Search Results

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

Page 63/133 | < Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >

• Acquisition Design pattern

  - by Tony

  Anybody any idea where I can find details about this pattern? It is used in relation to threading. C++

  Read the article

• What is MVC and what are the advantages of it?

  - by Teifion

  I found What are mvp and mvc and what is the difference but it didn't really answer this question. I've recently started using MVC because it's part of the framework that myself and my work-partner are going to use. We chose it because it looked easy and separated process from display, are there advantages besides this that we don't know about and could be missing out on? Pros Display and Processing are seperated Cons None so far

  Read the article

• Elegant and 'correct' multiton implementation in Objective C?

  - by submachine

  Would you call this implementation of a multiton in objective-c 'elegant'? I have programmatically 'disallowed' use of alloc and allocWithZone: because the decision to allocate or not allocate memory needs to be done based on a key. I know for sure that I need to work with only two instances, so I'm using 'switch-case' instead of a map. #import "Multiton.h" static Multiton *firstInstance = nil; static Multiton *secondInstance = nil; @implementation Multiton + (Multiton *) sharedInstanceForDirection:(char)direction { return [[self allocWithKey:direction] init]; } + (id) allocWithKey:(char)key { return [self allocWithZone:nil andKey:key]; } + (id)allocWithZone:(NSZone *)zone andKey:(char)key { Multiton **sharedInstance; @synchronized(self) { switch (key) { case KEY_1: sharedInstance = &firstInstance; break; case KEY_2: sharedInstance = &secondInstance; break; default: [NSException raise:NSInvalidArgumentException format:@"Invalid key"]; break; } if (*sharedInstance == nil) *sharedInstance = [super allocWithZone:zone]; } return *sharedInstance; } + (id) allocWithZone:(NSZone *)zone { //Do not allow use of alloc and allocWithZone [NSException raise:NSObjectInaccessibleException format:@"Use allocWithZone:andKey: or allocWithKey:"]; return nil; } - (id) copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone { return self; } - (id) retain { return self; } - (unsigned) retainCount { return NSUIntegerMax; } - (void) release { return; } - (id) autorelease { return self; } - (id) init { [super init]; return self; } PS: I've not tried out if this works as yet, but its compiling cleanly :)

  Read the article

• how to handle exceptions/errors in php?

  - by fayer

  when using 3rd part libraries they tend to throw exceptions to the browser and hence kill the script. eg. if im using doctrine and insert a duplicate record to the database it will throw an exception. i wonder, what is best practice for handling these exceptions. should i always do a try...catch? but doesn't that mean that i will have try...catch all over the script and for every single function/class i use? Or is it just for debugging? i don't quite get the picture. Cause if a record already exists in a database, i want to tell the user "Record already exists". And if i code a library or a function, should i always use "throw new Expcetion($message, $code)" when i want to create an error? Please shed a light on how one should create/handle exceptions/errors. Thanks

  Read the article

• Pattern for version-specific implementations of a Java class

  - by Mike Monkiewicz

  So here's my conundrum. I am programming a tool that needs to work on old versions of our application. I have the code to the application, but can not alter any of the classes. To pull information out of our database, I have a DTO of sorts that is populated by Hibernate. It consumes a data object for version 1.0 of our app, cleverly named DataObject. Below is the DTO class. public class MyDTO { private MyWrapperClass wrapper; public MyDTO(DataObject data) { wrapper = new MyWrapperClass(data); } } The DTO is instantiated through a Hibernate query as follows: select new com.foo.bar.MyDTO(t1.data) from mytable t1 Now, a little logic is needed on top of the data object, so I made a wrapper class for it. Note the DTO stores an instance of the wrapper class, not the original data object. public class MyWrapperClass { private DataObject data; public MyWrapperClass(DataObject data) { this.data = data; } public String doSomethingImportant() { ... version-specific logic ... } } This works well until I need to work on version 2.0 of our application. Now DataObject in the two versions are very similar, but not the same. This resulted in different sub classes of MyWrapperClass, which implement their own version-specific doSomethingImportant(). Still doing okay. But how does myDTO instantiate the appropriate version-specific MyWrapperClass? Hibernate is in turn instantiating MyDTO, so it's not like I can @Autowire a dependency in Spring. I would love to reuse MyDTO (and my dozens of other DTOs) for both versions of the tool, without having to duplicate the class. Don't repeat yourself, and all that. I'm sure there's a very simple pattern I'm missing that would help this. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

  - by Luki

  I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

  Read the article

• Where do you put your dependencies?

  - by The All Foo

  If I use the dependency injection pattern to remove dependencies they end up some where else. For example, Snippet 1, or what I call Object Maker. I mean you have to instantiate your objects somewhere...so when you move dependency out of one object, you end up putting it another one. I see that this consolidates all my dependencies into one object. Is that the point, to reduce your dependencies so that they all reside in a single ( as close to as possible ) location? Snippet 1 - Object Maker <?php class ObjectMaker { public function makeSignUp() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignUpObject = new ControlSignUp(); $SignUpObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignUpObject; } public function makeSignIn() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignInObject = new ControlSignIn(); $SignInObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignInObject; } public function makeTweet( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $TweetObject = new ControlTweet(); $TweetObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $TweetObject; } public function makeBookmark( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $BookmarkObject = new ControlBookmark(); $BookmarkObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject,$TextObject,$MessageObject); return $BookmarkObject; } }

  Read the article

• Should I be using the command pattern? Seems like a lot of work...

  - by Fedor

  My Room class has a lot of methods I used before I decided to use the command pattern. Previously, I was invoking a lot of commands and now it seems I have to make a method in my roomParser class for every method. If I wanted to invoke say, setHotelCode I would have to create a method in roomParser that iterates through and invokes the method. Is this the way I should be using the command pattern? <?php interface Parseable { public function parse( $arr, $dept ); } class Room implements Parseable { protected $_adults; protected $_kids; protected $_startDate; protected $_endDate; protected $_hotelCode; protected $_sessionNs; protected $_minRate; protected $_maxRate; protected $_groupCode; protected $_rateCode; protected $_promoCode; protected $_confCode; protected $_currency = 'USD'; protected $_soapAction; protected $_soapHeaders; protected $_soapServer; protected $_responseXml; protected $_requestXml; public function __construct( $startdate,$enddate,$rooms=1,$adults=2,$kids=0 ) { $this->setNamespace(SESSION_NAME); $this->verifyDates( $startdate, $enddate ); $this->_rooms= $rooms; $this->_adults= $adults; $this->_kids= $kids; $this->setSoapAction(); $this->setRates(); } public function parse( $arr, $dept ) { $this->_price = $arr * $dept * rand(); return $this; } public function setNamespace( $namespace ) { $this->_sessionNs = $namespace; } private function verifyDates( $startdate, $enddate ) {} public function setSoapAction( $str= 'CheckAvailability' ) { $this->_soapAction = $str; } public function setRates( $rates='' ) { } public function setHotelCode($code ) { $this->_hotelCode = $code; } private function getSoapHeader() { return '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <soap:Header> </soap:Header>'; } private function getSoapFooter() { return '</soap:Envelope>'; } private function getSource() { return '<POS> <Source><RequestorId ID="" ID_Context="" /></Source> </POS>'; } function requestXml() { $this->_requestXml = $this->getSoapHeader(); $this->_requestXml .='<soap:Body></soap:Body>'; return $this->_requestXml; } private function setSoapHeaders ($contentLength) { $this->_soapHeaders = array('POST /url HTTP/1.1', 'Host: '.SOAP_HOST, 'Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8', 'Content-Length: '.$contentLength); } } class RoomParser extends SplObjectStorage { public function attach( Parseable $obj ) { parent::attach( $obj ); } public function parseRooms( $arr, $dept ) { for ( $this->rewind(); $this->valid(); $this->next() ) { $ret = $this->current()->parse( $arr, $dept ); echo $ret->getPrice(), PHP_EOL; } } } $arrive = '12/28/2010'; $depart = '01/02/2011'; $rooms = new RoomParser( $arrive, $depart); $rooms->attach( new Room( '12/28/2010', '01/02/2011') ); $rooms->attach( new Room( '12/29/2010', '01/04/2011') ); echo $rooms->count(), ' Rooms', PHP_EOL; Edit: I'm thinking it may be easier if I made the RoomParser less generic by storing properties that all the objects will share. Though I'll probably have to make methods if I want to override for a certain object.

  Read the article

• Buffering db inserts in multithreaded program

  - by Winter

  I have a system which breaks a large taks into small tasks using about 30 threads as a time. As each individual thread finishes it persists its calculated results to the database. What I want to achieve is to have each thread pass its results to a new persisance class that will perform a type of double buffering and data persistance while running in its own thread. For example, after 100 threads have moved their data to the buffer the persistance class then the persistance class swaps the buffers and persists all 100 entries to the database. This would allow utilization of prepared statements and thus cut way down on the I/O between the program and the database. Is there a pattern or good example of this type of multithreading double buffering?

  Read the article

• What is the MVC version of this code?

  - by Ian Boyd

  i'm trying to wrap my head around how to enterprise up my code: taking a simple routine and splitting it up into 5 or 6 methods in 3 or 4 classes. i quickly came up three simple examples of code how i currently write it. Could someone please convert these into an MVC/MVP obfuscated version? Example 1: The last name is mandatory. Color the text box red if nothing is entered. Color it green if stuff is entered: private void txtLastname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Lastname mandatory. //Color pinkish if nothing entered. Greenish if entered. if (txtLastname.Text.Trim() == "") { //Lastname is required, color pinkish txtLastname.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Lastname entered, remove the coloring txtLastname.BackColor = ControlGood; } } Example 2: The first name is optional, but try to get it. We'll add a bluish tint to this "try to get" field: private void txtFirstname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Firstname can be blank. //Hint them that they should *try* to get it with a bluish color. //If they do enter stuff: it better be not all spaces. if (txtFirstname.Text == "") { //Nothing there, hint it blue txtFirstname.BackColor = ControlRequired; } else if (txtFirstname.Text.Trim() == "") { //They entered spaces - bad user! txtFirstname.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Entered stuff, remove coloring txtFirstname.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } } Example 3 The age is totally optional. If an age is entered, it better be valid: private void txtAge_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Age is optional, but if entered it better be valid int nAge = 0; if (Int32.TryParse(txtAge.Text, out nAge)) { //Valid integer entered if (nAge < 0) { //Negative age? i don't think so txtAge.BackColor = ControlBad; } else { //Valid age entered, remove coloring txtAge.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } } else { //Whatever is in there: it's *not* a valid integer, if (txtAge.Text == "") { //Blank is okay txtAge.BackColor = SystemColors.Window; } else { //Not a valid age, bad user txtAge.BackColor = ControlBad; } } } Every time i see MVC code, it looks almost like random splitting of code into different methods, classes, and files. i've not been able to determine a reason or pattern to their madness. Without any understanding of they why it's being one some way, it makes no sense. And using the words model, view, controller and presenter, like i'm supposed to know what that means, doesn't help. The model is your data. The view shows data on screen. The controller is used to carry out the users actions And oranges taste orangy. Here's my attempt at splitting things up in order to make the code more difficult to follow. Is this anywhere close to MVC? private void txtFirstname_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { FirstnameTextChangedHandler(sender, e); } private void FirstnameTextChangedHandler(sender, e) { string firstname = GetFirstname(); Color firstnameTextBoxColor = GetFirstnameTextBoxColor(firstname); SetFirstNameTextBoxColor(firstnameTextBoxColor); } private string GetFirstname() { return txtFirstname.Text; } private Color GetFirstnameTextBoxColor(string firstname) { //Firstname can be blank. //Hint them that they should *try* to get it with a bluish color. //If they do enter stuff: it better be not all spaces. if (firstname == "") { //Nothing there, hint it blue return GetControlRequiredColor(); } else if (firstname.Trim() == "") { //They entered spaces - bad user! return GetControlBadColor(); } else { //Entered stuff, remove coloring return GetControlDefaultColor(); } } private Color GetControlRequiredColor() { return ControlRequired; } private Color GetControlBadColor() { return ControlBad; } private Color GetControlGoodColor() { return ControlGood; } //am i doin it rite i've obfuscated the code, but it's still altogether. The next step in the MVC obfuscation, i gather, is to hide the code in 3 or 4 different files. It's that next step that i don't understand. What is the logical separation of which functions are moved into what other classes? Can someone translate my 3 simple examples above into full fledged MVC obfuscation? Edit: Not ASP/ASP.NET/Online. Pretend it's on a desktop, handheld, surface, kiosk. And pretend it's language agnostic.

  Read the article

• Refactoring Singleton Overuse

  - by drharris

  Today I had an epiphany, and it was that I was doing everything wrong. Some history: I inherited a C# application, which was really just a collection of static methods, a completely procedural mess of C# code. I refactored this the best I knew at the time, bringing in lots of post-college OOP knowledge. To make a long story short, many of the entities in code have turned out to be Singletons. Today I realized I needed 3 new classes, which would each follow the same Singleton pattern to match the rest of the software. If I keep tumbling down this slippery slope, eventually every class in my application will be Singleton, which will really be no logically different from the original group of static methods. I need help on rethinking this. I know about Dependency Injection, and that would generally be the strategy to use in breaking the Singleton curse. However, I have a few specific questions related to this refactoring, and all about best practices for doing so. How acceptable is the use of static variables to encapsulate configuration information? I have a brain block on using static, and I think it is due to an early OO class in college where the professor said static was bad. But, should I have to reconfigure the class every time I access it? When accessing hardware, is it ok to leave a static pointer to the addresses and variables needed, or should I continually perform Open() and Close() operations? Right now I have a single method acting as the controller. Specifically, I continually poll several external instruments (via hardware drivers) for data. Should this type of controller be the way to go, or should I spawn separate threads for each instrument at the program's startup? If the latter, how do I make this object oriented? Should I create classes called InstrumentAListener and InstrumentBListener? Or is there some standard way to approach this? Is there a better way to do global configuration? Right now I simply have Configuration.Instance.Foo sprinkled liberally throughout the code. Almost every class uses it, so perhaps keeping it as a Singleton makes sense. Any thoughts? A lot of my classes are things like SerialPortWriter or DataFileWriter, which must sit around waiting for this data to stream in. Since they are active the entire time, how should I arrange these in order to listen for the events generated when data comes in? Any other resources, books, or comments about how to get away from Singletons and other pattern overuse would be helpful.

  Read the article

• Accessing the "super of this" in Java

  - by gerdemb

  This is what I'm doing now. Is there a better way to access the super class? public class SearchWidget { private void addWishlistButton() { final SearchWidget thisWidget = this; button.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() { public void onClick(ClickEvent event) { // A better way to access the super class? // something like "this.super" ...? workWithWidget(thisWidget); } } } } I'm programming with Google Web Toolkit, but I think this is really a generic Java question.

  Read the article

• Help me to find a better approach-Design Pattern

  - by DJay

  I am working on an ASP.Net web application in which several WCF services are being used. At client level, I am creating channel factory mechanism to invoke service operations. Right now, I have created an assembly having classes used for channel factory creation code for every service. As per my assumption this is some sort of facade pattern. Please help me to find a better approach or any design pattern, which I can use here.

  Read the article

• How to face observable object containing an observable field

  - by iseek

  Hello, I need a hint concerning MVC and Observer-Pattern. For example a model contains the classes "Address" and "Person". The Address class contains the fields street:String, zipcode:String, location:String. Whereas the Person class contains the fields name:String, firstName:String, address:Address. My approach so far looks something like this: Both, Address and Person are observable. If one of their setters is being called, I validate whether the current value and new value differ. Only in this case an update event is fired. The event contains the source, the name of the changed field, the old and the new value. The class for the view contains text fields to display and edit the information of a person: name, firstname, street, zipcode, location. It knows the Person model and is an subscribed observer for the person. So it gets the update events from the person object. My questions concerns the address field from type Address in the person class, since an address is observable on its own. If the view gets an update event from person when a new address has been set, I can update all of the address related fields in the view. But what if a field of the address changes? Should the view also register for update events from the address? Any hints about common design approaches would be appreciated. Greetings.

  Read the article

• Lazy loading? Better avoiding it?

  - by Charlie Pigarelli

  I just read about this design pattern: Lazy Load. And, since in the application i'm working on i have all the classes in one folder, i was wondering if this pattern could just make me avoiding the include() function for every class. I mean: It's nice to know that if i forgot to include a class, PHP, before falling into an error, trough an __autoload() function try to get it. But is it fine enough to just don't care about including classes and let PHP do it by your own every time? Or we should write __autoload() just in case it is needed?

  Read the article

• Find recipes that can be cooked from provided ingridients

  - by skaurus

  Sorry for bad English :( Suppose i can preliminary organize recipes and ingredients data in any way. How can i effectively conduct search of recipes by user-provided ingredients, preferably sorted by max match - so, first going recipes that use maximum of provided ingridients and do not contain any other ingrs, after them recipes that uses less of provided set and still not any other ingrs, after them recipes with minimum additional requirements and so on? All i can think about is represent recipe ingridients like bitmasks, and compare required bitmask with all recipes, but it is obviously a bad way to go. And related things like Levenstein distance i don't see how to use here. I believe it should be quite common task...

  Read the article

• Magic Method __set() on a Instantiated Object

  - by streetparade

  Ok i have a problem, sorry if i cant explaint it clear but the code speaks for its self. i have a class which generates objects from a given class name; Say we say the class is Modules: public function name($name) { $this->includeModule($name); try { $module = new ReflectionClass($name); $instance = $module->isInstantiable() ? $module->newInstance() : "Err"; $this->addDelegate($instance); } catch(Exception $e) { Modules::Name("Logger")->log($e->getMessage()); } return $this; } The AddDelegate Method: protected function addDelegate($delegate) { $this->aDelegates[] = $delegate; } The __call Method public function __call($methodName, $parameters) { $delegated = false; foreach ($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if(class_exists(get_class($delegate))) { if(method_exists($delegate,$methodName)) { $method = new ReflectionMethod(get_class($delegate), $methodName); $function = array($delegate, $methodName); return call_user_func_array($function, $parameters); } } } The __get Method public function __get($property) { foreach($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if ($delegate->$property !== false) { return $delegate->$property; } } } All this works fine expect the function __set public function __set($property,$value) { //print_r($this->aDelegates); foreach($this->aDelegates as $k=>$delegate) { //print_r($k); //print_r($delegate); if (property_exists($delegate, $property)) { $delegate->$property = $value; } } //$this->addDelegate($delegate); print_r($this->aDelegates); } class tester { public function __set($name,$value) { self::$module->name(self::$name)->__set($name,$value); } } Module::test("logger")->log("test"); // this logs, it works echo Module::test("logger")->path; //prints /home/bla/test/ this is also correct But i cant set any value to class log like this Module::tester("logger")->path ="/home/bla/test/log/"; The path property of class logger is public so its not a problem of protected or private property access. How can i solve this issue? I hope i could explain my problem clear.

  Read the article

• Sending object C from class A to class B

  - by user278618

  Hi, I can't figure out how to design classes in my system. In classA I create object selenium (it simulates user actions at website). In this ClassA I create another objects like SearchScreen, Payment_Screen and Summary_Screen. # -*- coding: utf-8 -*- from selenium import selenium import unittest, time, re class OurSiteTestCases(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.verificationErrors = [] self.selenium = selenium("localhost", 5555, "*chrome", "http://www.someaddress.com/") time.sleep(5) self.selenium.start() def test_buy_coffee(self): sel = self.selenium sel.open('/') sel.window_maximize() search_screen=SearchScreen(self.selenium) search_screen.choose('lavazza') payment_screen=PaymentScreen(self.selenium) payment_screen.fill_test_data() summary_screen=SummaryScreen(selenium) summary_screen.accept() def tearDown(self): self.selenium.stop() self.assertEqual([], self.verificationErrors) if __name__ == "__main__": unittest.main() It's example SearchScreen module: class SearchScreen: def __init__(self,selenium): self.selenium=selenium def search(self): self.selenium.click('css=button.search') I want to know if there is anything ok with a design of those classes?

  Read the article

• Single-Page Web Apps: Client-side datastores & server persistence

  - by fig-gnuton

  How should client-side datastores & persistence be handled in a single-page web application? Global vars vs. DI/IoC: Should datastores be assigned to global variables so any part of the application can access them? Or should they be dependency injected where required? Server persistence: Assuming a datastore's data needn't always be persisted to the server immediately, should the datastore itself handle persistence? If not, then what class should handle persistence and how should the persistence class fit into the client-side architecture overall? Is the datastore considered the model in MVC, or is it something else since it just stores raw data?

  Read the article

• How can I refactor this to work without breaking the pattern horribly?

  - by SnOrfus

  I've got a base class object that is used for filtering. It's a template method object that looks something like this. public class Filter { public void Process(User u, GeoRegion r, int countNeeded) { List<account> selected = this.Select(u, r, countNeeded); // 1 List<account> filtered = this.Filter(selected, u, r, countNeeded); // 2 if (filtered.Count > 0) { /* do businessy stuff */ } // 3 if (filtered.Count < countNeeded) this.SendToSuccessor(u, r, countNeeded - filtered) // 4 } } Select(...), Filter(...) are protected abstract methods and implemented by the derived classes. Select(...) finds objects in the based on x criteria, Filter(...) filters those selected further. If the remaining filtered collection has more than 1 object in it, we do some business stuff with it (unimportant to the problem here). SendToSuccessor(...) is called if there weren't enough objects found after filtering (it's a composite where the next class in succession will also be derived from Filter but have different filtering criteria) All has been ok, but now I'm building another set of filters, which I was going to subclass from this. The filters I'm building however would require different params and I don't want to just implement those methods and not use the params or just add to the param list the ones I need and have them not used in the existing filters. They still perform the same logical process though. I also don't want to complicated the consumer code for this (which looks like this) Filter f = new Filter1(); Filter f2 = new Filter2(); Filter f3 = new Filter3(); f.Sucessor = f2; f2.Sucessor = f3; /* and so on adding filters as successors to previous ones */ foreach (User u in users) { foreach (GeoRegion r in regions) { f.Process(u, r, ##); } } How should I go about it?

  Read the article

• What is the best way to create a debugging web page for a computation in Java?

  - by Shooshpanchick

  I'm developing a website that uses some complex computations (NLP-related). My customer wants to have "debugging" webpages for some of these computations where he can run them with arbitrary input and see all the intermediate results that occur during computation. Before this request all of the computations were encapsulated in beans and intermediate results were logged into general log. What is the best way to capture all these results on Java level to render them as webpage?

  Read the article

• Beginner Design pattern question (Web Services involved)

  - by zombie

  Hi all ! I am a noob to web services world. I need to develop a login validator module and expose it as a service. I want it to be service independent, i.e I should have the option of exposing it as a SOAP service or REST service in the future. What pattern should I follow ? Sorry if I am unclear in my requirements, I can clarify as per need. Thanks !! Edit : I am using Eclipse as an IDE and Jersey libraries. I am not into any framework, simply using the MVC pattern. I find a lot of difference between SOAP ann REST methods, so I want my methods to be implementation independent - i.e I should be easily able to use my method through a SOAP or REST service call as per need. What should I do for maximum flexibility ?

  Read the article

• PHP Access property of a class from within a class instantiated in the original class.

  - by Iain

  I'm not certain how to explain this with the correct terms so maybe an example is the best method... $master = new MasterClass(); $master->doStuff(); class MasterClass { var $a; var $b; var $c; var $eventProccer; function MasterClass() { $this->a = 1; $this->eventProccer = new EventProcess(); } function printCurrent() { echo '<br>'.$this->a.'<br>'; } function doStuff() { $this->printCurrent(); $this->eventProccer->DoSomething(); $this->printCurrent(); } } class EventProcess { function EventProcess() {} function DoSomething() { // trying to access and change the parent class' a,b,c properties } } My problem is i'm not certain how to access the properties of the MasterClass from within the EventProcess-DoSomething() method? I would need to access, perform operations on and update the properties. The a,b,c properties will be quite large arrays and the DoSomething() method would be called many times during the execuction of the script. Any help or pointers would be much appreciated :)

  Read the article

• c# wpf command pattern

  - by evan

  I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

  Read the article

• How should I handle expected errors? eg. "username already exists"

  - by Pheter

  I am struggling to understand how I should design the error handling parts of my code. I recently asked a similar question about how I should go about returning server error codes to the user, eg. 404 errors. I learnt that I should handle the error from within the current part of the application; seem's simple enough. However, what should I do when I can't handle the error from the current link in the chain? For example, I may have a class that is used to manage authentication. One of it's methods could be createUser($username, $password). Within that function, I need to determine if the username already exists. If this is true, how should I alert the calling code about this? Returning null instead of a user object is one way. But how do I then know what caused the error? How should I handle errors in such a way that calling code can easily find out what caused the error? Is there a design pattern commonly used for this kind of situation?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >