Search Results

Search found 6690 results on 268 pages for 'worst practices'.

Page 87/268 | < Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >

  • Specification: Use cases for CRUD

    - by Mario Ortegón
    I am writing a Product requirements specification. In this document I must describe the ways that the user can interact with the system in a very high level. Several of these operations are "Create-Read-Update-Delete" on some objects. The question is, when writing use cases for these operations, what is the right way to do so? Can I write only one Use Case called "Manage Object x" and then have these operations as included Use Cases? Or do I have to create one use case per operation, per object? The problem I see with the last approach is that I would be writing quite a few pages that I feel do not really contribute to the understanding of the problem. What is the best practice?

    Read the article

  • Is my method for avoiding dynamic_cast<> faster than dynamic_cast<> itself ?

    - by ereOn
    Hi, I was answering a question a few minutes ago and it raised to me another one: In one of my projects, I do some network message parsing. The messages are in the form of: [1 byte message type][2 bytes payload length][x bytes payload] The format and content of the payload are determined by the message type. I have a class hierarchy, based on a common class Message. To instanciate my messages, i have a static parsing method which gives back a Message* depending on the message type byte. Something like: Message* parse(const char* frame) { // This is sample code, in real life I obviously check that the buffer // is not NULL, and the size, and so on. switch(frame[0]) { case 0x01: return new FooMessage(); case 0x02: return new BarMessage(); } // Throw an exception here because the mesage type is unknown. } I sometimes need to access the methods of the subclasses. Since my network message handling must be fast, I decived to avoid dynamic_cast<> and I added a method to the base Message class that gives back the message type. Depending on this return value, I use a static_cast<> to the right child type instead. I did this mainly because I was told once that dynamic_cast<> was slow. However, I don't know exactly what it really does and how slow it is, thus, my method might be as just as slow (or slower) but far more complicated. What do you guys think of this design ? Is it common ? Is it really faster than using dynamic_cast<> ? Any detailed explanation of what happen under the hood when one use dynamic_cast<> is welcome !

    Read the article

  • Design advice for avoiding change in several classes

    - by Anders Svensson
    Hi, I'm trying to figure out how to design a small application more elegantly, and make it more resistant to change. Basically it is a sort of project price calculator, and the problem is that there are many parameters that can affect the pricing. I'm trying to avoid cluttering the code with a lot of if-clauses for each parameter, but still I have e.g. if-clauses in two places checking for the value of the size parameter. I have the Head First Design Patterns book, and have tried to find ideas there, but the closest I got was the decorator pattern, which has an example where starbuzz coffee sets prices depending first on condiments added, and then later in an exercise by adding a size parameter (Tall, Grande, Venti). But that didn't seem to help, because adding that parameter still seemed to add if-clause complexity in a lot of places (and this being an exercise they didn't explain that further). What I am trying to avoid is having to change several classes if a parameter were to change or a new parameter added, or at least change in as few places as possible (there's some fancy design principle word for this that I don't rememeber :-)). Here below is the code. Basically it calculates the price for a project that has the tasks "Writing" and "Analysis" with a size parameter and different pricing models. There will be other parameters coming in later too, like "How new is the product?" (New, 1-5 years old, 6-10 years old), etc. Any advice on the best design would be greatly appreciated, whether a "design pattern" or just good object oriented principles that would make it resistant to change (e.g. adding another size, or changing one of the size values, and only have to change in one place rather than in several if-clauses): public class Project { private readonly int _numberOfProducts; protected Size _size; public Task Analysis { get; set; } public Task Writing { get; set; } public Project(int numberOfProducts) { _numberOfProducts = numberOfProducts; _size = GetSize(); Analysis = new AnalysisTask(numberOfProducts, _size); Writing = new WritingTask(numberOfProducts, _size); } private Size GetSize() { if (_numberOfProducts <= 2) return Size.small; if (_numberOfProducts <= 8) return Size.medium; return Size.large; } public double GetPrice() { return Analysis.GetPrice() + Writing.GetPrice(); } } public abstract class Task { protected readonly int _numberOfProducts; protected Size _size; protected double _pricePerHour; protected Dictionary<Size, int> _hours; public abstract int TotalHours { get; } public double Price { get; set; } protected Task(int numberOfProducts, Size size) { _numberOfProducts = numberOfProducts; _size = size; } public double GetPrice() { return _pricePerHour * TotalHours; } } public class AnalysisTask : Task { public AnalysisTask(int numberOfProducts, Size size) : base(numberOfProducts, size) { _pricePerHour = 850; _hours = new Dictionary<Size, int>() { { Size.small, 56 }, { Size.medium, 104 }, { Size.large, 200 } }; } public override int TotalHours { get { return _hours[_size]; } } } public class WritingTask : Task { public WritingTask(int numberOfProducts, Size size) : base(numberOfProducts, size) { _pricePerHour = 650; _hours = new Dictionary<Size, int>() { { Size.small, 125 }, { Size.medium, 100 }, { Size.large, 60 } }; } public override int TotalHours { get { if (_size == Size.small) return _hours[_size] * _numberOfProducts; if (_size == Size.medium) return (_hours[Size.small] * 2) + (_hours[Size.medium] * (_numberOfProducts - 2)); return (_hours[Size.small] * 2) + (_hours[Size.medium] * (8 - 2)) + (_hours[Size.large] * (_numberOfProducts - 8)); } } } public enum Size { small, medium, large } public partial class Form1 : Form { public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); List<int> quantities = new List<int>(); for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { quantities.Add(i); } comboBoxNumberOfProducts.DataSource = quantities; } private void comboBoxNumberOfProducts_SelectedIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { Project project = new Project((int)comboBoxNumberOfProducts.SelectedItem); labelPrice.Text = project.GetPrice().ToString(); labelWriterHours.Text = project.Writing.TotalHours.ToString(); labelAnalysisHours.Text = project.Analysis.TotalHours.ToString(); } } At the end is a simple current calling code in the change event for a combobox that set size... (BTW, I don't like the fact that I have to use several dots to get to the TotalHours at the end here either, as far as I can recall, that violates the "principle of least knowledge" or "the law of demeter", so input on that would be appreciated too, but it's not the main point of the question) Regards, Anders

    Read the article

  • Separation of interfaces and implementation

    - by bonefisher
    From assembly(or module) perspective, what do you think of separation of Interface (1.assembly) and its Implementation (2.assembly)? In this way we can use some IoC container to develop more decoupling desing.. Say we have an assembly 'A', which contains interfaces only. Then we have an assembly 'B' which references 'A' and implements those interfaces..It is dependent only on 'A'. In assembly 'C' then we can use the IoC container to create objects of 'A' using dependency injection of objects from 'B'. This way 'B' and 'C' are completely unaware (not dependent) of themselves..

    Read the article

  • SVN Best practice for a "branch" of your main product ?

    - by Steffen
    At my job we develop websites - however now we're going to make a "whitelabelled" version of a site, which basically means it's the same site, however with a different logo and hosted on a different domain. Also it'll have minor graphical differences, but overall the engine is the same. My initial thought for keeping this in SVN, was to just make a branch for it - however I'm not quite certain if this could give me trouble later on. Normally I keep my branches somewhat short lived - mainly used for developing a new feature, without disturbing trunk. We need to be able to merge trunk changes into this "whitelabel" version, which I why I thought about branching it in the first place. So what's the best way to archive this ?

    Read the article

  • Synchronising scripts / db / files from dev system to web server

    - by Spoonface
    I work as a freelance web dev, and up until now have been ftping my scripts / databases / static files to my web server manually, but I'm finding that is too error prone. So I'm looking for an app to automate uploading new and updated scripts / files / databases / etc. I know a lot of independent devs use WinSCP or Unison, but I don't think those apps can synch databases. Does anyone have any other suggestions? It doesn't need to be anything overly feature rich as I'm not working within a team or across multiple operating systems or anything like that. I can purchase any reasonably priced license if necesary. My work is primarily for PHP / MySQL / Apache on a Windows system, and then uploaded to a Linux / Apache server. thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • Transform.Translation problem on rotation

    - by eco_bach
    I am using the following to scale and reposition a UIView layer when the device rotates to landscape. [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: 0] forKeyPath: @"transform.translation.x"]; [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: 0] forKeyPath: @"transform.translation.y"]; [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: 1] forKeyPath: @"transform.scale.x"]; //[NSNumber numberWithInt:1] [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: 1] forKeyPath: @"transform.scale.y"]; and then the folowing when rotating back to portrait [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: -75] forKeyPath: @"transform.translation.x"]; [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: 0] forKeyPath: @"transform.translation.y"]; [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: .7] forKeyPath: @"transform.scale.x"]; //[NSNumber numberWithInt:1] [containerView.layer setValue:[NSNumber numberWithFloat: .7] forKeyPath: @"transform.scale.y"]; The problem is that after rotaing back to portrait, the layer is 'travelling' ie the x,y offset are gradually changing(increasing x, decreasing y). Scale seems fine (ie doesn't increment, decrement on repeated rotations) Can anyone suggest a proper solution?

    Read the article

  • Design patterns to avoid

    - by Brian Rasmussen
    A lot of people seem to agree, that the Singleton pattern has a number of drawbacks and some even suggest to avoid the pattern all together. There's an excellent discussion here. Please direct any comments about the Singleton pattern to that question. Are there other design patterns, that should be avoided or used with great care?

    Read the article

  • Generic data input form in asp.net mvc application

    - by Diego
    Hello, I have an application that have EF 16 classes that share this information: They all are classes only with a key field and a description. I think it should be a waste if I make a controller with just 1 method just to present a form to fill these classes info, then I was thinking in to make a generic form(with key, description) and dynamically fill the right class through a sort of selection the selected info in any way, any good suggestion or pattern to do that? Where the generic methods should be located.

    Read the article

  • NHibernate session management in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Kevin Pang
    I am currently playing around with the HybridSessionBuilder class found on Jeffrey Palermo's blog post: http://jeffreypalermo.com/blog/use-this-nhibernate-wrapper-to-keep-your-repository-classes-simple/ Using this class, my repository looks like this: public class UserRepository : IUserRepository { private readonly ISessionBuilder _sessionBuilder; public UserRepository(ISessionBuilder sessionBuilder) { _sessionBuilder = sessionBuilder; } public User GetByID(string userID) { using (ISession session = _sessionBuilder.GetSession()) { return session.Get<User>(userID); } } } Is this the best way to go about managing the NHibernate session / factory? I've heard things about Unit of Work and creating a session per web request and flushing it at the end. From what I can tell, my current implementation isn't doing any of this. It is basically relying on the Repository to grab the session from the session factory and use it to run the queries. Are there any pitfalls to doing database access this way?

    Read the article

  • Best way to handle input from a keyboard "wedge"

    - by Mykroft
    I'm writing a C# POS (point of sale) system that takes input from a keyboard wedge magcard reader. This means that any data it reads off of a mag stripe is entered as if it were typed on the keyboard very quickly. Currently I'm handling this by attaching to the KeyPress event and looking for a series of very fast key presses that contain the card swipe sentinel characters. Is there a better way to deal with this sort of input? Edit: The device does simply present the data as keystrokes and doesn't interface through some other driver. Also We use a wide range of these types of devices so ideally a method should work independent of the specific model of wedge being used. However if there is no other option I'll have to make do.

    Read the article

  • Should ActionResult perform other tasks too

    - by Ori
    In Asp.net MVC one is encouraged to derive custom ActionResults, however should these classes handle other tasks unrelated to views, perhaps a EmailActionResult would render a view then send an email. What is best practice for the class ActionResult, is it only view specific? I want to keep things DRY too. Should the sending of the email be factored into a service class? perhaps using a filter would work. what are your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Extension methods for encapsulation and reusability

    - by tzaman
    In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself?

    Read the article

  • What are the common programming mistakes in Python?

    - by Paul McGuire
    I was about to tag the recent question in which the OP accidentally shadowed the builtin operator module with his own local operator.py with the "common-mistakes" tag, and I saw that there are a number of interesting questions posted asking for common mistakes to avoid in Java, Ruby, Scala, Clojure, .Net, jQuery, Haskell, SQL, ColdFusion, and so on, but I didn't see any for Python. For the benefit of Python beginners, can we enumerate the common mistakes that we have all committed at one time or another, in the hopes of maybe steering a newbie or two clear of them? (In homage to "The Princess Bride", I call these the Classic Blunders.) If possible, a little supporting explanation on what the problem is, and the generally accepted resolution/workaround, so that the beginning Pythoner doesn't read your answer and say "ok, that's a mistake, how do I fix it?"

    Read the article

  • Why Shouldn't I Programmatically Submit Username/Password to Facebook/Twitter/Amazon/etc?

    - by viatropos
    I wish there was a central, fully customizable, open source, universal login system that allowed you to login and manage all of your online accounts (maybe there is?)... I just found RPXNow today after starting to build a Sinatra app to login to Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, OpenID, and EventBrite, and it looks like it might save some time. But I keep wondering, not being an authentication guru, why couldn't I just have a sleek login page saying "Enter username and password, and check your login service", and then in the background either scrape the login page from say EventBrite and programmatically submit the form with Mechanize, or use an API if there was one? It would be so much cleaner and such a better user experience if they didn't have to go through popups and redirects and they could use any previously existing accounts. My question is: What are the reasons why I shouldn't do something like that? I don't know much about the serious details of cookies/sessions/security, so if you could be descriptive or point me to some helpful links that would be awesome. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Checking for empty arrays: count vs empty

    - by Dan McG
    This question on 'How to tell if a PHP array is empty' had me thinking of this question Is there a reason that count should be used instead of empty when determining if an array is empty or not? My personal thought would be if the 2 are equivalent for the case of empty arrays you should use empty because it gives a boolean answer to a boolean question. From the question linked above, it seems that count($var) == 0 is the popular method. To me, while technically correct, makes no sense. E.g. Q: $var, are you empty? A: 7. Hmmm... Is there a reason I should use count == 0 instead or just a matter of personal taste? As pointed out by others in comments for a now deleted answer, count will have performance impacts for large arrays because it will have to count all elements, whereas empty can stop as soon as it knows it isn't empty. So, if they give the same results in this case, but count is potentially inefficient, why would we ever use count($var) == 0?

    Read the article

  • How sophisticated should be DAL?

    - by Andrew Florko
    Basically, DAL (Data Access Layer) should provide simple CRUD (Create/Read/Update/Delete) methods but I always have a temptation to create more sophisticated methods in order to minimize database access roundtrips from Business Logic Layer. What do you think about following extensions to CRUD (most of them are OK I suppose): Read: GetById, GetByName, GetPaged, GetByFilter... e.t.c. methods Create: GetOrCreate methods (model entity is returned from DB or created if not found and returned), Create(lots-of-relations) instead of Create and multiple AssignTo methods calls Update: Merge methods (entities list are updated, created and deleted in one call) Delete: Delete(bool children) - optional children delete, Cleanup methods Where do you usually implement Entity Cache capabilities? DAL or BLL? (My choice is BLL, but I have seen DAL implementations also) Where is the boundary when you decide: this operation is too specific so I should implement it in Business Logic Layer as DAL multiple calls? I often found insufficient BLL operations that were implemented in dozen database roundtrips because developer was afraid to create a bit more sophisticated DAL. Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • index 'enabled' fields good idea?

    - by sibidiba
    Content of a website is stored in a MySQL database. 99% of the content will be enabled, but some (users, posts etc.) will be disabled. Most of the queries end as WHERE (...) AND enabled Is it a good idea to create an index on the field 'enabled'?

    Read the article

  • jquery - detect if selector returns null

    - by peirix
    What is the best way to detect if a jQuery-selector returns an empty object. If you do: alert($('#notAnElement')); you get [object Object], so the way I do it now is: alert($('#notAnElement').get(0)); which will write "undefined", and so you can do a check for that. But it seems very bad. What other way is there?

    Read the article

  • What is the most elegant way to validate the presence of ONLY one out of two attributes using Rails?

    - by marcgg
    class Followup < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :post belongs_to :comment end This model needs to only have either a post or a comment, but only one of the two. Here's the rspec for what I'm trying to do: it "should be impossible to have both a comment and a post" do followup = Followup.make followup.comment = Comment.make followup.should be_valid followup.post = Post.make followup.should_not be_valid end I can see a bunch of ways of doing this, but what would be the most elegant way of doing this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >