Search Results

Search found 17041 results on 682 pages for 'architecture and design'.

Page 9/682 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • PHP Aspect Oriented Design

    - by Devin Dixon
    This is a continuation of this Code Review question. What was taken away from that post, and other aspect oriented design is it is hard to debug. To counter that, I implemented the ability to turn tracing of the design patterns on. Turning trace on works like: //This can be added anywhere in the code Run::setAdapterTrace(true); Run::setFilterTrace(true); Run::setObserverTrace(true); //Execute the functon echo Run::goForARun(8); In the actual log with the trace turned on, it outputs like so: adapter 2012-02-12 21:46:19 {"type":"closure","object":"static","call_class":"\/public_html\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","class":"Run","method":"goForARun","call_method":"goForARun","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":68,"end_line":70} filter 2012-02-12 22:05:15 {"type":"closure","event":"return","object":"static","class":"run_filter","method":"\/home\/prodigyview\/public_html\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":51,"end_line":58} observer 2012-02-12 22:05:15 {"type":"closure","object":"static","class":"run_observer","method":"\/home\/prodigyview\/public_html\/public\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":61,"end_line":63} When the information is broken down, the data translates to: Called by an adapter or filter or observer The function called was a closure The location of the closure Class:method the adapter was implemented on The Trace of where the method was called from Start Line and End Line The code has been proven to work in production environments and features various examples of to implement, so the proof of concept is there. It is not DI and accomplishes things that DI cannot. I wouldn't call the code boilerplate but I would call it bloated. In summary, the weaknesses are bloated code and a learning curve in exchange for aspect oriented functionality. Beyond the normal fear of something new and different, what are other weakness in this implementation of aspect oriented design, if any? PS: More examples of AOP here: https://github.com/ProdigyView/ProdigyView/tree/master/examples/design

    Read the article

  • Is there really anything to gain with complex design? [duplicate]

    - by SB2055
    This question already has an answer here: What is enterprise software, exactly? 8 answers I've been working for a consulting firm for some time, with clients of various sizes, and I've seen web applications ranging in complexity from really simple: MVC Service Layer EF DB To really complex: MVC UoW DI / IoC Repository Service UI Tests Unit Tests Integration Tests But on both ends of the spectrum, the quality requirements are about the same. In simple projects, new devs / consultants can hop on, make changes, and contribute immediately, without having to wade through 6 layers of abstraction to understand what's going on, or risking misunderstanding some complex abstraction and costing down the line. In all cases, there was never a need to actually make code swappable or reusable - and the tests were never actually maintained past the first iteration because requirements changed, it was too time-consuming, deadlines, business pressure, etc etc. So if - in the end - testing and interfaces aren't used rapid development (read: cost-savings) is a priority the project's requirements will be changing a lot while in development ...would it be wrong to recommend a super-simple architecture, even to solve a complex problem, for an enterprise client? Is it complexity that defines enterprise solutions, or is it the reliability, # concurrent users, ease-of-maintenance, or all of the above? I know this is a very vague question, and any answer wouldn't apply to all cases, but I'm interested in hearing from devs / consultants that have been in the business for a while and that have worked with these varying degrees of complexity, to hear if the cool-but-expensive abstractions are worth the overall cost, at least while the project is in development.

    Read the article

  • Naming a class that decides to retrieve things from cache or a service + architecture evaluation

    - by Thomas Stock
    Hi, I'm a junior developer and I'm working on a pet project that I want to learn as much as possible from. I have the following scenario: There's a WCF service that I use to retrieve and update data, lets say Cars. So it's called CarWCFService and has a GetCars(), SaveCar(), ... . It implements interface ICarService. This isn't the Actual WCF service but more like a wrapper around it. Upon retrieving data from the service, I want to store them in local memory, as cache. I have made a class for this called CarCacheService which also implements interface ICarService. (I will explain later why it implements ICarService) I don't want client code to be calling these implementations. Instead, I want to create a third implementation for ICarService that tries to read from the CarCacheService before calling the WCFCarService, stores retrieved data in the CarCacheService, etc. 3 questions: How do I name this third class? I was thinking about something as simple as CarService. This does not really says what the service does exactly, tho. Is the naming for the other classes good? Would this naming and architecture be obvious for future programmers? This is my biggest concern. Does this architecture make sense? The reason that I implement ICarService on the CarCacheService is mainly because it allows me to fake the WCFService while debugging. I can store dummy data in a CarCacheService instance and pass it to the CarService, together with an(other) empty CarCacheService. If I made CacheCarService and WCFService public I could let client code decide if they want to drop the caching and just work directly on the WCFService.

    Read the article

  • Software Design Idea for multi tier architecture

    - by Preyash
    I am currently investigating multi tier architecture design for a web based application in MVC3. I already have an architecture but not sure if its the best I can do in terms of extendability and performance. The current architecure has following components DataTier (Contains EF POCO objects) DomainModel (Contains Domain related objects) Global (Among other common things it contains Repository objects for CRUD to DB) Business Layer (Business Logic and Interaction between Data and Client and CRUD using repository) Web(Client) (which talks to DomainModel and Business but also have its own ViewModels for Create and Edit Views for e.g.) Note: I am using ValueInjector for convering one type of entity to another. (which is proving an overhead in this desing. I really dont like over doing this.) My question is am I having too many tiers in the above architecure? Do I really need domain model? (I think I do when I exposes my Business Logic via WCF to external clients). What is happening is that for a simple database insert it (1) create ViewModel (2) Convert ViewModel to DomainModel for Business to understand (3) Business Convert it to DataModel for Repository and then data comes back in the same order. Few things to consider, I am not looking for a perfect architecure solution as it does not exits. I am looking for something that is scalable. It should resuable (for e.g. using design patterns ,interfaces, inheritance etc.) Each Layers should be easily testable. Any suggestions or comments is much appriciated. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Best peer-to-peer game architecture

    - by Dejw
    Consider a setup where game clients: have quite small computing resources (mobile devices, smartphones) are all connected to a common router (LAN, hotspot etc) The users want to play a multiplayer game, without an external server. One solution is to host an authoritative server on one phone, which in this case would be also a client. Considering point 1 this solution is not acceptable, since the phone's computing resources are not sufficient. So, I want to design a peer-to-peer architecture that will distribute the game's simulation load among the clients. Because of point 2 the system needn't be complex with regards to optimization; the latency will be very low. Each client can be an authoritative source of data about himself and his immediate environment (for example bullets.) What would be the best approach to designing such an architecture? Are there any known examples of such a LAN-level peer-to-peer protocol? Notes: Some of the problems are addressed here, but the concepts listed there are too high-level for me. Security I know that not having one authoritative server is a security issue, but it is not relevant in this case as I'm willing to trust the clients. Edit: I forgot to mention: it will be a rather fast-paced game (a shooter). Also, I have already read about networking architectures at Gaffer on Games.

    Read the article

  • Correct architecture for running and stopping complex tasks in the background

    - by Phonon
    I'm having trouble working out the correct architecture for the following task. I have a GUI in Windows Forms that contains a ListBox, listing certain architectural layouts. One an item in this list is selected, a custom Control displays an interactive visualization of the selected layout. Drawing of this interactive diagram is a CPU-intensive task, and can take up to a second on my machine. The kind of functionality I'm trying to achieve is that if a user wants to quickly scroll through the layouts in the ListBox (say, holding down the down arrow key), I don't want my computer to sit there thinking about how to draw the layout before it allows the user to do anything else. The obvious answer is, of course, to run the layout calculations in a separate thread. But how do I make that thread return a whole control? How do I make sure I'm not running two layout calculations at once? I'm fairly new to this complex GUI business. So the real question is what is the right architecture to implement something like this? This seems like something people do all the time, but finding any suggestions on how to do it properly is really difficult.

    Read the article

  • Server-side Architecture for Online Game

    - by Draiken
    basically I have a game client that has communicate with a server for almost every action it takes, the game is in Java (using LWJGL) and right now I will start making the server. The base of the game is normally one client communicating with the server alone, but I will require later on for several clients to work together for some functionalities. I've already read how authentication server should be sepparated and I intend on doing it. The problem is I am completely inexperienced in this kind of server-side programming, all I've ever programmed were JSF web applications. I imagine I'll do socket connections for pretty much every game communication since HTML is very slow, but I still don't really know where to start on my server. I would appreciate reading material or guidelines on where to start, what architecture should the game server have and maybe some suggestions on frameworks that could help me getting the client-server communication. I've looked into JNAG but I have no experience with this kind of thing, so I can't really tell if it is a solid and good messaging layer. Any help is appreciated... Thanks ! EDIT: Just a little more information about the game. It is intended to be a very complex game with several functionalities, making some functionalities a "program" inside the program. It is not an usual game, like FPS or RPG but I intend on having a lot of users using these many different "programs" inside the game. If I wasn't clear enough, I'd really appreciate people that have already developed games with java client/server architecture, how they communicated, any frameworks, apis, messaging systems, etc. It is not a question of lack of knowledge of language, more a question for advice, so I don't end up creating something that works, but in the later stages will have to be rewriten for any kind of limiting reason. PS: sorry if my english is not perfect...

    Read the article

  • Architecture of a "website generator" web application

    - by Resorath
    What is the most maintainable and efficient way to architect a web application who's purpose is to host and generate websites which can be customized to a certain degree? There are a lot of these style of applications in the wild that generate all kinds of sites, from sites that host World of Warcraft guilds like guildlaunch to other sites like my wedding for wedding site hosting. My question is, what is the basic architecture that these sites operate on? I imagine there are two ways of thinking about this. A central set of code that all sites on the host run against, and it acts differently based on which site was visited. In this manner, when the base code is updated all sites are updated simultaneously. Or, the code for an individual site exists in a silo, and is simply replicated to a new directory each time a site is created. When an update needs to be applied, the code is pushed out to each site silo. In my case, I am working in PHP with the CodeIgniter framework, however the answer need not be limited to this case. Which method (if any) creates a more maintainable and efficient architecture to manage this style of web application?

    Read the article

  • The Interaction between Three-Tier Client/Server Model and Three-Tier Application Architecture Model

    The three-tier client/server model is a network architectural approach currently used in modern networking. This approach divides a network in to three distinct components. Three-Tier Client/Server Model Components Client Component Server Component Database Component The Client Component of the network typically represents any device on the network. A basic example of this would be computer or another network/web enabled devices that are connected to a network. Network clients request resources on the network, and are usually equipped with a user interface for the presentation of the data returned from the Server Component. This process is done through the use of various software clients, and example of this can be seen through the use of a web browser client. The web browser request information from the Server Component located on the network and then renders the results for the user to process. The Server Components of the network return data based on specific client request back to the requesting client.  Server Components also inherit the attributes of a Client Component in that they are a device on the network and that they can also request information from other Server Components. However what differentiates a Client Component from a Server Component is that a Server Component response to requests from devices on the network. An example of a Server Component can be seen in a web server. A web server listens for new requests and then interprets the request, processes the web pages, and then returns the processed data back to the web browser client so that it may render the data for the user to interpret. The Database Component of the network returns unprocessed data from databases or other resources. This component also inherits attributes from the Server Component in that it is a device on a network, it can request information from other server components and database components, and it also listens for new requests so that it can return data when needed. The three-tier client/server model is very similar to the three-tier application architecture model, and in fact the layers can be mapped to one another. Three-Tier Application Architecture Model Presentation Layer/Logic Business Layer/Logic Data Layer/Logic The Presentation Layer including its underlying logic is very similar to the Client Component of the three-tiered model. The Presentation Layer focuses on interpreting the data returned by the Business Layer as well as presents the data back to the user.  Both the Presentation Layer and the Client Component focus primarily on the user and their experience. This allows for segments of the Business Layer to be distributable and interchangeable because the Presentation Layer is not directly integrated in with Business Layer. The Presentation Layer does not care where the data comes from as long as it is in the proper format. This allows for the Presentation Layer and Business Layer to be stored on one or more different servers so that it can provide a higher availability to clients requesting data. A good example of this is a web site that uses load balancing. When a web site decides to take on the task of load balancing they must obtain a network device that sits in front of a one or machines in order to distribute the request across multiple servers. When a user comes in through the load balanced device they are redirected to a specific server based on a few factors. Common Load Balancing Factors Current Server Availability Current Server Response Time Current Server Priority The Business Layer and corresponding logic are business rules applied to data prior to it being sent to the Presentation Layer. These rules are used to manipulate the data coming from the Data Access Layer, in addition to validating any data prior to being stored in the Data Access Layer. A good example of this would be when a user is trying to create multiple accounts under one email address. The Business Layer logic can prevent duplicate accounts by enforcing a unique email for every new account before the data is even stored in the Data Access Layer. The Server Component can be directly tied to this layer in that the server typically stores and process the Business Layer before it is returned to the end-user via the Presentation Layer. In addition the Server Component can also run automated process through the Business Layer on the data in the Data Access Layer so that additional business analysis can be derived from the data that has been already collected. The Data Layer and its logic are responsible for storing information so that it can be easily retrieved. Typical in most modern applications data is stored in a database management system however data can also be in the form of files stored on a file server. In addition a database can take on one of several forms. Common Database Formats XML File Pipe Delimited File Tab Delimited File Comma Delimited File (CSV) Plain Text File Microsoft Access Microsoft SQL Server MySql Oracle Sybase The Database component of the Networking model can be directly tied to the Data Layer because this is where the Data Layer obtains the data to return back the Business Layer. The Database Component basically allows for a place on the network to store data for future use. This enables applications to save data when they can and then quickly recall the saved data as needed so that the application does not have to worry about storing the data in memory. This prevents overhead that could be created when an application must retain all data in memory. As you can see the Three-Tier Client/Server Networking Model and the Three-Tiered Application Architecture Model rely very heavily on one another to function especially if different aspects of an application are distributed across an entire network. The use of various servers and database servers are wonderful when an application has a need to distribute work across the network. Network Components and Application Layers Interaction Database components will store all data needed for the Data Access Layer to manipulate and return to the Business Layer Server Component executes the Business Layer that manipulates data so that it can be returned to the Presentation Layer Client Component hosts the Presentation Layer that  interprets the data and present it to the user

    Read the article

  • Teacher demands excessive/unjustified use of Design Patterns

    - by SoboLAN
    I study computer science and I have a class called "Programming Techniques". Its purpose is to teach (us) good object oriented design principles. During the semester we have homeworks, programs that we must write to demonstrate what we've learned. The lab assistant demands for each of these homeworks that specific design patterns should be used. For example, the current homework is an application used for processing customer orders. We are demanded to use either "Factory Method" or "Abstract Factory" design patterns for this. It gets even worse: at the end of the semester we must write a program (something more complex) that must use at least one creational pattern, at least one structural pattern and at least one behavioural pattern. Is it normal to demand this ? I mean, forcing us to design our programs in such a way that a specific design pattern makes sense is just beyond what I consider ok. If I'm a car mechanic and have a huge tool box, then I will use a certain tool from that box if and when the situation demands it. Not more, not less. If my design of the application doesn't demand at all the use of "Abstract Factory" (for example), then why should I implement it ? I'm not sure yet if the senior lecturer agrees with what the lab assistant is demanding, but I want to talk to him about it and I need solid arguments to do so. How should I approach this problem with him ? PS: I'm sure there must be a better way to teach us these things. Maybe making us each week read about 3 design patterns and the next week giving us a test with small but specific programming or architectural situations/problems. The goal in that test would be to identify what design patterns would make sense and how they could be implemented. This way, he can see if we understand them. EDIT: These homeworks are not just 100-line programs, they have quite a lot of requirements and are fairly complicated. This is the reason we have about 2 - 3 weeks of deadline for each of them. I agree that practicing this is the best way to learn. But shouldn't smaller programs/applications be used for this ? Something just for demonstrating purposes. Not big programs with lots of requirements/classes/etc.

    Read the article

  • Getting a design company to embrace the benefits of good development

    - by Toby
    I know there are already various topics discussing what we can do to get managers to buy into good development practices, but I was wondering if there are any specific things we can do to explain to designers that Web Development is more than just turning their design into a website. I want to try and push them to design based on progressive enhancement, responsive design and ajax but I think there is a trend to stick to the print based design principles, which is understandable as it is their background, but is frustrating to a dev.

    Read the article

  • Making a design for a Problem [closed]

    - by Vaibhav Agarwal
    I have written many codes using OOPS and I am still to understand when is a code good enough to be accepted by experts. The thought procedure of every man is different and so is the design. My question is should I do something in particular to design my programs in such a way that they are good enough to be accepted by people. Other thing I have also read Head First Object Oriented Design but at last I feel that the way they design the problems is much different I would have designed them.

    Read the article

  • How do you deal with design in Scrum?

    - by Seth
    How do you deal with design in Scrum? Do you still have well written design documents for each scrum iteration? Do you just do design notes featuring UML diagrams? Or do you just have well commented code? Each iteration may involve changing design so I just wanted to know how people capture this so new developers have an easy job of understanding the domain and getting on board as rapidly as possible.

    Read the article

  • How do you deal with design in Scrum?

    - by Seth
    How do you deal with design in Scrum? Do you still have well written design documents for each scrum iteration? Do you just do design notes featuring UML diagrams? Or do you just have well commented code? Each iteration may involve changing design so I just wanted to know how people capture this so new developers have an easy job of understanding the domain and getting on board as rapidly as possible.

    Read the article

  • What is the rationale behind Apache Jena's *everything is an interface if possible* design philosophy?

    - by David Cowden
    If you are familiar with the Java RDF and OWL engine Jena, then you have run across their philosophy that everything should be specified as an interface when possible. This means that a Resource, Statement, RDFNode, Property, and even the RDF Model, etc., are, contrary to what you might first think, Interfaces instead of concrete classes. This leads to the use of Factories quite often. Since you can't instantiate a Property or Model, you must have something else do it for you --the Factory design pattern. My question, then, is, what is the reasoning behind using this pattern as opposed to a traditional class hierarchy system? It is often perfectly viable to use either one. For example, if I want a memory backed Model instead of a database-backed Model I could just instantiate those classes, I don't need ask a Factory to give me one. As an aside, I'm in the process of writing a library for manipulating Pearltrees data, which is exported from their website in the form of an RDF/XML document. As I write this library, I have many options for defining the relationships present in the Peartrees data. What is nice about the Pearltrees data is that it has a very logical class system: A tree is made up of pearls, which can be either Page, Reference, Alias, or Root pearls. My question comes from trying to figure out if I should adopt the Jena philosophy in my library which uses Jena, or if I should disregard it, pick my own design philosophy, and stick with it.

    Read the article

  • Single API Architecture

    - by user1901686
    When people refer to an architecture that involves a single service API that all clients talk to (a client can be an iPad app, etc), what is the "client" for the web app -- is it A) the web browser itself. Thus, the entire app is written in html/css/javascript and ajax calls to the service are made to fetch data and changes are made through javascript or B) you have an MVC-like stack on a server, only instead of the controllers calling to the model layer directly, they call to the service API which return models that are used to render the traditional views or C) something else?

    Read the article

  • When is a Use Case layer needed?

    - by Meta-Knight
    In his blog post The Clean Architecture Uncle Bob suggests a 4-layer architecture. I understand the separation between business rules, interfaces and infrastructure, but I wonder if/when it's necessary to have separate layers for domain objects and use cases. What added value will it bring, compared to just having the uses cases as "domain services" in the domain layer? The only useful info I've found on the web about a use case layer is an article by Martin Fowler, who seems to contradict Uncle Bob about its necessity: At some point I may run into the problems, and then I'll make a Use Case Controller - but only then. And even when I do that I rarely consider the Use Case Controllers to occupy a separate layer in the system architecture. Edit: I stumbled upon a video of Uncle Bob's Architecture: The Lost Years keynote, in which he explains this architecture in depth. Very informative.

    Read the article

  • How to make this design closer to proper DDD?

    - by Seralize
    I've read about DDD for days now and need help with this sample design. All the rules of DDD make me very confused to how I'm supposed to build anything at all when domain objects are not allowed to show methods to the application layer; where else to orchestrate behaviour? Repositories are not allowed to be injected into entities and entities themselves must thus work on state. Then an entity needs to know something else from the domain, but other entity objects are not allowed to be injected either? Some of these things makes sense to me but some don't. I've yet to find good examples of how to build a whole feature as every example is about Orders and Products, repeating the other examples over and over. I learn best by reading examples and have tried to build a feature using the information I've gained about DDD this far. I need your help to point out what I do wrong and how to fix it, most preferably with code as "I would not recomment doing X and Y" is very hard to understand in a context where everything is just vaguely defined already. If I can't inject an entity into another it would be easier to see how to do it properly. In my example there are users and moderators. A moderator can ban users, but with a business rule: only 3 per day. I did an attempt at setting up a class diagram to show the relationships (code below): interface iUser { public function getUserId(); public function getUsername(); } class User implements iUser { protected $_id; protected $_username; public function __construct(UserId $user_id, Username $username) { $this->_id = $user_id; $this->_username = $username; } public function getUserId() { return $this->_id; } public function getUsername() { return $this->_username; } } class Moderator extends User { protected $_ban_count; protected $_last_ban_date; public function __construct(UserBanCount $ban_count, SimpleDate $last_ban_date) { $this->_ban_count = $ban_count; $this->_last_ban_date = $last_ban_date; } public function banUser(iUser &$user, iBannedUser &$banned_user) { if (! $this->_isAllowedToBan()) { throw new DomainException('You are not allowed to ban more users today.'); } if (date('d.m.Y') != $this->_last_ban_date->getValue()) { $this->_ban_count = 0; } $this->_ban_count++; $date_banned = date('d.m.Y'); $expiration_date = date('d.m.Y', strtotime('+1 week')); $banned_user->add($user->getUserId(), new SimpleDate($date_banned), new SimpleDate($expiration_date)); } protected function _isAllowedToBan() { if ($this->_ban_count >= 3 AND date('d.m.Y') == $this->_last_ban_date->getValue()) { return false; } return true; } } interface iBannedUser { public function add(UserId $user_id, SimpleDate $date_banned, SimpleDate $expiration_date); public function remove(); } class BannedUser implements iBannedUser { protected $_user_id; protected $_date_banned; protected $_expiration_date; public function __construct(UserId $user_id, SimpleDate $date_banned, SimpleDate $expiration_date) { $this->_user_id = $user_id; $this->_date_banned = $date_banned; $this->_expiration_date = $expiration_date; } public function add(UserId $user_id, SimpleDate $date_banned, SimpleDate $expiration_date) { $this->_user_id = $user_id; $this->_date_banned = $date_banned; $this->_expiration_date = $expiration_date; } public function remove() { $this->_user_id = ''; $this->_date_banned = ''; $this->_expiration_date = ''; } } // Gathers objects $user_repo = new UserRepository(); $evil_user = $user_repo->findById(123); $moderator_repo = new ModeratorRepository(); $moderator = $moderator_repo->findById(1337); $banned_user_factory = new BannedUserFactory(); $banned_user = $banned_user_factory->build(); // Performs ban $moderator->banUser($evil_user, $banned_user); // Saves objects to database $user_repo->store($evil_user); $moderator_repo->store($moderator); $banned_user_repo = new BannedUserRepository(); $banned_user_repo->store($banned_user); Should the User entitity have a 'is_banned' field which can be checked with $user->isBanned();? How to remove a ban? I have no idea.

    Read the article

  • Estimating time for planning and technical design using Evidence Based Scheduling

    - by Turgs
    I'm at the beginning of a development project in a large organization. The Functional Requirements are currently being worked out and documented with our business stakeholders by our Enterprise Design department. I'm required to produce Technical Design Documents and manage the team to actually build the solution. I'm wanting to try Evidence Based Scheduling, but as I understand, part of that is breaking the job down into small tasks that are less than 14 hours in duration, which requires me to have already done the Technical Design. Therefore, can Evidence Based Scheduling only be used after the Technical Design has been done? How do you then plan and estimate the time it may take to come up with the Technical Design?

    Read the article

  • SSIS Design Patterns Training in London 8-11 Sep!

    - by andyleonard
    A few seats remain for my course SQL Server Integration Services 2012 Design Patterns to be delivered in London 8-11 Sep 2014. Register today to learn more about: New features in SSIS 2012 and 2014 Advanced patterns for loading data warehouses Error handling The (new) Project Deployment Model Scripting in SSIS The (new) SSIS Catalog Designing custom SSIS tasks Executing, managing, monitoring, and administering SSIS in the enterprise Business Intelligence Markup Language (Biml) BimlScript ETL Instrumentation...(read more)

    Read the article

  • What is a good design model for my new class?

    - by user66662
    I am a beginning programmer who, after trying to manage over 2000 lines of procedural php code, now has discovered the value of OOP. I have read a few books to get me up to speed on the beginning theory, but would like some advice on practical application. So,for example, let's say there are two types of content objects - an ad and a calendar event. what my application does is scan different websites (a predefined list), and, when it finds an ad or an event, it extracts the data and saves it to a database. All of my objects will share a $title and $description. However, the Ad object will have a $price and the Event object will have $startDate. Should I have two separate classes, one for each object? Should I have a 'superclass' with the $title and $description with two other Ad and Event classes with their own properties? The latter is at least the direction I am on now. My second question about this design is how to handle the logic that extracts the data for $title, $description, $price, and $date. For each website in my predefined list, there is a specific regex that returns the desired value for each property. Currently, I have an extremely large switch statement in my constructor which determines what website I am own, sets the regex variables accordingly, and continues on. Not only that, but now I have to repeat the logic to determine what site I am on in the constructor of each class. This doesn't feel right. Should I create another class Algorithms and store the logic there for each site? Should the functions of to handle that logic be in this class? or specific to the classes whos properties they set? I want to take into account in my design two things: 1) I will add different content objects in the future that share $title and $description, but will have their own properties, so, I want to be able to easily grow these as needed. 2) I will add more websites constantly (each with their own algorithms for data extraction) so I would like to plan efficienty managing and working with these now. I thought about extending the Ad or Event class with 'websiteX' class and store its functions there. But, this didn't feel right either as now I have to manage 100s of little website specific class files. Note, I didn't know if this was the correct site or stackoverflow was the better choice. If so, let me know and I'll post there.

    Read the article

  • Designing a system with different business rules for different customers

    - by user1595846
    My company is rewriting our proprietary business application. The current architecture is poorly done and inflexible. It is coded more procedural oriented as opposed to object oriented. It has become difficult to maintain. Our system is a web application written in .Net Webforms. I am considering ASP.Net MVC for the rewrite. We intend to rewrite it with a good, solid architecture with the goal of maintainability and reusable classes for some of our other systems and services. We would also like the system to be customizable for different customers in the event that we market the system. I am considering redesigning the system based on the layered architecture (Presentation, Business, Data Access layers) described in the Microsoft Patterns and Practices Application Architecture Guide. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff650706.aspx Hopefully this isn't too open ended, but how would you recommend allowing for different business logic/rules for different customers? I'm aware of Windows Workflow Foundation, but from what I've read about it, it seems many business rules could be too complicated to handle there. Also, Can anyone point me to where I can download an example of a .net solution that is based on the Application Architecture Guide? I have already downloaded the Layered Architecture Solution Guidance and the Expense Sample on codeplex. I was looking for something a bit larger and more robust that I could step through the code and see how it works. If you feel there are better architectures to base our redesign on please feel free to share. I appreciate your help!

    Read the article

  • Architecture of interaction modes ("paint tools") for a 3D paint program

    - by Bernhard Kausler
    We are developing a Qt-based application to navigate through and paint on a volume treated as a 3D pixel graphic. The layout of the app consists of three orthogonal slice views on which the user may paint stuff like dots, circles etc. and also erase already painted pixels. Think of a 3D Gimp or MS Paint. How would you design the the architecture for the different interaction modes (i.e. paint tools)? My idea is: use the MVC pattern have a separate controler for every interaction mode install an event filter on all three slice views to collect all incoming user interaction events (mouse, keyboard) redirect the events to the currently active interaction controler I would appreciate critical comments on that idea.

    Read the article

  • Appropriate level of granularity for component-based architecture

    - by Jon Purdy
    I'm working on a game with a component-based architecture. An Entity owns a set of Component instances, each of which has a set of Slot instances with which to store, send, and receive values. Factory functions such as Player produce entities with the required components and slot connections. I'm trying to determine the best level of granularity for components. For example, right now Position, Velocity, and Acceleration are all separate components, connected in series. Velocity and Acceleration could easily be rewritten into a uniform Delta component, or Position, Velocity, and Acceleration could be combined alongside such components as Friction and Gravity into a monolithic Physics component. Should a component have the smallest responsibility possible (at the cost of lots of interconnectivity) or should related components be combined into monolithic ones (at the cost of flexibility)? I'm leaning toward the former, but I could use a second opinion.

    Read the article

  • Architecture for subscription based application

    - by John
    This is about the architecture of my application I think. I have a Rails application where companies can administrate all things related to clients. Companies can buy a subscription and their users can access the application online. Hopefully I will get multiple companies subscribing to my appplication/service. Thing is, what should I do with my code and database? Seperate app code base and database per company One app code base but seperate database per company One app code base and one database The decision I am to make involves security (e.g. user from company X should not see any data from company Y) performance (let's suppose it becomes successful, it should have a good performance) and scalability (again, if successful, it should have a good performance but also easy for me to handle all the companies, code changes, etc) For sake of maintainability, I tend to opt for the one code base. For the database I really don't know at this moment. So what do you think is the best option?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >