Search Results

Search found 24391 results on 976 pages for 'static methods'.

Page 188/976 | < Previous Page | 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195  | Next Page >

  • More elegant way to avoid hard coding the format of a a CSV file?

    - by dsollen
    I know this is trivial issue, but I just feel this can be more elegant. So I need to write/read data files for my program, lets say they are CSV for now. I can implement the format as I see fit, but I may have need to change that format later. The simply thing to do is something like out.write(For.getValue()+","+bar.getMinValue()+","+fi.toString()); This is easy to write, but obviously is guilty of hard coding and the general 'magic number' issue. The format is hard-coded, requires parsing of the code to figure out the file format, and changing the format requires changing multiple methods. I could instead have my constants specifying the location that I want each variable to be saved in the CSV file to remove some of the 'magic numbers'; then save/load into the an array at the location specified by the constants: int FOO_LOCATION=0; int BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION=1; int FI_LOCATION=2 int NUM_ARGUMENTS=3; String[] outputArguments=new String[NUM_ARGUMENTS]; outputArguments[FOO_LOCATION] = foo.getValue(); outputArgumetns[BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION] = bar.getMinValue(); outptArguments[FI_LOCATOIN==fi.toString(); writeAsCSV(outputArguments); But this is...extremely verbose and still a bit ugly. It makes it easy to see the format of existing CSV and to swap the location of variables within the file easily. However, if I decide to add an extra value to the csv I need to not only add a new constant, but also modify the read and write methods to add the logic that actually saves/reads the argument from the array; I still have to hunt down every method using these variables and change them by hand! If I use Java enums I can clean this up slightly, but the real issue is still present. Short of some sort of functional programming (and java's inner classes are too ugly to be considered functional) I still have no obvious way of clearly expressing what variable is associated with each constant short of writing (and maintaining) it in the read/write methods. For instance I still need to write somewhere that the FOO_LOCATION specifies the location of foo.getValue(). It seems as if there should be a prettier, easier to maintain, manner for approaching this? Incidentally, I'm working in java at the moment, however, I am interested conceptually about the design approach regardless of language. Some library in java that does all the work for me is definitely welcome (though it may prove more hassle to get permission to add it to the codebase then to just write something by hand quickly), but what I'm really asking is more about how to write elegant code if you had to do this by hand.

    Read the article

  • Useful design patterns for working with FragmentManager on Android

    - by antman8969
    When working with fragments, I have been using a class composed of static methods that define actions on fragments. For any given project, I might have a class called FragmentActions, which contains methods similar to the following: public static void showDeviceFragment(FragmentManager man){ String tag = AllDevicesFragment.getFragmentTag(); AllDevicesFragment fragment = (AllDevicesFragment)man.findFragmentByTag(tag); if(fragment == null){ fragment = new AllDevicesFragment(); } FragmentTransaction t = man.beginTransaction(); t.add(R.id.main_frame, fragment, tag); t.commit(); } I'll usually have one method per application screen. I do something like this when I work with small local databases (usually SQLite) so I applied it to fragments, which seem to have a similar workflow; I'm not married to it though. How have you organized your applications to interface with the Fragments API, and what (if any) design patterns do you think apply do this?

    Read the article

  • How to store a list of Objects that might change in future?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    I have set of Objects of the same class which have different values of their attributes. and I need to find the best match from a function under given scenarios out of these objects. In future these objects might increase as well. Quite similar to the way we have Color class in awt. we have some static color objects in the class with diff rgb values. But in my case say, I need to chose the suitable color out of these static ones based on certain criteria. So should I keep them in an arrayList or enum or keep them as static vars as in case of Colors. because I will need to parse through all of them and decide upon the best match. so I need them in some sort of collection. But in future if I need to add another type I will have to modify the class and add another list.add(object) call for this one and then it will violate the open-close principle. How should I go about it ?

    Read the article

  • Collision Systems Implementation

    - by hrr4
    Just curious what might be a good way to implement a decent collision system. As a class inherited by a base Entity class? Currently I'm stuck and could just use a couple better ideas than my own. Any help is appreciated! Edit: Sorry, it's 2D Collisioning but honestly, I'm not looking for specific collision methods. I'm looking more about the lines of implementation. Just curious of some of the common methods of how to implement collision systems such as: Should the entire collision system be it's own class? What, if anything, should be inheritable? These are some of my questions. Sorry for the confusion.

    Read the article

  • Useful design patterns for working with FragmentManger on Android

    - by antman8969
    When working with fragments, I have been using a class composed of static methods that define actions on fragments. For any given project, I might have a class called FragmentActions, which contains methods similar to the following: public static void showDeviceFragment(FragmentManager man){ String tag = AllDevicesFragment.getFragmentTag(); AllDevicesFragment fragment = (AllDevicesFragment)man.findFragmentByTag(tag); if(fragment == null){ fragment = new AllDevicesFragment(); } FragmentTransaction t = man.beginTransaction(); t.add(R.id.main_frame, fragment, tag); t.commit(); } I'll usually have one method per application screen. I do something like this when I work with small local databases (usually SQLite) so I applied it to fragments, which seem to have a similar workflow; I'm not married to it though. How have you organized your applications to interface with the Fragments API, and what (if any) design patterns do you think apply do this?

    Read the article

  • Type Conversion in JPA 2.1

    - by delabassee
    The Java Persistence 2.1 specification (JSR 338) adds support for various new features such as schema generation, stored procedure invocation, use of entity graphs in queries and find operations, unsynchronized persistence contexts, injection into entity listener classes, etc. JPA 2.1 also add support for Type Conversion methods, sometime called Type Converter. This new facility let developers specify methods to convert between the entity attribute representation and the database representation for attributes of basic types. For additional details on Type Conversion, you can check the JSR 338 Specification and its corresponding JPA 2.1 Javadocs. In addition, you can also check those 2 articles. The first article ('How to implement a Type Converter') gives a short overview on Type Conversion while the second article ('How to use a JPA Type Converter to encrypt your data') implements a simple use-case (encrypting data) to illustrate Type Conversion. Mission critical applications would probably rely on transparent database encryption facilities provided by the database but that's not the point here, this use-case is easy enough to illustrate JPA 2.1 Type Conversion.

    Read the article

  • having 2 ip's on a debian 7 box

    - by David
    I just installed Debian Wheezy on my homeserver. I want to assign 2 ip's to it on the same network interface, 1 static ip (eth0) and 1 dynamic ip (eth0:1). I know it doesn't make much sense but I need it to test something. I edited my /etc/network/interfaces to be like this: auto lo eth0 eth0:1 iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.178.240 network 192.168.178.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.178.255 gateway 192.168.178.1 iface eth0:1 inet dhcp when I bring up eth0:1 (ifup eth0:1) I get the following error (eth0 works fine) Bind socket to interface: No such device Failed to bring up eth0:1. is it even possible to have a dynamic and static ip on the same network adapter?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to have many Abstract classes in your application?

    - by JoseK
    We initially wanted to implement a Strategy pattern with varying implementations of the methods in a commmon interface. These will get picked up at runtime based on user inputs. As it's turned out, we're having Abstract classes implementing 3 - 5 common methods and only one method left for a varying implementation i.e. the Strategy. Update: By many abstract classes I mean there are 6 different high level functionalities i.e. 6 packages , and each has it's Interface + AbstractImpl + (series of Actual Impl). Is this a bad design in any way? Any negative views in terms of later extensibility - I'm preparing for a code/design review with seniors.

    Read the article

  • ubuntu server in a vm, can't connect to internet

    - by jessh
    I'm attemtping to host my own development web server in a virtual box guest, Ubuntu Server. I would like this virtual machine to be accessible from not only my home network, but outside the LAN as well. As such, I've set up a static IP (so I can later forward ports to this static IP.) My virtual box settings have this vm only using one adapter -- in bridged mode. Here's what my /etc/network/interfaces looks like: iface eth0 inet static address 10.0.1.203 /*this is outside the DHCP range*/ netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 10.0.1.1 network 10.0.1.0 broadcast 10.0.1.255 dns-nameservers: 8.8.8.8 8.8.8.4 Here's what the output of ifconfig looks like: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2241201/locker/ubuntu.png My Host is a mac mini, running OS X 10.7. From within the guest, if I ping google.com: $ ping google.com # outputs 'ping: unknown host google.com' immediately Why am I unable to access the web?

    Read the article

  • Problems bringing up a second virtual network interface

    - by tubaguy50035
    I'm having issues adding a second IP address to one interface. Below is my /etc/networking/interfaces # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback #eth0 is our main IP address auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 198.58.103.* netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 198.58.103.1 #eth0:0 is our private address auto eth0:0 iface eth0:0 inet static address 192.168.129.134 netmask 255.255.128.0 #eth0:1 is for www.site.com auto eth0:1 iface eth0:1 inet static address 198.58.104.* netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 198.58.104.1 When I run /etc/init.d/networking restart, I get a fail error about bringing up eth0:1: RTNETLINK answers: File exists Failed to bring up eth0:1. Any reason this would be? I didn't have any problems with I first set up eth0 and eth0:0.

    Read the article

  • How to configure simple game AI setting with jtable

    - by Asgard
    I'm developing an application that has methods of this kind: attackIfIsFar(); protectIfIsNear(); helpAfterDeadOf(); helpBeforeAttackOf(); etc. The initialization of my application for n players is something like player1.attackIfIsFar(player2); player2.protectIfIsNear(player4); player3.helpAfterDeadOf(player1); player4.helpBeforeAttackOf(player3); etc. I don't know how to configure a jtable that that can allow me to set the equivalent of this code-block In others words I need simply a way to create a jtable with 3 column and n row, were I can set in the column 1 and 3, the player, and in the central column one of the available methods that each player on the column 1 must invoke on each player of column 3

    Read the article

  • Add & Show data in Java ArrayList [closed]

    - by Kaidul Islam Sazal
    I have a class inside a main class : static class Graph{ static int u, v, cost; } I have instantiated an arraylist of the class: static List<Graph> g = new ArrayList<Graph>(); And I insert several values into the arraylist like this: Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in); for (int i = 0; i < edge_no; i++) { Graph e = new Graph(); e.u = input.nextInt(); e.v = input.nextInt(); e.cost = input.nextInt(); g.add(e); } And I print it like this: for (int i = 0; i < edge_no; i++) { System.out.println(g.get(i).u + " " + g.get(i).v + " " + g.get(i).cost); } But the problem is that, when I print it, only the last value is shown all the time.It seems that, all the previous values are over-written with it. Input : 1 2 5 1 3 8 2 3 9 Output: 2 3 9 2 3 9 2 3 9 Expected output is just like the input.But I can't fix the problem as I am novice in java.

    Read the article

  • May I give a single class multiple responsibilities if only one will ever be reusable?

    - by lnluis
    To the extent that I understand the Single Responsibility Principle, a SINGLE class must only have one responsibility. We use this so that we can reuse other functionalities in other classes and not affect the whole class. My question is: what if the entity has only one purpose that really interacts with the system, and that purpose won't change? Do you have to separate the implementations of your methods into another class and just instantiate those from your entity class? Or to put it another way... Is it ok to break the SRP if you know those functions will not be reusable in the future? Or is it better to assume that we do not know if the functionalities of these methods will be reusable or not, and so just abstract them to other classes?

    Read the article

  • Lost connectivity after configuring multiple network adapters on separate networks

    - by Dave Long
    I am trying to setup an Ubuntu hosting server, currently just for development, and the server has two NICs, each sitting on a different network. eth0 is on 192.168.200.* and eth1 is on 192.168.101.* and each one has a static IP. eth0 is the public facing NIC card and eth1 is strictly for internal access to the server. I initially only setup eth0 and added the eth1 card when I needed it. eth0 was working find until I added eth1, now, can't get any connectivity on eth0 unless I pull eth1 out of the box. The configuration on each system is as follows: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.200.94 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.200.0 broadcast 192.168.200.255 gateway 192.168.200.253 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.101.64 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.101.0 broadcast 192.168.101.255 gateway 192.168.101.254 Again eth0 worked fine until I added eth1. I have seen this happen with Windows servers if you have a Default Gateway setup for both NICs, but I am not sure if this works the same on Ubuntu. My resolv.conf file looks like so: nameserver 192.168.101.59 nameserver 192.168.101.58 domain domain.local search domain.local Per request here is the Routing table 192.168.101.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.200.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 default 192.168.101.254 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth1 default 192.168.200.253 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0

    Read the article

  • Try/Catch or test parameters

    - by Ondra Morský
    I was recently on a job interview and I was given a task to write simple method in C# to calculate when the trains meet. The code was simple mathematical equation. What I did was that I checked all the parameters on the beginning of the method to make sure, that the code will not fail. My question is: Is it better to check the parameters, or use try/catch? Here are my thoughts: Try/catch is shorter Try/catch will work always even if you forget about some condition Catch is slow in .NET Testing parameters is probably cleaner code (Exceptions should be exceptional) Testing parameters gives you more control over return values I would prefer testing parameters in methods longer than +/- 10 lines, but what do you think about using try/catch in simple methods just like this – i.e. return (a*b)/(c+d); There are many similar questions on stackexchnage, but I am interested in this particular scenario.

    Read the article

  • If you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed?

    - by jokoon
    Per the Linux kernel coding style document: The answer to that is that if you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. What can I deduct from this quote? On top of the fact that too long methods are hard to maintain, are they hard or impossible to optimize for the compiler? I don't really understand if this quote encourages better coding practice or is really a mathematical / algorithmic sort of truth. I also read in some C++ optimizing guide that dividing up a program into more function improves its design is a common thing taught at school, but it should be not done too much, since it can turn into a lot of JMP calls (even if the compiler can inline some methods by itself).

    Read the article

  • Does OO, TDD, and Refactoring to Smaller Functions affect Speed of Code?

    - by Dennis
    In Computer Science field, I have noticed a notable shift in thinking when it comes to programming. The advice as it stands now is write smaller, more testable code refactor existing code into smaller and smaller chunks of code until most of your methods/functions are just a few lines long write functions that only do one thing (which makes them smaller again) This is a change compared to the "old" or "bad" code practices where you have methods spanning 2500 lines, and big classes doing everything. My question is this: when it call comes down to machine code, to 1s and 0s, to assembly instructions, should I be at all concerned that my class-separated code with variety of small-to-tiny functions generates too much extra overhead? While I am not exactly familiar with how OO code and function calls are handled in ASM in the end, I do have some idea. I assume that each extra function call, object call, or include call (in some languages), generate an extra set of instructions, thereby increasing code's volume and adding various overhead, without adding actual "useful" code. I also imagine that good optimizations can be done to ASM before it is actually ran on the hardware, but that optimization can only do so much too. Hence, my question -- how much overhead (in space and speed) does well-separated code (split up across hundreds of files, classes, and methods) actually introduce compared to having "one big method that contains everything", due to this overhead? UPDATE for clarity: I am assuming that adding more and more functions and more and more objects and classes in a code will result in more and more parameter passing between smaller code pieces. It was said somewhere (quote TBD) that up to 70% of all code is made up of ASM's MOV instruction - loading CPU registers with proper variables, not the actual computation being done. In my case, you load up CPU's time with PUSH/POP instructions to provide linkage and parameter passing between various pieces of code. The smaller you make your pieces of code, the more overhead "linkage" is required. I am concerned that this linkage adds to software bloat and slow-down and I am wondering if I should be concerned about this, and how much, if any at all, because current and future generations of programmers who are building software for the next century, will have to live with and consume software built using these practices. UPDATE: Multiple files I am writing new code now that is slowly replacing old code. In particular I've noted that one of the old classes was a ~3000 line file (as mentioned earlier). Now it is becoming a set of 15-20 files located across various directories, including test files and not including PHP framework I am using to bind some things together. More files are coming as well. When it comes to disk I/O, loading multiple files is slower than loading one large file. Of course not all files are loaded, they are loaded as needed, and disk caching and memory caching options exist, and yet still I believe that loading multiple files takes more processing than loading a single file into memory. I am adding that to my concern.

    Read the article

  • Designing object oriented programming

    - by Pota Onasys
    Basically, I want to make api calls using an SDK I am writing. I have the following classes: Car CarData (stores input values needed to create a car like model, make, etc) Basically to create a car I do the following: [Car carWithData: cardata onSuccess: successHandler onError: errorHandler] that basically is a factory method that creates instance of Car after making an API call request and populating the new Car class with the response and passes that instance to the successHandler. So "Car" has the above static method to create that car, but also has non-static methods to edit, delete cars (which would make edit, delete API calls to the server) So when the Car create static method passes a new car to the successHandler by doing the following: successHandler([[Car alloc] initWithDictionary: dictionary) The success handler can go ahead and use that new car to do the following: [car update: cardata] [car delete] considering the new car object now has an ID for each car that it can pass to the update and delete API calls. My questions: Do I need a cardata object to store user inputs or can I store them in the car object that would also later store the response from all of the api calls? How can I improve this model? With regards to CarData, note that there might be different inputs for the different API calls. So create function might need to know model, make, etc, but find function might need to know the number of items to find, the limit, the start id, etc.

    Read the article

  • Imperative vs. component based programming [closed]

    - by AlexW
    I've been thinking about how programming and more specifically the teaching of programming is advocated amongst the community (online). Often I've heard that Ruby and RoR is an ideal platform for learning to program. I completely disagree... RoR and Ruby are based on the application of the component based paradigm, which means they are ideal for rapid application development. This is much like the MVC model in PHP and ASP.NET But, learning a proper imperative language like Java or C/C++ (or even Perl and PHP) is the only way for a new programmer to explore logic itself, and not get too bogged down in architectural concerns like the need for separation of concerns, and the preference for components. Maybe it's a personal preference thing. I rather think that the most interesting aspects to programming are the procedural bits of code I write that actually do stuff rather than the project planning, and modelling that comes about from fully object oriented engineering or simply using the MVC model. I know this may sound confused to some of you. I feel strongly though that the best way for programming to be taught is through imperative and procedural methods. Architectural (component) methods come later, if at all. After all, none of the amazing algorithms that exist were based on OOP practice! It's all procedural code when it comes to the 'magic'. OOP is useful in creating products and utilities. Algorithms are what makes things happen, and move data around, and so imperative (and/or procedural) code are what matters most. When I see programmers recommending Ruby on Rails to newbie developers, I think it's just so wrong. Just because you write less code with Ruby does not make it easier to do! It's the opposite... you have to know loads more to appreciate its succinct nature. New coders who really want to understand the nuts and bolts of coding need to go away and figure out writing methods/functions (i.e. imperative programming) and working in procedural style, in order to grasp the fundamentals, first, before looking into architectural ways of working. So, my question is: should Ruby ever be recommended as a first language? I think no (obviously)... what arguments are there for it?

    Read the article

  • Should I implement an interface directly or have the superclass do it?

    - by c_maker
    Is there a difference between public class A extends AbstractB implements C {...} versus... public class A extends AbstractB {...} AbstractB implements C {...} I understand that in both cases, class A will end up conforming to the interface. In the second case, AbstractB can provide implementation for interface methods in C. Is that the only difference? If I do NOT want to provide an implementation for any of the interface methods in AbstractB, which style should I be using? Does using one or the other have some hidden 'documentation' purpose?

    Read the article

  • "more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed" How should I understand this quote ?

    - by jokoon
    The answer to that is that if you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. What can I deduct from this quote ? On top of the fact that too long methods are hard to maintain, are they hard or impossible to optimize for the compiler ? I don't really understand if this quote encourages better coding practice or is really a mathematical/algorithmic sort of truth... I also read in some C++ optimizing guide that dividing up a program into more function improves its design is a common thing taught at school, but it should be not done too much, since it can turn into a lot of JMP calls (even if the compiler can inline some methods by itself).

    Read the article

  • Best Practice to return responses from service

    - by A9S6
    I am writing a SOAP based ASP.NET Web Service having a number of methods to deal with Client objects. e.g: int AddClient(Client c) = returns Client ID when successful List GetClients() Client GetClientInfo(int clientId) In the above methods, the return value/object for each method corresponds to the "all good" scenario i.e. A client Id will be returned if AddClient was successful or a List< of Client objects will be returned by GetClients. But what if an error occurs, how do I convey the error message to the caller? I was thinking of having a Response class: Response { StatusCode, StatusMessage, Details } where Details will hold the actual response but in that case the caller will have to cast the response every time. What are your views on the above? Is there a better solution? ---------- UPDATED ----------- Is there something new in WCF for the above? What difference will it make If I change the ASP.NET Web Service to a WCF Service?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195  | Next Page >