Search Results

Search found 71115 results on 2845 pages for 'file patterns'.

Page 158/2845 | < Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >

• Implementing the procducer-consumer pattern with .NET 4.0

  - by bitbonk

  With alle the new paralell programming features in .NET 4.0, what would be a a simple and fast way to implement the producer-consumer pattern (where at least one thread is producing/enqueuing task items and another thread executes/dequeues these tasks). Can we benfit from all these new APIs? What is your preferred implementation of this pattern?

  Read the article

• Configuration and Model-View

  - by HH

  I am using the Model-View pattern on a small application I'm writing. Here's the scenario: The model maintains a list of directories from where it can extract the data that it needs. The View has a Configuration or a Setting dialog where the user can modify this list of directories (the dialog has a JList displaying the list in addition to add and remove buttons). I need some advice from the community: The View needs to communicate these changes to the model. I thought first of adding to the model these methods: addDirectory() and removeDirectory(). But I am trying to limit the number of methods (or channels) that the View can use to communicate with and manipulate the model. Is there any good practice for this? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Singletons and other design issues

  - by Ahmed Saleh

  I have worked using different languages like C++/Java and currently AS3. Most applications were computer vision, and small 2D computer games. Most companies that I have worked for, they use Singletons in a language like AS3, to retrieve elements or classes in an easy way. Their problem is basically they needs some variables or to call other functions from other classes. In a language like AS3, there is no private constructor, and they write a hacky code to prevent new instances. In Java and C++ I also faced the situation that I need to use other classe's members or to call their functions in different classes. The question is, is there a better or another design, to let other classes interact with each others without using singletons? I feel that composition is the answer, but I need more detailed solutions or design suggestions.

  Read the article

• Process for beginning a Ruby on Rails project

  - by Daniel Beardsley

  I'm about to begin a Ruby on Rails project and I'd love to hear how others go through the process of starting an application design. I have quite a bit of experience with RoR, but don't have that many starting from scratch with only a vision experiences and would appreciate the wisdom of others who've been there. I'm looking for an order of events, reasons for the order, and maybe why each part is important. I can think of a few starting points, but I'm not sure where it's best to begin Model design and relationships (entities, how they relate, and their attributes) Think of user use-cases (or story-boards) and implement the minimum to get these done Create Model unit-tests then create the necessary migrations and AR models to get the tests to pass Hack out the most basic version of the simplest part of your application and go from there Start with a template for a rails app (like http://github.com/thoughtbot/suspenders) Do the boring gruntwork first (User auth, session management, ...) ...

  Read the article

• Explain "Leader/Follower" Pattern

  - by Alex B

  I can't seem to find a good explanation of "Leader/Follower" pattern. All explanations either simply refer to it in the context of some problem, or are completely meaningless. Can anyone explain to the the mechanics of how this pattern works, and why and how it improves performance over more traditional asynchronous IO models? Examples and links to diagrams are appreciated too.

  Read the article

• Activator.CreateInstance vs Factory Pattern

  - by Heka

  What is the difference between Activator.CreateInstance and factory? Can they be used interchangeably? Or stil do we need a factory pattern?

  Read the article

• How can I handle multiple views of a data object? Which design pattern is acceptable?

  - by tranquil.byte

  I have a person object. class Person { private $name; ... } I need to be able to change how they are displayed on the front-end ( visitors have control ). They can choose list view, grid view, photo view for example. class PersonDisplay { public function displayList() { // Query database // Output html to display in list mode } public function displayPhoto() { // Query database // Output html to display in photo mode } } Is this an acceptable way to handle the presentation of the items on the front-end or is there a specific design pattern I should be researching to help me with this task? Does anyone have any suggestions or ideas where this could go wrong or if this could potentially make maintenance a nightmare? The Person object was just an example very similiar to what I am using.

  Read the article

• Proper design a Model-Controller in Cocoa?

  - by legege

  Hi, I'm trying to design a simple Cocoa application and I would like to have a clear and easy to understand software architecture. Of course, I'm using a basic MVC design and my question concerns the Model layer. For my application, the Model represents data fetched on the Internet with a XML-RPC API. I'm planning to use Core Data to represent a locally fetched version. How should the data be loaded initially? I'm reading the Cocoa Design Pattern book, and they talk about a Model-Controller that is centric to the Model. How would that be done? Thanks!

  Read the article

• how to share a variable between two threads

  - by prmatta

  I just inherited some code, two threads within this code need to perform a system task. One thread should do the system task before the other thread. They should not be performing the system task together. The two threads do not have references to each other. Now, I know I can use some sort of a semaphore to achieve this. But my question is what is the right way to get both threads to access this semaphore. I could create a static variable/method a new class : public class SharedSemaphore { private static Semaphore s = new Semaphore (1, true); public static void performSystemTask () { s.acquire(); } public static void donePerformingSystemTask() { s.release(); } } This would work (right?) but this doesn't seem like the right thing to do. Because, the threads now have access to a semaphore, without ever having a reference to it. This sort of thing doesn't seem like a good programming practice. Am I wrong?

  Read the article

• Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

  - by Jeff

  I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

  Read the article

• wpf command pattern

  - by evan

  I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

  Read the article

• DI with disposable objects

  - by sunnychaganty

  Suppose my repository class looks like this: class myRepository : IDisposable{ private DataContext _context; public myRepository(DataContext context){ _context = context; } public void Dispose(){ // to do: implement dispose of DataContext } } now, I am using Unity to control the lifetime of my repository & the data context & configured the lifetimes as: DataContext - singleton myRepository - create a new instance each time Does this mean that I should not be implementing the IDisposable on the repository to clean up the DataContext? Any guidance on such items?

  Read the article

• Design pattern for extending Android's activities?

  - by Carl

  While programming on Android, I end up writing a parent activity which is extended by several others. A bit like ListActivity. My parent activity extends Activity. if I intend to use a Map or a List, I can't use my parent activity as superclass - the child activity can only extend one activity obviously. As such I end up writing my parent activities with the same logic for Activity, ListActivity, MapActivity and so forth. What am I looking for is some sort of trait functionality/design pattern which would help in this case. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Observer pattern and violation of Single Responsibility Principle

  - by Devil Jin

  I have an applet which repaints itself once the text has changed Design 1: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet implements Listener{ private DynamicText text = null; public void init(){ text = new DynamicText("Welcome"); } public void paint(Graphics g){ g.drawString(text.getText(), 50, 30); } //implement Listener update() method public void update(){ repaint(); } } //DynamicText.java public class DynamicText implements Publisher{ // implements Publisher interface methods //notify listeners whenever text changes } Isn't this a violation of Single Responsibility Principle where my Applet not only acts as Applet but also has to do Listener job. Same way DynamicText class not only generates the dynamic text but updates the registered listeners. Design 2: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet{ private AppletListener appLstnr = null; public void init(){ appLstnr = new AppletListener(this); // applet stuff } } // AppletListener.java public class AppletListener implements Listener{ private Applet applet = null; public AppletListener(Applet applet){ this.applet = applet; } public void update(){ this.applet.repaint(); } } // DynamicText public class DynamicText{ private TextPublisher textPblshr = null; public DynamicText(TextPublisher txtPblshr){ this.textPblshr = txtPblshr; } // call textPblshr.notifyListeners whenever text changes } public class TextPublisher implments Publisher{ // implements publisher interface methods } Q1. Is design 1 a SPR violation? Q2. Is composition a better choice here to remove SPR violation as in design 2.

  Read the article

• Is the provider pattern an implementation of IOC?

  - by blahblah

  Is the provider pattern an implementation of IOC? If not, why not? (reading through martin fowlers article on ioc)

  Read the article

• .Net - Whats the difference between a Session Facade and Business Delegate?

  - by KP65

  What I understand so far: Business Delegate - In the presentation tier, as an ASP component, provides an interface for ASP views to access business components without exposing their API, therefore reducing coupling between the two. Session Facade - In the business tier, as a com+ component, encapsulates business objects, provides a course grain interface for views to access business components. Reduces coupling, hides complex business component interaction from views. So what is the actual difference? They seem pretty similar to me..

  Read the article

• What should go in each MVVM triad?

  - by Harry

  OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

  - by MatthewMartin

  This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

  Read the article

• Is this physical collection class that contains only static methods an Anti-Pattern?

  - by Tj Kellie

  I'm trying to figure out if I should continue on with a current pattern in an application I'm working in, or refactor this into something else. I have a set of collection classes off a generic base of List. These classes have public constructors but contain only static methods that return collections. They look like this: public class UserObjCollection : BaseCollection<UserObj> { public static UserObjCollection GetAllUserObj() { UserObjCollection obj = new UserObjCollection(); obj.MapObjects(new UserObjDataService().GetAllUserObj()); return obj; } } Is this a Pattern or Anti-Pattern and what are the merits of this over a straight factory pattern?

  Read the article

• Exploring the Factory Design Pattern

  - by asksuperuser

  There was an article here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/Ee817667%28pandp.10%29.aspx The first part of tut implemented this pattern with abstract classes. The second part shows an example with Interface class. But nothing in this article discusses why this pattern would rather use abstract or interface. So what explanation (advantages of one over the other) would you give ? Not in general but for this precise pattern.

  Read the article

• Dependency Injection & Singleton Design pattern

  - by SysAdmin

  How do we identify when to use dependency injection or singleton pattern. I have read in lot of websites where they say "Use Dependency injection over singleton pattern". But I am not sure if I totally agree with them. For my small or medium scale projects I definitely see the use of singleton pattern straightforward. For example Logger. I could use Logger.GetInstance().Log(...) But, instead of this, why do I need to inject every class I create, with the logger's instance?.

  Read the article

• Routing redirection decision

  - by programming late night

  I have really no idea why I'm asking this as this a really completely irrelevant question for which I should have figured out an answer within milliseconds, yet I'm doing it. So in my project I have a Router class which splits up the request and selects the right page to be loaded. Fine so far. Now I have a page displayed when the user requests a page that doesn't exist, you know, 404. So theoretically, if the user entered mydomain.com/404 (I use mod_rewrite with a requests collector via index.php?req=*) the 404 error would be shown to him, but in fact there was no error - the 404 page would be displayed as a perfectly normal page. So if someone would try out requesting the 404 page via /404, he would be shown the page but he can't tell if the 404 page he requested doesn't exist and he is actually getting a, you guessed it, 404 error or if he actually found some flaw in the system that makes him able to see an error page when there is no error. I don't know how dumb this whole thing here is but I'm sure some of you have in fact ran into this problem already. Short version: If the user enters mydomain.com/404 the 404 page is shown even though there is no 404 error. I know this is a completely irrelevant question, please don't tell me, but I just spontaneously wanted to hear your thoughts on it. Strange eh? Should I redirect direct access to my 404-page to the home page? Should I do nothing? Should I just go to bed and stop asking irrelevant stuff?

  Read the article

• Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

  - by Roman A. Taycher

  If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

  Read the article

• Undo/Redo using Memento: Stack, Queue or just LinkedList?

  - by serhio

  What is the best having when implementing Memento pattern (for Undo/Redo) in witch collection to Keep Mementos? Basically, I need this(c = change, u = undo, r = redo): 0 *c -1 0 *c -2 -1 0 *c -3 -2 -1 0 <u -2 -1 0 1 *c -3 -2 -1 0 Variants: LinkedList - possible in principle, maybe not optimized. Queue - not adapted for this task, IMO. Stack - not adapted for undo AND redo; Double Stack - maybe optimal, but can't control the undo maximum size.

  Read the article

• anti-if campaign

  - by Andrew Siemer

  I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >