Search Results

Search found 18534 results on 742 pages for 'global design'.

Page 237/742 | < Previous Page | 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244  | Next Page >

  • Understanding MongoDB (and NoSQL in general) and how to make the best use of it

    - by Earlz
    Hello, I am beginning to think that my next project I am wanting to do would work better with a NoSQL solution. The project would either involve a ton of 2-column tables or a ton of dynamic queries with dynamically generated columns in a traditional SQL database. So I feel a NoSQL database would be much cleaner. I'm looking at MongoDB and it looks pretty promising. Anyway, I'm attempting to make sense of it all. Also, I will be using MongoMapper in Ruby. Anyway though, I'm confused as to how to layout things in such a freeform database. I've read http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2170152/nosql-best-practices and the answer there says that normalization is usually bad in a NoSQL DB. So how would be the best way of laying out say a simple blog with users, posts, and comments? My natural thought was to have three collections for each and then link them by a unique ID. But this apparently is wrong? So, what are some of the ways to lay out such a thing? My concern with the answer given in the other question is, what if the author's name changed? You'd have to go through updating a ton of posts and comments. But is this an okay thing to do with NoSQL?

    Read the article

  • Accessing a Class Member from a First-Class Function

    - by dbyrne
    I have a case class which takes a list of functions: case class A(q:Double, r:Double, s:Double, l:List[(Double)=>Double]) I have over 20 functions defined. Some of these functions have their own parameters, and some of them also use the q, r, and s values from the case class. Two examples are: def f1(w:Double) = (d:Double) => math.sin(d) * w def f2(w:Double, q:Double) = (d:Double) => d * q * w The problem is that I then need to reference q, r, and s twice when instantiating the case class: A(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, List(f1(3.0), f2(4.0, 0.5))) //0.5 is referenced twice I would like to be able to instantiate the class like this: A(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, List(f1(3.0), f2(4.0))) //f2 already knows about q! What is the best technique to accomplish this? Can I define my functions in a trait that the case class extends? EDIT: The real world application has 7 members, not 3. Only a small number of the functions need access to the members. Most of the functions don't care about them.

    Read the article

  • java question: Is it a method?

    - by Stefan
    Hello, I'm no Java guy, so I ask myself what this means: public Button(Light light) { this.light = light; } Is Button a method? I ask myself, because it takes an input parameter light. But if it was a method, why would it begin with a capital letter and has no return data type? Here comes the full example: public class Button { private Light light; public Button(Light light) { this.light = light; } public void press() { light.turnOn(); } } I know, this question is really trivial. However, I have nothing to do with Java and haven't found a description for the Button thing above. I'm just interested.

    Read the article

  • Database: Storing Dates as Numeric Values

    - by Chin
    I'm considering storing some date values as ints. i.e 201003150900 Excepting the fact that I lose any timezone information, is there anything else I should be concerned about with his solution? Any queries using this column would be simple 'where after or before' type lookups. i.e Where datefield is less than 201103000000 (before March next year). currently the app is using MSSQL2005. Any pointers to pitfalls appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How do I recover from an unchecked exception?

    - by erickson
    Unchecked exceptions are alright if you want to handle every failure the same way, for example by logging it and skipping to the next request, displaying a message to the user and handling the next event, etc. If this is my use case, all I have to do is catch some general exception type at a high level in my system, and handle everything the same way. But I want to recover from specific problems, and I'm not sure the best way to approach it with unchecked exceptions. Here is a concrete example. Suppose I have a web application, built using Struts2 and Hibernate. If an exception bubbles up to my "action", I log it, and display a pretty apology to the user. But one of the functions of my web application is creating new user accounts, that require a unique user name. If a user picks a name that already exists, Hibernate throws an org.hibernate.exception.ConstraintViolationException (an unchecked exception) down in the guts of my system. I'd really like to recover from this particular problem by asking the user to choose another user name, rather than giving them the same "we logged your problem but for now you're hosed" message. Here are a few points to consider: There a lot of people creating accounts simultaneously. I don't want to lock the whole user table between a "SELECT" to see if the name exists and an "INSERT" if it doesn't. In the case of relational databases, there might be some tricks to work around this, but what I'm really interested in is the general case where pre-checking for an exception won't work because of a fundamental race condition. Same thing could apply to looking for a file on the file system, etc. Given my CTO's propensity for drive-by management induced by reading technology columns in "Inc.", I need a layer of indirection around the persistence mechanism so that I can throw out Hibernate and use Kodo, or whatever, without changing anything except the lowest layer of persistence code. As a matter of fact, there are several such layers of abstraction in my system. How can I prevent them from leaking in spite of unchecked exceptions? One of the declaimed weaknesses of checked exceptions is having to "handle" them in every call on the stack—either by declaring that a calling method throws them, or by catching them and handling them. Handling them often means wrapping them in another checked exception of a type appropriate to the level of abstraction. So, for example, in checked-exception land, a file-system–based implementation of my UserRegistry might catch IOException, while a database implementation would catch SQLException, but both would throw a UserNotFoundException that hides the underlying implementation. How do I take advantage of unchecked exceptions, sparing myself of the burden of this wrapping at each layer, without leaking implementation details?

    Read the article

  • How to decide which colors to use that look most similar across most screens/monitors?

    - by Lyon
    Hi, I'm baffled. I'm trying to find suitable colors for a logo that would look similar across most monitors/screens. I know it's near impossible, but how does one end up with the color palette that new Google logo and Facebook "blue" uses for example? I've a monitor that has been calibrated, and a few laptop screens that have default settings. Yet both the Google logo and facebook's look similar (although they aren't using colors restricted to the web safe 216 palette. Any ideas? thoughts? Thanks

    Read the article

  • how to get access to private members of nested class?

    - by macias
    Background: I have enclosed (parent) class E with nested class N with several instances of N in E. In the enclosed (parent) class I am doing some calculations and I am setting the values for each instance of nested class. Something like this: n1.field1 = ...; n1.field2 = ...; n1.field3 = ...; n2.field1 = ...; ... It is one big eval method (in parent class). My intention is -- since all calculations are in parent class (they cannot be done per nested instance because it would make code more complicated) -- make the setters only available to parent class and getters public. And now there is a problem: when I make the setters private, parent class cannot acces them when I make them public, everybody can change the values and C# does not have friend concept I cannot pass values in constructor because lazy evaluation mechanism is used (so the instances have to be created when referencing them -- I create all objects and the calculation is triggered on demand) I am stuck -- how to do this (limit access up to parent class, no more, no less)? I suspect I'll get answer-question first -- "but why you don't split the evaluation per each field" -- so I answer this by example: how do you calculate min and max value of a collection? In a fast way? The answer is -- in one pass. This is why I have one eval function which does calculations and sets all fields at once.

    Read the article

  • Code Contracts Vs. Object Initializers (.net 4.0)

    - by Mystagogue
    At face value, it would seem that object initializers present a problem for .net 4.0 "code contracts", where normally the invariant should be established by the time the object constructor is finished. Presumably, however, object-initializers require properties to be set after construction is complete. My question is if the invariants of "code contracts" are able to handle object initializers, "as if" the properties were set before the constructor completes? That would be very nice indeed!!

    Read the article

  • coding in native language

    - by radi
    is it possible to someone to invent a new programming language in his native language , and if it possible how to do that and what the tools he need to write compiler for it . thanks .

    Read the article

  • How do you find the balance between Javascript (jQuery) and code behind in ASP.NET.

    - by PieterG
    Stackoverflow members, How do you currently find the balance between javascript and code behind. I have recently come across some extremely bad (in my eyes) legacy code that lends itself to chaos (someHugeJavafile.js) which contains a lot of the logic used in many of the pages. Let's say for example that you have a Form that you need to complete. 1. Personal Details 2. Address Information 3. Little bit more about yourself You don't want to overload the person with all the fields at once, so you decide to split it up into steps. Do you create separate pages for Personal Details, Address Information and a Little bit more about yourself. Do you create controls for each and hide and show them on a postback or using some update panel? Do you use jQuery and do some checking to ensure that the person has completed the required fields for the step and show the new "section" by using .show()? How do you usually find the balance?

    Read the article

  • How to track history of db tables that include many-to-many mapping tables?

    - by chacmool
    I have seen several questions here on tracking db history, but can't seem to find one that matches our situation. We need to track the history of several tables, some of which are many-to-many linking tables. Eg say we have this schema: EntityA id name EntityB id name ABLink A_id B_id So, tracking changes to EntityA or EntityB seems pretty straightforward. We can keep a log table with the same columns plus a date stamp and user. But what about the links? How do we maintain the set of links that are valid for a given version of the data? We need to be able to recreate a history of the data showing changes in chronological order. So if a link added or deleted, we indicate that. Etc.

    Read the article

  • How to leverage Spring Integration in a real-world JMS distributed architecture?

    - by ngeek
    For the following scenario I am looking for your advices and tips on best practices: In a distributed (mainly Java-based) system with: many (different) client applications (web-app, command-line tools, REST API) a central JMS message broker (currently in favor of using ActiveMQ) multiple stand-alone processing nodes (running on multiple remote machines, computing expensive operations of different types as specified by the JMS message payload) How would one best apply the JMS support provided by the Spring Integration framework to decouple the clients from the worker nodes? When reading through the reference documentation and some very first experiments it looks like the configuration of an JMS inbound adapter inherently require to use a subscriber, which in a decoupled scenario does not exist. Small side note: communication should happen via JMS text messages (using a JSON data structure for future extensibility).

    Read the article

  • What VS Projecttype for Model and Database?

    - by Tim
    Hello folks, i've just started a new asp.net project which could increase fastly(a small erp-system for our company). So i thought it would be a good idea to split at least the model from the view/controller(the asp.net project). Because it could be that i need to access some classes and the database from a windows app in future, i dicided to put the Model into its own Project. What Visual Studio 2005 Professional Projecttype is most suitable for this requirement and why? SqlServerProject (DB is MS Sql Server 2005 EP) Class Library Web Service Application Database project no separate Project/other(keep in mind VS 2005 has no ASP.NET MVC-Project) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Service Layer Patter - Could we avoid the service layer on a specific case?

    - by lidermin
    Hi, we are trying to implement an application using the Service Layer Pattern cause our application needs to connect to other multiple applications too, and googling on the web, we found this link of a demostrative graphic for the "right" way of apply the pattern: martinfowler.com - Service Layer Pattern But now we have a question: what if our system needs to implement some business logic, only for our application (like some maintenance data for the system itself) that we don't need to share with other systems. Based on this graphic: As it seems, it will be unnecesary to implement a service layer just for that; it will be more practical to avoid the service layer, and just go from User Interface to the Business Layer (for example). What should be the right way in this case to implement the Service Layer Pattern? What do you suggest us for a scenario like the one I told you? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Service Layer Patter - Could we avoid the service layer on a specific case?

    - by lidermin
    Hi, we are trying to implement an application using the Service Layer Pattern cause our application needs to connect to other multiple applications too, and googling on the web, we found this link of a demostrative graphic for the "right" way of apply the pattern: martinfowler.com - Service Layer Pattern But now we have a question: what if our system needs to implement some business logic, only for our application (like some maintenance data for the system itself) that we don't need to share with other systems. Based on this graphic: As it seems, it will be unnecesary to implement a service layer just for that; it will be more practical to avoid the service layer, and just go from User Interface to the Business Layer (for example). What should be the right way in this case to implement the Service Layer Pattern? What do you suggest us for a scenario like the one I told you? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Data Modeling Help - Do I add another table, change existing table's usage, or something else?

    - by StackOverflowNewbie
    Assume I have the following tables and relationships: Person - Id (PK) - Name A Person can have 0 or more pets: Pet - Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name A person can have 0 or more attributes (e.g. age, height, weight): PersonAttribute _ Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name - Value PROBLEM: I need to represent pet attributes, too. As it turns out, these pet attributes are, in most cases, identical to the attributes of a person (e.g. a pet can have an age, height, and weight too). How do I represent pet attributes? Do I create a PetAttribute table? PetAttribute Id (PK) PetId (FK) Name Value Do I change PersonAttribute to GenericAttribute and have 2 foreign keys in it - one connecting to Person, the other connecting to Pet? GenericAttribute Id (PK) PersonId (FK) PetId (FK) Name Value NOTE: if PersonId is set, then PetId is not set. If PetId is set, PersonId is not set. Do something else?

    Read the article

  • Small methods - Small sprocs

    - by Berlioz
    Uncle Bob recommends having small methods. Do stored procedures have an ideal size? Or can they run on for 100's and 100's of lines long? Also does anyone have anything to say about where to place business logic. If located in stored procedures, the database is being used as data processing tier. If you read Adam Machanic, his bias is toward the database, does that imply long stored procedures that only the author of the sproc understands, leaving maintainers to deal with the mess? I guess there is two inter-related questions, somehow. Thanks in advance for responding to a fuzzy question(s).

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to restrict access to a public method to only a specific class in C#?

    - by Anon
    I have a class A with a public method in C#. I want to allow access to this method to only class B. Is this possible? UPDATE: This is what i'd like to do: public class Category { public int NumberOfInactiveProducts {get;} public IList<Product> Products {get;set;} public void ProcessInactiveProduct() { // do things... NumberOfInactiveProducts++; } } public class Product { public bool Inactive {get;} public Category Category {get;set;} public void SetInactive() { this.Inactive= true; Category.ProcessInactiveProduct(); } } I'd like other programmers to do: var prod = Repository.Get<Product>(id); prod.SetInactive(); I'd like to make sure they don't call ProcessInactiveProduct manually: var prod = Repository.Get<Product>(id); prod.SetInactive(); prod.Category.ProcessInactiveProduct(); I want to allow access of Category.ProcessInactiveProduct to only class Product. Other classes shouldn't be able to call Category.ProcessInactiveProduct.

    Read the article

  • Break a class in twain, or impose an interface for restricted access?

    - by bedwyr
    What's the best way of partitioning a class when its functionality needs to be externally accessed in different ways by different classes? Hopefully the following example will make the question clear :) I have a Java class which accesses a single location in a directory allowing external classes to perform read/write operations to it. Read operations return usage stats on the directory (e.g. available disk space, number of writes, etc.); write operations, obviously, allow external classes to write data to the disk. These methods always work on the same location, and receive their configuration (e.g. which directory to use, min disk space, etc.) from an external source (passed to the constructor). This class looks something like this: public class DiskHandler { public DiskHandler(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int space = getAvailableSpace(); ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } There's quite a bit more going on, but this will do to suffice. This class needs to be accessed differently by two external classes. One class needs access to the read operations; the other needs access to both read and write operations. public class DiskWriter { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskWriter() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { diskHandler.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskReader() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskHandler.getAvailableSpace(...); } } At this point, both classes share the same class, but the class which should only read has access to the write methods. Solution 1 I could break this class into two. One class would handle read operations, and the other would handle writes: // NEW "UTILITY" CLASSES public class WriterUtil { private ReaderUtil diskReader; public WriterUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... diskReader = new ReaderUtil(dir, minSpace); } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(); ... } } public class ReaderUtil { public ReaderUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } // MODIFIED EXTERNALLY-ACCESSING CLASSES public class DiskWriter { WriterUtil diskWriter; public DiskWriter() { diskWriter = new WriterUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { diskWriter.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { ReaderUtil diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new ReaderUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(...); } } This solution prevents classes from having access to methods they should not, but it also breaks encapsulation. The original DiskHandler class was completely self-contained and only needed config parameters via a single constructor. By breaking apart the functionality into read/write classes, they both are concerned with the directory and both need to be instantiated with their respective values. In essence, I don't really care to duplicate the concerns. Solution 2 I could implement an interface which only provisions read operations, and use this when a class only needs access to those methods. The interface might look something like this: public interface Readable { int getAvailableSpace(); } The Reader class would instantiate the object like this: Readable diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new DiskHandler(...); } This solution seems brittle, and prone to confusion in the future. It doesn't guarantee developers will use the correct interface in the future. Any changes to the implementation of the DiskHandler could also need to update the interface as well as the accessing classes. I like it better than the previous solution, but not by much. Frankly, neither of these solutions seems perfect, but I'm not sure if one should be preferred over the other. I really don't want to break the original class up, but I also don't know if the interface buys me much in the long run. Are there other solutions I'm missing?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244  | Next Page >