Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 122/348 | < Previous Page | 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129  | Next Page >

  • Separation of concerns and authentication

    - by Tom Gilder
    I'm trying to be a Good Developer and separate my concerns out. I've got an ASP.NET MVC project with all my web code, and a DAL project with all the model code. Sometimes code in the DAL needs to check if the current user is authorized to perform some actions, by checking something like CurrentUser.IsAdmin. For the web site, the current is derived from the Windows username (from HttpContext.Current.User.Identity), but this is clearly a web concern and shouldn't be coupled to the DAL. What's the best pattern to loosely couple the authentication? Should the DAL be asking the MVC code for a username, or the MVC be telling the DAL? Are there advantages or disadvantages to one or the other? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Is ASP.NET MVC is really MVC? Or how to separate model from controller?

    - by Andrey
    Hi all, This question is a bit rhetorical. At some point i got a feeling that ASP.NET MVC is not that authentic implementation of MVC pattern. Or i didn't understood it. Consider following domain: electric bulb, switch and motion detector. They are connected together and when you enter the room motion detector switches on the bulb. If i want to represent them as MVC: switch is model, because it holds the state and contains logic bulb is view, because it presents the state of model to human motion detector is controller, because it converts user actions to generic model commands Switch has one private field (On/Off) as a State and two methods (PressOn, PressOff). If you call PressOn when it is Off it goes to On, if you call it again state doesn't change. Bulb can be replaced with buzzer, motion detector with timer or button, but the model still represent the same logic. Eventually system will have same behavior. This is how i understand classical MVC decomposition, please correct me if i am wrong. Now let's decompose it in ASP.Net MVC way. Bulb is still a view Controller will be switch + motion detector Model is some object that will just pass state to bulb. So the logic that defines behavior moves to controller. Question 1: Is my understanding of MVC and ASP.NET MVC correct? Question 2: If yes, do you agree that ASP.NET MVC is not 100% accurate implementation? And back to life. The final question is how to separate model from controller in case of ASP.NET MVC. There can be two extremes. Controller does basic stuff and call model to do all the logic. Another is controller does all the logic and model is just something like class with properties that is mapped to DB. Question 3: Where should i draw the line between this extremes? How to balance? Thanks, Andrey

    Read the article

  • Factory Method Implementation

    - by cedar715
    I was going through the 'Factory method' pages in SO and had come across this link. And this comment. The example looked as a variant and thought to implement in its original way: to defer instantiation to subclasses... Here is my attempt. Does the following code implements the Factory pattern of the example specified in the link? Please validate and suggest if this has to undergo any re-factoring. public class ScheduleTypeFactoryImpl implements ScheduleTypeFactory { @Override public IScheduleItem createLinearScheduleItem() { return new LinearScheduleItem(); } @Override public IScheduleItem createVODScheduleItem() { return new VODScheduleItem(); } } public class UseScheduleTypeFactory { public enum ScheduleTypeEnum { CableOnDemandScheduleTypeID, BroadbandScheduleTypeID, LinearCableScheduleTypeID, MobileLinearScheduleTypeID } public static IScheduleItem getScheduleItem(ScheduleTypeEnum scheduleType) { IScheduleItem scheduleItem = null; ScheduleTypeFactory scheduleTypeFactory = new ScheduleTypeFactoryImpl(); switch (scheduleType) { case CableOnDemandScheduleTypeID: scheduleItem = scheduleTypeFactory.createVODScheduleItem(); break; case BroadbandScheduleTypeID: scheduleItem = scheduleTypeFactory.createVODScheduleItem(); break; case LinearCableScheduleTypeID: scheduleItem = scheduleTypeFactory.createLinearScheduleItem(); break; case MobileLinearScheduleTypeID: scheduleItem = scheduleTypeFactory.createLinearScheduleItem(); break; default: break; } return scheduleItem; } }

    Read the article

  • Which Code Should Go Where in MVC Structure

    - by Oguz
    My problem is in somewhere between model and controller.Everything works perfect for me when I use MVC just for crud (create, read, update, delete).I have separate models for each database table .I access these models from controller , to crud them . For example , in contacts application,I have actions (create, read, update, delete) in controller(contact) to use model's (contact) methods (create, read, update, delete). The problem starts when I try to do something more complicated. There are some complex processes which I do not know where should I put them. For example , in registering user process. I can not just finish this process in user model because , I have to use other models too (sending mails , creating other records for user via other models) and do lots of complex validations via other models. For example , in some complex searching processes , I have to access lots of models (articles, videos, images etc.) Or, sometimes , I have to use apis to decide what I will do next or which database model I will use to record data So where is the place to do this complicated processes. I do not want to do them in controllers , Because sometimes I should use these processes in other controllers too. And I do not want to put these process in models because , I use models as database access layers .May be I am wrong,I want to know . Thank you for your answer .

    Read the article

  • "do it all" page structure and things to watch out for?

    - by Andrew Heath
    I'm still getting my feet wet in PHP (my 1st language) and I've reached the competency level where I can code one page that handles all sorts of different related requests. They generally have a structure like this: (psuedo code) <?php include 'include/functions.php'; IF authorized IF submit (add data) ELSE IF update (update data) ELSE IF list (show special data) ELSE IF tab switch (show new area) ELSE display vanilla (show default) ELSE "must be registered/logged-in" ?> <HTML> // snip <?php echo $output; ?> // snip </HTML> and it all works nicely, and quite quickly which is cool. But I'm still sorta feeling my way in the dark... and would like some input from the pros regarding this type of page design... is it a good long-term structure? (it seems easily expanded...) are there security risks particular to this design? are there corners I should avoid painting myself into? Just curious about what lies ahead, really...

    Read the article

  • Can per-user randomized salts be replaced with iterative hashing?

    - by Chas Emerick
    In the process of building what I'd like to hope is a properly-architected authentication mechanism, I've come across a lot of materials that specify that: user passwords must be salted the salt used should be sufficiently random and generated per-user ...therefore, the salt must be stored with the user record in order to support verification of the user password I wholeheartedly agree with the first and second points, but it seems like there's an easy workaround for the latter. Instead of doing the equivalent of (pseudocode here): salt = random(); hashedPassword = hash(salt . password); storeUserRecord(username, hashedPassword, salt); Why not use the hash of the username as the salt? This yields a domain of salts that is well-distributed, (roughly) random, and each individual salt is as complex as your salt function provides for. Even better, you don't have to store the salt in the database -- just regenerate it at authentication-time. More pseudocode: salt = hash(username); hashedPassword = hash(salt . password); storeUserRecord(username, hashedPassword); (Of course, hash in the examples above should be something reasonable, like SHA-512, or some other strong hash.) This seems reasonable to me given what (little) I know of crypto, but the fact that it's a simplification over widely-recommended practice makes me wonder whether there's some obvious reason I've gone astray that I'm not aware of.

    Read the article

  • R: disentangling scopes

    - by rescdsk
    Hi, Right now, in my R project, I have functions1.R with doFoo() and doBar(), functions2.R with other functions, and main.R with the main program in it, which first does source('functions1.R'); source('functions2.R'), and then calls the other functions. I've been starting the program from the R GUI in Mac OS X, with source('main.R'). This is fine the first time, but after that, the variables that were defined the first time through the program are defined for the second time functions*.R are sourced, and so the functions get a whole bunch of extra variables defined. I don't want that! I want an "undefined variable" error when my function uses a variable it shouldn't! Twice this has given me very late nights of debugging! So how do other people deal with this sort of problem? Is there something like source(), but that makes an independent namespace that doesn't fall through to the main one? Making a package seems like one solution, but it seems like a big pain in the butt compared to e.g. Python, where a source file is automatically a separate namespace. Any tips? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • "Nearly divisible"

    - by bobobobo
    I want to check if a floating point value is "nearly" a multiple of 32. E.g. 64.1 is "nearly" divisible by 32, and so is 63.9. Right now I'm doing this: #define NEARLY_DIVISIBLE 0.1f float offset = fmodf( val, 32.0f ) ; if( offset < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from above } // if it was 63.9, then the remainder would be large, so add some then and check again else if( fmodf( val + 2*NEARLY_DIVISIBLE, 32.0f ) < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from below } Got a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Common programming mistakes for Scala developers to avoid

    - by jelovirt
    In the spirit of Common programming mistakes for Java developers to avoid? Common programming mistakes for JavaScript developers to avoid? Common programming mistakes for .NET developers to avoid? Common programming mistakes for Haskell developers to avoid? Common programming mistakes for Python developers to avoid? Common Programming Mistakes for Ruby Developers to Avoid Common programming mistakes for PHP developers to avoid? what are some common mistakes made by Scala developers, and how can we avoid them? Also, as the biggest group of new Scala developers come from Java, what specific pitfalls they have to be aware of? For example, one often cited problem Java programmers moving to Scala make is use a procedural approach when a functional one would be more suitable in Scala. What other mistakes e.g. in API design newcomers should try to avoid.

    Read the article

  • Which is better Java programming practice for looping up to an int value: a converted for-each loop

    - by Arvanem
    Hi folks, Given the need to loop up to an arbitrary int value, is it better programming practice to convert the value into an array and for-each the array, or just use a traditional for loop? FYI, I am calculating the number of 5 and 6 results ("hits") in multiple throws of 6-sided dice. My arbitrary int value is the dicePool which represents the number of multiple throws. As I understand it, there are two options: Convert the dicePool into an array and for-each the array: public int calcHits(int dicePool) { int[] dp = new int[dicePool]; for (Integer a : dp) { // call throwDice method } } Use a traditional for loop. public int calcHits(int dicePool) { for (int i = 0; i < dicePool; i++) { // call throwDice method } } I apologise for the poor presentation of the code above (for some reason the code button on the Ask Question page is not doing what it should). My view is that option 1 is clumsy code and involves unnecessary creation of an array, even though the for-each loop is more efficient than the traditional for loop in Option 2. Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have.

    Read the article

  • HELP!! Ruby & RoR Resources?

    - by aaroninfidel
    Hello, I've been a PHP Developer for a few years now and I've recently been interested in learning Ruby & Rails but I've found a lot of the resources I've found seem to be dated and not for Rails 2.0 or Ruby 1.8.6 etc... can anyone point me in the right direction? I'm running OSX 10.6 with the default ruby & rails installation. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to using web.config to store settings (for complex solutions)

    - by Brian MacKay
    In our web applications, we seperate our Data Access Layers out into their own projects. This creates some problems related to settings. Because the DAL will eventually need to be consumed from perhaps more than one application, web.config does not seem like a good place to keep the connection strings and some of the other DAL-related settings. To solve this, on some of our recent projects we introduced a third project just for settings. We put the setting in a system of .Setting files... With a simple wrapper, the ability to have different settings for various enviroments (Dev, QA, Staging, Production, etc) was easy to achieve. The only problem there is that the settings project (including the .Settings class) compiles into an assembly, so you can't change it without doing a build/deployment, and some of our customers want to be able to configure their projects without Visual Studio. So, is there a best practice for this? I have that sense that I'm reinventing the wheel. Some solutions such as storing settings in a fixed directory on the server in, say, our own XML format occurred to us. But again, I would rather avoid having to re-create encryption for sensitive values and so on. And I would rather keep the solution self-contained if possible. EDIT: The original question did not contain the really penetrating reason that we can't (I think) use web.config ... That puts a few (very good) answers out of context, my bad.

    Read the article

  • Java operator overloading

    - by nimcap
    Not using operators makes my code obscure. (aNumber / aNother) * count is better than aNumber.divideBy(aNother).times(count) After 6 months of not writing a single comment I had to write a comment to the simple operation above. Usually I refactor until I don't need comment. And this made me realize that it is easier to read and perceive math symbols and numbers than their written forms. For example TWENTY_THOUSAND_THIRTEEN.plus(FORTY_TWO.times(TWO_HUNDERED_SIXTY_ONE)) is more obscure than 20013 + 42*261 So do you know a way to get rid of obscurity while not using operator overloading in Java? Update: I did not think my exaggeration on comments would cause such trouble to me. I am admitting that I needed to write comment a couple of times in 6 months. But not more than 10 lines in total. Sorry for that. Update 2: Another example: budget.plus(bonusCoefficient.times(points)) is more obscure than budget + bonusCoefficient * points I have to stop and think on the first one, at first sight it looks like clutter of words, on the other hand, I get the meaning at first look for the second one, it is very clear and neat. I know this cannot be achieved in Java but I wanted to hear some ideas about my alternatives.

    Read the article

  • Why is it preferable to call a static method statically from within an instance of the method's clas

    - by javanix
    If I create an instance of a class in Java, why is it preferable to call a static method of that same class statically, rather than using this.method()? I get a warning from Eclipse when I try to call static method staticMethod() from within the custom class's constructor via this.staticMethod(). public MyClass() { this.staticMethod(); } vs public MyClass() { MyClass.staticMethod(); } Can anyone explain why this is a bad thing to do? It seems to me like the compiler should already have allocated an instance of the object, so statically allocating memory would be unneeded overhead.

    Read the article

  • Java 'Prototype' pattern - new vs clone vs class.newInstance

    - by Guillaume
    In my project there are some 'Prototype' factories that create instances by cloning a final private instance. The author of those factories says that this pattern provides better performance than calling 'new' operator. Using google to get some clues about that, I've found nothing really relevant about that. Here is a small excerpt found in a javdoc from an unknown project javdoc from an unknown project Sadly, clone() is rather slower than calling new. However it is a lot faster than calling java.lang.Class.newInstance(), and somewhat faster than rolling our own "cloner" method. For me it's looking like an old best practice of the java 1.1 time. Does someone know more about this ? Is this a good practice to use that with 'modern' jvm ?

    Read the article

  • Best practice for DAO pattern ?

    - by Tony
    I've seen a lot of codes use a service-dao pattern , I don't know the origin of this pattern . It force the front layer call service , then delegates some of the service task to dao. I want to ask : Does DAO layer do purely data access related task ? What about exception encapsulation ? Is there other pattern can be used to replace this ?

    Read the article

  • Controls added in the designer are null during Page_Load

    - by mwright
    All of the names below are generic and not the actual names used. I have a custom UserControl with a Panel that contains a a couple Labels, both .aspx controls. .aspx: <asp:Panel runat="server"> <asp:Label ID="label1" runat="server"> </asp:Label> </asp:Panel> <asp:Panel runat="server"> <asp:Label ID="label2" runat="server"> </asp:Label> </asp:Panel> Codebehind: private readonly Object object; protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { // These are the lines that are failing // label1 and label2 are null label1.Text = object.Value1; label2.Text = object.Value2; } public ObjectRow(Object objectToDisplay) { object = objectToDisplay; } On another page, in the code behind, I create a new instance of the custom user control. protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { CustomControl control = new CustomControl(object); } The user control takes the parameter and attempts to set the labels based off of the object passed in. The labels that it tries to assign the values to are however, null. Is this an ASP.net lifecycle issue that I'm not understanding? My understanding based on the Microsoft ASP.net lifecycle page was that page controls were available after the Page_Initialization. What is the proper way to do this? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • How to create custom javadoc tags

    - by Carlucho
    How to create custom javadoc tags such as @pre / @post... I found some links that explain it but i haven had luck with them, i dont know if that am already tired but i can figure where to put it. these are some of the links http://www.developer.com/java/other/article.php/3085991/Javadoc-Programming.html http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/tooldocs/windows/javadoc.html I'm sorry to ask to be spoon fed but am at the stage where i only see black dots on the screen :\ Thanks a bunch

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129  | Next Page >