Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'oop criticism'.

Page 30/64 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • What to call factory-like (java) methods used with immutable objects

    - by StaxMan
    When creating classes for "immutable objects" immutable meaning that state of instances can not be changed; all fields assigned in constructor) in Java (and similar languages), it is sometimes useful to still allow creation of modified instances. That is, using an instance as base, and creating a new instance that differs by just one property value; other values coming from the base instance. To give a simple example, one could have class like: public class Circle { final double x, y; // location final double radius; public Circle(double x, double y, double r) { this.x = x; this.y = y; this.r = r; } // method for creating a new instance, moved in x-axis by specified amount public Circle withOffset(double deltaX) { return new Circle(x+deltaX, y, radius); } } So: what should method "withOffset" be called? (note: NOT what its name ought to be -- but what is this class of methods called). Technically it is kind of a factory method, but somehow that does not seem quite right to me, since often factories are just given basic properties (and are either static methods, or are not members of the result type but factory type). So I am guessing there should be a better term for such methods. Since these methods can be used to implement "fluent interface", maybe they could be "fluent factory methods"? Better suggestions? EDIT: as suggested by one of answers, java.math.BigDecimal is a good example with its 'add', 'subtract' (etc) methods. Also: I noticed that there's this question (by Jon Skeet no less) that is sort of related (although it asks about specific name for method)

    Read the article

  • Call static properties within another class in php

    - by ali A
    I have problem about calling a static property of a class inside another class. Class A { public $property; public function __construct( $prop ) { $this->property = $prop; } public function returnValue(){ return static::$this->property; } } Class B extends A { public static $property_one = 'This is first property'; public static $property_two = 'This is second property'; } $B = new B( 'property_one' ); $B->returnValue(); I expect to return This is first property But the Output is just the name a parameter input in __construct; When I print_r( static::$this->property ); the output is just property_one

    Read the article

  • Where do you put your dependencies?

    - by The All Foo
    If I use the dependency injection pattern to remove dependencies they end up some where else. For example, Snippet 1, or what I call Object Maker. I mean you have to instantiate your objects somewhere...so when you move dependency out of one object, you end up putting it another one. I see that this consolidates all my dependencies into one object. Is that the point, to reduce your dependencies so that they all reside in a single ( as close to as possible ) location? Snippet 1 - Object Maker <?php class ObjectMaker { public function makeSignUp() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignUpObject = new ControlSignUp(); $SignUpObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignUpObject; } public function makeSignIn() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignInObject = new ControlSignIn(); $SignInObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignInObject; } public function makeTweet( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $TweetObject = new ControlTweet(); $TweetObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $TweetObject; } public function makeBookmark( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $BookmarkObject = new ControlBookmark(); $BookmarkObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject,$TextObject,$MessageObject); return $BookmarkObject; } }

    Read the article

  • Are protected constructors considered good practice?

    - by Álvaro G. Vicario
    I'm writing some little helper classes to handle trees. Basically, I have a node and a special root node that represents the tree. I want to keep it generic and simple. This is part of the code: <?php class Tree extends TreeNode{ public function addById($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ if( $parent = $this->findNodeById($parent_id) ){ $parent->addChildById($node_id, $generic_content); } } } class TreeNode{ public function __construct($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ // ... } protected function addChildById($node_id, $generic_content){ $this->children[] = new TreeNode($this->node_id, $node_id, $generic_content); } } $Categories = new Tree; $Categories->addById(1, NULL, $foo); $Categories->addById(2, NULL, $bar); $Categories->addById(3, 1, $gee); ?> My questions: Is it sensible to force TreeNode instances to be created through TreeNode::addById()? If it's so, would it be good practise to declare TreeNode::__construct() as private/protected?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

    - by Roman
    I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • Pattern or recommneded refactoring for method

    - by iKode
    I've written a method that looks like this: public TimeSlotList processTimeSlots (DateTime startDT, DateTime endDT, string bookingType, IList<Booking> normalBookings, GCalBookings GCalBookings, List<DateTime> otherApiBookings) { { ..... common process code ...... while (utcTimeSlotStart < endDT) { if (bookingType == "x") { //process normal bookings using IList<Booking> normalBookings } else if (bookingType == "y") { //process google call bookings using GCalBookings GCalBookings } else if (bookingType == "z" { //process other apibookings using List<DateTime> otherApiBookings } } } So I'm calling this from 3 different places, each time passing a different booking type, and each case passing the bookings I'm interested in processing, as well as 2 empty objects that aren't used for this booking type. I'm not able to get bookings all into the same datatype, which would make this easier and each booking type needs to be processed differently, so I'm not sure how I can improve this. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • 'is instanceof' Interface bad design

    - by peterRit
    Say I have a class A class A { Z source; } Now, the context tells me that 'Z' can be an instance of different classes (say, B and C) which doesn't share any common class in their inheritance tree. I guess the naive approach is to make 'Z' an Interface class, and make classes B and C implement it. But something still doesn't convince me because every time an instance of class A is used, I need to know the type of 'source'. So all finishes in multiple 'ifs' making 'is instanceof' which doesn't sound quite nice. Maybe in the future some other class implements Z, and having hardcoded 'ifs' of this type definitely could break something. The escence of the problem is that I cannot resolve the issue by adding functions to Z, because the work done in each instance type of Z is different. I hope someone can give me and advice, maybe about some useful design pattern. Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++ (g++) Compile Error, Expected "="/etc. Before 'MyWindow" (my class name)

    - by Ell
    Hi all, I have a very strange problem and the following code wont compile: #ifndef MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED #define MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED class MyWindow{ private: WNDCLASSEX window_class; HWND window_handle; HDC device_context_handle; HGLRC open_gl_render_context; MSG message; BOOL quit; public: Window(int height=416, int width=544, WindowStyle window_style=WINDOWED); void Show(); void Close(); ~Window(); }; #endif // MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED I get the following error: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or 'attribute' before 'MyWindow' I can't see any syntax errors here, although I coukd be wrong as I am very (very) new in c++. Thanks in advance, ell.

    Read the article

  • Need help extrapolating Java code

    - by Berlioz
    If anyone familiar with Rebecca Wirfs-Brock, she has a piece of Java code found in her book titled, Object Design: Roles, Responsibilities, and Collaborations. Here is the quote Applying Double Dispatch to a Specific Problem To implement the game Rock, Paper, Scissors we need to write code that determines whether one object “beats” another. The game has nine possible outcomes based on the three kinds of objects. The number of interactions is the cross product of the kinds of objects. Case or switch statements are often governed by the type of data that is being operated on. The object-oriented language equivalent is to base its actions on the class of some other object. In Java, it looks like this Here is the piece of Java code on page 16 ' import java.util.*; import java.lang.*; public class Rock { public static void main(String args[]) { } public static boolean beats(GameObject object) { if (object.getClass.getName().equals("Rock")) { result = false; } else if (object.getClass.getName().equals("Paper")) { result = false; } else if(object.getClass.getName().equals("Scissors")) { result = true; } return result; } }' ===This is not a very good solution. First, the receiver needs to know too much about the argument. Second, there is one of these nested conditional statements in each of the three classes. If new kinds of objects could be added to the game, each of the three classes would have to be modified. Can anyone share with me how to get this "less than optimal" piece of code to work in order to see it 'working'. She proceeds to demonstrate a better way, but I will spare you. Thanks

    Read the article

  • how to handle exceptions/errors in php?

    - by fayer
    when using 3rd part libraries they tend to throw exceptions to the browser and hence kill the script. eg. if im using doctrine and insert a duplicate record to the database it will throw an exception. i wonder, what is best practice for handling these exceptions. should i always do a try...catch? but doesn't that mean that i will have try...catch all over the script and for every single function/class i use? Or is it just for debugging? i don't quite get the picture. Cause if a record already exists in a database, i want to tell the user "Record already exists". And if i code a library or a function, should i always use "throw new Expcetion($message, $code)" when i want to create an error? Please shed a light on how one should create/handle exceptions/errors. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Passing parameter to base class constructor or using instance variable?

    - by deamon
    All classes derived from a certain base class have to define an attribute called "path". In the sense of duck typing I could rely upon definition in the subclasses: class Base: pass # no "path" variable here def Sub(Base): def __init__(self): self.path = "something/" Another possiblity would be to use the base class constructor: class Base: def __init__(self, path): self.path = path def Sub(Base): def __init__(self): super().__init__("something/") What would you prefer and why? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • How do I write object classes effectively when dealing with table joins?

    - by Chris
    I should start by saying I'm not now, nor do I have any delusions I'll ever be a professional programmer so most of my skills have been learned from experience very much as a hobby. I learned PHP as it seemed a good simple introduction in certain areas and it allowed me to design simple web applications. When I learned about objects, classes etc the tutor's basic examnples covered the idea that as a rule of thumb each database table should have its own class. While that worked well for the photo gallery project we wrote, as it had very simple mysql queries, it's not working so well now my projects are getting more complex. If I require data from two separate tables which require a table join I've instead been ignoring the class altogether and handling it on a case by case basis, OR, even worse been combining some of the data into the class and the rest as a separate entity and doing two queries, which to me seems inefficient. As an example, when viewing content on a forum I wrote, if you view a thread, I retrieve data from the threads table, the posts table and the user table. The queries from the user and posts table are retrieved via a join and not instantiated as an object, whereas the thread data is called using my Threads class. So how do I get from my current state of affairs to something a little less 'stupid', for want of a better word. Right now I have a DB class that deals with connection and escaping values etc, a parent db query class that deals with the common queries and methods, and all of the other classes (Thread, Upload, Session, Photo and ones thats aren't used Post, User etc ) are children of that. Do I make a big posts class that has the relevant extra attributes that I retrieve from the users (and potentially threads) table? Do I have separate classes that populate each of their relevant attributes with a single query? If so how do I do that? Because of the way my classes are written, based on what I was taught, my db update row method, or insert method both just take the attributes as an array and update all of that, if I have extra attributes from other db tables in each class then how do I rewrite those methods as obbiously updating automatically like that would result in errors? In short I think my understanding is limited right now and I'd like some pointers when it comes to the fundamentals of how to write more complex classes.

    Read the article

  • Define a class dynamically?

    - by Pekka
    Is there a way to dynamically and conditionally create a class definition in PHP, i.e. if (condition matches) include file containing class definition else class myclass extends ancestor_class { .................... } without eval()? My background is the accepted answer to this question. I am looking for the best way to build a untouchable core library, with user-defined empty classes extending the core library if necessary. I want to create the final class definition "on the fly" if there is no user-defined empty class for a certain ancestor class.

    Read the article

  • How do you determine how coarse or fine-grained a 'responsibility' should be when using the single r

    - by Mark Rogers
    In the SRP, a 'responsibility' is usually described as 'a reason to change', so that each class (or object?) should have only one reason someone should have to go in there and change it. But if you take this to the extreme fine-grain you could say that an object adding two numbers together is a responsibility and a possible reason to change. Therefore the object should contain no other logic, because it would produce another reason for change. I'm curious if there is anyone out there that has any strategies for 'scoping', the single-responsibility principle that's slightly less objective?

    Read the article

  • PHP Object Oriented forum example

    - by Martin Trigaux
    Hello, I'm trying to learn to use PHP with an object oriented scheme. I think I understand the concept but I need real example, a forum exactly. I know PhpBB but it's maybe too complicated to fully understand it so I'm looking for something simpler but still in object oriented. Thank you

    Read the article

  • Override java methods without affecting parent behaviour

    - by Timmmm
    suppose I have this classes (sorry it's kind of hard to think of a simple example here; I don't want any "why would you want to do that?" answers!): class Squarer { public void setValue(int v) { mV = v; } public int getValue() { return mV; } private int mV; public void square() { setValue(getValue() * getValue()); } } class OnlyOddInputsSquarer extends Squarer { @Override public void setValue(int v) { if (v % 2 == 0) { print("Sorry, this class only lets you square odd numbers!") return; } super.setValue(v); } } auto s = new OnlyOddInputsSquarer(); s.setValue(3); s.square(); This won't work. When Squarer.square() calls setValue(), it will go to OnlyOddInputsSquarer.setValue() which will reject all its values (since all squares are even). Is there any way I can override setValue() so that all the functions in Squarer still use the method defined there? PS: Sorry, java doesn't have an auto keyword you haven't heard about! Wishful thinking on my part.

    Read the article

  • Why must use "out" instead of ref ?

    - by Phsika
    i wrote some code blocks about ref -out declaration. i think that ref is most useful out. Ok. why i need to use out. i can use always ref everytime: namespace out_ref { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { sinifA sinif = new sinifA(); int test = 100; sinif.MethodA(out test); Console.WriteLine(test.ToString()); sinif.MethodB(ref test); Console.WriteLine(test.ToString()); Console.ReadKey(); } } class sinifA { public void MethodA(out int a) { a = 200; } int _b; public void MethodB(ref int b) { _b = b; b = 2*b; } } }

    Read the article

  • Confuse about which object should i assign the function to

    - by CliffC
    i have the following two class which convert object into xml string should i do something like class Person { public string GetXml() { //return a xml string } } or it is better to create another class which accept the person as a parameter and convert it into XML something like class PersonSerializer { public string Serialize(Person person) { // return a xml string } } Thanks

    Read the article

  • What Patterns Should I Consider For a Html Widget Generator?

    - by DaveDev
    I'm looking to see if I can design a HtmlHelper extension method that will generate the Html for different types of widgets I want to produce. Each different type of widget implements functionality to get and prepare any data it needs to render. Can anyone suggest any patterns I could refer to for approaches to take? I know there are probably frameworks available that will do this for me, but I thought I'd give it a try anyway. Any points of advice? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Which is the correct design pattern for my PHP application?

    - by user1487141
    I've been struggling to find good way to implement my system which essentially matches the season and episode number of a show from a string, you can see the current working code here: https://github.com/huddy/tvfilename I'm currently rewriting this library and want a nicer way to implement how the the match happens, currently essentially the way it works is: There's a folder with classes in it (called handlers), every handler is a class that implements an interface to ensure a method called match(); exists, this match method uses the regex stored in a property of that handler class (of which there are many) to try and match a season and episode. The class loads all of these handlers by instantiating each one into a array stored in a property, when I want to try and match some strings the method iterates over these objects calling match(); and the first one that returns true is then returned in a result set with the season and episode it matched. I don't really like this way of doing it, it's kind of hacky to me, and I'm hoping a design pattern can help, my ultimate goal is to do this using best practices and I wondered which one I should use? The other problems that exist are: More than one handler could match a string, so they have to be in an order to prevent the more greedy ones matching first, not sure if this is solvable as some of the regex patterns have to be greedy, but possibly a score system, something that shows a percentage of how likely the match is correct, i'd have no idea how to actually implement this though. I'm not if instantiating all those handlers is a good way of doing it, speed is important, but using best practices and sticking to design patterns to create good, extensible and maintainable code is my ultimate priority. It's worth noting the handler classes sometimes do other things than just regex matching, they sometimes prep the string to be matched by removing common words etc. Cheers for any help Billy

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of calling new on an object instance?

    - by Geo
    I'm reading [Programming Perl][1], and I found this code snippet: sub new { my $invocant = shift; my $class = ref($invocant) || $invocant; my $self = { color => "bay", legs => 4, owner => undef, @_, # Override previous attributes }; return bless $self, $class; } With constructors like this one, what's the benefit of calling new on an object instance? I assume that it's what it's for, right? My guess is that if anyone would want to write such a constructor, he would have to add some more code that copies the attributes of the first object to the one about to be created.

    Read the article

  • What does Protected Internal means in .Net

    - by vaibhav
    Protected Means, we can access this member only in a deriving class, and internal means we can access this member in any type in the same assembly using a object. So can I consider a Protected Internal member as a public member in the same assembly. and as a protected member in the different assembly.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >