Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 128/348 | < Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >

  • Best practice for writing ARRAYS

    - by Douglas
    I've got an array with about 250 entries in it, each their own array of values. Each entry is a point on a map, and each array holds info for: name, another array for points this point can connect to, latitude, longitude, short for of name, a boolean, and another boolean The array has been written by another developer in my team, and he has written it as such: names[0]=new Array; names[0][0]="Campus Ice Centre"; names[0][1]= new Array(0,1,2); names[0][2]=43.95081811364498; names[0][3]=-78.89848709106445; names[0][4]="CIC"; names[0][5]=false; names[0][6]=false; names[1]=new Array; names[1][0]="Shagwell's"; names[1][1]= new Array(0,1); names[1][2]=43.95090307839151; names[1][3]=-78.89815986156464; names[1][4]="shg"; names[1][5]=false; names[1][6]=false; Where I would probably have personally written it like this: var names = [] names[0] = new Array("Campus Ice Centre", new Array[0,1,2], 43.95081811364498, -78.89848709106445, "CIC", false, false); names[1] = new Array("Shagwell's", new Array[0,1], 43.95090307839151, -78.89815986156464, 'shg", false, false); They both work perfectly fine of course, but what I'm wondering is: 1) does one take longer than the other to actually process? 2) am I incorrect in assuming there is a benefit to the compactness of my version of the same thing? I'm just a little worried about his 3000 lines of code versus my 3-400 to get the same result. Thanks in advance for any guidance.

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC2 TekPub Starter Site methodology question

    - by Pino
    Ok I've just ran into this and I was only supposed to be checking my emails however I've ended up watching this (and not far off subscribing to TekPub). http://tekpub.com/production/starter Now these app is a great starting point, but it raises one issue for me and the development process I've been shown to follow (rightly or wrongly). There is no conversion from the LinqToSql object when passing data to the view. Are there any negitives to this? The main one I can see is with validation, does this cause issues when using MVC's built in validation as this is somthing we use extensivly. Because we are using the built in objects generated by LinqToSql how would one go about adding validation, like [Required(ErrorMessage="Name is Required")] public string Name {get;set;} Interested to understand the benifits of this methodology and any negitives that, should we take it on, experiance through the development process.

    Read the article

  • quantity of measurable units design pattern

    - by Berryl
    Hello I am thinking through a nice pattern to be useful across domains of measurable units (ie, Length, Time) and came up with the following use case and initial classes, and of course, questions! 1) Does a Composite pattern help or complicate? 2) Should the Convert method(s) in the ComposityNode be a separate converter class? All comments appreciated. Cheers, Berryl Example Use Case: var inch = new ConvertableUnit("inch", 1) var foot = new ConvertableUnit("foot", 12) var imperialUnits = new CompositeConvertableUnit("imperial units", .024) imperialUnits.AddChild(inch) imperialUnits.AddChild(foot) var meter = new ConvertableUnit("meter", 1) var millimeter = new ConvertableUnit("millimeter ", .001) var imperialUnits = new CompositeConvertableUnit("metric units", 1) imperialUnits.AddChild(meter) imperialUnits.AddChild(millimeter) var oneInch = new Quantity(1, inch); var oneFoot = new Quantity(1, foot); oneFoot.ToBase() // "12 inches" var oneMeter = new Quantity(1, meter); oneInch.ToBase() // .024 meters Possible Solution ConvertableUnit : Node double Rate string Name Quantity ConvertableUnit Unit double Amount CompositeConvertableUnit : Node ISet<ConvertableUnit> _children ConvertableUnit BaseUnit {get{ return _children.Where(c=>c.Rate == 1).First() } } Quantity ConvertTo(Quantity from, Quantity to) Quantity ToBase(Quantity from);

    Read the article

  • Shouldn't ObjectInputStream extend FilterInputStream?

    - by Vaibhav Bajpai
    The block quotes are from the Java Docs - A FilterInputStream contains some other input stream, which it uses as its basic source of data, possibly transforming the data along the way or providing additional functionality. A DataInputStream lets an application read primitive Java data types from an underlying input stream in a machine-independent way. The DataInputStream therefore extends FilterInputStream An ObjectInputStream deserializes primitive data and objects previously written using an ObjectOutputStream. However, for some reason the ObjectInputStream does NOT extend FilterInputStream even though it is also reading objects (this time and not primitive types) from the underlying input stream. Here is the branching of the concerned classes. Is there is a design reasoning for the same?

    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

  • Rounded Corners Image Change on Hover

    - by Sarfraz
    Hello, I created a rounded box/button and sliced its first corner, the middle bar (which repeats horizontally to adjust the width of the button text/content) and the last corner and used following markup: <div id="left-corner"></div> <div id="middle-bar">About Us</div> <div id="right-corner"></div> These divs have corresponding images from CSS and are floated left. Those three divs create a single rounded button wiht text About Us which is fine. Problem: I have also created similar three slices of hover images but I wonder how to apply hover to those buttons because if I use :hover with these hovered slices, then even hovering on corner images also creates hovering effect. One alternative is to use fixed width buttons and slice buttons completely but I do not want to do that.

    Read the article

  • Multi-level shop, xml or sql. best practice?

    - by danrichardson
    Hello, i have a general "best practice" question regarding building a multi-level shop, which i hope doesn't get marked down/deleted as i personally think it's quite a good "subjective" question. I am a developer in charge (in most part) of maintaining and evolving a cms system and associated front-end functionality. Over the past half year i have developed a multiple level shop system so that an infinite level of categories may exist down into a product level and all works fine. However over the last week or so i have questioned by own methods in front-end development and the best way to show the multi-level data structure. I currently use a sql server database (2000) and pull out all the shop levels and then process them into an enumerable typed list with child enumerable typed lists, so that all levels are sorted. This in my head seems quite process heavy, but we're not talking about thousands of rows, generally only 1-500 rows maybe. I have been toying with the idea recently of storing the structure in an XML document (as well as the database) and then sending last modified headers when serving/requesting the document for, which would then be processed as/when nessecary with an xsl(t) document - which would be processed server side. This is quite a handy, reusable method of storing the data but does it have more overheads in the fact im opening and closing files? And also the xml will require a bit of processing to pull out blocks of xml if for instance i wanted to show two level mid way through the tree for a side menu. I use the above method for sitemap purposes so there is currently already code i have built which does what i require, but unsure what the best process is to go about. Maybe a hybrid method which pulls out the data, sorts it and then makes an xml document/stream (XDocument/XmlDocument) for xsl processing is a good way? - This is the way i currently make the cms work for the shop. So really (and thanks for sticking with me on this), i am just wandering which methods other people use or recommend as being the best/most logical way of doing things. Thanks Dan

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC IoC usability

    - by Andrew Florko
    Hello everybody, How often do you use IoC for controllers/DAL in real projects? IoC allows to abstract application from concrete implementation with additional layer of interfaces that should be implemented. But how often concrete implementation changes? Should we really have to do job twice adding method to interface then the implementation if implementation hardly will ever be changed? I took part in about 10 asp.net projects and DAL (ORM-like and not) was never rewritten completely. Watching lots of videos I clearly understand that IoC "is cool" and the really nice way to program, but does it really needed?

    Read the article

  • Bi-directional view model syncing with "live" collections and properties (MVVM)

    - by Schneider
    I am getting my knickers in a twist recently about View Models (VM). Just like this guy I have come to the conclusion that the collections I need to expose on my VM typically contain a different type to the collections exposed on my business objects. Hence there must be a bi-directional mapping or transformation between these two types. (Just to complicate things, on my project this data is "Live" such that as soon as you change a property it gets transmitted to other computers) I can just about cope with that concept, using a framework like Truss, although I suspect there will be a nasty surprise somewhere within. Not only must objects be transformed but a synchronization between these two collections is required. (Just to complicate things I can think of cases where the VM collection might be a subset or union of business object collections, not simply a 1:1 synchronization). I can see how to do a one-way "live" sync, using a replicating ObservableCollection or something like CLINQ. The problem then becomes: What is the best way to create/delete items? Bi-directinal sync does not seem to be on the cards - I have found no such examples, and the only class that supports anything remotely like that is the ListCollectionView. Would bi-directional sync even be a sensible way to add back into the business object collection? All the samples I have seen never seem to tackle anything this "complex". So my question is: How do you solve this? Is there some technique to update the model collections from the VM? What is the best general approach to this?

    Read the article

  • logic of button to be disabled or not in mvc

    - by rod
    Hi All, Here's an excerpt from a book I'm reading about application design with MVC: Ideally, the view is so simple and logic-free as to need virtually no testing. Users (and developers before users) can reasonably test the view by simply looking at the pixels on the screen. Anything else beyond pure graphical rendering should ideally be taken out of the view and placed in the controller and model. This includes, for example, the logic that determines whether a certain button should be enabled or grayed out at some point. what does the bold statement mean to you? what would this look like? thanks, rod.

    Read the article

  • How do you handle very old browsers on your site?

    - by Alex
    Hi. We have a non-profit web site that got about 5 million hits in May. Of those, about 5,700 were from IE 5.x or lower; about 4,000 were from folks with Netscape 4.x or lower. We know that the current site's layout works for newer browsers and we're testing it on IE6 as well (along with Chrome, Opera, Safari, and Firefox). How do you handle the folks with the older browsers? Because of jQuery libraries and such, the pages might not function correctly on those old browsers. Is there an easy way to show a text-only version on browsers that can't handle the CSS and jQuery goodies? How do large sites handle this sort of thing? I've used the @embed to hide the stylesheet from Netscape 4.x, but not sure beyond that.

    Read the article

  • How to exit an if clause

    - by Roman Stolper
    What sorts of methods exist for prematurely exiting an if clause? There are times when I'm writing code and want to put a break statement inside of an if clause, only to remember that those can only be used for loops. Lets take the following code as an example: if some_condition: ... if condition_a: # do something # and then exit the outer if block ... if condition_b: # do something # and then exit the outer if block # more code here I can think of one way to do this: assuming the exit cases happen within nested if statements, wrap the remaining code in a big else block. Example: if some_condition: ... if condition_a: # do something # and then exit the outer if block else: ... if condition_b: # do something # and then exit the outer if block else: # more code here The problem with this is that more exit locations mean more nesting/indented code. Alternatively, I could write my code to have the if clauses be as small as possible and not require any exits. Does anyone know of a good/better way to exit an if clause? If there are any associated else-if and else clauses, I figure that exiting would skip over them.

    Read the article

  • How to build a JSON response by combining @foo.to_json(options) and @bars.to_json(options) in Rails

    - by smotchkkiss
    First, the desired result I have User and Item models. I'd like to build a JSON response that looks like this: { "user": {"username":"Bob!","foo":"whatever","bar":"hello!"}, "items": [ {"id":1, "name":"one", "zim":"planet", "gir":"earth"}, {"id":2, "name":"two", "zim":"planet", "gir":"mars"} ] } However, my User and Item model have more attributes than just those. I found a way to get this to work, but beware, it's not pretty... Please help... My hacks home_controller.rb class HomeController < ApplicationController def observe respond_to do |format| format.js { render :json => Observation.new(current_user, @items).to_json } end end end observation.rb # NOTE: this is not a subclass of ActiveRecord::Base # this class just serves as a container to aggregate all "observable" objects class Observation attr_accessor :user, :items def initialize(user, items) self.user = user self.items = items end # The JSON needs to be decoded before it's sent to the `to_json` method in the home_controller otherwise the JSON will be escaped... # What a mess! def to_json { :user => ActiveSupport::JSON.decode(user.to_json(:only => :username, :methods => [:foo, :bar])), :items => ActiveSupport::JSON.decode(auctions.to_json(:only => [:id, :name], :methods => [:zim, :gir])) } end end

    Read the article

  • Can the Singleton be replaced by Factory?

    - by lostiniceland
    Hello Everyone There are already quite some posts about the Singleton-Pattern around, but I would like to start another one on this topic since I would like to know if the Factory-Pattern would be the right approach to remove this "anti-pattern". In the past I used the singleton quite a lot, also did my fellow collegues since it is so easy to use. For example, the Eclipse IDE or better its workbench-model makes heavy usage of singletons as well. It was due to some posts about E4 (the next big Eclipse version) that made me start to rethink the singleton. The bottom line was that due to this singletons the dependecies in Eclipse 3.x are tightly coupled. Lets assume I want to get rid of all singletons completely and instead use factories. My thoughts were as follows: hide complexity less coupling I have control over how many instances are created (just store the reference I a private field of the factory) mock the factory for testing (with Dependency Injection) when it is behind an interface In some cases the factories can make more than one singleton obsolete (depending on business logic/component composition) Does this make sense? If not, please give good reasons for why you think so. An alternative solution is also appreciated. Thanks Marc

    Read the article

  • Are GUIDs the ultimate ID?

    - by mafutrct
    I noticed some people don't bother having the usual incremented number as ID but instead simply generate a GUID. The advantages include: Quick and easy No need to keep track of previous IDs Guaranteed to be unique even across machines without knowledge of each other Some disadvantages are: Possibly performance bottleneck Uses a large number of bytes My understanding is that using a GUID is beneficial in most cases, except if optimization for time or space is an issue. Did I miss something? Or do you agree with this idea?

    Read the article

  • System.Drawing.Image for Images in Business Objects?

    - by Mudu
    Hi Folks I'd like to store an image in a business object. In MSDN I saw that the System.Drawing-namespace provides lots of GDI+-features, etc. Is it okay to store an Image in an System.Drawing.Image class in business layer (which is a class library "only"), and thus including a reference to System.Drawing too? I slightly feel just kind of bad doing that, 'cause it seems like I have UI-specific references in business code. Moreover, the code could become unnecessarily platform-dependant (though this is only a problem in theory, because we do not develop for multiple platforms). If it isn't right that way, which type would fit best? Thank you for any response! Matthias

    Read the article

  • EnterpriseLibrary.Logging directory ..

    - by MüllerDK
    Hi, I'm using MS EnterpriseLibrary.Logging and that works perfectly. But the logfile(s) are placed in where the program file are located. How do I get it to place my logfiles in individual users applicationData folder?? The folder I'm talking about is the one you get by calling "Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.ApplicationData)". Any help appreciated :-) Best Regards Søren

    Read the article

  • Dynamically loading CSS and JavaScript using Prototype

    - by Salman A
    I have a classic ASP application that I've been constantly trying to modularize. Currently, almost all pages are divided in to two pages: an outer page that contains the layout, header, sidebar, footer an inner page that contains ASP code The outer pages use dreamweaver templates so updating layout and replicating changes is easy. The inner pages are managed by me. Now here is the problem: I had to add a lightbox to one page, I chose Lightbox 2 which requires Prototype. I ended up adding Prototype on every page, assuming that sooner or later I'll upgrade all pages, forms, ajax requests and other javascript to use Prototype. I've now added two other plugins -- Modalbox and Protofade; each with a pair of .JS and .CSS files. Since I'll be using these three plugins on specific set of pages I am wondering if I can load the required CSS and JS files dynamically. I do not want to access the document head and add include files there, I'll have to do this from inside a DIV where all ASP code is supposed to go.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC null ViewResult

    - by David Neale
    How should one deal with an MVC controller returning a null ViewResult? As an example I am creating a simple edit view: public ActionResult Edit(int id) { var person = (from p in context.SWLiftShare_Persons where p.id == id select p).SingleOrDefault(); if (person != null) { return View(person); } else return View(); } I guess in reality there's no point in checking for a null result in the controller because the view picks out properties from the model: <h2>Edit - <%= Html.Encode(Model.Name) %></h2> <%= Html.ValidationSummary("Edit was unsuccessful. Please correct the errors and try again.") %> <% using (Html.BeginForm()) {%> <fieldset> <legend>Fields</legend> <p> <label for="id">id: <%= Html.Encode(Model.id) %></label> </p> <p> <label for="CollarNumber">CollarNumber:</label> <%= Html.TextBox("CollarNumber", Model.CollarNumber)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("CollarNumber", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="Name">Name:</label> <%= Html.TextBox("Name", Model.Name)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("Name", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="EmailAddress">EmailAddress:</label> <%= Html.TextBox("EmailAddress", Model.EmailAddress, new { style = "width:300px" })%> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("EmailAddress", "*") %> </p> <p> <input type="submit" value="Save" /> </p> </fieldset> <% } %> I could just wrap everything in a <% if(Model != null) { //render edit markup... etc. but that seems rather unelegant. Is there a better way to deal with this?

    Read the article

  • Deliberately adding bugs to assess QA processes

    - by bgbg
    How do you know that as many bugs as possiblle have been discovered and solved in a program? Couple of years ago I have read a document about debugging (I think it was some sort of HOWTO). Among other things, that document described a technique in which the programming team deliberately adds bugs into the code and passes it to the QA team. The QA process is considered completed when all the deliberately known bugs have been discovered. Unfortunately, I cannot find this document, or any similar one with description of this trick. Can someone please point me to such a document?

    Read the article

  • Best practice - When to evaluate conditionals of function execution

    - by Tesserex
    If I have a function called from a few places, and it requires some condition to be met for anything it does to execute, where should that condition be checked? In my case, it's for drawing - if the mouse button is held down, then execute the drawing logic (this is being done in the mouse movement handler for when you drag.) Option one says put it in the function so that it's guaranteed to be checked. Abstracted, if you will. public function Foo() { DoThing(); } private function DoThing() { if (!condition) return; // do stuff } The problem I have with this is that when reading the code of Foo, which may be far away from DoThing, it looks like a bug. The first thought is that the condition isn't being checked. Option two, then, is to check before calling. public function Foo() { if (condition) DoThing(); } This reads better, but now you have to worry about checking from everywhere you call it. Option three is to rename the function to be more descriptive. public function Foo() { DoThingOnlyIfCondition(); } private function DoThingOnlyIfCondition() { if (!condition) return; // do stuff } Is this the "correct" solution? Or is this going a bit too far? I feel like if everything were like this function names would start to duplicate their code. About this being subjective: of course it is, and there may not be a right answer, but I think it's still perfectly at home here. Getting advice from better programmers than I is the second best way to learn. Subjective questions are exactly the kind of thing Google can't answer.

    Read the article

  • Best Practice With JFrame Constructors?

    - by David Barry
    In both my Java classes, and the books we used in them laying out a GUI with code heavily involved the constructor of the JFrame. The standard technique in the books seems to be to initialize all components and add them to the JFrame in the constructor, and add anonymous event handlers to handle events where needed, and this is what has been advocated in my class. This seems to be pretty easy to understand, and easy to work with when creating a very simple GUI, but seems to quickly get ugly and cumbersome when making anything other than a very simple gui. Here is a small code sample of what I'm describing: public class FooFrame extends JFrame { JLabel inputLabel; JTextField inputField; JButton fooBtn; JPanel fooPanel; public FooFrame() { super("Foo"); fooPanel = new JPanel(); fooPanel.setLayout(new FlowLayout()); inputLabel = new JLabel("Input stuff"); fooPanel.add(inputLabel); inputField = new JTextField(20); fooPanel.add(inputField); fooBtn = new JButton("Do Foo"); fooBtn.addActionListener(new ActionListener() { public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) { //handle event } }); fooPanel.add(fooBtn); add(fooPanel, BorderLayout.CENTER); } } Is this type of use of the constructor the best way to code a Swing application in java? If so, what techniques can I use to make sure this type of constructor is organized and maintainable? If not, what is the recommended way to approach putting together a JFrame in java?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >