Search Results

Search found 4243 results on 170 pages for 'anti 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 60/170 | < Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >

  • What is the most stupid coded solution you have read/improved/witnessed?

    - by Rigo Vides
    And for stupid I mean Illogical, non-effective, complex(the bad way), ugly code style. I will start: We had a requirement there when we needed to hide certain objects given the press of a button. So this framework we were using at the time provided a way to tag objects and retrieve all the objects with a certain tag in a complete iterable collection. So I presented the most logically solution given these conditions to my partner: Me: you know, tag all the objects we needed to hide with the same tag, then call the function to get them all, iterate trough them and make them hidden. Partner: I don't know, that is hardcoding for me... Me: So what do you suggest? 20 mins later... Partner: I don't know... let's put a tag to all the objects to be hidden like this, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (and so for each object to be hidden), Then we make a for from 1 to n (where n was the number of objects to hide) and we hide them all there!

    Read the article

  • Singleton Properties

    - by coffeeaddict
    Ok, if I create a singleton class and expose the singleton object through a public static property...I understand that. But my singleton class has other properties in it. Should those be static? Should those also be private? I just want to be able to access all properties of my singleton class by doing this: MySingletonClass.SingletonProperty.SomeProperty2 Where SingletonProperty returns me the single singleton instance. I guess my question is, how do you expose the other properties in the singleton class..make them private and then access them through your public singleton static property?

    Read the article

  • 3 tier application pattern suggestion

    - by Maxim Gershkovich
    I have attempted to make my first 3 tier application. In the process I have run into one problem I am yet to find an optimal solution for. Basically all my objects use an IFillable interface which forces the implementation of a sub as follows Public Sub Fill(ByVal Datareader As Data.IDataReader) Implements IFillable.Fill This sub then expects the Ids from the datareader will be identical to the properties of the object as such. Me.m_StockID = Datareader.GetGuid(Datareader.GetOrdinal("StockID")) In the end I end up with a datalayer that looks something like this. Public Shared Function GetStockByID(ByVal ConnectionString As String, ByVal StockID As Guid) As Stock Dim res As New Stock Using sqlConn As New SqlConnection(ConnectionString) sqlConn.Open() res.Fill(StockDataLayer.GetStockByIDQuery(sqlConn, StockID)) End Using Return res End Function Mostly this pattern seems to make sense. However my problem is, lets say I want to implement a property for Stock called StockBarcodeList. Under the above mentioned pattern any way I implement this property I will need to pass a connectionstring to it which obviously breaks my attempt at layer separation. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might be able to solve this problem or am I going about this the completely wrong way? Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might improve my implementation? Please note however I am deliberately trying to avoid using the dataset in any form.

    Read the article

  • What is the best approach to binding commands in a ViewModel to elements in the View?

    - by Micah
    Anyone who has tried to implement RoutedCommands in WPF using M-V-VM has undoubtedly run into issues. Commands (non-UI commands that is) should be implemented in the ViewModel. For instance if I needed to save a CustomerViewModel then I would implement that as a command directly on my CustomerViewModel. However if I wanted to pop up a window to show the users addresses I would implement a ShowCustomerAddress command directly in the view since this a UI specific function. How do I define the command bindings in the viewmodel, and use them in the view?

    Read the article

  • Optional Member Objects

    - by David Relihan
    Okay, so you have a load of methods sprinkled around your systems main class. So you do the right thing and refactor by creating a new class and perform move method(s) into a new class. The new class has a single responsibility and all is right with the world again: class Feature { public: Feature(){}; void doSomething(); void doSomething1(); void doSomething2(); }; So now your original class has a member variable of type object: Feature _feature; Which you will call in the main class. Now if you do this many times, you will have many member-objects in your main class. Now these features may or not be required based on configuration so in a way it's costly having all these objects that may or not be needed. Can anyone suggest a way of improving this? At the moment I plan to test in the newly created class if the feature is enabled - so the when a call is made to method I will return if it is not enabled. I could have a pointer to the object and then only call new if feature is enabled - but this means I will have to test before I call a method on it which would be potentially dangerous and not very readable. Would having an auto_ptr to the object improve things: auto_ptr<Feature> feature; Or am I still paying the cost of object invokation even though the object may\or may not be required. BTW - I don't think this is premeature optimisation - I just want to consider the possibilites.

    Read the article

  • Could any help me in resource of how to build framework with api like facebook ?

    - by Space Cracker
    we will develop a web site that will have some free services and we want to make it as a framework that can any build application over it or can use its api in their site .. Could any lead me in how to start it , what's the better architecture and design pattern help in that , is there any resources discuss or explain how to do like this ? FYI : we are dot net developers but we can learn any other if its urgently needed in such a solution

    Read the article

  • Hierarchy / Flyweight / Instancing Problem in Python

    - by Dan
    Here is the problem I am trying to solve, (I have simplified the actual problem, but this should give you all the relevant information). I have a hierarchy like so: 1.A 1.B 1.C 2.A 3.D 4.B 5.F (This is hard to illustrate - each number is the parent, each letter is the child). Creating an instance of the 'letter' objects is expensive (IO, database costs, etc), so should only be done once. The hierarchy needs to be easy to navigate. Children in the hierarchy need to have just one parent. Modifying the contents of the letter objects should be possible directly from the objects in the hierarchy. There needs to be a central store containing all of the 'letter' objects (and only those in the hierarchy). 'letter' and 'number' objects need to be possible to create from a constructor (such as Letter(**kwargs) ). It is perfectably acceptable to expect that when a letter changes from the hierarchy, all other letters will respect the same change. Hope this isn't too abstract to illustrate the problem. What would be the best way of solving this? (Then I'll post my solution) Here's an example script: one = Number('one') a = Letter('a') one.addChild(a) two = Number('two') a = Letter('a') two.addChild(a) for child in one: child.method1() for child in two: print '%s' % child.method2()

    Read the article

  • Strategy Pattern with Type Reflection affecting Performances ?

    - by Aurélien Ribon
    Hello ! I am building graphs. A graph consists of nodes linked each other with links (indeed my dear). In order to assign a given behavior to each node, I implemented the strategy pattern. class Node { public BaseNodeBehavior Behavior {get; set;} } As a result, in many parts of the application, I am extensively using type reflection to know which behavior a node is. if (node.Behavior is NodeDataOutputBehavior) workOnOutputNode(node) .... My graph can get thousands of nodes. Is type reflection greatly affecting performances ? Should I use something else than the strategy pattern ? I'm using strategy because I need behavior inheritance. For example, basically, a behavior can be Data or Operator, a Data behavior can IO, Const or Intermediate and finally an IO behavior can be Input or Output. So if I use an enumeration, I wont be able to test for a node behavior to be of data kind, I will need to test it to be [Input, Output, Const or Intermediate]. And if later I want to add another behavior of Data kind, I'm screwed, every data-testing method will need to be changed.

    Read the article

  • How build my own Application Setting

    - by adisembiring
    I want to build a ApplicationSetting for my application. The ApplicationSetting can be stored in a properties file or in a database table. The settings are stored in key-value pairs. E.g. ftp.host = blade ftp.username = dummy ftp.pass = pass content.row_pagination = 20 content.title = How to train your dragon. I have designed it as follows: Application settings reader: interface IApplicationSettingReader { read(); } DatabaseApplicationSettingReader { dao appSettingDao; AppSettings read() { List<AppSettingEntity> listEntity = appSettingsDao.findAll(); Map<String, String> map = new HaspMap<String, String>(); foreach (AppSettingEntity entity : listEntity) { map.put(entity.getConfigName(), entity.getConfigValue()); } return new AppSettings(map); } } DatabaseApplicationSettingReader { dao appSettingDao; AppSettings read() { //read from some properties file return new AppSettings(map); } } Application settings class: AppSettings { private static AppSettings instance; private Map map; Public AppSettings(Map map) { this.map = map; } public static AppSettings getInstance() { if (instance == null) { throw new RuntimeException("Object not configure yet"); } return instance; } public static configure(IApplicationSettingReader reader) { instance = reader.read(); } public String getFtpSetting(String param) { return map.get("ftp." + param); } public String getContentSetting(String param) { return map.get("content." + param); } } Test class: AppSettingsTest { IApplicationSettingReader reader; @Before public void setUp() throws Exception { reader = new DatabaseApplicationSettingReader(); } @Test public void getContentSetting_should_get_content_title() { AppSettings.configure(reader); Instance settings = AppSettings.getInstance(); String title = settings.getContentSetting("title"); assertNotNull(title); Sysout(title); } } My questions are: Can you give your opinion about my code, is there something wrong? I configure my application setting once, while the application start, I configure the application setting with appropriate reader (DbReader or PropertiesReader), I make it singleton. The problem is, when some user edit the database or file directly to database or file, I can't get the changed values. Now, I want to implement something like ApplicationSettingChangeListener. So if the data changes, I will refresh my application settings. Do you have any suggestions how this can be implemented?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript Resource Management Design Pattern

    - by Adam
    As a web developer, a common problem I find myself tackling is waiting for something to load before doing something else. In particular, I often hide (using either display: none; or visibility: hidden; depending on the situation) elements while waiting for a background image or a CSS file to load. Consider this example from Last.FM. They overlay a semi-transparant PNG over each album art image so that it looks like it's inside a jewel-case. They let it load when it loads, so depending on your internet speed, you may see the art image by itself (without the overlay) temporarily. In this case, the album art looks fine without the jewel-case effect. But in similar situations, I have found that I don't want the user to see the site's design mangled as resources incrementally load. So, in rare cases I have hidden everything from the user until the whole kit and kaboodle has loaded. But this is often a pain to write out, and may force the user to wait for a pretty long time to see anything (besides "loading..." text). I can think of (and have used on occasion) some obvious solutions/compromises: Use some inline CSS so that as certain parts of the DOM load and render, they will immediately have the correct size/position/etc. Immediately render the navigation part of the site, so that if the user wanted to use the current page purely to get somewhere else, they don't have to wait for the rest to load. Load pixelated images first as placeholders for layout while lazy-loading higher quality images as replacements. Something quirky like using a cute animated gif to distract the user during a "loading..." phase. Show useful information as a reference while loading the full UI. (Something akin to Gmail Inbox Preview, etc.) (Sorry if my question was basically just asked and answered...) Despite all of these ideas, I still find myself hoping there are better ways of doing some of these things. So I guess what I'm looking for is some inspiration and/or any creative ways of dealing with this problem that you guys may have seen out in the wild.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to make a setter return "this"?

    - by Ken Liu
    Is it a good or bad idea to make setters in java return "this"? public Employee setName(String name){ this.name = name; return this; } This pattern can be useful because then you can chain setters like this: list.add(new Employee().setName("Jack Sparrow").setId(1).setFoo("bacon!")); instead of this: Employee e = new Employee(); e.setName("Jack Sparrow"); ...and so on... list.add(e); ...but it sort of goes against standard convention. I suppose it might be worthwhile just because it can make that setter do something else useful. I've seen this pattern used some places (e.g. JMock, JPA), but it seems uncommon, and only generally used for very well defined APIs where this pattern is used everywhere. Update: What I've described is obviously valid, but what I am really looking for is some thoughts on whether this is generally acceptable, and if there are any pitfalls or related best practices. I know about the Builder pattern but it is a little more involved then what I am describing - as Josh Bloch describes it there is an associated static Builder class for object creation.

    Read the article

  • Is a "factory" method the right pattern?

    - by jdt141
    Hey all - So I'm working to improve an existing implementation. I have a number of polymorphic classes that are all composed into a higher level container class. The problem I'm dealing with at the moment is that the higher level container class, well, sucks. It looks something like this, which I really don't have a problem with (as the polymorphic classes in the container should be public). My real issue is the constructor... /* * class1 and class 2 derive from the same superclass */ class Container { public: boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass1> class1; boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass2> class2; private: ... } /* * Constructor - builds the objects that we need in this container. */ Container::Container(some params) { class1.reset(new ComposedClass1(...)); class2.reset(new ComposedClass2(...)); } What I really need is to make this container class more re-usable. By hard-coding up the member objects and instantiating them, it basically isn't and can only be used once. A factory is one way to build what I need (potentially by supplying a list of objects and their specific types to be created?) Other ways to get around this problem? Seems like someone should have solved it before... Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to perform a literal match with regex using wildcard

    - by kashif4u
    I am trying to perform literal match with regular expression using wildcard. string utterance = "Show me customer id 19"; string pattern 1 = "*tom*"; string patter 2 = "*customer id [0-9]*"; Desired results: if (Regex.IsMatch(utterance, pattern 1 )) { MATCH NOT FOUND } if (Regex.IsMatch(utterance, pattern 2 )) { MATCH FOUND } I have tried looking for literal match solution/syntax in wildcard but having difficulty. Could you also enlighten me with with an example on possible Pattern Matching Strength algorithm i.e. if code match 90 select? Note: I have table with 100000 records to perform literal matches from user utterances. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Question about design (inheritance, polymorphism)

    - by Dan
    Hi, I have a question about a problem I'm struggling with. Hope you can bear with me. Imagine I have an Object class representing the base class of a hierarchy of physical objects. Later I inherit from it to create an Object1D, Object2D and Object3D classes. Each of these derived classes will have some specific methods and attributes. For example, the 3d object might have functionality to download a 3d model to be used by a renderer. So I'd have something like this: class Object {}; class Object1D : public Object { Point mPos; }; class Object2D : public Object { ... }; class Object3D : public Object { Model mModel; }; Now I'd have a separate class called Renderer, which simply takes an Object as argument and well, renders it :-) In a similar way, I'd like to support different kinds of renderers. For instance, I could have a default one that every object could rely on, and then provide other specific renderers for some kind of objects: class Renderer {}; // Default one class Renderer3D : public Renderer {}; And here comes my problem. A renderer class needs to get an Object as an argument, for example in the constructor in order to retrieve whatever data it needs to render the object. So far so good. But a Renderer3D would need to get an Object3D argument, in order to get not only the basic attributes but also the specific attributes of a 3d object. Constructors would look like this: CRenderer(Object& object); CRenderer3D(Object3D& object); Now how do I specify this in a generic way? Or better yet, is there a better way to design this? I know I could rely on RTTI or similar but I'd like to avoid this if possible as I feel there is probably a better way to deal with this. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Implement Exception Handling in ASP.NET C# Project

    - by Shrewd Demon
    hi, I have an application that has many tiers. as in, i have... Presentation Layer (PL) - contains all the html My Codes Layer (CL) - has all my code Entity Layer (EL) - has all the container entities Business Logic Layer (BLL) - has the necessary business logic Data Logic Layer (DLL) - any logic against data Data Access Layer (DAL) - one that accesses data from the database Now i want to provide error handling in my DLL since it is responsible for executing statement like ExecureScalar and all.... And i am confused as to how to go about it...i mean do i catch the error in the DLL and throw it back to the BLL and from there throw it back to my code or what.... can any one please help me how do i implement a clean and easy error handling techinque help you be really appreciated. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Separate functionality depending on Role in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Andrew Bullock
    I'm looking for an elegant pattern to solve this problem: I have several user roles in my system, and for many of my controller actions, I need to deal with slightly different data. For example, take /Users/Edit/1 This allows a Moderator to edit a users email address, but Administrators to edit a user's email address and password. I'd like a design for separating the two different bits of action code for the GET and the POST. Solutions I've come up with so far are: Switch inside each method, however this doesn't really help when i want different model arguments on the POST :( Custom controller factory which chooses a UsersController_ForModerators and UsersController_ForAdmins instead of just UsersController from the controller name and current user role Custom action invoker which choose the Edit_ForModerators method in a similar way to above Have an IUsersController and register a different implementation of it in my IoC container as a named instance based on Role Build an implementation of the controller at runtime using Castle DynamicProxy and manipulate the methods to those from role-based implementations Im preferring the named IoC instance route atm as it means all my urls/routing will work seamlessly. Ideas? Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Practical rules for premature optimization

    - by DougW
    It seems that the phrase "Premature Optimization" is the buzz-word of the day. For some reason, iphone programmers in particular seem to think of avoiding premature optimization as a pro-active goal, rather than the natural result of simply avoiding distraction. The problem is, the term is beginning to be applied more and more to cases that are completely inappropriate. For example, I've seen a growing number of people say not to worry about the complexity of an algorithm, because that's premature optimization (eg http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2190275/help-sorting-an-nsarray-across-two-properties-with-nssortdescriptor/2191720#2191720). Frankly, I think this is just laziness, and appalling to disciplined computer science. But it has occurred to me that maybe considering the complexity and performance of algorithms is going the way of assembly loop unrolling, and other optimization techniques that are now considered unnecessary. What do you think? Are we at the point now where deciding between an O(n^n) and O(n!) complexity algorithm is irrelevant? What about O(n) vs O(n*n)? What do you consider "premature optimization"? What practical rules do you use to consciously or unconsciously avoid it? This is a bit vague, but I'm curious to hear other peoples' opinions on the topic.

    Read the article

  • Java library class to handle scheduled execution of "callbacks"?

    - by Hanno Fietz
    My program has a component - dubbed the Scheduler - that lets other components register points in time at which they want to be called back. This should work much like the Unix cron service, i. e. you tell the Scheduler "notify me at ten minutes past every full hour". I realize there are no real callbacks in Java. Here's my approach, is there a library which already does this stuff? Feel free to suggest improvements, too. Register call to Scheduler passes: a time specification containing hour, minute, second, year month, dom, dow, where each item may be unspecified, meaning "execute it every hour / minute etc." (just like crontabs) an object containing data that will tell the calling object what to do when it is notified by the Scheduler. The Scheduler does not process this data, just stores it and passes it back upon notification. a reference to the calling object Upon startup, or after a new registration request, the Scheduler starts with a Calendar object of the current system time and checks if there are any entries in the database that match this point in time. If there are, they are executed and the process starts over. If there aren't, the time in the Calendar object is incremented by one second and the entreis are rechecked. This repeats until there is one entry or more that match(es). (Discrete Event Simulation) The Scheduler will then remember that timestamp, sleep and wake every second to check if it is already there. If it happens to wake up and the time has already passed, it starts over, likewise if the time has come and the jobs have been executed. Edit: Thanks for pointing me to Quartz. I'm looking for something much smaller, however.

    Read the article

  • Am I abusing Policies?

    - by pmr
    I find myself using policies a lot in my code and usually I'm very happy with that. But from time to time I find myself confronted with using that pattern in situations where the Policies are selected and runtime and I have developed habbits to work around such situations. Usually I start with something like that: class DrawArrays { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; class DrawElements { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public Policy { using Policy::sendDraw(); public: void render() const; }; When the policy is picked at runtime I have different choices of working around the situation. Different code paths: if(drawElements) { Vertices<DrawElements> vertices; } else { Vertices<DrawArrays> vertices; } Inheritance and virtual calls: class PureVertices { public: void render()=0; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public PureVertices, public Policy { //.. }; Both solutions feel wrong to me. The first creates an umaintainable mess and the second introduces the overhead of virtual calls that I tried to avoid by using policies in the first place. Am I missing the proper solutions or do I use the wrong pattern to solve the problem?

    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 | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >