Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 36/64 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

  • Object model design choice

    - by spinon
    I am currently working on a ASP.NET MVC reporting application using C#. This is a redesign from a PHP application that was just initially thrown together and is now starting to gain some more traction. SowWe are in the process of reworking the backend to have a more OO approach. One of the descisions I am currently wrestling with is how to structure the domain objects. Since 95% of the site is readonly I am not sure if the typical approaches are practical. Should I create domain objects for the primary pieces of the application (ticket, assignment, assignee) and then create static methods off of these areas to pull the reporting data? Or should I just skip that part and create the chart data classes and have some get method off of these classes? It's not a real big application and currenlty I am the only one developing on it. But I feel torn as to which approach. I feel that the first one is the better choice but maybe overkill given that the majority of uses is for aggregate reporting. Anybody have some good insight on why I should go one way or another?

    Read the article

  • Using PHP interfaces in Codeigniter

    - by John Stewart
    I am trying to find out how can I used PHP interfaces in my MVC design. I want to make sure that the design enforces an interface so that any new module would follow that. For example: <?php interface BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg); } class ServiceAPI implements BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg) { return $msg; } } class Service_Two_API implements BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg) { return "can't do this: ".$msg; } } ?> I want to do this in CI. Is it possible? how should I design it?

    Read the article

  • override __set in __construct() in php?

    - by user151841
    I have a class based on database values. I'm using __set to automatically sync database values with the class properties. Set checks an array of database fields that it is allowed to update in the database. The field 'id' isn't in the list, so __set will throw an exception if you try to do $objDbRow->id = 5;. However, there is one time when I do want to set the id property of the object, and that's on instantiation. So in __constuct, I have $this->id = $id (where $id is passed to __construct). However, __set seems to be intercepting the setting here, because an exception is being thrown on construction. What's the way to get around this? I suppose I also have a boolean flag, like $instantiated, that __set() would check before it does it's field whitelist checking. But that feels inelegant.

    Read the article

  • Generic overloading tells me this is the same function. Not agree.

    - by serhio
    base class: Class List(Of T) Function Contains(ByVal value As T) As Boolean derived class: Class Bar : List(Of Exception) ' Exception type as example ' Function Contains(Of U)(ByVal value As U) As Boolean compiler tells me that that two are the same, so I need to declare Overloads/new this second function. But I want use U to differentiate the type (one logic) like NullReferenceException, ArgumentNull Exception, etc. but want to leave the base function(no differentiation by type - other logic) as well.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to cancel function override in parent class and use function from top level parent

    - by Anatoliy Gusarov
    class TopParent { protected function foo() { $this->bar(); } private function bar() { echo 'Bar'; } } class MidParent extends TopParent { protected function foo() { $this->midMethod(); parent::foo(); } public function midMethod() { echo 'Mid'; } public function generalMethod() { echo 'General'; } } Now the question is if I have a class, that extends MidParent because I need to call class Target extends MidParent { //How to override this method to return TopParent::foo(); ? protected function foo() { } } So I need to do this: $mid = new MidParent(); $mid->foo(); // MidBar $taget = new Target(); $target->generalMethod(); // General $target->foo(); // Bar UPDATE Top parent is ActiveRecord class, mid is my model object. I want to use model in yii ConsoleApplication. I use 'user' module in this model, and console app doesn't support this module. So I need to override method afterFind, where user module is called. So the Target class is the class that overrides some methods from model which uses some modules that console application doesn't support.

    Read the article

  • Accessing a function of an instance which is in an arraylist

    - by fadeir
    I'm tring to access a function of an instance which is in an arraylist. Is there any way to do that without using the class name of the instance? import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.List; class apple{ int price; public void myFunction(int iPrice) { price=iPrice; } } class orange{ int price; public void myFunction(int iPrice) { price=iPrice; } } public class main { public static void main(String[] args) { List list= new ArrayList(); //create 3 apple object to list list.add( new apple() ); list.add( new apple() ); list.add( new orange() ); list.get(0).myFunction(1); /* Error: The method myFunction(int) is undefined for the type Object*/ } } I know that;((apple) list.get(0)).myFunction(1); is a way but I'dont want to use any class name while calling the function.

    Read the article

  • Inheriting and overriding interfaces in C#

    - by Daniel A. White
    Please note: I am writing this question. I have these interfaces in a library/framework I am working on: interface IRepository<TKey,TModel> { void Remove(TModel entity); } interface IRepository<T> : IRepository<int, T> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TKey,TModel> : IRepository<TKey, TModel> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TModel> : ISoftDeleteRepository<int, TModel>, IRepository<TModel> { } and these implementations class Repository : IRepository { void Remove(TModel entity) { // actually Delete } } interface IRepository<T> : IRepository<int, T> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TKey,TModel> : IRepository<TKey, TModel> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TModel> : ISoftDeleteRepository<int, TModel>, IRepository<TModel> { }

    Read the article

  • interact with an interface?

    - by ajsie
    from what i've read it seems that one can interact with an interface? eg. lets say that i've got an interface with an empty method "eat()" then 2 subclasses are implementing this interface. can my controller interact with only the interface and use it's eat() method? have a look at the picture in this link strategy

    Read the article

  • How should I lay-out my PHP login class?

    - by ThinkingInBits
    So, there is going to be one login form; however 1 of 3 types of members will be signing in member_type_a, member_type_b, member_type_c all of whom have some of the same properties, and some whom may have specific methods and/or properties to them. I want the class to be saved to a session variable for use with member area pages. Any suggestions on applicable design patterns?

    Read the article

  • Best way to design a class in python

    - by Fraz
    So, this is more like a philosophical question for someone who is trying to understand classes. Most of time, how i use class is actually a very bad way to use it. I think of a lot of functions and after a time just indent the code and makes it a class and replacing few stuff with self.variable if a variable is repeated a lot. (I know its bad practise) But anyways... What i am asking is: class FooBar: def __init__(self,foo,bar): self._foo = foo self._bar = bar self.ans = self.__execute() def __execute(self): return something(self._foo, self._bar) Now there are many ways to do this: class FooBar: def __init__(self,foo): self._foo = foo def execute(self,bar): return something(self._foo, bar) Can you suggest which one is bad and which one is worse? or any other way to do this. This is just a toy example (offcourse). I mean, there is no need to have a class here if there is one function.. but lets say in __execute something() calls a whole set of other methods.. ?? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Updating the Jpanel of a class

    - by ivor
    Hi, After some advice on using jpanel - I'm new to java and playing around with the GUI elements. Bascially what I'm curious about is if I can set up a Jpanel in one class, then somehow add labels etc to the that container, but from another class. Is this possible ? or do i have to set the entire GUI up in one class, but then I guess I would have the same issue, if I wanted to update those fields I had set up in the main class from another class? Apologies I don't really have any code that's usefull to demostrate here - I'm just trying to get the idea going, working out if its possible before I go ahead. And I'm not even sure if this is possible. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Hash Tables - Java

    - by Antony
    Am about to do a homework, and i need to store quite a lot of information (Dictionary) in a data structure of my choice. I heard people in my classroom saying hash-tables are the way to go. How come?

    Read the article

  • Get information from a higher class?

    - by Clint Davis
    I don't know really how to word the question so please bear with me... I have 3 classes: Server, Database, and Table. Each class has a "Name" property. How I want it to work is that each server can have multiple databases and each database can have multiple tables. So in the Server class I have this property. Private _databases As List(Of Database) Public Property Databases() As List(Of Database) Get Return _databases End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Database)) _databases = value End Set End Property And I have something similar in the Database class for the tables. This works fine now because I can do something like this to get all the databases in the server. For Each db In s.Databases 's being the server object Debug.Print(db.Name) Next I would like to expand these classes. I want the server class to handle all the connection information and I would like the other classes to use the server class's connection information in them. For example, I setup a server class and set the connection string to the server. Then I want the database class to use serverclass.connectionstring property to connect to the server and get a list of all the databases. But I want to keep that code in the database class. How can I do this? I've attached some code of what I want to do. Public Class Server Private _name As String Public Property Name() As String Get Return _name End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _name = value End Set End Property Private _databases As List(Of Database) Public Property Databases() As List(Of Database) Get Return _databases End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Database)) _databases = value End Set End Property End Class '-----New class Public Class Database Private _name As String Public Property Name() As String Get Return _name End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _name = value End Set End Property Private _tables As List(Of Table) Public Property Tables() As List(Of Table) Get Return _tables End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Table)) _tables = value End Set End Property 'This is where I need help! Private Sub LoadTables () dim connectionstring as string = server.connectionstring 'Possible? 'Do database stuff End Class Thanks for reading!

    Read the article

  • How to output multiple rows from an SQL query using the mysqli object

    - by Jonathan
    Assuming that the mysqli object is already instantiatied (and connected) with the global variable $mysql, here is the code I am trying to work with. class Listing { private $mysql; function getListingInfo($l_id = "", $category = "", $subcategory = "", $username = "", $status = "active") { $condition = "`status` = '$status'"; if (!empty($l_id)) $condition .= "AND `L_ID` = '$l_id'"; if (!empty($category)) $condition .= "AND `category` = '$category'"; if (!empty($subcategory)) $condition .= "AND `subcategory` = '$subcategory'"; if (!empty($username)) $condition .= "AND `username` = '$username'"; $result = $this->mysql->query("SELECT * FROM listing WHERE $condition") or die('Error fetching values'); $this->listing = $result->fetch_array() or die('could not create object'); foreach ($this->listing as $key => $value) : $info[$key] = stripslashes(html_entity_decode($value)); endforeach; return $info; } } there are several hundred listings in the db and when I call $result-fetch_array() it places in an array the first row in the db. however when I try to call the object, I can't seem to access more than the first row. for instance: $listing_row = new Listing; while ($listing = $listing_row-getListingInfo()) { echo $listing[0]; } this outputs an infinite loop of the same row in the db. Why does it not advance to the next row? if I move the code: $this->listing = $result->fetch_array() or die('could not create object'); foreach ($this->listing as $key => $value) : $info[$key] = stripslashes(html_entity_decode($value)); endforeach; if I move this outside the class, it works exactly as expected outputting a row at a time while looping through the while statement. Is there a way to write this so that I can keep the fetch_array() call in the class and still loop through the records?

    Read the article

  • What is an instance of a field called?

    - by waxwing
    This might be an odd question, but it has actually caused me some headache. In Object oriented programming, there are accepted names for key concepts. In our model, we have classes with methods and fields. Now, going to the data world: An instance of a class is called an object. An instance of a field is called... what? A value? Isn't the term value a little broad for this? I have been offered "property" as well, but isn't property also part of the model and not the data? (This is not purely academic, I am actually coding these concepts.)

    Read the article

  • AS3 Passing data between objects/classes

    - by 1337holiday
    So i a building a categorized menu of different foods. I have a class for "categories" (buttons) which essentially will return a string "salads", "drinks", etc. I now have another class "menuItems" for items within categories and this handles sizes such as "small", "med", "large", etc. My problem now is that when i return "salads", i want to invoke an array which contains all the elements of salads, send it to menuItems which will populate the menu. So far i have both the category objects and the menu object setup. I just cant seem to be able to send the data that the category object is returning and pass it to the menu object. Both of which are added to the stage as shown below: If there was a way that i could say add all these classes to one class so that they can talk to each other that would be great but i dont know how to do this. Been stuck for hours, please any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • how can I get around no arrays as class constants in php?

    - by user151841
    I have a class with a static method. There is an array to check that a string argument passed is a member of a set. But, with the static method, I can't reference the class property in an uninstantiated class, nor can I have an array as a class constant. I suppose I could hard code the array in the static method, but then if I need to change it, I'd have to remember to change it in two places. I'd like to avoid this.

    Read the article

  • How to implement copy operator for such C++ structure?

    - by Kabumbus
    So having struct ResultStructure { ResultStructure(const ResultStructure& other) { // copy code in here ? using memcpy ? how??? } ResultStructure& operator=(const ResultStructure& other) { if (this != &other) { // copy code in here ? } return *this } int length; char* ptr; }; How to implement copy? (sorry - I am C++ nube)

    Read the article

  • Force result for empty() test on an object

    - by hsz
    Hello ! Simple class for example: class Foo { protected $_bar; public function setBar( $value ) { $this->_bar = $value; } } And here is the question: $obj = new Foo(); var_dump( empty( $obj ) ); // true $obj->setBar( 'foobar' ); var_dump( empty( $obj ) ); // false Is it possible to change class's behaviour with testing it with empty() function so it will returns true when object is not filled with data ? I know about magic function __isset( $name ) but it is called only when we test specific field like: empty( $obj->someField ); but not when test whole object.

    Read the article

  • Python - Is it possible to get the name of the chained function?

    - by user1326876
    I'm working on a class that basically allows for method chaining, for setting some attrbutes for different dictionaries stored. The syntax is as follows: d = Test() d.connect().setAttrbutes(Message=Blah, Circle=True, Key=True) But there can also be other instances, so, for example: d = Test() d.initialise().setAttrbutes(Message=Blah) Now I believe that I can overwrite the "setattrbutes" function; I just don't want to create a function for each of the dictionary. Instead I want to capture the name of the previous chained function. So in the example above I would then be given "connect" and "initialise" so I know which dictionary to store these inside. I hope this makes sense. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • Can you explain this generics behavior and if I have a workaround?

    - by insta
    Sample program below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace GenericsTest { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { IRetrievable<int, User> repo = new FakeRepository(); Console.WriteLine(repo.Retrieve(35)); } } class User { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } } class FakeRepository : BaseRepository<User>, ICreatable<User>, IDeletable<User>, IRetrievable<int, User> { // why do I have to implement this here, instead of letting the // TKey generics implementation in the baseclass handle it? //public User Retrieve(int input) //{ // throw new NotImplementedException(); //} } class BaseRepository<TPoco> where TPoco : class,new() { public virtual TPoco Create() { return new TPoco(); } public virtual bool Delete(TPoco item) { return true; } public virtual TPoco Retrieve<TKey>(TKey input) { return null; } } interface ICreatable<TPoco> { TPoco Create(); } interface IDeletable<TPoco> { bool Delete(TPoco item); } interface IRetrievable<TKey, TPoco> { TPoco Retrieve(TKey input); } } This sample program represents the interfaces my actual program uses, and demonstrates the problem I'm having (commented out in FakeRepository). I would like for this method call to be generically handled by the base class (which in my real example is able to handle 95% of the cases given to it), allowing for overrides in the child classes by specifying the type of TKey explicitly. It doesn't seem to matter what parameter constraints I use for the IRetrievable, I can never get the method call to fall through to the base class. Also, if anyone can see an alternate way to implement this kind of behavior and get the result I'm ultimately looking for, I would be very interested to see it. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • PHP inheriting/extending a particular instance of an Object

    - by delta9
    Is there any way to force PHP to extend an existing/particular (and for that matter, already instantiated) instance of an object? This imaginary code should explain what I am wondering: class Base { public $var; function __construct($var){ $this->var = $name; } } class Extender extends Base { function __construct($parent) { parent = $parent; } } $base = new Base('yay!'); $extender = new Extender($base); echo 'Extended base var value: '.$extender->var.'<br/>'; Output (would be): Extended base var value: yay! To be clear, I am wanting to instantiate an object that extends a PARTICULAR INSTANCE of another object, one that has already been instantiated. I am aware that I can pass a reference to an object to another object (via it's constructor function) and then add it as a property of the receiving object, I'm wondering if there is a real way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Objective-C inheritance; calling overriden method from superclass?

    - by anshuchimala
    Hello, I have an Objective-C class that has a method that is meant to be overridden, which is uses in a different method. Something like this: @interface BaseClass - (id)overrideMe; - (void)doAwesomeThings; @end @implementation BaseClass - (id)overrideMe { [self doesNotRecognizeSelector:_cmd]; return nil; } - (void)doAwesomeThings { id stuff = [self overrideMe]; /* do stuff */ } @end @interface SubClass : BaseClass @end @implementation SubClass - (id)overrideMe { /* Actually do things */ return <something>; } @end However, when I create a SubClass and try to use it, it still calls overrideMe on the BaseClass and crashes due to doesNotRecognizeSelector:. (I'm not doing a [super overrideMe] or anything stupid like that). Is there a way to get BaseClass to call the overridden overrideMe?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >