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 Oriented vs Relational Databases

    - by Dan
    Objects oriented databases seem like a really cool idea to me, no need to worry about mapping your domain model to your database model, no messing around with sql or ORM tools. The way I understand it, relational DBs offer some advantages when there is massive amounts of data, and searching an indexing need to be done. To my mind 99% of websites are not massive, and enterprise issues never need to be thought about, so why arn't OO DBs more widely used?

    Read the article

  • Widget_Controller for different types of data (MVC)

    - by steve-o
    Hello, I have a few widgets I need to show on a site - they are all relating to different types of data (e.g user, house). Each type of data and its relations is represented in specific models, but as far as a controller or helper is concerned, is it an ok plan to have a generic Widget controller/helper which generates the necessary widgets, even though each widget is dealing with distinct data? I don't really want to generate these widgets within the User and House controllers, as these controllers are dealing with different types of functionality. I'd imagine that the Widget_Controller could just contain static methods for generating these widgets, e.g: Widget_Controller::user_panel(); Does that make sense? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Is it good practise to blank out inherited functionality that will not be used?

    - by Timo Kosig
    I'm wondering if I should change the software architecture of one of my projects. I'm developing software for a project where two sides (in fact a host and a device) use shared code. That helps because shared data, e.g. enums can be stored in one central place. I'm working with what we call a "channel" to transfer data between device and host. Each channel has to be implemented on device and host side. We have different kinds of channels, ordinary ones and special channels which transfer measurement data. My current solution has the shared code in an abstract base class. From there on code is split between the two sides. As it has turned out there are a few cases when we would have shared code but we can't share it, we have to implement it on each side. The principle of DRY (don't repeat yourself) says that you shouldn't have code twice. My thought was now to concatenate the functionality of e.g. the abstract measurement channel on the device side and the host side in an abstract class with shared code. That means though that once we create an actual class for either the device or the host side for that channel we have to hide the functionality that is used by the other side. Is this an acceptable thing to do: public abstract class MeasurementChannelAbstract { protected void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { } protected void MethodUsedByHostSide() { } } public class DeviceMeasurementChannel : MeasurementChannelAbstract { public new void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { base.MethodUsedByDeviceSide(); } } Now, DeviceMeasurementChannel is only using the functionality for the device side from MeasurementChannelAbstract. By declaring all methods/members of MeasurementChannelAbstract protected you have to use the new keyword to enable that functionality to be accessed from the outside. Is that acceptable or are there any pitfalls, caveats, etc. that could arise later when using the code?

    Read the article

  • Extend base class properties

    - by user1888033
    I need your help to extend my base class, here is the similar structure i have. public class ShowRoomA { public audi AudiModelA { get; set; } public benz benzModelA { get; set; } } public class audi { public string Name { get; set; } public string AC { get; set; } public string PowerStearing { get; set; } } public class benz { public string Name { get; set; } public string AC { get; set; } public string AirBag { get; set; } public string MusicSystem { get; set; } } //My Implementation class like this class Main() { private void UpdateDetails() { ShowRoomA ojbMahi = new ShowRoomA(); GetDetails( ojbMahi ); // this works fine } private void GetDetails(ShowRoomA objShowRoom) { objShowRoom = new objShowRoom(); objShowRoom.audi = new audi(); objShowRoom.audi.Name = "AUDIMODEL94CD698"; objShowRoom.audi.AC = "6 TON"; objShowRoom.audi.PowerStearing = "Electric"; objShowRoom.benz= new benz(); objShowRoom.audi.Name = "BENZMODEL34LCX"; objShowRoom.audi.AC = "8 TON"; objShowRoom.audi.AirBag = "Two (1+1)"; objShowRoom.audi.MusicSystem = "Poineer 3500W"; } } // Till this cool. // Now I got requirement for ShowRoomB with replacement of old audi and benz with new models and new other brand cars also added. // I don't want to modify GetDetails() method. by reusing this method additional logic i want to apply to my new extended model. // Here I struck in designing my new model of ShowRoomB (base of ShowRoomA) ... I have tried some thing like... but not sure. public class audiModelB:audi { public string JetEngine { get; set; } } public class benzModelB:benz { public string JetEngine { get; set; } } public class ShowRoomB { public audiModelB AudiModelB { get; set; } public benzModelB benzModelB { get; set; } } // My new code to Implementation class like this class Main() { private void UpdateDetails() { ShowRoomB ojbNahi = new ShowRoomB(); GetDetails( ojbNahi ); // this is NOT working! I know this object does not contain base class directly, still some what i want fill my new model with old properties. Kindly suggest here } } Can any one please give me solutions how to achieve my extending requirement for base class "ShowroomA" Really appreciated your time and suggestions. Thanks in advance,

    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

  • Is this a reasonable way to handle getters/setters in a PHP class?

    - by Mark Biek
    I'm going to try something with the format of this question and I'm very open to suggestions about a better way to handle it. I didn't want to just dump a bunch of code in the question so I've posted the code for the class on refactormycode. base-class-for-easy-class-property-handling My thought was that people can either post code snippets here or make changes on refactormycode and post links back to their refactorings. I'll make upvotes and accept an answer (assuming there's a clear "winner") based on that. At any rate, on to the class itself: I see a lot of debate about getter/setter class methods and is it better to just access simple property variables directly or should every class have explicit get/set methods defined, blah blah blah. I like the idea of having explicit methods in case you have to add more logic later. Then you don't have to modify any code that uses the class. However I hate having a million functions that look like this: public function getFirstName() { return $this->firstName; } public function setFirstName($firstName) { return $this->firstName; } Now I'm sure I'm not the first person to do this (I'm hoping that there's a better way of doing it that someone can suggest to me). Basically, the PropertyHandler class has a __call magic method. Any methods that come through __call that start with "get" or "set" are then routed to functions that set or retrieve values into an associative array. The key into the array is the name of the calling method after get or set. So, if the method coming into __call is "getFirstName", the array key is "FirstName". I liked using __call because it will automatically take care of the case where the subclass already has a "getFirstName" method defined. My impression (and I may be wrong) is that the __get & __set magic methods don't do that. So here's an example of how it would work: class PropTest extends PropertyHandler { public function __construct() { parent::__construct(); } } $props = new PropTest(); $props->setFirstName("Mark"); echo $props->getFirstName(); Notice that PropTest doesn't actually have "setFirstName" or "getFirstName" methods and neither does PropertyHandler. All that's doing is manipulating array values. The other case would be where your subclass is already extending something else. Since you can't have true multiple inheritance in PHP, you can make your subclass have a PropertyHandler instance as a private variable. You have to add one more function but then things behave in exactly the same way. class PropTest2 { private $props; public function __construct() { $this->props = new PropertyHandler(); } public function __call($method, $arguments) { return $this->props->__call($method, $arguments); } } $props2 = new PropTest2(); $props2->setFirstName('Mark'); echo $props2->getFirstName(); Notice how the subclass has a __call method that just passes everything along to the PropertyHandler __call method. Another good argument against handling getters and setters this way is that it makes it really hard to document. In fact, it's basically impossible to use any sort of document generation tool since the explicit methods to be don't documented don't exist. I've pretty much abandoned this approach for now. It was an interesting learning exercise but I think it sacrifices too much clarity.

    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 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

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 >