Search Results

Search found 45436 results on 1818 pages for 'singleton class'.

Page 1/1818 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Static class vs Singleton class in C# [closed]

    - by Floradu88
    Possible Duplicate: What is the difference between all-static-methods and applying a singleton pattern? I need to make a decision for a project I'm working of whether to use static or singleton. After reading an article like this I am inclined to use singleton. What is better to use static class or singleton? Edit 1 : Client Server Desktop Application. Please provide code oriented solutions.

    Read the article

  • Static vs Singleton in C# (Difference between Singleton and Static)

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    Recently I have came across a question what is the difference between Static and Singleton classes. So I thought it will be a good idea to share blog post about it.Difference between Static and Singleton classes:A singleton classes allowed to create a only single instance or particular class. That instance can be treated as normal object. You can pass that object to a method as parameter or you can call the class method with that Singleton object. While static class can have only static methods and you can not pass static class as parameter.We can implement the interfaces with the Singleton class while we can not implement the interfaces with static classes.We can clone the object of Singleton classes we can not clone the object of static classes.Singleton objects stored on heap while static class stored in stack.more at my personal blog: dotnetjalps.com

    Read the article

  • Java Singleton Pattern

    - by Spencer
    I'm used the Singleton Design Pattern public class Singleton { private static final Singleton INSTANCE = new Singleton(); // Private constructor prevents instantiation from other classes private Singleton() {} public static Singleton getInstance() { return INSTANCE; } } My question is how do I create an object of class Singleton in another class? I've tried: Singleton singleton = new Singleton(); // error - constructor is private Singleton singleton = Singleton.getInstance(); // error - non-static method cannot be referenced from a static context What is the correct code? Thanks, Spencer

    Read the article

  • Name for Osherove's modified singleton pattern?

    - by Kazark
    I'm pretty well sold on the "singletons are evil" line of thought. Nevertheless, there are limited occurrences when you want to limit the creation of an object. Roy Osherove advises, If you're planning to use a singleton in your design, separate the logic of the singleton class and the logic that makes it a singleton (the part that initializes a static variables, for example) into two separate classes. That way, you can keep the single responsibility principle (SRP) and also have a way to override singleton logic. (The Art of Unit Testing 261-262) This pattern still perpetuates the global state. However, it does result in a testable design, so it seems to me to be a good pattern for mitigating the damage of a singleton. However, Osherove does not give a name to this pattern; but naming a pattern, according to the Gang of Four, is important: Naming a pattern immediately increases our design vocabulary. It lets us design at a higher level of abstraction. (3) Is there a standard name for this pattern? It seems different enough from a standard singleton to deserve a separate name. Decoupled Singleton, perhaps?

    Read the article

  • Difference between Singleton implemention using pointer and using static object

    - by Anon
    EDIT: Sorry my question was not clear, why do books/articles prefer implementation#1 over implementation#2? What is the actual advantage of using pointer in implementation of Singleton class vs using a static object? Why do most books prefer this class Singleton { private: static Singleton *p_inst; Singleton(); public: static Singleton * instance() { if (!p_inst) { p_inst = new Singleton(); } return p_inst; } }; over this class Singleton { public: static Singleton& Instance() { static Singleton inst; return inst; } protected: Singleton(); // Prevent construction Singleton(const Singleton&); // Prevent construction by copying Singleton& operator=(const Singleton&); // Prevent assignment ~Singleton(); // Prevent unwanted destruction };

    Read the article

  • Python singleton pattern

    - by Javier Garcia
    Hi, someone can tell me why this is incorrect as a singleton pattern: class preSingleton(object): def __call__(self): return self singleton = preSingleton() a = singleton() b = singleton() print a==b a.var_in_a = 100 b.var_in_b = 'hello' print a.var_in_b print b.var_in_a Edit: The above code prints: True hello 100 thank you very much

    Read the article

  • c++ casting base class to derived class mess

    - by alan2here
    If I were to create a base class called base and derived classes called derived_1, derived_2 etc... I use a collection of instances of the base class, then when I retrieved an element and tried to use it I would find that C++ thinks it's type is that of the base class, probably because I retrieved it from a std::vector of base. Which is a problem when I want to use features that only exist for the specific derived class who's type I knew this object was when I put it into the vector. So I cast the element into the type it is supposed to be and found this wouldn't work. (derived_3)obj_to_be_fixed; And remembered that it's a pointer thing. After some tweaking this now worked. *((derived_3*)&obj_to_be_fixed); Is this right or is there for example an abc_cast() function that does it with less mess?

    Read the article

  • Trying to change variables in a singleton using a method

    - by Johnny Cox
    I am trying to use a singleton to store variables that will be used across multiple view controllers. I need to be able to get the variables and also set them. How do I call a method in a singleton to change the variables stored in the singleton. total+=1079; [var setTotal:total]; where var is a static Singleton *var = nil; I need to update the total and send to the setTotal method inside the singleton. But when I do this the setTotal method never gets accessed. The get methods work but the setTotal method does not. Please let me know what should. Below is some of my source code // // Singleton.m // Rolo // // Created by on 6/28/12. // Copyright (c) 2012 Johnny Cox. All rights reserved. // #import "Singleton.h" @implementation Singleton @synthesize total,tax,final; #pragma mark Singleton Methods + (Singleton *)sharedManager { static Singleton *sharedInstance = nil; static dispatch_once_t onceToken; dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{ sharedInstance = [[Singleton alloc] init]; // Do any other initialisation stuff here }); return sharedInstance; } +(void) setTotal:(double) tot { Singleton *shared = [Singleton sharedManager]; shared.total = tot; NSLog(@"hello"); } +(double) getTotal { Singleton *shared = [Singleton sharedManager]; NSLog(@"%f",shared.total); return shared.total; } +(double) getTax { Singleton *shared = [Singleton sharedManager]; NSLog(@"%f",shared.tax); return shared.tax; } @end // // Singleton.h // Rolo // // Created by on 6/28/12. // Copyright (c) 2012 Johnny Cox. All rights reserved. // #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> @interface Singleton : NSObject @property (nonatomic, assign) double total; @property (nonatomic, assign) double tax; @property (nonatomic, assign) double final; + (id)sharedManager; +(double) getTotal; +(void) setTotal; +(double) getTax; @end

    Read the article

  • const vs. readonly for a singleton

    - by GlenH7
    First off, I understand there are folk who oppose the use of singletons. I think it's an appropriate use in this case as it's constant state information, but I'm open to differing opinions / solutions. (See The singleton pattern and When should the singleton pattern not be used?) Second, for a broader audience: C++/CLI has a similar keyword to readonly with initonly, so this isn't strictly a C# type question. (Literal field versus constant variable in C++/CLI) Sidenote: A discussion of some of the nuances on using const or readonly. My Question: I have a singleton that anchors together some different data structures. Part of what I expose through that singleton are some lists and other objects, which represent the necessary keys or columns in order to connect the linked data structures. I doubt that anyone would try to change these objects through a different module, but I want to explicitly protect them from that risk. So I'm currently using a "readonly" modifier on those objects*. I'm using readonly instead of const with the lists as I read that using const will embed those items in the referencing assemblies and will therefore trigger a rebuild of those referencing assemblies if / when the list(s) is/are modified. This seems like a tighter coupling than I would want between the modules, but I wonder if I'm obsessing over a moot point. (This is question #2 below) The alternative I see to using "readonly" is to make the variables private and then wrap them with a public get. I'm struggling to see the advantage of this approach as it seems like wrapper code that doesn't provide much additional benefit. (This is question #1 below) It's highly unlikely that we'll change the contents or format of the lists - they're a compilation of things to avoid using magic strings all over the place. Unfortunately, not all the code has converted over to using this singleton's presentation of those strings. Likewise, I don't know that we'd change the containers / classes for the lists. So while I normally argue for the encapsulations advantages a get wrapper provides, I'm just not feeling it in this case. A representative sample of my singleton public sealed class mySingl { private static volatile mySingl sngl; private static object lockObject = new Object(); public readonly Dictionary<string, string> myDict = new Dictionary<string, string>() { {"I", "index"}, {"D", "display"}, }; public enum parms { ABC = 10, DEF = 20, FGH = 30 }; public readonly List<parms> specParms = new List<parms>() { parms.ABC, parms.FGH }; public static mySingl Instance { get { if(sngl == null) { lock(lockObject) { if(sngl == null) sngl = new mySingl(); } } return sngl; } } private mySingl() { doSomething(); } } Questions: Am I taking the most reasonable approach in this case? Should I be worrying about const vs. readonly? is there a better way of providing this information?

    Read the article

  • abstract class extends abstract class in php?

    - by user151841
    I am working on a simple abstract database class. In my usage of this class, I'll want to have some instance be a singleton. I was thinking of having a abstract class that is not a singleton, and then extend it into another abstract class that is a singleton. Is this possible? Recommended?

    Read the article

  • Multiple Instances of Static Singleton

    - by Nexus
    I've recently been working with code that looks like this: using namespace std; class Singleton { public: static Singleton& getInstance(); int val; }; Singleton &Singleton::getInstance() { static Singleton s; return s; } class Test { public: Test(Singleton &singleton1); }; Test::Test(Singleton &singleton1) { Singleton singleton2 = Singleton::getInstance(); singleton2.val = 1; if(singleton1.val == singleton2.val) { cout << "Match\n"; } else { cout << "No Match " << singleton1.val << " - " << singleton2.val << "\n"; } } int main() { Singleton singleton = Singleton::getInstance(); singleton.val = 2; Test t(singleton); } Every time I run it I get "No Match". From what I can tell when stepping through with GDB is that there are two instances of the Singleton. Why is this?

    Read the article

  • How to change the state of a singleton in runtime

    - by user34401
    Consider I am going to write a simple file based logger AppLogger to be used in my apps, ideally it should be a singleton so I can call it via public class AppLogger { public static String file = ".."; public void logToFile() { // Write to file } public static log(String s) { AppLogger.getInstance().logToFile(s); } } And to use it AppLogger::log("This is a log statement"); The problem is, what is the best time I should provide the value of file since it is a just a singleton? Or how to refactor the above code (or skip using singleton) so I can customize the log file path? (Assume I don't need to write to multiple at the same time) p.s. I know I can use library e.g. log4j, but consider it is just a design question, how to refactor the code above?

    Read the article

  • Singleton design pattern vs Singleton beans in Spring container

    - by Peeyush
    As we all know we have beans as singleton by default in Spring container and if we have a web application based on Spring framework then in that case do we really need to implement Singleton design pattern to hold global data rather than just creating a bean through spring. Please bear with me if I'm not able to explain what I actually meant to ask.

    Read the article

  • class hierarchy design for small java project

    - by user523956
    I have written a java code which does following:- Main goal is to fetch emails from (inbox, spam) folders and store them in database. It fetches emails from gmail,gmx,web.de,yahoo and Hotmail. Following attributes are stored in mysql database. Slno, messagedigest, messageid, foldername, dateandtime, receiver, sender, subject, cc, size and emlfile. For gmail,gmy and web.de, I have used javamail API, because email form it can be fetched with IMAP. For yahoo and hotmail, I have used html parser and httpclient to fetch emails form spam folder and for inbox folder, I have used pop3 javamail API. I want to have proper class hierarchy which makes my code efficient and easily reusable. As of now I have designed class hierarchy as below: I am sure it can still be improved. So I would like to have different opinions on it. I have following classes and methods as of now. MainController:- Here I pass emailid, password and foldername from which emails have to be fetched. Abstract Class :-EmailProtocol Abstract Methods of it (All methods except executeParser contains method definition):- connectImap() // used by gmx,gmail and web.de email ids connectPop3() // used by hotmail and yahoo to fetch emails of inbox folder createMessageDigest // used by every email provider(gmx, gmail,web.de,yahoo,hotmail) establishDBConnection // used by every email emailAlreadyExists // used by every email which checks whether email already exists in db or not, if not then store it. storeemailproperties // used by every email to store emails properties to mysql database executeParser // nothing written in it. Overwridden and used by just hotmail and yahoo to fetch emails form spam folder. Imap extends EmailProtocol (nothing in it. But I have to have it to access methods of EmailProtocol. This is used to fetch emails from gmail,gmx and web.de) I know this is really a bad way but don't know how to do it other way. Hotmsil extends EmailProtocol Methods:- executeParser() :- This is used by just hotmail email id. fetchjunkemails() :- This is also very specific for only hotmail email id. Yahoo extends EmailProtocol Methods:- executeParser() storeEmailtotemptable() MoveEmailtoInbox() getFoldername() nullorEquals() All above methods are specific for yahoo email id. public DateTimeFormat(class) format() //this formats datetime of gmax,gmail and web.de emails. formatYahoodate //this formats datetime of yahoo email. formatHotmaildate // this formats datetime of hotmail email. public StringFormat ConvertStreamToString() // Accessed by every class except DateTimeFormat class. formatFromTo() // Accessed by every class except DateTimeFormat class. public Class CheckDatabaseExistance public static void checkForDatabaseTablesAvailability() (This method checks at the beginnning whether database and required tables exist in mysql or not. if not it creates them) Please see code of my MainController class so that You can have an idea about how I use different classes. public class MainController { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { ArrayList<String> web_de_folders = new ArrayList<String>(); web_de_folders.add("INBOX"); web_de_folders.add("Unbekannt"); web_de_folders.add("Spam"); web_de_folders.add("OUTBOX"); web_de_folders.add("SENT"); web_de_folders.add("DRAFTS"); web_de_folders.add("TRASH"); web_de_folders.add("Trash"); ArrayList<String> gmx_folders = new ArrayList<String>(); gmx_folders.add("INBOX"); gmx_folders.add("Archiv"); gmx_folders.add("Entwürfe"); gmx_folders.add("Gelöscht"); gmx_folders.add("Gesendet"); gmx_folders.add("Spamverdacht"); gmx_folders.add("Trash"); ArrayList<String> gmail_folders = new ArrayList<String>(); gmail_folders.add("Inbox"); gmail_folders.add("[Google Mail]/Spam"); gmail_folders.add("[Google Mail]/Trash"); gmail_folders.add("[Google Mail]/Sent Mail"); ArrayList<String> pop3_folders = new ArrayList<String>(); pop3_folders.add("INBOX"); CheckDatabaseExistance.checkForDatabaseTablesAvailability(); EmailProtocol imap = new Imap(); System.out.println("CHECKING FOR NEW EMAILS IN WEB.DE...(IMAP)"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); imap.connectImap("[email protected]", "pwd", web_de_folders); System.out.println("\nCHECKING FOR NEW EMAILS IN GMX.DE...(IMAP)"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); imap.connectImap("[email protected]", "pwd", gmx_folders); System.out.println("\nCHECKING FOR NEW EMAILS IN GMAIL...(IMAP)"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); imap.connectImap("[email protected]", "pwd", gmail_folders); EmailProtocol yahoo = new Yahoo(); Yahoo y=new Yahoo(); System.out.println("\nEXECUTING YAHOO PARSER"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); y.executeParser("http://de.mc1321.mail.yahoo.com/mc/welcome?ymv=0","[email protected]","pwd"); System.out.println("\nCHECKING FOR NEW EMAILS IN INBOX OF YAHOO (POP3)"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); yahoo.connectPop3("[email protected]","pwd",pop3_folders); System.out.println("\nCHECKING FOR NEW EMAILS IN INBOX OF HOTMAIL (POP3)"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); yahoo.connectPop3("[email protected]","pwd",pop3_folders); EmailProtocol hotmail = new Hotmail(); Hotmail h=new Hotmail(); System.out.println("\nEXECUTING HOTMAIL PARSER"); System.out.println("*********************************************************************************"); h.executeParser("https://login.live.com/ppsecure/post.srf","[email protected]","pwd"); } } I have kept DatetimeFormat and StringFormat class public so that I can access its public methods by just (DatetimeFormat.formatYahoodate for e.g. from different methods). This is the first time I have developed something in java. It serves its purpose but of course code is still not so efficient I think. I need your suggestions on this project.

    Read the article

  • How to build a Singleton-like dependency injector replacement (Php)

    - by Erparom
    I know out there are a lot of excelent containers, even frameworks almost entirely DI based with good strong IoC classes. However, this doesn't help me to "define" a new pattern. (This is Php code but understandable to anyone) Supose we have: //Declares the singleton class bookSingleton { private $author; private static $bookInstance; private static $isLoaned = FALSE; //The private constructor private function __constructor() { $this->author = "Onecrappy Writer Ofcheap Novels"; } //Sets the global isLoaned state and also gets self instance public static function loanBook() { if (self::$isLoaned === FALSE) { //Book already taken, so return false return FALSE; } else { //Ok, not loaned, lets instantiate (if needed and loan) if (!isset(self::$bookInstance)) { self::$bookInstance = new BookSingleton(); } self::$isLoaned = TRUE; } } //Return loaned state to false, so another book reader can take the book public function returnBook() { $self::$isLoaned = FALSE; } public function getAuthor() { return $this->author; } } Then we get the singelton consumtion class: //Consumes the Singleton class BookBorrower() { private $borrowedBook; private $haveBookState; public function __construct() { this->haveBookState = FALSE; } //Use the singelton-pattern behavior public function borrowBook() { $this->borrowedBook = BookSingleton::loanBook(); //Check if was successfully borrowed if (!this->borrowedBook) { $this->haveBookState = FALSE; } else { $this->haveBookState = TRUE; } } public function returnBook() { $this->borrowedBook->returnBook(); $this->haveBookState = FALSE; } public function getBook() { if ($this->haveBookState) { return "The book is loaned, the author is" . $this->borrowedbook->getAuthor(); } else { return "I don't have the book, perhaps someone else took it"; } } } At last, we got a client, to test the behavior function __autoload($class) { require_once $class . '.php'; } function write ($whatever,$breaks) { for($break = 0;$break<$breaks;$break++) { $whatever .= "\n"; } echo nl2br($whatever); } write("Begin Singleton test", 2); $borrowerJuan = new BookBorrower(); $borrowerPedro = new BookBorrower(); write("Juan asks for the book", 1); $borrowerJuan->borrowBook(); write("Book Borrowed? ", 1); write($borrowerJuan->getAuthorAndTitle(),2); write("Pedro asks for the book", 1); $borrowerPedro->borrowBook(); write("Book Borrowed? ", 1); write($borrowerPedro->getAuthorAndTitle(),2); write("Juan returns the book", 1); $borrowerJuan->returnBook(); write("Returned Book Juan? ", 1); write($borrowerJuan->getAuthorAndTitle(),2); write("Pedro asks again for the book", 1); $borrowerPedro->borrowBook(); write("Book Borrowed? ", 1); write($borrowerPedro->getAuthorAndTitle(),2); This will end up in the expected behavior: Begin Singleton test Juan asks for the book Book Borrowed? The book is loaned, the author is = Onecrappy Writer Ofcheap Novels Pedro asks for the book Book Borrowed? I don't have the book, perhaps someone else took it Juan returns the book Returned Book Juan? I don't have the book, perhaps someone else took it Pedro asks again for the book Book Borrowed? The book is loaned, the author is = Onecrappy Writer Ofcheap Novels So I want to make a pattern based on the DI technique able to do exactly the same, but without singleton pattern. As far as I'm aware, I KNOW I must inject the book inside "borrowBook" function instead of taking a static instance: public function borrowBook(BookNonSingleton $book) { if (isset($this->borrowedBook) || $book->isLoaned()) { $this->haveBook = FALSE; return FALSE; } else { $this->borrowedBook = $book; $this->haveBook = TRUE; return TRUE; } } And at the client, just handle the book: $borrowerJuan = new BookBorrower(); $borrowerJuan-borrowBook(new NonSingletonBook()); Etc... and so far so good, BUT... Im taking the responsability of "single instance" to the borrower, instead of keeping that responsability inside the NonSingletonBook, that since it has not anymore a private constructor, can be instantiated as many times... making instances on each call. So, What does my NonSingletonBook class MUST be in order to never allow borrowers to have this same book twice? (aka) keep the single instance. Because the dependency injector part of the code (borrower) does not solve me this AT ALL. Is it needed the container with an "asShared" method builder with static behavior? No way to encapsulate this functionallity into the Book itself? "Hey Im a book and I shouldn't be instantiated more than once, I'm unique"

    Read the article

  • Class Design and Structure Online Web Store

    - by Phorce
    I hope I have asked this in the right forum. Basically, we're designing an Online Store and I am designing the class structure for ordering a product and want some clarification on what I have so far: So a customer comes, selects their product, chooses the quantity and selects 'Purchase' (I am using the Facade Pattern - So subsystems execute when this action is performed). My class structure: < Order > < Product > <Customer > There is no inheritance, more Association < Order has < Product , < Customer has < Order . Does this structure look ok? I've noticed that I don't handle the "Quantity" separately, I was just going to add this into the "Product" class, but, do you think it should be a class of it's own? Hope someone can help.

    Read the article

  • null values vs "empty" singleton for optional fields

    - by Uko
    First of all I'm developing a parser for an XML-based format for 3D graphics called XGL. But this question can be applied to any situation when you have fields in your class that are optional i.e. the value of this field can be missing. As I was taking a Scala course on coursera there was an interesting pattern when you create an abstract class with all the methods you need and then create a normal fully functional subclass and an "empty" singleton subclass that always returns false for isEmpty method and throws exceptions for the other ones. So my question is: is it better to just assign null if the optional field's value is missing or make a hierarchy described above and assign it an empty singleton implementation?

    Read the article

  • General question about Ruby singleton class

    - by Dex
    module MyModule def my_method; 'hello'; end end class MyClass class << self include MyModule end end MyClass.my_method # => "hello I'm unsure why "include MyModule" needs to be in the singleton class in order to be called using just MyClass. Why can't I go: X = MyClass.new X.my_method

    Read the article

  • C++ Singleton Constructor and Destructor

    - by Aaron
    Does it matter if the constructor/destructor implementation is provided in the header file or the source file? For example, which way is preferred and why? Way 1: class Singleton { public: ~Singleton() { } private: Singleton() { } }; Way 2: class Singleton { public: ~Singleton(); private: Singleton(); }; In the source .cc file: Singleton::Singleton() { } Singleton::~Singleton() { } Initially, I have the implementation in a source file, but I was asked to remove it. Does anyone know why?

    Read the article

  • UML - Class Diagrams Order -> Products

    - by Phorce
    I have a class diagram that is like this: < Order > (1) CAN HAVE (M) < products > But therefore "Order" has the following: Order_Id Customer_Id Order_date_day Order_date_month Order_date_yeah But I do not know how it would handle the Products? Because, I couldn't have "ProductID" because that would mean that each item in this class would have to have a separate instance for each product (E.g. someone ordered 100 products, but only placed 1 order). Could I have an Product object in class Order? If so, how do you represent that in UML? Thank you

    Read the article

  • UML Class Diagram: Abstract or Interface?

    - by J Smith
    I am modeling a class diagram and have spotted an opportunity to simplify it slightly. What I want to know is, would this it be better to implement an abstract class or an interface? The scenario is this, I have the classes: Artist Genre Album Song All of which share the methods getName, setName, and getCount (playcount that is). Would it be best to create an abstract 'Music' class with the aforementioned abstract methods, or should I create an interface, since the classes that implement the interface have to include all of the interface's methods (I think, correct me if I'm wrong). I hope I've given enough detail, please ask questions if I haven't. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Abstract Base Class or Class?

    - by Mohit Deshpande
    For my semester project, my team and I are supposed to make a .jar file (library, not runnable) that contains a game development framework and demonstrate the concepts of OOP. Its supposed to be a FRAMEWORK and another team is supposed to use our framework and vice-versa. So I want to know how we should start. We thought of several approaches: 1. Start with a plain class public class Enemy { public Enemy(int x, int y, int health, int attack, ...) { ... } ... } public class UserDefinedClass extends Enemy { ... } 2. Start with an abstract class that user-defined enemies have to inherit abstract members public abstract class Enemy { public Enemy(int x, int y, int health, int attack, ...) { ... } public abstract void draw(); public abstract void destroy(); ... } public class UserDefinedClass extends Enemy { ... public void draw() { ... } public void destroy() { ... } } 3. Create a super ABC (Abstract Base Class) that ALL inherit from public abstract class VectorEntity { ... } public abstract class Enemy extends VectorEntity { ... } public class Player extends VectorEntity { ... } public class UserDefinedClass extends Enemy { ... } Which should I use? Or is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • The Singleton Pattern

    - by Darren Young
    Hi, I am a new programmer (4 months into my first job) and have recently taken an interest in design patterns. One that I have used recently is the Singleton. However, looking at some comments on this thread Overused or abused programming techniques .......it has some bad feedback. Come somebody explain why? I have found it useful in some places, however I could probably have achieved the same without it using a static class. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Class Design for special business rules

    - by Samuel Front
    I'm developing an application that allows people to place custom manufacturing orders. However, while most require similar paperwork, some of them have custom paperwork that only they require. My current class design has a Manufacturer class, of which of one of the member variables is an array of RequiredSubmission objects. However, there are two issues that I am somewhat concerned about. First, some manufacturers are willing to accept either a standard form or their own custom form. I'm thinking of storing this in the RequiredSubmission object, with an array of alternate forms that are a valid substitute. I'm not sure that this is ideal, however. The major issue, however, is that some manufacturers have deadline cycles. For example, forms A, B and C have to be delivered by January 1, while payment must be rendered by January 10. If you miss those, you'll have to wait until the next cycle. I'm not exactly sure how I can get this to work with my existing classes—how can I say "this set of dates all belong to the same cycle, with date A for form A, date B for form B, etc." I would greatly appreciate any insights on how to best design these classes.

    Read the article

  • Nested class - calling the nested class from the parent class

    - by insanepaul
    I have a class whereby a method calls a nested class. I want to access the parent class properties from within the nested class. public class ParentClass { private x; private y; private z; something.something = new ChildClass public class ChildClass { need to get x, y and z; } } How do I access x,y and z from within the child class. Something to do with referencing the parent class but how? }

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >