Search Results

Search found 12093 results on 484 pages for 'partial classes'.

Page 62/484 | < Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >

  • Why do some APIs provide mostly interfaces, not classes?

    - by Lord Torgamus
    Some Java APIs provide a large number of interfaces and few classes. For example, the Stellent/Oracle UCM API is composed of roughly 80% interfaces/20% classes, and many of the classes are just exceptions. What is the technical reason for preferring interfaces to classes? Is it just an effort to minimize coupling? To improve encapsulation/information hiding? Something else?

    Read the article

  • Open source equivelants to VS / web reference proxy classes?

    - by seraphym
    As an ASP.NET developer, I'm used to working with how VS/C# transparently autogens proxy classes for web references (yes, I know, we're spoiled), but now that I'm creating documentation for more than one coding platform I'm trying to discover what the equivelant to that is in any other framework. So is there a similar way to work transparently with web reference proxy classes for say, RoR, PHP, and Python? And if there's nothing integrated, are there tools you recommend to autogen the proxy classes, or do you recommend to roll custom classes?

    Read the article

  • How do I use link_to_remote to pass then render a partial in rails?

    - by Angela
    I want to create several link_to_remote links that are campaign names: <% @campaigns.each do |campaign| %> <!--link_to_remote(name, options = {}, html_options = nil)--> <%= link_to_remote(campaign, :update => "campaign_todo", :url => %> <% end %> I want the output to update on the page to render a partial, which runs a loop through the values associated with the campaign. The API docs says this will render a partial, but I'm not clear where the name of the :partial template is passed in, either here or in the controller Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Partial view is not rendering within the main view it's contained (instead it's rendered in it's own page)?

    - by JaJ
    I have a partial view that is contained in a simple index view. When I try to add a new object to my model and update my partial view to display that new object along with existing objects the partial view is rendered outside the page that it's contained? I'm using AJAX to update the partial view but what is wrong with the following code? Model: public class Product { public int ID { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } [DataType(DataType.Currency)] public decimal Price { get; set; } } public class BoringStoreContext { List<Product> results = new List<Product>(); public BoringStoreContext() { Products = new List<Product>(); Products.Add(new Product() { ID = 1, Name = "Sure", Price = (decimal)(1.10) }); Products.Add(new Product() { ID = 2, Name = "Sure2", Price = (decimal)(2.10) }); } public List<Product> Products {get; set;} } public class ProductIndexViewModel { public Product NewProduct { get; set; } public IEnumerable<Product> Products { get; set; } } Index.cshtml View: @model AjaxPartialPageUpdates.Models.ProductIndexViewModel @using (Ajax.BeginForm("Index_AddItem", new AjaxOptions { UpdateTargetId = "productList" })) { <div> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.NewProduct.Name) @Html.EditorFor(model => model.NewProduct.Name) </div> <div> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.NewProduct.Price) @Html.EditorFor(model => model.NewProduct.Price) </div> <div> <input type="submit" value="Add Product" /> </div> } <div id='productList'> @{ Html.RenderPartial("ProductListControl", Model.Products); } </div> ProductListControl.cshtml Partial View @model IEnumerable<AjaxPartialPageUpdates.Models.Product> <table> <!-- Render the table headers. --> <tr> <th>Name</th> <th>Price</th> </tr> <!-- Render the name and price of each product. --> @foreach (var item in Model) { <tr> <td>@Html.DisplayFor(model => item.Name)</td> <td>@Html.DisplayFor(model => item.Price)</td> </tr> } </table> Controller: public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { BoringStoreContext db = new BoringStoreContext(); ProductIndexViewModel viewModel = new ProductIndexViewModel { NewProduct = new Product(), Products = db.Products }; return View(viewModel); } public ActionResult Index_AddItem(ProductIndexViewModel viewModel) { BoringStoreContext db = new BoringStoreContext(); db.Products.Add(viewModel.NewProduct); return PartialView("ProductListControl", db.Products); } }

    Read the article

  • What happens if two COM classes each without a threading model are implemented in one in-proc COM se

    - by sharptooth
    Consider a situation. I have an in-proc COM server that contains two COM classes. Both classes are marked as "no threading model" in the registry - the "ThreadingModel" value is just absent. Both classes read/write the same set of global variable without any synchronization. As far as I know "no threading model" will enforce COM to disallow concurrent access to the same or different instances of the same class by different threads. Will COM prevent concurrent access to instances of the two abovementioned different classes? Do I need synchronization when accessing the global variables from two different COM classes in this situation?

    Read the article

  • how do you pass in a collection to an MVC 2 partial view?

    - by femi
    hello , how do you pass in a collection to an MVC 2 partial view? I saw an example where they used the syntax; <% Html.RenderPartial("QuestionPartial", question); % this passes in only ONE question object.. what if i want to pass in several questions into the partial view and , say, i want to list them out...how would i pass in SEVERAL questions? thanks

    Read the article

  • How bad is it to have two methods with the same name but different signatures in two classes?

    - by Super User
    I have a design problem related to a public interface, the names of methods, and the understanding of my API and code. I have two classes like this: class A: ... function collision(self): .... ... class B: .... function _collision(self, another_object, l, r, t, b): .... The first class has one public method named collision, and the second has one private method called _collision. The two methods differs in argument type and number. As an example let's say that _collision checks if the object is colliding with another object with certain conditions l, r, t, b (collide on the left side, right side, etc) and returns true or false. The public collision method, on the other hand, resolves all the collisions of the object with other objects. The two methods have the same name because I think it's better to avoid overloading the design with different names for methods that do almost the same thing, but in distinct contexts and classes. Is this clear enough to the reader or I should change the method's name?

    Read the article

  • How bad it's have two methods with the same name but differents signatures in two classes?

    - by Super User
    I have a design problem relationated with the public interface, the names of methods and the understanding of my API and my code. I have two classes like this: class A: ... function collision(self): .... ... class B: .... function _collision(self, another_object, l, r, t, b): .... The first class have one public method named collision and the second have one private method called _collision. The two methods differs in arguments type and number. In the API _m method is private. For the example let's say that the _collision method checks if the object is colliding with another_ object with certain conditions l, r, t, b (for example, collide the left side, the right side, etc) and returns true or false according to the case. The collision method, on the other hand, resolves all the collisions of the object with other objects. The two methods have the same name because I think is better avoid overload the design with different names for methods who do almost the same think, but in distinct contexts and classes. This is clear enough to the reader or I should change the method's name?

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to manage reusable classes/libraries separately?

    - by Tom
    When coding, I naturally often come up with classes or a set of classes with a high reusability. I'm looking for an easy, straight-forward way to work on them separately. I'd like to be able to easily integrate them into any project; it also should be possible to switch to a different version with as few commands as possible. Am I right with the assumption that git (or another VCS) is best suited for this? I thought of setting up local repositories for each class/project/library/plugin and then just cloning/pulling them. It would be great if I could reference those projects by name, not by the full path. Like git clone someproject. edit: To clarify, I know what VCS are about and I do use them. I'm just looking for a comfortable way to store and edit some reusable pieces of code (including unit tests) separately and to be able to include them (without the unit tests) in other projects, without having to manually copy files. Apache Maven is a good example, but I'm looking for a language-independent solution, optimally command-line-based.

    Read the article

  • DB Object passing between classes singleton, static or other?

    - by Stephen
    So I'm designing a reporting system at work it's my first project written OOP and I'm stuck on the design choice for the DB class. Obviously I only want to create one instance of the DB class per-session/user and then pass it to each of the classes that need it. What I don't know it what's best practice for implementing this. Currently I have code like the following:- class db { private $user = 'USER'; private $pass = 'PASS'; private $tables = array( 'user','report', 'etc...'); function __construct(){ //SET UP CONNECTION AND TABLES } }; class report{ function __construct ($params = array(), $db, $user) { //Error checking/handling trimed //$db is the database object we created $this->db = $db; //$this->user is the user object for the logged in user $this->user = $user; $this->reportCreate(); } public function setPermission($permissionId = 1) { //Note the $this->db is this the best practise solution? $this->db->permission->find($permissionId) //Note the $this->user is this the best practise solution? $this->user->checkPermission(1) $data=array(); $this->db->reportpermission->insert($data) } };//end report I've been reading about using static classes and have just come across Singletons (though these appear to be passé already?) so what's current best practice for doing this?

    Read the article

  • Are there legitimate reasons for returning exception objects instead of throwing them?

    - by stakx
    This question is intended to apply to any OO programming language that supports exception handling; I am using C# for illustrative purposes only. Exceptions are usually intended to be raised when an problem arises that the code cannot immediately handle, and then to be caught in a catch clause in a different location (usually an outer stack frame). Q: Are there any legitimate situations where exceptions are not thrown and caught, but simply returned from a method and then passed around as error objects? This question came up for me because .NET 4's System.IObserver<T>.OnError method suggests just that: exceptions being passed around as error objects. Let's look at another scenario, validation. Let's say I am following conventional wisdom, and that I am therefore distinguishing between an error object type IValidationError and a separate exception type ValidationException that is used to report unexpected errors: partial interface IValidationError { } abstract partial class ValidationException : System.Exception { public abstract IValidationError[] ValidationErrors { get; } } (The System.Component.DataAnnotations namespace does something quite similar.) These types could be employed as follows: partial interface IFoo { } // an immutable type partial interface IFooBuilder // mutable counterpart to prepare instances of above type { bool IsValid(out IValidationError[] validationErrors); // true if no validation error occurs IFoo Build(); // throws ValidationException if !IsValid(…) } Now I am wondering, could I not simplify the above to this: partial class ValidationError : System.Exception { } // = IValidationError + ValidationException partial interface IFoo { } // (unchanged) partial interface IFooBuilder { bool IsValid(out ValidationError[] validationErrors); IFoo Build(); // may throw ValidationError or sth. like AggregateException<ValidationError> } Q: What are the advantages and disadvantages of these two differing approaches?

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Class Inheritance For PHP

    - by VirtuosiMedia
    I have a situation where I think I might need dynamic class inheritance in PHP 5.3, but the idea doesn't sit well and I'm looking for a different design pattern to solve my problem if it's possible. Use Case I have a set of DB abstraction layer classes that dynamically compiles SQL queries, with one DAL class for each DB type (MySQL, MsSQL, Oracle, etc.). Each table in the database has its own class that extends the appropriate DAL class. The idea is that you interact with the table classes, but never directly use the DAL class. If you want to support a different DB type for your app, you don't need to rewrite any queries or even any code, you simply change a setting that swaps one DAL class out for another...and that's it. To give you a better idea of how this is used, you can take a look at the DAL class, the table classes, and how they are used on this StackExchange Code Review page. To really understand what I'm trying to do, please take a look at my implementation first before suggesting a solution. Issues The strategy that I had used previously was to have all of the DAL classes share the same class name. This eliminated autoloading, so I had to manually load the appropriate DAL class in a switch statement. However, this approach presents some problems for testing and documentation purposes, so I'd like to find a different way to solve the problem of loading the correct DAL class more elegantly. Update to clarify the issue The problem basically boils down to inconsistencies in the class name (pre-PHP 5.3) or class namespace (PHP 5.3) and its location in the directory structure. At this point, all of my DAL classes have the same name, DBObject, but reside in different folders, MySQL, Oracle, etc. My table classes all extend DBObject, but which DBObject they extend varies depending on which one has been loaded. Basically, I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too. The table classes act as a stable API and extend a dynamic backend, the DAL (DBObject) classes. It works great, but I outsmarted myself and because of the inconsistencies with the class names and their locations, I can't autoload the DBObject, which makes running unit tests and generating API docs impossible for the DBObject classes because the tests and docs rely on auto-loading. Just loading the appropriate DBObject into memory using a factory method won't work because there will be times when I need to load multiple DBObjects for testing. Because the classes currently share a name, this causes a class is already defined error. I can make exceptions for the DBObjects in my test code, obviously, but I'm looking for something a little less hacky as there may future instances where something similar would need to be done. Solutions? Worst case scenario, I can continue my current strategy, but I don't like it very much, especially as I'll soon be converting my code to PHP 5.3. I suspect that I can use some sort of dynamic inheritance via either namespaces (preferred) or a dynamic class extension, but I haven't been able to find good examples of this implemented in the wild. In your answers, please suggest either an alternate pattern that would work for this use case or an example of dynamic inheritance done right. Please assume PHP 5.3 with namespaced code. Any code examples are greatly encouraged. The preferred constraints for the solution are: DAL class can be autoloaded. DAL classes don't share the same exact same namespace, but share the same class name. As an example, I would prefer to use classes named DbObject that use namespaces like Vm\Db\MySql and Vm\Db\Oracle. Table classes don't have to be rewritten with a change in DB type. The appropriate DB type is determined via a single setting only. That setting is the only thing that should need to change to interchange DB types. Ideally, the setting check should occur only once per page load, but I'm flexible on that.

    Read the article

  • Can I write a .NETCF Partial Class to extend System.Windows.Forms.UserControl?

    - by eidylon
    Okay... I'm writing a .NET CF (VBNET 2008 3.5 SP1) application, which has one master form, and it dynamically loads specific UserControls based on menu click, in a sort of framework idea. There are certain methods and properties these controls all need to work within the app. Right now I am doing this as an Interface, but this is aggravating as all get up, because some of the methods are optional, and yet I MUST implement them by the nature of interfaces. I would prefer to use inheritance, so that I can have certain code be inherited with overridability, but if I write a class which inherits System.Windows.Forms.UserControl and then inherit my control from that, it squiggles, and tells me that UserControls MUST inherit directly from System.Windows.Forms.UserControl. (Talk about a design flaw!) So next I thought, well, let me use a partial class to extend System.Windows.Forms.UserControl, but when I do that, even though it all seems to compile fine, none of my new properties/methods show up on my controls. Is there any way I can use partial classes to 'extend' System.Windows.Forms.UserControl? For example, can anyone give me a code sample of a partial class which simply adds a MyCount As Integer readonly property to the System.Windows.Forms.UserControl class? If I can just see how to get this going, I can take it from there and add the rest of my functionality. Thanks in advance! I've been searching google, but can't find anything that seems to work for UserControl extension on .NET CF. And the Interface method is driving me crazy as even a small change means updating ALL the controls whether they need to 'override' the method or not.

    Read the article

  • Rendering partial for table row with form_tag is getting crazy!

    - by xopht
    I have 23(column)x6(row) table and change the row with link_to_remote function. each tr tag has its own id attribute. change link call change action and change action changes the row using render function wit partial. _change.html.erb <td id="row_1">1</td> . . omitted . . <td id="row_23">23</td> link_to_remote function <%= link_to_remote 'Change', :update => 'row_1', :url => change_path %> change action def change logger.debug render :partial => 'change' end If I coded like above, everything work okay. This means all changed-columns are in one row. But, if I wrap partial code with *form_for* function like below... <% form_for 'change' do %> <td id="row_1">1</td> . . omitted . . <td id="row_23">23</td> <% end %> Then, one column located in one row and that column is the first column. I've looked up the log file, but it was normal html tags. What's wrong?

    Read the article

  • How to submit sitemap when your website has partial https? - Error: "Not in Domain"

    - by Ralph N
    My website is an ecommerce that is set up to do http for the item browsing portion, but https for things like shopping cart, contact us, etc.. (anything that has forms on it). I've submitted my website a long time ago to google webmaster tools as http://www.mywebsite.com. I also submitted a sitemap with about 40 links - 8 of them are https. I've noticed that for the longest time, google webmaster tools was reporting that 32 out of the 40 links have been crawled. I tested all the links against my robots.txt and realized that my robots text was blocking the https links. Google says those links are "Not In Domain". Is there a way i'm supposed to get around this so that I can have a hybrid-ssl site? I understand the concept that one site is mywebsite.com:80 and the other is mywebsite.com:443, but i'd like to avoid submitting and maintaining 2 seperate websites on google webmaster tools.

    Read the article

  • Multiple classes in a single .cs file - good or bad?

    - by Sergio
    Is it advisable to create multiple classes within a .cs file or should each .cs file have an individual class? For example: public class Items { public class Animal { } public class Person { } public class Object { } } Dodging the fact for a minute that this is a poor example of good architecture, is having more than a single class in a .cs file a code smell?

    Read the article

  • Why is my class worse than the hierarchy of classes in the book (beginner OOP)?

    - by aditya menon
    I am reading this book. The author is trying to model a lesson in a college. The goal is to output the Lesson Type (Lecture or Seminar), and the Charges for the lesson depending on whether it is a hourly or fixed price lesson. So the output should be: lesson charge 20. Charge type: hourly rate. lesson type seminar. lesson charge 30. Charge type: fixed rate. lesson type lecture. When the input is as follows: $lessons[] = new Lesson('hourly rate', 4, 'seminar'); $lessons[] = new Lesson('fixed rate', null, 'lecture'); I wrote this: class Lesson { private $chargeType; private $duration; private $lessonType; public function __construct($chargeType, $duration, $lessonType) { $this->chargeType = $chargeType; $this->duration = $duration; $this->lessonType = $lessonType; } public function getChargeType() { return $this->getChargeType; } public function getLessonType() { return $this->getLessonType; } public function cost() { if($this->chargeType == 'fixed rate') { return "30"; } else { return $this->duration * 5; } } } $lessons[] = new Lesson('hourly rate', 4, 'seminar'); $lessons[] = new Lesson('fixed rate', null, 'lecture'); foreach($lessons as $lesson) { print "lesson charge {$lesson->cost()}."; print " Charge type: {$lesson->getChargeType()}."; print " lesson type {$lesson->getLessonType()}."; print "<br />"; } But according to the book, I am wrong (I am pretty sure I am, too). The author gave a large hierarchy of classes as the solution instead. In a previous chapter, the author stated the following 'four signposts' as the time when I should consider changing my class structure: Code Duplication The Class Who Knew Too Much About His Context The Jack of All Trades - Classes that try to do many things Conditional Statements The only problem I can see is Conditional Statements, and that too in a vague manner - so why refactor this? What problems do you think might arise in the future that I have not foreseen?

    Read the article

  • Is it evil to model JSON responses to classes when they are mostly smilar?

    - by Aybe
    Here's the problem : While implementing a C# wrapper for an online API (Discogs) I've been faced to a dilemma : quite often the responses returned have mostly similar members and while modeling these responses to classes, some questions surfaces on which way to go would be the best. Example : Querying for a 'release' or a 'master' will return an object that contains an array of 'artist', however these 'artists' do not exactly have the same members. Currently I decided to represent these 'artists' as a single 'Artist' class, against having respective 'ReleaseArtist' and 'MasterArtist' classes which soon becomes very confusing even though another problem arises : when a category (master or release) does not return these members, they will be null. Though it might sound confusing as well I find it less confusing than the former situation as I've tackled the problem by simply not showing null members when visualizing these objects. Is this the right approach to follow ? An example of these differences : public class Artist { public List<Alias> Aliases { get; set; } public string DataQuality { get; set; } public List<Image> Images { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public List<string> NameVariations { get; set; } public string Profile { get; set; } public string Realname { get; set; } public string ReleasesUrl { get; set; } public string ResourceUrl { get; set; } public string Uri { get; set; } public List<string> Urls { get; set; } } public class ReleaseArtist { public string Join { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public string Anv { get; set; } public string Tracks { get; set; } public string Role { get; set; } public string ResourceUrl { get; set; } public int Id { get; set; } }

    Read the article

  • How can I use UML to model a relationship between two classes, where one has functions exposed as friend to the other?

    - by user1796528
    I have a two classes: ------------ --------------- X Y ------------ --------------- relation ------------ ------------------ --------------- A() C() B() D() E() ------------ --------------- I want to inherit just these two functions from X class, where they are defined with the friend access modifier. My class will be: --------------- Y --------------- --------------- C() A() D() --------------- Y class uses some functions of X class namely A and D. How can I model this relationship in a UML class diagram?

    Read the article

  • Multiple classes in a single .cs file - good or bad?

    - by Sergio
    Is it advisable to create multiple classes within a .cs file or should each .cs file have an individual class? For example: public class Items { public class Animal { } public class Person { } public class Object { } } Dodging the fact for a minute that this is a poor example of good architecture, is having more than a single class in a .cs file a code smell?

    Read the article

  • Is it dangerous for me to give some of my Model classes Control-like methods?

    - by Pureferret
    In my personal project I have tried to stick to MVC, but I've also been made aware that sticking to MVC too tightly can be a bad thing as it makes writing awkward and forces the flow of the program in odd ways (i.e. some simple functions can be performed by something that normally wouldn't, and avoid MVC related overheads). So I'm beginning to feel justified in this compromise: I have some 'manager programs' that 'own' data and have some way to manipulate it, as such I think they'd count as both part of the model, and part of the control, and to me this feels more natural than keepingthem separate. For instance: One of my Managers is the PlayerCharacterManager that has these methods: void buySkill(PlayerCharacter playerCharacter, Skill skill); void changeName(); void changeRole(); void restatCharacter(); void addCharacterToGame(); void createNewCharacter(); PlayerCharacter getPlayerCharacter(); List<PlayerCharacter> getPlayersCharacter(Player player); List<PlayerCharacter> getAllCharacters(); I hope the mothod names are transparent enough that they don't all need explaining. I've called it a manager because it will help manage all of the PlayerCharacter 'model' objects the code creates, and create and keep a map of these. I may also get it to store other information in the future. I plan to have another two similar classes for this sort of control, but I will orchestrate when and how this happens, and what to do with the returned data via a pure controller class. This splitting up control between informed managers and the controller, as opposed to operating just through a controller seems like it will simplify my code and make it flow more. My question is, is this a dangerous choice, in terms of making the code harder to follow/test/fix? Is this somethign established as good or bad or neutral? I oculdn't find anything similar except the idea of Actors but that's not quite why I'm trying to do. Edit: Perhaps an example is needed; I'm using the Controller to update the view and access the data, so when I click the 'Add new character to a player button' it'll call methods in the controller that then go and tell the PlayerCharacterManager class to create a new character instance, it'll call the PlayerManager class to add that new character to the player-character map, and then it'll add this information to the database, and tell the view to update any GUIs effected. That is the sort of 'control sequence' I'm hoping to create with these manager classes.

    Read the article

  • How to handle notifications to several partial views of the same model?

    - by Seki
    I am working on refactoring an old simulation of a Turing machine. The application uses a class that contains the state and the logic of program execution, and several panels to display the tape representation and show the state, messages, and the GUI controls (start, stop, program listing, ...). I would like to refactor it using the MVC architecture that was not used originaly: the Frame is the only way to get access to the different panels and there is also a strong coupling between the "engine" class and the GUI updates in the way of frame.displayPanel.state.setText("halted"); or frame.outputPanel.messages.append("some thing"); It looks to me that I should put the state related code into an observable model class and make the different panels observers. My problem is that the java Observable class only provides a global notification to the Observers, while I would prefer not to refresh every Observers everytime, but only when the part that specificaly observe has changed. I am thinking of implementing myself several vectors of listeners (for the state / position, for the output messages, ...) but I feel like reinventing the wheel. I though also about adding some flags that the observers could check like isNewMessageAvailable(), hasTapeMoved(), etc but it sounds also approximative design. BTW, is it ok to keep the fetch / execute loop into the model or should I move it in another place? We can think in a theorical ideal way as I am completely revamping this small application.

    Read the article

  • Want to Optimize Your Own Site? Then SEO Classes Are the Answer

    If you have decided to learn search engine optimization because you would like your website to gain higher ranking by adding targeted keywords then the best way to do this would be to attend SEO classes online. This way you won't have to pay professional SEO companies as you will be capable of setting up your own business in no time one you have completed your training.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >