Search Results

Search found 14545 results on 582 pages for 'design patterns'.

Page 177/582 | < Previous Page | 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184  | Next Page >

  • Problem understanding Inheritance

    - by dhruvbird
    I've been racking my brains over inheritance for a while now, but am still not completely able to get around it. For example, the other day I was thinking about relating an Infallible Human and a Fallible Human. Let's first define the two: Infallible Human: A human that can never make a mistake. It's do_task() method will never throw an exception Fallible Human: A human that will occasionally make a mistakes. It's do_task() method may occasionally throw a ErrorProcessingRequest Exception The question was: IS an infallible human A fallible human OR IS a fallible human AN infallible human? The very nice answer I received was in the form of a question (I love these since it gives me rules to answer future questions I may have). "Can you pass an infallible human where a fallible human is expected OR can you pass a fallible human where an infallible human is expected?" It seems apparent that you can pass an infallible human where a fallible human is expected, but not the other way around. I guess that answered my question. However, it still feels funny saying "An infallible human is a fallible human". Does anyone else feel queasy when they say it? It almost feels as if speaking out inheritance trees is like reading out statements from propositional calculus in plain English (the if/then implication connectives don't mean the same as that in spoken English). Does anyone else feel the same?

    Read the article

  • Should I use a class in this: Reading a XML file using lxml.

    - by PulpFiction
    Hi everyone. This question is in continuation to my previous question, in which I asked about passing around an ElementTree. I need to read the XML files only and to solve this, I decided to create a global ElementTree and then parse it wherever required. My question is: Is this an acceptable practice? I heard global variables are bad. If I don't make it global, I was suggested to make a class. But do I really need to create a class? What benefits would I have from that approach. Note that I would be handling only one ElementTree instance per run, the operations are read-only. If I don't use a class, how and where do I declare that ElementTree so that it available globally? (Note that I would be importing this module) Please answer this question in the respect that I am a beginner to development, and at this stage I can't figure out whether to use a class or just go with the functional style programming approach.

    Read the article

  • Sequential coupling in code

    - by dotnetdev
    Hi, Is sequential coupling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_coupling) really a bad thing in code? Although it's an anti-pattern, the only risk I see is calling methods in the wrong order but documentation of an API/class library with this anti-pattern should take care of that. What other problems are there from code which is sequential? Also, this pattern could easily be fixed by using a facade it seems. Thanks

    Read the article

  • What exactly is GRASP's Controller about?

    - by devoured elysium
    What is the idea behind Grasp's Controller pattern? My current interpretation is that sometimes you want to achieve something that needs to use a couple of classes but none of those classes could or has access to the information needed to do it, so you create a new class that does the job, having references to all the needed classes(this is, could be the information expert). Is this a correct view of what Grasp's Controller is about? Generally when googling or SO'ing controller, I just get results about MVC's (and whatnot) which are topics that I don't understand about, so I'd like answers that don't assume I know ASP.NET's MVC or something :( Thanks

    Read the article

  • What is the definition of a Service object ?

    - by Maskime
    I've been working a lot with PHP. But recently i was sent on a work wich use Java. In PHP i used to do a lot of Singleton object but this pattern has not the same signification in Java that it has in PHP. So i wanted to go for an utility class (a class with static method) but my chief doesn't like this kind of classes and ask me to go for services object. So my guess was that a service object is just a class with a constructor that implement some public methods... Am i right ?

    Read the article

  • Setting the type of a field in a superclass from a subclass (Java)

    - by Ibolit
    Hi. I am writing a project on Google App Engine, within it I have a number of abstract classes that I hope I will be able to use in my future projects, and a number of concrete classes inheriting from them. Among other abstract classes I have an abstract servlet that does user management, and I hava an abstract user. The AbstractUser has all the necessary fields and methods for storing it in the datastore and telling whether the user is registered with my service or not. It does not implement any project specific functionality. The abstract servlet that manages users, refers only to the methods declared in the AbstractUser class, which allows it to generate links for logging in, logging out and registering (for unregistered users). In order to implement the project-specific user functionality I need to subclass the Abstract user. The servlets I use in my project are all indirect descendants from that abstract user management servlet, and the user is a protected field in it, so the descendant servlets can use it as their own field. However, whenever i want to access any project specific method of the concrete user, i need to cast it to that type. i.e. (abstract user managing servlet) ... AbstractUser user = getUser(); ... abstract protected AbstractUser getUser(); (project-specific abstract servlet) @Override protected AbstractUser getUser() { return MyUserFactory.getUser(); } any other project specific servlet: int a = ((ConcreteUser) user).getA(); Well, what i'd like to do is to somehow make the type of “user” in the superclass depend on something in the project-specific abstract class. Is it at all possible? And i don't want to move all the user-management stuff into a project-specific layer, for i would like to have it for my future projects already written :) Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • correct technical term for this pattern

    - by Oliver A.
    sometimes I use a pattern which is very similar to the singleton pattern: There is one default instance which and a static get method to aces it. But you may create other instances and pass it as optional parameter and if you want to and you can even replace the default instance with a instance from a child class. So it is NO SINGLETON at all but it is used like one singleton in most cases. Anyone got an idea who to call something like this ? Maybe half*** singleton? domiton?

    Read the article

  • What pattern is this? php

    - by user151841
    I have several classes that are basically interfaces to database rows. Since the class assumes that a row already exists ( __construct expects a field value ), there is a public static function that allows creation of the row and returns an instance of the class. Here's an example ( without the actual database inserts ): class selfStarter { public $type; public function __construct( $type ) { $this->type = $type; } public static function create( $type ) { if ( ! empty($type) ) { $starter = & new selfStarter($type); return $starter; } } } $obj1 = selfStarter::create( "apple" ); $obj2 = & new selfStarter( "banana" ); What is this pattern called?

    Read the article

  • incapsulation of a code inmatlab

    - by user531225
    my code is pathname=uigetdir; filename=uigetfile('*.txt','choose a file name.'); data=importdata(filename); element= (data.data(:,10)); in_array=element; pattern= [1 3]; locations = cell(1, numel(pattern)); for p = 1:(numel(pattern)) locations{p} = find(in_array == pattern(p)); end idx2 = []; for p = 1:numel(locations{1}) start_value = locations{1}(p); for q = 2:numel(locations) found = true; if (~any((start_value + q - 1) == locations{q})) found = false; break; end end if (found) idx2(end + 1) = locations{1}(p); end end [m2,n2]=size(idx2) res_name= {'one' 'two'}; res=[n n2]; In this code I finding a pattern in one of the column of my data file and counting how many times it's repeated. I have like 200 files that I want to do the same with them but unfotunatlly I'm stuck. this is what I have added so far pathname=uigetdir; files=dir('*.txt'); for k=1:length(files) filename=files(k).name; data(k)=importdata(files(k).name); element{k}=data(1,k).data(:,20); in_array=element;pattern= [1 3]; locations = cell(1, numel(pattern)); for p = 1:(numel(pattern)) locations{p} = find(in_array{k}== pattern(p)); end idx2{k} = []; how can I continue this code..??

    Read the article

  • Abstract away a compound identity value for use in business logic?

    - by John K
    While separating business logic and data access logic into two different assemblies, I want to abstract away the concept of identity so that the business logic deals with one consistent identity without having to understand its actual representation in the data source. I've been calling this a compound identity abstraction. Data sources in this project are swappable and various and the business logic shouldn't care which data source is currently in use. The identity is the toughest part because its implementation can change per kind of data source, whereas other fields like name, address, etc are consistently scalar values. What I'm searching for is a good way to abstract the concept of identity, whether it be an existing library, a software pattern or just a solid good idea of some kind is provided. The proposed compound identity value would have to be comparable and usable in the business logic and passed back to the data source to specify records, entities and/or documents to affect, so the data source must be able to parse back out the details of its own compound ids. Data Source Examples: This serves to provide an idea of what I mean by various data sources having different identity implementations. A relational data source might express a piece of content with an integer identifier plus a language specific code. For example. content_id language Other Columns expressing details of content 1 en_us 1 fr_ca The identity of the first record in the above example is: 1 + en_us However when a NoSQL data source is substituted, it might somehow represent each piece of content with a GUID string 936DA01F-9ABD-4d9d-80C7-02AF85C822A8 plus language code of a different standardization, And a third kind of data source might use just a simple scalar value. So on and so forth, you get the idea.

    Read the article

  • In java web application, where should i store users photos?

    - by stunaz
    Hello, this questions may be stupid, but i dont really see how to resolve it : lest say that in my application, i have a user. This user edit his profile, and need to edit his avatar. Where should i store the avatar file? first of all i was saving all the files in src\main\webapp\resources , but each time i redeploy that folder empties. so i dedide to place in an other location : c:\wwwdir\resources, but i can't link local resources from remote pages, so i was not able to display any avatar . any idea? advise? link?

    Read the article

  • Whats the best way of using MVC + ajax (jquery) to load page content, aspx or ascx or both

    - by devzero
    I want to have a menu that when I click replaces the content of a "main" div with content from a mvc view. This works just fine if I use a .aspx page, but any master.page content is then doubled (like the and any css/js). If I do the same but uses a .ascx user control the content is loaded without the extras, but if any browser loads the menu item directly (ie search bot's or someone with JS disabled), the page is displayed without the master.page content. The best solution I've found so far is to create the content as a .ascx page, then have a .aspx page load this if it's called directly from the menu link, while the ajax javascript would modify the link to use only the .ascx. This leads to a lot duplication though, as every user control needs it's own .aspx page. I was wondering if there is any better way of doing this? Could for example the master.page hide everything that's not from the .aspx page if it was called with parameter ?ajax=true?

    Read the article

  • What's wrong (or right) with this JS Object Pattern?

    - by unsane1
    Here's an example of the pattern I'm using in my javascript objects these days (this example relies on jQuery). http://pastie.org/private/ryn0m1gnjsxdos9onsyxg It works for me reasonably well, but I'm guessing there's something wrong, or at least sub-optimal about it, I'm just curious to get people's opinions. Here's a smaller, inline example of it: sample = function(attach) { // set internal reference to self var self = this; // public variable(s) self.iAmPublic = true; // private variable(s) var debug = false; var host = attach; var pane = { element: false, display: false } // public function(s) self.show = function() { if (!pane.display) { position(); $(pane.element).show('fast'); pane.display = true; } } self.hide = function() { if (pane.display) { $(pane.element).hide('fast'); pane.display = false; } } // private function(s) function init () { // do whatever stuff is needed on instantiation of this object // like perhaps positioning a hidden div pane.element = document.createElement('div'); return self; } function position() { var h = { 'h': $(host).outerHeight(), 'w': $(host).outerWidth(), 'pos': $(host).offset() }; var p = { 'w': $(pane.element).outerWidth() }; $(pane.element).css({ top: h.pos.top + (h.h-1), left: h.pos.left + ((h.w - p.w) / 2) }); } function log () { if (debug) { console.log(arguments); } } // on-instantiation let's set ourselves up return init(); } I'm really curious to get people's thoughts on this.

    Read the article

  • How to dispose the objects created by factory pattern

    - by Ram
    Hi, I am using Factory pattern to create .NET objects of a class. I also need to make sure that all such objects should be disposed before application terminates. Where and How can I dispose the objects created by factory pattern? Shall I dispose in the class in which I am getting the objects created by factory?

    Read the article

  • C++ OOP: Which functions to put into the class?

    - by oh boy
    Assume I have a class a: class a { public: void load_data( ); private: void check_data( ); void work_data( ); void analyze_data( ); } Those functions all do something with the class or one of its members. However this function: bool validate_something( myType myData ) { if ( myData.blah > 0 && myData.blah < 100 ) { return true; } return false; } Is related to the class and will only be called by it, so it won't be needed anywhere else Doesn't do anything with the class or its members - just a small "utility" function Where to put validate_something? Inside or outside the class?

    Read the article

  • What exactly is GRASP's Controller about?

    - by devoured elysium
    What is the idea behind Grasp's Controller pattern? My current interpretation is that sometimes you want to achieve something that needs to use a couple of classes but none of those classes could or has access to the information needed to do it, so you create a new class that does the job, having references to all the needed classes(this is, could be the information expert). Is this a correct view of what Grasp's Controller is about? Generally when googling or SO'ing controller, I just get results about MVC's (and whatnot) which are topics that I don't understand about, so I'd like answers that don't assume I know ASP.NET's MVC or something :( Thanks

    Read the article

  • A self-creator: What pattern is this? php

    - by user151841
    I have several classes that are basically interfaces to database rows. Since the class assumes that a row already exists ( __construct expects a field value ), there is a public static function that allows creation of the row and returns an instance of the class. Here's a pseudo-code example : class fruit { public $id; public function __construct( $id ) { $this->id = $id; $sql = "SELECT * FROM Fruits WHERE id = $id"; ... $this->arrFieldValues[$field] = $row[$value]; } public function __get( $var ) { return $this->arrFieldValues[$var]; } public function __set( $var, $val ) { $sql = "UPDATE fruits SET $var = $val WHERE id = $this->id"; } public static function create( $id ) { $sql = "INSERT INTO Fruits ( fruit_name ) VALUE ( '$fruit' )"; $id = mysql_insert_id(); $fruit = & new fruit($id); return $fruit; } } $obj1 = fruit::create( "apple" ); $obj2 = & new fruit( 12 ); What is this pattern called? Edit: I changed the example to one that has more database-interface functionality. For most of the time, this kind of class would be instantiated normally, through __construct(). But sometimes when you need to create a new row first, you would call create().

    Read the article

  • Should Service Depend on Many Repositories, or Break Them Up?

    - by Josh Pollard
    I'm using a repository pattern for my data access. So I basically have a repository per table/class. My UI currently uses service classes to actually get things done, and these service classes wrap, and therefore depend on repositories. In many cases my services are only dependent upon one or two repositories, so things aren't too crazy. Unfortunately, one of my forms in the UI expects the user to enter data that will span five different tables. For this form I made a single service class that depends upon five repositories. Then the methods within the service for saving and loading the data call the appropriate methods on all of the corresponding repositories. As you can imagine, the save and load methods in this service are really big. Also, unit testing this service is getting really difficult because I have to setup so many fake repositories. Would it have been a better choice to break this single service apart into a few smaller services? It would put more code at the UI layer, but would make the services smaller and more testable.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184  | Next Page >