Search Results

Search found 17770 results on 711 pages for 'repository design'.

Page 8/711 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Setting up a git repository on a server

    - by lostInTransit
    Hi I read through the other git questions here but couldn't really follow whether they are trying to do the same thing as I am. So if you find any duplicates, please let me know. I have a central server with SSO installed. All my machines are connected through the lan to this server. I have also setup a remote git repository on this server. Now what I'd like to do is make the server act as a central repository. All my employees can commit their code to the server and the server pushes it to the remote git repository. Also can I integrate it with SSO in any way? Can someone please help me out with this process? I am new to git and still learning how to use it effectively. So a step-by-step process or an existing document which I can refer to for this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Adding Thunderbird-stable repository gives "can't find signing_key_fingerprint" error

    - by EBV2010
    I'm trying to install Thunderbird 11 on Kubuntu 10.04. I was able to do it on the machine I'm working on. To get a clean process that I can roll out to other clients, I re-installed the machine and repeated the process. This is what I did (I've left out the sudo for clarity): add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-security/ppa apt-get update add-apt-repository ppa:mozilla-team/thunderbird-stable The last one resulted in this error: Error: can't find signing_key_fingerprint at https://launchpad.net/api/1.0/~mozilla-team/+archive/thunderbird-stable The machine as it was before re-installation gave no such message. It was built from the same sources. Bottomline: I got Thunderbird 11.0 to run on Kubuntu 10.04 but after re-installation, adding the repository gives an error and won't add. Is there a way to solve the signing_key_fingerprint error?

    Read the article

  • What is good practice in .NET system architecture design concerning multiple models and aggregates

    - by BuzzBubba
    I'm designing a larger enterprise architecture and I'm in a doubt about how to separate the models and design those. There are several points I'd like suggestions for: - models to define - way to define models Currently my idea is to define: Core (domain) model Repositories to get data to that domain model from a database or other store Business logic model that would contain business logic, validation logic and more specific versions of forms of data retrieval methods View models prepared for specifically formated data output that would be parsed by views of different kind (web, silverlight, etc). For the first model I'm puzzled at what to use and how to define the mode. Should this model entities contain collections and in what form? IList, IEnumerable or IQueryable collections? - I'm thinking of immutable collections which IEnumerable is, but I'd like to avoid huge data collections and to offer my Business logic layer access with LINQ expressions so that query trees get executed at Data level and retrieve only really required data for situations like the one when I'm retrieving a very specific subset of elements amongst thousands or hundreds of thousands. What if I have an item with several thousands of bids? I can't just make an IEnumerable collection of those on the model and then retrieve an item list in some Repository method or even Business model method. Should it be IQueryable so that I actually pass my queries to Repository all the way from the Business logic model layer? Should I just avoid collections in my domain model? Should I void only some collections? Should I separate Domain model and BusinessLogic model or integrate those? Data would be dealt trough repositories which would use Domain model classes. Should repositories be used directly using only classes from domain model like data containers? This is an example of what I had in mind: So, my Domain objects would look like (e.g.) public class Item { public string ItemName { get; set; } public int Price { get; set; } public bool Available { get; set; } private IList<Bid> _bids; public IQueryable<Bid> Bids { get { return _bids.AsQueryable(); } private set { _bids = value; } } public AddNewBid(Bid newBid) { _bids.Add(new Bid {.... } } Where Bid would be defined as a normal class. Repositories would be defined as data retrieval factories and used to get data into another (Business logic) model which would again be used to get data to ViewModels which would then be rendered by different consumers. I would define IQueryable interfaces for all aggregating collections to get flexibility and minimize data retrieved from real data store. Or should I make Domain Model "anemic" with pure data store entities and all collections define for business logic model? One of the most important questions is, where to have IQueryable typed collections? - All the way from Repositories to Business model or not at all and expose only solid IList and IEnumerable from Repositories and deal with more specific queries inside Business model, but have more finer grained methods for data retrieval within Repositories. So, what do you think? Have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • nHibernate session - Using repository pattern in Web, windows, wcf etc...

    - by alex
    I recently posted a question which was answered by Bryan Watts, regarding generic repository for nHibernate. I'm trying to design my data access to allow various facets - from ASP.net, WCF and Windows Forms / Windows services. I'm a bit confused re: session management etc.. How would I handle this? I've been checking out code such as: http://membranecms.googlecode.com/svn/ and questions such as: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1207833/nhibernate-linq-session-management But what do i do if i don't just do things in a web based environment..? Do i need to create different repositories for each client? Or do i pass in the ISession into the (for example) UserRepository constructor..? ... as a side note I'm using nHibernate.Linq Also using fluent nHibernate to config my mapping

    Read the article

  • Design Pattern for Social Game Mission Mechanics

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Does TDD lead to the good design?

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

    Read the article

  • Functional/nonfunctional requirements VS design ideas

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

    Read the article

  • Good resources for language design

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • How to explain why design choices are good?

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

    Read the article

  • Help with MVC design pattern?

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

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net Entity Framework Repository & Linq

    - by Chris Klepeis
    My scenario: This is an ASP.NET 4.0 web app programmed via C# I implement a repository pattern. My repositorys all share the same ObjectContext, which is stored in httpContext.Items. Each repository creates a new ObjectSet of type E. Heres some code from my repository: public class Repository<E> : IRepository<E>, IDisposable where E : class { private DataModelContainer _context = ContextHelper<DataModelContainer>.GetCurrentContext(); private IObjectSet<E> _objectSet; private IObjectSet<E> objectSet { get { if (_objectSet == null) { _objectSet = this._context.CreateObjectSet<E>(); } return _objectSet; } } public IQueryable<E> GetQuery() { return objectSet; } Lets say I have 2 repositorys, 1 for states and 1 for countrys and want to create a linq query against both. Note that I use POCO classes with the entity framework. State and Country are 2 of these POCO classes. Repository stateRepo = new Repository<State>(); Repository countryRepo = new Repository<Country>(); IEnumerable<State> states = (from s in _stateRepo.GetQuery() join c in _countryRepo.GetQuery() on s.countryID equals c.countryID select s).ToList(); Debug.WriteLine(states.First().Country.country) essentially, I want to retrieve the state and the related country entity. The query only returns the state data... and I get a null argument exception on the Debug.WriteLine LazyLoading is disabled in my .edmx... thats the way I want it.

    Read the article

  • Problem Registering a Generic Repository with Windsor IoC

    - by Robin
    I’m fairly new to IoC and perhaps my understanding of generics and inheritance is not strong enough for what I’m trying to do. You might find this to be a mess. I have a generic Repository base class: public class Repository<TEntity> where TEntity : class, IEntity { private Table<TEntity> EntityTable; private string _connectionString; private string _userName; public string UserName { get { return _userName; } set { _userName = value; } } public Repository() {} public Repository(string connectionString) { _connectionString = connectionString; EntityTable = (new DataContext(connectionString)).GetTable<TEntity>(); } public Repository(string connectionString, string userName) { _connectionString = connectionString; _userName = userName; EntityTable = (new DataContext(connectionString)).GetTable<TEntity>(); } // Data access methods ... ... } and a SqlClientRepository that inherits Repository: public class SqlClientRepository : Repository<Client> { private Table<Client> ClientTable; private string _connectionString; private string _userName; public SqlClientRepository() {} public SqlClientRepository(string connectionString) : base(connectionString) { _connectionString = connectionString; ClientTable = (new DataContext(connectionString)).GetTable<Client>(); } public SqlClientRepository(string connectionString, string userName) : base(connectionString, userName) { _connectionString = connectionString; _userName = userName; ClientTable = (new DataContext(connectionString)).GetTable<Client>(); } // data access methods unique to Client repository ... } The Repository class provides some generics methods like Save, Delete, etc, that I want all my repository derived classes to share. The TEntity parameter is constrained to the IEntity interface: public interface IEntity { int Id { get; set; } NameValueCollection GetSaveRuleViolations(); NameValueCollection GetDeleteRuleViolations(); } This allows the Repository class to reference these methods within its Save and Delete methods. Unit tests work fine on mock SqlClientRepository instances as well as live unit tests on the real database. However, in the MVC context: public class ClientController : Controller { private SqlClientRepository _clientRepository; public ClientController(SqlClientRepository clientRepository) { this._clientRepository = clientRepository; } public ClientController() { } // ViewResult methods ... ... } ... _clientRepository is always null. I’m using Windor Castle as an IoC container. Here is the configuration: <component id="ClientRepository" service="DomainModel.Concrete.Repository`1[[DomainModel.Entities.Client, DomainModel]], DomainModel" type="DomainModel.Concrete.SqlClientRepository, DomainModel" lifestyle="PerWebRequest"> <parameters> <connectionString>#{myConnStr}</connectionString> </parameters> </component> I’ve tried many variations in the Windsor configuration file. I suspect it’s more of a design flaw in the above code. As I'm looking over my code, it occurs to me that when registering components with an IoC container, perhaps service must always be an interface. Could this be it? Does anybody have a suggestion? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Repository Design Pattern Guidance

    - by thefactor
    Let's say you have an MVVM CRM application. You have a number of customer objects in memory, through a repository. What would be the appropriate place to handle tasks that aren't associated with traditional MVVM tasks from a GUI? For example, let's say every few minutes you want to check to see if their address is valid and pop up a notification if it is not. Or you want to send out an hourly e-mail update. Or you want a window to pop up to remind you to call a customer at a specific time. Where does this logic go? It's not GUI/action-oriented, and it's not logic that would be appropriate for a repository, I think.

    Read the article

  • Accessing Repositories from Domain

    - by Paul T Davies
    Say we have a task logging system, when a task is logged, the user specifies a category and the task defaults to a status of 'Outstanding'. Assume in this instance that Category and Status have to be implemented as entities. Normally I would do this: Application Layer: public class TaskService { //... public void Add(Guid categoryId, string description) { var category = _categoryRepository.GetById(categoryId); var status = _statusRepository.GetById(Constants.Status.OutstandingId); var task = Task.Create(category, status, description); _taskRepository.Save(task); } } Entity: public class Task { //... public static void Create(Category category, Status status, string description) { return new Task { Category = category, Status = status, Description = descrtiption }; } } I do it like this because I am consistently told that entities should not access the repositories, but it would make much more sense to me if I did this: Entity: public class Task { //... public static void Create(Category category, string description) { return new Task { Category = category, Status = _statusRepository.GetById(Constants.Status.OutstandingId), Description = descrtiption }; } } The status repository is dependecy injected anyway, so there is no real dependency, and this feels more to me thike it is the domain that is making thedecision that a task defaults to outstanding. The previous version feels like it is the application layeer making that decision. Any why are repository contracts often in the domain if this should not be a posibility? Here is a more extreme example, here the domain decides urgency: Entity: public class Task { //... public static void Create(Category category, string description) { var task = new Task { Category = category, Status = _statusRepository.GetById(Constants.Status.OutstandingId), Description = descrtiption }; if(someCondition) { if(someValue > anotherValue) { task.Urgency = _urgencyRepository.GetById (Constants.Urgency.UrgentId); } else { task.Urgency = _urgencyRepository.GetById (Constants.Urgency.SemiUrgentId); } } else { task.Urgency = _urgencyRepository.GetById (Constants.Urgency.NotId); } return task; } } There is no way you would want to pass in all possible versions of Urgency, and no way you would want to calculate this business logic in the application layer, so surely this would be the most appropriate way? So is this a valid reason to access repositories from the domain?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Creating Entity Framework objects with Unity for Unit of Work/Repository pattern

    - by TobyEvans
    Hi there, I'm trying to implement the Unit of Work/Repository pattern, as described here: http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive/2009/06/16/using-repository-and-unit-of-work-patterns-with-entity-framework-4-0.aspx This requires each Repository to accept an IUnitOfWork implementation, eg an EF datacontext extended with a partial class to add an IUnitOfWork interface. I'm actually using .net 3.5, not 4.0. My basic Data Access constructor looks like this: public DataAccessLayer(IUnitOfWork unitOfWork, IRealtimeRepository realTimeRepository) { this.unitOfWork = unitOfWork; this.realTimeRepository = realTimeRepository; } So far, so good. What I'm trying to do is add Dependency Injection using the Unity Framework. Getting the EF data context to be created with Unity was an adventure, as it had trouble resolving the constructor - what I did in the end was to create another constructor in my partial class with a new overloaded constructor, and marked that with [InjectionConstructor] [InjectionConstructor] public communergyEntities(string connectionString, string containerName) :this() { (I know I need to pass the connection string to the base object, that can wait until once I've got all the objects initialising correctly) So, using this technique, I can happily resolve my entity framework object as an IUnitOfWork instance thus: using (IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer()) { container.RegisterType<IUnitOfWork, communergyEntities>(); container.Configure<InjectedMembers>() .ConfigureInjectionFor<communergyEntities>( new InjectionConstructor("a", "b")) DataAccessLayer target = container.Resolve<DataAccessLayer>(); Great. What I need to do now is create the reference to the repository object for the DataAccessLayer - the DAL only needs to know the interface, so I'm guessing that I need to instantiate it as part of the Unity Resolve statement, passing it the appropriate IUnitOfWork interface. In the past, I would have just passed the Repository constructor the db connection string, and it would have gone away, created a local Entity Framework object and used that just for the lifetime of the Repository method. This is different, in that I create an Entity Framework instance as an IUnitOfWork implementation during the Unity Resolve statement, and it's that instance I need to pass into the constructor of the Repository - is that possible, and if so, how? I'm wondering if I could make the Repository a property and mark it as a Dependency, but that still wouldn't solve the problem of how to create the Repository with the IUnitOfWork object that the DAL is being Resolved with I'm not sure if I've understood this pattern correctly, and will happily take advice on the best way to implement it - Entity Framework is staying, but Unity can be swapped out if not the best approach. If I've got the whole thing upside down, please tell me thanks

    Read the article

  • where to enlist transaction with parent child delete (repository or bll)?

    - by Caroline Showden
    My app uses a business layer which calls a repository which uses linq to sql. I have an Item class that has an enum type property and an ItemDetail property. I need to implement a delete method that: (1) always delete the Item (2) if the item.type is XYZ and the ItemDetail is not null, delete the ItemDetail as well. My question is where should this logic be housed? If I have it in my business logic which I would prefer, this involves two separate repository calls, each of which uses a separate datacontext. I would have to wrap both calls is a System.Transaction which (in sql 2005) get promoted to a distributed transaction which is not ideal. I can move it all to a single repository call and the transaction will be handled implicitly by the datacontext but feel that this is really business logic so does not belong in the repository. Thoughts? Carrie

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >