Search Results

Search found 162 results on 7 pages for 'hierarchies'.

Page 2/7 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  | Next Page >

  • Which are the best ways to organize view hierarchies in GUI interfaces?

    - by none
    I'm currently trying to figure out the best techniques for organizing GUI view hierarchies, that is dividing a window into several panels which are in turn divided into other components. I've given a look to the Composite Design Pattern, but I don't know if I can find better alternatives, so I'd appreciate to know if using the Composite is a good idea, or it would be better looking for some other techniques. I'm currently developing in Java Swing, but I don't think that the framework or the language can have a great impact on this. Any help will be appreciated. ---------EDIT------------ I was currently developing a frame containing three labels, one button and a text field. At the button pressed, the content inside the text field would be searched, and the results written inside the three labels. One of my typical structure would be the following: MainWindow | Main panel | Panel with text field and labels. | Panel with search button Now, as the title explains, I was looking for a suitable way of organizing both the MainPanel and the other two panels. But here came problems, since I'm not sure whether organizing them like attributes or storing inside some data structure (i.e. LinkedList or something like this). Anyway, I don't really think that both my solution are really good, so I'm wondering if there are really better approaches for facing this kind of problems. Hope it helps

    Read the article

  • Hierachies....from the Top Down

    - by Joe G
    I've been struggling with how to write on the topic of the importance of hierarchy design.  It's not so much that hierarchies haven't always been important, it's more of that with Fusion, the timing of when the hierarchies are designed should take a higher priority.    I will attempt to explain..... When I was implementing applications, back in the day, we had the list of detailed account values to enter with the obvious parent accounts. Then, after the setup was complete and things were functioning, the reporting phase started.  Users explained the elements that they want on the reports, what totals should be included, and how things should be compared.  Frequently, there was at least one calculation that became a nightmare either because it was based on very specific things that didn't relate to anything else or because it was "hardcoded" so that when something changed, someone need to "fix" the report. With Fusion, the process changes slightly.  You still want to enter all of the detailed accounts, but before you start adding parent values, you should investigate the reporting requirements from the top-down.  It's better to build hierarchies based on the reporting requirements than it is to build reports based on random hierarchies. Build reports based on hierarchies that resemble the reports themselves, and maintain the hierarchies without rework of the reports. For example, if you look at an income statement, you may have line items for Material Costs, Employee Costs, Travel & Entertainment, and Total Operating Expenses.  In your hierarchy, you have detail values that roll up to Material Costs, Employee Costs, and Travel & Entertainment which roll up to Total Operating Expenses. Balances are stored automatically in the cube for each of these.  When you define the report, you pick each of these members - no calculations required.  If a new detail value is added, you simply add it to the hierarchy, and there is no need to modify the report. I realize that there are always exceptions that require special handling, but I am confident that you will end up with much fewer exceptions if you make reporting a priority and design your hierarchies from the top-down.

    Read the article

  • How can I build a list of world geo locations and their relative geographical hierarchies?

    - by Nathan Ridley
    I want to build a database of geographical locations and would like to be able to identify locations that fall inside other locations. For example, The Empire State Building is going to have one geo-coordinate, but my database would be able to tell me that it falls inside Manhattan, which falls inside New York City, which is in the state of New York and so forth. I've been looking at OpenStreetMap which seems to have a pretty decent database but as best I can tell, I would need to create a set of polygon structures representing each region and then detect if a coordinate falls inside a given region's polygon. Is there a better way to do this, or is there a data source where all of this has already been calculated?

    Read the article

  • PowerPivot, Parent/Child and Unary Operators

    - by AlbertoFerrari
    Following my last post about parent/child hierarchies in PowerPivot, I worked a bit more to implement a very useful feature of Parent/Child hierarchies in SSAS which is obviously missing in PowerPivot, i.e. unary operators. A unary operator is simply the aggregation function that needs to be used to aggregate values of children over their parent. Unary operators are very useful in accountings where you might have incomes and expenses in the same hierarchy and, at the total level, you want to subtract...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Efficiently representing a dynamic transform hierarchy

    - by Mattia
    I'm looking for a way to represent a dynamic transform hierarchy (i.e. one where nodes can be inserted and removed arbitrarily) that's a bit more efficient than using a standard tree of pointers . I saw the answers to this question ( Efficient structure for representing a transform hierarchy. ), but as far as I can determine the tree-as-array approach only works for static hierarchies or dynamic ones where nodes have a fixed number of children (both deal-breakers for me). I'm probably wrong about that but could anyone point out how? If I'm not wrong are there other alternatives that work for dynamic hierarchies?

    Read the article

  • Build an Organization Chart In Visio 2010

    - by Mysticgeek
    With trying to manage a business these days, it’s very important to have an Organization Chart to keep everything manageable. Here we’ll show you how to build one in Visio 2010. This Guest Article was written by our friends over at Office 2010 Club. Need for Organization Charts The need of creating Organization Charts are becoming indispensable these days, as companies start focusing on extensive hiring for far reach availability, increase in productivity and targeting diverse markets. Considering this rigorous change, creating an organization chart can help stakeholders in comprehending the ever growing organization structure & hierarchy with an ease. It shows the basic structure of organization along with defining the relationships between employees working in different departments. Opportunely, Microsoft Visio 2010 offers an easy way to create Organization chart. As before now, orthodox ways of listing organization hierarchy have been used for defining the structure of departments along with communication possible including; horizontal and vertical communications. To transform these lists which defines organizational structure, into a detailed chart, Visio 2010 includes an add-in for importing Excel spreadsheet, which comes in handy for pulling out data from spreadsheet to create an organization chart. Importantly, you don’t need to indulge yourself in maze of defining organizational hierarchies and chalking-out structure, as you just need to specify the column & row headers, along with data you need to import and it will automatically create out chart defining; organizational hierarchies with specified credentials of each employee, categorized in their corresponding departments. Creating Organization Charts in Visio 2010 To start off with, we have created an Excel spreadsheet having fields, Name, Supervisor, Designation, Department and Phone. The Name field contains name of all the employees working in different departments, whereas Supervisor field contains name of supervisors or team leads. This field is vital for creating Organization Chart, as it defines the basic structure & hierarchy in chart. Now launch Visio 2010, head over to View tab, under Add-Ons menu, from Business options, click Organization Chart Wizard. This will start Organization Chart Wizard, in the first step, enable Information that’s already stored in a file or database option, and click Next. As we are importing Excel sheet, select the second option for importing Excel spreadsheet. Specify the Excel file path and click Next to continue. In this step, you need to specify the fields which actually defines the structure of an organization. In our case, these are Name & Supervisor fields. After specifying fields, click Next to Proceed further. As organization chart is primarily for showing the hierarchy of departments/employees working in organization along with how they are linked together, and who supervises whom. Considering this, in this step we will leave out Supervisor field, because it’s inclusion wouldn’t be necessary as Visio automatically chalks-out the basic structure defined in Excel sheet. Add the rest of the fields under Displayed fields category, and click Next. Now choose the fields which you want to include in Organization Chart’s shapes and click Next. This step is about breaking the chart into multiple pages, if you are dealing with 100+ employees, you may want to specify numbers of pages on which Organization Chart will be displayed. But in our case, we are dealing with much less amount of data, so we will enable I want the wizard to automatically break my organization chart across pages option. Specify the name you need to show on the top of the page. If you are having less than 20 hierarchies, enter the name of the highest ranked employee in organization and click Finish to end the wizard. It will instantly create an Organization chart out of specified Excel spreadsheet. Highest ranked employee will be shown on top of the organization chart, supervising various employees from different departments. As shown below, his immediate subordinates further manages other employees and so on. For advance customizations, head over to Org Chart tab, here you will find different groups for setting up the Org Chart’s hierarchy and manage other employees’ positions. Under Arrange group, shapes’ arrangements can be changed and it provides easy navigation through the chart. You can also change the type of the position and hide subordinates of selected employee. From Picture group, you can insert a picture of the employees, departments, etc. From synchronization group, you have the option of creating a synced copy and expanding subordinates of selected employee. Under Organization Data group, you can change whole layout of Organization chart from Display Options including; shape display, show divider, enable/disable imported fields, change block position, and fill colors, etc. If at any point of time, you need to insert new position or announce vacancy, Organization Chart stencil is always available on the left sidebar. Drag the desired Organization Chart shape into main diagram page, to maintain the structure integrity, i.e, for inserting subordinates for a specific employee, drag the position shape over the existing employee shape box. For instance, We have added a consultant in organization, who is directly under CEO, for maintaining this, we have dragged the Consultant box and just dropped it over the CEO box to make the immediate subordinate position. Adding details to new position is a cinch, just right-click new position box and click Properties. This will open up Shape Data dialog, start filling in all the relevant information and click OK. Here you can see the newly created position is easily populated with all the specified information. Now expanding an Organization Chart doesn’t require maintenance of long lists any more. Under Design tab, you can also try out different designs & layouts over organization chart to make it look more flamboyant and professional.  Conclusion An Organization Chart is a great way of showing detailed organizational hierarchies; with defined credentials of employees, departments structure, new vacancies, newly hired employees, recently added departments, and importantly shows most convenient way of interaction between different departments & employees, etc. Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Geek Reviews: Using Dia as a Free Replacement for Microsoft VisioMysticgeek Blog: Create Appealing Charts In Excel 2007Create Charts in Excel 2007 the Easy Way with Chart AdvisorCreate a Hyperlink in a Word 2007 Flow Chart and Hide Annoying ScreenTipsCreate A Flow Chart In Word 2007 TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips HippoRemote Pro 2.2 Xobni Plus for Outlook All My Movies 5.9 CloudBerry Online Backup 1.5 for Windows Home Server Know if Someone Accessed Your Facebook Account Shop for Music with Windows Media Player 12 Access Free Documentaries at BBC Documentaries Rent Cameras In Bulk At CameraRenter Download Songs From MySpace Steve Jobs’ iPhone 4 Keynote Video

    Read the article

  • Master Data Management for Location Data - Oracle Site Hub

    - by david.butler(at)oracle.com
    Most MDM discussions cover key domains such as customer, supplier, product, service, and reference data. It is usually understood that these domains have complex structures and hundreds if not thousands of attributes that need governing. Location, on the other hand, strikes most people as address data. How hard can that be? But for many industries, locations are complex, and site information is critical to efficient operations and relevant analytics. Retail stores and malls, bank branches, construction sites come to mind. But one of the best industries for illustrating the power of a site mastering application is Oil & Gas.   Oracle's Master Data Management solution for location data is the Oracle Site Hub. It is a location mastering solution that enables organizations to centralize site and location specific information from heterogeneous systems, creating a single view of site information that can be leveraged across all functional departments and analytical systems.   Let's take a look at the location entities the Oracle Site Hub can manage for the Oil & Gas industry: organizations, property, land, buildings, roads, oilfield, service center, inventory site, real estate, facilities, refineries, storage tanks, vendor locations, businesses, assets; project site, area, well, basin, pipelines, critical infrastructure, offshore platform, compressor station, gas station, etc. Any site can be classified into multiple hierarchies, like organizational hierarchy, operational hierarchy, geographic hierarchy, divisional hierarchies and so on. Any site can also be associated to multiple clusters, i.e. collections of sites, and these can be used as a foundation for driving reporting, analysis, organize daily work, etc. Hierarchies can also be used to model entities which are structured or non-structured collections of nodes, like for example routes, pipelines and more. The User Defined Attribute Framework provides the needed infrastructure to add single row attributes groups like well base attributes (well IDs, well type, well structure and key characterizing measures, and more) and well geometry, and multi row attribute groups like well applications, permits, production data, activities, operations, logs, treatments, tests, drills, treatments, and KPIs. Site Hub can also model areas, lands, fields, basins, pools, platforms, eco-zones, and stratigraphic layers as specific sites, tracking their base attributes, aliases, descriptions, subcomponents and more. Midstream entities (pipelines, logistic sites, pump stations) and downstream entities (cylinders, tanks, inventories, meters, partner's sites, routes, facilities, gas stations, and competitor sites) can also be easily modeled, together with their specific attributes and relationships. Site Hub can store any type of unstructured data associated to a site. This could be stored directly or on an external content management solution, like Oracle Universal Content Management. Considering a well, for example, Site Hub can store any relevant associated multimedia file such as: CAD drawings of the well profile, structure and/or parts, engineering documents, contracts, applications, permits, logs, pictures, photos, videos and more. For any site entity, Site Hub can associate all the related assets and equipments at the site, as well as all relationships between sites, between a site and multiple parties, and between a site and any purchasable or sellable item, over time. Items can be equipment, instruments, facilities, services, products, production entities, production facilities (pipelines, batteries, compressor stations, gas plants, meters, separators, etc.), support facilities (rigs, roads, transmission or radio towers, airstrips, etc.), supplier products and services, catalogs, and more. Items can just be associated to sites using standard Site Hub features, or they can be fully mastered by implementing Oracle Product Hub. Site locations (addresses or geographical coordinates) are also managed with out-of-the-box address geo-coding capabilities coupled with Google Maps integration to deliver powerful mapping capabilities and spatial data analysis. Locations can be shared between different sites. Centered on the site location, any site can also have associated areas. Site Hub can master any site location specific information, like for example cadastral, ownership, jurisdictional, geological, seismic and more, and any site-centric area specific information, like for example economical, political, risk, weather, logistic, traffic information and more. Now if anyone ever asks you why locations need MDM, think about how all these Oil & Gas entities and attributes would translate into your business locations. To learn more about Oracle's full MDM solution for the digital oil field, here is a link to Roberto Negro's outstanding whitepaper: Oracle Site Master Data Management for mastering wells and other PPDM entities in a digital oilfield context  

    Read the article

  • Oracle's Primavera P6 Analytics Now Available!

    - by mark.kromer
    Oracle's Primavera product team has announced this week that general availability of our first Oracle BI (OBI) based analytical product with pre-built business intelligence dashboards, reports and KPIs built in. P6 Analytics uses OBI's drill-down capabilities, summarizations, hierarchies and other BI features to provide knowledge to your business users to make the best decisions on portfolios, projects, schedules & resources with deep insights. Without needing to launch into the P6 tool, your executives, PMO, project sponsors, etc. can view up to date project performance information as well as historic trends of project performance. Using web-based portal technology, P6 Analytics makes it easy to manage by exception and then drill down to quickly identify root cause analysis of problem projects. At the same time, a brand new version of the P6 Reporting Database R2 was just announded and is also now available. This updated reporting database provides you with 4 star schemas with spread data and includes P6 activity, project and resource codes. You can use the data warehouse and ETL functions of the P6 Reporting Database R2 with your own reporting tools or build dashboards that utilize the hierarchies & drill down to the day-level on scheduled activities using Busines Objects, Cognos, Microsoft, etc. Both of these products can be downloaded from E-Delivery under the Primavera applications section in the P6 EPPM v7.0 media pack. I put some examples below of the resource utilization, earned value, landing page and portfolio analysis dashboards that come out of the box with P6 Analytics to give you these deep insights into your projects & portfolios on day 1 of using the tool. Please send an email to Karl or me if you have any questions or would like more information. Oracle Technology Network and the Oracle.com marketing sites are currently being refreshed with further details of these exciting new releases of the Primavera BI and data warehouse products. Lastly, scroll below for some screenshots of the new P6 Analytics R1 product using OBIEE! Thanks, Mark Kromer

    Read the article

  • Meet SQLBI at PASS Summit 2012 #sqlpass

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    Next week I and Alberto Ferrari will be in Seattle at PASS Summit 2012. You can meet us at our sessions, at a book signing and hopefully watching some other session during the conference. Here are our appointments: Thursday, November 08, 2012, 10:15 AM - 11:45 AM – Alberto Ferrari – Room 606-607 Querying and Optimizing DAX (BIA-321-S) Do you want to learn how to write DAX queries and how to optimize them? Don’t miss this session! Thursday, November 08, 2012, 12:00 PM - 12:30 PM – Bookstore Book signing event at the Bookstore corner with Alberto Ferrari, Marco Russo and Chris Webb Visit the bookstore and sign your copy of our Microsoft SQL Server 2012 Analysis Services: The BISM Tabular Model book. Thursday, November 08, 2012, 1:30 PM - 2:45 PM – Marco Russo – Room 611 Near Real-Time Analytics with xVelocity (without DirectQuery) (BIA-312) What’s the latency you can tolerate for your data? Discover what is the limit in Tabular without using DirectQuery and learn how to optimize your data model and your queries for a near real-time analytical system. Not a trivial task, but more affordable than you might think. Friday, November 09, 2012, 9:45 AM - 11:00 AM Parent-Child Hierarchies in Tabular (BIA-301) Multidimensional has a more advanced support for hierarchies than Tabular, but in reality you can do almost the same things by using data modeling, DAX functions and BIDS Helper!  Friday, November 09, 2012, 1:00 PM - 2:15 PM – Marco Russo – Room 612 Inside DAX Query Plans (BIA-403) Discover the query plan for your DAX query and learn how to read it and how to optimize a DAX query by using these information. If you meet us at the conference, stop us and say hello: it’s always nice to know our readers!

    Read the article

  • Why do you hate Java? Is it the language or the framework? [closed]

    - by zneak
    According to you all, Java is the third most-hated language here. The two other most hated languages are PHP and VBScript. (It's quite funny how they stand together on the podium.) I'd like to make it known that the question mostly addresses people who don't like Java. I assume here a number of subjective opinions as facts because they're usually considered true among people who don't like Java, and I don't want to be convinced otherwise here. If you're a Java enthusiast, you might find this question frustrating. It's never been made clear if people hate Java itself, or if they hate it because of the framework, or if it's a mixture of the two. On a side you have the language, where you have: the "everything should be an object" philosophy, even in instances where it should obviously be something else (event handlers I'm pointing you); checked exceptions; the idea that all logic should be presented as methods and properties is a big no-no; the fact that "closures" created by anonymous types only include final variables and arguments, but will allow write access to any member of the parent class; a few more. On the other side, you have the JDK, with... its load of inconsistencies and overengineering; monolithic class hierarchies; meaningless base exceptions like IOException (though other frameworks have similar exception hierarchies); sluggish responsiveness even with Swing; a few more. My question is, do you think that, if either one (Java or the JDK) was taken alone, and the other was dropped in favor of something else, the new combination would be better? For instance, if you could use the C# syntax with the JDK (adapting get*/set* methods into properties, and interfaces with only one method into delegates), or the Java syntax with the .NET Framework (doing the inverse transformations), would things get better in your opinion?

    Read the article

  • Attribute Overwriting in MDX

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    Jeffrey Wang wrote a great blog post about attribute overwriting in MDX that is very clear and full of helpful pictures to show what happens when you write an MDX statement that writes into your multidimensional space. This is very common in an MDX Script and if you tried to customize the DateTool solution you probably experienced how hard this concept can be. The point is not that MDX is hard, is that a model based on multiple hierarchies in a dimension (and each attribute is a hierarchy by default!)...(read more)

    Read the article

  • What is a good strategy for binding view objects to model objects in C++?

    - by B.J.
    Imagine I have a rich data model that is represented by a hierarchy of objects. I also have a view hierarchy with views that can extract required data from model objects and display the data (and allow the user to manipulate the data). Actually, there could be multiple view hierarchies that can represent and manipulate the model (e.g. an overview-detail view and a direct manipulation view). My current approach for this is for the controller layer to store a reference to the underlying model object in the View object. The view object can then get the current data from the model for display, and can send the model object messages to update the data. View objects are effectively observers of the model objects and the model objects broadcast notifications when properties change. This approach allows all the views to update simultaneously when any view changes the model. Implemented carefully, this all works. However, it does require a lot of work to ensure that no view or model objects hold any stale references to model objects. The user can delete model objects or sub-hierarchies of the model at any time. Ensuring that all the view objects that hold references to the model objects that have been deleted is time-consuming and difficult. It feels like the approach I have been taking is not especially clean; while I don't want to have to have explicit code in the controller layer for mediating the communication between the views and the model, it seems like there must be a better (implicit) approach for establishing bindings between the view and the model and between related model objects. In particular, I am looking for an approach (in C++) that understands two key points: There is a many to one relationship between view and model objects If the underlying model object is destroyed, all the dependent view objects must be cleaned up so that no stale references exist While shared_ptr and weak_ptr can be used to manage the lifetimes of the underlying model objects and allows for weak references from the view to the model, they don't provide for notification of the destruction of the underlying object (they do in the sense that the use of a stale weak_ptr allows for notification), but I need an approach that notifies the dependent objects that their weak reference is going away. Can anyone suggest a good strategy to manage this?

    Read the article

  • New Samples on MSDN Code Gallery

    - by mattande
    (This post was contributed by John Burrows, Lead Program Manager for the MDS Team) A couple of new samples have been posted to the MSDN Code Gallery; two sample models that illustrate recursive and explicit cap hierarchies and a Visual Studio solution that contains an example of calling the Model Deployment API via code. Sample Models Employees The Employee sample model contains the employees of a fictitious Winery “Coho Winery” that has a legal structure in the form of three subsidiaries and an...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Is OOP hard because it is not natural?

    - by zvrba
    One can often hear that OOP naturally corresponds to the way people think about the world. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: We (or at least I) conceptualize the world in terms of relationships between things we encounter, but the focus of OOP is designing individual classes and their hierarchies. Note that, in everyday life, relationships and actions exist mostly between objects that would have been instances of unrelated classes in OOP. Examples of such relationships are: "my screen is on top of the table"; "I (a human being) am sitting on a chair"; "a car is on the road"; "I am typing on the keyboard"; "the coffee machine boils water", "the text is shown in the terminal window." We think in terms of bivalent (sometimes trivalent, as, for example in, "I gave you flowers") verbs where the verb is the action (relation) that operates on two objects to produce some result/action. The focus is on action, and the two (or three) [grammatical] objects have equal importance. Contrast that with OOP where you first have to find one object (noun) and tell it to perform some action on another object. The way of thinking is shifted from actions/verbs operating on nouns to nouns operating on nouns -- it is as if everything is being said in passive or reflexive voice, e.g., "the text is being shown by the terminal window". Or maybe "the text draws itself on the terminal window". Not only is the focus shifted to nouns, but one of the nouns (let's call it grammatical subject) is given higher "importance" than the other (grammatical object). Thus one must decide whether one will say terminalWindow.show(someText) or someText.show(terminalWindow). But why burden people with such trivial decisions with no operational consequences when one really means show(terminalWindow, someText)? [Consequences are operationally insignificant -- in both cases the text is shown on the terminal window -- but can be very serious in the design of class hierarchies and a "wrong" choice can lead to convoluted and hard to maintain code.] I would therefore argue that the mainstream way of doing OOP (class-based, single-dispatch) is hard because it IS UNNATURAL and does not correspond to how humans think about the world. Generic methods from CLOS are closer to my way of thinking, but, alas, this is not widespread approach. Given these problems, how/why did it happen that the currently mainstream way of doing OOP became so popular? And what, if anything, can be done to dethrone it?

    Read the article

  • Having fun with Reflection

    - by Nick Harrison
    I was once asked in a technical interview what I could tell them about Reflection.   My response, while a little tongue in cheek was that "I can tell you it is one of my favorite topics to talk about" I did get a laugh out of that and it was a great ice breaker.    Reflection may not be the answer for everything, but it often can be, or maybe even should be.     I have posted in the past about my favorite CopyTo method.   It can come in several forms and is often very useful.   I explain it further and expand on the basic idea here  The basic idea is to allow reflection to loop through the properties of two objects and synchronize the ones that are in common.   I love this approach for data binding and passing data across the layers in an application. Recently I have been working on a project leveraging Data Transfer Objects to pass data through WCF calls.   We won't go into how the architecture got this way, but in essence there is a partial duplicate inheritance hierarchy where there is a related Domain Object for each Data Transfer Object.     The matching objects do not share a common ancestor or common interface but they will have the same properties in common.    By passing the problems with this approach, let's talk about how Reflection and our friendly CopyTo could make the most of this bad situation without having to change too much. One of the problems is keeping the two sets of objects in synch.   For this particular project, the DO has all of the functionality and the DTO is used to simply transfer data back and forth.    Both sets of object have parallel hierarchies with the same properties being defined at the corresponding levels.   So we end with BaseDO,  BaseDTO, GenericDO, GenericDTO, ProcessAreaDO,  ProcessAreaDTO, SpecializedProcessAreaDO, SpecializedProcessAreaDTO, TableDo, TableDto. and so on. Without using Reflection and a CopyTo function, tremendous care and effort must be made to keep the corresponding objects in synch.    New properties can be added at any level in the inheritance and must be kept in synch at all subsequent layers.    For this project we have come up with a clever approach of calling a base GetDo or UpdateDto making sure that the same method at each level of inheritance is called.    Each level is responsible for updating the properties at that level. This is a lot of work and not keeping it in synch can create all manner of problems some of which are very difficult to track down.    The other problem is the type of code that this methods tend to wind up with. You end up with code like this: Transferable dto = new Transferable(); base.GetDto(dto); dto.OfficeCode = GetDtoNullSafe(officeCode); dto.AccessIndicator = GetDtoNullSafe(accessIndicator); dto.CaseStatus = GetDtoNullSafe(caseStatus); dto.CaseStatusReason = GetDtoNullSafe(caseStatusReason); dto.LevelOfService = GetDtoNullSafe(levelOfService); dto.ReferralComments = referralComments; dto.Designation = GetDtoNullSafe(designation); dto.IsGoodCauseClaimed = GetDtoNullSafe(isGoodCauseClaimed); dto.GoodCauseClaimDate = goodCauseClaimDate;       One obvious problem is that this is tedious code.   It is error prone code.    Adding helper functions like GetDtoNullSafe help out immensely, but there is still an easier way. We can bypass the tedious code, by pass the complex inheritance tricks, and reduce all of this to a single method in the base class. TransferObject dto = new TransferObject(); CopyTo (this, dto); return dto; In the case of this one project, such a change eliminated the need for 20% of the total code base and a whole class of unit test cases that made sure that all of the properties were in synch. The impact of such a change also needs to include the on going time savings and the improvements in quality that can arise from them.    Developers who are not worried about keeping the properties in synch across mirrored object hierarchies are freed to worry about more important things like implementing business requirements.

    Read the article

  • Javascript Inheritance Part 2

    - by PhubarBaz
    A while back I wrote about Javascript inheritance, trying to figure out the best and easiest way to do it (http://geekswithblogs.net/PhubarBaz/archive/2010/07/08/javascript-inheritance.aspx). That was 2 years ago and I've learned a lot since then. But only recently have I decided to just leave classical inheritance behind and embrace prototypal inheritance. For most of us, we were trained in classical inheritance, using class hierarchies in a typed language. Unfortunately Javascript doesn't follow that model. It is both classless and typeless, which is hard to fathom for someone who's been using classes the last 20 years. For the last two or three years since I've got into Javascript I've been trying to find the best way to force it into the class model without much success. It's clunky and verbose and hard to understand. I think my biggest problem was that it felt so wrong to add or change object members at run time. Every time I did it I felt like I needed a shower. That's the 20 years of classical inheritance in me. Finally I decided to embrace change and do something different. I decided to use the factory pattern to build objects instead of trying to use inheritance. Javascript was made for the factory pattern because of the way you can construct objects at runtime. In the factory pattern you have a factory function that you call and tell it to give you a certain type of object back. The factory function takes care of constructing the object to your specification. Here's an example. Say we want to have some shape objects and they have common attributes like id and area that we want to depend on in other parts of your application. So first thing to do is create a factory object and give it a factory method to create an abstract shape object. The factory method builds the object then returns it. var shapeFactory = { getShape: function(id){ var shape = { id: id, area: function() { throw "Not implemented"; } }; return shape; }}; Now we can add another factory method to get a rectangle. It calls the getShape() method first and then adds an implementation to it. getRectangle: function(id, width, height){ var rect = this.getShape(id); rect.width = width; rect.height = height; rect.area = function() { return this.width * this.height; }; return rect;} That's pretty simple right? No worrying about hooking up prototypes and calling base constructors or any of that crap I used to do. Now let's create a factory method to get a cuboid (rectangular cube). The cuboid object will extend the rectangle object. To get the area we will call into the base object's area method and then multiply that by the depth. getCuboid: function(id, width, height, depth){ var cuboid = this.getRectangle(id, width, height); cuboid.depth = depth; var baseArea = cuboid.area; cuboid.area = function() { var a = baseArea.call(this); return a * this.depth; } return cuboid;} See how we called the area method in the base object? First we save it off in a variable then we implement our own area method and use call() to call the base function. For me this is a lot cleaner and easier than trying to emulate class hierarchies in Javascript.

    Read the article

  • Questions on Juval Lowy's IDesign C# Coding Standard

    - by Jan
    We are trying to use the IDesign C# Coding standard. Unfortunately, I found no comprehensive document to explain all the rules that it gives, and also his book does not always help. Here are the open questions that remain for me (from chapter 2, Coding Practices): No. 26: Avoid providing explicit values for enums unless they are integer powers of 2 No. 34: Always explicitly initialize an array of reference types using a for loop No. 50: Avoid events as interface members No. 52: Expose interfaces on class hierarchies No. 73: Do not define method-specific constraints in interfaces No. 74: Do not define constraints in delegates Here's what I think about those: I thought that providing explicit values would be especially useful when adding new enum members at a later point in time. If these members are added between other already existing members, I would provide explicit values to make sure the integer representation of existing members does not change. No idea why I would want to do this. I'd say this totally depends on the logic of my program. I see that there is alternative option of providing "Sink interfaces" (simply providing already all "OnXxxHappened" methods), but what is the reason to prefer one over the other? Unsure what he means here: Could this mean "When implementing an interface explicitly in a non-sealed class, consider providing the implementation in a protected virtual method that can be overridden"? (see Programming .NET Components 2nd Edition, end of chapter “Interfaces and Class Hierarchies”). I suppose this is about providing a "where" clause when using generics, but why is this bad on an interface? I suppose this is about providing a "where" clause when using generics, but why is this bad on a delegate?

    Read the article

  • Simple Oracle File repository with folder hierarchy

    - by Ope
    I have an application that stores large amount of files (XML and binary) in folder hierarchies. Currently the main method is storing them in file system or using a legacy CMS, which we want to get rid of. The CMS supports Oracle and a customer wants to keep the files in Oracle because of enterprise policies (backup etc.) The question is: Is there a simple implementation of file repository with folder hierarchy for Oracle? What I am looking for is a small .Net component or example code (PL/SQL and/or .Net) that would have the following methods: Create, Delete, Exists Folder CRUD file Move and potentially Copy file or directory Access to files and folders with paths like "/root/folder1/folder2/file.xml" Ability to get all the files and folders in a folder and potentially also the entire directory tree Tree traversal, getting the parent, all children etc. needs to be fast. I need the implementation in .Net, but if it was just the stored procedures, I could create the .Net calling code. I have pointers to generic articles for creating hierarchies in DB, so if I need to do it from scratch, I know where to start. What I am asking here, is there already an implementation that I could take without doing this from scratch? It seems like such a generic requirement... If the answer is a CMS, Document management system or such it should be Open Source or at least quite cheap (some hundreds / server) and it should be possible to deploy it XCopy - hopefully only couple of DLL:s. I do not need - or want - a full featured big CMS with dozens of dlls and especially not an msi-installation. I have tried to google this, but the words "repository", "CMS", "file hierarchy" etc. give so many answers, the searches are pretty much useless. Thanks, OPe

    Read the article

  • What does the -R flag do for chflags?

    - by ralphthemagician
    I'm not clear on exactly what the -R flag does for chflags. I was wondering if someone might be able to help me. The man page says this: Recurse: Change the file flags of file hierarchies rooted in the files instead of just the files themselves. I don't understand what that means. Can someone tell me what the difference would be between chflags -R hidden and just chflags hidden? There's an online man page here for reference: http://ss64.com/osx/chflags.html

    Read the article

  • MDX using EXISTING, AGGREGATE, CROSSJOIN and WHERE

    - by James Rogers
    It is a well-published approach to using the EXISTING function to decode AGGREGATE members and nested sub-query filters.  Mosha wrote a good blog on it here and a more recent one here.  The use of EXISTING in these scenarios is very useful and sometimes the only option when dealing with multi-select filters.  However, there are some limitations I have run across when using the EXISTING function against an AGGREGATE member:   The AGGREGATE member must be assigned to the Dimension.Hierarchy being detected by the EXISTING function in the calculated measure. The AGGREGATE member cannot contain a crossjoin from any other dimension or hierarchy or EXISTING will not be able to detect the members in the AGGREGATE member.   Take the following query (from Adventure Works DW 2008):   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members))'    member [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM] as 'AGGREGATE({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]})'   select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]     where   [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM]   Here we are attempting to count the existing fiscal weeks in slicer.  This is useful to get a per-week average for another member. Many applications generate queries in this manner (such as Oracle OBIEE).  This query returns the correct result of (4) weeks. Now let's put a twist in it.  What if the querying application submits the query in the following manner:   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members))'    member [Customer].[Customer Geography].[CM] as 'AGGREGATE({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]})'   select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]     where   [Customer].[Customer Geography].[CM]   Here we are attempting to count the existing fiscal weeks in slicer.  However, the AGGREGATE member is built on a different dimension (in name) than the one EXISTING is trying to detect.  In this case the query returns (174) which is the total number of [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members defined in the dimension.   Now another twist, the AGGREGATE member will be named appropriately and contain the hierarchy we are trying to detect with EXISTING but it will be cross-joined with another hierarchy:   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members))'    member [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM] as 'AGGREGATE({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]}*    {[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[Australia],[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States]})'  select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]    where   [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM]   Once again, we are attempting to count the existing fiscal weeks in slicer.  Again, in this case the query returns (174) which is the total number of [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members defined in the dimension. However, in 2008 R2 this query returns the correct result of 4 and additionally , the following will return the count of existing countries as well (2):   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members))'   member [Country Count] as 'count(existing([Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].members))'  member [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM] as 'AGGREGATE({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]}*    {[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[Australia],[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States]})'  select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]    where   [Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[CM]   2008 R2 seems to work as long as the AGGREGATE member is on at least one of the hierarchies attempting to be detected (i.e. [Date].[Fiscal Weeks] or [Customer].[Customer Geography]). If not, it seems that the engine cannot find a "point of entry" into the aggregate member and ignores it for calculated members.   One way around this would be to put the sets from the AGGREGATE member explicitly in the WHERE clause (slicer).  I realize this is only supported in SSAS 2005 and 2008.  However, after talking with Chris Webb (his blog is here and I highly recommend following his efforts and musings) it is a far more efficient way to filter/slice a query:   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members))'    select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]    where   ({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]}   ,{[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[Australia],[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States]})   This query returns the correct result of (4) weeks.  Additionally, we can count the cross-join members of the two hierarchies in the slicer:   With   member [Week Count] as 'count(existing([Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].members)*existing([Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].members))'    select   {[Week Count]} on columns from   [Adventure Works]    where   ({[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[47]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[48]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[49]&[2004],[Date].[Fiscal Weeks].[Fiscal Week].&[50]&[2004]}   ,{[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[Australia],[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States]})   We get the correct number of (8) here.

    Read the article

  • Master Data Services Employees Sample Model

    - by Davide Mauri
    I’ve been playing with Master Data Services quite a lot in those last days and I’m also monitoring the web for all available resources on it. Today I’ve found this freshly released sample available on MSDN Code Gallery: SQL Server Master Data Services Employee Sample Model http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/SSMDSEmployeeSample This sample shows how Recursive Hierarchies can be modeled in order to represent a typical organizational chart scenario where a self-relationship exists on the Employee entity. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Webcast: 12.2.4 Advanced Planning Command Center Enhancements

    - by ChristineS-Oracle
    Webcast: 12.2.4 Advanced Planning Command Center Enhancements Date: June 12, 2014 at 11:00 am ET, 10:00 am CT, 9:00 am MT, 8:00 am PT, 8:30 pm, India Time (Mumbai, GMT+05:30) This advisor webcast helps Functional Users and IT Analysts understand the new features introduced in Advanced Planning Command Center (APCC) as part of 12.2.4 release. These include custom hierarchies, custom measures, additional measures like projected on hand etc. Other new features include new reports like Build Plan, Order Details. It also includes new integration capabilities between APCC and DRP and support for Trade Planning in APCC. Topics will include: New Feature Introduction Feature Overview and Setup Steps Implementation Tips & Best Practices Details & Registration: Doc ID 1670447.1

    Read the article

  • How to refactor an OO program into a functional one?

    - by Asik
    I'm having difficulty finding resources on how to write programs in a functional style. The most advanced topic I could find discussed online was using structural typing to cut down on class hierarchies; most just deal with how to use map/fold/reduce/etc to replace imperative loops. What I would really like to find is an in-depth discussion of an OOP implementation of a non-trivial program, its limitations, and how to refactor it in a functional style. Not just an algorithm or a data structure, but something with several different roles and aspects - a video game perhaps. By the way I did read Real-World Functional Programming by Tomas Petricek, but I'm left wanting more.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  | Next Page >