Search Results

Search found 17921 results on 717 pages for 'cocoa design patterns'.

Page 288/717 | < Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >

  • Validation without ServiceLocator

    - by Dmitriy Nagirnyak
    Hi, I am getting back again and again to it thinking about the best way to perform validation on POCO objects that need access to some context (ISession in NH, IRepository for example). The only option I still can see is to use S*ervice Locator*, so my validation would look like: public User : ICanValidate { public User() {} // We need this constructor (so no context known) public virtual string Username { get; set; } public IEnumerable<ValidationError> Validate() { if (ServiceLocator.GetService<IUserRepository>().FindUserByUsername(Username) != null) yield return new ValidationError("Username", "User already exists.") } } I already use Inversion Of control and Dependency Injection and really don't like the ServiceLocator due to number of facts: Harder to maintain implicit dependencies. Harder to test the code. Potential threading issues. Explicit dependency only on the ServiceLocator. The code becomes harder to understand. Need to register the ServiceLocator interfaces during the testing. But on the other side, with plain POCO objects, I do not see any other way of performing the validation like above without ServiceLocator and only using IoC/DI. So the question would be: is there any way to use DI/IoC for the situation described above? Thanks, Dmitriy.

    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 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

  • 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

  • Sub-Schemas in SQL Server 2005/2008

    - by Maushu
    This is a simple question yet I was unable to find any information at all about this. Is it possible to have sub-schemas in SQL Server 2005/2008? Example: Having a HR (Human Resources) schema with a sub-schema called Training (with tables related to this). It would end up like HR.Training.* where * would be the tables.

    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

  • 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

  • Examples of IOC/DI over Singleton

    - by Amitd
    Hi, Just started learning/reading about DI and IOC frameworks. Also I read many articles on SO and internet that say that one should prefer DI/IOC over singleton. Can anyone give/link examples of exactly how DI/IOC eliminates/solves the various issues regarding the Singleton pattern? (hopefully code and explanation for better understanding) Also given a system has already implemented Singleton pattern, how to refactor/implement DI/IOC for the same? (any examples for the same?) (Language/Framework no bars..C# would be helpful) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Which is the most memory leak safe approach.

    - by MattC
    I have a table of frequently updated information. This is presented using a container div with a div for each row, each row containing 10 divs. I am using setInterval to call a an asmx webservice that returns some json formatted information. On the success callback I call $("#myContainer").empty(); on the container div and recreate the rows and 10 nested divs for each row's columns. This page may be left to run for a whole day, so I am wary of updating the DOM like this as I have noticed that memory does rise for the browser over time (IE8). The other approach I am considering is to add an idea to the row div. When new results process each item of data, look for the corresponding row, if it exists overwrite the data in each div. If it doesn't exist (new data for example), append the row. What approaches have others used for this sort of long lived pseudo realtime information display. TIA

    Read the article

  • CQRS - The query side

    - by mattcodes
    A lot of the blogsphere articles related to CQRS (command query repsonsibility) seperation seem to imply that all screens/viewmodels are flat. e.g. Name, Age, Location Of Birth etc.. and thus the suggestion that implementation wise we stick them into fast read source etc.. single table per view mySQL etc.. and pull them out with something like primitive SqlDataReader, kick that nasty nhibernate ORM etc.. However, whilst I agree that domain models dont mapped well to most screens, many of the screens that I work with are more dimensional, and Im sure this is pretty common in LOB apps. So my question is how are people handling screen where by for example it displays a summary of customer details and then a list of their orders with a [more detail] link etc.... I thought about keeping with the straight forward SQL query to the Query Database breaking off the outer join so can build a suitable ViewModel to View but it seems like overkill? Alternatively (this is starting to feel yuck) in CustomerSummaryView table have a text/big (whatever the type is in your DB) column called Orders, and the columns for the Order summary screen grid are seperated by , and rows by |. Even with XML datatype it still feeel dirty. Any thoughts on an optimal practice?

    Read the article

  • Java - how to design your own type?

    - by Walter White
    Hi all, Is it possible to design your own Java Type, say an extensible enum? For instance, I have user roles that a certain module uses and then a sub-package provides additional roles. What would be involved on the JDK side of things? Walter

    Read the article

  • How you would you describe the Observer pattern in beginner language?

    - by Sheldon
    Currently, my level of understanding is below all the coding examples on the web about the Observer Pattern. I understand it simply as being almost a subscription that updates all other events when a change is made that the delegate registers. However, I'm very unstable in my true comprehension of the benefits and uses. I've done some googling, but most are above my level of understanding. I'm trying to implement this pattern with my current homework assignment, and to truly make sense on my project need a better understanding of the pattern itself and perhaps an example to see what its use. I don't want to force this pattern into something just to submit, I need to understand the purpose and develop my methods accordingly so that it actually serves a good purpose. My text doesn't really go into it, just mentions it in one sentence. MSDN was hard for me to understand, as I'm a beginner on this, and it seems more of an advanced topic. How would you describe this Observer pattern and its uses in C# to a beginner? For an example, please keep code very simple so I can understand the purpose more than complex code snippets. I'm trying to use it effectively with some simple textbox string manipulations and using delegates for my assignment, so a pointer would help!

    Read the article

  • Resources for Programmatic Rendering of Topology Maps

    - by bn
    Servus, Do you know of any frameworks, APIS, languages, or other resources that are well suited for drawing topology maps that allow a user to interact with objects on the map? I am not constrained by language choice and the program can be web-based, or stand-alone. I thought I would check before rolling my own. My goal is not to draw cartographic maps, but more like this picture: http://www.fineconnection.com/files/images/GraphicalNM.PNG, or if you are familiar with Edward Tufte's books, the data-visualization mechanisms he describes such as a map of a metro or subway. Also, if you have had any experience rendering these types of user interfaces or usage of underlying datastructures, I would be grateful to hear any thoughts you have on the subject, advice, any "gotchas." Thank you very for your time, -bn

    Read the article

  • MVC pattern and State Machine

    - by topright
    I think of a game as a state machine. Game States separate I/O processing, game logic and rendering into different classes: while (game_loop) { game->state->io_events(this); game->state->logic(this); game->state->rendering(); } You can easily change a game state in this approach. MVC separation works in more complex way: while (game_loop) { game->cotroller->io_events(this); game->model->logic(this); game->view->rendering(); } So changing Game States becomes error prone task (switch 3 MVC objects, not 1). What are practical ways of combining these 2 concepts?

    Read the article

  • Register all GUI components as Observers or pass current object to next object as a constructor argu

    - by Jack
    First, I'd like to say that I think this is a common issue and there may be a simple or common solution that I am unaware of. Many have probably encountered a similar problem. Thanks for reading. I am creating a GUI where each component needs to communicate (or at least be updated) by multiple other components. Currently, I'm using a Singleton class to accomplish this goal. Each GUI component gets the instance of the singleton and registers itself. When updates need to be made, the singleton can call public methods in the registered class. I think this is similar to an Observer pattern, but the singleton has more control. Currently, the program is set up something like this: class c1 { CommClass cc; c1() { cc = CommClass.getCommClass(); cc.registerC1( this ); C2 c2 = new c2(); } } class c2 { CommClass cc; c2() { cc = CommClass.getCommClass(); cc.registerC2( this ); C3 c3 = new c3(); } } class c3 { CommClass cc; c3() { cc = CommClass.getCommClass(); cc.registerC3( this ); C4 c4 = new c4(); } } etc. Unfortunately, the singleton class keeps growing larger as more communication is required between the components. I was wondering if it's a good idea to instead of using this singleton, pass the higher order GUI components as arguments in the constructors of each GUI component: class c1 { c1() { C2 c2 = new c2( this ); } } class c2 { C1 c1; c2( C1 c1 ) { this.c1 = c1 C3 c3 = new c3( c1, this ); } } class c3 { C1 c1; C2 c2; c3( C1 c1, C2 c2 ) { this.c1 = c1; this.c2 = c2; C4 c4 = new c4( c1, c2, this ); } } etc. The second version relies less on the CommClass, but it's still very messy as the private member variables increase in number and the constructors grow in length. Each class contains GUI components that need to communicate through CommClass, but I can't think of a good way to do it. If this seems strange or horribly inefficient, please describe some method of communication between classes that will continue to work as the project grows. Also, if this doesn't make any sense to anyone, I'll try to give actual code snippets in the future and think of a better way to ask the question. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • "select * from table" vs "select colA,colB,etc from table" interesting behaviour in SqlServer2005

    - by kristof
    Apology for a lengthy post but I needed to post some code to illustrate the problem. Inspired by the question What is the reason not to use select * ? posted a few minutes ago, I decided to point out some observations of the select * behaviour that I noticed some time ago. So let's the code speak for itself: IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.objects WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[starTest]') AND type in (N'U')) DROP TABLE [dbo].[starTest] CREATE TABLE [dbo].[starTest]( [id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [A] [varchar](50) NULL, [B] [varchar](50) NULL, [C] [varchar](50) NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] GO insert into dbo.starTest(a,b,c) select 'a1','b1','c1' union all select 'a2','b2','c2' union all select 'a3','b3','c3' go IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.views WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[vStartest]')) DROP VIEW [dbo].[vStartest] go create view dbo.vStartest as select * from dbo.starTest go go IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.views WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[vExplicittest]')) DROP VIEW [dbo].[vExplicittest] go create view dbo.[vExplicittest] as select a,b,c from dbo.starTest go select a,b,c from dbo.vStartest select a,b,c from dbo.vExplicitTest IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.objects WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[starTest]') AND type in (N'U')) DROP TABLE [dbo].[starTest] CREATE TABLE [dbo].[starTest]( [id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [A] [varchar](50) NULL, [B] [varchar](50) NULL, [D] [varchar](50) NULL, [C] [varchar](50) NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] GO insert into dbo.starTest(a,b,d,c) select 'a1','b1','d1','c1' union all select 'a2','b2','d2','c2' union all select 'a3','b3','d3','c3' select a,b,c from dbo.vExplicittest select a,b,c from dbo.vStartest If you execute the following query and look at the results of last 2 select statements, the results that you will see will be as follows: select a,b,c from dbo.vExplicittest a1 b1 c1 a2 b2 c2 a3 b3 c3 select a,b,c from dbo.vStartest a1 b1 d1 a2 b2 d2 a3 b3 d3 As you can see in the results of select a,b,c from dbo.vStartest the data of column c has been replaced with the data from colum d. I believe that is related to the way the views are compiled, my understanding is that the columns are mapped by column indexes (1,2,3,4) as apposed to names. I though I would post it as a warning for people using select * in their sql and experiencing unexpected behaviour. Note: If you rebuild the view that uses select * each time after you modify the table it will work as expected

    Read the article

  • Are Multiple Iterators possible in php?

    - by artvolk
    Good day! I know that C# allows multiple iterators using yield, like described here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1754041/is-multiple-iterators-is-possible-in-c In PHP there is and Iterator interface. Is it possible to implement more than one iteration scenario for a class? More details (EDIT): For example I have class TreeNode implementing single tree node. The whole tree can be expressed using only one this class. I want to provide iterators for iterating all direct and indirect children of current node, for example using BreadthFirst or DepthFirst order. I can implement this Iterators as separate classes but doing so I need that tree node should expose it's children collection as public. C# pseudocode: public class TreeNode<T> { ... public IEnumerable<T> DepthFirstEnumerator { get { // Some tree traversal using 'yield return' } } public IEnumerable<T> BreadthFirstEnumerator { get { // Some tree traversal using 'yield return' } } }

    Read the article

  • Objective-C Simple Inheritance and OO Principles

    - by bleeckerj
    I have a subclass SubClass that inherits from baseclass BaseClass. BaseClass has an initializer, like so: -(id)init { self = [super init]; if(self) { [self commonInit]; } return self; } -(void)commonInit { self.goodStuff = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; } SubClass does its initializer, like so: -(id)init { self = [super init]; if(self) { [self commonInit]; } return self; } -(void)commonInit { self.extraGoodStuff = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; } Now, I've *never taken a proper Objective-C course, but I'm a programmer more from the Electrical Engineering side, so I make do. I've developed server-side applications mostly in Java though, so I may be seeing the OO world through Java principles. When SubClass is initialized, it calls the BaseClass init and my expectation would be — because inheritance to me implies that characteristics of a BaseClass pass through to SubClass — that the commonInit method in BaseClass would be called during BaseClass init. It is not. I can *sorta understand maybe-possibly-stretch-my-imagination why it wouldn't be. But, then — why wouldn't it be based on the principles of OOP? What does "self" represent if not the instance of the class of the running code? Okay, so — I'm not going to argue that what a well-developed edition of Objective-C is doing is wrong. So, then — what is the pattern I should be using in this case? I want SubClass to have two main bits — the goodStuff that BaseClass has as well as the extraGoodStuff that it deserves as well. Clearly, I've been using the wrong pattern in this type of situation. Am I meant to expose commonInit (which makes me wonder about encapsulation principles — why expose something that, in the Java world at least, would be considered "protected" and something that should only ever be called once for each instance)? I've run into a similar problem in the recent past and tried to muddle through it, but now — I'm really wondering if I've got my principles and concepts all straight in my head. Little help, please.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to create static classes in PHP (like in C#)?

    - by aleemb
    I want to create a static class in PHP and have it behave like it does in C#, so Constructor is automatically called on the first call to the class No instantiation required Something of this sort... static class Hello { private static $greeting = 'Hello'; private __construct() { $greeting .= ' There!'; } public static greet(){ echo $greeting; } } Hello::greet(); // Hello There!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >