Search Results

Search found 17940 results on 718 pages for 'algorithm design'.

Page 287/718 | < Previous Page | 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294  | Next Page >

  • When is lazy evaluation not useful?

    - by Cherian
    Delay execution is almost always a boon. But then there are cases when it’s a problem and you resort to “fetch” (in Nhibernate) to eager fetch it. Do you know practical situations when lazy evaluation can bite you back…?

    Read the article

  • Confused about this factory, as it doesn't look like an Abstract Factory nor Factory Method

    - by Pin
    I'm looking into Guice and I've been reading its documentation recently. Reading the motivation section I don't understand the factories part, why they name it that way. To me that factory is just a wrapper for the implementing class they want it to return after calling getInstance(). public class CreditCardProcessorFactory { private static CreditCardProcessor instance; public static void setInstance(CreditCardProcessor creditCardProcessor) { instance = creditCardProcessor; } public static CreditCardProcessor getInstance() { if (instance == null) { throw new IllegalStateException("CreditCardProcessorFactory not initialized. " + "Did you forget to call CreditCardProcessor.setInstance() ?"); } return instance; } } Why do they call it factory as well if it is neither an abstract factory nor a factory method? Or am I missing something? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How is jQuery so fast?

    - by ClarkeyBoy
    Hey, I have a rather large application which, on the admin frontend, takes a few seconds to load a page because of all the pageviews that it has to load into objects before displaying anything. Its a bit complex to explain how the system works, but a few of my other questions explains the system in great detail. The main difference between what they say and the current system is that the customer frontend no longer loads all the pageviews into objects when a customer first views the page - it simply adds the pageview to the database and creates an object in an unsynchronised list... to put it simply, when a customer views a page it no longer loads all the pageviews into objects; but the admin frontend still does. I have been working on some admin tools on the customer frontend recently, so if an administrator clicks the description of an item in the catalogue then the right hand column will display statistics and available actions for the selected item. To do this the page which gets loaded (through $('action-container').load(bla bla bla);) into the right hand column has to loop through ALL the pageviews - this ultimately means that ALL the pageviews are loaded into objects if they haven't been already. For some reason this loads really REALLY fast. The difference in speed is only like a second on my dev site, but the live site has thousands of pageviews so the difference is quite big... So my question is: why is it that the admin frontend loads so slowly while using $(bla).load(bla); is so fast? I mean whatever method jQuery uses, can't browsers use this method too and load pages super-fast? Obviously not as someone would've done that by now - but I am interested to know just why the difference is so big... is it just my system or is there a major difference in speed between the browser getting a page and jQuery getting a page? Do other people experience the same kind of differences? Thanks in advance, Regards, Richard

    Read the article

  • How do I create breadcrumbs like in this Apple site ?

    - by Jsmith
    I've seen this page here and I really like the breadcrumbs at the bottom. How do I achieve this behavior ? The breadcrumbs at the bottom stays at the bottom and nomatter if you're scrolling down, it is still there. http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/navigation/index.html?section=Resource+Types&topic=Getting+Started Please someone help me with some good code. Because I have no clue.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid using this in a contructor

    - by Paralife
    I have this situation: interface MessageListener { void onMessageReceipt(Message message); } class MessageReceiver { MessageListener listener; public MessageReceiver(MessageListener listener, other arguments...) { this.listener = listener; } loop() { Message message = nextMessage(); listener.onMessageReceipt(message); } } and I want to avoid the following pattern: (Using the this in the Client constructor) class Client implements MessageListener { MessageReceiver receiver; MessageSender sender; public Client(...) { receiver = new MessageReceiver(this, other arguments...); sender = new Sender(...); } . . . @Override public void onMessageReceipt(Message message) { if(Message.isGood()) sender.send("Congrtulations"); else sender.send("Boooooooo"); } } The reason why i need the above functionality is because i want to call the sender inside the onMessageReceipt() function, for example to send a reply. But I dont want to pass the sender into a listener, so the only way I can think of is containing the sender in a class that implements the listener, hence the above resulting Client implementation. Is there a way to achive this without the use of 'this' in the constructor? It feels bizare and i dont like it, since i am passing myself to an object(MessageReceiver) before I am fully constructed. On the other hand, the MessageReceiver is not passed from outside, it is constructed inside, but does this 'purifies' the bizarre pattern? I am seeking for an alternative or an assurance of some kind that this is safe, or situations on which it might backfire on me.

    Read the article

  • C# Setting Properties using Index

    - by Guazz
    I have a business class that contains many properties for various stock-exchange price types. This is a sample of the class: public class Prices { public decimal Today {get; set} public decimal OneDay {get; set} public decimal SixDay {get; set} public decimal TenDay {get; set} public decimal TwelveDay {get; set} public decimal OneDayAdjusted {get; set;} public decimal SixDayAdjusted {get; set;} public decimal TenDayAdjusted {get; set;} public decimal OneHundredDayAdjusted {get; set;} } I have a legacy system that supplies the prices using string ids to identify the price type. E.g. Today = "0D" OneDay = "1D" SixDay = "6D" //..., etc. Firstly, I load all the values to an IDictionary() collection so we have: [KEY] VALUE [0D] = 1.23456 [1D] = 1.23456 [6D] = 1.23456 ...., etc. Secondly, I set the properties of the Prices class using a method that takes the above collection as a parameter like so: SetPricesValues(IDictionary<string, decimal> pricesDictionary) { // TODAY'S PRICE string TODAY = "D0"; if (true == pricesDictionary.ContainsKey(TODAY)) { this.Today = pricesDictionary[TODAY]; } // OneDay PRICE string ONE_DAY = "D1"; if (true == pricesDictionary.ContainsKey(ONE_DAY)) { this.OneDay = pricesDictionary[ONE_DAY]; } //..., ..., etc., for each other property } Is there a more elegant technique to set a large amount of properties? Thanks, j

    Read the article

  • XAML Binding to complex value objects

    - by Gus
    I have a complex value object class that has 1) a number or read-only properties; 2) a private constructor; and 3) a number of static singleton instance properties [so the properties of a ComplexValueObject never change and an individual value is instantiated once in the application's lifecycle]. public class ComplexValueClass { /* A number of read only properties */ private readonly string _propertyOne; public string PropertyOne { get { return _propertyOne; } } private readonly string _propertyTwo; public string PropertyTwo { get { return _propertyTwo; } } /* a private constructor */ private ComplexValueClass(string propertyOne, string propertyTwo) { _propertyOne = propertyOne; _propertyTwo = PropertyTwo; } /* a number of singleton instances */ private static ComplexValueClass _complexValueObjectOne; public static ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObjectOne { get { if (_complexValueObjectOne == null) { _complexValueObjectOne = new ComplexValueClass("string one", "string two"); } return _complexValueObjectOne; } } private static ComplexValueClass _complexValueObjectTwo; public static ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObjectTwo { get { if (_complexValueObjectTwo == null) { _complexValueObjectTwo = new ComplexValueClass("string three", "string four"); } return _complexValueObjectTwo; } } } I have a data context class that looks something like this: public class DataContextClass : INotifyPropertyChanged { private ComplexValueClass _complexValueClass; public ComplexValueClass ComplexValueObject { get { return _complexValueClass; } set { _complexValueClass = value; PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs("ComplexValueObject")); } } } I would like to write a XAML binding statement to a property on my complex value object that updates the UI whenever the entire complex value object changes. What is the best and/or most concise way of doing this? I have something like: <Object Value="{Binding ComplexValueObject.PropertyOne}" /> but the UI does not update when ComplexValueObject as a whole changes.

    Read the article

  • recursive delete trigger and ON DELETE CASCADE contraints are not deleting everything

    - by bitbonk
    I have a very simple datamodel that represents a tree structure: The RootEntity is the root of such a tree, it can contain children of type ContainerEntity and of type AtomEntity. The type ContainerEntity again can contain children of type ContainerEntity and of type AtomEntity but can not contain children of type RootEntity. Children are referenced in a well known order. The DB model for this is below. My problem now is that when I delete a RootEntity I want all children to be deleted recursively. I have create foreign key with CASCADE DELETE and two delete triggers for this. But it is not deleting everything, it always leaves some items in the ContainerEntity, AtomEntity, ContainerEntity_Children and AtomEntity_Children tables. Seemling beginning with the recursionlevel of 3. CREATE TABLE RootEntity ( Id UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL, Name VARCHAR(500) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_RootEntity PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (Id), ); CREATE TABLE ContainerEntity ( Id UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL, Name VARCHAR(500) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_ContainerEntity PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (Id), ); CREATE TABLE AtomEntity ( Id UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL, Name VARCHAR(500) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_AtomEntity PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (Id), ); CREATE TABLE RootEntity_Children ( ParentId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL, OrderIndex INT NOT NULL, ChildContainerEntityId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NULL, ChildAtomEntityId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NULL, ChildIsContainerEntity BIT NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_RootEntity_Children PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (ParentId, OrderIndex), -- foreign key to parent RootEntity CONSTRAINT FK_RootEntiry_Children__RootEntity FOREIGN KEY (ParentId) REFERENCES RootEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, -- foreign key to referenced (child) ContainerEntity CONSTRAINT FK_RootEntiry_Children__ContainerEntity FOREIGN KEY (ChildContainerEntityId) REFERENCES ContainerEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, -- foreign key to referenced (child) AtomEntity CONSTRAINT FK_RootEntiry_Children__AtomEntity FOREIGN KEY (ChildAtomEntityId) REFERENCES AtomEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, ); CREATE TABLE ContainerEntity_Children ( ParentId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL, OrderIndex INT NOT NULL, ChildContainerEntityId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NULL, ChildAtomEntityId UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NULL, ChildIsContainerEntity BIT NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_ContainerEntity_Children PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (ParentId, OrderIndex), -- foreign key to parent ContainerEntity CONSTRAINT FK_ContainerEntity_Children__RootEntity FOREIGN KEY (ParentId) REFERENCES ContainerEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, -- foreign key to referenced (child) ContainerEntity CONSTRAINT FK_ContainerEntity_Children__ContainerEntity FOREIGN KEY (ChildContainerEntityId) REFERENCES ContainerEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, -- foreign key to referenced (child) AtomEntity CONSTRAINT FK_ContainerEntity_Children__AtomEntity FOREIGN KEY (ChildAtomEntityId) REFERENCES AtomEntity (Id) ON DELETE CASCADE, ); CREATE TRIGGER Delete_RootEntity_Children ON RootEntity_Children FOR DELETE AS DELETE FROM ContainerEntity WHERE Id IN (SELECT ChildContainerEntityId FROM deleted) DELETE FROM AtomEntity WHERE Id IN (SELECT ChildAtomEntityId FROM deleted) GO CREATE TRIGGER Delete_ContainerEntiy_Children ON ContainerEntity_Children FOR DELETE AS DELETE FROM ContainerEntity WHERE Id IN (SELECT ChildContainerEntityId FROM deleted) DELETE FROM AtomEntity WHERE Id IN (SELECT ChildAtomEntityId FROM deleted) GO

    Read the article

  • Web user expectations

    - by Ash
    When designing a good Web GUI what expectations can we expect from an end user? I've come up with the following, but I wonder if there are any others which can suggest.. If I click on a hyperlink it will take me to another page/part of this page If I tick/untick a checkbox it might alter the page state (enable/disable elements) If I click on a button I expect it to do something to data. If I click on a button I expect something to happen immediately (either to the current page, or for me to be taken to another page) If I have clicked on a hyperlink and it has taken me to another page, I expect to be able to use the Back button to get back to the previous page in a state similar to that which I left it in If I change something in a form, I can change it back to its previous value if necessary Unless I click on the 'Submit' button nothing should happen to my data. If I bookmark/favourite a page then it should show the same related data each time I visit it If text is underlined and looks like a link, it should be a link and act as one The reasoning behind this question is more a 'UI from hell' one. For example I have come across pages which checking a tickbox next to a record will delete it, straight away, via ajax. To me that just seems wrong, a checkbox is a toggle - something which a delete operation definitely isn't!

    Read the article

  • Data access pattern

    - by andlju
    I need some advice on what kind of pattern(s) I should use for pushing/pulling data into my application. I'm writing a rule-engine that needs to hold quite a large amount of data in-memory in order to be efficient enough. I have some rather conflicting requirements; It is not acceptable for the engine to always have to wait for a full pre-load of all data before it is functional. Only fetching and caching data on-demand will lead to the engine taking too long before it is running quickly enough. An external event can trigger the need for specific parts of the data to be reloaded. Basically, I think I need a combination of pushing and pulling data into the application. A simplified version of my current "pattern" looks like this (in psuedo-C# written in notepad): // This interface is implemented by all classes that needs the data interface IDataSubscriber { void RegisterData(Entity data); } // This interface is implemented by the data access class interface IDataProvider { void EnsureLoaded(Key dataKey); void RegisterSubscriber(IDataSubscriber subscriber); } class MyClassThatNeedsData : IDataSubscriber { IDataProvider _provider; MyClassThatNeedsData(IDataProvider provider) { _provider = provider; _provider.RegisterSubscriber(this); } public void RegisterData(Entity data) { // Save data for later StoreDataInCache(data); } void UseData(Key key) { // Make sure that the data has been stored in cache _provider.EnsureLoaded(key); Entity data = GetDataFromCache(key); } } class MyDataProvider : IDataProvider { List<IDataSubscriber> _subscribers; // Make sure that the data for key has been loaded to all subscribers public void EnsureLoaded(Key key) { if (HasKeyBeenMarkedAsLoaded(key)) return; PublishDataToSubscribers(key); MarkKeyAsLoaded(key); } // Force all subscribers to get a new version of the data for key public void ForceReload(Key key) { PublishDataToSubscribers(key); MarkKeyAsLoaded(key); } void PublishDataToSubscribers(Key key) { Entity data = FetchDataFromStore(key); foreach(var subscriber in _subscribers) { subscriber.RegisterData(data); } } } // This class will be spun off on startup and should make sure that all data is // preloaded as quickly as possible class MyPreloadingThread { IDataProvider _provider; MyPreloadingThread(IDataProvider provider) { _provider = provider; } void RunInBackground() { IEnumerable<Key> allKeys = GetAllKeys(); foreach(var key in allKeys) { _provider.EnsureLoaded(key); } } } I have a feeling though that this is not necessarily the best way of doing this.. Just the fact that explaining it seems to take two pages feels like an indication.. Any ideas? Any patterns out there I should have a look at?

    Read the article

  • Building big, immutable objects without using constructors having long parameter lists

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have some big (more than 3 fields) Objects which can and should be immutable. Every time I run into that case i tend to create constructor abominations with long parameter lists. It doesn't feel right, is hard to use and readability suffers. It is even worse if the fields are some sort of collection type like lists. A simple addSibling(S s) would ease the object creation so much but renders the object mutable. What do you guys use in such cases? I'm on Scala and Java, but i think the problem is language agnostic as long as the language is object oriented. Solutions I can think of: "Constructor abominations with long parameter lists" The Builder Pattern Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • How to do inclusive range queries when only half-open range is supported (ala SortedMap.subMap)

    - by polygenelubricants
    On SortedMap.subMap This is the API for SortedMap<K,V>.subMap: SortedMap<K,V> subMap(K fromKey, K toKey) : Returns a view of the portion of this map whose keys range from fromKey, inclusive, to toKey, exclusive. This inclusive lower bound, exclusive upper bound combo ("half-open range") is something that is prevalent in Java, and while it does have its benefits, it also has its quirks, as we shall soon see. The following snippet illustrates a simple usage of subMap: static <K,V> SortedMap<K,V> someSortOfSortedMap() { return Collections.synchronizedSortedMap(new TreeMap<K,V>()); } //... SortedMap<Integer,String> map = someSortOfSortedMap(); map.put(1, "One"); map.put(3, "Three"); map.put(5, "Five"); map.put(7, "Seven"); map.put(9, "Nine"); System.out.println(map.subMap(0, 4)); // prints "{1=One, 3=Three}" System.out.println(map.subMap(3, 7)); // prints "{3=Three, 5=Five}" The last line is important: 7=Seven is excluded, due to the exclusive upper bound nature of subMap. Now suppose that we actually need an inclusive upper bound, then we could try to write a utility method like this: static <V> SortedMap<Integer,V> subMapInclusive(SortedMap<Integer,V> map, int from, int to) { return (to == Integer.MAX_VALUE) ? map.tailMap(from) : map.subMap(from, to + 1); } Then, continuing on with the above snippet, we get: System.out.println(subMapInclusive(map, 3, 7)); // prints "{3=Three, 5=Five, 7=Seven}" map.put(Integer.MAX_VALUE, "Infinity"); System.out.println(subMapInclusive(map, 5, Integer.MAX_VALUE)); // {5=Five, 7=Seven, 9=Nine, 2147483647=Infinity} A couple of key observations need to be made: The good news is that we don't care about the type of the values, but... subMapInclusive assumes Integer keys for to + 1 to work. A generic version that also takes e.g. Long keys is not possible (see related questions) Not to mention that for Long, we need to compare against Long.MAX_VALUE instead Overloads for the numeric primitive boxed types Byte, Character, etc, as keys, must all be written individually A special check need to be made for toInclusive == Integer.MAX_VALUE, because +1 would overflow, and subMap would throw IllegalArgumentException: fromKey > toKey This, generally speaking, is an overly ugly and overly specific solution What about String keys? Or some unknown type that may not even be Comparable<?>? So the question is: is it possible to write a general subMapInclusive method that takes a SortedMap<K,V>, and K fromKey, K toKey, and perform an inclusive-range subMap queries? Related questions Are upper bounds of indexed ranges always assumed to be exclusive? Is it possible to write a generic +1 method for numeric box types in Java? On NavigableMap It should be mentioned that there's a NavigableMap.subMap overload that takes two additional boolean variables to signify whether the bounds are inclusive or exclusive. Had this been made available in SortedMap, then none of the above would've even been asked. So working with a NavigableMap<K,V> for inclusive range queries would've been ideal, but while Collections provides utility methods for SortedMap (among other things), we aren't afforded the same luxury with NavigableMap. Related questions Writing a synchronized thread-safety wrapper for NavigableMap On API providing only exclusive upper bound range queries Does this highlight a problem with exclusive upper bound range queries? How were inclusive range queries done in the past when exclusive upper bound is the only available functionality?

    Read the article

  • Create inherited class from base class

    - by Raj
    public class Car { private string make; private string model; public Car(string make, string model) { this.make = make; this.model = model; } public virtual void Display() { Console.WriteLine("Make: {0}", make); Console.WriteLine("Model: {0}", model); } public string Make { get{return make;} set{make = value;} } public string Model { get{return model;} set{model = value;} } } public class SuperCar:Car { private Car car; private int horsePower; public SuperCar(Car car) { this.car = car; } public int HorsePower { get{return horsePower;} set{horsepower = value;} } public override void Display() { base.Display(); Console.WriteLine("I am a super car"); } When I do something like Car myCar = new Car("Porsche", "911"); SuperCar mySupcar = new SuperCar(myCar); mySupcar.Display(); I only get "I am a supercar" but not the properties of my base class. Should I explicitly assign the properties of my base class in the SuperCar constructor? In fact I'm trying Decorator pattern where I want a class to add behaviour to a base class.

    Read the article

  • DRY programming dilemma

    - by fayer
    the situation is like this: im creating a Logger class that can write to a file but the write_to_file() function is in a helper class as a static function. i could call that function but then the Log class would be dependent to the helper class. isn't dependency bad? but if i can let it use a helper function then what is the point of having helper functions? what should one prioritize here: using helper functions and have to include this helper class everywhere (but the other 99 methods wont be useful) or just copy and paste into the Log class (but then if i have done this 100 times and then make a change i have to change in 100 places). share your thoughts and experience!

    Read the article

  • Best way to represent Gender in a class library used in multilingual applications

    - by Hauge
    I'm creating class library with some commonly used classes like persons, addresses etc. This library will be used in an multilingual application, and I am looking for the most convenient way to represent a persons gender. Ideally I would like to be able to code like this: Person person = new Person { Gender = Genders.Male, FirstName = "Nice", LastName = "Dude" } if (person.Gender == Genders.Male) Console.WriteLine("person is Male"); Console.WriteLine(person.Gender); //Should output: Male Console.WriteLine(person.Gender.ToString("da-DK")); //Should output the name of the gender in the language provided List<Gender> genders = Genders.GetAll(); foreach(Gender gender in genders) { Console.WriteLine(gender.ToString()); Console.WriteLine(gender.ToString("da-DK")); } What would you do? An enumeration and a specialized Gender class, but what about the localization then? Regards Jesper Hauge

    Read the article

  • Objective-C partial implementation of classes in separate files

    - by Aran Mulholland
    I am using core data and am generating classes from my data model. I implement custom methods in these classes, however when i regenerate i generate over the top so i end up copying and pasting a bit. What i would like to do is split my implementation files ('.m') so i can have one header file with multiple '.m' files. then i can keep my custom methods in one and not have to worry about erasing them when i regenerate. I use this technique in .NET a lot with its partial keyword. Is there anything similar in objective-C

    Read the article

  • good way to implement NotSpecification: isSpecialCaseOf?

    - by koen
    I'm implementing the specification pattern. The NotSpecification seems simple at first: NotSpecification.IsSpecialCaseOf(otherSpecification) return !this.specification.isSpecialCaseOf(otherSpecification) But it doesn't work for all Specifications: Not(LesserThan(5)).IsSpecialCaseOf(GreaterThan(4)) This should be true. So far I think that the only way to accomplish the isSpecialCaseOf the NotSpecification is to implement the remainderUnsatisfiedBy (partial subsumption in the paper on the specification pattern). But maybe I am missing something more simple or a logical insight that makes this unnecessary. Question: Is there another way of implementing this by not using remainderUnsatisfiedBy?

    Read the article

  • What are some funny error pages websites have?

    - by Dean
    This question is along the same lines as What are some funny loading statements to keep my users amused, I want screenshots of all the coolest "error" pages site's throw up when something's broken. I know pandora.com talks about a panda ravaging it's way through the office, twitter's has the little birds floating around or something, sourceforge had one with some funny robots the other day. I'm sure I saw a blog once that had a bunch of them, but it's kinda hard to google "error pages". Community Wiki, of course :)

    Read the article

  • Converting old WCF service to RIA one

    - by Artur
    Hi there, Currently I have a service that looks like: Some app <-- WCF Service <-- Business Logic <-- Entity Framework Model <-- SQL Database One of "some app" would be Silverlight, but there as well will be lots of other clients (mainly mobile devices). To me the greatest benefit of having RIA services is possibility of making ordinary (not asynchronous) calls from Silverlight. I wondered if there is an easy way of converting what I have so far to be a RIA service? I as well wonder if there is a point of doing so if I plan to use the same service for multiple platforms/clients? Any help/links would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Accessing the Private Constructor

    - by harigm
    I am java developer, went for an interview. I have been asked a question about the Private constructor 1) Can I access a Private Constructor of a Class and Instantiate the class. I was thinking and gave the answer directly--- "NO" But its wrong, can any one help Why NO? and How we can achieve this

    Read the article

  • Business Layer Pattern on Rails? MVCL

    - by Fabiano PS
    That is a broad question, and I appreciate no short/dumb asnwers like: "Oh that is the model job, this quest is retarded (period)" PROBLEM Where I work at people created a system over 2 years for managing the manufacture process over demand in the most simplified still broad as possible, involving selling, buying, assemble, The system is coded over Ruby On Rails. The result has been changed lots of times and the result is a mess on callbacks (some are called several times), 200+ models, and fat controllers: Total bad. The QUESTION is, if there is a gem, or pattern designed to handle Rails large app logic? The logic whould be able to fully talk to models (whose only concern would be data format handling and validation) What I EXPECT is to reduce complexity from various controllers, and hard to track callbacks into files with the responsibility to handle a business operation logic. In some cases there is the need to wait for a response, in others, only validation of the input is enough and a bg process would take place. ie: -- Sell some products (need to wait the operation to finish) 1. Set a View able to get the products input 2. Controller gets the product list inputed by employee and call the logic Logic::ExecuteWithResponse('sell', 'products', :prods => @product_list_with_qtt, :when => @date, :employee => current_user() ) This Logic would handle buying order, assemble order, machine schedule, warehouse reservation, and others

    Read the article

  • Java: initialization problem with private-final-int-value and empty constructor

    - by HH
    $ javac InitInt.java InitInt.java:7: variable right might not have been initialized InitInt(){} ^ 1 error $ cat InitInt.java import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class InitInt { private final int right; InitInt(){} public static void main(String[] args) { // I don't want to assign any value. // just initialize it, how? InitInt test = new InitInt(); System.out.println(test.getRight()); // later assiging a value } public int getRight(){return right;} } Initialization problem with Constructor InitInt{ // Still the error, "may not be initialized" // How to initialise it? if(snippetBuilder.length()>(charwisePos+25)){ right=charwisePos+25; }else{ right=snippetBuilder.length()-1; } }

    Read the article

  • Relational vs. Dimensional Databases, what's the difference?

    - by grautur
    I'm trying to learn about OLAP and data warehousing, and I'm confused about the difference between relational and dimensional modeling. Is dimensional modeling basically relational modeling, but allowing for redundant/un-normalized data? For example, let's say I have historical sales data on (product, city, # sales). I understand that the following would be a relational point-of-view: Product | City | # Sales Apples, San Francisco, 400 Apples, Boston, 700 Apples, Seattle, 600 Oranges, San Francisco, 550 Oranges, Boston, 500 Oranges, Seattle, 600 While the following is a more dimensional point-of-view: Product | San Francisco | Boston | Seattle Apples, 400, 700, 600 Oranges, 550, 500, 600 But it seems like both points of view would nonetheless be implemented in an identical star schema: Fact table: Product ID, Region ID, # Sales Product dimension: Product ID, Product Name City dimension: City ID, City Name And it's not until you start adding some additional details to each dimension that the differences start popping up. For instance, if you wanted to track regions as well, a relational database would tend to have a separate region table, in order to keep everything normalized: City dimension: City ID, City Name, Region ID Region dimension: Region ID, Region Name, Region Manager, # Regional Stores While a dimensional database would allow for denormalization to keep the region data inside the city dimension, in order to make it easier to slice the data: City dimension: City ID, City Name, Region Name, Region Manager, # Regional Stores Is this correct?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294  | Next Page >