Search Results

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

Page 55/133 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

• design using a readonly class in c#

  - by edosoft

  Hi Small design question here. I'm trying to develop a calculation app in C#. I have a class, let's call it InputRecord, which holds 100s of fields (multi dimensional arrays) This InputRecordclass will be used in a number of CalculationEngines. Each CalculcationEngine can make changes to a number of fields in the InputRecord. These changes are steps needed for it's calculation. Now I don't want the local changes made to the InputRecord to be used in other CalculcationEngine's classes. The first solution that comes to mind is using a struct: these are value types. However I'd like to use inheritance: each CalculationEngine needs a few fields only relevant to that engine: it's has it's own InputRecord, based on BaseInputRecord. Can anyone point me to a design that will help me accomplish this?

  Read the article

• Is there a memory and performance hit taken from using Bloch's Builder Pattern?

  - by WolfmanDragon

  What is the memory and performance usage compared to creating a object with only a constructor? The usage here is in creating a Set<Object> or List<Object> that may contain million plus entries and I am concerned with the overhead of using Bloch's Builder Pattern. I have used it in the past, but never in this large of a scope.

  Read the article

• How to better design it ???

  - by Deepak

  public interface IBasePresenter { } public interface IJobViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public interface IActivityViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public class BaseView { public IBasePresenter Presenter { get; set; } } public class JobView : BaseView { public IJobViewPresenter JobViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IJobViewPresenter;} } } public class ActivityView : BaseView { public IActivityViewPresenter ActivityViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IActivityViewPresenter;} } } Lets assume that I need a IBasePresenter property on BaseView. Now this property is inherited by JobView and ActivityView but if I need reference to IJobViewPresenter object in these derived classes then I need to type cast IBasePresenter property to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityPresenter (which I want to avoid) or create JobViewPresenter and ActivityViewPresenter on derived classes (as shown above). I want to avoid type casting in derived classes and still have reference to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityViewPresenter and still have IBasePresenter in BaseView. Is there a way I can achieve it ?

  Read the article

• MVC (model-view-controller) - can it be explained in simple terms?

  - by DVK

  I need to explain to a not-very-technical manager the MVC (model-view-controller) concept and ran into trouble. The problem is that the explanation needs to be on a "your grandma will get it" level - e.g. even the fairly straightforward explanation offered on MVC Wiki page didn't work, at least with my commentary. Does anyone have a reference to a good MVC explanation in simple terms? It would ideally be done with non-techie metaphor examples (e.g. similar to "Decorator pattern is like glasses") - one reason I failed was that all MVC examples I could come up with were development related. I once saw a list of pattern explanations but to the best of my memory MVC was not on it. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Expose subset of a class - design question

  - by thanikkal

  Suppose i have a product class with about close to 100 properties. Now for some operations (Say tax calculation) i dont really need this bulky product type, rather only a subset that has price related properties. I am not sure if i should create different snap shots(class) of products that just has the properties that i am interested in. what would be the ideal approach so that i don't unnecessarily pass around unsought fluff? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Passing data between objects in Chain of Responsibility pattern

  - by AbrahamJP

  While implementing the Chain of Responsibility pattern, i came across a dilemma om how to pass data between objects in the chain. The datatypes passed between object in the chain can differ for each object. As a temporary fix I had created a Static class containing a stack where each object in the chain can push the results to the stack while the next object in the chain could pop the results from the stack. Here is a sample code on what I had implemented. public interface IHandler { void Process(); } public static class StackManager { public static Stack DataStack = new Stack(); } //This class doesn't require any input to operate public class OpsA : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var ProcessedData = DoSomeOperation(); StackManager.DataStack.Push(ProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } //This class require input data to operate upon public class OpsB : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Retrieve the results from the previous Operation var InputData = StackManager.DataStack.Pop(); //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var NewProcessedData = DoMoreProcessing(InputData); StackManager.DataStack.Push(NewProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } public class ChainOfResponsibilityPattern { public void Process() { IHandler ProcessA = new OpsA(); IHandler ProcessB = new OpsB(); ProcessA.Successor = ProcessB; ProcessA.Process(); } } Please help me to find a better approach to pass data between handlers objects in the chain.

  Read the article

• One executable with cmd-line params or just many satellite executables?

  - by Nikos Baxevanis

  I design an application back-end. For now, it is a .NET process (a Console Application) which hosts various communication frameworks such as Agatha and NServiceBus. I need to periodically update my datastore with values (coming from the application while it's running). I found three possible ways: Accept command line arguments, so I can call my console app with -update. On start up a background thread will periodically invoke the update method. Create an updater.exe app which will do the updates, but I will have code duplication since in some way it will need to query the data from the source in order to save it to the datastore. Which one is better?

  Read the article

• Objective-c design advice for use of different data sources, swapping between test and live

  - by user200341

  I'm in the process of designing an application that is part of a larger piece of work, depending on other people to build an API that the app can make use of to retrieve data. While I was thinking about how to setup this project and design the architecture around it, something occurred to me, and I'm sure many people have been in similar situations. Since my work is depending on other people to complete their tasks, and a test server, this slows work down at my end. So the question is: What's the best practice for creating test repositories and classes, implementing them, and not having to depend on altering several places in the code to swap between the test classes and the actual repositories / proper api calls. Contemplate the following scenario: GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [[GetDataFromApiCommand alloc]init]; getDataCommand.delegate = self; [getDataCommand getData]; Once the data is available via the API, "GetDataFromApiCommand" could use the actual API, but until then a set of mock data could be returned upon the call of [getDataCommand getData] There might be multiple instances of this, in various places in the code, so replacing all of them wherever they are, is a slow and painful process which inevitably leads to one or two being overlooked. In strongly typed languages we could use dependency injection and just alter one place. In objective-c a factory pattern could be implemented, but is that the best route to go for this? GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [GetDataFromApiCommandFactory buildGetDataFromApiCommand]; getDataCommand.delegate = self; [getDataCommand getData]; What is the best practices to achieve this result? Since this would be most useful, even if you have the actual API available, to run tests, or work off-line, the ApiCommands would not necessarily have to be replaced permanently, but the option to select "Do I want to use TestApiCommand or ApiCommand". It is more interesting to have the option to switch between: All commands are test and All command use the live API, rather than selecting them one by one, however that would also be useful to do for testing one or two actual API commands, mixing them with test data. EDIT The way I have chosen to go with this is to use the factory pattern. I set up the factory as follows: @implementation ApiCommandFactory + (ApiCommand *)newApiCommand { // return [[ApiCommand alloc]init]; return [[ApiCommandMock alloc]init]; } @end And anywhere I want to use the ApiCommand class: GetDataFromApiCommand *getDataCommand = [ApiCommandFactory newApiCommand]; When the actual API call is required, the comments can be removed and the mock can be commented out. Using new in the message name implies that who ever uses the factory to get an object, is responsible for releasing it (since we want to avoid autorelease on the iPhone). If additional parameters are required, the factory needs to take these into consideration i.e: [ApiCommandFactory newSecondApiCommand:@"param1"]; This will work quite well with repositories as well.

  Read the article

• Application Design: Single vs. Multiple Hits to the DB

  - by shyneman

  I'm building a service that performs a set of configured activities based on the type of request that it receives. Each activity involves going to the database and retrieving/updating some kind of information. The logic for each activity can be generalized and re-used across different request types. The activities may need to participate in a transaction for the duration of the servicing the request. One option, I'm considering is having each activity maintain its own access to DAL/database. This fully encapsulates the activity into a stand-alone re-usable piece, but hitting the database multiple times for one request doesn't seem like a viable option. I don't really know how to easily implement the concept of a transaction across the multiple activities here either. The second option is to encapsulate ALL the activities into one big activity and hit the database once. But this does not allow re-use and configuration of these activities for different requests. Does anyone have any suggestions and input about what should be the best way to approach my problem? Thanks for any help.

  Read the article

• In a PHP project, how do you organize and access your helper objects?

  - by Pekka

  How do you organize and manage your helper objects like the database engine, user notification, error handling and so on in a PHP based, object oriented project? Say I have a large PHP CMS. The CMS is organized in various classes. A few examples: the database object user management an API to create/modify/delete items a messaging object to display messages to the end user a context handler that takes you to the right page a navigation bar class that shows buttons a logging object possibly, custom error handling etc. I am dealing with the eternal question, how to best make these objects accessible to each part of the system that needs it. my first apporach, many years ago was to have a $application global that contained initialized instances of these classes. global $application; $application->messageHandler->addMessage("Item successfully inserted"); I then changed over to the Singleton pattern and a factory function: $mh =&factory("messageHandler"); $mh->addMessage("Item successfully inserted"); but I'm not happy with that either. Unit tests and encapsulation become more and more important to me, and in my understanding the logic behind globals/singletons destroys the basic idea of OOP. Then there is of course the possibility of giving each object a number of pointers to the helper objects it needs, probably the very cleanest, resource-saving and testing-friendly way but I have doubts about the maintainability of this in the long run. Most PHP frameworks I have looked into use either the singleton pattern, or functions that access the initialized objects. Both fine approaches, but as I said I'm happy with neither. I would like to broaden my horizon on what is possible here and what others have done. I am looking for examples, additional ideas and pointers towards resources that discuss this from a long-term, real-world perspective. Also, I'm interested to hear about specialized, niche or plain weird approaches to the issue. Bounty I am following the popular vote in awarding the bounty, the answer which is probably also going to give me the most. Thank you for all your answers!

  Read the article

• Server Emulator Design Pattern

  - by adisembiring

  I wanna build server socket emulator, but I want implement some design pattern there. I will described my case study that I have simplified like these: My Server Socket will always listen client socket. While some request message come from the client socket, the server emulator will response the client through the socket. the response is response code. '00' will describe request message processed successfully, and another response code expect '00' will describe there are some error while processing the message request. IN the server there are some UI, this UI contain check response parameter such as. response code timeout interval While the server want to response the client message, the response code taken from input parameter response form UI check the timeout interval, it will create sleep thread and the interval taken from timeout interval input from UI. I have implement the function, but I create it in one class. I feel it so sucks. Can you suggest me what class / interface that I must create to refactor my code.

  Read the article

• QuestionOrAnswer model?

  - by Mark

  My site has Listings. Users can ask Questions about listings, and the author of the listing can respond with an Answer. However, the Answer might need clarification, so I've made them recursive (you can "answer" an answer). So how do I set up the database? The way I have it now looks like this (in Django-style models): class QuestionOrAnswer(Model): user = ForeignKey(User, related_name='questions') listing = ForeignKey(Listing, related_name='questions') parent = models.ForeignKey('self', null=True, blank=True, related_name='children') message = TextField() But what bugs me is that listing is now an attribute of the answers as well (it doesn't need to be). What happens if the database gets mangled and an answer belongs to a different listing than its parent question? That just doesn't make any sense. We can separate it with polymorphism: QuestionOrAnswer user message created updated Question(QuestionOrAnswer) shipment Answer(QuestionOrAnswer) parent = ForeignKey(QuestionOrAnswer) And that ought to work, but now ever question and answer is split into 2 tables. Is it worth this overhead for clearly defined models?

  Read the article

• multiple classes with same methods - best pattern

  - by Tony

  I have a few classes in my current project where validation of Email/Website addresses is necessary. The methods to do that are all the same. I wondered what's the best way to implement this, so I don't need to have these methods copy pasted everywhere? The classes themselves are not necessarily related, they only have those validation methods in common.

  Read the article

• Perls Of Wisdom For a .Net Programmer [closed]

  - by DeanMc

  Hi Guys, I like to think that recently I have moved from complete beginner to beginner. It has been a hard road and one on which I took many wrong turns. Very rarely in any profession is there a place where so many rock stars gather, this is something I would like to take advantage of. What I would like to ask is what are your perls of wisdom for a .net programmer. They can be anything you feel of value, a concept, a book, a process that should be followed, anything of that nature, it doesn't have to be .net specific just contextual. Thanks for taking the time to read this and respond.

  Read the article

• Dependency Injection: I don't get where to start!

  - by Andy

  I have several articles about Dependency Injection, and I can see the benefits, especially when it comes to unit testing. The units can me loosely coupled, and mocking of dependencies can be made. The trouble is - I just don't get where to start. Consider this snippet below of (much edited for the purpose of this post) code that I have. I am instantiating a Plc object from the main form, and passing in a communications mode via the Connect method. In it's present form it becomes hard to test, because I can't isolate the Plc from the CommsChannel to unit test it. (Can I?) The class depends on using a CommsChannel object, but I am only passing in a mode that is used to create this channel within the Plc itself. To use dependancy injection, I should really pass in an already created CommsChannel (via an 'ICommsChannel' interface perhaps) to the Connect method, or maybe via the Plc constructor. Is that right? But then that would mean creating the CommsChannel in my main form first, and this doesn't seem right either, because it feels like everything will come back to the base layer of the main form, where everything begins. Somehow it feels like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. Where do you start? You have to create an instance of something somewhere, but I'm struggling to understand where that should be. public class Plc() { public bool Connect(CommsMode commsMode) { bool success = false; // Create new comms channel. this._commsChannel = this.GetCommsChannel(commsMode); // Attempt connection success = this._commsChannel.Connect(); return this._connected; } private CommsChannel GetCommsChannel(CommsMode mode) { CommsChannel channel; switch (mode) { case CommsMode.RS232: channel = new SerialCommsChannel( SerialCommsSettings.Default.ComPort, SerialCommsSettings.Default.BaudRate, SerialCommsSettings.Default.DataBits, SerialCommsSettings.Default.Parity, SerialCommsSettings.Default.StopBits); break; case CommsMode.Tcp: channel = new TcpCommsChannel( TCPCommsSettings.Default.IP_Address, TCPCommsSettings.Default.Port); break; default: // Throw unknown comms channel exception. } return channel; } }

  Read the article

• some confusions to singleton pattern in PHP

  - by SpawnCxy

  Hi all, In my team I've been told to write resource class like this style: class MemcacheService { private static $instance = null; private function __construct() { } public static function getInstance($fortest = false) { if (self::$instance == null) { self::$instance = new Memcached(); if ($fortest) { self::$instance->addServer(MEMTEST_HOST, MEMTEST_PORT); } else { self::$instance->addServer(MEM_HOST, MEM_PORT); } } return self::$instance; } } But I think in PHP resource handles will be released and initialized again every time after a request over. That means MemcacheService::getInstance() is totally equal new Memcached() which cannot be called singleton pattern at all. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Regards

  Read the article

• Find First Specific Byte in a Byte[] Array c#

  - by divinci

  Hi there, I have a byte array and wish to find the first occurance (if any) of a specific byte. Can you guys help me with a nice, elegant and efficient way to do it? /// Summary /// Finds the first occurance of a specific byte in a byte array. /// If not found, returns -1. public int GetFirstOccurance(byte byteToFind, byte[] byteArray) { }

  Read the article

• Which design pattern is most appropriate?

  - by Anon

  Hello, I want to create a class that can use one of four algorithms (and the algorithm to use is only known at run-time). I was thinking that the Strategy design pattern sounds appropriate, but my problem is that each algorithm requires slightly different parameters. Would it be a bad design to use strategy, but pass in the relevant parameters into the constructor?. Here is an example (for simplicity, let's say there are only two possible algorithms) ... class Foo { private: // At run-time the correct algorithm is used, e.g. a = new Algorithm1(1); AlgorithmInterface* a; }; class AlgorithmInterface { public: virtual void DoSomething = 0; }; class Algorithm1 : public AlgorithmInterface { public: Algorithm1( int i ) : value(i) {} virtual void DoSomething(){ // Does something with int value }; int value; }; class Algorithm2 : public AlgorithmInterface { public: Algorithm2( bool b ) : value(b) {} virtual void DoSomething(){ // Do something with bool value }; bool value; };

  Read the article

• asp.mvc model design

  - by Radu D

  Hi, I am pretty new to MVC and I am looking for a way to design my models. I have the MVC web site project and another class library that takes care of data access and constructing the business objects. If I have in that assembly a class named Project that is a business object and I need to display all projects in a view ... should I make another model class Project? In this case the classes will be identical. Do I gain something from doing a new model class? I don't like having in views references to objects from another dll ... but i don't like duplicating the code neither. Did you encounter the same problem?

  Read the article

• Grasp Controller, Does it really need a UI to exist?

  - by dbones

  I have a Domain model which can be in multiple states, and if these states go out of a given range it the domain should automatically react. For example I have a Car which is made of multiple things which have measurements the Engine - Rev counter and Temperature the Fuel Tank - capacity Is is plaseable to have a CarStateController, which observses the engine and the tank, and if these states go out of range IE the engine temperature goes above range, turn the engine fan on?? There is no UI, (you could argue it would show a light on the dash board, but for this case it does not) is this a valid use of a GRASP controller pattern? if not what is this CarStateController Called? Or have I completely missed the point and this should be the State Pattern?

  Read the article

• View artifacts leaking into the model of MVC

  - by Jono

  In an ASP.NET MVC application (which has very little chance of having its view technology ported to something non-HTML, but whose functional requirements evolve weekly,) how much HTML should ideally be allowed to be directly represented in the Model? I might come across as a design bigot for this, but I regard it as bad practice to allow any view constructs to "leak" into the model in an MVC application (and vice versa). For example, a Model that represents an item you're about to purchase should know nothing about the HTML check box that says "add giftwrap/message", nor should it know about any HTML drop down lists for payment card types. Conversely the View shouldn't be doing work like figuring out button text by translating keys into values (by looking in resource files.)

  Read the article

• Designing a class in such a way that it doesn't become a "God object"

  - by devoured elysium

  I'm designing an application that will allow me to draw some functions on a graphic. Each function will be drawn from a set of points that I will pass to this graphic class. There are different kinds of points, all inheriting from a MyPoint class. For some kind of points it will be just printing them on the screen as they are, others can be ignored, others added, so there is some kind of logic associated to them that can get complex. How to actually draw the graphic is not the main issue here. What bothers me is how to make the code logic such that this GraphicMaker class doesn't become the so called God-Object. It would be easy to make something like this: class GraphicMaker { ArrayList<Point> points = new ArrayList<Point>(); public void AddPoint(Point point) { points.add(point); } public void DoDrawing() { foreach (Point point in points) { if (point is PointA) { //some logic here else if (point is PointXYZ) { //...etc } } } } How would you do something like this? I have a feeling the correct way would be to put the drawing logic on each Point object (so each child class from Point would know how to draw itself) but two problems arise: There will be kinds of points that need to know all the other points that exist in the GraphicObject class to know how to draw themselves. I can make a lot of the methods/properties from the Graphic class public, so that all the points have a reference to the Graphic class and can make all their logic as they want, but isn't that a big price to pay for not wanting to have a God class?

  Read the article

• DAO design pattern and using it across multiple tables

  - by Casey

  I'm looking for feedback on the Data Access Object design pattern and using it when you have to access data across multiple tables. It seems like that pattern, which has a DAO for each table along with a Data Transfer Object (DTO) that represents a single row, isn't too useful for when dealing with data from multiple tables. I was thinking about creating a composite DAO and corresponding DTO that would return the result of, let's say performing a join on two tables. This way I can use SQL to grab all the data instead of first grabbing data from one using one DAO and than the second table using the second DAO, and than composing them together in Java. Is there a better solution? And no, I'm not able to move to Hibernate or another ORM tool at the moment. Just straight JDBC for this project.

  Read the article

• Search for a pattern in a list of strings - Python

  - by Holtz

  I have a list of strings containing filenames such as, file_names = ['filei.txt','filej.txt','filek.txt','file2i.txt','file2j.txt','file2k.txt','file3i.txt','file3j.txt','file3k.txt'] I then remove the .txt extension using: extension = os.path.commonprefix([n[::-1] for n in file_names])[::-1] file_names_strip = [n[:-len(extension)] for n in file_names] And then return the last character of each string in the list file_names_strip: h = [n[-1:] for n in file_names_strip] Which gives h = ['i', 'j', 'k', 'i', 'j', 'k', 'i', 'j', 'k'] How can i test for a pattern of strings in h? So if i,j,k occur sequentially it would return True and False if not. I need to know this because not all file names are formatted like they are in file_names. So: test_ijk_pattern(h) = True no_pattern = ['1','2','3','1','2','3','1','2','3'] test_ijk_pattern(no_pattern) = False

  Read the article

• Is MFC is based on any design pattern,if so which design pattern??

  - by Vikram

  Is MFC is based on any design pattern,if so which design pattern??

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >