Search Results

Search found 4243 results on 170 pages for 'anti patterns'.

Page 72/170 | < Previous Page | 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79  | Next Page >

  • Multiple leaf methods problem in composite pattern

    - by Ondrej Slinták
    At work, we are developing an PHP application that would be later re-programmed into Java. With some basic knowledge of Java, we are trying to design everything to be easily re-written, without any headaches. Interesting problem came out when we tried to implement composite pattern with huge number of methods in leafs. What are we trying to achieve (not using interfaces, it's just an example): class Composite { ... } class LeafOne { public function Foo( ); public function Moo( ); } class LeafTwo { public function Bar( ); public function Baz( ); } $c = new Composite( Array( new LeafOne( ), new LeafTwo( ) ) ); // will call method Foo in all classes in composite that contain this method $c->Foo( ); It seems like pretty much classic Composite pattern, but problem is that we will have quite many leaf classes and each of them might have ~5 methods (of which few might be different than others). One of our solutions, which seems to be the best one so far and might actually work, is using __call magic method to call methods in leafs. Unfortunately, we don't know if there is an equivalent of it in Java. So the actual question is: Is there a better solution for this, using code that would be eventually easily re-coded into Java? Or do you recommend any other solution? Perhaps there's some different, better pattern I could use here. In case there's something unclear, just ask and I'll edit this post.

    Read the article

  • C# Linq: Can you merge DataContexts?

    - by Andreas Grech
    Say I have one database, and this database has a set of tables that are general to all Clients and some tables that are specific to certain clients. Now what I have in mind is creating a primary DataContext that includes only the tables that are general to all the clients, and then create separate DataContexts that contain only the tables that are specific to the client. Is there a way to kind of "merge" DataContexts so that it becomes one context? So for Client A, I need one DataContext that includes both the general tables and also the tables for that specific client (retrieved from two different DataContexts) ? [Update] What I think I can do is, from the Partial Class of the DataContext instead of letting my DataContext inherit from DataContext I make it inherit from MyDataContext; that way, the tables from MyDataContext and the other DataContext will be available in one DataContext class. What do you think about this approach? Of course with something like this you can only merge two datacontexts at once though...

    Read the article

  • Java - Calling all methods of a class

    - by Thomas Eschemann
    I'm currently working on an application that has to render several Freemarker templates. So far I have a Generator class that handles the rendering. The class looks more or less like this: public class Generator { public static void generate(…) { renderTemplate1(); renderTemplate2(); renderTemplate3(); } private static void render(…) { // renders the template } private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; … } This works, but it doesn't really feel right. What I would like to do is create a class that holds all the renderTemplate...() methods and then call them dynamically from my Generator class. This would make it cleaner and easier to extend. I was thinking about using something like reflection, but it doesn't really feel like a good solution either. Any idea on how to implement this properly ?

    Read the article

  • 'is instanceof' Interface bad design

    - by peterRit
    Say I have a class A class A { Z source; } Now, the context tells me that 'Z' can be an instance of different classes (say, B and C) which doesn't share any common class in their inheritance tree. I guess the naive approach is to make 'Z' an Interface class, and make classes B and C implement it. But something still doesn't convince me because every time an instance of class A is used, I need to know the type of 'source'. So all finishes in multiple 'ifs' making 'is instanceof' which doesn't sound quite nice. Maybe in the future some other class implements Z, and having hardcoded 'ifs' of this type definitely could break something. The escence of the problem is that I cannot resolve the issue by adding functions to Z, because the work done in each instance type of Z is different. I hope someone can give me and advice, maybe about some useful design pattern. Thanks

    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

  • Writing a synchronized thread-safety wrapper for NavigableMap

    - by polygenelubricants
    java.util.Collections currently provide the following utility methods for creating synchronized wrapper for various collection interfaces: synchronizedCollection(Collection<T> c) synchronizedList(List<T> list) synchronizedMap(Map<K,V> m) synchronizedSet(Set<T> s) synchronizedSortedMap(SortedMap<K,V> m) synchronizedSortedSet(SortedSet<T> s) Analogously, it also has 6 unmodifiedXXX overloads. The glaring omission here are the utility methods for NavigableMap<K,V>. It's true that it extends SortedMap, but so does SortedSet extends Set, and Set extends Collection, and Collections have dedicated utility methods for SortedSet and Set. Presumably NavigableMap is a useful abstraction, or else it wouldn't have been there in the first place, and yet there are no utility methods for it. So the questions are: Is there a specific reason why Collections doesn't provide utility methods for NavigableMap? How would you write your own synchronized wrapper for NavigableMap? Glancing at the source code for OpenJDK version of Collections.java seems to suggest that this is just a "mechanical" process Is it true that in general you can add synchronized thread-safetiness feature like this? If it's such a mechanical process, can it be automated? (Eclipse plug-in, etc) Is this code repetition necessary, or could it have been avoided by a different OOP design pattern?

    Read the article

  • Have you ever derived a programming solution from nature?

    - by Ryu
    When you step back and look at ... the nature of animals, insects, plants and the problems they have organically solved perhaps even the nature and balance of the universe Have you ever been able to solve a problem by deriving an approach from nature? I've heard of Ant Colony Algorithms being able to optimize supply chain amongst other things. Also Fractal's being the "geometry of nature" have been applied to a wide range of problems. Now that spring is here again and the world is coming back to life I'm wondering if anybody has some experiences they can share. Thanks PS I would recommend watching the "Hunting the Hidden Dimension" Nova episode on fractals.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Filters: How to set Viewdata for Dropdown based on action parameter

    - by CRice
    Hi, Im loading an entity 'Member' from its id in route data. [ListItemsForMembershipType(true)] public ActionResult Edit(Member someMember) {...} The attribute on the action loads the membership type list items for a dropdown box and sticks it in viewdata. This is fine for add forms, and search forms (it gets all active items) but I need the attribute to execute BASED ON THE VALUE someMember.MembershipTypeId, because its current value must always be present when loading the item (i.e. all active items, plus the one from the loaded record). So the question is, what is the standard pattern for this? How can my attribute accept the value or should I be loading the viewdata for the drop down in a controller supertype or during model binding or something else? It is in an attribute now because the code to set the viewdata would otherwise be duplicated in each usage in each action.

    Read the article

  • Best practice for passing configuration to each GUI object

    - by Laimoncijus
    Hi, I am writing an application, where I do have few different windows implemented, where each window is a separate class. Now I need somehow to pass a single configuration object to all of them. My GUI is designed in way, where I have one main window, which may create some child windows of its own, and these child windows can have their own childs (so there is no possibility to create all windows in initialization part and feed the config object to all of them from the very beginning)... What would be best practice for sharing this configuration object between them? Always passing via constructor or maybe making it somewhere as final public static and let each window object to access it when needed? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Doubleton Pattern Implementation

    - by Pierreten
    I'm leveraging the Doubleton Pattern from this link http://www.codeproject.com/KB/architecture/designpattern_doubleton.aspx in my own code. I think it makes things a lot easier since the Singleton only provides one instance, but I get two with this pattern. I was wondering if it would make sense to have it implement an interface so I can inject it into my domain layer.

    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

  • Is there a design pattern that expresses objects (an their operations) in various states?

    - by darren
    Hi I have a design question about the evolution of an object (and its state) after some sequence of methods complete. I'm having trouble articulating what I mean so I may need to clean up the question based on feedback. Consider an object called Classifier. It has the following methods: void initialise() void populateTrainingSet(TrainingSet t) void pupulateTestingSet(TestingSet t) void train() void test() Result predict(Instance i) My problem is that these methods need to be called in a certain order. Futher, some methods are invalid until a previous method is called, and some methods are invalid after a method has been called. For example, it would be invalid to call predict() before test() was called, and it would be invalid to call train() after test() was called. My approach so far has been to maintain a private enum that represents the current stateof the object: private static enum STATE{ NEW, TRAINED, TESTED, READY}; But this seems a bit cloogy. Is there a design pattern for such a problem type? Maybe something related to the template method.

    Read the article

  • Pattern for creating a database schema using JDBC

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a Java-application that loads data from a legacy file format into an SQLite-Database using JDBC. If the database file specified does not exist, it is supposed to create a new one. Currently the schema for the database is hardcoded in the application. I would much rather have it in a separate file as an SQL-Script, but apparently there is now easy way to execute an SQL-Script though JDBC. Is there any other way or a pattern to achieve something like this?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • What pattern to use in this scenario?

    - by jess
    Hi, We have got many forms(windows app C#) in our application.We have similar steps in most of them - user adds a new object(in a grid),fills values and save.On,save,we validate,and save if everything ok,else show message.Now,adding of object usually means we add a new row with some default values.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

< Previous Page | 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79  | Next Page >