Search Results

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

Page 72/348 | < Previous Page | 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79  | Next Page >

• 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

• How can I bind an interface to a class decided by an xml or database configuration at the launch of the application?

  - by ipohfly

  I'm re-working on the design of an existing application which is build using WebForms. Currently the plan is to work it into a MVP pattern application while using Ninject as the IoC container. The reason for Ninject to be there is that the boss had wanted a certain flexibility within the system so that we can build in different flavor of business logic in the model and let the programmer to choose which to use based on the client request, either via XML configuration or database setting. I know that Ninject have no need for XML configuration, however I'm confused on how it can help to dynamically inject the dependency into the system? Imagine I have a interface IMember and I need to bind this interface to the class decided by a xml or database configuration at the launch of the application, how can I achieve that?

  Read the article

• How to implement string matching based on a pattern

  - by Vincent Rischmann

  I was asked to build a tool that can identify if a string match a pattern. Example: {1:20} stuff t(x) {a,b,c} would match: 1 stuff tx a 20 stuff t c It is a sort of regex but with a different syntax Parentheses indicate an optional value {1:20} is a interval; I will have to check if the token is a number and if it is between 1 and 20 {a,b,c} is just an enumeration; it can be either a or b or c Right now I implemented this with a regex, and the interval stuff was a pain to do. On my own time I tried implementing some kind of matcher by hand, but it turns out it's not that easy to do. By experimenting I ended up with a function that generates a state table from the pattern and a state machine. It worked well until I tried to implement the optional value, and I got stuck and how to generate the state table. After that I searched how I could do this, and that led me to stuff like LL parser, LALR parser, recursive-descent parser, context-free grammars, etc. I never studied any of this so it's hard to know what is relevant here, but I think this is what I need: A grammar A parser which generates states from the grammar and a pattern A state machine to see if a string match the states So my first question is: Is this right ? And second question, what do you recommend I read/study to be able to implement this ?

  Read the article

• Best approach for tracking dependent state

  - by Pace

  Let's pretend I work on a project tracking application. The application is a database backed, server hosted, web application. In this application there are Projects which have many Activities which have many Tasks. A Task has two date fields an originalDueDate and a projectedDueDate. In addition, there are dynamic fields on the Activities and the Projects which indicate whether the Activity or Project is behind schedule based on the projected due dates of the child tasks and various other variables such as remaining buffer time, etc. There are a number of things that can cause the projectedDueDate to change. For example, an employee working on the project may (via a server request) enter in a shipping delay. Alternatively, a site may (via a server request) enter in an unexpected closure. When any of these things occur I need to not only update the projectedDueDate of the Task but also trigger the corresponding Project and Activity to update as well. What is the best way to do this? I've thought of the observer pattern but I don't keep a single copy of all these objects in memory. When a request comes in, I query the Task in from the database, at that point there is no associated Activity in memory that would be a listener. I could remove the ability to query for Tasks and force the application to query first by Project, then by Activity (in context of Project), then by task (in context of Activity) adding the observer relationships at each step but I'm not sure if that is the best way. I could setup a database event listening system so when a Task modified event is dispatched I have a handler which queries for the Activity at that point. I could simply setup a two-way relationship between Task and Activity so that the Task knows about the parent Activity and when the Task updates his state the Task grabs his parent and updates state. Right now I'm stuck considering all the options and am wondering if any single approach (doesn't have to be a listed approach) is jumping out at others as the best approach.

  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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• Which are the best ways to organize view hierarchies in GUI interfaces?

  - by none

  I'm currently trying to figure out the best techniques for organizing GUI view hierarchies, that is dividing a window into several panels which are in turn divided into other components. I've given a look to the Composite Design Pattern, but I don't know if I can find better alternatives, so I'd appreciate to know if using the Composite is a good idea, or it would be better looking for some other techniques. I'm currently developing in Java Swing, but I don't think that the framework or the language can have a great impact on this. Any help will be appreciated. ---------EDIT------------ I was currently developing a frame containing three labels, one button and a text field. At the button pressed, the content inside the text field would be searched, and the results written inside the three labels. One of my typical structure would be the following: MainWindow | Main panel | Panel with text field and labels. | Panel with search button Now, as the title explains, I was looking for a suitable way of organizing both the MainPanel and the other two panels. But here came problems, since I'm not sure whether organizing them like attributes or storing inside some data structure (i.e. LinkedList or something like this). Anyway, I don't really think that both my solution are really good, so I'm wondering if there are really better approaches for facing this kind of problems. Hope it helps

  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

• 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

• using static methods and classes

  - by vedant1811

  I know that static methods/variables are associated with the class and not the objects of the class and are useful in situations when we need to keep count of, say the number of objects of the class that were created. Non-static members on the other hand may need to work on the specific object (i.e. to use the variables initialized by the constructor) My question what should we do when we need neither of the functionalities? Say I just need a utility function that accepts value(s) and returns a value besed solely on the values passed. I want to know whether such methods should be static or not. How is programming efficiency affected and which is a better coding practice/convention and why. PS: I don't want to spark off a debate, I just want a subjective answer and/or references.

  Read the article

• Design Pattern for Data Validation

  - by melodui

  What would be the best design pattern for this problem: I have an Object A. Object A can either be registered or deleted from the database depending on the user request. Data validation is performed before registration or deletion of the object. There are a set of rules to be checked before the object can be registered and another set of rules for deletion. Some of these rules are common for both operations. So far, I think the Chain of Responsibility design pattern fits the most but I'm having trouble implementing it.

  Read the article

• Can it be a good idea to create a new table for each client of a webapp?

  - by Will

  This is semi-hypothetical, and as I've no experience in dealing with massive database tables, I have no idea if this is horrible for some reason. On to the situation: Imagine a web based application - lets say accounting software - which has 20,000 clients and each client has 1000+ entries in a table. That's 20 million rows which I know can certainly slow down complex queries. In a case like this, does it make more sense to create a new table in the database for each client? How do databases react to having 20k (or more!) tables?

  Read the article

• Tips for Making this Code Testable [migrated]

  - by Jesse Bunch

  So I'm writing an abstraction layer that wraps a telephony RESTful service for sending text messages and making phone calls. I should build this in such a way that the low-level provider, in this case Twilio, can be easily swapped without having to re-code the higher level interactions. I'm using a package that is pre-built for Twilio and so I'm thinking that I need to create a wrapper interface to standardize the interaction between the Twilio service package and my application. Let us pretend that I cannot modify this pre-built package. Here is what I have so far (in PHP): <?php namespace Telephony; class Provider_Twilio implements Provider_Interface { public function send_sms(Provider_Request_SMS $request) { if (!$request->is_valid()) throw new Provider_Exception_InvalidRequest(); $sms = \Twilio\Twilio::request('SmsMessage'); $response = $sms->create(array( 'To' => $request->to, 'From' => $request->from, 'Body' => $request->body )); if ($this->_did_request_fail($response)) { throw new Provider_Exception_RequestFailed($response->message); } $response = new Provider_Response_SMS(TRUE); return $response; } private function _did_request_fail($api_response) { return isset($api_response->status); } } So the idea is that I can write another file like this for any other telephony service provided that it implements Provider_Interface making them swappable. Here are my questions: First off, do you think this is a good design? How could it be improved? Second, I'm having a hard time testing this because I need to mock out the Twilio package so that I'm not actually depending on Twilio's API for my tests to pass or fail. Do you see any strategy for mocking this out? Thanks in advance for any advice!

  Read the article

• Is there a pattern to restrict which classes can update another class?

  - by Mike

  Say I have a class ImportantInfo with a public writable property Data. Many classes will read this property but only a few will ever set it. Basically, if you want to update Data you should really know what you're doing. Is there a pattern I could use to make this explicit other than by documenting it? For example, some way to enforce that only classes that implement IUpdateImportantData can do it (this is just an example)? I'm not talking about security here, but more of a "hey, are you sure you want to do that?" kind of thing.

  Read the article

• How to separate and maintain customer specific code

  - by WYSIWYG

  I am implementing customer specific code and currently following simple approach like if (cusomterId == 23) do it. I want to separate out all the customer related code in separate place. But I have following problems. In code is in 1. Stored procs 2. Plain old classes. 3. Controllers 4. Views I came up with two solutions. First is to create table CustomerFunctionlity with columns CustomerId, FunctionalityName, method/Proc, inputs/outputs With this table I can simply check if exists, execute given function. Another way is creating a factory which returns customer related object for an interface. I am writting small end to end customer specific functionalities. How can I write maintenable code. Thanks

  Read the article

• Settings object with singleton pattern

  - by axis

  I need to build an object that will have only one instance because this Object is dedicated to the storage of vital settings for my application and I would like to avoid a misuse of this type or a conflict at run-time. The most popular solution for this, according to the internet, is the Singleton pattern. But I would like to know about other ideas or solutions for this; also I would like to know if other solutions can be much more easy to grasp for an user of this hypothetical library. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Two HTML elements with same id attribute: How bad is it really?

  - by danludwig

  Just browsing the google maps source code. In their header, they have 2 divs with id="search" one contains the other, and also has jstrack="1" attribute. There is a form separating them like so: <div id="search" jstrack="1"> <form action="/maps" id="...rest isn't important"> ... <div id="search">... Since this is google, I'm assuming it's not a mistake. So how bad can it really be to violate this rule? As long as you are careful in your css and dom selection, why not reuse id's like classes? Does anyone do this on purpose, and if so, why?

  Read the article

• practical use of knowledge vs tutorials [on hold]

  - by Lauris Skraucis

  I DONT NEED FACTS,I NEED OPINIONS FROM OTHER DEVELOPERS! Which would be more useful, spend more time on tutorials than on practical use of knowledge or spend more time making real life apps? Like I do everything 50/50 or better I spend all time practicing and putting my knowledge in real life things (php, jQuery, AngularJS)? This is a big pain, I learnt jQuery, then Angular, then php, but didn't practice and forget the code, now I watched basic and intermediate tutorials to refresh knowledge, so what do you think what is the best?

  Read the article

• "Never do in code what you can get the SQL server to do well for you" - Is this a recipe for a bad design?

  - by PhonicUK

  It's an idea I've heard repeated in a handful of places. Some more or less acknowledging that once trying to solve a problem purely in SQL exceeds a certain level of complexity you should indeed be handling it in code. The logic behind the idea is that for the large majority of cases, the database engine will do a better job at finding the most efficient way of completing your task than you could in code. Especially when it comes to things like making the results conditional on operations performed on the data. Arguably with modern engines effectively JIT'ing + caching the compiled version of your query it'd make sense on the surface. The question is whether or not leveraging your database engine in this way is inherently bad design practice (and why). The lines become blurred further when all the logic exists inside the database and you're just hitting it via an ORM.

  Read the article

• How can I refactor my code to use fewer singletons?

  - by fish

  I started a component based, networked game (so far only working on the server). I know why singletons can be bad, but I can't think of another way to implement the same thing. So far I have: A GameState singleton (for managing the global state of the game, i.e. pre-game, running, exiting). A World singleton, which is the root entity for my entity graph An EntityFactory A ComponentFactory I'm thinking about adding a "MessageDispatcher" so individual components can subscribe to network messages. The factories do not have state, so I suppose they aren't so bad. However, the others do have global state, which is asking for trouble. How can I refactor my code so it uses fewer singletons?

  Read the article

• Creating a Predicate Builder extension method

  - by Rippo

  I have a Kendo UI Grid that I am currently allowing filtering on multiple columns. I am wondering if there is a an alternative approach removing the outer switch statement? Basically I want to able to create an extension method so I can filter on a IQueryable<T> and I want to drop the outer case statement so I don't have to switch column names. private static IQueryable<Contact> FilterContactList(FilterDescriptor filter, IQueryable<Contact> contactList) { switch (filter.Member) { case "Name": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).Contains( filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname == filter.Value.ToString() || w.Lastname == filter.Value.ToString() || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname) == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; case "Company": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.Contains(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; } return contactList; } Some additional information, I am using NHibernate Linq. Also another problem is that the "Name" column on my grid is actually "Firstname" + " " + "LastName" on my contact entity. We can also assume that all filterable columns will be strings.

  Read the article

• Are my negative internship experiences representative of the real world? [closed]

  - by attemptAtAnonymity

  I'm curious if my current experiences as an intern are representative of actual industry. As background, I'm through the better part of two computing majors and a math major at a major university; I've aced every class and adored all of them, so I'd like to think that I'm not terrible at programming. I got an internship with one of the major software companies, and half way through now I've been shocked at the extraordinarily low quality of code. Comments don't exist, it's all spaghetti code, and everything that could be wrong is even worse. I've done a ton of tutoring/TAing, so I'm very used to reading bad code, but the major industry products I've been seeing trump all of that. I work 10-12 hours a day and never feel like I'm getting anywhere, because it's endless hours of trying to figure out an undocumented API or determine the behavior of some other part of the (completely undocumented) product. I've left work hating the job every day so far, and I desperately want to know if this is what is in store for the rest of my life. Did I draw a short straw on internships (the absurdly large paychecks imply that it's not a low quality position), or is this what the real world is like?

  Read the article

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