Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 57/133 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

  • Is there a design pattern for injecting methods into a class?

    - by glenn I.
    I have a set of classes that work together (I'm coding in javascript). There is one parent class and a number of child classes that are instantiated by the parent class. I have a number of clients of these classes that each need to add on one more methods to the parent or child classes. Rather than having each client inherit from these classes, which is doable but messy because of the child classes, I am having these clients pass functions into the parent class when they instantiate the main class. The main class creates the methods dynamically and the clients can call the methods like they were there all along. My questions are: is this a sensible thing to do? what would the design pattern be for what I am doing?

    Read the article

  • creational pattern for instances depending on multiple subclass instances

    - by markusw
    I have a problem, for that I was not able to identify a suitable design pattern. I want to create instances depending on a given type that has been passed to a factory method. What I am doing until now is the following: T create(SuperType x) { if (x instanceof SubType1) { // do some stuff and return a new SubType extends T } else if (x instanceof SubType2) { // do some stuff and return a new SubType extends T } else if ... } else { throw new UnSupportedOperationException("nothing defined for " + x); } } It seems not to be best pratice for me. Has anybody an idea how to solve this in a better way?

    Read the article

  • Is Abstract Factory Pattern implemented correctly for given scenario.... ???

    - by Amit
    First thing... I am novice to pattern world, so correct me if wrong anywhere Scenario: There are multiple companies providing multiple products of diff size so there are 3 entities i.e. Companies, Their Product and size of product I have implement Abstract Pattern on this i.e. so that I will create instance of IProductFactory interface to get desired product... Is below implementation of Abstract Factory Pattern correct ??? If not then please correct the approach + Also tell me if any other pattern can be used for such scenario Thanks in advance... public enum Companies { Samsung = 0, LG = 1, Philips = 2, Sony = 3 } public enum Product { PlasmaTv = 0, DVD = 1 } public enum ProductSize { FortyTwoInch, FiftyFiveInch } interface IProductFactory { IPhilips GetPhilipsProduct(); ISony GetSonyProduct(); } interface ISony { string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size); } interface IPhilips { string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size); } class ProductFactory : IProductFactory { public IPhilips GetPhilipsProduct() { return new Philips(); } public ISony GetSonyProduct() { return new Sony(); } } class Philips : IPhilips { #region IPhilips Members public string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size) {// I have ingnore size for now.... string output = string.Empty; if (product == Product.PlasmaTv) { output = "Plasma TV Created !!!"; } else if (product == Product.DVD) { output = "DVD Created !!!"; } return output; } #endregion } class Sony : ISony {// I have ingnore size for now.... #region ISony Members public string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size) { string output = string.Empty; if (product == Product.PlasmaTv) { output = "Plasma TV Created !!!"; } else if (product == Product.DVD) { output = "DVD Created !!!"; } return output; } #endregion } IProductFactory prodFactory = new ProductFactory(); IPhilips philipsObj = prodFactory.GetPhilipsProduct(); MessageBox.Show(philipsObj.CreateProducts(Product.DVD, ProductSize.FortyTwoInch)); or //ISony sonyObj = prodFactory.GetSonyProduct(); //MessageBox.Show(sonyObj.CreateProducts(Product.DVD, ProductSize.FortyTwoInch));

    Read the article

  • Applying the Decorator Pattern to Forms

    - by devoured elysium
    I am trying to apply the Decorator Design Pattern to the following situation: I have 3 different kind of forms: Green, Yellow, Red. Now, each of those forms can have different set of attributes. They can have a minimize box disabled, a maximized box disabled and they can be always on top. I tried to model this the following way: Form <---------------------------------------FormDecorator /\ /\ |---------|-----------| |----------------------|-----------------| GreenForm YellowForm RedForm MinimizeButtonDisabled MaximizedButtonDisabled AlwaysOnTop Here is my GreenForm code: public class GreenForm : Form { public GreenForm() { this.BackColor = Color.GreenYellow; } public override sealed Color BackColor { get { return base.BackColor; } set { base.BackColor = value; } } } FormDecorator: public abstract class FormDecorator : Form { private Form _decoratorForm; protected FormDecorator(Form decoratorForm) { this._decoratorForm = decoratorForm; } } and finally NoMaximizeDecorator: public class NoMaximizeDecorator : FormDecorator { public NoMaximizeDecorator(Form decoratorForm) : base(decoratorForm) { this.MaximizeBox = false; } } So here is the running code: static void Main() { Application.EnableVisualStyles(); Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false); Application.Run(CreateForm()); } static Form CreateForm() { Form form = new GreenForm(); form = new NoMaximizeDecorator(form); form = new NoMinimizeDecorator(form); return form; } The problem is that I get a form that isn't green and that still allows me to maximize it. It is only taking in consideration the NoMinimizeDecorator form. I do comprehend why this happens but I'm having trouble understanding how to make this work with this Pattern. I know probably there are better ways of achieving what I want. I made this example as an attempt to apply the Decorator Pattern to something. Maybe this wasn't the best pattern I could have used(if one, at all) to this kind of scenario. Is there any other pattern more suitable than the Decorator to accomplish this? Am I doing something wrong when trying to implement the Decorator Pattern? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Question about factory classes

    - by devoured elysium
    Currently I have created a ABCFactory class that has a single method creating ABC objects. Now that I think of it, maybe instead of having a factory, I could just make a static method in my ABC Method. What are the pro's and con's on making this change? Will it not lead to the same? I don't foresee having other classes inherit ABC, but one never knows! Thanks

    Read the article

  • What software design pattern is best for the following scenario (C#)

    - by askjdh
    I have a gps device that records data e.g. datetime, latitude, longitude I have an sdk that reads the data from the device. The way the data is read: A command packet (basically a combination of int values in a struct) is sent to the device. The device responds with the data in fixed size chunks e.g. 64bytes Depending on the command issued I will get back differect data structs e.g. sending command 1 to the device returns a struct like struct x { id int, name char[20] } command 2 returns a collection of the following structs (basically it boils down to an array of the structs - y[12]) struct y { date datetime, lat decimal, lon decimal } I would then want to convert the struct to a class and save the data to a database. What would be the best way to encapsulate the entire process, preferably using some established design pattern? Many thanks M

    Read the article

  • Should Factories Persist Entities?

    - by mxmissile
    Should factories persist entities they build? Or is that the job of the caller? Pseudo Example Incoming: public class OrderFactory { public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); .... return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public OrderController(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); repository.Insert(order); ... } } or public class OrderFactory { public OrderFactory(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); ... repository.Insert(order); return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); ... } } Is there a recommended practice here?

    Read the article

  • Would ViewModels fit in the Model View Presenter pattern?

    - by Jonn
    Having used ViewModels in MVC, I was wondering if applying the same to the MVP pattern is practical. I only have a few considerations, one being that MVP is already fairly hard to implement (with all the additional coding, not much on the seeming complexity) or that ViewModels already have a slightly similar way of modeling data or entities. Would adding another layer in the form of ViewModels be redundant or is it a logical abstraction that I, as one implementing the MVP pattern, should adhere to?

    Read the article

  • how can i use switch statement on type-safe enum pattern

    - by Fer
    I found a goodlooking example about implementation enums in a different way. That is called type-safe enum pattern i think. I started using it but i realized that i can not use it in a switch statement. My implementation looks like the following: public sealed class MyState { private readonly string m_Name; private readonly int m_Value; public static readonly MyState PASSED= new MyState(1, "OK"); public static readonly MyState FAILED= new MyState(2, "ERROR"); private MyState(int value, string name) { m_Name = name; m_Value = value; } public override string ToString() { return m_Name; } public int GetIntValue() { return m_Value; } } What can i add to my class in order to be able to use this pattern in switch statements in C#? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • JavaScript Module Pattern - What about using "return this"?

    - by Rob
    After doing some reading about the Module Pattern, I've seen a few ways of returning the properties which you want to be public. One of the most common ways is to declare your public properties and methods right inside of the "return" statement, apart from your private properties and methods. A similar way (the "Revealing" pattern) is to provide simply references to the properties and methods which you want to be public. Lastly, a third technique I saw was to create a new object inside your module function, to which you assign your new properties before returning said object. This was an interesting idea, but requires the creation of a new object. So I was thinking, why not just use "this.propertyName" to assign your public properties and methods, and finally use "return this" at the end? This way seems much simpler to me, as you can create private properties and methods with the usual "var" or "function" syntax, or use the "this.propertyName" syntax to declare your public methods. Here's the method I'm suggesting: (function() { var privateMethod = function () { alert('This is a private method.'); } this.publicMethod = function () { alert('This is a public method.'); } return this; })(); Are there any pros/cons to using the method above? What about the others?

    Read the article

  • Are we using IoC effectively?

    - by Juliet
    So my company uses Castle Windsor IoC container, but in a way that feels "off": All the data types are registered in code, not the config file. All data types are hard-coded to use one interface implementation. In fact, for nearly all given interfaces, there is and will only ever be one implementation. All registered data types have a default constructor, so Windsor doesn't instantiate an object graph for any registered types. The people who designed the system insist the IoC container makes the system better. We have 1200+ public classes, so its a big system, the kind where you'd expect to find a framework like Windsor. But I'm still skeptical. Is my company using IoC effectively? Is there an advantage to new'ing objects with Windsor than new'ing objects with the new keyword?

    Read the article

  • Haskell: Pattern Matching with Lists

    - by user1670032
    I'm trying to make a function that takes in a list, and if one of the elements is negative, then any elements in that list that are equal to its positive counterpart should be changed to 0. Eg, if there is a -2 in a list, then all 2's in that list should be changed to 0. Any ideas why it only works for some cases and not others? I'm not understanding why this is, I've looked it over several times. changeToZero [] = [] changeToZero [x] = [x] changeToZero (x:zs:y:ws) | (x < 0) && ((-1)*(x) == y) = x : zs : 0 : changeToZero ws changeToZero (x:xs) = x : changeToZero xs *Main changeToZero [-1,1,-2,2,-3,3] [-1,1,-2,2,-3,3] *Main changeToZero [-2,1,2,3] [-2,1,0,3] *Main changeToZero [-2,1,2,3,2] [-2,1,0,3,2] *Main changeToZero [1,-2,2,2,1] [1,-2,2,0,1]

    Read the article

  • Is this class + constructor definition pattern overly redundant?

    - by Protector one
    I often come across a pattern similar to this: class Person { public string firstName, lastName; public Person(string firstName, string lastName) { this.firstName = firstName; this.lastName = lastName; } } This feels overly redundant (I imagine typing "firstName" once, instead of thrice could be enough…), but I can't think of a proper alternative. Any ideas? Maybe I just don't know about a certain design pattern I should be using here? Edit - I think I need to elaborate a little. I'm not asking how to make the example code "better", but rather, "shorter". In its current state, all member names appear 3 times (declaration, initialization, constructor arguments), and it feels rather redundant. So I'm wondering if there is a pattern (or semantic sugar) to get (roughly) the same behavior, but with less bloat. I apologize for being unclear initially.

    Read the article

  • Best practice to modularise a large Grails app?

    - by Mulone
    Hi all, A Grails app I'm working on is becoming pretty big, and it would be good to refactor it into several modules, so that we don't have to redeploy the whole thing every time. In your opinion, what is the best practice to split a Grails app in several modules? In particular I'd like to create a package of domain classes + relevant services and use it in the app as a module. Is this possible? Is it possible to do it with plugins? Cheers, Mulone

    Read the article

  • Handling Dialogs in WPF with MVVM

    - by Ray Booysen
    In the MVVM pattern for WPF, handling dialogs is one of the more complex operations. As your view model does not know anything about the view, dialog communication can be interesting. I can expose an ICommand that when the view invokes it, a dialog can appear. Does anyone know of a good way to handle results from dialogs? I am speaking about windows dialogs such as MessageBox. One of the ways we did this was have an event on the viewmodel that the view would subscribe to when a dialog was required. public event EventHandler<MyDeleteArgs> RequiresDeleteDialog; This is OK, but it means that the view requires code which is something I would like to stay away from.

    Read the article

  • What does a WinForm application need to be designed for usability, and be robust, clean, and profess

    - by msorens
    One of the principal problems impeding productivity in software implementation is the classic conundrum of “reinventing the wheel”. Of late I am a .NET developer and even the wonderful wizardry of .NET and Visual Studio covers only a portion of this challenging issue. Below I present my initial thoughts both on what is available and what should be available from .NET on a WinForm, focusing on good usability. That is, aspects of an application exposed to the user and making the user experience easier and/or better. (I do include a couple items not visible to the user because I feel strongly about them, such as diagnostics.) I invite you to contribute to these lists. LIST A: Components provided by .NET These are substantially complete components provided by .NET, i.e. those requiring at most trivial coding to use. “About” dialog -- add it with a couple clicks then customize. Persist settings across invocations -- .NET has the support; just use a few lines of code to glue them together. Migrate settings with a new version -- a powerful one, available with one line of code. Tooltips (and infotips) -- .NET includes just plain text tooltips; third-party libraries provide richer ones. Diagnostic support -- TraceSources, TraceListeners, and more are built-in. Internationalization -- support for tailoring your app to languages other than your own. LIST B: Components not provided by .NET These are not supplied at all by .NET or supplied only as rudimentary elements requiring substantial work to be realized. Splash screen -- a small window present during program startup with your logo, loading messages, etc. Tip of the day -- a mini-tutorial presented one bit at a time each time the user starts your app. Check for available updates -- facility to query a server to see if the user is running the latest version of your app, then provide a simple way to upgrade if a new version is found. Maximize to multiple monitors -- the canonical window allows you to maximize to a single monitor only; in my apps I allow maximizing across multiple monitors with a click. Taskbar notifier -- flash the taskbar when your backgrounded app has new info for the user. Options dialogs -- multi-page dialogs letting the user customize the app settings to his/her own preferences. Progress indicator -- for long running operations give the user feedback on how far there is left to go. Memory gauge -- an indicator (either absolute or percentage) of how much memory is used by your app. LIST C: Stylistic and/or tiny bits of functionality This list includes bits of functionality that are too tiny to merit being called a component, along with stylistic concerns (that admittedly do overlap with the Windows User Experience Interaction Guidelines). Design a form for resizing -- unless you are restricting your form to be a fixed size, use anchors and docking so that it does what is reasonable when enlarged or shrunk by the user. Set tab order on a form -- repeated tab presses by the user should advance from field to field in a logical order rather than the default order in which you added fields. Adjust controls to be aware of operating modes -- When starting a background operation with, for example, a “Go” button, disable that “Go” button until the operation completes. Provide access keys for all menu items (per UXGuide). Provide shortcut keys for commonly used menu items (per UXGuide). Set up some (global or important or common) shortcut keys without associating to menu items. Allow some menu items to be invoked with or without modifier keys (shift, control, alt) where the modifier key is useful to vary the operation slightly. Hook up Escape and Enter on child forms to do what is reasonable. Decorate any library classes with documentation-comments and attributes -- this allows Visual Studio to leverage them for Intellisense and property descriptions. Spell check your code! What else would you include?

    Read the article

  • With MVVM, does each UI window have its own ViewModel?

    - by j0rd4n
    When I'm designing multiple views under the MVVM pattern, does each view get its own ViewModel or do they all share the same one? I understand that this is ultimately a flexible decision, but what is the best practice? My gut tells me to have a ViewModel for each view (i.e. each separate UI window). All of the blog examples of MVVM show a single view but not much beyond that.

    Read the article

  • Explain "Leader/Follower" Pattern

    - by Alex B
    I can't seem to find a good explanation of "Leader/Follower" pattern. All explanations either simply refer to it in the context of some problem, or are completely meaningless. Can anyone explain to the the mechanics of how this pattern works, and why and how it improves performance over more traditional asynchronous IO models? Examples and links to diagrams are appreciated too.

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for adding / removing elements

    - by de3
    Wikipedia's definition for Iterator pattern design: the Iterator pattern is a design pattern in which iterators are used to access the elements of an aggregate object sequentially without exposing its underlying implementation. Iterator interface in java provides the following methods hasNext() next() remove() Is there a pattern design, or a java interface for inserting / deleting elements, and getting length of the aggregate object, in addition to iterating them? I know remove() is an optional method that can be used once per call to next(), but I am implementing a circular FIFO array and need a method delete() independent of iterator's next().

    Read the article

  • What performance overhead do IoC containers involve?

    - by Sosh
    Hi, Loose coupling is wonderful of course, but I have often wondered what overhead wiring up dynamically using an IoC container (for example Castle Windsor) has over a tightly coupled system? I know that a detailed answer would depend on what the IoC was being used for, but I'm really just trying to get a feel for the magnitude of effort involved in the IoC work. Does anyone have any stats or other resources regarding this? Thanks

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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