Search Results

Search found 11996 results on 480 pages for 'dependency properties'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 21/480 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to optimize maven dependencies automatically?

    - by AlexR
    I am working on a big project that consists of about 40 sub-projects with very not optimized dependencies. There are declared dependencies that are not in use as well as used but undeclared dependencies. The second case is possible when dependency is added via other dependency. I want to remove redundant and add required dependencies. I ran mvn dependency:analyze and got a long list of warnings I have to fix now. I wonder whether there is maven plugin or any other utility that can update my pom.xml files automatically. I tried to do it manually but it takes a lot of time. It seems it will take a couple of days of copy/paste to complete the task. In worse case I can write such script myself but probably ready stuff exists? Here is how mvn dependency:analyze reports dependency warnings: [WARNING] Used undeclared dependencies found: [WARNING] org.apache.httpcomponents:httpcore:jar:4.1:compile [WARNING] Unused declared dependencies found: [WARNING] commons-lang:commons-lang:jar:2.4:compile [WARNING] org.json:json:jar:20090211:compile

    Read the article

  • How do I pass dependency to object with Castle Windsor and MS Test?

    - by Nick
    I am trying to use Castle Windsor with MS Test. The test class only seems to use the default constructor. How do I configure Castle to resolve the service in the constructor? Here is the Test Class' constructors: private readonly IWebBrowser _browser; public DepressionSummaryTests() { } public DepressionSummaryTests(IWebBrowser browser) { _browser = browser; } My component in the app config looks like so: <castle> <components> <component id="browser" service="ConversationSummary.IWebBrowser, ConversationSummary" type="ConversationSummary.Browser" /> </components> </castle> Here is my application container: public class ApplicationContainer : WindsorContainer { private static IWindsorContainer container; static ApplicationContainer() { container = new WindsorContainer(new XmlInterpreter(new ConfigResource("castle"))); } private static IWindsorContainer Container { get { return container; } } public static IWebBrowser Browser { get { return (IWebBrowser) Container.Resolve("browser"); } } } MS test requires the default constructor. What am I missing? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Should an object be fully complete before injected as a dependency?

    - by Hans
    This is an extension of this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3027082/understanding-how-to-inject-object-dependencies. Since it is a bit different, I wanted to separate them, to make it, hopefully, easier to answer. Also, this is not a real system, just a simplified example that I thought we'd all be familiar with. TIA. : DB threads: thread_id, thread_name, etc posts: post_id, thread_id, post_name, post_contents, post_date, post_user_id, etc Overview Basically I'm looking at the most maintainable way to load $post_id and have it cascade and load the other things I want to know about and I'm trying to keep the controller skinny. BUT: I'm ending up with too many dependencies to inject I'm passing in initialized but empty objects I want to limit how many parameters I am passing around I could inject $post(-many) into $thread(one<-), but on that page I'm not looking at a thread, I'm looking at a post I could combine/inject them into a new object Detail If I am injecting an object into another, is it best to have it fully created first? I'm trying to limit how many parameters I have to pass in to a page, but I end up with a circle. // 1, empty object injected via constructor $thread = new Thread; $post = new Post($thread); // $thread is just an empty object $post->load($post_id); // I could now do something like $post->get('thread_id') to get everything I want in $post // 2, complete object injected via constructor $thread = new Thread; $thread->load($thread_id); // this page would have to have passed in a $thread_id, too $post = new Post($thread); // thread is a complete object, with the data I need, like thread name $post->load($post_id); // 3, inject $post into $thread, but this makes less sense to me, since I'm looking at a post page, not a thread page $post = new Post(); $post->load($post_id); $thread = new Thread($post); $thread->load(); // would load based on the $post->get('post_id') and combine. Now I have all the data I want, but it's non-intuitive to be heirarchially Thread->Post instead of Post-with-thread-info // Or, I could inject $post into $thread, but if I'm on a post page, // having an object with a top level of Thread instead of // Post-which-contains-thread-info, makes less sense to me. // to go with example 1 class post { public function __construct(&$thread) { $this->thread=$thread; } public function load($id) { // ... here I would load all the post data based on $id // now include the thread data $this->thread->load($this->get('thread_id')); return $this; } } // I don't want to do $thread = new Thread; $post = new Post; $post->load($post_id); $thread->load($post->get('post_id')); Or, I could create a new object and inject both $post and $thread into it, but then I have object with an increasing number of dependencies.

    Read the article

  • Passing Services to MainViewModel - SHOULD I use a dependency injection container ?

    - by msfanboy
    Hello, I have this code: public partial class App : Application { protected override void OnStartup(StartupEventArgs e) { base.OnStartup(e); var mainVM = new MainViewModel ( new Service1(), ... new Service10(), ); var window = new MainWindow(); window.DataContext = mainVM; window.Show(); } } I pass all my Services instances to the MainViewModel. Within the MainViewModel I spread those services to other ViewModels via constructor parameter passing. Should I use any DI framework for the services in the App class? If yes whats the benefit of resolving the services instead of just creating the instance manually... ?

    Read the article

  • Technical Article: Oracle Magazine Java Developer of the Year Adam Bien on Java EE 6 Simplicity by Design

    - by janice.heiss(at)oracle.com
    Java Champion and Oracle Magazine Java Developer of the Year, Adam Bien, offers his unique perspective on how to leverage new Java EE 6 features to build simple and maintainable applications in a new article in Oracle Magazine. Bien examines different Java EE 6 architectures and design approaches in an effort to help developers build efficient, simple, and maintainable applications.From the article: "Java EE 6 consists of a set of independent APIs released together under the Java EE name. Although these APIs are independent, they fit together surprisingly well. For a given application, you could use only JavaServer Faces (JSF) 2.0, you could use Enterprise JavaBeans (EJB) 3.1 for transactional services, or you could use Contexts and Dependency Injection (CDI) with Java Persistence API (JPA) 2.0 and the Bean Validation model to implement transactions.""With a pragmatic mix of available Java EE 6 APIs, you can entirely eliminate the need to implement infrastructure services such as transactions, threading, throttling, or monitoring in your application. The real challenge is in selecting the right subset of APIs that minimizes overhead and complexity while making sure you don't have to reinvent the wheel with custom code. As a general rule, you should strive to use existing Java SE and Java EE services before expanding your search to find alternatives." Read the entire article here.

    Read the article

  • Do abstractions have to reduce code readability?

    - by Martin Blore
    A good developer I work with told me recently about some difficulty he had in implementing a feature in some code we had inherited; he said the problem was that the code was difficult to follow. From that, I looked deeper into the product and realised how difficult it was to see the code path. It used so many interfaces and abstract layers, that trying to understand where things began and ended was quite difficult. It got me thinking about the times I had looked at past projects (before I was so aware of clean code principles) and found it extremely difficult to get around in the project, mainly because my code navigation tools would always land me at an interface. It would take a lot of extra effort to find the concrete implementation or where something was wired up in some plugin type architecture. I know some developers strictly turn down dependency injection containers for this very reason. It confuses the path of the software so much that the difficulty of code navigation is exponentially increased. My question is: when a framework or pattern introduces so much overhead like this, is it worth it? Is it a symptom of a poorly implemented pattern? I guess a developer should look to the bigger picture of what that abstractions brings to the project to help them get through the frustration. Usually though, it's difficult to make them see that big picture. I know I've failed to sell the needs of IOC and DI with TDD. For those developers, use of those tools just cramps code readability far too much.

    Read the article

  • Explicitly pass context object versus injecting with IoC

    - by SonOfPirate
    I have a layered service application where the service layer delegates operations into the domain layer for execution. Many of these operations need to know the context under which they are operation. (The context included the identity of the current user, culture information, etc. received from the caller.) For example, I have an API method that returns a list of announcements. The list is based on the current user's role and each announcement is localized to their culture. The API is a thin-facade that delegates to an Application Service in my domain layer. The Application Service method obviously needs to know the context of the current request/operation as another call to the same API from another user should result in a different list. Within this method, we also have logging that uses some of the context information so we a clear understanding of the context when the operation was performed (this is especially useful if something goes wrong.) While this is a contrived example, in the real world, my Application Services will coordinate operations with many collaborative components, any number of them also needing the context information. My choice is to pass the context to the Application Service which would then pass it with any calls to collaborators or have the IoC container satisfy the dependency the Application Service and any collaborators have on the context. I am wondering if it is considered good/bad, best practices/code smell, etc. if I pass the context object as a parameter to the domain methods or if injecting the context via an IoC container is preferred. (EDIT: I should mention that the context object is instantiated per-request.)

    Read the article

  • Service layer coupling

    - by Justin
    I am working on writing a service layer for an order system in php. It's the typical scenario, you have an Order that can have multiple Line Items. So lets say a request is received to store a line item with pictures and comments. I might receive a json request such as { 'type': 'Bike', 'color': 'Red', 'commentIds': [3193,3194] 'attachmentIds': [123,413] } My idea was to have a Service_LineItem_Bike class that knows how to take the json data and store an entity for a bike. My question is, the Service_LineItem class now needs to fetch comments and file attachments, and store the relationships. Service_LineItem seems like it should interact with a Service_Comment and a Service_FileUpload. Should instances of these two other services be instantiated and passed to the Service_LineItem constructor,or set by getters and setters? Dependency injection seems like the right solution, allowing a service access to a 'service fetching helper' seems wrong, and this should stay at the application level. I am using Doctrine 2 as a ORM, and I can technically write a dql query inside Service_LineItem to fetch the comments and file uploads necessary for the association, but this seems like it would have a tighter coupling, rather then leaving this up to the right service object.

    Read the article

  • Automatic Properties, Collection Initializers, and Implicit Line Continuation support with VB 2010

    [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] This is the eighteenth in a series of blog posts Im doing on the upcoming VS 2010 and .NET 4 release. A few days ago I blogged about two new language features coming with C# 4.0: optional parameters and named arguments.  Today Im going to post about a few of my favorite new features being added to VB with VS 2010: Auto-Implemented Properties, Collection...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • wcf web service in post method, object properties are null, although the object is not null

    - by Abdalhadi Kolayb
    i have this problem in post method when i send object parameter to the method, then the object is not null, but all its properties have the default values. here is data module: [DataContract] public class Products { [DataMember(Order = 1)] public int ProdID { get; set; } [DataMember(Order = 2)] public string ProdName { get; set; } [DataMember(Order = 3)] public float PrpdPrice { get; set; } } and here is the interface: [OperationContract] [WebInvoke( Method = "POST", UriTemplate = "AddProduct", ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.WrappedRequest, RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json)] string AddProduct([MessageParameter(Name = "prod")]Products prod); public string AddProduct(Products prod) { ProductsList.Add(prod); return "return string"; } here is the json request: Content-type:application/json {"prod":[{"ProdID": 111,"ProdName": "P111","PrpdPrice": 111}]} but in the server the object received: {"prod":[{"ProdID": 0,"ProdName": NULL,"PrpdPrice": 0}]}

    Read the article

  • specific div css properties [migrated]

    - by Alecs
    I have a div : <div id="fancyboxID-1"> <p>0767380042</p> </div> and this css: ? #fancyboxID-1 p { font-size:150px; text-align: center; line-height:150px; overflow:hidden;} After I upload and refresh the website I don't see any changes but if I check the source code: I see the css properties. It's very strange for me, I've tried to upload on another server and there it works. Any ideas why this is not working ?

    Read the article

  • Throwing exception from a property when my object state is invalid

    - by Rumi P.
    Microsoft guidelines say: "Avoid throwing exceptions from property getters", and I normally follow that. But my application uses Linq2SQL, and there is the case where my object can be in invalid state because somebody or something wrote nonsense into the database. Consider this toy example: [Table(Name="Rectangle")] public class Rectangle { [Column(Name="ID", IsPrimaryKey = true, IsDbGenerated = true)] public int ID {get; set;} [Column(Name="firstSide")] public double firstSide {get; set;} [Column(Name="secondSide")] public double secondSide {get; set;} public double sideRatio { get { return firstSide/secondSide; } } } Here, I could write code which ensures that my application never writes a Rectangle with a zero-length side into the database. But no matter how bulletproof I make my own code, somebody could open the database with a different application and create an invalid Rectangle, especially one with a 0 for secondSide. (For this example, please forget that it is possible to design the database in a way such that writing a side length of zero into the rectangle table is impossible; my domain model is very complex and there are constraints on model state which cannot be expressed in a relational database). So, the solution I am gravitating to is to change the getter to: get { if(firstSide > 0 && secondSide > 0) return firstSide/secondSide; else throw new System.InvalidOperationException("All rectangle sides should have a positive length"); } The reasoning behind not throwing exceptions from properties is that programmers should be able to use them without having to make precautions about catching and handling them them. But in this case, I think that it is OK to continue to use this property without such precautions: if the exception is thrown because my application wrote a non-zero rectangle side into the database, then this is a serious bug. It cannot and shouldn't be handled in the application, but there should be code which prevents it. It is good that the exception is visibly thrown, because that way the bug is caught. if the exception is thrown because a different application changed the data in the database, then handling it is outside of the scope of my application. So I can't do anything about it if I catch it. Is this a good enough reasoning to get over the "avoid" part of the guideline and throw the exception? Or should I turn it into a method after all? Note that in the real code, the properties which can have an invalid state feel less like the result of a calculation, so they are "natural" properties, not methods.

    Read the article

  • gnome-file-share-properties doesn't work

    - by Riccardo Magrini
    I've configured gnome-file-share-properties on all my Ubuntu's PC for sharing the directory Public to each other. I following some guide found on Internet for the configuration of it, all explain the same procedure but in my case I don't see any Public directory shared with the PC. Following this link http://library.gnome.org/users/gnome-user-share/stable/gnome-user-share-getting-started.html.en I'd see the directory Public plus the name of PC that shares its directory on Nautilus Places. In my case I don't see anything, therefore on the Network place see all the machines 'n if I try to click on one receive this: "DBus error org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message did not receive a reply (timeout by message bus)" note: I don't want to use Samba because I've all Ubuntu PC, and the firewall is disabled on all PC.

    Read the article

  • Syncing properties across a game server

    - by Vaughan Hilts
    I'm beginning to implement a simple scripting system into my networked server, and I've hit a snag. Before, I've been wrapping my calls into functions on objects that manipulate objects, but lately I've been finding this to be a pain for simple things. For example, if I set 'player.HP = 1'.. this works server-side. But the player side never sees this change unless I explicitly send a packet to inform the client. For many things like map swapping that require more complicated changes, like change X, Y, Map and do this.. I have a function. That's fine. But what about these small properties I want to sync?

    Read the article

  • Multiple parameters vs single parameter(object with multiple properties)

    - by Shwetanka
    I have an Entity Student with following properties - (name, joinedOn, birthday, age, batch, etc.) and a function fetchStudents(<params>). I want to fetch students based on multiple filters. In my method I have two ways to pass filters. Pass all filters as params to the method Make a class StudentCriteria with filters as fields and then pass the object of this class While working in java I always go with the second option but recently I'm working in php and I was advised to go with the first way. I am unable to figure out which way is better in maintaining the code, reusability and performance wise. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Custom Model Binding of IEnumerable Properties in ASP.Net MVC 2

    - by Doug Lampe
    MVC 2 provides a GREAT feature for dealing with enumerable types.  Let's say you have an object with a parent/child relationship and you want to allow users to modify multiple children at the same time.  You can simply use the following syntax for any indexed enumerables (arrays, generic lists, etc.) and then your values will bind to your enumerable model properties. 1: <% using (Html.BeginForm("TestModelParameter", "Home")) 2: { %> 3: < table > 4: < tr >< th >ID</th><th>Name</th><th>Description</th></tr> 5: <% for (int i = 0; i < Model.Items.Count; i++) 6: { %> 7: < tr > 8: < td > 9: <%= i %> 10: </ td > 11: < td > 12: <%= Html.TextBoxFor(m => m.Items[i].Name) %> 13: </ td > 14: < td > 15: <%= Model.Items[i].Description %> 16: </ td > 17: </ tr > 18: <% } %> 19: </ table > 20: < input type ="submit" /> 21: <% } %> Then just update your model either by passing it into your action method as a parameter or explicitly with UpdateModel/TryUpdateModel. 1: public ActionResult TestTryUpdate() 2: { 3: ContainerModel model = new ContainerModel(); 4: TryUpdateModel(model); 5:   6: return View("Test", model); 7: } 8:   9: public ActionResult TestModelParameter(ContainerModel model) 10: { 11: return View("Test", model); 12: } Simple right?  Well, not quite.  The problem is the DefaultModelBinder and how it sets properties.  In this case our model has a property that is a generic list (Items).  The first bad thing the model binder does is create a new instance of the list.  This can be fixed by making the property truly read-only by removing the set accessor.  However this won't help because this behaviour continues.  As the model binder iterates through the items to "set" their values, it creates new instances of them as well.  This means you lose any information not passed via the UI to your controller so in the examplel above the "Description" property would be blank for each item after the form posts. One solution for this is custom model binding.  I have put together a solution which allows you to retain the structure of your model.  Model binding is a somewhat advanced concept so you may need to do some additional research to really understand what is going on here, but the code is fairly simple.  First we will create a binder for the parent object which will retain the state of the parent as well as some information on which children have already been bound. 1: public class ContainerModelBinder : DefaultModelBinder 2: { 3: /// <summary> 4: /// Gets an instance of the model to be used to bind child objects. 5: /// </summary> 6: public ContainerModel Model { get; private set; } 7:   8: /// <summary> 9: /// Gets a list which will be used to track which items have been bound. 10: /// </summary> 11: public List<ItemModel> BoundItems { get; private set; } 12:   13: public ContainerModelBinder() 14: { 15: BoundItems = new List<ItemModel>(); 16: } 17:   18: protected override object CreateModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Type modelType) 19: { 20: // Set the Model property so child binders can find children. 21: Model = base.CreateModel(controllerContext, bindingContext, modelType) as ContainerModel; 22:   23: return Model; 24: } 25: } Next we will create the child binder and have it point to the parent binder to get instances of the child objects.  Note that this only works if there is only one property of type ItemModel in the parent class since the property to find the item in the parent is hard coded. 1: public class ItemModelBinder : DefaultModelBinder 2: { 3: /// <summary> 4: /// Gets the parent binder so we can find objects in the parent's collection 5: /// </summary> 6: public ContainerModelBinder ParentBinder { get; private set; } 7: 8: public ItemModelBinder(ContainerModelBinder containerModelBinder) 9: { 10: ParentBinder = containerModelBinder; 11: } 12:   13: protected override object CreateModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Type modelType) 14: { 15: // Find the item in the parent collection and add it to the bound items list. 16: ItemModel item = ParentBinder.Model.Items.FirstOrDefault(i => !ParentBinder.BoundItems.Contains(i)); 17: ParentBinder.BoundItems.Add(item); 18: 19: return item; 20: } 21: } Finally, we will register these binders in Global.asax.cs so they will be used to bind the classes. 1: protected void Application_Start() 2: { 3: AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); 4:   5: ContainerModelBinder containerModelBinder = new ContainerModelBinder(); 6: ModelBinders.Binders.Add(typeof(ContainerModel), containerModelBinder); 7: ModelBinders.Binders.Add(typeof(ItemModel), new ItemModelBinder(containerModelBinder)); 8:   9: RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); 10: } I'm sure some of my fellow geeks will comment that this could be done more efficiently by simply rewriting some of the methods of the default model binder to get the same desired behavior.  I like my method shown here because it extends the binder class instead of modifying it so it minimizes the potential for unforseen problems. In a future post (if I ever get around to it) I will explore creating a generic version of these binders.

    Read the article

  • [Iphone-Dev] Assigning values : difference between properties and class variables ?

    - by gotye
    Hey guys, I noticed that I rarely use properties, due to the fact that I rarely need to access my object's variables outside my class ;) So I usually do : NSMutableArray *myArray; // not a property ! My question is : even if i don't declare myArray as a property, does iphone make a retain anyway if I do myArray = arrayPassedToMe; I think so but I just wanted to confirm ;) Any thoughts welcome ! Gotye

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >