Search Results

Search found 53297 results on 2132 pages for 'web design hero'.

Page 541/2132 | < Previous Page | 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548  | Next Page >

• Process a batch of items, return an object to report on status

  - by Naeem Sarfraz

  I'm looking for a pattern (or good practice) for the following scenario: My function List<BatchItemResponse> Process(List<BatchItem> Data) {..} will process a list of data, and return info on where each item in the batch could be processed. struct BatchItemResponse { int BatchItemID; bool Processed; string Description; } Any thoughts? Is what I've proposed as good as it gets?

  Read the article

• Is this physical collection class that contains only static methods an Anti-Pattern?

  - by Tj Kellie

  I'm trying to figure out if I should continue on with a current pattern in an application I'm working in, or refactor this into something else. I have a set of collection classes off a generic base of List. These classes have public constructors but contain only static methods that return collections. They look like this: public class UserObjCollection : BaseCollection<UserObj> { public static UserObjCollection GetAllUserObj() { UserObjCollection obj = new UserObjCollection(); obj.MapObjects(new UserObjDataService().GetAllUserObj()); return obj; } } Is this a Pattern or Anti-Pattern and what are the merits of this over a straight factory pattern?

  Read the article

• Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

  - by Jeff

  I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

  Read the article

• Is there anything bad in declaring static inner class inside interface in java?

  - by Roman

  I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad in this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

  Read the article

• wpf command pattern

  - by evan

  I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

  Read the article

• What should go in each MVVM triad?

  - by Harry

  OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

  Read the article

• .Net - Whats the difference between a Session Facade and Business Delegate?

  - by KP65

  What I understand so far: Business Delegate - In the presentation tier, as an ASP component, provides an interface for ASP views to access business components without exposing their API, therefore reducing coupling between the two. Session Facade - In the business tier, as a com+ component, encapsulates business objects, provides a course grain interface for views to access business components. Reduces coupling, hides complex business component interaction from views. So what is the actual difference? They seem pretty similar to me..

  Read the article

• Database schema for Product Properties

  - by Chemosh

  As so many people I'm looking for a Products /Product Properties database schema. I'm using Ruby on Rails and (Thinking) Sphinx for faceted searches. Requirements: Adding new product types and their options should not require a change to the database schema Support faceted searches using Sphinx. Solutions I've come across: (See Bill Karwin's answer) Option 1: Single Table Inheritance Not an option really. The table would contain way to many columns. Option 2: Class Table Inheritance Ruby on Rails caches the database schema on start-up which means a restart whenever a new type of product is introduced. If you have a size able product catalog this could mean hundreds of tables. Option 3: Serialized LOB Kills being able to do faceted searches without heavy application logic. Option 4: Entity-Attribute-Value For testing purposes, EAV worked fine. However it could quickly become a mess and a maintenance hell as you add more and more options (e.g. when an option increase the prices or delivery time). What option should I go with? What other solutions are out there? Is there a silver bullet (ha) I overlooked?

  Read the article

• Proper abstraction of the database tier in a 3 tier system?

  - by Earlz

  Hello, I am creating a 3 tier application. Basically it goes Client - (through optional server to be a thin-client) - Business Logic - Database Layer And basically making it so that there is never any skipping around. As such, I want for all of the SQL queries and such to be in the Database Layer. Well, now I'm a bit confused. I made a few static classes to start off the database tier but what should I do for the database connections? Should I just create a new database connection anytime I enter the Database Layer or would that be wasteful? Does Connection.Open() take time whenever you have a ConnectionPool? To me, it just feels wrong for the Business tier to have to pass in a IdbConnection object to the Database tier. It seems like the Database tier should handle all of that DB-specific code. What do you think? How can I do it the proper way while staying practical?

  Read the article

• use inheritance to create a custom, type safe, null safe collection ?

  - by pointlesspolitics

  I am not clear with above statement. It would be great if anybody can explain how we can use inheritance to create a custom, type safe and null safe collection ? Thanks

  Read the article

• Is incrementing in a loop exponential time?

  - by user356106

  I've a simple but confusing doubt about whether the program below runs in exponential time. The question is : given a +ve integer as input, print it out. The catch is that you deliberately do this in a loop, like this: int input,output=0; cininput; while(input--) ++output; // Takes time proportional to the value of input cout<< output; I'm claiming that this problem runs in exponential time. Because, the moment you increase the # of bits in input by 1, the program takes double the amount of time to execute. Put another way, to print out log2(input) bits, it takes O(input) time. Is this reasoning right?

  Read the article

• Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

  - by Roman A. Taycher

  If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

  Read the article

• Correct model for a database with a table for each user.

  - by BAH

  Kinda stuck here... I have an application with lets say 5000 rows of data per user and was wondering if it was right or wrong to do it this way: On user account creation a new table is created (UserData_[UserID]) or should I just have 1 table for userdata and have everything in there with a column for userid? The reason I am stuck at the moment is that it seems NHibernate isn't able to be mapped to dynamic table names without creating another ISessionFactory which has alot of overhead AFAIK. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

  - by MatthewMartin

  This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

  Read the article

• How to use Unique Composite Key

  - by LifeH2O

  I have a table Item(ItemName*, ItemSize*, Price, Notes) I was making composite key of (ItemName,ItemSize) to uniquely identify item. And now after reading some answers on stackoverflow suggesting the use of UNIQUE i revised it as Item(ItemID*, ItemName, ItemSize, Price, Notes) But How to apply UNIQUE constraint on ItemName and ItemSize please correct if there is something wrong in question

  Read the article

• anti-if campaign

  - by Andrew Siemer

  I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

  Read the article

• Storing day and month (without year)

  - by Sasha

  I'm having trouble with figuring out the best way to store some data in my database. I've got to store DD/MM dates in a database, but I'm not sure of the best way to store this so that it can be easily sorted and searched. Basically a user will be able to save important dates in the format DD/MM, which they will be reminded of closer to the day. The DATE data type doesn't seem completely appropriate as it includes year, but I can't think of another way of storing this data. It would be possible to include a specific year to the end of all occasions, but this almost doesn't seem right.

  Read the article

• C++ inheritance and member function pointers

  - by smh

  In C++, can member function pointers be used to point to derived (or even base) class members? EDIT: Perhaps an example will help. Suppose we have a hierarchy of three classes X, Y, Z in order of inheritance. Y therefore has a base class X and a derived class Z. Now we can define a member function pointer p for class Y. This is written as: void (Y::*p)(); (For simplicity, I'll assume we're only interested in functions with the signature void f() ) This pointer p can now be used to point to member functions of class Y. This question (two questions, really) is then: Can p be used to point to a function in the derived class Z? Can p be used to point to a function in the base class X?

  Read the article

• Why does std::map operator[] create an object if the key doesn't exist?

  - by n1ck

  Hi, I'm pretty sure I already saw this question somewhere (comp.lang.c++? Google doesn't seem to find it there either) but a quick search here doesn't seem to find it so here it is: Why does the std::map operator[] create an object if the key doesn't exist? I don't know but for me this seems counter-intuitive if you compare to most other operator[] (like std::vector) where if you use it you must be sure that the index exists. I'm wondering what's the rationale for implementing this behavior in std::map. Like I said wouldn't it be more intuitive to act more like an index in a vector and crash (well undefined behavior I guess) when accessed with an invalid key? Refining my question after seeing the answers: Ok so far I got a lot of answers saying basically it's cheap so why not or things similar. I totally agree with that but why not use a dedicated function for that (I think one of the comment said that in java there is no operator[] and the function is called put)? My point is why doesn't map operator[] work like a vector? If I use operator[] on an out of range index on a vector I wouldn't like it to insert an element even if it was cheap because that probably mean an error in my code. My point is why isn't it the same thing with map. I mean, for me, using operator[] on a map would mean: i know this key already exist (for whatever reason, i just inserted it, I have redundancy somewhere, whatever). I think it would be more intuitive that way. That said what are the advantage of doing the current behavior with operator[] (and only for that, I agree that a function with the current behavior should be there, just not operator[])? Maybe it give clearer code that way? I don't know. Another answer was that it already existed that way so why not keep it but then, probably when they (the ones before stl) choose to implement it that way they found it provided an advantage or something? So my question is basically: why choose to implement it that way, meaning a somewhat lack of consistency with other operator[]. What benefit do it give? Thanks

  Read the article

• Regarding the ViewModel

  - by mizipzor

  Im struggling to understand the ViewModel part of the MVVM pattern. My current approach is to have a class, with no logic whatsoever (important), except that it implements INotifyPropertyChanged. The class is just a collection of properties, a struct if you like, describing an as small part of the data as possible. I consider this my Model. Most of the WPF code I write are settings dialogs that configure said Model. The code-behind of the dialog exposes a property which returns an instance of the Model. In the XAML code I bind to subproperties of that property, thereby binding directly to the Model's properties. Which works quite well since it implements the INotifyPropertyChanged. I consider this settings dialog the View. However, I havent really been able to figure out what in all this is the ViewModel. The articles Ive read suggests that the ViewModel should tie the View and the Model together, providing the logic the Model lacks but is still to complex to go directly into the View. Is this correct? Would, in my example, the code-behind of the settings dialog be considered the ViewModel? I just feel a bit lost and would like my peers to debunk some of my assumptions. Am I completely off track here?

  Read the article

• Data Warehouse: One Database or many?

  - by drrollins

  At my new company, they keep all data associated with the data warehouse, including import, staging, audit, dimension and fact tables, together in the same physical database. I've been a database developer for a number of years now and this consolidation of function and form seems counter to everything I know. It seems to make security, backup/restore and performance management issues more manually intensive. Is this something that is done in the industry? Are there substantial reasons for doing or not doing it? The platform is Netezza. The size is in terabytes, hundreds of millions of rows. What I'm looking to get from answers to this question is a solid understanding of how right or wrong this path is. From your experience, what are the issues I should be focused on arguing if this is a path that will cause trouble for us down the road. If it is no big deal, then I'd like to know that as well.

  Read the article

• Usability: Save changes using "Apply" button or after every single change?

  - by mr.b

  I am interested in hearing opinions and experiences of fellow developers on topic of designing user interface, usability AND maintainability-wise. Common approach is to allow users to tweak options and after form gets "dirty", enable "Apply" button, and user has possibility to back out by pressing cancel. This is most common approach on Windows platform (I believe MS usability guidelines say to do so as well). Another way is to apply changes after every single change has been made to options. Example, user checks some checkbox, and change is applied. User changes value of some text box, and change is applied after box looses focus, etc. You get the point. This approach is most common on Mac OSX. Regardless of my personal opinion (which is that Apple is better at usability, but software I usually write targets Windows users), what do you people think?

  Read the article

• Am I trying to Implement Multiple Inheritance. How can I do this.

  - by Shantanu Gupta

  I have created a class say A which has some functions defined as protected. Now Class B inherits A and class C inherits B. Class A has private default constructor and protected parameterized constructor. I want Class B to be able to access all the protected functions defined in Class A but class C can have access on some of the functions only not all the functions and class C is inheriting class B. How can I restrict access to some of the functions of Class A from Class C ? EDIT: namespace Db { public Class A { private A(){} protected A(string con){assign this value} protected DataTable getTable(){return Table;} protected Sqlparameters setParameters(){return parameter;} } } namespace Data { public Class B:A { protected B():base("constring"){} protected DataTable output(){return getTable();} protected sqlparameter values(param IDataParameter[] parameter){} } } namespace Bsns { public Class C:B { protected C():base(){} protected DataTable show() {return values(setparameter());} } } EDIT I think what I am trying to do here is Multiple inheritance. Please check. Class A { //suppose 10 functions are declared } Class B:A { //5 functions declared which are using A's function in internal body } Class C:B { //using all functions of B but require only 4 functions of A to be accessible by C. }

  Read the article

• Pagination in a Rich Domain Model

  - by user246790

  I use rich domain model in my app. The basic ideas were taken there. For example I have User and Comment entities. They are defined as following: <?php class Model_User extends Model_Abstract { public function getComments() { /** * @var Model_Mapper_Db_Comment */ $mapper = $this->getMapper(); $commentsBlob = $mapper->getUserComments($this->getId()); return new Model_Collection_Comments($commentsBlob); } } class Model_Mapper_Db_Comment extends Model_Mapper_Db_Abstract { const TABLE_NAME = 'comments'; protected $_mapperTableName = self::TABLE_NAME; public function getUserComments($user_id) { $commentsBlob = $this->_getTable()->fetchAllByUserId((int)$user_id); return $commentsBlob->toArray(); } } class Model_Comment extends Model_Abstract { } ?> Mapper's getUserComments function simply returns something like: return $this->getTable->fetchAllByUserId($user_id) which is array. fetchAllByUserId accepts $count and $offset params, but I don't know to pass them from my Controller to this function through model without rewriting all the model code. So the question is how can I organize pagination through model data (getComments). Is there a "beatiful" method to get comments from 5 to 10, not all, as getComments returns by default.

  Read the article

• Partial class or "chained inheritance"

  - by Charlie boy

  Hi From my understanding partial classes are a bit frowned upon by professional developers, but I've come over a bit of an issue; I have made an implementation of the RichTextBox control that uses user32.dll calls for faster editing of large texts. That results in quite a bit of code. Then I added spellchecking capabilities to the control, this was made in another class inheriting RichTextBox control as well. That also makes up a bit of code. These two functionalities are quite separate but I would like them to be merged so that I can drop one control on my form that has both fast editing capabilities and spellchecking built in. I feel that simply adding the code form one class to the other would result in a too large code file, especially since there are two very distinct areas of functionality, so I seem to need another approach. Now to my question; To merge these two classes should I make the spellchecking RichTextBox inherit from the fast edit one, that in turn inherits RichTextBox? Or should I make the two classes partials of a single class and thus making them more “equal” so to speak? This is more of a question of OO principles and exercise on my part than me trying to reinvent the wheel, I know there are plenty of good text editing controls out there. But this is just a hobby for me and I just want to know how this kind of solution would be managed by a professional. Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548  | Next Page >