Search Results

Search found 16838 results on 674 pages for 'writing patterns dita cms'.

Page 101/674 | < Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >

  • Synchronizing reading and writing with synchronous NamedPipes

    - by Mike Trader
    A Named Pipe Server is created with hPipe = CreateNamedPipe( zPipePath, PIPE_ACCESS_DUPLEX, PIPE_TYPE_BYTE | PIPE_WAIT | PIPE_READMODE_BYTE, PIPE_UNLIMITED_INSTANCES, 8192, 8192, NMPWAIT_USE_DEFAULT_WAIT, NULL) Then we immediately call: ConnectNamedPipe( hPipe, BYVAL %NULL ) Which blocks until the client connects. Then we proceed directly to ReadFile( hPipe, ... The problem is that it takes the Client takes a finite amount of time to prepare and write all the fcgi request parameters. This has usually not completed before the Pipe Server performs its ReadFile(). The Read file operation thus finds no data in the pipe and the process fails. Is there a mechanism to tell when a Write() has occurred/finished after a client has connected to a NamedPipe? If I had control of the Client process, I could use a common Mutex, but I don't, and I really do not want to get into I/O completion ports just to solve this problem! I can of course use a simple timer to wait 60m/s or so which is usually plenty of time for the wrote to complete, but that is a horrible hack.

    Read the article

  • Problem with writing if condition

    - by Himadri
    I have two decimal numbers. I want those number to be same upto 4 decimal points without rounding. If numbers are different I want 2nd number to be replaced by 1st. What if condition should I write? Eg, 1. num1 = 0.94618976 num2 = 0.94620239 If we round these numbers upto 4 decimal then we get 0.9462 same number, but I don't want to round these numbers. 2. num1 = 0.94620239 num2 = 0.94639125 The one way I found is take absolute difference of both numbers say diff and then check the value. My problem is of checking the range of diff. I am using delphi but you can answer in any language.Thank You.

    Read the article

  • MVVM pattern: ViewModel updates after Model server roundtrip

    - by Pavel Savara
    I have stateless services and anemic domain objects on server side. Model between server and client is POCO DTO. The client should become MVVM. The model could be graph of about 100 instances of 20 different classes. The client editor contains diverse tab-pages all of them live-connected to model/viewmodel. My problem is how to propagate changes after server round-trip nice way. It's quite easy to propagate changes from ViewModel to DTO. For way back it would be possible to throw away old DTO and replace it whole with new one, but it will cause lot of redrawing for lists/DataTemplates. I could gather the server side changes and transmit them to client side. But the names of fields changed would be domain/DTO specific, not ViewModel specific. And the mapping seems nontrivial to me. If I should do it imperative way after round-trip, it would break SOC/modularity of viewModels. I'm thinking about some kind of mapping rule engine, something like automappper or emit mapper. But it solves just very plain use-cases. I don't see how it would map/propagate/convert adding items to list or removal. How to identify instances in collections so it could merge values to existing instances. As well it should propagate validation/error info. Maybe I should implement INotifyPropertyChanged on DTO and try to replay server side events on it ? And then bind ViewModel to it ? Would binding solve the problems with collection merges nice way ? Is EventAgregator from PRISM useful for that ? Is there any event record-replay component ? Is there better client side pattern for architecture with server side logic ?

    Read the article

  • simple python file writing question

    - by aharon
    I'm learning Python, and have run into a bit of a problem. On my OSX install of Python 3.1, this happens in the console: >>> filename = "test" >>> reader = open(filename, 'r') >>> writer = open(filename, 'w') >>> reader.read() '' >>> writer.write("hello world\n") 12 >>> reader.read() '' And calling more test in BASH confirms that there is nothing in test. What's going on? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Rails Full Engine using a Full Engine

    - by SirLenz0rlot
    I've got this full rails engine Foo with functionality X. I want to make another engine, engine Bar, that is pretty much the same, but override funcitonality x with y. (it basically does the same, but a few controller actions and views are differently implemented). (I might split this later in several mountable engines, but for now, this will be the setup: project Baz, using engine Bar, which uses engine Foo) I would like to know if there are any pitfalls. It doesn't seem like a pattern that is often used? Anybody else using this 'some sort of engine inheritance'?

    Read the article

  • What is the "Dispatcher" design pattern?

    - by Ben Farmer
    What is the "dispatcher" pattern and how would I implement it in code? I have a property bag of generic objects and would like to have the retrieval delegated to a generic method. Currently, I have properties looking for a specific key in the bag. For example: private Dictionary<String, Object> Foo { get; set; } private const String WidgetKey = "WIDGETKEY"; public Widget? WidgetItem { get { return Foo.ContainsKey(WidgetKey) ? Foo[WidgetKey] as Widget: null; } set { if (Foo.ContainsKey(WidgetKey)) Foo[WidgetKey] = value; else Foo.Add(WidgetKey, value); } } It was suggested that this could be more generic with the "dispatcher" pattern, but I've been unable to find a good description or example. I'm looking for a more generic way to handle the property bag store/retrieve.

    Read the article

  • Is it ok to dynamic cast "this" as a return value?

    - by Panayiotis Karabassis
    This is more of a design question. I have a template class, and I want to add extra methods to it depending on the template type. To practice the DRY principle, I have come up with this pattern (definitions intentionally omitted): template <class T> class BaseVector: public boost::array<T, 3> { protected: BaseVector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z); public: bool operator == (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator + (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator - (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> &operator += (const Vector<T> &other) { (*this)[0] += other[0]; (*this)[1] += other[1]; (*this)[2] += other[2]; return *dynamic_cast<Vector<T> * const>(this); } } template <class T> class Vector : public BaseVector<T> { public: Vector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z) : BaseVector<T>(x, y, z) { } }; template <> class Vector<double> : public BaseVector<double> { public: Vector<double>(const double x, const double y, const double z); Vector<double>(const Vector<int> &other); double norm() const; }; I intend BaseVector to be nothing more than an implementation detail. This works, but I am concerned about operator+=. My question is: is the dynamic cast of the this pointer a code smell? Is there a better way to achieve what I am trying to do (avoid code duplication, and unnecessary casts in the user code)? Or am I safe since, the BaseVector constructor is private?

    Read the article

  • Help with writing a php code that repeats itself per array value

    - by Mohammad
    Hi I'm using Closure Compiler to compress and join a few JavaScript files the syntax is something like this; $c = new PhpClosure(); $c->add("JavaScriptA.js") ->add("JavaScriptB.js") ->write(); How could I make it systematically add more files from an array lets say for each array element in $file = array('JavaScriptA.js','JavaScriptB.js','JavaScriptC.js',..) it would execute the following code $c = new PhpClosure(); $c->add("JavaScriptA.js") ->add("JavaScriptB.js") ->add("JavaScriptC.js") ->add ... ->write(); Thank you so much in advance!

    Read the article

  • Am I abusing Policies?

    - by pmr
    I find myself using policies a lot in my code and usually I'm very happy with that. But from time to time I find myself confronted with using that pattern in situations where the Policies are selected and runtime and I have developed habbits to work around such situations. Usually I start with something like that: class DrawArrays { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; class DrawElements { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public Policy { using Policy::sendDraw(); public: void render() const; }; When the policy is picked at runtime I have different choices of working around the situation. Different code paths: if(drawElements) { Vertices<DrawElements> vertices; } else { Vertices<DrawArrays> vertices; } Inheritance and virtual calls: class PureVertices { public: void render()=0; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public PureVertices, public Policy { //.. }; Both solutions feel wrong to me. The first creates an umaintainable mess and the second introduces the overhead of virtual calls that I tried to avoid by using policies in the first place. Am I missing the proper solutions or do I use the wrong pattern to solve the problem?

    Read the article

  • C - struct problems - writing

    - by Catarrunas
    Hello, I'm making a program in C, and I'mm having some troubles with memory, I think. So my problem is: I have 2 functions that return a struct. When I run only one function at a time I have no problem whatsoever. But when I run one after the other I always get an error when writting to the second struct. Function struct item* ReadFileBIN(char *name) -- reads a binary file. struct tables* getMesasInfo(char* Filename) -- reads a text file. My code is this: #include "stdafx.h" #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <time.h> int numberOfTables=0; int numberOfItems=0; //struct tables* mesas; //struct item* Menu; typedef struct item{ char nome[100]; int id; float preco; }; typedef struct tables{ int id; int capacity; bool inUse; }; struct tables* getMesasInfo(char* Filename){ struct tables* mesas; char *c; int counter,numberOflines=0,temp=0; char *filename=Filename; FILE * G; G = fopen(filename,"r"); if (G==NULL){ printf("Cannot open file.\n"); } else{ while (!feof(G)){ fscanf(G, "%s", &c); numberOflines++; } fclose(G); } /* Memory allocate for input array */ mesas = (struct tables *)malloc(numberOflines* sizeof(struct tables*)); counter=0; G=fopen(filename,"r"); while (!feof(G)){ mesas[counter].id=counter; fscanf(G, "%d", &mesas[counter].capacity); mesas[counter].inUse= false; counter++; } fclose(G); numberOfTables = counter; return mesas; } struct item* ReadFileBIN(char *name) { int total=0; int counter; FILE *ptr_myfile; struct item my_record; struct item* Menu; ptr_myfile=fopen(name,"r"); if (!ptr_myfile) { printf("Unable to open file!"); } while (!feof(ptr_myfile)){ fread(&my_record,sizeof(struct item),1,ptr_myfile); total=total+1; } numberOfItems=total-1; Menu = (struct item *)calloc(numberOfItems , sizeof(struct item)); fseek(ptr_myfile, sizeof(struct item), SEEK_END); rewind(ptr_myfile); for ( counter=1; counter < total ; counter++) { fread(&my_record,sizeof(struct item),1,ptr_myfile); Menu[counter] = my_record; printf("Nome: %s\n",Menu[counter].nome); printf("ID: %d\n",Menu[counter].id); printf("Preco: %f\n",Menu[counter].preco); } fclose(ptr_myfile); return Menu; } int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { struct item* tt = ReadFileBIN("menu.dat"); struct tables* t = getMesasInfo("Capacity.txt"); getchar(); }** Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Is testability alone justification for dependency injection?

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    The advantages of DI, as far as I am aware, are: Reduced Dependencies More Reusable Code More Testable Code More Readable Code Say I have a repository, OrderRepository, which acts as a repository for an Order object generated through a Linq to Sql dbml. I can't make my orders repository generic as it performs mapping between the Linq Order entity and my own Order POCO domain class. Since the OrderRepository by necessity is dependent on a specific Linq to Sql DataContext, parameter passing of the DataContext can't really be said to make the code reuseable or reduce dependencies in any meaningful way. It also makes the code harder to read, as to instantiate the repository I now need to write new OrdersRepository(new MyLinqDataContext()) which additionally is contrary to the main purpose of the repository, that being to abstract/hide the existence of the DataContext from consuming code. So in general I think this would be a pretty horrible design, but it would give the benefit of facilitating unit testing. Is this enough justification? Or is there a third way? I'd be very interested in hearing opinions.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: I don't get where to start!

    - by Andy
    I have several articles about Dependency Injection, and I can see the benefits, especially when it comes to unit testing. The units can me loosely coupled, and mocking of dependencies can be made. The trouble is - I just don't get where to start. Consider this snippet below of (much edited for the purpose of this post) code that I have. I am instantiating a Plc object from the main form, and passing in a communications mode via the Connect method. In it's present form it becomes hard to test, because I can't isolate the Plc from the CommsChannel to unit test it. (Can I?) The class depends on using a CommsChannel object, but I am only passing in a mode that is used to create this channel within the Plc itself. To use dependancy injection, I should really pass in an already created CommsChannel (via an 'ICommsChannel' interface perhaps) to the Connect method, or maybe via the Plc constructor. Is that right? But then that would mean creating the CommsChannel in my main form first, and this doesn't seem right either, because it feels like everything will come back to the base layer of the main form, where everything begins. Somehow it feels like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. Where do you start? You have to create an instance of something somewhere, but I'm struggling to understand where that should be. public class Plc() { public bool Connect(CommsMode commsMode) { bool success = false; // Create new comms channel. this._commsChannel = this.GetCommsChannel(commsMode); // Attempt connection success = this._commsChannel.Connect(); return this._connected; } private CommsChannel GetCommsChannel(CommsMode mode) { CommsChannel channel; switch (mode) { case CommsMode.RS232: channel = new SerialCommsChannel( SerialCommsSettings.Default.ComPort, SerialCommsSettings.Default.BaudRate, SerialCommsSettings.Default.DataBits, SerialCommsSettings.Default.Parity, SerialCommsSettings.Default.StopBits); break; case CommsMode.Tcp: channel = new TcpCommsChannel( TCPCommsSettings.Default.IP_Address, TCPCommsSettings.Default.Port); break; default: // Throw unknown comms channel exception. } return channel; } }

    Read the article

  • Delegates in Action -Help

    - by Amutha
    I am learning delegates.I am very curious to apply delegates to the following chain-of-responsibility pattern. Kindly help me the way to apply delegates to the following piece. Thanks in advance.Thanks for your effort. #region Chain of Responsibility Pattern namespace Chain { public class Player { public string Name { get; set; } public int Score { get; set; } } public abstract class PlayerHandler { protected PlayerHandler _Successor = null; public abstract void HandlePlayer(Player _player); public void SetupHandler(PlayerHandler _handler) { _Successor = _handler; } } public class Employee : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score <= 100) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Employee", _player.Name)); } else { _Successor.HandlePlayer(_player); } } } public class Supervisor : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score >100 && _player.Score<=200) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Supervisor", _player.Name)); } else { _Successor.HandlePlayer(_player); } } } public class Manager : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score > 200) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Manager", _player.Name)); } else { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} got low score", _player.Name)); } } } } #endregion #region Main() void Main() { Chain.Player p1 = new Chain.Player(); p1.Name = "Jon"; p1.Score = 100; Chain.Player p2 = new Chain.Player(); p2.Name = "William"; p2.Score = 170; Chain.Player p3 = new Chain.Player(); p3.Name = "Robert"; p3.Score = 300; Chain.Employee emp = new Chain.Employee(); Chain.Manager mgr = new Chain.Manager(); Chain.Supervisor sup = new Chain.Supervisor(); emp.SetupHandler(sup); sup.SetupHandler(mgr); emp.HandlePlayer(p1); emp.HandlePlayer(p2); emp.HandlePlayer(p3); } #endregion

    Read the article

  • Using free function as pseudo-constructors to exploit template parameter deduction

    - by Poita_
    Is it a common pattern/idiom to use free functions as pseudo-constructors to avoid having to explicitly specify template parameters? For example, everyone knows about std::make_pair, which uses its parameters to deduce the pair types: template <class A, class B> std::pair<A, B> make_pair(A a, B b) { return std::pair<A, B>(a, b); } // This allows you to call make_pair(1, 2), // instead of having to type pair<int, int>(1, 2) // as you can't get type deduction from the constructor. I find myself using this quite often, so I was just wondering if many other people use it, and if there is a name for this pattern?

    Read the article

  • Writing from an array to a file bash and new lines

    - by S1syphus
    I'm trying to write a script the generates a template file for Pashua (a perl script for creating GUI on osx) I want to crate an instance for each item in the array, so the ideal output would be: AB1.type = openbrowser AB1.label = Choose a master playlist file AB1.width=310 AB1.tooltip = Blabla filesystem browser AB2.type = openbrowser AB2.label = Choose a master playlist file AB2.width=310 AB2.tooltip = Blabla filesystem browser ...and so on for the rest of the array: What I am using to write to the text file at the moment is: count=1 saveIFS="$IFS" IFS=$'\n' array=($(<TEST.txt)) IFS="$saveIFS" for i in "${array[@]}"; do declare AD$count="$i"; ((count++)); done for i in "${array[@]}"; do echo "AD$count".type = openbrowser "AD$count".label = Choose a master playlist file \n "AD$count".width=310 \n "AD$count".tooltip = Blabla filesystem browser \n" >> long.txt; done However \n doesn't produce a newline in the text file, and I am pretty sure there is a alot nicer way todo this, ideas?

    Read the article

  • Writing a .wmv file using WMA sf filter

    - by Manish
    Hi I am trying to create an output .wmv file using WM Asf writer filter.Here is my code . IBaseFilter* pASFWriter; CoCreateInstance(CLSID_WMAsfWriter,NULL,CLSCTX_INPROC_SERVER,IID_IBaseFilter,(void**) (&pASFWriter)); pGraphBuilder-AddFilter(pASFWriter,L"FileWriter"); IFileSinkFilter *pSink2=NULL; pASFWriter-QueryInterface(IID_IFileSinkFilter,(void**)&pSink2); pSink2-SetFileName(OUTFILENAME,NULL); All of the above return S_OK however there is no file created .I am not able to understand why this is so?

    Read the article

  • dynamic behavior of factory class

    - by manu1001
    I have a factory class that serves out a bunch of properties. Now, the properties might come either from a database or from a properties file. This is what I've come up with. public class Factory { private static final INSTANCE = new Factory(source); private Factory(DbSource source) { // read from db, save properties } private Factory(FileSource source) { // read from file, save properties } // getInstance() and getProperties() here } What's a clean way of switching between these behaviors based on the environment. I want to avoid having to recompile the class each time.

    Read the article

  • creational pattern for instances depending on multiple subclass instances

    - by markusw
    I have a problem, for that I was not able to identify a suitable design pattern. I want to create instances depending on a given type that has been passed to a factory method. What I am doing until now is the following: T create(SuperType x) { if (x instanceof SubType1) { // do some stuff and return a new SubType extends T } else if (x instanceof SubType2) { // do some stuff and return a new SubType extends T } else if ... } else { throw new UnSupportedOperationException("nothing defined for " + x); } } It seems not to be best pratice for me. Has anybody an idea how to solve this in a better way?

    Read the article

  • 3 tier application pattern suggestion

    - by Maxim Gershkovich
    I have attempted to make my first 3 tier application. In the process I have run into one problem I am yet to find an optimal solution for. Basically all my objects use an IFillable interface which forces the implementation of a sub as follows Public Sub Fill(ByVal Datareader As Data.IDataReader) Implements IFillable.Fill This sub then expects the Ids from the datareader will be identical to the properties of the object as such. Me.m_StockID = Datareader.GetGuid(Datareader.GetOrdinal("StockID")) In the end I end up with a datalayer that looks something like this. Public Shared Function GetStockByID(ByVal ConnectionString As String, ByVal StockID As Guid) As Stock Dim res As New Stock Using sqlConn As New SqlConnection(ConnectionString) sqlConn.Open() res.Fill(StockDataLayer.GetStockByIDQuery(sqlConn, StockID)) End Using Return res End Function Mostly this pattern seems to make sense. However my problem is, lets say I want to implement a property for Stock called StockBarcodeList. Under the above mentioned pattern any way I implement this property I will need to pass a connectionstring to it which obviously breaks my attempt at layer separation. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might be able to solve this problem or am I going about this the completely wrong way? Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might improve my implementation? Please note however I am deliberately trying to avoid using the dataset in any form.

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC best way to update cached table

    - by Eddy Mishiyev
    There are certain tables that get called often but updated rarely. One of these tables is Departments. So to save DB trips, I think it is ok to cache this table taking into consideration that the table has very small size. However, once you cached it an issue of keeping the table data fresh occurs. So what is the best way to determine that the table is dirty and therefore requires a reload and how that code should be invoked. I look for solution that will be scalable. So updating the cache right after inserting will not work. So if one machine inserted the record all other on network should get notified to reload the cache. I was thinking for calling corresponding web service from T-SQL but don't really like the idea of consuming recourses on sql server. So what are the best practices to resolve this type of problems. Thanks in advance Eddy

    Read the article

  • Activator.CreateInstance(string) and Activator.CreateInstance<T>() difference

    - by Juan Manuel Formoso
    No, this is not a question about generics. I have a Factory pattern with several classes with internal constructors (I don't want them being instantiated if not through the factory). My problem is that CreateInstance fails with a "No parameterless constructor defined for this object" error unless I pass "true" on the non-public parameter. Example // Fails Activator.CreateInstance(type); // Works Activator.CreateInstance(type, true); I wanted to make the factory generic to make it a little simpler, like this: public class GenericFactory<T> where T : MyAbstractType { public static T GetInstance() { return Activator.CreateInstance<T>(); } } However, I was unable to find how to pass that "true" parameter for it to accept non-public constructors (internal). Did I miss something or it isn't possible?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >