Search Results

Search found 5895 results on 236 pages for 'cake pattern'.

Page 53/236 | < Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >

  • What OO Design to use ( is there a Design Pattern )?

    - by Blundell
    I have two objects that represent a 'Bar/Club' ( a place where you drink/socialise). In one scenario I need the bar name, address, distance, slogon In another scenario I need the bar name, address, website url, logo So I've got two objects representing the same thing but with different fields. I like to use immutable objects, so all the fields are set from the constructor. One option is to have two constructors and null the other fields i.e: class Bar { private final String name; private final Distance distance; private final Url url; public Bar(String name, Distance distance){ this.name = name; this.distance = distance; this.url = null; } public Bar(String name, Url url){ this.name = name; this.distance = null; this.url = url; } // getters } I don't like this as you would have to null check when you use the getters In my real example the first scenario has 3 fields and the second scenario has about 10, so it would be a real pain having two constructors, the amount of fields I would have to declare null and then when the object are in use you wouldn't know which Bar you where using and so what fields would be null and what wouldn't. What other options do I have? Two classes called BarPreview and Bar? Some type of inheritance / interface? Something else that is awesome?

    Read the article

  • What's is the point of PImpl pattern while we can use interface for same purpose in C++?

    - by ZijingWu
    I see a lot of source code which using PIMPL idiom in C++. I assume Its purposes are hidden the private data/type/implementation, so it can resolve dependence, and then reduce compile time and header include issue. But interface class in C++ also have this capability, it can also used to hidden data/type and implementation. And to hidden let the caller just see the interface when create object, we can add an factory method in it declaration in interface header. The comparison is: Cost: The interface way cost is lower, because you doesn't even need to repeat the public wrapper function implementation void Bar::doWork() { return m_impl->doWork(); }, you just need to define the signature in the interface. Well understand: The interface technology is more well understand by every C++ developer. Performance: Interface way performance not worse than PIMPL idiom, both an extra memory access. I assume the performance is same. Following is the pseudocode code to illustrate my question: // Forward declaration can help you avoid include BarImpl header, and those included in BarImpl header. class BarImpl; class Bar { public: // public functions void doWork(); private: // You doesn't need to compile Bar.cpp after change the implementation in BarImpl.cpp BarImpl* m_impl; }; The same purpose can be implement using interface: // Bar.h class IBar { public: virtual ~IBar(){} // public functions virtual void doWork() = 0; }; // to only expose the interface instead of class name to caller IBar* createObject(); So what's the point of PIMPL?

    Read the article

  • What Java data structure/design pattern best models this object, considering it would perform these methods?

    - by zundarz
    Methods: 1. getDistance(CityA,CityB) // Returns distance between two cities 2. getCitiesInRadius(CityA,integer) // Returns cities within a given distance of another city 3. getCitiesBeyondRadius(CityA,integer) //Returns cities beyond a given distance of another city 4. getRemoteDestinations(integer) // Returns all city pairs greater than x distance of each other 5. getLocalDestinations(integer) //Returns all city pairs within x distance of each other

    Read the article

  • Which is a better design pattern for a database wrapper: Save as you go or Save when your done?

    - by izuriel
    I know this is probably a bad way to ask this question. I was unable to find another question that addressed this. The full question is this: We're producing a wrapper for a database and have two different viewpoints on managing data with the wrapper. The first is that all changes made to a data object in code must be persisted in the database by calling a "save" method to actually save the changes. The other side is that these changes should be save as they are made, so if I change a property it's saved, I change another it's save as well. What are the pros/cons of either choice and which is the "proper" way to manage the data?

    Read the article

  • WHY Google does not ban these sites using this SEO pattern? [on hold]

    - by saddam.bg
    I have seen some sites using a different kind of SEO to promote copyrighted materials such as movies. They also have submitted their site to Google webmaster tools but still now did not get banned. Their Alexa ranks are 7000 or less. On the other hand I have run 5 movie affiliate sites and all of them got banned by Google within a short period of time. I have copied the url of the homepage of solarmovie.me and pasted it on the google search and instead of the homepage url I have seen that their category or tag shows as the homepage (www.solarmovie.me/watch-category/hollyw... Now is solarmovie.me publishing its posts as a single page or something else? I tried to find out what kind of SEO or coding that was, but I couldn't since I have very little knowledge about coding. Also I have seen the same thing with ALLUC.TO in google search (www.alluc.to/popular-links.html). Could anyone please help with the SEO of this kind so that I don't get banned by google frequently or index removed. All SEO webmaster i need your help!!!! Please give me some good tips for this type of SEO. Thank You Very Much

    Read the article

  • Snow Leopard - resolving hostnames issue

    - by romant
    This worked in Leopard, although since Snowie came along … I have a Location setup with a DNS server to use [eg 10.0.0.17] , and a search string [eg sub.dom.ain.com] In the terminal: $ nslookup cake Server 10.0.0.17 Address: 10.0.0.17#53 Name: cake.sub.dom.ain.com Address: 10.0.0.38 So works like a charm. Although if I just the hostname cake in any other application within OSX - such as Safari/CoRD, they simply can't resolve the hostname. I have to instead use the FQDN cake.sub.dom.ain.com - why is this so? Why did this work in Leopard and is now broken? Would love a solution. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Simplifying for-if messes with better structure?

    - by HH
    # Description: you are given a bitwise pattern and a string # you need to find the number of times the pattern matches in the string # any one liner or simple pythonic solution? import random def matchIt(yourString, yourPattern): """find the number of times yourPattern occurs in yourString""" count = 0 matchTimes = 0 # How can you simplify the for-if structures? for coin in yourString: #return to base if count == len(pattern): matchTimes = matchTimes + 1 count = 0 #special case to return to 2, there could be more this type of conditions #so this type of if-conditionals are screaming for a havoc if count == 2 and pattern[count] == 1: count = count - 1 #the work horse #it could be simpler by breaking the intial string of lenght 'l' #to blocks of pattern-length, the number of them is 'l - len(pattern)-1' if coin == pattern[count]: count=count+1 average = len(yourString)/matchTimes return [average, matchTimes] # Generates the list myString =[] for x in range(10000): myString= myString + [int(random.random()*2)] pattern = [1,0,0] result = matchIt(myString, pattern) print("The sample had "+str(result[1])+" matches and its size was "+str(len(myString))+".\n" + "So it took "+str(result[0])+" steps in average.\n" + "RESULT: "+str([a for a in "FAILURE" if result[0] != 8])) # Sample Output # # The sample had 1656 matches and its size was 10000. # So it took 6 steps in average. # RESULT: ['F', 'A', 'I', 'L', 'U', 'R', 'E']

    Read the article

  • incapsulation of a code inmatlab

    - by user531225
    my code is pathname=uigetdir; filename=uigetfile('*.txt','choose a file name.'); data=importdata(filename); element= (data.data(:,10)); in_array=element; pattern= [1 3]; locations = cell(1, numel(pattern)); for p = 1:(numel(pattern)) locations{p} = find(in_array == pattern(p)); end idx2 = []; for p = 1:numel(locations{1}) start_value = locations{1}(p); for q = 2:numel(locations) found = true; if (~any((start_value + q - 1) == locations{q})) found = false; break; end end if (found) idx2(end + 1) = locations{1}(p); end end [m2,n2]=size(idx2) res_name= {'one' 'two'}; res=[n n2]; In this code I finding a pattern in one of the column of my data file and counting how many times it's repeated. I have like 200 files that I want to do the same with them but unfotunatlly I'm stuck. this is what I have added so far pathname=uigetdir; files=dir('*.txt'); for k=1:length(files) filename=files(k).name; data(k)=importdata(files(k).name); element{k}=data(1,k).data(:,20); in_array=element;pattern= [1 3]; locations = cell(1, numel(pattern)); for p = 1:(numel(pattern)) locations{p} = find(in_array{k}== pattern(p)); end idx2{k} = []; how can I continue this code..??

    Read the article

  • comparision of strings

    - by EmiLazE
    i am writing a program, that simulates game mastermind. but i am struggling on how to compare guessed pattern to key pattern. the game conditions are a little bit changed: patterns consist of letters. if an element of guessed pattern is equal to element of key pattern, and also index is equal, then print b. if an element of guessed pattern is equal to element of key pattern, but index is not, then print w. if an element of guessed pattern is not equal to element of key pattern, print dot. in feedback about guessed pattern, 'b's come first, 'w's second, '.'s last. my problem is that i cannot think of a way totally satisfies the answer. for (i=0; i<patternlength; i++) { for (x=0; x<patternlength; x++) { if (guess[i]==key[x] && i==x) printf("b"); if (guess[i]==key[x] && i!=x) printf("w"); if (guess[i]!=key[x]) printf("."); } }

    Read the article

  • What is a good pattern for binding a collection of objects coming from WCF, in Silverlight?

    - by Krishna
    Hi there, I've got a question about a Silverlight WCF Databinding pattern: There are many examples about how to bind data using {Binding} expressions in XAML, how to make async calls to a WCF service, set the DataContext property of a element in the UI, how to use ObservableCollections and INotifyPropertyChanged, INotifyCollectionChanged and so on. Background: I'm using the MVVM pattern, and have a Silverlight ItemsControl, whose ItemsSource is set to an ObservableCollection property on my ViewModel object. My view is of course the XAML which has the {Binding}. Say the model object is called 'Metric'. My ViewModel periodically makes calls to a WCF service that returns ObservableCollection. MetricInfo is the data transfer object (DTO). My question is two-fold: Is there any way to avoid copying each property of MetricInfo to the model class - Metric? When the WCF calls completes, is there any way to make sure I sync the items which are in both my local ObservableCollection and the result of the WCF call - without having to first clear out all the items in the local collection and then add all the ones from the WCF call result? thanks, Krishna

    Read the article

  • Is it worthwhile to implement observer pattern in PHP?

    - by Extrakun
    I have been meaning to make use of design pattern in PHP, such as the observer pattern, but that I have to recreate the observers' relationship each time the page is loaded pains me. As references are saved as a new concrete objects in session, there is no way to preserve relationships between subscribers and their observers unless you use a GUID or some other properties to form a lookup, and store that property instead. With the cost of recreating the relationships each time a page is loaded, is it worthwhile to use design patterns such as observers in PHP, compared to having a clean design? Any real-world experience to share?

    Read the article

  • Is there a recommended way to use the Observer pattern in MVP using GWT?

    - by Tomislav Nakic-Alfirevic
    I am thinking about implementing a user interface according to the MVP pattern using GWT, but have doubts about how to proceed. These are (some of) my goals: - the presenter knows nothing about the UI technology (i.e. uses nothing from com.google.*) - the view knows nothing about the model or the presenter - the model knows nothing of the view or the presenter (...obviously) I would place an interface between the view and the presenter and use the Observer pattern to decouple the two: the view generates events and the presenter gets notified. What confuses me is that java.util.Observer and java.util.Observable are not supported in GWT. This suggests that what I'm doing is not the recommended way to do it, as far as GWT is concerned, which leads me to my questions: what is the recommended way to implement MVP using GWT, specifically with the above goals in mind? How would you do it?

    Read the article

  • Is this a well known design pattern? what is it's name

    - by GenEric35
    Hi I have seen this often in code, but when I speak of it i don't know the name of such 'pattern' I have a method with 2 arguments that calls an overloaded method that has 3 arguments and intentionality sets the 3rd one to empty string. public DoWork(string name, string phoneNumber) { CreateContact(name, phoneNumber, string.Empty) } public DoWork(string name, string phoneNumber, string emailAddress) { //do the work } The reason I'm doing this is I to not duplicate code, and allow the existing callers to still call the method that has only 2 parameters. I have associate a few tags to this question, but it probably fit in more categories of questions. Is this a pattern, and does it have a name?

    Read the article

  • Stream classes ... design, pattern for creating views over streams

    - by ToxicAvenger
    A question regarding the design of stream classes - I need a pattern to create independent views over a single stream instance (in my case for reading). A view would be a consecutive part of the stream. The problem I have with the stream classes is that the state (reading or writing) is coupled with the underlying data/storage. So if I need to partition a stream into different segments (whether segments overlap or not doesn't matter), I cannot easily create views over the stream, the views would store start and end position. Because reading from a view - which would translate to reading from the underlying stream adjusted based on the start/end positions - would change the state of the underlying stream instance. So what I could do is take a read on a view instance, adjust the Position of the stream, read the chunks I need. But I cannot do that concurrently. Why is it designed in such a way, and what kind of pattern could I implement to create independet views over a single stream instance which would allow to read/write independently (and concurrently)?

    Read the article

  • Cloud to On-Premise Connectivity Patterns

    - by Rajesh Raheja
    Do you have a requirement to convert an Opportunity in Salesforce.com to an Order/Quote in Oracle E-Business Suite? Or maybe you want the creation of an Oracle RightNow Incident to trigger an on-premise Oracle E-Business Suite Service Request creation for RMA and Field Scheduling? If so, read on. In a previous blog post, I discussed integrating TO cloud applications, however the use cases above are the reverse i.e. receiving data FROM cloud applications (SaaS) TO on-premise applications/databases that sit behind a firewall. Oracle SOA Suite is assumed to be on-premise with with Oracle Service Bus as the mediation and virtualization layer. The main considerations for the patterns are are security i.e. shielding enterprise resources; and scalability i.e. minimizing firewall latency. Let me use an analogy to help visualize the patterns: the on-premise system is your home - with your most valuable possessions - and the SaaS app is your favorite on-line store which regularly ships (inbound calls) various types of parcels/items (message types/service operations). You need the items at home (on-premise) but want to safe guard against misguided elements of society (internet threats) who may masquerade as postal workers and vandalize property (denial of service?). Let's look at the patterns. Pattern: Pull from Cloud The on-premise system polls from the SaaS apps and picks up the message instead of having it delivered. This may be done using Oracle RightNow Object Query Language or SOAP APIs. This is particularly suited for certain integration approaches wherein messages are trickling in, can be centralized and batched e.g. retrieving event notifications on an hourly schedule from the Oracle Messaging Service. To compare this pattern with the home analogy, you are avoiding any deliveries to your home and instead go to the post office/UPS/Fedex store to pick up your parcel. Every time. Pros: On-premise assets not exposed to the Internet, firewall issues avoided by only initiating outbound connections Cons: Polling mechanisms may affect performance, may not satisfy near real-time requirements Pattern: Open Firewall Ports The on-premise system exposes the web services that needs to be invoked by the cloud application. This requires opening up firewall ports, routing calls to the appropriate internal services behind the firewall. Fusion Applications uses this pattern, and auto-provisions the services on the various virtual hosts to secure the topology. This works well for service integration, but may not suffice for large volume data integration. Using the home analogy, you have now decided to receive parcels instead of going to the post office every time. A door mail slot cut out allows the postman can drop small parcels, but there is still concern about cutting new holes for larger packages. Pros: optimal pattern for near real-time needs, simpler administration once the service is provisioned Cons: Needs firewall ports to be opened up for new services, may not suffice for batch integration requiring direct database access Pattern: Virtual Private Networking The on-premise network is "extended" to the cloud (or an intermediary on-demand / managed service offering) using Virtual Private Networking (VPN) so that messages are delivered to the on-premise system in a trusted channel. Using the home analogy, you entrust a set of keys with a neighbor or property manager who receives the packages, and then drops it inside your home. Pros: Individual firewall ports don't need to be opened, more suited for high scalability needs, can support large volume data integration, easier management of one connection vs a multitude of open ports Cons: VPN setup, specific hardware support, requires cloud provider to support virtual private computing Pattern: Reverse Proxy / API Gateway The on-premise system uses a reverse proxy "API gateway" software on the DMZ to receive messages. The reverse proxy can be implemented using various mechanisms e.g. Oracle API Gateway provides firewall and proxy services along with comprehensive security, auditing, throttling benefits. If a firewall already exists, then Oracle Service Bus or Oracle HTTP Server virtual hosts can provide reverse proxy implementations on the DMZ. Custom built implementations are also possible if specific functionality (such as message store-n-forward) is needed. In the home analogy, this pattern sits in between cutting mail slots and handing over keys. Instead, you install (and maintain) a mailbox in your home premises outside your door. The post office delivers the parcels in your mailbox, from where you can securely retrieve it. Pros: Very secure, very flexible Cons: Introduces a new software component, needs DMZ deployment and management Pattern: On-Premise Agent (Tunneling) A light weight "agent" software sits behind the firewall and initiates the communication with the cloud, thereby avoiding firewall issues. It then maintains a bi-directional connection either with pull or push based approaches using (or abusing, depending on your viewpoint) the HTTP protocol. Programming protocols such as Comet, WebSockets, HTTP CONNECT, HTTP SSH Tunneling etc. are possible implementation options. In the home analogy, a resident receives the parcel from the postal worker by opening the door, however you still take precautions with chain locks and package inspections. Pros: Light weight software, IT doesn't need to setup anything Cons: May bypass critical firewall checks e.g. virus scans, separate software download, proliferation of non-IT managed software Conclusion The patterns above are some of the most commonly encountered ones for cloud to on-premise integration. Selecting the right pattern for your project involves looking at your scalability needs, security restrictions, sync vs asynchronous implementation, near real-time vs batch expectations, cloud provider capabilities, budget, and more. In some cases, the basic "Pull from Cloud" may be acceptable, whereas in others, an extensive VPN topology may be well justified. For more details on the Oracle cloud integration strategy, download this white paper.

    Read the article

  • Cloud to On-Premise Connectivity Patterns

    - by Rajesh Raheja
    Do you have a requirement to convert an Opportunity in Salesforce.com to an Order/Quote in Oracle E-Business Suite? Or maybe you want the creation of an Oracle RightNow Incident to trigger an on-premise Oracle E-Business Suite Service Request creation for RMA and Field Scheduling? If so, read on. In a previous blog post, I discussed integrating TO cloud applications, however the use cases above are the reverse i.e. receiving data FROM cloud applications (SaaS) TO on-premise applications/databases that sit behind a firewall. Oracle SOA Suite is assumed to be on-premise with with Oracle Service Bus as the mediation and virtualization layer. The main considerations for the patterns are are security i.e. shielding enterprise resources; and scalability i.e. minimizing firewall latency. Let me use an analogy to help visualize the patterns: the on-premise system is your home - with your most valuable possessions - and the SaaS app is your favorite on-line store which regularly ships (inbound calls) various types of parcels/items (message types/service operations). You need the items at home (on-premise) but want to safe guard against misguided elements of society (internet threats) who may masquerade as postal workers and vandalize property (denial of service?). Let's look at the patterns. Pattern: Pull from Cloud The on-premise system polls from the SaaS apps and picks up the message instead of having it delivered. This may be done using Oracle RightNow Object Query Language or SOAP APIs. This is particularly suited for certain integration approaches wherein messages are trickling in, can be centralized and batched e.g. retrieving event notifications on an hourly schedule from the Oracle Messaging Service. To compare this pattern with the home analogy, you are avoiding any deliveries to your home and instead go to the post office/UPS/Fedex store to pick up your parcel. Every time. Pros: On-premise assets not exposed to the Internet, firewall issues avoided by only initiating outbound connections Cons: Polling mechanisms may affect performance, may not satisfy near real-time requirements Pattern: Open Firewall Ports The on-premise system exposes the web services that needs to be invoked by the cloud application. This requires opening up firewall ports, routing calls to the appropriate internal services behind the firewall. Fusion Applications uses this pattern, and auto-provisions the services on the various virtual hosts to secure the topology. This works well for service integration, but may not suffice for large volume data integration. Using the home analogy, you have now decided to receive parcels instead of going to the post office every time. A door mail slot cut out allows the postman can drop small parcels, but there is still concern about cutting new holes for larger packages. Pros: optimal pattern for near real-time needs, simpler administration once the service is provisioned Cons: Needs firewall ports to be opened up for new services, may not suffice for batch integration requiring direct database access Pattern: Virtual Private Networking The on-premise network is "extended" to the cloud (or an intermediary on-demand / managed service offering) using Virtual Private Networking (VPN) so that messages are delivered to the on-premise system in a trusted channel. Using the home analogy, you entrust a set of keys with a neighbor or property manager who receives the packages, and then drops it inside your home. Pros: Individual firewall ports don't need to be opened, more suited for high scalability needs, can support large volume data integration, easier management of one connection vs a multitude of open ports Cons: VPN setup, specific hardware support, requires cloud provider to support virtual private computing Pattern: Reverse Proxy / API Gateway The on-premise system uses a reverse proxy "API gateway" software on the DMZ to receive messages. The reverse proxy can be implemented using various mechanisms e.g. Oracle API Gateway provides firewall and proxy services along with comprehensive security, auditing, throttling benefits. If a firewall already exists, then Oracle Service Bus or Oracle HTTP Server virtual hosts can provide reverse proxy implementations on the DMZ. Custom built implementations are also possible if specific functionality (such as message store-n-forward) is needed. In the home analogy, this pattern sits in between cutting mail slots and handing over keys. Instead, you install (and maintain) a mailbox in your home premises outside your door. The post office delivers the parcels in your mailbox, from where you can securely retrieve it. Pros: Very secure, very flexible Cons: Introduces a new software component, needs DMZ deployment and management Pattern: On-Premise Agent (Tunneling) A light weight "agent" software sits behind the firewall and initiates the communication with the cloud, thereby avoiding firewall issues. It then maintains a bi-directional connection either with pull or push based approaches using (or abusing, depending on your viewpoint) the HTTP protocol. Programming protocols such as Comet, WebSockets, HTTP CONNECT, HTTP SSH Tunneling etc. are possible implementation options. In the home analogy, a resident receives the parcel from the postal worker by opening the door, however you still take precautions with chain locks and package inspections. Pros: Light weight software, IT doesn't need to setup anything Cons: May bypass critical firewall checks e.g. virus scans, separate software download, proliferation of non-IT managed software Conclusion The patterns above are some of the most commonly encountered ones for cloud to on-premise integration. Selecting the right pattern for your project involves looking at your scalability needs, security restrictions, sync vs asynchronous implementation, near real-time vs batch expectations, cloud provider capabilities, budget, and more. In some cases, the basic "Pull from Cloud" may be acceptable, whereas in others, an extensive VPN topology may be well justified. For more details on the Oracle cloud integration strategy, download this white paper.

    Read the article

  • How to implement async pattern in windows forms application?

    - by Alkersan
    I'm using an MVC pattern in winforms application. I need to call remote service asynchronously. So On some event in View I invoke corresponding Presenter method. In Presenter I call BeginInvoke method of service. But to View must be updated only in Main Thread. I could actualy point CallBack to some function in View, and update it`s controls state, but this conflicts with MVP pattern - View must not be responsible for data it carries. This callback function must be in Presenter. But how then invoke View in Main Thread?

    Read the article

  • Should I use a modified singleton design pattern that only allows one reference to its instance?

    - by Graham
    Hi, I have a class that would normally just generate factory objects, however this class should only used once throughout the program in once specifix place. What is the best design pattern to use in this instance? I throught that having a modified singleton design which only allows one reference to instance throughout the program would be the correct way to go. So only the first call to getInstance() returns the factory library. Is this a good or bad idea? Have I missed out another fundermental design pattern for solving this problem? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • does anyone see any issues with this thread pattern?

    - by prmatta
    Here is a simple thread pattern that I use when writing a class that needs just one thread, and needs to a specific task. The usual requirements for such a class are that it should be startable, stopable and restartable. Does anyone see any issues with this pattern that I use? public class MyThread implements Runnable { private boolean _exit = false; private Thread _thread = null; public void start () { if (_thread == null) { _thread = new Thread(this, "MyThread"); _thread.start(); } } public void run () { while (_exit) { //do something } } public void stop () { _exit = true; if (_thread != null) { _thread.interrupt(); _thread = null; } } } I am looking for comments around if I am missing something, or if there is a better way to write this.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >