Search Results

Search found 14326 results on 574 pages for 'design by contract'.

Page 57/574 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

• Web Design in Today's Economy

  Web Design in today's Economy In today's economy businesses are looking for cheaper ways to get their Web Design and Web Development needs met. This is not necessarily a bad thing, however with web sites you get what you pay for.

  Read the article

• CSS In The World Of Website Design

  Style sheet languages are computer languages which have now been heavily used in the Internet. It was introduced in the industry of website design when people sought many ways on how to avoid the use... [Author: Margarette Mcbride - Web Design and Development - May 06, 2010]

  Read the article

• SEO Web Design - A Worthwhile Investment?

  The last decade has seen an increased focus on SEO and SEO web design. With SEO a popular 'buzz' word amongst businesses of many different sizes some people may have begun to ask themselves how they could benefit from SEO web design.

  Read the article

• The Rise Of CSS In Web Design

  Style sheet languages were introduced in the market because of their capability to reduce the problems which are usually associated with the use of tables in website design. One of the most popular s... [Author: Margarette Mcbride - Web Design and Development - May 04, 2010]

  Read the article

• Contract developer trying to get outsourcing contract with current client.

  - by Mike

  I work for a major bank as a contract software developer. I've been there a few months, and without exception this place has the worst software practices I've ever seen. The software my team makes has no formal testing, terrible code (not reusable, hard to read, etc), minimal documentation, no defined development process and an absolutely sickening amount of waste due to bureaucratic overhead. Part of my contract is to maintain a group of thousands of very poorly written batch jobs. When one of the jobs fails (read: crashes), it's a developers job to look at the source, figure out what's wrong, fix it, and check it in. There is no quality assurance process or auditing of the results whatsoever. Once the developer says "it works" a manager signs off and it goes into production. What's disturbing is that these jobs essentially grab market data and put it into a third-party risk management system, which provides the bank with critical intelligence. I've discovered the disturbing truth that this has been happening since the 90s and nobody really has evidence the system is getting the correct data! Without going into details, an issue arose on Friday that was so horrible I actually stormed out of the place. I was ready to quit, but I decided to just get out to calm my nerves and possibly go back Monday. I've been reflecting today on how to handle this. I have realized that, in probably less than 6 months, I could (with 2 other developers) remake a large component of this system. The new system would provide them with, as primary benefits, a maintainable codebase less prone to error and a solid QA framework. To do it properly I would have to be outside the bank, the internal bureaucracy is just too much. And moreover, I think a bank is fundamentally not a place that can make good software. This is my plan. Write a report explaining in depth all the problems with their current system Explain why their software practices fail and generate a tremendous amount of error and waste. Use this as the basis for claiming the project must be developed externally. Write a high level development plan, including what resources I will require Hand 1,2,3 to my manager, hopefully he passes it up the chain. Worst case he fires me, but this isn't so bad. Convinced Executive decides to award my company a contract for the new system I have 8 years experience as a software contractor and have delivered my share of successful software products, but all working in-house for small/medium sized companies. When I read this over, I think I have a dynamite plan. But since this is the first time doing something this bold so I have my doubts. My question is, is this a good idea? If you think not, please spare no detail.

  Read the article

• Generate Entity Data Model from Data Contract

  - by CSmooth.net

  I would like to find a fast way to convert a Data Contract to a Entity Data Model. Consider the following Data Contract: [DataContract] class PigeonHouse { [DataMember] public string housename; [DataMember] public List<Pigeon> pigeons; } [DataContract] class Pigeon { [DataMember] public string name; [DataMember] public int numberOfWings; [DataMember] public int age; } Is there an easy way to create an ADO.NET Entity Data Model from this code?

  Read the article

• Help me with a solution for what could be solutioned by virtual static fields... in FPC

  - by Gregory Smith

  Hi I'm doing an event manager in Freepascal Each event is an object type TEvent (=object), each kind of event must derive from this class. Events are differentiated by an integer identificator, assigned dynamically. The problem is that i want to retrieve the event id of an instance, and i can't do it well. All instances of a class(object) have a unique id = so it should be static field. All classes have a diferent id = so it should be virtual. Event ids are assignated in run time, and can change = so it can't be a simple method In sum, I can't put all this together. I'm looking for an elegant solution, i don't want to write a hardcoded table, actualizing it in every constructor... etc, i'd prefer something taking advantage of the polymorphism Can anyone help me with another technical or design solution? I remark I don't want to use class instead of object construct.(property doesn't work on objects? :(

  Read the article

• How come you cannot catch Code Contract exceptions?

  - by Finglas

  System.Diagnostics.Contracts.ContractException is not accessiable in my test project. Note this code is purely myself messing around with my shiney new copy of Visual Studio, but I'd like to know what I'm doing wrong. I'm using the professional edition of VS, therefore I do not have static checking. In order to still use code contracts (which I like) I figured the only way my method can work is to catch the exception that is thrown at runtime, but I'm not finding this possible. TestMethod [TestMethod, ExpectedException(typeof(System.Diagnostics.Contracts.ContractException))] public void returning_a_value_less_than_one_throws_exception() { var person = new Person(); person.Number(); } Method public int Number() { Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<int>() >= 0); return -1; } Error Error 1 'System.Diagnostics.Contracts.ContractException' is inaccessible due to its protection level.

  Read the article

• Designing a state machine in C++

  - by skyeagle

  I have a little problem that involves modelling a state machine. I have managed to do a little bit of knowledge engineering and 'reverse engineer' a set of primitive deterministic rules that determine state as well as state transitions. I would like to know what the best practises are regarding: How to rigorously test my states and state transitions to make sure that the system cannot end up in an undeetermined state. How to enforce state transition requirements (for example, it should be impossible to go directly from stateFoo to StateFooBar, i.e. to embue each state with 'knowlege' about the states it can transition to. Ideally, I would like to use clean, pattern based design, with templates wherever possible. I do need somewhere to start though and I would be grateful for any pointers (no pun intended), that are sent my way.

  Read the article

• abstract method signature, inheritance, and "Do" naming convention

  - by T. Webster

  I'm learning about design patterns and in examples of code I've seen a convention where the abstract class declares a method, for example: public abstract class ServiceBase { ... public virtual object GetSomething(); and then protected abstract object DoGetSomething(); My question is on why these two methods exist, since they appear to serve the same purpose. Is this so that the base class GetSomething() method logic cannot be overridden by inherited classes? But then again, the method is marked virtual, so it can be overridden anyway. What is the usefulness here in requiring derived class implementers to implement the abstract method when the virtual method can be called anyway?

  Read the article

• overflow-x AND Middle Mouse Button Moving

  - by Rad The Mad

  My Page is 980px in Width, but I have a few design elements (which belong with the background). I positioned them with position: absolute;. This creates a horizontal scrollbar for those who have a =< 1024 resolution. I disabled that scrollbar with overflow-x:hidden on (and for IE7 and etc). However, when I hold my middle mouse button,(i think this applies to laptop touchpads as well) it let's me move around to the right, is it possible to fix this with anything? (javascript, css)? Tested this issues in Chrome, IE, Firefox.

  Read the article

• What patterns exist for web application development?

  - by DaveDev

  I understand that MVC & MVP are design patterns that are commonly used for web development, as well as ASP.NET WebForms (more of an anti-pattern, really!). What other patterns are used in web application development? I'm not necessarily saying I want to learn/use new patterns just to be different - I do believe there's a lot of value in taking the conventional route - but I think it's good to know what else is out there to be able to properly understand what I'm currently working with. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How to apply Abstract Factory Pattern ???

  - by Amit

  I am new to Design Pattern and I have a scenario here... and not sure as how to implement the pattern ... We have multiple vendors Philips, Onida... Each vendor (philips, onida...) may have different type of product i.e. Plasma or Normal TV I want specific product of each vendor using Abstract Factory Pattern... Thanks in advance for any help... My implementation so far... public enum TvType { Samsung = 0,LG = 1,Philips = 2, Sony = 3 } public enum Product { Plasma = 0,NormalTV = 1 } concrete class of each vendor.... that returns each product and also the interface that contains ProductInfo i.e. if Vendor is ... then it must have this product....

  Read the article

• How to implement "drag n drop" user interface on website?

  - by Nikkeloodeni

  Hello, I was wondering what would be the best way to implement some kind of "drag n drop" user interface? What i mean is that there would be one main page and every link click (eg. other sections like about, gallery, contact form) would open a new drag n drop element on top of that main page. Something like windows desktop where you can move your application windows around the screen. Would it be best to call different functions with AJAX when a link is clicked? Like "gallery" link would call gallery-function and retrieve dynamically generated contents of that "window" with AJAX call and then just load that stuff on some div? Or would some other type of approach suit better for this? I hope I was able to explain this clearly enough. I'm looking for a proper "design pattern" to implement this. All suggestions are wellcome! :)

  Read the article

• How to program a connection pool?

  - by the_drow

  Is there a known algorithm for implementing a connection pool? If not what are the known algorithms and what are their trade-offs? What design patterns are common when designing and programming a connection pool? Are there any code examples implement a connection pool using boost.asio? Is it a good idea to use a connection pool for presisting connections (not http)? How is threading related to connection pooling? When do you need a new thread?

  Read the article

• Many-to-many relationship in oop

  - by Manu

  what is best way to model many-to-many relationship? lets say we have a two classes , Team and Player any given Player can be in multiple Team s any Team can have as many Player s as they like I like to call methods like playerX.getTeamList() to get the list of all the Team s he/she is in teamY.getPlayerList() to get the list of all the Player s in the team (or have some other way to do this effectively) I can think of two ways of doing this , but they just don't feels like good oop pattens. can you think of any good ways , perhaps a design patten ?

  Read the article

• Should I share UI for objects that use common fields?

  - by wb

  I have a parent class that holds all of the fields that are common between all device types. From that, I have a few derived classes that each hold their unique fields. Say I have device type "Switch" and "Transformer". Both derived classes only have 2-3 of their own unique fields. When doing the UI design (windows forms) in this case. Should I create two separate forms for each device type or create a user control with all fields that are shared among all devices? Thank you.

  Read the article

• C# Lack of Static Inheritance - What Should I Do?

  - by yellowblood

  Alright, so as you probably know, static inheritance is impossible in C#. I understand that, however I'm stuck with the development of my program. I will try to make it as simple as possible. Lets say our code needs to manage objects that are presenting aircrafts in some airport. The requirements are as follows: There are members and methods that are shared for all aircrafts There are many types of aircrafts, each type may have its own extra methods and members. There can be many instances for each aircraft type. Every aircraft type must have a friendly name for this type, and more details about this type. For example a class named F16 will have a static member FriendlyName with the value of "Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon". Other programmers should be able to add more aircrafts, although they must be enforced to create the same static details about the types of the aircrafts. In some GUI, there should be a way to let the user see the list of available types (with the details such as FriendlyName) and add or remove instances of the aircrafts, saved, lets say, to some XML file. So, basically, if I could enforce inherited classes to implement static members and methods, I would enforce the aircraft types to have static members such as FriendlyName. Sadly I cannot do that. So, what would be the best design for this scenario?

  Read the article

• How do you keep your business rules DRY?

  - by Mario

  I periodically ponder how to best design an application whose every business rule exists in just a single location. (While I know there is no proverbial “best way” and that designs are situational, people must have a leaning toward one practice or another.) I work for a shop where they prefer to house as much of the business rules as possible in the database. This requires developers in many cases to perform identical front-end validations to avoid sending data to the database that will result in an exception—not very DRY. It grates me anytime I find myself duplicating any kind of logic—even lowly validation logic. I am a single-point-of-truth purist to an anal degree. On the other end of the spectrum, I know of shops that create dumb databases (the Rails community leans in this direction) and handle all of the business logic in a separate tier (in Rails the models would house “most” of this). Note the word “most” which implies that some business logic does end up spilling into other places (in Rails it might spill over into the controllers). In way, a clean separation of concerns where all business logic exists in a single core location is a Utopian fantasy that’s hard to uphold (n-tiered architecture or not). Furthermore, is see the “Database as a fortress” and would agree that it should be built on constraints that cause it to reject bad data. As such, I hold principles that cause a degree of angst as I attempt to balance them. How do you balance the database-as-a-fortress view with the desire to have a single-point-of-truth?

  Read the article

• AntFarm anti-pattern -- strategies to avoid, antidotes to help heal from

  - by alchemical

  I'm working on a 10 page web site with a database back-end. There are 500+ objects in use, trying to implement the MVP pattern in ASP.Net. I'm tracing the code-execution from a single-page, my finger has been on F-11 in Visual Studio for about 40 minutes, there seems to be no end, possibly 1000+ method calls for one web page! If it was just 50 objects that would be one thing, however, code execution snakes through all these objects just like millions of ants frantically woring in their giant dirt mound house, riddled with object tunnels. Hence, a new anti-pattern is born : AntFarm. AntFarm is also known as "OO-Madnes", "OO-Fever", OO-ADD, or simply design-pattern junkie. This is not the first time I've seen this, nor my associates at other companies. It seems that this style is being actively propogated, or in any case is a misunderstanding of the numerous OO/DP gospels going around... I'd like to introduce an anti-pattern to the anti-pattern: GST or "Get Stuff Done" AKA "Get Sh** done" AKA GRD (GetRDone). This pattern focused on just what it says, getting stuff done, in a simple way. I may try to outline it more in a later post, or please share your ideas on this antidote pattern. Anyway, I'm in the midst of a great example of AntFarm anti-pattern as I write (as a bonus, there is no documentation or comments). Please share you thoughts on how this anti-pattern has become so prevelant, how we can avoid it, and how can one undo or deal with this pattern in a live system one must work with!

  Read the article

• Pros and cons of making database IDs consistent and "readable"

  - by gmale

  Question Is it a good rule of thumb for database IDs to be "meaningless?" Conversely, are there significant benefits from having IDs structured in a way where they can be recognized at a glance? What are the pros and cons? Background I just had a debate with my coworkers about the consistency of the IDs in our database. We have a data-driven application that leverages spring so that we rarely ever have to change code. That means, if there's a problem, a data change is usually the solution. My argument was that by making IDs consistent and readable, we save ourselves significant time and headaches, long term. Once the IDs are set, they don't have to change often and if done right, future changes won't be difficult. My coworkers position was that IDs should never matter. Encoding information into the ID violates DB design policies and keeping them orderly requires extra work that, "we don't have time for." I can't find anything online to support either position. So I'm turning to all the gurus here at SA! Example Imagine this simplified list of database records representing food in a grocery store, the first set represents data that has meaning encoded in the IDs, while the second does not: ID's with meaning: Type 1 Fruit 2 Veggie Product 101 Apple 102 Banana 103 Orange 201 Lettuce 202 Onion 203 Carrot Location 41 Aisle four top shelf 42 Aisle four bottom shelf 51 Aisle five top shelf 52 Aisle five bottom shelf ProductLocation 10141 Apple on aisle four top shelf 10241 Banana on aisle four top shelf //just by reading the ids, it's easy to recongnize that these are both Fruit on Aisle 4 ID's without meaning: Type 1 Fruit 2 Veggie Product 1 Apple 2 Banana 3 Orange 4 Lettuce 5 Onion 6 Carrot Location 1 Aisle four top shelf 2 Aisle four bottom shelf 3 Aisle five top shelf 4 Aisle five bottom shelf ProductLocation 1 Apple on aisle four top shelf 2 Banana on aisle four top shelf //given the IDs, it's harder to see that these are both fruit on aisle 4 Summary What are the pros and cons of keeping IDs readable and consistent? Which approach do you generally prefer and why? Is there an accepted industry best-practice?

  Read the article

• Pattern for UI configuration

  - by TERACytE

  I have a Win32 C++ program that validates user input and updates the UI with status information and options. Currently it is written like this: void ShowError() { SetIcon(kError); SetMessageString("There was an error"); HideButton(kButton1); HideButton(kButton2); ShowButton(kButton3); } void ShowSuccess() { SetIcon(kError); std::String statusText (GetStatusText()); SetMessageString(statusText); HideButton(kButton1); HideButton(kButton2); ShowButton(kButton3); } // plus several more methods to update the UI using similar mechanisms I do not likes this because it duplicates code and causes me to update several methods if something changes in the UI. I am wondering if there is a design pattern or best practice to remove the duplication and make the functionality easier to understand and update. I could consolidate the code inside a config function and pass in flags to enable/disable UI items, but I am not convinced this is the best approach. Any suggestions and ideas?

  Read the article

• Using an ORM with a database that has no defined relationships?

  - by Ahmad

  Consider a database(MSSQL 2005) that consists of 100+ tables which have primary keys defined to a certain degree. There are 'relationships' between tables, however these are not enforced with foreign key constraints. Consider the following simplified example of typical types of tables I am dealing with. The are clear relations between the User and City and Province tables. However, they key issues is the inconsistent data types in the tables and naming conventions. User: UserRowId [int] PK Name [varchar(50)] CityId [smallint] ProvinceRowId [bigint] City: CityRowId [bigint] PK CityDescription [varchar(100)] Province: ProvinceId [int] PK ProvinceDesc [varchar(50)] I am considering a rewrite of the application (in ASP.net MVC) that uses this data source as is similar in design to MVC storefront. However I am going through a proof of concept phase and this is one of the stumbling blocks I have come across. What are my options in terms of ORM choice that can be easily used and why? Should I even be considering an ORM? (The reason I ask this is that most explanations and tutorials all work with relatively cleanly designed existing databases, or newly created ones when compared to mine. I am thus having a very hard time trying to find a way forward with this problem) There is a huge amount of existing SQL queries, would a datamappper(eg IBatis.net) be more suitable since we could easily modify them to work and reuse the investment already made? I have found this question on SO which indicates to me that an ORM can be used - however I get the impression that this a question of mapping? Note: at the moment, the object model is not clearly defined as it was non-existent. The existing system pretty much did almost everything in SQL or consisted of overly complicated, and numerous queries to complete fucntionality. I am pretty much a noob and have zero experience around ORMs and MVC - so this an awesome learning curve I am on.

  Read the article

• When is factory method better than simple factory and vice versa?

  - by Bruce

  Hi all Working my way through the Head First Design Patterns book. I believe I understand the simple factory and the factory method, but I'm having trouble seeing what advantages factory method brings over simple factory. If an object A uses a simple factory to create its B objects, then clients can create it like this: A a = new A(new BFactory()); whereas if an object uses a factory method, a client can create it like this: A a = new ConcreteA(); // ConcreteA contains a method for instantiating the same Bs that the BFactory above creates, with the method hardwired into the subclass of A, ConcreteA. So in the case of the simple factory, clients compose A with a B factory, whereas with the factory method, the client chooses the appropriate subclass for the types of B it wants. There really doesn't seem to be much to choose between them. Either you have to choose which BFactory you want to compose A with, or you have to choose the right subclass of A to give you the Bs. Under what circumstances is one better than the other? Thanks all!

  Read the article

• Why does C# not provide the C++ style 'friend' keyword?

  - by Ash

  The C++ friend keyword allows a class A to designate class B as it's friend. This allows Class B to access the private/protected members of class A. I've never read anything as to why this was left out of C# (and VB.NET). Most answers to this earlier StackOverflow question seem to be saying it is a useful part of C++ and there are good reasons to use it. In my experience I'd have to agree. Another question seems to me to be really asking how to do something similar to friend in a C# application. While the answers generally revolve around nested classes, it doesn't seem quite as elegant as using the friend keyword. The original Design Patterns book uses the friend keyword regularly throughout its examples. So in summary, why is friend missing from C#, and what is the "best practice" way (or ways) of simulating it in C#? (By the way, the "internal" keyword is not the same thing, it allows ALL classes within the entire assembly to access internal members, friend allows you to give access to a class to just one other class.)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >