Search Results

Search found 16051 results on 643 pages for 'schema design'.

Page 7/643 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Design Pattern for Social Game Mission Mechanics

    - by Furkan ÇALISKAN
    When we want to design a mission sub-system like in the The Ville or Sims Social, what kind of design pattern / idea would fit the best? There may be relation between missions (first do this then this etc...) or not. What do you think sims social or the ville or any other social games is using for this? I'm looking for a best-practise method to contruct a mission framework for tha game. How the well-known game firms do this stuff for their large scale social facebook games? Giving missions to the players and wait players to complete them. when they finished the missions, providing a method to catch this mission complete events considering large user database by not using server-side not so much to prevent high-traffic / resource consumption. how should i design the database and server-client communication to achive this design condidering this trade-off.

    Read the article

  • Design patterns: when to use and when to stop doing everything using patterns

    - by honeybadger
    This question arises due to comment of FredOverflow in my previous post. Design pattern used in projects I am quite confused by the comment. I know design pattern help in making code reusable and readable (may lack in efficiency a bit). But when to use design patterns and most importantly when to stop doing everything using patterns or carried away by it ? Any comments from you will be helpful. tagging programing languages too to cover broader audience.

    Read the article

  • So, "Are Design Patterns Missing Language Features"?

    - by Eduard Florinescu
    I saw the answer to this question: How does thinking on design patterns and OOP practices change in dynamic and weakly-typed languages? There it is a link to an article with an outspoken title: Are Design Patterns Missing Language Features. But where you can get snippets that seem very objective and factual and that can be verified from experience like: PaulGraham said "Peter Norvig found that 16 of the 23 patterns in Design Patterns were 'invisible or simpler' in Lisp." and a thing that confirms what I recently seen with people trying to simulate classes in javascript: Of course, nobody ever speaks of the "function" pattern, or the "class" pattern, or numerous other things that we take for granted because most languages provide them as built-in features. OTOH, programmers in a purely PrototypeOrientedLanguage? might well find it convenient to simulate classes with prototypes... I am taking into consideration also that design patterns are a communcation tool and because even with my limited experience participating in building applications I can see as an anti-pattern(ineffective and/or counterproductive) for example forcing a small PHP team to learn GoF patterns for small to medium intranet app, I am aware that scale, scope and purpose can determine what is effective and/or productive. I saw small commercial applications that mixed functional with OOP and still be maintainable, and I don't know if many would need for example in python to write a singleton but for me a simple module does the thing. patterns So are there studies or hands on experience shared that takes into consideration, all this, scale and scope of project, dynamics and size of the team, languages and technologies, so that you don't feel that a (difficult for some)design pattern is there just because there isn't a simpler way to do it or that it cannot be done by a language feature?

    Read the article

  • New book in the style of Advanced Programming Language Design by R. A. Finkel [closed]

    - by mfellner
    I am currently researching visual programming language design for a university paper and came across Advanced Programming Language Design by Raphael A. Finkel from 1996. Other, older discussions in the same vein on Stackoverflow have mentioned Language Implementation Patterns by Terence Parr and Programming Language Pragmatics* by Michael L. Scott. I was wondering if there is even more (and especially up-to-date) literature on the general topic of programming language design. *) http://www.cs.rochester.edu/~scott/pragmatics/

    Read the article

  • Does TDD lead to the good design?

    - by Eugen Martynov
    I'm in transition from "writing unit tests" state to TDD. I saw as Johannes Brodwall creates quite acceptable design from avoiding any of architecture phase before. I'll ask him soon if it was real improvisation or he had some thoughts upfront. I also clearly understand that everyone has experience that prevents to write explicit design bad patterns. But after participating in code retreat I hardly believe that writing test first could save us from mistakes. But I also believe that tests after code will lead to mistakes much faster. So this night question is asking for people who is using TDD for a long time share their experience about results of design without upfront thinking. If they really practice it and get mostly suitable design. Or it's my small understanding about TDD and probably agile.

    Read the article

  • Functional/nonfunctional requirements VS design ideas

    - by Nicholas Chow
    Problem domain Functional requirements defines what a system does. Non-Functional requirements defines quality attributes of what the system does as a whole.(performance, security, reliability, volume, useability, etc.) Constraints limits the design space, they restrict designers to certain types of solutions. Solution domain Design ideas , defines how the system does it. For example a stakeholder need might be we want to increase our sales, therefore we must improve the usability of our webshop so more customers will purchase, a requirement can be written for this. (problem domain) Design takes this further into the solution domain by saying "therefore we want to offer credit card payments in addition to the current prepayment option". My problem is that the transition phase from requirement to design seems really vague, therefore when writing requirements I am often confused whether or not I incorporated design ideas in my requirements, that would make my requirement wrong. Another problem is that I often write functional requirements as what a system does, and then I also specify in what timeframe it must be done. But is this correct? Is it then a still a functional requirement or a non functional one? Is it better to seperate it into two distinct requirements? Here are a few requirements I wrote: FR1 Registration of Organizer FR1 describes the registration of an Organizer on CrowdFundum FR1.1 The system shall display a registration form on the website. FR1.2 The system shall require a Name, Username, Document number passport/ID card, Address, Zip code, City, Email address, Telephone number, Bank account, Captcha code on the registration form when a user registers. FR1.4 The system shall display an error message containing: “Registration could not be completed” to the subscriber within 1 seconds after the system check of the registration form was unsuccessful. FR1.5 The system shall send a verification email containing a verification link to the subscriber within 30 seconds after the system check of the registration form was successful. FR1.6 The system shall add the newly registered Organizer to the user base within 5 seconds after the verification link was accessed. FR2 Organizer submits a Project FR2 describes the submission of a Project by an Organizer on CrowdFundum - FR2 The system shall display a submit Project form to the Organizer accounts on the website.< - FR2.3 The system shall check for completeness the Name of the Project, 1-3 Photo’s, Keywords of the Project, Punch line, Minimum and maximum amount of people, Funding threshold, One or more reward tiers, Schedule of when what will be organized, Budget plan, 300-800 Words of additional information about the Project, Contact details within 1 secondin after an Organizer submits the submit Project form. - FR2.8 The system shall add to the homepage in the new Projects category the Project link within 30 seconds after the system made a Project webpage - FR2.9 The system shall include in the Project link for the homepage : Name of the Project, 1 Photo, Punch line within 30 seconds after the system made a Project webpage. Questions: FR 1.1 : Have I incorporated a design idea here, would " the system shall have a registration form" be a better functional requirement? F1.2 ,2.3 : Is this not singular? Would the conditions be better written for each its own separate requirement FR 1.4: Is this a design idea? Is this a correct functional requirement or have I incorporated non functional(performance) in it? Would it be better if I written it like this: FR1 The system shall display an error message when check is unsuccessful. NFR: The system will respond to unsuccesful registration form checks within 1 seconds. Same question with FR 2.8 and 2.9. FR2.3: The system shall check for "completeness", is completeness here used ambigiously? Should I rephrase it? FR1.2: I added that the system shall require a "Captcha code" is this a functional requirement or does it belong to the "security aspect" of a non functional requirement. I am eagerly waiting for your response. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Good resources for language design

    - by Aaron Digulla
    There are lots of books about good web design, UI design, etc. With the advent of Xtext, it's very simple to write your own language. What are good books and resources about language design? I'm not looking for a book about compiler building (like the dragon book) but something that answers: How to create a grammar that is forgiving (like adding optional trailing commas)? Which grammar patterns cause problems for users of a language? How create a compact grammar without introducing ambiguities

    Read the article

  • Design Patterns and their most common uses for them [closed]

    - by cable729
    Possible Duplicate: What are some programming design patterns that are useful in game development? As I'm returning to game dev, I've realized that I've lost a lot of the knowledge I had before. So now I'm looking at design patterns that I can use for my next project. One design pattern that I've seen a lot is the 'composition method,' which uses actors and components. Is that the right name for it? I'd like to look more at this and see what the advantages/pitfalls are. So what design patterns are out there, and what are the advantages/disadvantages to them?

    Read the article

  • How to explain why design choices are good?

    - by Telastyn
    As I've become a better developer, I find that much of my design skill comes more from intuition than mechanical analysis. This is great. It lets me read code and get a feel for it quicker. It lets me translate designs between languages and abstractions much easier. And it let's me get stuff done faster. The downside is that I find it harder to explain to teammates (and worse, management) why a particular design is advantageous; especially teammates that are behind the times on best practices. "This design is more testable!" or "You should favor composition over inheritance." go right over their heads, and lead into the rabbit hole of me trying to clue everyone in to the last decade of software engineering advances. I'll get better at it with practice of course, but in the mean time it involves a lot of wasted time and/or bad design (that will lead to wasted time fixing it later). How can I better explain why a certain design is superior, when the benefits aren't completely obvious to the audience?

    Read the article

  • Help with MVC design pattern?

    - by user3681240
    I am trying to build a java program for user login but I am not sure if my MVC design is accurate. I have the following classes: LoginControl - servlet LoginBean - data holder java class with private variables getters and setters LoginDAO - concrete java class where I am running my SQL queries and doing rest of the logical work. Connection class - java class just to connect to the database view - jsp to display the results html - used for form Is this how you design a java program based on MVC design pattern? Please provide some suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Database design - table relationship question

    - by iama
    I am designing schema for a simple quiz application. It has 2 tables - "Question" and "Answer Choices". Question table has 'question ID', 'question text' and 'answer id' columns. "Answer Choices" table has 'question ID', 'answer ID' and 'answer text' columns. With this simple schema it is obvious that a question can have multiple answer choices & hence the need for the answer choices table. However, a question can have only one correct answer and hence the need for the 'answer ID' in the question table. However, this 'answer ID' column in the question table provides a illusion as though there can be multiple questions for a single answer which is not correct. The other alternative to eliminate this illusion is to have another table just for correct answer that will have just 2 columns namely the question ID and the answer ID with a 1-1 relationship between the two tables. However, I think this is redundant. Any recommendation on how best to design this thereby enforcing the rules that a question can have multiple answer choices but only one correct answer? Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • New to Java and Spring. What are some good design principles for an inexperienced java developer like me?

    - by Imtiaz Ahmad
    I am learning Java and have written a few small useful programs. I am new to spring but have managed to understand the concept of dependency injection for decoupling. I'm trying to applying that in my development work in an enterprise setting. What are the 3 most important design patterns I should master (not for interview purposes but ones that I will use every day in as a good java developer)? Also what are some good java design considerations and practices in coding specifically in Java? My goal is write good decoupled and coherent programs that are easy to maintain that don't make me standout as a java rookie. Stuff like not beginning my package names with com. have already made me precariously visible in my team. But they know I have 2 years of coding experience and its not in java.

    Read the article

  • Testing for Active Directory Schema modification (not upgrade)

    - by Darktux
    I am trying to test a schema modification. That is i need to add one of the attributes to global catalog by modifying schema , initially in a lab which is exact replica.My questions are below; - What tests need to be done post schema change to determine if its safe for production? - Apart from measuring changes in DIT size post change, is there a way to find the whole size increase for adding an attribute to GC pre change? please let me know if any extra questions or info required.

    Read the article

  • JPA 2.1 Schema Generation (TOTD #187)

    - by arungupta
    This blog explained some of the key features of JPA 2.1 earlier. Since then Schema Generation has been added to JPA 2.1. This Tip Of The Day (TOTD) will provide more details about this new feature in JPA 2.1. Schema Generation refers to generation of database artifacts like tables, indexes, and constraints in a database schema. It may or may not involve generation of a proper database schema depending upon the credentials and authorization of the user. This helps in prototyping of your application where the required artifacts are generated either prior to application deployment or as part of EntityManagerFactory creation. This is also useful in environments that require provisioning database on demand, e.g. in a cloud. This feature will allow your JPA domain object model to be directly generated in a database. The generated schema may need to be tuned for actual production environment. This usecase is supported by allowing the schema generation to occur into DDL scripts which can then be further tuned by a DBA. The following set of properties in persistence.xml or specified during EntityManagerFactory creation controls the behaviour of schema generation. Property Name Purpose Values javax.persistence.schema-generation-action Controls action to be taken by persistence provider "none", "create", "drop-and-create", "drop" javax.persistence.schema-generation-target Controls whehter schema to be created in database, whether DDL scripts are to be created, or both "database", "scripts", "database-and-scripts" javax.persistence.ddl-create-script-target, javax.persistence.ddl-drop-script-target Controls target locations for writing of scripts. Writers are pre-configured for the persistence provider. Need to be specified only if scripts are to be generated. java.io.Writer (e.g. MyWriter.class) or URL strings javax.persistence.ddl-create-script-source, javax.persistence.ddl-drop-script-source Specifies locations from which DDL scripts are to be read. Readers are pre-configured for the persistence provider. java.io.Reader (e.g. MyReader.class) or URL strings javax.persistence.sql-load-script-source Specifies location of SQL bulk load script. java.io.Reader (e.g. MyReader.class) or URL string javax.persistence.schema-generation-connection JDBC connection to be used for schema generation javax.persistence.database-product-name, javax.persistence.database-major-version, javax.persistence.database-minor-version Needed if scripts are to be generated and no connection to target database. Values are those obtained from JDBC DatabaseMetaData. javax.persistence.create-database-schemas Whether Persistence Provider need to create schema in addition to creating database objects such as tables, sequences, constraints, etc. "true", "false" Section 11.2 in the JPA 2.1 specification defines the annotations used for schema generation process. For example, @Table, @Column, @CollectionTable, @JoinTable, @JoinColumn, are used to define the generated schema. Several layers of defaulting may be involved. For example, the table name is defaulted from entity name and entity name (which can be specified explicitly as well) is defaulted from the class name. However annotations may be used to override or customize the values. The following entity class: @Entity public class Employee {    @Id private int id;    private String name;     . . .     @ManyToOne     private Department dept; } is generated in the database with the following attributes: Maps to EMPLOYEE table in default schema "id" field is mapped to ID column as primary key "name" is mapped to NAME column with a default VARCHAR(255). The length of this field can be easily tuned using @Column. @ManyToOne is mapped to DEPT_ID foreign key column. Can be customized using JOIN_COLUMN. In addition to these properties, couple of new annotations are added to JPA 2.1: @Index - An index for the primary key is generated by default in a database. This new annotation will allow to define additional indexes, over a single or multiple columns, for a better performance. This is specified as part of @Table, @SecondaryTable, @CollectionTable, @JoinTable, and @TableGenerator. For example: @Table(indexes = {@Index(columnList="NAME"), @Index(columnList="DEPT_ID DESC")})@Entity public class Employee {    . . .} The generated table will have a default index on the primary key. In addition, two new indexes are defined on the NAME column (default ascending) and the foreign key that maps to the department in descending order. @ForeignKey - It is used to define foreign key constraint or to otherwise override or disable the persistence provider's default foreign key definition. Can be specified as part of JoinColumn(s), MapKeyJoinColumn(s), PrimaryKeyJoinColumn(s). For example: @Entity public class Employee {    @Id private int id;    private String name;    @ManyToOne    @JoinColumn(foreignKey=@ForeignKey(foreignKeyDefinition="FOREIGN KEY (MANAGER_ID) REFERENCES MANAGER"))    private Manager manager;     . . . } In this entity, the employee's manager is mapped by MANAGER_ID column in the MANAGER table. The value of foreignKeyDefinition would be a database specific string. A complete replay of Linda's talk at JavaOne 2012 can be seen here (click on CON4212_mp4_4212_001 in Media). These features will be available in GlassFish 4 promoted builds in the near future. JPA 2.1 will be delivered as part of Java EE 7. The different components in the Java EE 7 platform are tracked here. JPA 2.1 Expert Group has released Early Draft 2 of the specification. Section 9.4 and 11.2 provide all details about Schema Generation. The latest javadocs can be obtained from here. And the JPA EG would appreciate feedback.

    Read the article

  • Validating an XML document fragment against XML schema

    - by shylent
    Terribly sorry if I've failed to find a duplicate of this question. I have a certain document with a well-defined document structure. I am expressing that structure through an XML schema. That data structure is operated upon by a RESTful service, so various nodes and combinations of nodes (not the whole document, but fragments of it) are exposed as "resources". Naturally, I am doing my own validation of the actual data, but it makes sense to validate the incoming/outgoing data against the schema as well (before the fine-grained validation of the data). What I don't quite grasp is how to validate document fragments given the schema definition. Let me illustrate: Imagine, the example document structure is: <doc-root> <el name="foo"/> <el name="bar"/> </doc-root> Rather a trivial data structure. The schema goes something like this: <xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <xsd:element name="doc-root"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="el" type="myCustomType" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> <xsd:complexType name="myCustomType"> <xsd:attribute name="name" use="required" /> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:schema> Now, imagine, I've just received a PUT request to update an 'el' object. Naturally, I would receive not the full document or not any xml, starting with 'doc-root' at its root, but the 'el' element itself. I would very much like to validate it against the existing schema then, but just running it through a validating parser wouldn't work, since it will expect a 'doc-root' at the root. So, again, the question is, - how can one validate a document fragment against an existing schema, or, perhaps, how can a schema be written to allow such an approach. Hope it made sense.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to export an XSD schema from a DataContract

    - by Eric
    I'm using DataContractSerializer to serialize/deserialize my classes to/from XML. Everything works fine, but at some point I'd like to establish a standard schema for the format of these XML files independent of the actual code. That way if something breaks in the serialization process I can always go back and check what the standard schema should be. Or if I do need to modify the schema the modification is an explicit decision rather then just a later affect of modifying my code. In addition, other people may be writing other software that may not be .NET based that would need to read from these XML files. I'd like to be able to provide them with some kind of documentation of the schema. Is there some relationship between a DataContract and an XSD schema. Is there a way to export the DataContract attributes in classes as an XSD schema?

    Read the article

  • Is this kind of design - a class for Operations On Object - correct?

    - by Mithir
    In our system we have many complex operations which involve many validations and DB activities. One of the main Business functionality could have been designed better. In short, there were no separation of layers, and the code would only work from the scenario in which it was first designed at, and now there were more scenarios (like requests from an API or from other devices) So I had to redesign. I found myself moving all the DB code to objects which acts like Business to DB objects, and I've put all the business logic in an Operator kind of a class, which I've implemented like this: First, I created an object which will hold all the information needed for the operation let's call it InformationObject. Then I created an OperatorObject which will take the InformationObject as a parameter and act on it. The OperatorObject should activate different objects and validate or check for existence or any scenario in which the business logic is compromised and then make the operation according to the information on the InformationObject. So my question is - Is this kind of implementation correct? PS, this Operator only works on a single Business-wise Operation.

    Read the article

  • Rails - authoritative source for your database schema?

    - by keruilin
    I have Rails app, and every once in a while, when I bring new developer onboard they exclaim that they should be able to produce the current DB schema in their dev environment by running the whole history of the migrations. I personally don't think that migrations is the authoritative source for your schema. Right now what we do is load a production copy of the DB, with the current schema, onto the dev machine. And, from there, the schema can be maintained via incremental migrations. So my question are: What is the authoritative source of your schema on a Rails project? What is now considered the best-practice way to maintain your DB schema?

    Read the article

  • Recommended design pattern for object with optional and modifiable attributtes? [on hold]

    - by Ikuzen
    I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

    Read the article

  • Why can't we capture the design of software more effectively?

    - by Ira Baxter
    As engineers, we all "design" artifacts (buildings, programs, circuits, molecules...). That's an activity (design-the-verb) that produces some kind of result (design-the-noun). I think we all agree that design-the-noun is a different entity than the artifact itself. A key activity in the software business (indeed, in any business where the resulting product artifact needs to be enhanced) is to understand the "design (the-noun)". Yet we seem, as a community, to be pretty much complete failures at recording it, as evidenced by the amount of effort people put into rediscovering facts about their code base. Ask somebody to show you the design of their code and see what you get. I think of a design for software as having: An explicit specification for what the software is supposed to do and how well it does it An explicit version of the code (this part is easy, everybody has it) An explanation for how each part of the code serves to achieve the specification A rationale as to why the code is the way it is (e.g., why a particualr choice rather than another) What is NOT a design is a particular perspective on the code. For example [not to pick specifically on] UML diagrams are not designs. Rather, they are properties you can derive from the code, or arguably, properties you wish you could derive from the code. But as a general rule, you can't derive the code from UML. Why is it that after 50+ years of building software, why don't we have regular ways to express this? My personal opinion is that we don't have good ways to express this. Even if we do, most of the community seems so focused on getting "code" that design-the-noun gets lost anyway. (IMHO, until design becomes the purpose of engineering, with the artifact extracted from the design, we're not going to get around this). What have you seen as means for recording designs (in the sense I have described it)? Explicit references to papers would be good. Why do you think specific and general means have not been succesful? How can we change this?

    Read the article

  • (Database Design - products attributes): What is better option for product attribute database design

    - by meyosef
    Hi, I new in database design. What is better option for product attribute database design for cms?(Please suggest other options also). option 1: 1 table products{ id product_name color price attribute_name1 attribute_value1 attribute_name2 attribute_value2 attribute_name3 attribute_value3 } option 2: 3 tables products{ id product_name color price } attribute{ id name value } products_attribute{ products_id attribute_id } Thanks, Yosef

    Read the article

  • which is better, creating a materialized view or a new table?

    - by Carson
    I have some demanding mysql queries that are needed to grap same up-to-date datasets from 5-7 mysql tables. I am thinking of creating a table or materialized view to gather all demanding columns from other tables, so as to increase performance. If I create that table, I may need to do extra insert / update / delete operation each time other tables updated. if I create materialized view, I am worrying if the performance can be greatly improved. Because data from other tables are changing very frequently. Most likely, the view may need to be created first everytime before selecting it. Any ideas? e.g. how to cache? other extra measures I can do?

    Read the article

  • which is better, creating a view or a new table?

    - by Carson
    I have some demanding mysql queries that are needed to grap same datasets from several mysql tables. I am thinking of creating a table or view to gather all demanding columns from other tables, so as to increase performance. If I create that table, I may need to do extra insert / update / delete operation each time other tables updated. if I create view, I am worrying if the performance can be greatly improved. Because data from other tables are changing very frequently. Most likely, the view may need to be created first everytime before selecting it. Any ideas? e.g. how to cache? other extra measures I can do?

    Read the article

  • Why isn't the Spring AOP XML schema properly loaded when Tomcat loads & reads beans.xml

    - by chrisbunney
    I'm trying to use Spring's Schema Based AOP Support in Eclipse and am getting errors when trying to load the configuration in Tomcat. There are no errors in Eclipse and auto-complete works correctly for the aop namespace, however when I try to load the project into eclipse I get this error: 09:17:59,515 WARN XmlBeanDefinitionReader:47 - Ignored XML validation warning org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: schema_reference.4: Failed to read schema document 'http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop-2.5.xsd', because 1) could not find the document; 2) the document could not be read; 3) the root element of the document is not . Followed by: SEVERE: StandardWrapper.Throwable org.springframework.beans.factory.xml.XmlBeanDefinitionStoreException: Line 39 in XML document from /WEB-INF/beans.xml is invalid; nested exception is org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: cvc-complex-type.2.4.c: The matching wildcard is strict, but no declaration can be found for element 'aop:config'. Caused by: org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: cvc-complex-type.2.4.c: The matching wildcard is strict, but no declaration can be found for element 'aop:config'. Based on this, it seems the schema is not being read when Tomcat parses the beans.xml file, leading to the <aop:config> element not being recognised. My beans.xml file is as follows: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:jaxws="http://cxf.apache.org/jaxws" xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-2.5.xsd http://cxf.apache.org/jaxws http://cxf.apache.org/schemas/jaxws.xsd http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop-2.5.xsd"> <!--import resource="classpath:META-INF/cxf/cxf.xml" /--> <!--import resource="classpath:META-INF/cxf/cxf-extension-soap.xml" /--> <!--import resource="classpath:META-INF/cxf/cxf-servlet.xml" /--> <!-- NOTE: endpointName attribute maps to wsdl:port@name & should be the same as the portName attribute in the @WebService annotation on the IWebServiceImpl class --> <!-- NOTE: serviceName attribute maps to wsdl:service@name & should be the same as the serviceName attribute in the @WebService annotation on the ASDIWebServiceImpl class --> <!-- NOTE: address attribute is the actual URL of the web service (relative to web app location) --> <jaxws:endpoint xmlns:tns="http://iwebservices.ourdomain/" id="iwebservices" implementor="ourdomain.iwebservices.IWebServiceImpl" endpointName="tns:IWebServiceImplPort" serviceName="tns:IWebService" address="/I" wsdlLocation="wsdl/I.wsdl"> <!-- To have CXF auto-generate WSDL on the fly, comment out the above wsdl attribute --> <jaxws:features> <bean class="org.apache.cxf.feature.LoggingFeature" /> </jaxws:features> </jaxws:endpoint> <aop:config> <aop:aspect id="myAspect" ref="aBean"> </aop:aspect> </aop:config> </beans> The <aop:config> element in my beans.xml file is copy-pasted from the Spring website to try and remove any possible source of error Can anyone shed any light on why this error is occurring and what I can do to fix it?

    Read the article

  • What are the software design essentials? [closed]

    - by Craig Schwarze
    I've decided to create a 1 page "cheat sheet" of essential software design principles for my programmers. It doesn't explain the principles in any great depth, but is simply there as a reference and a reminder. Here's what I've come up with - I would welcome your comments. What have I left out? What have I explained poorly? What is there that shouldn't be? Basic Design Principles The Principle of Least Surprise – your solution should be obvious, predictable and consistent. Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) - the simplest solution is usually the best one. You Ain’t Gonna Need It (YAGNI) - create a solution for the current problem rather than what might happen in the future. Don’t Repeat Yourself (DRY) - rigorously remove duplication from your design and code. Advanced Design Principles Program to an interface, not an implementation – Don’t declare variables to be of a particular concrete class. Rather, declare them to an interface, and instantiate them using a creational pattern. Favour composition over inheritance – Don’t overuse inheritance. In most cases, rich behaviour is best added by instantiating objects, rather than inheriting from classes. Strive for loosely coupled designs – Minimise the interdependencies between objects. They should be able to interact with minimal knowledge of each other via small, tightly defined interfaces. Principle of Least Knowledge – Also called the “Law of Demeter”, and is colloquially summarised as “Only talk to your friends”. Specifically, a method in an object should only invoke methods on the object itself, objects passed as a parameter to the method, any object the method creates, any components of the object. SOLID Design Principles Single Responsibility Principle – Each class should have one well defined purpose, and only one reason to change. This reduces the fragility of your code, and makes it much more maintainable. Open/Close Principle – A class should be open to extension, but closed to modification. In practice, this means extracting the code that is most likely to change to another class, and then injecting it as required via an appropriate pattern. Liskov Substitution Principle – Subtypes must be substitutable for their base types. Essentially, get your inheritance right. In the classic example, type square should not inherit from type rectangle, as they have different properties (you can independently set the sides of a rectangle). Instead, both should inherit from type shape. Interface Segregation Principle – Clients should not be forced to depend upon methods they do not use. Don’t have fat interfaces, rather split them up into smaller, behaviour centric interfaces. Dependency Inversion Principle – There are two parts to this principle: High-level modules should not depend on low-level modules. Both should depend on abstractions. Abstractions should not depend on details. Details should depend on abstractions. In modern development, this is often handled by an IoC (Inversion of Control) container.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >