Search Results

Search found 17041 results on 682 pages for 'architecture design'.

Page 281/682 | < Previous Page | 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288  | Next Page >

  • C++ inheritance and member function pointers

    - by smh
    In C++, can member function pointers be used to point to derived (or even base) class members? EDIT: Perhaps an example will help. Suppose we have a hierarchy of three classes X, Y, Z in order of inheritance. Y therefore has a base class X and a derived class Z. Now we can define a member function pointer p for class Y. This is written as: void (Y::*p)(); (For simplicity, I'll assume we're only interested in functions with the signature void f() ) This pointer p can now be used to point to member functions of class Y. This question (two questions, really) is then: Can p be used to point to a function in the derived class Z? Can p be used to point to a function in the base class X?

    Read the article

  • Pagination in a Rich Domain Model

    - by user246790
    I use rich domain model in my app. The basic ideas were taken there. For example I have User and Comment entities. They are defined as following: <?php class Model_User extends Model_Abstract { public function getComments() { /** * @var Model_Mapper_Db_Comment */ $mapper = $this->getMapper(); $commentsBlob = $mapper->getUserComments($this->getId()); return new Model_Collection_Comments($commentsBlob); } } class Model_Mapper_Db_Comment extends Model_Mapper_Db_Abstract { const TABLE_NAME = 'comments'; protected $_mapperTableName = self::TABLE_NAME; public function getUserComments($user_id) { $commentsBlob = $this->_getTable()->fetchAllByUserId((int)$user_id); return $commentsBlob->toArray(); } } class Model_Comment extends Model_Abstract { } ?> Mapper's getUserComments function simply returns something like: return $this->getTable->fetchAllByUserId($user_id) which is array. fetchAllByUserId accepts $count and $offset params, but I don't know to pass them from my Controller to this function through model without rewriting all the model code. So the question is how can I organize pagination through model data (getComments). Is there a "beatiful" method to get comments from 5 to 10, not all, as getComments returns by default.

    Read the article

  • Element Content Versus Attribute for Simple XML Value

    - by MB
    I know the elements versus attributes debate has come up many times here and elsewhere (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here) but I haven't seen much discussion of elements versus attributes for simple property values. So which of the following approaches do you think is better for storing a simple value? A: Value in Element Content: <TotalCount>553</TotalCount> <CelsiusTemperature>23.5</CelsiusTemperature> <SingleDayPeriod>2010-05-29</SingleDayPeriod> <ZipCodeLocation>12203</ZipCodeLocation> or B: Value in Attribute: <TotalCount value="553"/> <CelsiusTemperature value="23.5"/> <SingleDayPeriod day="2010-05-29"/> <ZipCodeLocation code="12203"/> I suspect that putting the value in the element content (A) might look a little more familiar to most folks (though I'm not sure about that). Putting the value in an attribute (B) might use less characters, but that depends on the length of the element and attribute names. Putting the value in an attribute (B) might be more extensible, because you could potentially include all sorts of extra information as nested elements. Whereas, by putting the value inside the element content (A), you're restricting extensibility to adding more attributes. But then extensibility often isn't a concern for really simple properties - sometimes you know that you'll never need to add additional data. Bottom line might be that it simply doesn't matter, but it would still be great to hear some thoughts and see some votes for the two options.

    Read the article

  • Bad idea to have the same object, have a different side effect after method call.

    - by Nathan W
    Hi all, I'm having a bit of a gesign issue(again). Say I have this Buttonpad object: now this object is a wrapper object over one in a com object. At the moment it has a method on it called CreateInto(IComObject). Now to make a new button pad in the Com Object. You do: ButtonPad pad = new ButtonPad(); pad.Title = "Hello"; // Set some more properties. pad.CreateInto(Cominstance); The createinfo method will excute the right commands to buid the button pad in the com object. After it has been created it any calls against it are foward to the underlying object for change so: pad.Title = "New title"; will call the com object to set the title and also set the internal title variable. Basically any calls before the CreateInfo method only affect the .NET object anything after has the side effect of calling the com object also. I'm not very good at sequence diagrams but here is my attempt to explain whats going on: This doesn't feel good to me, it feels like I'm lying to the user about what the button pad does. I was going to have a object called WrappedButtonPad, which is returned from CreateInto and the user could make calls against that to make changes to the Com Object, but I feel having two objects that almost do the same thing but only differ by names might be even worse. Are these valid designs, or am I right to be worried? How else would you handle a object the can create and query a com object?

    Read the article

  • How would you organize this in asp.net mvc?

    - by chobo
    I have an asp.net mvc 2.0 application that contains Areas/Modules like calendar, admin, etc... There may be cases where more than one area needs to access the same Repo, so I am not sure where to put the Data Access Layers and Repositories. First Option: Should I create Data Access Layer files (Linq to SQL in my case) with their accompanying Repositories for each area, so each area only contains the Tables, and Repositories needed by those areas. The benefit is that everything needed to run that module is one place, so it is more encapsulated (in my mind anyway). The downside is that I may have duplicate queries, because other modules may use the same query. Second Option Or, would it be better to place the DAL and Repositories outside the Area's and treat them as Global? The advantage is I won't have any duplicate queries, but I may be loading a lot of unnecessary queries and DAL tables up for certain modules. It is also more work to reuse or modify these modules for future projects (though the chance of reusing them is slim to none :)) Which option makes more sense? If someone has a better way I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Responsive grid, floated elements move underneath one another when min-width is reached

    - by Francesca
    I'm in the process of creating a responsive site (currently only working on the main content.) I've created two floated divs with percentage based widths. One contains an image which resizes with the browser resizing. The image has a min-width of 100px. Can anyone tell me why when put into a mobile sized width it doesn't drop down? How can I make the image stack underneath the text? JS Fiddle Live site

    Read the article

  • What is the standard way to add an icon to a link with CSS?

    - by ewernli
    I'm used to use padding + background-image to place an icon next to a link. There are many example of this approach. Here is one from here: <a class="external" href="http://www.othersite.com/">link</a> a.external { padding-right: 15px; background: transparent url(images/external-link-icon.gif) no-repeat top right; } But most browser don't print background image, which is annoying. What is the standard to place icon next to links which is semantically correct and works in all cases? (I couldn't find an exact similar question. If there is one, just close this one as duplicate)

    Read the article

  • ruby on rails has_many through relationship

    - by BennyB
    Hi i'm having a little trouble with a has_many through relationship for my app and was hoping to find some help. So i've got Users & Lectures. Lectures are created by one user but then other users can then "join" the Lectures that have been created. Users have their own profile feed of the Lectures they have created & also have a feed of Lectures friends have created. This question however is not about creating a lecture but rather "Joining" a lecture that has been created already. I've created a "lecturerelationships" model & controller to handle this relationship between Lectures & the Users who have Joined (which i call "actives"). Users also then MUST "Exit" the Lecture (either by clicking "Exit" or navigating to one of the header navigation links). I'm grateful if anyone can work through some of this with me... I've got: Users.rb model Lectures.rb model Users_controller Lectures_controller then the following model lecturerelationship.rb class lecturerelationship < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :active_id, :joinedlecture_id belongs_to :active, :class_name => "User" belongs_to :joinedlecture, :class_name => "Lecture" validates :active_id, :presence => true validates :joinedlecture_id, :presence => true end lecturerelationships_controller.rb class LecturerelationshipsController < ApplicationController before_filter :signed_in_user def create @lecture = Lecture.find(params[:lecturerelationship][:joinedlecture_id]) current_user.join!(@lecture) redirect_to @lecture end def destroy @lecture = Lecturerelationship.find(params[:id]).joinedlecture current_user.exit!(@user) redirect_to @user end end Lectures that have been created (by friends) show up on a users feed in the following file _activity_item.html.erb <li id="<%= activity_item.id %>"> <%= link_to gravatar_for(activity_item.user, :size => 200), activity_item.user %><br clear="all"> <%= render :partial => 'shared/join', :locals => {:activity_item => activity_item} %> <span class="title"><%= link_to activity_item.title, lecture_url(activity_item) %></span><br clear="all"> <span class="user"> Joined by <%= link_to activity_item.user.name, activity_item.user %> </span><br clear="all"> <span class="timestamp"> <%= time_ago_in_words(activity_item.created_at) %> ago. </span> <% if current_user?(activity_item.user) %> <%= link_to "delete", activity_item, :method => :delete, :confirm => "Are you sure?", :title => activity_item.content %> <% end %> </li> Then you see I link to the the 'shared/join' partial above which can be seen in the file below _join.html.erb <%= form_for(current_user.lecturerelationships.build(:joinedlecture_id => activity_item.id)) do |f| %> <div> <%= f.hidden_field :joinedlecture_id %> </div> <%= f.submit "Join", :class => "btn btn-large btn-info" %> <% end %> Some more files that might be needed: config/routes.rb SampleApp::Application.routes.draw do resources :users do member do get :following, :followers, :joined_lectures end end resources :sessions, :only => [:new, :create, :destroy] resources :lectures, :only => [:create, :destroy, :show] resources :relationships, :only => [:create, :destroy] #for users following each other resources :lecturerelationships, :only => [:create, :destroy] #users joining existing lectures So what happens is the lecture comes in my activity_feed with a Join button option at the bottom...which should create a lecturerelationship of an "active" & "joinedlecture" (which obviously are supposed to be coming from the user & lecture classes. But the error i get when i click the join button is as follows: ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid in LecturerelationshipsController#create SQLite3::ConstraintException: constraint failed: INSERT INTO "lecturerelationships" ("active_id", "created_at", "joinedlecture_id", "updated_at") VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?) Also i've included my user model (seems the error is referring to it) user.rb class User < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :email, :name, :password, :password_confirmation has_secure_password has_many :lectures, :dependent => :destroy has_many :lecturerelationships, :foreign_key => "active_id", :dependent => :destroy has_many :joined_lectures, :through => :lecturerelationships, :source => :joinedlecture before_save { |user| user.email = email.downcase } before_save :create_remember_token validates :name, :presence => true, :length => { :maximum => 50 } VALID_EMAIL_REGEX = /\A[\w+\-.]+@[a-z\d\-.]+\.[a-z]+\z/i validates :email, :presence => true, :format => { :with => VALID_EMAIL_REGEX }, :uniqueness => { :case_sensitive => false } validates :password, :presence => true, :length => { :minimum => 6 } validates :password_confirmation, :presence => true def activity # This feed is for "My Activity" - basically lectures i've started Lecture.where("user_id = ?", id) end def friendactivity Lecture.from_users_followed_by(self) end # lECTURE TO USER (JOINING) RELATIONSHIPS def joined?(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.find_by_joinedlecture_id(selected_lecture.id) end def join!(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.create!(:joinedlecture_id => selected_lecture.id) end def exit!(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.find_by_joinedlecture_id(selected_lecture.id).destroy end end Thanks for any and all help - i'll be on here for a while so as mentioned i'd GREATLY appreciate someone who may have the time to work through my issues with me...

    Read the article

  • Looking for Programming Language that allows you to change true and false.

    - by Maushu
    For my curiosity sake I'm looking for a dynamic object oriented language that allows you to change true to false and vice versa. Something like this: true = false, false = true; This should also affect any conditional statements, therefore 42 == 42 should return False. Basically, with this premise, nothing in the language would be safe from the programmer. Is there any language like this?

    Read the article

  • many-to-many-to-many, incl alignment of data from diff sources

    - by JefeCoon
    Re-factoring dbase to support many:many:many. At the second and third levels we need to preserve end-user 'mapping' or aligning of data from different sources, e.g. Order 17 FirstpartyOrderID => aha LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => AA-1 # maps to 77-a LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => AA-2 # maps to 77-b, 77-c LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-x # maps to 77-zulu, 77-alpha, 99-foxtrot LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-y # maps to 77-zulu, 99-foxtrot LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-z # maps to 77-alpha ThirdpartyOrderID => foo LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-a LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-b LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-c LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 77-zulu LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 77-alpha ThirdpartyOrderID => bar LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 99-foxtrot Each LineItem has daily datapoints reported from its own source (Firstparty|Thirdparty). In our UI & app we provide tools to align these, then we'd like to save them into the cleanest possible schema for querying, enabling us to diff the reported daily datapoints, and perform other daily calculations (which we'll store in the dbase also, fortunately that should be cake once we've nailed this). We need to map related [firstparty|thirdparty]line_items which have their own respective datapoints. We'll be using the association to pull each line_items collection of datapoints for summary and discrepancy calculations. I'm considering two options, std has_many,through x2 --or-- possibly (scary) ubermasterjoin table OptionA: order<<-->> order_join_table[id,order_id,firstparty_order_id,thirdparty_order_id] <<-->>line_item order_join_table[firstparty_order_id]-->raw_order[id] order_join_table[thirdparty_order_id]-->raw_order[id] raw_order-->raw_line_items[raw_order_id] line_item<<-->> line_item_join[id,LI_join_id,firstparty_LI,thirdparty_LI <<-->>raw_line_items line_item_join[firstparty_LI]-->raw_line_item[id] line_item_join[thirdparty_LI]-->raw_line_item[id] raw_line_item<<-->>datapoints = we rely upon join to store all mappings of first|third orders & line_items = keys to raw_* enable lookup of these order & line_item details = concerns about circular references and/or lack of correct mapping logic, e.g order--line_item--raw_line_items vs. order--raw_order--raw_line_items OptionB: order<<-->> join_master[id,order_id,FP_order_id,TP_order_id,FP_line_item_id,TP_line_item_id] join_master[FP_order_id & TP_order_id]-->raw_order[id] join_master[FP_line_item_id & TP_line_item_id]-->raw_line_item[id] = every combo of FP_line_item + TP_line_item writes a record into the join_master table = "theoretically" queries easy/fast/flexible/sexy At long last, my questions: a) any learnings from painful firsthand experience about how best to implement/tune/optimize many-to-many-to-many relationships b) in rails? c) any painful gotchas (circular references, slow queries, spaghetti-monsters) to watch out for? d) any joy & goodness in Rails3 that makes this magically easy & joyful? e) anyone written the "how to do many-to-many-to-many schema in Rails and make it fast & sexy?" tutorial that I somehow haven't found? If not, I'll follow up with our learnings in the hope it's helpful.. Thanks in advance- --Jeff

    Read the article

  • What's the most common scenario for Cocoa app setup during first launch?

    - by Eimantas
    I am creating an app and I would like a user to set some obligatory preferences during first app launch. What is the most common scenario to achieve this? Should I set some user defaults to see if the app has been setup? Also - if I determine that the app is being launched for the first time - how should I display "Setup" window? If I load it from the separte xib file - how will I deffer the display of main app window?

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern [.net/c#]

    - by gsharp
    Hi We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-) Thanks for you help.

    Read the article

  • Partial class or "chained inheritance"

    - by Charlie boy
    Hi From my understanding partial classes are a bit frowned upon by professional developers, but I've come over a bit of an issue; I have made an implementation of the RichTextBox control that uses user32.dll calls for faster editing of large texts. That results in quite a bit of code. Then I added spellchecking capabilities to the control, this was made in another class inheriting RichTextBox control as well. That also makes up a bit of code. These two functionalities are quite separate but I would like them to be merged so that I can drop one control on my form that has both fast editing capabilities and spellchecking built in. I feel that simply adding the code form one class to the other would result in a too large code file, especially since there are two very distinct areas of functionality, so I seem to need another approach. Now to my question; To merge these two classes should I make the spellchecking RichTextBox inherit from the fast edit one, that in turn inherits RichTextBox? Or should I make the two classes partials of a single class and thus making them more “equal” so to speak? This is more of a question of OO principles and exercise on my part than me trying to reinvent the wheel, I know there are plenty of good text editing controls out there. But this is just a hobby for me and I just want to know how this kind of solution would be managed by a professional. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • how to tackle a custom forms database

    - by Neil Hickman
    I'm currently researching a project for the place that I work in. We are trying to create a system that will allow forms to be set up dynamically from a database. My question is what database structure would best suit something like this? I currently have a structure of: forms_form forms_formfields forms_formdata I don't think this is the most appropriate layout for this. Basically to make is make sense I need to be able to make a form within the database that can have infinite fields all customized and have the data when submitted stored in the database.

    Read the article

  • Events in Classes (VB.NET)

    - by Otaku
    I find that I write a lot of code within my classes to keep properties in sync with each other. I've read about Events in Classes, but have not been able to wrap my head around how to make them work for what I'm looking for. I could use some advice here. For example, in this one I always want to keep myColor up to date with any change whatsoever in any or all of the Red, Green or Blue properties. Class myColors Private Property Red As Byte Private Property Green As Byte Private Property Blue As Byte Private Property myColor As Color Sub New() myColor = Color.FromArgb(0, 0, 0) End Sub Sub ChangeRed(ByVal r As Byte) Red = r myColor = Color.FromArgb(Red, Green, Blue) End Sub Sub ChangeBlue(ByVal b As Byte) Blue = b myColor = Color.FromArgb(Red, Green, Blue) End Sub End Class If one or more of those changes, I want myColor to be updated. Easy enough as above, but is there a way to work with events that would automatically do this so I don't have to put myColor = Color.FromArgb(Red, Green, Blue) in every sub routine?

    Read the article

  • Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

    - by Roman A. Taycher
    If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

    Read the article

  • Multiple operations depending on the type of the object passed

    - by mixm
    Assuming I create a method which is passed an object and that method would perform an action depending on the object passed. How should I identify the object? I thought of using the class name to identify the object, but that may be impractical since I could easily change the class name of objects, and generate headaches during future development. Am I right? edit: for example, i have objects ball and bomb. if i have another object called wall, and the wall has the method to resolve collisions with the wall (e.g. the coordinates of the colliding ball and bomb) but have different logic depending on the colliding object (i.e. ball and bomb)

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern

    - by gsharp
    We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-)

    Read the article

  • Modules vs. Classes and their influence on descendants of ActiveRecord::Base

    - by Chris
    Here's a Ruby OO head scratcher for ya, brought about by this Rails scenario: class Product < ActiveRecord::Base has_many(:prices) # define private helper methods end module PrintProduct attr_accessor(:isbn) # override methods in ActiveRecord::Base end class Book < Product include PrintProduct end Product is the base class of all products. Books are kept in the products table via STI. The PrintProduct module brings some common behavior and state to descendants of Product. Book is used inside fields_for blocks in views. This works for me, but I found some odd behavior: After form submission, inside my controller, if I call a method on a book that is defined in PrintProduct, and that method calls a helper method defined in Product, which in turn calls the prices method defined by has_many, I'll get an error complaining that Book#prices is not found. Why is that? Book is a direct descendant of Product! More interesting is the following.. As I developed this hierarchy PrintProduct started to become more of an abstract ActiveRecord::Base, so I thought it prudent to redefine everything as such: class Product < ActiveRecord::Base end class PrintProduct < Product end class Book < PrintProduct end All method definitions, etc. are the same. In this case, however, my web form won't load because the attributes defined by attr_accessor (which are "virtual attributes" referenced by the form but not persisted in the DB) aren't found. I'll get an error saying that there is no method Book#isbn. Why is that?? I can't see a reason why the attr_accessor attributes are not found inside my form's fields_for block when PrintProduct is a class, but they are found when PrintProduct is a Module. Any insight would be appreciated. I'm dying to know why these errors are occurring!

    Read the article

  • Improving MVP in Scala

    - by Alexey Romanov
    The classical strongly typed MVP pattern looks like this in Scala: trait IView { } trait Presenter[View <: IView] { // or have it as an abstract type member val view : View } case class View1(...) extends IView { ... } case object Presenter1 extends Presenter[View1] { val view = View1(...) } Now, I wonder if there is any nice way to improve on it which I am missing...

    Read the article

  • How to signal object instantiation in a Collaboration/Communication Diagram?

    - by devoured elysium
    I'd like to know how to translate the following line of code to a Collaboration Diagram: Food food = new Food("abc", 123); I know that I can call an Food's method using the following notation: MyStaticMethod() ----------------------> -------- | | | Food | | | -------- being that equivalent to Taste taste = Food.MyStaticMethod(); and MyInstanceMethod() ----------------------> --------------- | | | food : Food | | | --------------- is equivalent to food.MyInstanceMethod(); but how do I signal that I want to call a given constructor on Food? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288  | Next Page >