Search Results

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

Page 79/170 | < Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >

  • benefit of having a factory for object creation?

    - by ajsie
    I'm trying to understand the factory design pattern. I don't understand why it's good to have a middleman between the client and the product (object that the client wants). example with no factory: $mac = new Mac(); example with a factory: $appleStore = new AppleStore(); $mac = $appleStore->getProduct('mac'); How does the factory pattern decouple the client from the product? Could someone give an example of a future code change that will impact on example 1 negative, but positive in example 2 so I understand the importance of decoupling? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is it acceptable to design my GLSurfaceView as a main control class?

    - by Omega
    I'm trying to structure a game I'm making in Android so that I have a sound, flexible design. Right now I'm looking at where I can tie my games rules engine and graphics engine together and what should be in between them. At a glance, I've been eying my implementation of GLSurfaceView, where various screen events are captured. My rationale would be to create an instance of my game engine and graphics engine here and receive events and state changes to trigger updates of either where applicable. Further to this, in the future, the GLSurfaceView implementation could also store stubs for players during a network game and implementations of computer opponents and dispatch them appropriately. Does this seem like a sensible design? Are there any kinds of improvements I can make? Thanks for any input!

    Read the article

  • Avoiding sub-type selection in view code

    - by John Donoghue
    Hi, I have some code where the model contains some classes like (vb.net pseudocode, but could be any OO language): Enum AttributeType Boolean Date String End Enum MustInherit Class Attibute Must Override Function Type As AttributeType End Class Class BooleanAttribute: Attribute Function Type As AttributeType Return AttributeType.Boolean End Function End Class And the view contains some code like: Select Case AttributeType Case Boolean //Display checkbox control Case Date //Display date picker control Case String //Display textbox control End Select I don't really like the code in the view, for the hopefully obvious reasons (what happens when I get a new attribute type etc). My question is, how should I replace it? I could easily add a method to the concrete classes, but that pollutes the model with UI stuff so that's a horrible idea. I could move the select into a factory, but that seems to be just hiding the problem. Can anybody advise a better approach?

    Read the article

  • Makefile: expand dependencies

    - by Danyel
    First off, the title is very generic because there are just tons of ways of how to possibly solve this. However, I'm looking for a clean and neat way. Situation: I have two equal object files foo.o and foo-pi.o, the latter of which is position-independent (compiled with -fPIC). Both depend on foo.h and bar.h. Problem: How do I, without code duplication, declare dependency of all foo*.o to bar.h? Solutions so far: $(shell bash -c 'echo -ne foo{-pi,}.o'}: bar.h $(addsuffix .o, $(addprefix fo, o-pi o)): bar.h The first solution is not portable on systems that don't support bash, the second is a dirty solution since I could not figure out how to use empty strings in addprefix.

    Read the article

  • Singleton Pattern Implementation Issues?

    - by locky28
    Hi I am revising for an exam and need to know some implementation issues with the singleton pattern. they do not need to be too complex just basic things that would affect a developers decision to include them, Thanks P.S. Could any code examples be given in Java thanks.

    Read the article

  • UI Design - design pattern for city/country drop down? (ASP.NET MVC)

    - by JK
    What is the best way to do a city/country dropdown pair in ASP.NET MVC? I see lots of places with country above city, but that's unnatural: in real life we write city/country. I've used city, then country, but the problem is that the user then has to go backwards after changing the country. The other problem is what do you do about cities/countries not in your list? If city/country are both drop downs, then the user cant type their own city if it is missing. But if you have a dropdown and a textbox, that makes it unwieldy (you end up with 4 controls to enter 2 pieces of data). Are there any examples websites where the city/country dropdown pair are done in a very useable and clear manner?

    Read the article

  • Should I use a class in this: Reading a XML file using lxml.

    - by PulpFiction
    Hi everyone. This question is in continuation to my previous question, in which I asked about passing around an ElementTree. I need to read the XML files only and to solve this, I decided to create a global ElementTree and then parse it wherever required. My question is: Is this an acceptable practice? I heard global variables are bad. If I don't make it global, I was suggested to make a class. But do I really need to create a class? What benefits would I have from that approach. Note that I would be handling only one ElementTree instance per run, the operations are read-only. If I don't use a class, how and where do I declare that ElementTree so that it available globally? (Note that I would be importing this module) Please answer this question in the respect that I am a beginner to development, and at this stage I can't figure out whether to use a class or just go with the functional style programming approach.

    Read the article

  • How to implement the disposable pattern in a class that inherits from another disposable class?

    - by TheRHCP
    Hi, I often used the disposable pattern in simple classes that referenced small amount of resources, but I never had to implement this pattern on a class that inherits from another disposable class and I am starting to be a bit confused in how to free the whole resources. I start with a little sample code: public class Tracer : IDisposable { bool disposed; FileStream fileStream; public Tracer() { //Some fileStream initialization } public void Dispose() { this.Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (!disposed) { if (disposing) { if (fileStream != null) { fileStream.Dispose(); } } disposed = true; } } } public class ServiceWrapper : Tracer { bool disposed; ServiceHost serviceHost; //Some properties public ServiceWrapper () { //Some serviceHost initialization } //protected override void Dispose(bool disposing) //{ // if (!disposed) // { // if (disposing) // { // if (serviceHost != null) // { // serviceHost.Close(); // } // } // disposed = true; // } //} } My real question is: how to implement the disposable pattern inside my ServiceWrapper class to be sure that when I will dispose an instance of it, it will dispose resources in both inherited and base class? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Exception handling pattern

    - by treefrog
    It is a common pattern I see where the error codes associated with an exception are stored as Static final ints. when the exception is created to be thrown, it is constructed with one of these codes along with an error message. This results in the method that is going to catch it having to look at the code and then decide on a course of action. The alternative seems to be- declare a class for EVERY exception error case Is there a middle ground ? what is the recommended method ?

    Read the article

  • What is the right way to implement communication between java objects?

    - by imoschak
    I'm working on an academic project which simulates a rather large queuing procedure in java. The core of the simulator rests within one package where there exist 8 classes, each one implementing a single concept. Every class in the project follows SRP. These classes encapsulate the behavior of the simulator and inter-connect every other class in the project. The problem that has arisen is that most of these 8 classes are, as is logical i think, tightly coupled and each one has to have working knowledge of every other class in this package in order to be able to call methods from it when needed. The application needs only one instance of each class so it might be better to create static fields for each class in a new class and use that to make calls -instead of preserving a reference in each class for every other class in the package (which I'm certain that is incorrect)-, but is this considered a correct design solution? or is there a design pattern maybe that better suits my needs?

    Read the article

  • How to handle request/response propagation up and down a widget hierarchy in a GUI app?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Given a GUI application where widgets can be composed of other widgets: If the user triggers an event resulting in a lower level widget needing data from a model, what's the cleanest way to be able to send that request to a controller (or the datastore itself)? And subsequently get the response back to that widget? Presumably one wouldn't want the controller or datastore to be a singleton directly available to all levels of widgets, or is this an acceptable use of singleton? Or should a top level controller be injected as a dependency through a widget hierarchy, as far down as the lowest level widget that might need that controller? Or a different approach entirely?

    Read the article

  • How should nested components interact with model in a GUI application?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Broad design/architecture question. If you have nested components in a GUI, what's the most common way for those components to interact with data? For example, let's say a component receives a click on one of its buttons to save data. Should the save request be delegated up that component's ancestors, with the uppermost ancestor ultimately passing the request to a controller? Or are models/datastores in a GUI application typically singletons, so that a component at any level of a hierarchy can directly get/set data? Or is a controller injected as a dependency down the hierarchy of components, so that any given component is only one intermediary away from the datastore/model?

    Read the article

  • What's wrong (or right) with this JS Object Pattern?

    - by unsane1
    Here's an example of the pattern I'm using in my javascript objects these days (this example relies on jQuery). http://pastie.org/private/ryn0m1gnjsxdos9onsyxg It works for me reasonably well, but I'm guessing there's something wrong, or at least sub-optimal about it, I'm just curious to get people's opinions. Here's a smaller, inline example of it: sample = function(attach) { // set internal reference to self var self = this; // public variable(s) self.iAmPublic = true; // private variable(s) var debug = false; var host = attach; var pane = { element: false, display: false } // public function(s) self.show = function() { if (!pane.display) { position(); $(pane.element).show('fast'); pane.display = true; } } self.hide = function() { if (pane.display) { $(pane.element).hide('fast'); pane.display = false; } } // private function(s) function init () { // do whatever stuff is needed on instantiation of this object // like perhaps positioning a hidden div pane.element = document.createElement('div'); return self; } function position() { var h = { 'h': $(host).outerHeight(), 'w': $(host).outerWidth(), 'pos': $(host).offset() }; var p = { 'w': $(pane.element).outerWidth() }; $(pane.element).css({ top: h.pos.top + (h.h-1), left: h.pos.left + ((h.w - p.w) / 2) }); } function log () { if (debug) { console.log(arguments); } } // on-instantiation let's set ourselves up return init(); } I'm really curious to get people's thoughts on this.

    Read the article

  • How to dispose the objects created by factory pattern

    - by Ram
    Hi, I am using Factory pattern to create .NET objects of a class. I also need to make sure that all such objects should be disposed before application terminates. Where and How can I dispose the objects created by factory pattern? Shall I dispose in the class in which I am getting the objects created by factory?

    Read the article

  • Abstract away a compound identity value for use in business logic?

    - by John K
    While separating business logic and data access logic into two different assemblies, I want to abstract away the concept of identity so that the business logic deals with one consistent identity without having to understand its actual representation in the data source. I've been calling this a compound identity abstraction. Data sources in this project are swappable and various and the business logic shouldn't care which data source is currently in use. The identity is the toughest part because its implementation can change per kind of data source, whereas other fields like name, address, etc are consistently scalar values. What I'm searching for is a good way to abstract the concept of identity, whether it be an existing library, a software pattern or just a solid good idea of some kind is provided. The proposed compound identity value would have to be comparable and usable in the business logic and passed back to the data source to specify records, entities and/or documents to affect, so the data source must be able to parse back out the details of its own compound ids. Data Source Examples: This serves to provide an idea of what I mean by various data sources having different identity implementations. A relational data source might express a piece of content with an integer identifier plus a language specific code. For example. content_id language Other Columns expressing details of content 1 en_us 1 fr_ca The identity of the first record in the above example is: 1 + en_us However when a NoSQL data source is substituted, it might somehow represent each piece of content with a GUID string 936DA01F-9ABD-4d9d-80C7-02AF85C822A8 plus language code of a different standardization, And a third kind of data source might use just a simple scalar value. So on and so forth, you get the idea.

    Read the article

  • BlackBerry - Multiple Screens or Single Screen with Content Manager?

    - by Max Gontar
    Hi! I've seen projects which use many screens each one for different layout and functionality. I've seen projects with only one screen (like wizard workflow) where content is changed on user interaction (and this seems to be logical to use single screen in wizards). But also I've seen projects (apps like game or messenger or phone settings utility) which use single screen for different functionalities. I can see such advantages of having single screen in app: keep same decoration design and menu or toolbar (which may be also achieved with inheritance) keep single screen in ui stack (which may be achieved by pop/push screen) easy to handle data over application Can you tell other advantages/disadvantages of single screen app? When its better to use this approach? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Should Service Depend on Many Repositories, or Break Them Up?

    - by Josh Pollard
    I'm using a repository pattern for my data access. So I basically have a repository per table/class. My UI currently uses service classes to actually get things done, and these service classes wrap, and therefore depend on repositories. In many cases my services are only dependent upon one or two repositories, so things aren't too crazy. Unfortunately, one of my forms in the UI expects the user to enter data that will span five different tables. For this form I made a single service class that depends upon five repositories. Then the methods within the service for saving and loading the data call the appropriate methods on all of the corresponding repositories. As you can imagine, the save and load methods in this service are really big. Also, unit testing this service is getting really difficult because I have to setup so many fake repositories. Would it have been a better choice to break this single service apart into a few smaller services? It would put more code at the UI layer, but would make the services smaller and more testable.

    Read the article

  • Enums and inheritance

    - by devoured elysium
    I will use (again) the following class hierarchy: Event and all the following classes inherit from Event: SportEventType1 SportEventType2 SportEventType3 SportEventType4 I have originally designed the Event class like this: public abstract class Event { public abstract EventType EventType { get; } public DateTime Time { get; protected set; } protected Event(DateTime time) { Time = time; } } with EventType being defined as: public enum EventType { Sport1, Sport2, Sport3, Sport4 } The original idea would be that each SportEventTypeX class would set its correct EventType. Now that I think of it, I think this approach is totally incorrect for two reasons: If I want to later add a new SportEventType class I will have to modify the enum If I later decide to remove one SportEventType that I feel I won't use I'm also in big trouble with the enum. I have a class variable in the Event class that makes, afterall, assumptions about the kind of classes that will inherit from it, which kinda defeats the purpose of inheritance. How would you solve this kind of situation? Define in the Event class an abstract "Description" property, having each child class implement it? Having an Attribute(Annotation in Java!) set its Description variable instead? What would be the pros/cons of having a class variable instead of attribute/annotation in this case? Is there any other more elegant solution out there? Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++ OOP: Which functions to put into the class?

    - by oh boy
    Assume I have a class a: class a { public: void load_data( ); private: void check_data( ); void work_data( ); void analyze_data( ); } Those functions all do something with the class or one of its members. However this function: bool validate_something( myType myData ) { if ( myData.blah > 0 && myData.blah < 100 ) { return true; } return false; } Is related to the class and will only be called by it, so it won't be needed anywhere else Doesn't do anything with the class or its members - just a small "utility" function Where to put validate_something? Inside or outside the class?

    Read the article

  • Implementing search functionality with multiple optional parameters against database table.

    - by quarkX
    Hello, I would like to check if there is a preferred design pattern for implementing search functionality with multiple optional parameters against database table where the access to the database should be only via stored procedures. The targeted platform is .Net with SQL 2005, 2008 backend, but I think this is pretty generic problem. For example, we have customer table and we want to provide search functionality to the UI for different parameters, like customer Type, customer State, customer Zip, etc., and all of them are optional and can be selected in any combinations. In other words, the user can search by customerType only or by customerType, customerZIp or any other possible combinations. There are several available design approaches, but all of them have some disadvantages and I would like to ask if there is a preferred design among them or if there is another approach. Generate sql where clause sql statement dynamically in the business tier, based on the search request from the UI, and pass it to a stored procedure as parameter. Something like @Where = ‘where CustomerZip = 111111’ Inside the stored procedure generate dynamic sql statement and execute it with sp_executesql. Disadvantage: dynamic sql, sql injection Implement a stored procedure with multiple input parameters, representing the search fields from the UI, and use the following construction for selecting the records only for the requested fields in the where statement. WHERE (CustomerType = @CustomerType OR @CustomerType is null ) AND (CustomerZip = @CustomerZip OR @CustomerZip is null ) AND ………………………………………… Disadvantage: possible performance issue for the sql. 3.Implement separate stored procedure for each search parameter combinations. Disadvantage: The number of stored procedures will increase rapidly with the increase of the search parameters, repeated code.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring FAT client legacy application

    - by Paul
    I am working on a fat client legacy C++ application which has a lot of business logic mixed in with the presentation side of things. I want to clean things out and refactor the code out completely, so there is a clear seperation of concerns. I am looking at MVC or some other suitable design pattern in order to achieve this. I would like to get recommendations from people who have walked this road before - Do I use MVP or MVC (or another pattern)? What is/are the best practices for undertaking something like this (i.e. useful steps/checks) ?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >