Search Results

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

Page 145/348 | < Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >

• Are there any MVP Frameworks projects out there?

  - by Greg Malcolm

  MVC is used a number of popular frameworks. To name just a few, Ruby on Rails, ASP.NET MVC, Monorail, Spring MVC. Are there any equivalent frameworks using any variant of MVP? Most of the examples I've found online seem to be custom implementations of the pattern rather than reusable frameworks. Suggestions need not be specific to any particular programming language, my interest is mostly academic.

  Read the article

• what happens to running/blocked runnables when executorservice is shutdown()

  - by prmatta

  I posted a question about a thread pattern today, and almost everyone suggested that I look into the ExecutorService. While I was looking into the ExecutorService, I think I am missing something. What happens if the service has a running or blocked threads, and someone calls ExecutorService.shutdown(). What happens to threads that are running or blocked? Does the ExecutorService wait for those threads to complete before it terminates? The reason I ask this is because a long time ago when I used to dabble in Java, they deprecated Thread.stop(), and I remember the right way of stopping a thread was to use sempahores and extend Thread when necessary: public void run () { while (!this.exit) { try { block(); //do something } catch (InterruptedException ie) { } } } public void stop () { this.exit = true; if (this.thread != null) { this.thread.interrupt(); this.thread = null; } } How does ExecutorService handle running threads?

  Read the article

• Is there a design pattern for injecting methods into a class?

  - by glenn I.

  I have a set of classes that work together (I'm coding in javascript). There is one parent class and a number of child classes that are instantiated by the parent class. I have a number of clients of these classes that each need to add on one more methods to the parent or child classes. Rather than having each client inherit from these classes, which is doable but messy because of the child classes, I am having these clients pass functions into the parent class when they instantiate the main class. The main class creates the methods dynamically and the clients can call the methods like they were there all along. My questions are: is this a sensible thing to do? what would the design pattern be for what I am doing?

  Read the article

• What's the best practice to "look up" Java Enums?

  - by Marcus

  We have a REST API where clients can supply parameters representing values defined on the server in Java Enums. So we can provide a descriptive error, we add this lookup method to each Enum. Seems like we're just copying code (bad). Is there a better practice? public enum MyEnum { A, B, C, D; public static MyEnum lookup(String id) { try { return MyEnum.valueOf(id); } catch (IllegalArgumentException e) { throw new RuntimeException("Invalid value for my enum blah blah: " + id); } } } Update: The default error message provided by valueOf(..) would be No enum const class a.b.c.MyEnum.BadValue. I would like to provide a more descriptive error from the API.

  Read the article

• "Circuit breaker" for net.msmq?

  - by Alex

  Hi, The Circuit Breaker pattern, from the book Release It!, protects a service from requests while it is failing (or recovering). The net.msmq binding used with transactions give us nice retry and poison message capabilities. But I am missing the implementation of such a "Circuit breaker" pattern. A service is put under even heavier load by retries while it is already in a failure condition (like DB connectivity issues causing loads of blocked threads etc.). Anyone knows about a behavior extension or similar that explicitly closes the service host when defined failure thresholds have been exceeded? Cheers, Alex

  Read the article

• Any reason not to always log stack traces?

  - by Chris Knight

  Encountered a frustrating problem in our application today which came down to an ArrayIndexOutOfBounds exception being thrown. The exception's type was just about all that was logged which is fairly useless (but, oh dear legacy app, we still love you, mostly). I've redeployed the application with a change which logs the stack trace on exception handling (and immediately found the root cause of the problem) and wondered why no one else did this before. Do you generally log the stack trace and is there any reason you wouldn't do this? Bonus points if you can explain (why, not how) the rationale behind having to jump hoops in java to get a string representation of a stack trace!

  Read the article

• Passing data between objects in Chain of Responsibility pattern

  - by AbrahamJP

  While implementing the Chain of Responsibility pattern, i came across a dilemma om how to pass data between objects in the chain. The datatypes passed between object in the chain can differ for each object. As a temporary fix I had created a Static class containing a stack where each object in the chain can push the results to the stack while the next object in the chain could pop the results from the stack. Here is a sample code on what I had implemented. public interface IHandler { void Process(); } public static class StackManager { public static Stack DataStack = new Stack(); } //This class doesn't require any input to operate public class OpsA : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var ProcessedData = DoSomeOperation(); StackManager.DataStack.Push(ProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } //This class require input data to operate upon public class OpsB : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Retrieve the results from the previous Operation var InputData = StackManager.DataStack.Pop(); //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var NewProcessedData = DoMoreProcessing(InputData); StackManager.DataStack.Push(NewProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } public class ChainOfResponsibilityPattern { public void Process() { IHandler ProcessA = new OpsA(); IHandler ProcessB = new OpsB(); ProcessA.Successor = ProcessB; ProcessA.Process(); } } Please help me to find a better approach to pass data between handlers objects in the chain.

  Read the article

• What is the best way to handle my softwares licenses?

  - by Sergio Tapia

  By best I mean more time tested, easier to implement and easier for the users to work with. I do not want my licensing crap to interfere with their work. I was thinking of launching a WCF service that check with my license DB if it's a valid license and if it is, send a True. If the returned response is False, then shut down the program after telling them to fix their license. Do you think this is a good way to handle it?

  Read the article

• Perls Of Wisdom For a .Net Programmer [closed]

  - by DeanMc

  Hi Guys, I like to think that recently I have moved from complete beginner to beginner. It has been a hard road and one on which I took many wrong turns. Very rarely in any profession is there a place where so many rock stars gather, this is something I would like to take advantage of. What I would like to ask is what are your perls of wisdom for a .net programmer. They can be anything you feel of value, a concept, a book, a process that should be followed, anything of that nature, it doesn't have to be .net specific just contextual. Thanks for taking the time to read this and respond.

  Read the article

• Is there a difference between Perl's shift versus assignment from @_ for subroutine parameters?

  - by cowgod

  Let us ignore for a moment Damian Conway's best practice of no more than three positional parameters for any given subroutine. Is there any difference between the two examples below in regards to performance or functionality? Using shift: sub do_something_fantastical { my $foo = shift; my $bar = shift; my $baz = shift; my $qux = shift; my $quux = shift; my $corge = shift; } Using @_: sub do_something_fantastical { my ($foo, $bar, $baz, $qux, $quux, $corge) = @_; } Provided that both examples are the same in terms of performance and functionality, what do people think about one format over the other? Obviously the example using @_ is fewer lines of code, but isn't it more legible to use shift as shown in the other example? Opinions with good reasoning are welcome.

  Read the article

• MongoDB query to return only embedded document

  - by Matt

  assume that i have a BlogPost model with zero-to-many embedded Comment documents. can i query for and have MongoDB return only Comment objects matching my query spec? eg, db.blog_posts.find({"comment.submitter": "some_name"}) returns only a list of comments. edit: an example: import pymongo connection = pymongo.Connection() db = connection['dvds'] db['dvds'].insert({'title': "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy", 'episodes': [{'title': "Episode 1", 'desc': "..."}, {'title': "Episode 2", 'desc': "..."}, {'title': "Episode 3", 'desc': "..."}, {'title': "Episode 4", 'desc': "..."}, {'title': "Episode 5", 'desc': "..."}, {'title': "Episode 6", 'desc': "..."}]}) episode = db['dvds'].find_one({'episodes.title': "Episode 1"}, fields=['episodes']) in this example, episode is: {u'_id': ObjectId('...'), u'episodes': [{u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 1'}, {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 2'}, {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 3'}, {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 4'}, {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 5'}, {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 6'}]} but i just want: {u'desc': u'...', u'title': u'Episode 1'}

  Read the article

• Is it good to subclass a class only to separate some functional parts?

  - by prostynick

  Suppose we have abstract class A (all examples in C#) public abstract class A { private Foo foo; public A() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //a lot of other stuff... } But we are able to split it into two classes A and B: public abstract class A { public A() { } //a lot of stuff... } public abstract class B : A { private Foo foo; public B() : base() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //nothing else or just some overrides of A stuff } That's good, but we are 99.99% sure, that no one will ever subclass A, because functionality in B is very important. Is it still good to have two separate classes only to split some code into two parts and to separate functional elements?

  Read the article

• Scrum metrics for quality

  - by zachary

  What is the best way to measure QA in scrum? We have members who typically test and they are measured against how many bugs they find. If they don't find any bugs then they are considered to be doing a bad job. However, it is my understanding that the developers and quality people are considered one in the same. I would think that they should be judged against the same metrics... not different metrics then the developers who may also be doing testing work... What is the best way to handle metrics for QA and should QA people have separate metrics from developers in scrum? Any documents or links someone can point me to in regards to this?

  Read the article

• How to better design it ???

  - by Deepak

  public interface IBasePresenter { } public interface IJobViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public interface IActivityViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public class BaseView { public IBasePresenter Presenter { get; set; } } public class JobView : BaseView { public IJobViewPresenter JobViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IJobViewPresenter;} } } public class ActivityView : BaseView { public IActivityViewPresenter ActivityViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IActivityViewPresenter;} } } Lets assume that I need a IBasePresenter property on BaseView. Now this property is inherited by JobView and ActivityView but if I need reference to IJobViewPresenter object in these derived classes then I need to type cast IBasePresenter property to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityPresenter (which I want to avoid) or create JobViewPresenter and ActivityViewPresenter on derived classes (as shown above). I want to avoid type casting in derived classes and still have reference to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityViewPresenter and still have IBasePresenter in BaseView. Is there a way I can achieve it ?

  Read the article

• Is this bad Object Oriented Design? (derived class used in base class)

  - by Earlz

  Hello, Can someone tell me if this class structure is bad? class abstract Parent{ public Child Foo(){ return new Child(); } } class Child : Parent{} I've heard that referring to a derived type from a base type is always bad and signs of bad design. Can someone tell me why this is bad or even if it is bad?

  Read the article

• Is there a naming convention for a method that should set the properties of the passed object.

  - by Genady Sergeev

  Hello, I am writing a method that will set the properties of an object passed as a parameter. The method accepts one parameter of type interface and the return type of the method is the same interface. I was wondering if there is some kind of a naming convention for such methods. I was thinking of something like: FillInInterfaceTypeData or InitInterfaceTypeData but both sound clumsy to me. How do you think?

  Read the article

• Exposing a service to external systems - How should I design the contract?

  - by Larsi

  Hi! I know this question is been asked before here but still I'm not sure what to select. My service will be called from many 3 party system in the enterprise. I'm almost sure the information the service will collect (MyBigClassWithAllInfo) will change during the products lifetime. Is it still a good idea to expose objects? This is basically what my two alternatives: [ServiceContract] public interface ICollectStuffService { [OperationContract] SetDataResponseMsg SetData(SetDataRequestMsg dataRequestMsg); } // Alternative 1: Put all data inside a xml file [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public string Body { get; set; } [DataMember] public string OtherPropertiesThatMightBeHandy { get; set; } // ?? } // Alternative 2: Expose the objects [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public Header Header { get; set; } [DataMember] public MyBigClassWithAllInfo ExposedObject { get; set; } } public class SetDataResponseMsg { [DataMember] public ServiceError Error { get; set; } } The xml file would look like this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <Message>   <Header>     <InfoAboutTheSender>...</InfoAboutTheSender>   </Header>   <StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo>   <stuff1>...</stuff1> </StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo> </Message> Any thought on how this service should be implemented? Thanks Larsi

  Read the article

• How do I know if I'm being truly clever and not just "clever"?

  - by Covar

  If there's one thing I've learned from programming is that there are clever solutions to problems, and then there are "clever" solutions to problems. One is an intelligent solution to a difficult problem that results in improved efficiency and a better way to to do something and the other will wind up on The Daily WTF, and result in headaches and pain for anyone else involved. My question is how do you distinguish between one and the other? How do you figure out if you've over thought the solution? How do you stop yourself from throwing away truly clever solutions, thinking they were "clever"?

  Read the article

• Application Design: Single vs. Multiple Hits to the DB

  - by shyneman

  I'm building a service that performs a set of configured activities based on the type of request that it receives. Each activity involves going to the database and retrieving/updating some kind of information. The logic for each activity can be generalized and re-used across different request types. The activities may need to participate in a transaction for the duration of the servicing the request. One option, I'm considering is having each activity maintain its own access to DAL/database. This fully encapsulates the activity into a stand-alone re-usable piece, but hitting the database multiple times for one request doesn't seem like a viable option. I don't really know how to easily implement the concept of a transaction across the multiple activities here either. The second option is to encapsulate ALL the activities into one big activity and hit the database once. But this does not allow re-use and configuration of these activities for different requests. Does anyone have any suggestions and input about what should be the best way to approach my problem? Thanks for any help.

  Read the article

• YAGNI and database creation scripts

  - by Daniel Straight

  Right now, I have code which creates the database (just a few CREATE queries on a SQLite database) in my main database access class. This seems unnecessary as I have no intention of ever using the code. I would just need it if something went wrong and I needed to recreate the database. Should I... Leave things as they are, even though the database creation code is about a quarter of my file size. Move the database-creation code to a separate script. It's likely I'll be running it manually if I ever need to run it again anyway, and that would put it out-of-sight-out-of-mind while working on the main code. Delete the database-creation code and rely on revision control if I ever find myself needing it again.

  Read the article

• File descriptor limits and default stack sizes

  - by Charles

  Where I work we build and distribute a library and a couple complex programs built on that library. All code is written in C and is available on most 'standard' systems like Windows, Linux, Aix, Solaris, Darwin. I started in the QA department and while running tests recently I have been reminded several times that I need to remember to set the file descriptor limits and default stack sizes higher or bad things will happen. This is particularly the case with Solaris and now Darwin. Now this is very strange to me because I am a believer in 0 required environment fiddling to make a product work. So I am wondering if there are times where this sort of requirement is a necessary evil, or if we are doing something wrong. Edit: Great comments that describe the problem and a little background. However I do not believe I worded the question well enough. Currently, we require customers, and hence, us the testers, to set these limits before running our code. We do not do this programatically. And this is not a situation where they MIGHT run out, under normal load our programs WILL run out and seg fault. So rewording the question, is requiring the customer to change these ulimit values to run our software to be expected on some platforms, ie, Solaris, Aix, or are we as a company making it to difficult for these users to get going? Bounty: I added a bounty to hopefully get a little more information on what other companies are doing to manage these limits. Can you set these pragmatically? Should we? Should our programs even be hitting these limits or could this be a sign that things might be a bit messy under the covers? That is really what I want to know, as a perfectionist a seemingly dirty program really bugs me.

  Read the article

• How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately?

  - by sharptooth

  According to Wikipedia (the table at the page bottom), the earliest known version control systems were CVS and TeamWare both known from year 1990. How can it be? Software development has been here from at most 1960's and I honestly can't imagine working with codebase without version control. How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately compared to software development?

  Read the article

• Why is debugging better in an IDE?

  - by Bill Karwin

  I've been a software developer for over twenty years, programming in C, Perl, SQL, Java, PHP, JavaScript, and recently Python. I've never had a problem I could not debug using some careful thought, and well-placed debugging print statements. I respect that many people say that my techniques are primitive, and using a real debugger in an IDE is much better. Yet from my observation, IDE users don't appear to debug faster or more successfully than I can, using my stone knives and bear skins. I'm sincerely open to learning the right tools, I've just never been shown a compelling advantage to using visual debuggers. Moreover, I have never read a tutorial or book that showed how to debug effectively using an IDE, beyond the basics of how to set breakpoints and display the contents of variables. What am I missing? What makes IDE debugging tools so much more effective than thoughtful use of diagnostic print statements? Can you suggest resources (tutorials, books, screencasts) that show the finer techniques of IDE debugging? Sweet answers! Thanks much to everyone for taking the time. Very illuminating. I voted up many, and voted none down. Some notable points: Debuggers can help me do ad hoc inspection or alteration of variables, code, or any other aspect of the runtime environment, whereas manual debugging requires me to stop, edit, and re-execute the application (possibly requiring recompilation). Debuggers can attach to a running process or use a crash dump, whereas with manual debugging, "steps to reproduce" a defect are necessary. Debuggers can display complex data structures, multi-threaded environments, or full runtime stacks easily and in a more readable manner. Debuggers offer many ways to reduce the time and repetitive work to do almost any debugging tasks. Visual debuggers and console debuggers are both useful, and have many features in common. A visual debugger integrated into an IDE also gives you convenient access to smart editing and all the other features of the IDE, in a single integrated development environment (hence the name).

  Read the article

• Java Code Formating

  - by the qwerty

  I'm using FreeMarker to generate java code, but as most of it is dynamically generated it's difficult to control the code formation. I want to get code well formatted. Does anyone knows a lib or something like a pretty printer for java code?

  Read the article

• How many address fields would you use for a UK database?

  - by Draemon

  Address records are probably used in most database, but I've seen a number of slightly different sets of fields used to store them. The number of fields seems to vary from 3-7, and sometimes all fields are simple labelled address1..addressN, other times given specific meaning (town, city, etc). This is UK specific, though I'm open to comments about the rest of the world too. Here you need the first line of the address (actually just the number) and the post code to identify the address - everything else is mostly an added bonus. I'm currently favouring: Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 Town County Post Code We could add Country if we ever needed it (unlikely). What do you think? Is this too little, too much?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >