Search Results

Search found 13737 results on 550 pages for 'design consideration'.

Page 93/550 | < Previous Page | 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100  | Next Page >

• Programming and Ubiquitous Language (DDD) in a non-English domain

  - by Sandor Drieënhuizen

  I know there are some questions already here that are closely related to this subject but none of them take Ubiquitous Language as the starting point so I think that justifies this question. For those who don't know: Ubiquitous Language is the concept of defining a (both spoken and written) language that is equally used across developers and domain experts to avoid inconsistencies and miscommunication due to translation problems and misunderstanding. You will see the same terminology show up in code, conversations between any team member, functional specs and whatnot. So, what I was wondering about is how to deal with Ubiquitous Language in non-English domains. Personally, I strongly favor writing programming code in English completely, including comments but ofcourse excluding constants and resources. However, in a non-English domain, I'm forced to make a decision either to: Write code reflecting the Ubiquitous Language in the natural language of the domain. Translate the Ubiquitous Language to English and stop communicating in the natural language of the domain. Define a table that defines how the Ubiquitous Language translates to English. Here are some of my thoughts based on these options: 1) I have a strong aversion against mixed-language code, that is coding using type/member/variable names etc. that are non-English. Most programming languages 'breathe' English to a large extent and most of the technical literature, design pattern names etc. are in English as well. Therefore, in most cases there's just no way of writing code entirely in a non-English language so you end up with mixed languages anyway. 2) This will force the domain experts to start thinking and talking in the English equivalent of the UL, something that will probably not come naturally to them and therefore hinders communication significantly. 3) In this case, the developers communicate with the domain experts in their native language while the developers communicate with each other in English and most importantly, they write code using the English translation of the UL. I'm sure I don't want to go for the first option and I think option 3 is much better than option 2. What do you think? Am I missing other options? UPDATE Today, about year later, having dealt with this issue on a daily basis, I have to say that option 3 has worked out pretty well for me. It wasn't as tedious as I initially feared and translating in real time while talking to the client wasn't a problem either. I also found the following advantages to be true, based on my experience. Translating the UL makes you pay more attention to defining the UL and even the domain itself, especially when you don't know how to translate a term and you have to start looking through dictionaries etc. This has even caused me to reconsider domain modeling decisions a few times. It helps you make your knowledge of the English language more profound. Obviously, your code is much more pleasant to look at instead of being a mind boggling obscenity.

  Read the article

• Javascript Implementation Patterns for Server-side MVC Websites

  - by tmo256

  I'm looking for information on common patterns for initializing and executing Javascript page by page in a "traditional" server-side MVC website architecture. A few months ago, my development team began, but abandoned, a major re-architecture of our company's primary web app, including a full front-end redesign. In the process, there was some debate about the architecture of the Javascript in the current version of the site, and whether it fit into a clear, modern design pattern. Now I've returned to the process of overhauling the front end of this and several other MVC websites (Ruby on Rails and MVC.net) to implement a responsive framework (Bootstrap), and in the process will again need to review then revamp and update a lot of Javascript. These web applications are NOT single-page Javascript applications (in fact, we are ripping out a lot of Ajax) or designed to require a Javascript MVC pattern; these apps are basically brochure, catalog and administrative sites that follow a server-side MVC pattern. The vast majority of the Javascript required is behavioral, pre-built plugins (JQuery and Bootstrap, et al) that execute on specific DOM nodes. I'm going to give a very brief (as brief as I can be) run-down of the current architecture only in order to illustrate the scope and type of paradigm I'm talking about. Hopefully, it will help you understand the nature of the patterns I'm looking for, but I'm not looking for commentary on the specifics of this code. What I've done in the past is relatively straight-forward and easy to maintain, but, as mentioned above, some of the other developers don't like the current architecture. Currently, on document ready, I execute whatever global Javascript needs to occur on every page, and then call a page-specific init function to initialize node-specific functionality, retrieving the init method from a JS object. On each page load, something like this will happen: $(document).ready(function(){ $('header').menuAction(); App.pages.executePage('home','show'); //dynamic from framework request object }); And the main App javascript is like App = { usefulGlobalVar: 0, pages: { executePage: function(action, controller) { // if exists, App.pages[action][controller].init() }, home: { show: { init: function() { $('#tabs').tabs(); //et. al }, normalizeName: function() { // dom-specific utility function that // doesn't require a full-blown component/class/module } }, edit: ... }, user_profile: ... } } Any common features and functionality requiring modularization or compotentizing is done as needed with prototyping. For common implementation of plugins, I often extend JQuery, so I can easily initialize a plugin with the same options throughout the site. For example, $('[data-tabs]').myTabs() with this code in a utility javascript file: (function($) { $.fn.myTabs = function() { this.tabs( { //...common options }); }; }) Pointers to articles, books or other discussions would be most welcome. Again, I am looking for a site-wide implementation pattern, NOT a JS MVC framework or general how-tos on creating JS classes or components. Thanks for your help!

  Read the article

• Designing for an algorithm that reports progress

  - by Stefano Borini

  I have an iterative algorithm and I want to print the progress. However, I may also want it not to print any information, or to print it in a different way, or do other logic. In an object oriented language, I would perform the following solutions: Solution 1: virtual method have the algorithm class MyAlgoClass which implements the algo. The class also implements a virtual reportIteration(iterInfo) method which is empty and can be reimplemented. Subclass the MyAlgoClass and override reportIteration so that it does what it needs to do. This solution allows you to carry additional information (for example, the file unit) in the reimplemented class. I don't like this method because it clumps together two functionalities that may be unrelated, but in GUI apps it may be ok. Solution 2: observer pattern the algorithm class has a register(Observer) method, keeps a list of the registered observers and takes care of calling notify() on each of them. Observer::notify() needs a way to get the information from the Subject, so it either has two parameters, one with the Subject and the other with the data the Subject may pass, or just the Subject and the Observer is now in charge of querying it to fetch the relevant information. Solution 3: callbacks I tend to see the callback method as a lightweight observer. Instead of passing an object, you pass a callback, which may be a plain function, but also an instance method in those languages that allow it (for example, in python you can because passing an instance method will remain bound to the instance). C++ however does not allow it, because if you pass a pointer to an instance method, this will not be defined. Please correct me on this regard, my C++ is quite old. The problem with callbacks is that generally you have to pass them together with the data you want the callback to be invoked with. Callbacks don't store state, so you have to pass both the callback and the state to the Subject in order to find it at callback execution, together with any additional data the Subject may provide about the event is reporting. Question My question is relative to the fact that I need to implement the opening problem in a language that is not object oriented, namely Fortran 95, and I am fighting with my usual reasoning which is based on python assumptions and style. I think that in Fortran the concept is similar to C, with the additional trouble that in C you can store a function pointer, while in Fortran 95 you can only pass it around. Do you have any comments, suggestions, tips, and quirks on this regard (in C, C++, Fortran and python, but also in any other language, so to have a comparison of language features that can be exploited on this regard) on how to design for an algorithm that must report progress to some external entity, using state from both the algorithm and the external entity ?

  Read the article

• How to build a 4x game?

  - by Marco

  I'm trying to study how succefully implement a 4x game. Area of interest: 1) map data: how to store stellars systems (graphs?), how to generate them and so on.. 2) multiplayer: how to organize code in a non graphical server and a client to display it 3) command system: what are patters to catch user and ai decisions and handle them, adding at first "explore" and "colonize" then "combat", "research", "spy" and so on (commands can affect ships, planets, research, etc..) 4) ai system: ai can use commands to expand, upgrade planets and ship I know is a big questions, so help is appreciated :D 1) Map data Best choice is have a graph to model a galaxy. A node is a stellar system and every system have a list of planets. Ship cannot travel outside of predefined paths, like in Ascendancy: http://www.abandonia.com/files/games/221/Ascendancy_2.png Every connection between two stellar systems have a cost, in turns. Generate a galaxy is only a matter of: - dimension: number of stellar systems, - variety: randomize number of planets and types (desertic, earth, etc..), - positions of each stellar system on game space - connections: assure that exist a path between every node, so graph is "connected" (not sure if this a matematically correct term) 2) Multiplayer Game is organized in turns: player 1, player 2, ai1, ai2. Server take care of all data and clients just diplay it and collect data change. Because is a turn game, latency is not a problem :D 3) Command system I would like to design a hierarchy of commands to take care of this aspect: abstract Genericcommand (target) ExploreCommand (Ship) extends genericcommand colonizeCommand (Ship) buildcommand(planet, object) and so on. In my head all this commands are stored in a queue for every planets, ships or reasearch center or spy, and each turn a command is sent to a server to apply command and change data state 4) ai system I don't have any idea about this. Is a big topic and what I want is a simple ai. Something like "expand and fight against everyone". I think about a behaviour tree to control ai moves, so I can develop an ai that try to build ships to expand and then colonize planets, upgrade them throught science and combat enemies. Could be done with a finite state machine too ? any ideas, resources, article are welcome!

  Read the article

• Music Notation Editor - Refactoring view creation logic elseware

  - by Cyril Silverman

  Let me preface by saying that knowing some elementary music theory and music notation may be helpful in grasping the problem at hand. I'm currently building a Music Notation and Tablature Editor (in Javascript). But I've come to a point where the core parts of the program are more or less there. All functionality I plan to add at this point will really build off the foundation that I've created. As a result, I want to refactor to really solidify my code. I'm using an API called VexFlow to render notation. Basically I pass the parts of the editor's state to VexFlow to build the graphical representation of the score. Here is a rough and stripped down UML diagram showing you the outline of my program: In essence, a Part has many Measures which has many Notes which has many NoteItems (yes, this is semantically weird, as a chord is represented as a Note with multiple NoteItems, individual pitches or fret positions). All of the relationships are bi-directional. There are a few problems with my design because my Measure class contains the majority of the entire application view logic. The class holds the data about all VexFlow objects (the graphical representation of the score). It contains the graphical Staff object and the graphical notes. (Shouldn't these be placed somewhere else in the program?) While VexFlowFactory deals with actual creation (and some processing) of most of the VexFlow objects, Measure still "directs" the creation of all the objects and what order they are supposed to be created in for both the VexFlowStaff and VexFlowNotes. I'm not looking for a specific answer as you'd need a much deeper understanding of my code. Just a general direction to go in. Here's a thought I had, create an MeasureView/NoteView/PartView classes that contains the basic VexFlow objects for each class in addition to any extraneous logic for it's creation? but where would these views be contained? Do I create a ScoreView that is a parallel graphical representation of everything? So that ScoreView.render() would cascade down PartView and call render for each PartView and casade down into each MeasureView, etc. Again, I just have no idea what direction to go in. The more I think about it, the more ways to go seem to pop into my head. I tried to be as concise and simplistic as possible while still getting my problem across. Please feel free to ask me any questions if anything is unclear. It's quite a struggle trying to dumb down a complicated problem to its core parts.

  Read the article

• JS closures - Passing a function to a child, how should the shared object be accessed

  - by slicedtoad

  I have a design and am wondering what the appropriate way to access variables is. I'll demonstrate with this example since I can't seem to describe it better than the title. Term is an object representing a bunch of time data (a repeating duration of time defined by a bunch of attributes) Term has some print functionality but does not implement the print functions itself, rather they are passed in as anonymous functions by the parent. This would be similar to how shaders can be passed to a renderer rather than defined by the renderer. A container (let's call it Box) has a Schedule object that can understand and use Term objects. Box creates Term objects and passes them to Schedule as required. Box also defines the print functions stored in Term. A print function usually takes an argument and uses it to return a string based on that argument and Term's internal data. Sometime the print function could also use data stored in Schedule, though. I'm calling this data shared. So, the question is, what is the best way to access this shared data. I have a lot of options since JS has closures and I'm not familiar enough to know if I should be using them or avoiding them in this case. Options: Create a local "reference" (term used lightly) to the shared data (data is not a primitive) when defining the print function by accessing the shared data through Schedule from Box. Example: var schedule = function(){ var sched = Schedule(); var t1 = Term( function(x){ // Term.print() return (x + sched.data).format(); }); }; Bind it to Term explicitly. (Pass it in Term's constructor or something). Or bind it in Sched after Box passes it. And then access it as an attribute of Term. Pass it in at the same time x is passed to the print function, (from sched). This is the most familiar way for my but it doesn't feel right given JS's closure ability. Do something weird like bind some context and arguments to print. I'm hoping the correct answer isn't purely subjective. If it is, then I guess the answer is just "do whatever works". But I feel like there are some significant differences between the approaches that could have a large impact when stretched beyond my small example.

  Read the article

• .Net Application & Database Modularity/Reuse

  - by Martaver

  I'm looking for some guidance on how to architect an app with regards to modularity, separation of concerns and re-usability. I'm working on an application (ASP.Net, C#) that has distinctly generic chunks of functionality, that I'd love to be able to lift out, all layers, into re-usable components. This means the module handles the database schema, data access, API, everything so that the next time I want to use it I can just register the module and hook into it. Developing modules of re-usable functionality is a no-brainer, but what is really confusing me is what to do when it comes to handling a core re-usable database schema that serves the module's functionality. In an ideal world, I would register a module and it would ensure that the associated database schema exists in the DB. I would code on the assumption that the tables exist, calling the module's functionality through the DLL, agnostic of the database layer. Kind of like Enterprise Library's Caching/Logging Application Block, which can create a DB schema in the target DB to use as a data store. My Questions is: What do you think is the best way to achieve this, firstly, in terms design architecture, and secondly solution structure. What patterns/frameworks do you know that exist & support this kind of thing? My thoughts so far: I mostly use Entity Framework and SQL Server DB Projects. I thought about a 'black box' approach to modules of functionality. I could use use a code-first approach in EF4, and use the ObjectContext to create a database when the module is initialized. However this means that all of the entities that my module encapsulates would be disconnected from the rest of the application because they belonged to an abstracted ObjectContext. Further - Creating appropriate indexes and references between domain entities and the module's entities would be impossible to do practically. I've thought of adopting Enterprise Library and creating my own Application Blocks. I'm not sure how this would play nice with Entity Framework (if at all) though. I like the idea of building on proven patterns & practices to encapsulate established, reusable functionality. I thought of abandoning Entity Framework for the Module, and just creating a separate DB schema for the module with its own set of stored procedures & ADO.Net. Then deploying the script at run-time if interrogation shows that it doesn't exist. But once again, for application developing outside of the application, I would want to use Entity Framework and I would have to use the module separately, disconnected from the domain ObjectContext. Has anyone had experience developing these sorts of full-stack modules? What advice can you offer? Am I biting off more than I can chew?

  Read the article

• What are the differences between abstract classes, interfaces, and when to use them

  - by user66662

  Recently I have started to wrap my head around OOP, and I am now to the point where the more I read about the differences between Abstract classes and Interfaces the more confused I become. So far, neither can be instantiated. Interfaces are more or less structural blueprints that determine the skeleton and abstracts are different by being able to partially develop code. I would like to learn more about these through my specific situation. Here is a link to my first question if you would like a little more background information: What is a good design model for my new class? Here are two classes I created: class Ad { $title; $description $price; function get_data($website){ } function validate_price(){ } } class calendar_event { $title; $description $start_date; function get_data($website){ //guts } function validate_dates(){ //guts } } So, as you can see these classes are almost identical. Not shown here, but there are other functions, like get_zip(), save_to_database() that are common across my classes. I have also added other classes Cars and Pets which have all the common methods and of course properties specific to those objects (mileage, weight, for example). Now I have violated the DRY principle and I am managing and changing the same code across multiple files. I intend on having more classes like boats, horses, or whatever. So is this where I would use an interface or abstract class? From what I understand about abstract classes I would use a super class as a template with all of the common elements built into the abstract class, and then add only the items specifically needed in future classes. For example: abstract class content { $title; $description function get_data($website){ } function common_function2() { } function common_function3() { } } class calendar_event extends content { $start_date; function validate_dates(){ } } Or would I use an interface and, because these are so similar, create a structure that each of the subclasses are forced to use for integrity reasons, and leave it up to the end developer who fleshes out that class to be responsible for each of the details of even the common functions. my thinking there is that some 'common' functions may need to be tweaked in the future for the needs of their specific class. Despite all that above, if you believe I am misunderstanding the what and why of abstracts and interfaces altogether, by all means let a valid answer to be stop thinking in this direction and suggest the proper way to move forward! Thanks!

  Read the article

• How do you take into account usability and user requirements for your application?

  - by voroninp

  Our team supports BackOffice application: a mix of WinForm and WPF windows. (about 80 including dialogs). Really a kind of a Swiss Army Knife. It is used by developers, tech writers, security developers, testers. The requirements for new features come quite often and sometimes we play Wizard of Oz to decide which GUI our users like the most. And it usually happens (I admit it can be just my subjective interpretation of the reality) that one tiny detail giving the flavor of good usability to our app requires a lot of time. This time is being spent on 'fighting' with GUI framework making it act like we need. And it very difficult to make estimations for this type of tasks (at least for me and most members of our team). Scrum poker is not a help either. Management often considers this usability perfectionism to be a waste of time. On the other hand an accumulated affect of features where each has some little usability flaw frustrates users. But the same users want frequent releases and instant bug fixes. Hence, no way to get the positive feedback: there is always somebody who is snuffy. I constantly feel myself as competing with ourselves: more features - more bugs/tasks/architecture. We are trying to outrun the cart we are pushing. New technologies arrive and some of them can potentially help to improve the design or decrease task implementation time but these technologies require learning, prototyping and so on. Well, that was a story. And now is the question: How do you balance between time pressure, product quality, users and management satisfaction? When and how do you decide to leave the problem with not a perfect but to some extent acceptable solution, how often do you make these decisions? How do you do with your own satisfaction? What are your priorities? P.S. Please keep in mind, we are a BackOffice team, we have neither dedicated technical writer nor GUI designer. The tester have joined us recently. We've much work to do and much freedom concerning 'how'. I like it because it fosters creativity but I don't want to become too nerdy perfectionist.

  Read the article

• A solution for a PHP website without a framework

  - by lortabac

  One of our customers asked us to add some dynamic functionality to an existent website, made of several static HTML pages. We normally work with an MVC framework (mostly CodeIgniter), but in this case moving everything to a framework would require too much time. Since it is not a big project, not having the full functionality of a framework is not a problem. But the question is how to keep code clean. The solution I came up with is to divide code in libraries (the application's API) and models. So inside HTML there will only be API calls, and readability will not be sacrificed. I implemented this with a sort of static Registry (sorry if I'm wrong, I am not a design pattern expert): <?php class Custom_framework { //Global database instance private static $db; //Registered models private static $models = array(); //Registered libraries private static $libraries = array(); //Returns a database class instance static public function get_db(){ if(isset(self::$db)){ //If instance exists, returns it return self::$db; } else { //If instance doesn't exists, creates it self::$db = new DB; return self::$db; } } //Returns a model instance static public function get_model($model_name){ if(isset(self::$models[$model_name])){ //If instance exists, returns it return self::$models[$model_name]; } else { //If instance doesn't exists, creates it if(is_file(ROOT_DIR . 'application/models/' . $model_name . '.php')){ include_once ROOT_DIR . 'application/models/' . $model_name . '.php'; self::$models[$model_name] = new $model_name; return self::$models[$model_name]; } else { return FALSE; } } } //Returns a library instance static public function get_library($library_name){ if(isset(self::$libraries[$library_name])){ //If instance exists, returns it return self::$libraries[$library_name]; } else { //If instance doesn't exists, creates it if(is_file(ROOT_DIR . 'application/libraries/' . $library_name . '.php')){ include_once ROOT_DIR . 'application/libraries/' . $library_name . '.php'; self::$libraries[$library_name] = new $library_name; return self::$libraries[$library_name]; } else { return FALSE; } } } } Inside HTML, API methods are accessed like this: <?php echo Custom_framework::get_library('My_library')->my_method(); ?> It looks to me as a practical solution. But I wonder what its drawbacks are, and what the possible alternatives.

  Read the article

• Should library classes be wrapped before using them in unit testing?

  - 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. Example: 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'); $this->mail->send(); //Some } } However, Unit testing demands that I test one component at a time, so I need to mock the Zend_Mail class. In addition I'm violating the Dependency Inversion principle as my Logger class now depends on concretion not abstraction. Does that mean that I can never use a library class directly and must always wrap it in a class of my own? Example: interface Mailer{ public function setTo($to); public function setSubject($subject); public function setBody($body); public function send(); } class MyMailer implements Mailer{ private $mailer; function __construct(){ $this->mail=new Zend_Mail; //The class isn't injected this time } function setTo($to){ $this->mailer->setTo($to); } //implement the rest of the interface functions similarly } And now my Logger class can be happy :D class Logger{ private $mailer; function __construct(Mailer $mail){ $this->mail=$mail; } //rest of the code unchanged } Questions: Although I solved the mocking problem by introducing an interface, I have created a totally new class Mailer that now needs to be unit tested although it only wraps Zend_Mail which is already unit tested by the Zend team. Is there a better approach to all this? Zend_Mail's send() function could actually have a Zend_Transport object when called (i.e. public function send($transport = null)). Does this make the idea of a wrapper class more appealing? 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

• Lazy Processing of Streams

  - by Giorgio

  I have the following problem scenario: I have a text file and I have to read it and split it into lines. Some lines might need to be dropped (according to criteria that are not fixed). The lines that are not dropped must be parsed into some predefined records. Records that are not valid must be dropped. Duplicate records may exist and, in such a case, they are consecutive. If duplicate / multiple records exist, only one item should be kept. The remaining records should be grouped according to the value contained in one field; all records belonging to the same group appear one after another (e.g. AAAABBBBCCDEEEFF and so on). The records of each group should be numbered (1, 2, 3, 4, ...). For each group the numbering starts from 1. The records must then be saved somewhere / consumed in the same order as they were produced. I have to implement this in Java or C++. My first idea was to define functions / methods like: One method to get all the lines from the file. One method to filter out the unwanted lines. One method to parse the filtered lines into valid records. One method to remove duplicate records. One method to group records and number them. The problem is that the data I am going to read can be too big and might not fit into main memory: so I cannot just construct all these lists and apply my functions one after the other. On the other hand, I think I do not need to fit all the data in main memory at once because once a record has been consumed all its underlying data (basically the lines of text between the previous record and the current record, and the record itself) can be disposed of. With the little knowledge I have of Haskell I have immediately thought about some kind of lazy evaluation, in which instead of applying functions to lists that have been completely computed, I have different streams of data that are built on top of each other and, at each moment, only the needed portion of each stream is materialized in main memory. But I have to implement this in Java or C++. So my question is which design pattern or other technique can allow me to implement this lazy processing of streams in one of these languages.

  Read the article

• The term "interface" in C++

  - by Flexo

  Java makes a clear distinction between class and interface. (I believe C# does also, but I have no experience with it). When writing C++ however there is no language enforced distinction between class and interface. Consequently I've always viewed interface as a workaround for the lack of multiple inheritance in Java. Making such a distinction feels arbitrary and meaningless in C++. I've always tended to go with the "write things in the most obvious way" approach, so if in C++ I've got what might be called an interface in Java, e.g.: class Foo { public: virtual void doStuff() = 0; ~Foo() = 0; }; and I then decided that most implementers of Foo wanted to share some common functionality I would probably write: class Foo { public: virtual void doStuff() = 0; ~Foo() {} protected: // If it needs this to do its thing: int internalHelperThing(int); // Or if it doesn't need the this pointer: static int someOtherHelper(int); }; Which then makes this not an interface in the Java sense anymore. Instead C++ has two important concepts, related to the same underlying inheritance problem: virtual inhertiance Classes with no member variables can occupy no extra space when used as a base "Base class subobjects may have zero size" Reference Of those I try to avoid #1 wherever possible - it's rare to encounter a scenario where that genuinely is the "cleanest" design. #2 is however a subtle, but important difference between my understanding of the term "interface" and the C++ language features. As a result of this I currently (almost) never refer to things as "interfaces" in C++ and talk in terms of base classes and their sizes. I would say that in the context of C++ "interface" is a misnomer. It has come to my attention though that not many people make such a distinction. Do I stand to lose anything by allowing (e.g. protected) non-virtual functions to exist within an "interface" in C++? (My feeling is the exactly the opposite - a more natural location for shared code) Is the term "interface" meaningful in C++ - does it imply only pure virtual or would it be fair to call C++ classes with no member variables an interface still?

  Read the article

• Development Approach: User Interface In or Domain Model Out?

  - by Berin Loritsch

  While I've never delivered anything using Smalltalk, my brief time playing with it has definitely left its mark. The only way to describe the experience is MVC the way it was meant to be. Essentially, all the heavy lifting for your application is done in the business objects (or domain model if you are so inclined). The standard controls are bound to the business objects in some way. For example, a text box is mapped to an object's field (the field itself is an object so it's easy to do). A button would mapped to a method. This is all done with a very simple and natural API. We don't have to think about binding objects, etc. It just works. Yet, in many newer languages and APIs you are forced to think from the outside in. First with C++ and MFC, and now with C# and WPF, Microsoft has gotten it's developer world hooked on GUI builders where you build your application by implementing event handlers. Java Swing development isn't so different, only you are writing the code to instantiate the controls on the form yourself. For some projects, there may never even be a domain model--just event handlers. I've been in and around this model for most of my carreer. Each way forces you to think differently. With the Smalltalk approach, your domain is smart while your GUI is dumb. With the default VisualStudio approach, your GUI is smart while your domain model (if it exists) is rather anemic. Many developers that I work with see value in the Smalltalk approach, and try to shoehorn that approach into the VisualStudio environment. WPF has some dynamic binding features that makes it possible; but there are limitations. Inevitably some code that belongs in the domain model ends up in the GUI classes. So, which way do you design/develop your code? Why? GUI first. User interaction is paramount. Domain first. I need to make sure the system is correct before we put a UI on it. There's pros and cons for either approach. Domain model fits in there with crystal cathedrals and pie in the sky. GUI fits in there with quick and dirty (sometimes really dirty). And for an added bonus: How do you make sure the code is maintainable?

  Read the article

• Application workflow

  - by manseuk

  I am in the planning process for a new application, the application will be written in PHP (using the Symfony 2 framework) but I'm not sure how relevant that is. The application will be browser based, although there will eventually be API access for other systems to interact with the data stored within the application, again probably not relavent at this point. The application manages SIM cards for lots of different providers - each SIM card belongs to a single provider but a single customer might have many SIM cards across many providers. The application allows the user to perform actions against the SIM card - for example Activate it, Barr it, Check on its status etc Some of the providers provide an API for doing this - so a single access point with multiple methods eg activateSIM, getStatus, barrSIM etc. The method names differ for each provider and some providers offer methods for extra functions that others don't. Some providers don't have APIs but do offer these methods by sending emails with attachments - the attachments are normally a CSV file that contains the SIM reference and action required - the email is processed by the provider and replied to once the action has been complete. To give you an example - the front end of my application will provide a customer with a list of SIM cards they own and give them access to the actions that are provided by the provider of each specific SIM card - some methods may require extra data which will either be stored in the backend or collected from the user frontend. Once the user has selected their action and added any required data I will handle the process in the backend and provide either instant feedback, in the case of the providers with APIs, or start the process off by sending an email and waiting for its reply before processing it and updating the backend so that next time the user checks the SIM card its status is correct (ie updated by a backend process). My reason for creating this question is because I'm stuck !! I'm confused about how to approach the actual workflow logic. I was thinking about creating a Provider Interface with the most common methods getStatus, activateSIM and barrSIM and then implementing that interface for each provider. So class Provider1 implements Provider - Then use a Factory to create the required class depending on user selected SIM card and invoking the method selected. This would work fine if all providers offered the same methods but they don't - there are a subset which are common but some providers offer extra methods - how can I implement that flexibly ? How can I deal with the processes where the workflow is different - ie some methods require and API call and value returned and some require an email to be sent and the next stage of the process doesn't start until the email reply is recieved ... Please help ! (I hope this is a readable question and that this is the correct place to be asking) Update I guess what I'm trying to avoid is a big if or switch / case statement - some design pattern that gives me a flexible approach to implementing this kind of fluid workflow .. anyone ?

  Read the article

• What is the right way to group this project into classes?

  - by sigil

  I originally asked this on SO, where it was closed and recommended that I ask it here instead. I'm trying to figure out how to group all the functions necessary for my project into classes. The goal of the project is to execute the following process: Get the user's FTP credentials (username & password). Check to make sure the credentials establish a valid connection to the FTP server. Query several Sharepoint lists and join the results of those queries to create a list of items that need to have action taken on them. Each item in the list has a folder. For each item: Zip the contents of the folder. Upload the folder to the FTP server using SFTP Update the item's Sharepoint data. Email the user an Excel report showing, e.g., Items without folder paths Items that failed to zip or upload Steps 2-5 are performed on a periodic basis; if step 2 returns an invalid connection, the user is alerted and the process returns to step 1. If at any point the user presses a certain key, the process terminates. I've defined the following set of classes, each of which is in its own .cs file: SFTP: file transfer processes DataHandler: Sharepoint data retrieval/querying/updating processes. Also makes and uploads the zip files. Exceptions: Not just one class, this is the .cs file where I have all of my exception classes. Report: Builds and sends the report. Program: The main class for running the program. I recognize that the DataHandler class is a god object, but I don't have a good idea of how to refactor it. I feel like it should be more fine-grained than just breaking it into Sharepoint, Zip, and Upload, but maybe that's it. Also, I haven't yet worked out how to combine the periodic behavior with the "wait for user input at any point in the process" part; I think that involves threads, which means other classes to manage the threads... I'm not that well-versed in design patterns, but is there one that fits this project well? If this is too big of a topic to neatly explain in an SO answer, I'll also accept a link to a good tutorial on what I'm trying to do here.

  Read the article

• Is it good practice to keep 2 related tables (using auto_increment PK) to have the same Max of auto_increment ID when table1 got modified?

  - by Tum

  This question is about good design practice in programming. Let see this example, we have 2 interrelated tables: Table1 textID - text 1 - love.. 2 - men... ... Table2 rID - textID 1 - 1 2 - 2 ... Note: In Table1: textID is auto_increment primary key In Table2: rID is auto_increment primary key & textID is foreign key The relationship is that 1 rID will have 1 and only 1 textID but 1 textID can have a few rID. So, when table1 got modification then table2 should be updated accordingly. Ok, here is a fictitious example. You build a very complicated system. When you modify 1 record in table1, you need to keep track of the related record in table2. To keep track, you can do like this: Option 1: When you modify a record in table1, you will try to modify a related record in table 2. This could be quite hard in term of programming expecially for a very very complicated system. Option 2: instead of modifying a related record in table2, you decided to delete old record in table 2 & insert new one. This is easier for you to program. For example, suppose you are using option2, then when you modify record 1,2,3,....,100 in table1, the table2 will look like this: Table2 rID - textID 101 - 1 102 - 2 ... 200 - 100 This means the Max of auto_increment IDs in table1 is still the same (100) but the Max of auto_increment IDs in table2 already reached 200. what if the user modify many times? if they do then the table2 may run out of records? we can use BigInt but that make the app run slower? Note: If you spend time to program to modify records in table2 when table1 got modified then it will be very hard & thus it will be error prone. But if you just clear the old record & insert new records into table2 then it is much easy to program & thus your program is simpler & less error prone. So, is it good practice to keep 2 related tables (using auto_increment PK) to have the same Max of auto_increment ID when table1 got modified?

  Read the article

• How to recover Google classic design from its new design?

  - by Steven

  I typed this into my address bar: javascript:void(document.cookie=”PREF=ID=20b6e4c2f44943bb:U=4bf292d46faad806:TM=1249677602:LM=1257919388:S=odm0Ys-53ZueXfZG;path=/; domain=.google.com”); However, I don't like the new design of Google. How to switch back? How to cancel this effect using Javascript? How to reverse by using Javascript?

  Read the article

• Data Center Design and Preferences

  - by Warner

  When either selecting a data center as a co-location facility or designing a new one from scratch, what would your ideal specification be? Fundamentally, diversified power sources, multiple ISPs, redundant generators, UPS, cooling, and physical security are all desireable. What are the additional key requirements that someone might not consider on the first pass? What are the functional details someone might not consider during the initial high level design?

  Read the article

• Is this design possible with ExtJS?

  - by gargantaun

  I've been asked to do the front end for a web app, and to use ExtJS specifically. I've been working through a couple of tutorials, but I've not seen much variation on the default ExtJS look and feel except for some subtle changes to the colors and what not. The design I've been handed seems to be a radical departure from the standard ExtJs look and feel. So before I head down a dead end or start chasing wild geese, I wondered wether any ExtJS experts out there could point out any potential pit falls in the design, or is everything do-able? The design is here... cheers -t

  Read the article

• application authentication design ideas

  - by Berryl

  Hello I am working with on an app that uses wpf / silverlight on the front end and nhibernate on the back end, and looking for some design ideas to address authentication; I was looking at Rhino Security which I think is pretty slick and certainly useful, but doesn't in and of itself seem to address authentication. That said, I am looking for something of a technology agnostic overview of authentication design issues at this point. Does anyone have any links and / or experiences with an authentication design that is relatively easy to adapt to different common technologies. Cheers, Berryl

  Read the article

• ASP.net SessionState Error in Design Mode

  - by stringo0

  I'm getting a weird error in the design view for a user creation page for 2 controls: Error Creating Control - wCreateUser Session state can only be used when enableSessionState is set to true, either in a configuration file or in the Page directive. (There's some more) I've done both of these, but I'm still getting the error in design mode. The controls work fine when compiled, and on the live site - this is just in the Visual Web Developer 2010 Design view for the page. Any ideas as to how I can resolve this? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Facing problem in VB6.0 Activex Controls design.

  - by Dharmaraju

  Hi, This is dharmaraju, I am facing some problem in Activex Controls design. Kindly help me to resolve the issue. Problem Description: I have created a property mentioned below for a textbox. Public Property Let DataControl_Value(ByVal Value As Variant) Public Property Get DataControl_Value() As Variant This property is editable at design time if i use it VB6.0 Applications. Same thing is read only in case if i use it in vc++ MFC applications. I have defined one more property like below. Public Property Let DataControl_DataItemDef(ByVal Value As DTMDATACONTROLLib.IXMLDOMNode) Public Property Get DataControl_DataItemDef() As DTMDATACONTROLLib.IXMLDOMNode In this case the "DataControl_DataItemDef" property will not be available at design time.[not displaying in control's property window.] Kindly help me to resolve the issue.

  Read the article

• Need help in Architecture design in java

  - by palakolanusrinu

  Can anyone help in architecture design of one of my complex application. Requirement : In web based application, we need to generate Excel kind of report as HTML page and after that we need to perform different kinds of operations like Add manual rows Delete rows Edit rows adding comments based on each cell viewing the added comments. attaching the file based on each cell viewing the attached file. Collapsible functionality for some of rows In the process of design we have come up with DB design and application framework is Spring. and for Web not yet finalized. what is the best approach to implement this kind of UI? --JSF?(keep in mind we need to Excel operations like above mentioned operations) -- Any reporting tool which will provide editing functionality? Please suggest me How can we do it? and what is the best technology for it? or is there any reporting tools?

  Read the article

• Custom UI design in Sencha and othere touch framworks

  - by vWebby

  Can someone please guide me regarding which touch framework (javascript) I should use to make a tablet app? I am new to this area and I am looking for something which allows me to play with my own UI design comfortably. I went through sencha as I heard its apt for a tablet app environment but I am (sorry, it might sound odd) not able to make out whether I can use my own UI design to make app in sencha. Or any other framework (stable) allows to use custom UI design?? Any help regarding this is appreciated .. thanks in advance

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100  | Next Page >