inherit from this base class and should merely override these abstract functions of the base class. The rest as of the protocol e.g. should be simply handled in the background (using the code of the base class) and should not need to appear in the programmers code. What is the correct design strategy for such tasks? and how do I deal with, that the static main method is not inheritable? What are the key-tags for this problem? (I have problem searching for a solution since I lack clear statements on this problem) Goal is to create some sort of library/class, which - included in ones code - results in executables following the protocol. EDIT (new explanation): Okay let me try to explain more detailled: In this case programs should be clients within a client server architecture. We have a client server connection via TCP/IP. Each program needs to follow a specific protocol upon program start: As soon as my program starts and gets connected to the server it will receive an Init Message (TcpClient), when this happens it should trigger the function onInit(). (Should this be implemented by an event system?) After onInit() a acknowledgement message should be sent to the server. Afterwards there are some other steps as e.g. a config message from the server which triggers an onConfig and so on. Let's concentrate on the onInit function. The idea is, that onInit (and onConfig and so on) should be the only functions the programmer should edit while the overall protocol messaging is hidden for him. Therefore, I thought using an abstract class with the abstract methods onInit(), onConfig() in it should be the right thing. The static Main class I would like to hide, since within it e.g. there will be some part which connects to the tcp port, which reacts on the Init Message and which will call the onInit function. 2 problems here: 1. the static main class cant be inherited, isn it? 2. I cannot call abstract functions from the main class in the abstract master class. Let me give an Pseudo-example for my ideas: public abstract class MasterClass { static void Main(string[] args){ 1. open TCP connection 2. waiting for Init Message from server 3. onInit(); 4. Send Acknowledgement, that Init Routine has ended successfully 5. waiting for Config message from server 6..... } public abstract void onInit(); public abstract void onConfig(); } I hope you get the idea now! The programmer should afterwards inherit from this masterclass and merely need to edit the functions onInit and so on. Is this way possible? How? What else do you recommend for solving this? EDIT: The strategy ideo provided below is a good one! Check out my comment on that.

  Read the article

• desing pattern for related inputs

  - by curiousMo

  My question is a design question : let's say i have a data entry web page with 4 drop down lists, each depending on the previous one, and a bunch of text boxes. country (ddl), state (ddl), city (ddl), boro (ddl), address (txtBox), zipcode(txtbox). and an object that represents a datarow with a value for each. naturally the country, state, city and boro values will be values of primary keys of some lookup tables. when the user chooses to edits that record, i would load it from database and load it into the page. the issue that I have is how to streamline loading the ddls. i have some code that would grab the object, look thru its values and move them to their corresponding input controls in one shot. but in this case i will have to load possible values of country, then assign values, then load values of state, then assign value ans so on. I guess i am looking for an elegant solution. i am using asp.net, but i think it is irrelevant to the question. i am looking more into a design pattern. thanks

  Read the article

• Which design pattern to manage windows?

  - by Lu Lu

  Hello, I am using .NET 2.0 & C# to develop a WinForm Mdi application. It will have a Main Window and a lot of mdi windows. I am thinking I should use which design pattern to manage mdi windows. Because I want only one instance for each window, if window is existed, I will show it on top, & otherwise I will create and show it. Note: a mdi window is opened from Menus of Main Window or open from another mdi window. An example is very good. Update: Menu's status is depended on mdi window's status. Ex: If Window 'A' is openned - menu 'A' - disabled. When window 'A' is closed - I update menu 'A' status to Enabled. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Bi-directional view model syncing with "live" collections and properties (MVVM)

  - by Schneider

  I am getting my knickers in a twist recently about View Models (VM). Just like this guy I have come to the conclusion that the collections I need to expose on my VM typically contain a different type to the collections exposed on my business objects. Hence there must be a bi-directional mapping or transformation between these two types. (Just to complicate things, on my project this data is "Live" such that as soon as you change a property it gets transmitted to other computers) I can just about cope with that concept, using a framework like Truss, although I suspect there will be a nasty surprise somewhere within. Not only must objects be transformed but a synchronization between these two collections is required. (Just to complicate things I can think of cases where the VM collection might be a subset or union of business object collections, not simply a 1:1 synchronization). I can see how to do a one-way "live" sync, using a replicating ObservableCollection or something like CLINQ. The problem then becomes: What is the best way to create/delete items? Bi-directinal sync does not seem to be on the cards - I have found no such examples, and the only class that supports anything remotely like that is the ListCollectionView. Would bi-directional sync even be a sensible way to add back into the business object collection? All the samples I have seen never seem to tackle anything this "complex". So my question is: How do you solve this? Is there some technique to update the model collections from the VM? What is the best general approach to this?

  Read the article

• Shouldn't ObjectInputStream extend FilterInputStream?

  - by Vaibhav Bajpai

  The block quotes are from the Java Docs - A FilterInputStream contains some other input stream, which it uses as its basic source of data, possibly transforming the data along the way or providing additional functionality. A DataInputStream lets an application read primitive Java data types from an underlying input stream in a machine-independent way. The DataInputStream therefore extends FilterInputStream An ObjectInputStream deserializes primitive data and objects previously written using an ObjectOutputStream. However, for some reason the ObjectInputStream does NOT extend FilterInputStream even though it is also reading objects (this time and not primitive types) from the underlying input stream. Here is the branching of the concerned classes. Is there is a design reasoning for the same?

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC Paging for a search form

  - by James Alexander

  I've read several different posts on paging w/ in MVC but none describe a scenario where I have something like a search form and then want to display the results of the search criteria (with paging) beneath the form once the user clicks submit. My problem is that, the paging solution I'm using will create <a href="..."> links that will pass the desired page like so: http://mysite.com/search/2/ and while that's all fine and dandy, I don't have the results of the query being sent to the db in memory or anything so I need to query the DB again. If the results are handled by the POST controller action for /Search and the first page of the data is rendered as such, how do I get the same results (based on the form criteria specified by the user) when the user clicks to move to page 2? Some javascript voodoo? Leverage Session State? Make my GET controller action have the same variables expected by the search criteria (but optional), when the GET action is called, instantiate a FormCollection instance, populate it and pass it to the POST action method (there-by satisfying DRY)? Can someone point me in the right direction for this scenario or provide examples that have been implemented in the past? Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to restrict access to a class's data based on state?

  - by Marcus Swope

  In an ETL application I am working on, we have three basic processes: Validate and parse an XML file of customer information from a third party Match values received in the file to values in our system Load customer data in our system The issue here is that we may need to display the customer information from any or all of the above states to an internal user and there is data in our customer class that will never be populated before the values have been matched in our system (step 2). For this reason, I would like to have the values not even be available to be accessed when the customer is in this state, and I would like to have to avoid some repeated logic everywhere like: if (customer.IsMatched) DisplayTextOnWeb(customer.SomeMatchedValue); My first thought for this was to add a couple interfaces on top of Customer that would only expose the properties and behaviors of the current state, and then only deal with those interfaces. The problem with this approach is that there seems to be no good way to move from an ICustomerWithNoMatchedValues to an ICustomerWithMatchedValues without doing direct casts, etc... (or at least I can't find one). I can't be the first to have come across this, how do you normally approach this? As a last caveat, I would like for this solution to play nice with FluentNHibernate :) Thanks in advance...

  Read the article

• How can i return abstract class from any factory?

  - by programmerist

  using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; namespace EfTestFactory { public abstract class _Company { public abstract List<Personel> GetPersonel(); public abstract List<Prim> GetPrim(); public abstract List<Finans> GetFinans(); } public abstract class _Radyoloji { public abstract List<string> GetRadyoloji(); } public abstract class _Satis { public abstract List<string> GetSatis(); } public abstract class _Muayene { public abstract List<string> GetMuayene(); } public class Company : _Company { public override List<Personel> GetPersonel() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override List<Prim> GetPrim() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override List<Finans> GetFinans() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Radyoloji : _Radyoloji { public override List<string> GetRadyoloji() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Satis : _Satis { public override List<string> GetSatis() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Muayene : _Muayene { public override List<string> GetMuayene() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class GenoTipController { public object CreateByEnum(DataModelType modeltype) { string enumText = modeltype.ToString(); // will return for example "Company" Type classType = Type.GetType(enumText); // the Type for Company class object t = Activator.CreateInstance(classType); // create an instance of Company class return t; } } public class AntsController { static Dictionary<DataModelType, Func<object>> s_creators = new Dictionary<DataModelType, Func<object>>() { { DataModelType.Radyoloji, () => new _Radyoloji() }, { DataModelType.Company, () => new _Company() }, { DataModelType.Muayene, () => new _Muayene() }, { DataModelType.Satis, () => new _Satis() }, }; public object CreateByEnum(DataModelType modeltype) { return s_creators[modeltype](); } } public class CompanyView { public static List<Personel> GetPersonel() { GenoTipController controller = new GenoTipController(); _Company company = controller.CreateByEnum(DataModelType.Company) as _Company; return company.GetPersonel(); } } public enum DataModelType { Radyoloji, Satis, Muayene, Company } } if i write above codes i see some error: Cannot create an instance of abstract class or interface 'EfTestFactory_Company'How can i solve it? Look please below pic.

  Read the article

• Can anyone explain how the Strategy Pattern relates to Inversion of Control?

  - by Shane

  Can anyone explain exactly how the Strategy Pattern relates to Inversion of Control?

  Read the article

• State pattern: Why doesn't the context class implement or inherit the State abstract interface/class

  - by Ricket

  I'm reading about the State pattern. I have only just begun, so of course I begin by reading the entire Wikipedia article on it. I noticed that both of the examples in the article have some base abstract class or Java interface for a generic State's methods/functions. Then there are some states which inherit from the base and implement those methods/functions in different ways. Then there's a Context class which has a private member of type State and which, at any time, can be equal to an instance of one of the implementations. That context class also implements the same methods, and passes them onto the current state instance, and then has an additional method to change the state (or depending on design I understand the change of state could be a reaction to one of the implemented methods). Why doesn't this context class specifically "extend" or "implement" the generic State base class/interface?

  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

• What is the most stupid coded solution you have read/improved/witnessed?

  - by Rigo Vides

  And for stupid I mean Illogical, non-effective, complex(the bad way), ugly code style. I will start: We had a requirement there when we needed to hide certain objects given the press of a button. So this framework we were using at the time provided a way to tag objects and retrieve all the objects with a certain tag in a complete iterable collection. So I presented the most logically solution given these conditions to my partner: Me: you know, tag all the objects we needed to hide with the same tag, then call the function to get them all, iterate trough them and make them hidden. Partner: I don't know, that is hardcoding for me... Me: So what do you suggest? 20 mins later... Partner: I don't know... let's put a tag to all the objects to be hidden like this, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (and so for each object to be hidden), Then we make a for from 1 to n (where n was the number of objects to hide) and we hide them all there!

  Read the article

• What is the best approach to binding commands in a ViewModel to elements in the View?

  - by Micah

  Anyone who has tried to implement RoutedCommands in WPF using M-V-VM has undoubtedly run into issues. Commands (non-UI commands that is) should be implemented in the ViewModel. For instance if I needed to save a CustomerViewModel then I would implement that as a command directly on my CustomerViewModel. However if I wanted to pop up a window to show the users addresses I would implement a ShowCustomerAddress command directly in the view since this a UI specific function. How do I define the command bindings in the viewmodel, and use them in the view?

  Read the article

• Optional Member Objects

  - by David Relihan

  Okay, so you have a load of methods sprinkled around your systems main class. So you do the right thing and refactor by creating a new class and perform move method(s) into a new class. The new class has a single responsibility and all is right with the world again: class Feature { public: Feature(){}; void doSomething(); void doSomething1(); void doSomething2(); }; So now your original class has a member variable of type object: Feature _feature; Which you will call in the main class. Now if you do this many times, you will have many member-objects in your main class. Now these features may or not be required based on configuration so in a way it's costly having all these objects that may or not be needed. Can anyone suggest a way of improving this? At the moment I plan to test in the newly created class if the feature is enabled - so the when a call is made to method I will return if it is not enabled. I could have a pointer to the object and then only call new if feature is enabled - but this means I will have to test before I call a method on it which would be potentially dangerous and not very readable. Would having an auto_ptr to the object improve things: auto_ptr<Feature> feature; Or am I still paying the cost of object invokation even though the object may\or may not be required. BTW - I don't think this is premeature optimisation - I just want to consider the possibilites.

  Read the article

• How does java implement flyweight pattern for string under the hood?

  - by Dan

  If you have two instances of a String, and they are equal, in Java they will share the same memory. How is this implemented under the hood?

  Read the article

• 3 tier application pattern suggestion

  - by Maxim Gershkovich

  I have attempted to make my first 3 tier application. In the process I have run into one problem I am yet to find an optimal solution for. Basically all my objects use an IFillable interface which forces the implementation of a sub as follows Public Sub Fill(ByVal Datareader As Data.IDataReader) Implements IFillable.Fill This sub then expects the Ids from the datareader will be identical to the properties of the object as such. Me.m_StockID = Datareader.GetGuid(Datareader.GetOrdinal("StockID")) In the end I end up with a datalayer that looks something like this. Public Shared Function GetStockByID(ByVal ConnectionString As String, ByVal StockID As Guid) As Stock Dim res As New Stock Using sqlConn As New SqlConnection(ConnectionString) sqlConn.Open() res.Fill(StockDataLayer.GetStockByIDQuery(sqlConn, StockID)) End Using Return res End Function Mostly this pattern seems to make sense. However my problem is, lets say I want to implement a property for Stock called StockBarcodeList. Under the above mentioned pattern any way I implement this property I will need to pass a connectionstring to it which obviously breaks my attempt at layer separation. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might be able to solve this problem or am I going about this the completely wrong way? Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might improve my implementation? Please note however I am deliberately trying to avoid using the dataset in any form.

  Read the article

• Could any help me in resource of how to build framework with api like facebook ?

  - by Space Cracker

  we will develop a web site that will have some free services and we want to make it as a framework that can any build application over it or can use its api in their site .. Could any lead me in how to start it , what's the better architecture and design pattern help in that , is there any resources discuss or explain how to do like this ? FYI : we are dot net developers but we can learn any other if its urgently needed in such a solution

  Read the article

• MVC Really a Four Headed Pattern?

  - by Jascha

  Is it just me or is MVC really Model-View/Controller-View View-Model/Controller-Model with two distinct controllers?

  Read the article

• Hierarchy / Flyweight / Instancing Problem in Python

  - by Dan

  Here is the problem I am trying to solve, (I have simplified the actual problem, but this should give you all the relevant information). I have a hierarchy like so: 1.A 1.B 1.C 2.A 3.D 4.B 5.F (This is hard to illustrate - each number is the parent, each letter is the child). Creating an instance of the 'letter' objects is expensive (IO, database costs, etc), so should only be done once. The hierarchy needs to be easy to navigate. Children in the hierarchy need to have just one parent. Modifying the contents of the letter objects should be possible directly from the objects in the hierarchy. There needs to be a central store containing all of the 'letter' objects (and only those in the hierarchy). 'letter' and 'number' objects need to be possible to create from a constructor (such as Letter(**kwargs) ). It is perfectably acceptable to expect that when a letter changes from the hierarchy, all other letters will respect the same change. Hope this isn't too abstract to illustrate the problem. What would be the best way of solving this? (Then I'll post my solution) Here's an example script: one = Number('one') a = Letter('a') one.addChild(a) two = Number('two') a = Letter('a') two.addChild(a) for child in one: child.method1() for child in two: print '%s' % child.method2()

  Read the article

• Strategy Pattern with Type Reflection affecting Performances ?

  - by Aurélien Ribon

  Hello ! I am building graphs. A graph consists of nodes linked each other with links (indeed my dear). In order to assign a given behavior to each node, I implemented the strategy pattern. class Node { public BaseNodeBehavior Behavior {get; set;} } As a result, in many parts of the application, I am extensively using type reflection to know which behavior a node is. if (node.Behavior is NodeDataOutputBehavior) workOnOutputNode(node) .... My graph can get thousands of nodes. Is type reflection greatly affecting performances ? Should I use something else than the strategy pattern ? I'm using strategy because I need behavior inheritance. For example, basically, a behavior can be Data or Operator, a Data behavior can IO, Const or Intermediate and finally an IO behavior can be Input or Output. So if I use an enumeration, I wont be able to test for a node behavior to be of data kind, I will need to test it to be [Input, Output, Const or Intermediate]. And if later I want to add another behavior of Data kind, I'm screwed, every data-testing method will need to be changed.

  Read the article

• How build my own Application Setting

  - by adisembiring

  I want to build a ApplicationSetting for my application. The ApplicationSetting can be stored in a properties file or in a database table. The settings are stored in key-value pairs. E.g. ftp.host = blade ftp.username = dummy ftp.pass = pass content.row_pagination = 20 content.title = How to train your dragon. I have designed it as follows: Application settings reader: interface IApplicationSettingReader { read(); } DatabaseApplicationSettingReader { dao appSettingDao; AppSettings read() { List<AppSettingEntity> listEntity = appSettingsDao.findAll(); Map<String, String> map = new HaspMap<String, String>(); foreach (AppSettingEntity entity : listEntity) { map.put(entity.getConfigName(), entity.getConfigValue()); } return new AppSettings(map); } } DatabaseApplicationSettingReader { dao appSettingDao; AppSettings read() { //read from some properties file return new AppSettings(map); } } Application settings class: AppSettings { private static AppSettings instance; private Map map; Public AppSettings(Map map) { this.map = map; } public static AppSettings getInstance() { if (instance == null) { throw new RuntimeException("Object not configure yet"); } return instance; } public static configure(IApplicationSettingReader reader) { instance = reader.read(); } public String getFtpSetting(String param) { return map.get("ftp." + param); } public String getContentSetting(String param) { return map.get("content." + param); } } Test class: AppSettingsTest { IApplicationSettingReader reader; @Before public void setUp() throws Exception { reader = new DatabaseApplicationSettingReader(); } @Test public void getContentSetting_should_get_content_title() { AppSettings.configure(reader); Instance settings = AppSettings.getInstance(); String title = settings.getContentSetting("title"); assertNotNull(title); Sysout(title); } } My questions are: Can you give your opinion about my code, is there something wrong? I configure my application setting once, while the application start, I configure the application setting with appropriate reader (DbReader or PropertiesReader), I make it singleton. The problem is, when some user edit the database or file directly to database or file, I can't get the changed values. Now, I want to implement something like ApplicationSettingChangeListener. So if the data changes, I will refresh my application settings. Do you have any suggestions how this can be implemented?

  Read the article

• Is REST mandatory for MVC?

  - by balalakshmi

  I am beginning on ASP.net MVC. All the articles I have read so far mention REST as a key feature in MVC implementation My question: is REST mandatory for MVC implementation?

  Read the article

• JavaScript Resource Management Design Pattern

  - by Adam

  As a web developer, a common problem I find myself tackling is waiting for something to load before doing something else. In particular, I often hide (using either display: none; or visibility: hidden; depending on the situation) elements while waiting for a background image or a CSS file to load. Consider this example from Last.FM. They overlay a semi-transparant PNG over each album art image so that it looks like it's inside a jewel-case. They let it load when it loads, so depending on your internet speed, you may see the art image by itself (without the overlay) temporarily. In this case, the album art looks fine without the jewel-case effect. But in similar situations, I have found that I don't want the user to see the site's design mangled as resources incrementally load. So, in rare cases I have hidden everything from the user until the whole kit and kaboodle has loaded. But this is often a pain to write out, and may force the user to wait for a pretty long time to see anything (besides "loading..." text). I can think of (and have used on occasion) some obvious solutions/compromises: Use some inline CSS so that as certain parts of the DOM load and render, they will immediately have the correct size/position/etc. Immediately render the navigation part of the site, so that if the user wanted to use the current page purely to get somewhere else, they don't have to wait for the rest to load. Load pixelated images first as placeholders for layout while lazy-loading higher quality images as replacements. Something quirky like using a cute animated gif to distract the user during a "loading..." phase. Show useful information as a reference while loading the full UI. (Something akin to Gmail Inbox Preview, etc.) (Sorry if my question was basically just asked and answered...) Despite all of these ideas, I still find myself hoping there are better ways of doing some of these things. So I guess what I'm looking for is some inspiration and/or any creative ways of dealing with this problem that you guys may have seen out in the wild.

  Read the article

• Is it bad practice to make a setter return "this"?

  - by Ken Liu

  Is it a good or bad idea to make setters in java return "this"? public Employee setName(String name){ this.name = name; return this; } This pattern can be useful because then you can chain setters like this: list.add(new Employee().setName("Jack Sparrow").setId(1).setFoo("bacon!")); instead of this: Employee e = new Employee(); e.setName("Jack Sparrow"); ...and so on... list.add(e); ...but it sort of goes against standard convention. I suppose it might be worthwhile just because it can make that setter do something else useful. I've seen this pattern used some places (e.g. JMock, JPA), but it seems uncommon, and only generally used for very well defined APIs where this pattern is used everywhere. Update: What I've described is obviously valid, but what I am really looking for is some thoughts on whether this is generally acceptable, and if there are any pitfalls or related best practices. I know about the Builder pattern but it is a little more involved then what I am describing - as Josh Bloch describes it there is an associated static Builder class for object creation.

  Read the article

• Is a "factory" method the right pattern?

  - by jdt141

  Hey all - So I'm working to improve an existing implementation. I have a number of polymorphic classes that are all composed into a higher level container class. The problem I'm dealing with at the moment is that the higher level container class, well, sucks. It looks something like this, which I really don't have a problem with (as the polymorphic classes in the container should be public). My real issue is the constructor... /* * class1 and class 2 derive from the same superclass */ class Container { public: boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass1> class1; boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass2> class2; private: ... } /* * Constructor - builds the objects that we need in this container. */ Container::Container(some params) { class1.reset(new ComposedClass1(...)); class2.reset(new ComposedClass2(...)); } What I really need is to make this container class more re-usable. By hard-coding up the member objects and instantiating them, it basically isn't and can only be used once. A factory is one way to build what I need (potentially by supplying a list of objects and their specific types to be created?) Other ways to get around this problem? Seems like someone should have solved it before... Thanks!

  Read the article

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