Search Results

Search found 56780 results on 2272 pages for 'system design'.

Page 357/2272 | < Previous Page | 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364  | Next Page >

  • Make is more OOPey - good structure?

    - by Tom
    Hi, I just want advice on whether I could improve structure around a particular class which handles all disk access functions The structure of my program is that I have a class called Disk which gets data from flatfiles and databases on a, you guessed it, hard disk drive. I have functions like LoadTextFileToStringList, WriteStringToTextFile, DeleteLineInTextFile etc which are kind of "generic methods" In the same class I also have some more specific methods such as GetXFromDisk where X might be a particular field in a database table/query. Should I separate out the generic methods from the specialised. Should I make another class which inherits the generic methods. At the moment my class is static as there is no need to have an internal state of the class. I'm not really OOPing am I? Thanks Thomas

    Read the article

  • Optional Member Objects

    - by David Relihan
    Okay, so you have a load of methods sprinkled around your systems main class. So you do the right thing and refactor by creating a new class and perform move method(s) into a new class. The new class has a single responsibility and all is right with the world again: class Feature { public: Feature(){}; void doSomething(); void doSomething1(); void doSomething2(); }; So now your original class has a member variable of type object: Feature _feature; Which you will call in the main class. Now if you do this many times, you will have many member-objects in your main class. Now these features may or not be required based on configuration so in a way it's costly having all these objects that may or not be needed. Can anyone suggest a way of improving this? At the moment I plan to test in the newly created class if the feature is enabled - so the when a call is made to method I will return if it is not enabled. I could have a pointer to the object and then only call new if feature is enabled - but this means I will have to test before I call a method on it which would be potentially dangerous and not very readable. Would having an auto_ptr to the object improve things: auto_ptr<Feature> feature; Or am I still paying the cost of object invokation even though the object may\or may not be required. BTW - I don't think this is premeature optimisation - I just want to consider the possibilites.

    Read the article

  • SEO with image link alt text vs standard text-based link

    - by Infiniti Fizz
    Hi, I'm currently developing a website and the main navigation is made up of image links because the font used for them isn't standard. My client's only worry is will this mess up search engine optimization? Can I just add alt text to the images like "link 1" or use the name attribute of the anchor tag? Or would it be better to just have the navigation as anchor tags with the names of the links in them like: <a href="...">link 1</a>? I'm new to SEO so really don't know which to suggest to him, Thanks for your time, InfinitiFizz

    Read the article

  • How to secure authorization of methods

    - by Kurresmack
    I am building a web site in C# using MVC.Net How can I secure that no unauthorized persons can access my methods? What I mean is that I want to make sure that only admins can create articles on my page. If I put this logic in the method actually adding this to the database, wouldn't I have business logic in my data layer? Is it a good practise to have a seperate security layer that is always in between of the data layer and the business layer to make? The problem is that if I protect at a higher level I will have to have checks on many places and it is more likely that I miss one place and users can bypass security. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Change an access Primary key with relationships

    - by DiegoMaK
    I have a database in access 2007 accdb extension , there are more or less 30-40 tables with related primary key "local_number". it is a text primary key with 10 lenght. How can I change the length of this primary key to 30 WITHOUT delete previosly all the 30 relationship. 2,A similar question. I need add a compose primary key to my PK "local_number". I need Add a "Date" as composed PK. Then access just allow this if I first delete all relationships. How can Avoid this warning and change my PK ignoring this message.

    Read the article

  • Fixed footer with 960.gs

    - by Oguz
    I want to create fixed footer but , is it possible with 960 gs , because I am having trouble with height of container div . I can no set it to %100. <div class="container_12" > <div class="grid_3" id="side-space"></div> <div class="grid_6"> <div id="content-box"></div> </div> <div class="grid_3" id="side-space"></div> </div>

    Read the article

  • What should be the considerations for choosing SQL/NoSQL?

    - by Yuval A
    Target application is a medium-sized website built to support several hundred-thousand users an hour, with an option to scale above that. Data model is rather simple, and caching potential is pretty high (~10:1 ratio of read to edit actions). What should be the considerations when coming to choose between a relational, SQL-based datastore to a NoSQL option (such as HBase and Cassandra)?

    Read the article

  • Conceptual website designer ideas?

    - by Alex Tang
    Hi, I'm just wondering if anyone knows of any tool (apart from Visio) to generate visually nice looking website site maps or diagrams of a conceptual website. We're wanting to present some nice diagrams to our client but we're unsure about where to get started - we're all coders, not designers. Visio shapes or stencils are quite old. Just wondered what others in the industry are using!

    Read the article

  • Tables as relations in ER diagrams

    - by Richard Mar.
    Assume I have the following tables (**bold** - primary key, *italics* - foreign key): patient(**patient_id**, name) disease(**disease_id**, name) patient_disease(**p_d_id**, *patient_id*, *disease,_id* ) I want to draw the ER diagram for this. My idea is to make two entities, one for patient and one for disease, then make a n-to-n relation between them, with p_d_id as its attribute. Is that how it's supposed to be?

    Read the article

  • Has anyone ever encountered a Monad Transformer in the wild?

    - by martingw
    In my area of business - back office IT for a financial institution - it is very common for a software component to carry a global configuration around, to log it's progress, to have some kind of error handling / computation short circuit... Things that can be modelled nicely by Reader-, Writer-, Maybe-monads and the like in Haskell and composed together with monad transformers. But there seem to some drawbacks: The concept behind monad transformers is quite tricky and hard to understand, monad transformers lead to very complex type signatures, and they inflict some performance penalty. So I'm wondering: Are monad transformers best practice when dealing with those common tasks mentioned above?

    Read the article

  • How to Prove that using subselect queries in SQL is killing performance of server

    - by adopilot
    One of my jobs it to maintain our database, usually we have troubles with lack of performance while getting reports and working whit that base. When I start looking at queries which our ERP sending to database I see a lot of totally needlessly subselect queries inside main queries. As I am not member of developers which is creator of program we using, they do not like much when I criticize they code and job. Let say they do not taking my review as serious statements. So I asking you few questions about subselect in SQL Does subselect is taking a lot of more time then left outer joins? Does exists any blog, article or anything where I subselect is recommended not to use ? How I can prove that if we avoid subselesct in query that query is going to be faster ? Our database server is MSSQL2005

    Read the article

  • actionscript-3: refactor interface inheritance to get rid of ambiguous reference error

    - by maxmc
    hi! imagine there are two interfaces arranged via composite pattern, one of them has a dispose method among other methods: interface IComponent extends ILeaf { ... function dispose() : void; } interface ILeaf { ... } some implementations have some more things in common (say an id) so there are two more interfaces: interface ICommonLeaf extends ILeaf { function get id() : String; } interface ICommonComponent extends ICommonLeaf, IComponent { } so far so good. but there is another interface which also has a dispose method: interface ISomething { ... function dispose() : void; } and ISomething is inherited by ICommonLeaf: interface ICommonLeaf extends ILeaf, ISomething { function get id() : String; } As soon as the dispose method is invoked on an instance which implements the ICommonComponent interface, the compiler fails with an ambiguous reference error because ISomething has a method called dispose and ILeaf also has a dispose method, both living in different interfaces (IComponent, ISomething) within the inheritace tree of ICommonComponent. I wonder how to deal with the situation if the IComponent, the ILeaf and the ISomething can't change. the composite structure must also work for for the ICommonLeaf & ICommonComponent implementations and the ICommonLeaf & ICommonComponent must conform to the ISomething type. this might be an actionscript-3 specific issue. i haven't tested how other languages (for instance java) handle stuff like this.

    Read the article

  • Command Pattern : How to pass parameters to a command ?

    - by Romain Verdier
    My question is related to the command pattern, where we have the following abstraction (C# code) : public interface ICommand { Execute(); } Let's take a simple concrete command, which aims to delete an entity from our application. A Person instance, for example. I'll have a DeletePersonCommand, which implements ICommand. This command needs the Person to delete as a parameter, in order to delete it when Execute method is called. What is the best way to manage parametrized commands ? How to pass parameters to commands, before executing them ?

    Read the article

  • How to pass data to another droid device when the other device isn't expecting it

    - by James Black
    I am working on an application and one feature that would make it really useful is the ability to share some information, but the other device may not be expecting the data to be sent. For example, if I am reading a really good book, and I realize that a friend may like it, I could use an application to send the data to him, so he could order the book from Amazon. But, since he isn't expecting the data, I would hate for the application to be polling a server every so often, as that will be needlessly draining the battery. Ideally it would be great if there was a way to make a phone call to the target device, send a data packet and end the call. If it could be done and prevent the phone from ringing, then it would be very useful to me. I am curious if there is some way to send data between devices without polling.

    Read the article

  • How to map to tables in database PHPMyAdmin

    - by thegrede
    I'm working now on a project which a user can save their own coupon codes on the websites, so I want to know what is the best to do that, Lets say, I have 1 table with the users, like this, userId | firstName | lastName | codeId and then I have a table of the coupon codes, like this, codeId | codeNumber So what I can do is to connect the codeId to userId so when someone saves the coupons goes the codeId from the coupon table into the codeId of the users table, But now what if when a user have multiple coupons what do I do it should be connected to the user? I have 2 options what to do, Option 1, Saving the codeId from coupons table into the codeId of users table like 1,2,3,4,5, Option 2 To make a new row into the coupons table and to connect the user to the code with adding another field in the coupon table userId and putting into it the user which has added the coupon his userId of the users table, So what of the two options is better to do? Thanks you guys.

    Read the article

  • How to reference a specific object in an array of objects using jTemplates

    - by Travis
    I am using the excellent jTemplates plugin to generate content. Given a data object like this... var data = { name: 'datatable', table: [ {id: 1, name: 'Anne'}, {id: 2, name: 'Amelie'}, {id: 3, name: 'Polly'}, {id: 4, name: 'Alice'}, {id: 5, name: 'Martha'} ] }; ..I'm wondering if it is possible to directly specify an object in an array of objects using $T. (I'm hoping there is something like $T.table:3 available) Currently the only way I can think of to access a specific object in an array is to do something like this... {#foreach $T.table as record} {#if $T.record$iteration == 3} This is record 3! Name: {$T.record.name} {#/if} {#/for} However that seems clumsy... Any suggestions? Thanks

    Read the article

  • FWA for CSS based sites

    - by weotch
    Does anyone have a favorite style site that posts the latest and greatest sites constructed with CSS + HTML + JS? I'm thinking of something like thefwa.com but not for all flash microsites. Trying to find the definitive portal.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to make a setter return "this"?

    - by Ken Liu
    Is it a good or bad idea to make setters in java return "this"? public Employee setName(String name){ this.name = name; return this; } This pattern can be useful because then you can chain setters like this: list.add(new Employee().setName("Jack Sparrow").setId(1).setFoo("bacon!")); instead of this: Employee e = new Employee(); e.setName("Jack Sparrow"); ...and so on... list.add(e); ...but it sort of goes against standard convention. I suppose it might be worthwhile just because it can make that setter do something else useful. I've seen this pattern used some places (e.g. JMock, JPA), but it seems uncommon, and only generally used for very well defined APIs where this pattern is used everywhere. Update: What I've described is obviously valid, but what I am really looking for is some thoughts on whether this is generally acceptable, and if there are any pitfalls or related best practices. I know about the Builder pattern but it is a little more involved then what I am describing - as Josh Bloch describes it there is an associated static Builder class for object creation.

    Read the article

  • Common one-to-many table for multiple entities

    - by Ben V
    Suppose I have two tables, Customer and Vendor. I want to have a common address table for customer and vendor addresses. Customers and Vendors can both have one to many addresses. Option 1 Add columns for the AddressID to the Customer and Vendor tables. This just doesn't seem like a clean solution to me. Customer Vendor Address -------- --------- --------- CustomerID VendorID AddressID AddressID1 AddressID1 Street AddressID2 AddressID2 City... Option 2 Move the foreign key to the Address table. For a Customer, Address.CustomerID will be populated. For a Vendor, Address.VendorID will be populated. I don't like this either - I shouldn't need to modify the address table every time I want to use it for another entity. Customer Vendor Address -------- --------- --------- CustomerID VendorID AddressID CustomerID VendorID Option 3 I've also seen this - only 1 foreign key column on the Address table with another column to identify which foreign key table the address belongs to. I don't like this one because it requires all the foreign key tables to have the same type of ID. It also seems messy once you start coding against it. Customer Vendor Address -------- --------- --------- CustomerID VendorID AddressID FKTable FKID So, am I just too picky, or is there something I haven't thought of?

    Read the article

  • Architecting ASP.net MVC App to use repositories and services

    - by zaladane
    Hello, I recently started reading about ASP.net MVC and after getting excited about the concept, i started to migrate all my webform project to MVC but i am having a hard time keeping my controller skinny even after following all the good advices out there (or maybe i just don't get it ... ). The website i deal with has Articles, Videos, Quotes ... and each of these entities have categories, comments, images that can be associated with it. I am using Linq to sql for database operations and for each of these Entities, i have a Repository, and for each repository, i create a service to be used in the controller. so i have - ArticleRepository ArticleCategoryRepository ArticleCommentRepository and the corresponding service ArticleService ArticleCategoryService ... you see the picture. The problem i have is that i have one controller for article,category and comment because i thought that having ArticleController handle all of that might make sense, but now i have to pass all of the services needed to the Controller constructor. So i would like to know what it is that i am doing wrong. Are my services not designed properly? should i create Bigger service to encapsulate smaller services and use them in my controller? or should i have an articleCategory Controller and an articleComment Controller? A page viewed by the user is made of all of that, thee article to be viewed,the comments associated with it, a listing of the categories to witch it applies ... how can i efficiently break down the controller to keep it "skinny" and solve my headache? Thank you! I hope my question is not too long to be read ...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364  | Next Page >