Search Results

Search found 15120 results on 605 pages for 'mock driven design'.

Page 92/605 | < Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >

  • iOS - Unit tests for KVO/delegate codes

    - by ZhangChn
    I am going to design a MVC pattern. It could be either designed as a delegate pattern, or a Key-Value-Observing(KVO), to notify the controller about changing models. The project requires certain quality control procedures to conform to those verification documents. My questions: Does delegate pattern fit better for unit testing than KVO? If KVO fits better, would you please suggest some sample codes?

    Read the article

  • self referencing tables, good or bad?

    - by NimChimpsky
    Representing geographical locations within an application, the design of the underlying data model suggests two clear options (or maybe more?). One table with a self referencing parent_id column uk - london (london parent id = UK id) or two tables, with a one to many relationship using a foreign key. My preference is for one self-refercing table as it easily allows to extend into as many sub regions as required. IN general do people veer away from self referencing tables, or are they A-OK ?

    Read the article

  • Interaction of a GUI-based App and Windows Service

    - by psubsee2003
    I am working on personal project that will be designed to help manage my media library, specifically recordings created by Windows Media Center. So I am going to have the following parts to this application: A Windows Service that monitors the recording folder. Once a new recording is completed that meets specific criteria, it will call several 3rd party CLI Applications to remove the commercials and re-encode the video into a more hard-drive friendly format. A controller GUI to be able to modify settings of the service, specifically add new shows to watch for, and to modify parameters for the CLI Applications A standalone (GUI-based) desktop application that can perform many of the same functions as the windows service, expect manually on specific files instead of automatically based on specific criteria. (It should be mentioned that I have limited experience with an application of this complexity, and I have absolutely zero experience with Windows Services) Since the 1st and 3rd bullet share similar functionality, my design plan is to pull the common functionality into a separate library shared by both parts applications, but these 2 components do not need to interact otherwise. The 2nd and 3rd bullets seem to share some common functionality, both will have a GUI, both will have to help define similar parameters (one to send to the service and the other to send directly to the CLI applications), so I can see some advantage to combining them into the same application. On the other hand, the standalone application (bullet #3) really does not need to interact with the service at all, except for possibly sharing a few common default parameters that can easily be put into an XML in a common location, so it seems to make more sense to just keep everything separate. The controller GUI (2nd bullet) is where I am stuck at the moment. Do I just roll this functionality (allow for user interaction with the service to update settings and criteria) into the standalone application? Or would it be a better design decision to keep them separate? Specifically, I'm worried about adding the complexity of communicating with the Windows Service to the standalone application when it doesn't need it. Is WCF the right approach to allow the controller GUI to interact with the Windows Service? Or is there a better alternative? At the moment, I don't envision a need for a significant amount of interaction, maybe just adding a new task once in a while and occasionally tweaking a parameter, but when something is changed, I do expect the windows service to immediately use the new settings.

    Read the article

  • Lag compensation with networked 2D games

    - by Milo
    I want to make a 2D game that is basically a physics driven sandbox / activity game. There is something I really do not understand though. From research, it seems like updates from the server should only be about every 100ms. I can see how this works for a player since they can just concurrently simulate physics and do lag compensation through interpolation. What I do not understand is how this works for updates from other players. If clients only get notified of player positions every 100ms, I do not see how that works because a lot can happen in 100ms. The player could have changed direction twice or so in that time. I was wondering if anyone would have some insight on this issue. Basically how does this work for shooting and stuff like that? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is wrapping a third party code the only solution to unit test its consumers? [closed]

    - by Songo
    I'm doing unit testing and in one of my classes I need to send a mail from one of the methods, so using constructor injection I inject an instance of Zend_Mail class which is in Zend framework. Now some people argue that if a library is stable enough and won't change often then there is no need to wrap it. So assuming that Zend_Mail is stable and won't change and it fits my needs entirely, then I won't need a wrapper for it. Now take a look at my class Logger that depends on Zend_Mail: class Logger{ private $mailer; function __construct(Zend_Mail $mail){ $this->mail=$mail; } function toBeTestedFunction(){ //Some code $this->mail->setTo('some value'); $this->mail->setSubject('some value'); $this->mail->setBody('some value'); $this->mail->send(); //Some } } However, Unit testing demands that I test one component at a time, so I need to mock the Zend_Mail class. In addition I'm violating the Dependency Inversion principle as my Logger class now depends on concretion not abstraction. Now is wrapping Zend_Mail the only solution or is there a better approach to this problem? The code is in PHP, but answers doesn't have to be. This is more of a design issue than a language specific feature

    Read the article

  • Why are MVC & TDD not employed more in game architecture?

    - by secoif
    I will preface this by saying I haven't looked a huge amount of game source, nor built much in the way of games. But coming from trying to employ 'enterprise' coding practices in web apps, looking at game source code seriously hurts my head: "What is this view logic doing in with business logic? this needs refactoring... so does this, refactor, refactorrr" This worries me as I'm about to start a game project, and I'm not sure whether trying to mvc/tdd the dev process is going to hinder us or help us, as I don't see many game examples that use this or much push for better architectural practices it in the community. The following is an extract from a great article on prototyping games, though to me it seemed exactly the attitude many game devs seem to use when writing production game code: Mistake #4: Building a system, not a game ...if you ever find yourself working on something that isn’t directly moving your forward, stop right there. As programmers, we have a tendency to try to generalize our code, and make it elegant and be able to handle every situation. We find that an itch terribly hard not scratch, but we need to learn how. It took me many years to realize that it’s not about the code, it’s about the game you ship in the end. Don’t write an elegant game component system, skip the editor completely and hardwire the state in code, avoid the data-driven, self-parsing, XML craziness, and just code the damned thing. ... Just get stuff on the screen as quickly as you can. And don’t ever, ever, use the argument “if we take some extra time and do this the right way, we can reuse it in the game”. EVER. is it because games are (mostly) visually oriented so it makes sense that the code will be weighted heavily in the view, thus any benefits from moving stuff out to models/controllers, is fairly minimal, so why bother? I've heard the argument that MVC introduces a performance overhead, but this seems to me to be a premature optimisation, and that there'd more important performance issues to tackle before you worry about MVC overheads (eg render pipeline, AI algorithms, datastructure traversal, etc). Same thing regarding TDD. It's not often I see games employing test cases, but perhaps this is due to the design issues above (mixed view/business) and the fact that it's difficult to test visual components, or components that rely on probablistic results (eg operate within physics simulations). Perhaps I'm just looking at the wrong source code, but why do we not see more of these 'enterprise' practices employed in game design? Are games really so different in their requirements, or is a people/culture issue (ie game devs come from a different background and thus have different coding habits)?

    Read the article

  • How to refactor a method which breaks "The law of Demeter" principle?

    - by dreza
    I often find myself breaking this principle (not intentially, just through bad design). However recently I've seen a bit of code that I'm not sure of the best approach. I have a number of classes. For simplicity I've taken out the bulk of the classes methods etc public class Paddock { public SoilType Soil { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around paddock information } public class SoilType { public SoilDrainageType Drainage { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around soil types } public class SoilDrainageType { // a whole bunch of public properties that expose soil drainage values public double GetProportionOfDrainage(SoilType soil, double blockRatio) { // This method does a number of calculations using public properties // exposed off SoilType as well as the blockRatio value in some conditions } } In the code I have seen in a number of places calls like so paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); or within the block object itself in places it's Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.Soil, this.GetBlockRatio()); Upon reading this seems to break "The Law of Demeter" in that I'm chaining together these properties to access the method I want. So my thought in order to adjust this was to create public methods on SoilType and Paddock that contains wrappers i.e. on paddock it would be public class Paddock { public double GetProportionOfDrainage() { return Soil.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.GetBlockRatio()); } } on the SoilType it would be public class SoilType { public double GetProportionOfDrainage(double blockRatio) { return Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this, blockRatio); } } so now calls where it used would be simply // used outside of paddock class where we can access instances of Paddock paddock.GetProportionofDrainage() or this.GetProportionOfDrainage(); // if used within Paddock class This seemed like a nice alternative. However now I have a concern over how would I enforce this usage and stop anyone else from writing code such as paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); rather than just paddock.GetProportionOfDrainage(); I need the properties to remain public at this stage as they are too ingrained in usage throughout the code block. However I don't really want a mixture of accessing the method on DrainageType directly as that seems to defeat the purpose altogether. What would be the appropiate design approach in this situation? I can provide more information as required to better help in answers. Is my thoughts on refactoring this even appropiate or should is it best to leave it as is and use the property chaining to access the method as and when required?

    Read the article

  • Chapter 7–Enforced Data Protection

    - by drsql
    As the book progresses, I find myself veering from the original stated outline quite a bit, because as I teach about this more (and I am teaching a daylong db design class in August at http://www.sqlsolstice.com/ … shameless plug, but it is on topic :) I start to find that a given order works better. Originally I had slated myself to talk more about modeling here for three chapters, then get back to the more implementation topics to finish out the book, but now I am going to keep plugging through...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Speaking at SQL Saturday #39 in NYC!

    - by andyleonard
    I am honored to present Applied SSIS Design Patterns and Introduction to Incremental Loads at SQL Saturday #39 in New York City! If you're there and you read this blog, be sure to stop by and introduce yourself! :{> Andy Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Should I use multiple column primary keys or add a new column?

    - by Covar
    My current database design makes use of a multiple column primary key to use existing data (that would be unique anyway) instead of creating an additional column assigning each entry an arbitrary key. I know that this is allowed, but was wondering if this is a practice that I might want to use cautiously and possibly avoid (much like goto in C). So what are some of the disadvantages I might see in this approach or reasons I might want a single column key?

    Read the article

  • Designing for visually impaired gamers

    - by Aku
    Globally the number of people of all ages visually impaired is estimated to be 285 million, of whom 39 million are blind. — World Health Organisation, 2010. (That's 4.2% and 0.6% of the world population.) Most videogames put a strong emphasis on visuals in their content delivery. Visually impaired gamers are largely left out. How do I design a game to be accessible to visually impaired gamers?

    Read the article

  • Recommended readings for a sofware construction mini-course [on hold]

    - by Aivar
    I'm going to organize a mini-course for CS students who have completed CS1 (Python) and CS2 (Java). I'd like to show them more principled approach to programming practice and design, something along the lines of McConnel's Code Complete. If I had enough copies of Code Complete, I would assign some readings from that book. Can you recommend some freely available material (books, blog posts, articles, essays) for such a course? (I'd prefer to avoid topics specific to OOP and focus on more universal principles.)

    Read the article

  • What norms/standards should I follow when writing a functional spec?

    - by user970696
    I would like to know what documents (ISO?) should I follow when I write a functional specification. Or what should designers follow when creating the system design? I was told that there was a progress in last years but was not told what the progress was in (college professor). Thank you EDIT: I do not speak about document content etc. but about standards for capturing requirements, for business analysis.

    Read the article

  • Getting Requirements Right

    - by Tim Murphy
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/tmurphy/archive/2013/10/28/getting-requirements-right.aspxI had a meeting with a stakeholder who stated “I bet you wish I wasn’t in these meetings”.  She said this because she kept changing what we thought the end product should look like.  My reply was that it would be much worse if she came in at the end of the project and told us we had just built the wrong solution. You have to take the time to get the requirements right.  Be honest with all involved parties as to the amount of time it is taking to refine the requirements.  The only thing worse than wrong requirements is a surprise in budget overages.  If you give open visibility to your progress then management has the ability to shift priorities if needed. In order to capture the best requirements use different approaches to help your stakeholders to articulate their needs.  Use mock ups and matrix spread sheets to allow them to visualize and confirm that everyone has the same understanding.  The goals isn’t to record every last detail, but to have the major landmarks identified so there are fewer surprises along the way. Help the team members to understand that you all have the same goal.  You want to create the best possible solution for the given business problem.  If you do this everyone involved will do there best to outline a picture of what is to be built and you will be able to design an appropriate solution to fill those needs more easily. Technorati Tags: requirements gathering,PSC Group,PSC

    Read the article

  • Overused or abused programming techniques

    - by Anto
    Are there any techniques in programming that you find to be overused (IE used way more excessively than what they should be) or abused, or used a bit for everything, while not being a really good solution to many of the problems which people attempt to solve with it. It could be regular expressions, some kind of design pattern or maybe an algorithm, or something completely different. Maybe you think people abuse multiple inheritance etc.

    Read the article

  • Why Moq is thorwing "expected Invocation on the mock at least once". Where as it is being set once,e

    - by Mohit
    Following is the code. create a class lib add the ref to NUnit framework 2.5.3.9345 and Moq.dll 4.0.0.0 and paste the following code. Try running it on my machine it throws TestCase 'MoqTest.TryClassTest.IsMessageNotNull' failed: Moq.MockException : Expected invocation on the mock at least once, but was never performed: v = v.Model = It.Is(value(Moq.It+<c__DisplayClass21[MoqTest.GenInfo]).match) at Moq.Mock.ThrowVerifyException(IProxyCall expected, Expression expression, Times times, Int32 callCount) at Moq.Mock.VerifyCalls(Interceptor targetInterceptor, MethodCall expected, Expression expression, Times times) at Moq.Mock.VerifySet[T](Mock1 mock, Action1 setterExpression, Times times, String failMessage) at Moq.Mock1.VerifySet(Action`1 setterExpression) Class1.cs(22,0): at MoqTest.TryClassTest.IsMessageNotNull() using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using Moq; using NUnit.Framework; namespace MoqTest { [TestFixture] public class TryClassTest { [Test] public void IsMessageNotNull() { var mockView = new Mock<IView<GenInfo>>(); mockView.Setup(v => v.ModuleId).Returns(""); TryPresenter tryPresenter = new TryPresenter(mockView.Object); tryPresenter.SetMessage(new object(), new EventArgs()); // mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Message, Times.AtLeastOnce()); mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Model = It.Is<GenInfo>(x => x != null)); } } public class TryPresenter { private IView<GenInfo> view; public TryPresenter(IView<GenInfo> view) { this.view = view; } public void SetMessage(object sender, EventArgs e) { this.view.Model = null; } } public class MyView : IView<GenInfo> { #region Implementation of IView<GenInfo> public string ModuleId { get; set; } public GenInfo Model { get; set; } #endregion } public interface IView<T> { string ModuleId { get; set; } T Model { get; set; } } public class GenInfo { public String Message { get; set; } } } And if you change one line mockView.VerifySet(v = v.Model = It.Is(x = x != null)); to mockView.VerifySet(v = v.Model, Times.AtLeastOnce()); it works fine. I think Exception is incorrect.

    Read the article

  • Why Moq is throwing "expected Invocation on the mock at least once". Where as it is being set once,e

    - by Mohit
    Following is the code. create a class lib add the ref to NUnit framework 2.5.3.9345 and Moq.dll 4.0.0.0 and paste the following code. Try running it on my machine it throws TestCase 'MoqTest.TryClassTest.IsMessageNotNull' failed: Moq.MockException : Expected invocation on the mock at least once, but was never performed: v = v.Model = It.Is(value(Moq.It+<c__DisplayClass21[MoqTest.GenInfo]).match) at Moq.Mock.ThrowVerifyException(IProxyCall expected, Expression expression, Times times, Int32 callCount) at Moq.Mock.VerifyCalls(Interceptor targetInterceptor, MethodCall expected, Expression expression, Times times) at Moq.Mock.VerifySet[T](Mock1 mock, Action1 setterExpression, Times times, String failMessage) at Moq.Mock1.VerifySet(Action`1 setterExpression) Class1.cs(22,0): at MoqTest.TryClassTest.IsMessageNotNull() using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using Moq; using NUnit.Framework; namespace MoqTest { [TestFixture] public class TryClassTest { [Test] public void IsMessageNotNull() { var mockView = new Mock<IView<GenInfo>>(); mockView.Setup(v => v.ModuleId).Returns(""); TryPresenter tryPresenter = new TryPresenter(mockView.Object); tryPresenter.SetMessage(new object(), new EventArgs()); // mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Message, Times.AtLeastOnce()); mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Model = It.Is<GenInfo>(x => x != null)); } } public class TryPresenter { private IView<GenInfo> view; public TryPresenter(IView<GenInfo> view) { this.view = view; } public void SetMessage(object sender, EventArgs e) { this.view.Model = null; } } public class MyView : IView<GenInfo> { #region Implementation of IView<GenInfo> public string ModuleId { get; set; } public GenInfo Model { get; set; } #endregion } public interface IView<T> { string ModuleId { get; set; } T Model { get; set; } } public class GenInfo { public String Message { get; set; } } } And if you change one line mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Model = It.Is<GenInfo>(x => x != null)); to mockView.VerifySet(v => v.Model, Times.AtLeastOnce()); it works fine. I think Exception is incorrect.

    Read the article

  • Learning WPF GUI design

    - by Jon
    GUI's written using WPF seem to be closer to a Web 2.0 feel than older Winforms development has been; do you know of any good quality references online or books which give a general overview of how to design nice WPF applications? I saw this StackOverflow question where some GUI design books are mentioned, but am interested in information specifically for WPF. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1193001/is-wpf-silverlight-design-worth-learning Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Message Driven Bean with Java Message Queue down

    - by Rafa de Castro
    I have the following problem deploying my application. It uses JMS and a remote openMQ for communication between servers. The problem is that the connection is not fully reliable so it can be up or down. For reconnecting I set the jms reconnect glassfish property so it reconnects if at some moment the connection gets lost. The problem arises when i try to deploy the application and there is no connection. It looks like it keeps retrying the connection but the application does not finish deployment until connection is available. Is it possible to configure it in any way that the deployment continues even if there is no connection and keeps retrying until there is connection available? Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • How do I mock a class property with mox?

    - by Harley
    I have a class: class myclass(object): @property def myproperty(self): return 'hello' Using mox and py.test, how do I mock out myproperty? I've tried: mock.StubOutWithMock(myclass, 'myproperty') myclass.myproperty = 'goodbye' and mock.StubOutWithMock(myclass, 'myproperty') myclass.myproperty.AndReturns('goodbye') but both fail with AttributeError: can't set attribute.

    Read the article

  • Non-Relational Database Design

    - by Ian Varley
    I'm interested in hearing about design strategies you have used with non-relational "nosql" databases - that is, the (mostly new) class of data stores that don't use traditional relational design or SQL (such as Hypertable, CouchDB, SimpleDB, Google App Engine datastore, Voldemort, Cassandra, SQL Data Services, etc.). They're also often referred to as "key/value stores", and at base they act like giant distributed persistent hash tables. Specifically, I want to learn about the differences in conceptual data design with these new databases. What's easier, what's harder, what can't be done at all? Have you come up with alternate designs that work much better in the non-relational world? Have you hit your head against anything that seems impossible? Have you bridged the gap with any design patterns, e.g. to translate from one to the other? Do you even do explicit data models at all now (e.g. in UML) or have you chucked them entirely in favor of semi-structured / document-oriented data blobs? Do you miss any of the major extra services that RDBMSes provide, like relational integrity, arbitrarily complex transaction support, triggers, etc? I come from a SQL relational DB background, so normalization is in my blood. That said, I get the advantages of non-relational databases for simplicity and scaling, and my gut tells me that there has to be a richer overlap of design capabilities. What have you done? FYI, there have been StackOverflow discussions on similar topics here: the next generation of databases changing schemas to work with Google App Engine choosing a document-oriented database

    Read the article

  • The Community-Driven GDB Primer

    - by fbrereto
    I was reading this question and realized it might be helpful for entry- and pro-level developers alike (including myself) to have a common reference for best practices in using gdb. Many questions asked on Stack Overflow could easily be solved by taking some time to step some code in a debugger, and it would be good to have a community-approved resource to "teach them how to fish", so to speak. Even for those seasoned veterans who occasionally find themselves in gdb when they are accustomed to a GUI-tastic debugger might benefit from those who are much more familiar with the command line tool. For starters (both to gdb and to prime this thread) I submit: Ninefinger's gdb primer The gdb quick reference guide, which is useful for telling you what commands are available but not how best to use them. My hope is this thread is a seed planted that is of continued value to the community. If by "continued value" the community decides to nix it altogether, well then the masses have spoken.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >