Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns and practices'.

Page 71/348 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

• Structuring Access Control In Hierarchical Object Graph

  - by SB2055

  I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. Thoughts I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

  Read the article

• DDD: service contains two repository

  - by tikhop

  Does it correct way to have two repository inside one service and will it be an application or domain service? Suppose I have a Passenger object that should contains Passport (government id) object. I am getting Passenger from PassengerRepository. PassengerRepository create request to server and obtain data (json) than parse received data and store inside repository. I have confused because I want to store Passport as Entity and put it to PassportRepository but all information about password contains inside json than i received above. I guess that I should create a PassengerService that will be include PassengerRepository and PassportRepository with several methods like removePassport, addPassport, getAllPassenger and etc. UPDATE: So I guess that the better way is represent Passport as VO and store all passports inside Passenger aggregate. However there is another question: Where I should put the methods (methods calls server api) for management passenger's passport. I think the better place is so within Passenger aggregate.

  Read the article

• Is the use of explicit ' == true' comparison always bad? [closed]

  - by Slomojo

  Possible Duplicate: Make a big deal out of == true? I've been looking at a lot of code samples recently, and I keep noticing the use of... if( expression == true ) // do something... and... x = ( expression == true ) ? x : y; I've tended to always use... x = ( expression ) ? x : y; and... if( expression ) // do something... Where == true is implicit (and obvious?) Is this just a habit of mine, and I'm being picky about the explicit use of == true, or is it simply bad practice?

  Read the article

• Layering Design Pattern in Java clean code style

  - by zeraDev

  As a Java developer, I am developing trying to use the clean code rules. But in my team we are facing a concrete problem: We have a business layer offering a service called "createObject", this service makes a lot of operation which can result to problem. E.g: parentObjectDontExist, objectAlreadyExist, dontHaveAuthorizationToCreate, operationFailed... and we want the UI using this service to display different information messages depending which error occurred. In old java dev, we should have create all signed exception type and throw it in createObject. As Clean code says, it is forbidden to use Exception for business logic AND signed exceptions are evil... Why not...But i don't know how to solved this problem and i don't want to use return code. How do you do? Thanks for youre experience return.

  Read the article

• Pattern for loading and handling resources

  - by Enoon

  Many times there is the need to load external resources into the program, may they be graphics, audio samples or text strings. Is there a patten for handling the loading and the handling of such resources? For example: should I have a class that loads all the data and then call it everytime I need the data? As in: GraphicsHandler.instance().loadAllData() ...//and then later: draw(x,y, GraphicsHandler.instance().getData(WATER_IMAGE)) //or maybe draw(x,y, GraphicsHandler.instance().WATER_IMAGE) Or should I assign each resource to the class where it belongs? As in (for example, in a game): Graphics g = GraphicsLoader.load(CHAR01); Character c = new Character(..., g); ... c.draw(); Generally speaking which of these two is the more robust solution? GraphicsHandler.instance().getData(WATER_IMAGE) //or GraphicsHandler.instance().WATER_IMAGE //a constant reference

  Read the article

• Entity and pattern validation vs DB constraint

  - by Joerg

  When it comes to performance: What is the better way to validate the user input? If you think about a phone number and you only want numbers in the database, but it could begin with a 0, so you will use varchar: Is it better to check it via the entity model like this: @Size(min = 10, max = 12) @Digits(fraction = 0, integer = 12) @Column(name = "phone_number") private String phoneNumber; Or is it better to use on the database side a CHECK (and no checking in the entity model) for the same feature?

  Read the article

• Entry level engineer question regarding memory management

  - by Ealianis

  It has been a few months since I started my position as an entry level software developer. Now that I am past some learning curves (e.g. the language, jargon, syntax of VB and C#) I'm starting to focus on more esoteric topics, as to write better software. A simple question I presented to a fellow coworker was responded with "I'm focusing on the wrong things." While I respect this coworker I do disagree that this is a "wrong thing" to focus upon. Here was the code (in VB) and followed by the question. Note: The Function GenerateAlert() returns an integer. Dim alertID as Integer = GenerateAlert() _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, NewErrorInfo(Now(), alertID)) vs... _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, New ErrorInfo(Now(), GenerateAlert())) I originally wrote the latter and rewrote it with the "Dim alertID" so that someone else might find it easier to read. But here was my concern and question: Should one write this with the Dim AlertID, it would in fact take up more memory; finite but more, and should this method be called many times could it lead to an issue? How will .NET handle this object AlertID. Outside of .NET should one manually dispose of the object after use (near the end of the sub). I want to ensure I become a knowledgeable programmer that does not just rely upon garbage collection. Am I over thinking this? Am I focusing on the wrong things?

  Read the article

• Should I create inner class here or leave as is?

  - by AndroidNoob

  Folks, I have two separate classes. One of them makes http requests/receives response to/from a server and the second one converts received JSON objects into my models (separate classes). I'm thinking it would be an idea to include this class for data converting as an inner class of my first class. Wouldn't my first class be extra big because of it and I need to leave everything as is or this is a good common practice to behave like that?

  Read the article

• Dynamic Components

  - by Alex

  I am attempting to design a component-based architecture that allows Components to be dynamically enabled and disabled, much like the system employed by Unity3D. For example, all Components are implicitly enabled by default; however, if one desires to halt execution of code for a particular Component, one can disable it. Naively, I want to have a boolean flag in Component (which is an abstract class), and somehow serialize all method calls into strings, so that some sort of ComponentManager can check if a given Component is enabled/disabled before processing a method call on it. However, this is a pretty bad solution. I feel like I should employ some variation of the state paradigm, but I have yet to make progress. Any help would be greatly appreciated,

  Read the article

• Domain Model and Querying

  - by Tyrsius

  I am new to DDD, having worked only in Transaction-Script apps with an anemic model, or just Big Balls of Mud, so please forgive any terminology I abuse. I am trying to understand the proper separation between the domain model and the repository. What is the proper way to construct a domain object that is coming from a database, assuming the (incredibly simplified) need to query for objects by status (returns enumerable), or by ID. Should a factory be building the objects, exposing methods for GetByStatus() and GetByID(), using a DIed repository? Should a repository be called directly, knowing how to build a domain model from the DTO? Should the domain model have a constructor for get by ID, using a DIed repoistory to load the initial state, using some other (?) method for the list? I am not really sure what the best way would be, and this question has an answer advocating each one (these are certainly mutuallu exclusive).

  Read the article

• What Design Pattern is separating transform converters

  - by RevMoon

  For converting a Java object model into XML I am using the following design: For different types of objects (e.g. primitive types, collections, null, etc.) I define each its own converter, which acts appropriate with respect to the given type. This way it can easily extended without adding code to a huge if-else-then construct. The converters are chosen by a method which tests whether the object is convertable at all and by using a priority ordering. The priority ordering is important so let's say a List is not converted by the POJO converter, even though it is convertable as such it would be more appropriate to use the collection converter. What design pattern is that? I can only think of a similarity to the command pattern.

  Read the article

• How should I implement the repository pattern for complex object models?

  - by Eric Falsken

  Our data model has almost 200 classes that can be separated out into about a dozen functional areas. It would have been nice to use domains, but the separation isn't that clean and we can't change it. We're redesigning our DAL to use Entity Framework and most of the recommendations that I've seen suggest using a Repository pattern. However, none of the samples really deal with complex object models. Some implementations that I've found suggest the use of a repository-per-entity. This seems ridiculous and un-maintainable for large, complex models. Is it really necessary to create a UnitOfWork for each operation, and a Repository for each entity? I could end up with thousands of classes. I know this is unreasonable, but I've found very little guidance implementing Repository, Unit Of Work, and Entity Framework over complex models and realistic business applications.

  Read the article

• HTML5 article tag application for the iPad

  - by dspencer

  I've used article tags on websites. My understanding and practice is to use the article tag for publication content. I always use HTML/HTML5 tags as their intended purposes and not at will. Recently, I've seen an HTML template that uses the article tag for the non-publication page content such as the content of an About Us page or any other generic page. I asked the why it was used this way and the (vague) explanation was that it had to do with the way the iPad read the tag. Is this true?

  Read the article

• Should I be concerned that I can't program very fast without Google? [closed]

  - by seth

  Possible Duplicate: Google is good or bad for programmer? I'm currently in college to be a software engineer, and one of the main principles taught to us is how to learn for ourselves, and how to search the web when we have a doubt. This leads to a proactive attitude - when I need something, I go get it. Recently, I started wondering how much development would I be able to do without internet access and the answer bugged me quite a bit. I know the concept of the languages and how to use them, but I was amazed by how "slow" things were without having the Google to help in the development. Most of the problems I have are related to specific syntax. For example, reading and writing to a file in Java. I have done this about a dozen times in my life, yet every time I need to do it, I end up googling "read file java" and refreshing my memory. I completely understand the code and fully understand what it does, but I am sure that without Google it would take me a few tries to get the code correct. Is this normal? Should I be worried and try to change something in my programming behaviour?

  Read the article

• Android design advice - services & broadcast receivers

  - by basudz

  I'm in the process of learning the Android SDK and creating some projects to get a grasp on the system. The current project I'm working with works just fine but I'd like to get some advice about other ways I can go about designing it. Here's what it needs to do. When a text message is received from a specific number, it should fire off a toast message that repeats at a certain interval for a specific duration. To make this work, I created an SMS BroadcastReceiver and checked the incoming messages for the number I'm looking for. If found, an IntentService would be started that would pull out the interval and duration from saved shared prefs. The IntentService would then fire off a broadcast. The BroadcastReceiver for this would catch it and use the AlarmManager to handle the toast message repetitions. This all works just fine, but I'm wondering if there's a cleaner or more efficient way of going about doing this? Any suggestions or advice?

  Read the article

• What OO Design to use ( is there a Design Pattern )?

  - by Blundell

  I have two objects that represent a 'Bar/Club' ( a place where you drink/socialise). In one scenario I need the bar name, address, distance, slogon In another scenario I need the bar name, address, website url, logo So I've got two objects representing the same thing but with different fields. I like to use immutable objects, so all the fields are set from the constructor. One option is to have two constructors and null the other fields i.e: class Bar { private final String name; private final Distance distance; private final Url url; public Bar(String name, Distance distance){ this.name = name; this.distance = distance; this.url = null; } public Bar(String name, Url url){ this.name = name; this.distance = null; this.url = url; } // getters } I don't like this as you would have to null check when you use the getters In my real example the first scenario has 3 fields and the second scenario has about 10, so it would be a real pain having two constructors, the amount of fields I would have to declare null and then when the object are in use you wouldn't know which Bar you where using and so what fields would be null and what wouldn't. What other options do I have? Two classes called BarPreview and Bar? Some type of inheritance / interface? Something else that is awesome?

  Read the article

• Is it a good practice to code in English? [closed]

  - by Milox

  Possible Duplicate: Do people in non-English-speaking countries code in English? I have a development comming that is intended to be sold across Latin America (Spanish speakers), but I've heard from some partners that is a good practice to always code in English, I mean just code (methods, classes, pages names, etc), labels on GUI are going to be all in Spanish... Code will be edited in the future by developer of companies across Latin America and just maybe some from outside. What do you think?, any experience with this?

  Read the article

• Are there new flexible texteditors? [closed]

  - by RParadox

  Vi(m) and Emacs are almost 40 years old. Why are they still the standard, and what attempts have been made at coming up with a new flexible editor? Are there any features which can not be built into vim/emacs? My question is similar to this one: Time to drop Emacs and vi? No one had a suggestion, which surprises me. I would have thought that the core of a texteditor is very small and that people brew their own. Perhaps nobody wants to deal with supporting all the modes? Edit to clarify my question: Instead of writing modes and scripts I ask myself, why there is not a much lightweight project, which lets people custom the editor more directly? Vim has 365395 LOC (C lines all included), Emacs 1.5 million LOC. Why is there a project with say 50k LOC, which is the core, why people can use more freely? Perhaps there is such project, I haven't looked very far. I thought about putting together modules from Vim myself and experimenting with some ideas. The core of editing shouldn't be more than 10k? Vim has a lot optimizations which is really an overkill nowadays. Basically I'm looking for a code base for my own editor and Vi/Emacs are I believe not intended to be used in this way. Bill Joy said the following about vi. http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~kirkenda/joy84.html The fundamental problem with vi is that it doesn't have a mouse and therefore you've got all these commands. In some sense, its backwards from the kind of thing you'd get from a mouse-oriented thing. I think multiple levels of undo would be wonderful, too. But fundamentally, vi is still ed inside. You can't really fool it. Its like one of those pinatas - things that have candy inside but has layer after layer of paper mache on top. It doesn't really have a unified concept. I think if I were going to go back - I wouldn't go back, but start over again.

  Read the article

• Should you apply a language filter to a randomly generated string?

  - by Tim

  A while back I created a licensing system for my companies new product, as well as all products after this one. As with a lot of licensing systems mine generates codes: 25 character product and registration codes, as well as 16 character module unlocking codes. My question is, since some parts of these generated codes are random should I apply a language filter to it to avoid any embarrassing language being given to the end users? I chose to as it was not difficult at all. But has anyone else ever came across something like this? Any viewpoints as to if it is worth the effort?

  Read the article

• Is it a bad practice to have an interface to define constants?

  - by FabianB

  I am writing a set of junit test classes in java. There are several constants, for example strings that I will need in different test classes. I am thinking about an interface that defines them and every test class would implement it. The benefits I see there are: easy access to constants: "MY_CONSTANT" instead of "ThatClass.MY_CONSTANT" each constant defined only once Is this approach rather a good or bad practice? I feel like abusing the concept of interfaces a little bit. You can answer generally about interfaces/constants, but also about unit tests if there is something special about it.

  Read the article

• Moving from mock to real objects?

  - by jjchiw

  I'm like doing TDD so I started everything mocking objects, creating interface, stubbing, great. The design seems to work, now I'll implement the stuff, a lot of the code used in the stubs are going to be reused in my real implementation yay! Now should I duplicate the tests to use the real object implementation (but keeping the mocks object of the sensitive stuff like Database and "services" that are out of my context (http calls, etc...)) Or just change the mocks and stubs of the actual tests to use the real objects....... So the question is that, keep two tests or replace the stubs, mocks? And after that, I should keep designing with the mocks, stubs or just go with real objects? (Just making myself clear I'll keep the mock object of the sensitive stuff like database and services that are out of my context, in both situations.)

  Read the article

• Do ALL your variables need to be declared private?

  - by shovonr

  I know that it's best practice to stay safe, and that we should always prevent others from directly accessing a class' properties. I hear this all the time from university professors, and I also see this all the time in a lot of source code released on the App Hub. In fact, professors say that they will actually take marks off for every variable that gets declared public. Now, this leaves me always declaring variables as private. No matter what. Even if each of these variables were to have both a getter and a setter. But here's the problem: it's tedious work. I tend to quickly loose interest in a project every time I need to have a variable in a class that could have simply been declared public instead of private with a getter and a setter. So my question is, do I really need to declare all my variables private? Or could I declare some variables public whenever they require both a getter and a setter?

  Read the article

• How should I structure the implementation of turn-based board game rules?

  - by Setzer22

  I'm trying to create a turn-based strategy game on a tilemap. I'm using design by component so far, but I can't find a nice way to fit components into the part I want to ask. I'm struggling with the "game rules" logic. That is, the code that displays the menu, allows the player to select units, and command them, then tells the unit game objects what to do given the player input. The best way I could thing of handling this was using a big state machine, so everything that could be done in a "turn" is handled by this state machine, and the update code of this state machine does different things depending on the state. However, this approach leads to a large amount of code (anything not model-related) going into a big class. Of course I can subdivide this big class into more classes, but it doesn't feel modular and upgradable enough. I'd like to know of better systems to handle this in order to be able to upgrade the game with new rules without having a monstruous if/else chain (or switch / case, for that matter). Any ideas? What specific design pattern other than MVC should I be using?

  Read the article

• Writing and Understanding code

  - by Kitex

  I can write code. I can read code but I can't implement good code. How to develop deep understanding of any framework or stuff that we are working on? Is it looking into documentation and working on it? I have seen in this form that people that have great understanding of things they are working on. How is this possible? How to not scrape on the surface only? How to manage time vs learning vs productivity?

  Read the article

• Is it better to use preprocessor directive or if(constant) statement?

  - by MByD

  Let's say we have a codebase that is used for many different costumer, and we have some code in it that relevant only for costumers of type X. Is it better to use preprocessor directives to include this code only in costumer of type X, or to use if statement, to be more clear: // some code #if TYPE_X_COSTUMER = 1 // do some things #endif // rest of the code or if(TYPE_X_COSTUMER) { // do some things } The arguments I can think about are: Preprocessor directive results in smaller code footprint and less branches (on non-optimizing compilers) If statements results with code that always compiles, e.g. if someone will make a mistake that will harm the irrelevant code for the project he works on, the error will still appear, and he will not corrupt the code base. Otherwise he will not be aware of the corruption. I was always been told to prefer the usage of the processor over the usage of the preprocessor (If this is an argument at all...) What is preferable - when talking about a code base for many different costumers?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >