Search Results

Search found 69140 results on 2766 pages for 'design time'.

Page 360/2766 | < Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >

  • Are we using IoC effectively?

    - by Juliet
    So my company uses Castle Windsor IoC container, but in a way that feels "off": All the data types are registered in code, not the config file. All data types are hard-coded to use one interface implementation. In fact, for nearly all given interfaces, there is and will only ever be one implementation. All registered data types have a default constructor, so Windsor doesn't instantiate an object graph for any registered types. The people who designed the system insist the IoC container makes the system better. We have 1200+ public classes, so its a big system, the kind where you'd expect to find a framework like Windsor. But I'm still skeptical. Is my company using IoC effectively? Is there an advantage to new'ing objects with Windsor than new'ing objects with the new keyword?

    Read the article

  • Which fieldtype is best for storing PRICE values?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Hi there I am wondering whats the best "price field" in MSSQL for a shoplike structure? Looking at this overview: http://www.teratrax.com/sql_guide/data_types/sql_server_data_types.html We have datatypes called money, smallmoney, then we have decimal/numeric and lastly float and real Name, memory/disk-usage and value ranges: Money: 8 bytes (values: -922,337,203,685,477.5808 to +922,337,203,685,477.5807) Smallmoney: 4 bytes (values: -214,748.3648 to +214,748.3647) Decimal: 9 [default, min. 5] bytes (values: -10^38 +1 to 10^38 -1 ) Float: 8 bytes (values: -1.79E+308 to 1.79E+308 ) Real: 4 bytes (values: -3.40E+38 to 3.40E+38 ) My question is: is it really wise to store pricevalues in those types? what about eg. INT? Int: 4 bytes (values: -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647) Lets say a shop uses dollars, they have cents, but I dont see prices being $49.2142342 so the use of a lot of decimals showing cents seems waste of SQL bandwidth. Secondly, most shops wouldn't show any prices near 200.000.000 (not in normal webshops at least... unless someone is trying to sell me a famous tower in Paris) So why not go for an int? An int is fast, its only 4 bytes and you can easily make decimals, by saving values in cents instead of dollars and then divide when you present the values. The other approach would be to use smallmoney which is 4 bytes too, but this will require the math part of the CPU to do the calc, where as Int is integer power... on the downside you will need to divide every single outcome. Are there any "currency" related problems with regionalsettings when using smallmoney/money fields? what will these transfer too in C#/.NET ? Any pros/cons? Go for integer prices or smallmoney or some other? Whats does your experience tell?

    Read the article

  • Good code architecture for this problem?

    - by RCIX
    I am developing a space shooter game with customizable ships. You can increase the strength of any number of properties of the ship via a pair of radar charts*. Internally, i represent each ship as a subclassed SpaceObject class, which holds a ShipInfo that describes various properties of that ship. I want to develop a relatively simple API that lets me feed in a block of relative strengths (from minimum to maximum of what the radar chart allows) for all of the ship properties (some of which are simplifications of the underlying actual set of properties) and get back a ShipInfo class i can give to a PlayerShip class (that is the object that is instantiated to be a player ship). I can develop the code to do the transformations between simplified and actual properties myself, but i would like some recommendations as to what sort of architecture to provide to minimize the pain of interacting with this translator code (i.e. no methods with 5+ arguments or somesuch other nonsense). Does anyone have any ideas? *=not actually implemented yet, but that's the plan.

    Read the article

  • wpf command pattern

    - by evan
    I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is there a pattern for this?

    - by Timmy
    i have something that requires a matrix of values, similar to pokemon: i have a class object for each of the types, is there a pattern or a good way to implement this, as a middle layer or in the classes?

    Read the article

  • C++ game designing & polymorphism question

    - by Kotti
    Hi! I'm trying to implement some sort of 'just-for-me' game engine and the problem's plot goes the following way: Suppose I have some abstract interface for a renderable entity, e.g. IRenderable. And it's declared the following way: interface IRenderable { // (...) // Suppose that Backend is some abstract backend used // for rendering, and it's implementation is not important virtual void Render(Backend& backend) = 0; }; What I'm doing right now is something like declaring different classes like class Ball : public IRenderable { virtual void Render(Backend& backend) { // Rendering implementation, that is specific for // the Ball object // (...) } }; And then everything looks fine. I can easily do something like std::vector<IRenderable*> items, push some items like new Ball() in this vector and then make a call similiar to foreach (IRenderable* in items) { item->Render(backend); } Ok, I guess it is the 'polymorphic' way, but what if I want to have different types of objects in my game and an ability to manipulate their state, where every object can be manipulated via it's own interface? I could do something like struct GameState { Ball ball; Bonus bonus; // (...) }; and then easily change objects state via their own methods, like ball.Move(...) or bonus.Activate(...), where Move(...) is specific for only Ball and Activate(...) - for only Bonus instances. But in this case I lose the opportunity to write foreach IRenderable* simply because I store these balls and bonuses as instances of their derived, not base classes. And in this case the rendering procedure turns into a mess like ball.Render(backend); bonus.Render(backend); // (...) and it is bad because we actually lose our polymorphism this way (no actual need for making Render function virtual, etc. The other approach means invoking downcasting via dynamic_cast or something with typeid to determine the type of object you want to manipulate and this looks even worse to me and this also breaks this 'polymorphic' idea. So, my question is - is there some kind of (probably) alternative approach to what I want to do or can my current pattern be somehow modified so that I would actually store IRenderable* for my game objects (so that I can invoke virtual Render method on each of them) while preserving the ability to easily change the state of these objects? Maybe I'm doing something absolutely wrong from the beginning, if so, please point it out :) Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Should Factories Persist Entities?

    - by mxmissile
    Should factories persist entities they build? Or is that the job of the caller? Pseudo Example Incoming: public class OrderFactory { public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); .... return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public OrderController(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); repository.Insert(order); ... } } or public class OrderFactory { public OrderFactory(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); ... repository.Insert(order); return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); ... } } Is there a recommended practice here?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring static inner 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 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 in this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing User Interface. What is an effective way ?

    - by pierocampanelli
    I have an accounting & payroll client/server application where there are several input form with complex data validation rules. I am finding an effective way to perform unit testing of user interface. For complex validation rules I mean: "Disable button X if I Insert a value in textfield Y" "Enable a combobox if I insert a value in a textfield" ...... ...... Most promising pattern i have found is suggested by M. Fowler (http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/ModelViewPresenter.html). Have you any experience about Unit Testing of User Interface? As technology stack I am using: .NET 3.5 & Windows Forms Widget Library.

    Read the article

  • Question about factory classes

    - by devoured elysium
    Currently I have created a ABCFactory class that has a single method creating ABC objects. Now that I think of it, maybe instead of having a factory, I could just make a static method in my ABC Method. What are the pro's and con's on making this change? Will it not lead to the same? I don't foresee having other classes inherit ABC, but one never knows! Thanks

    Read the article

  • What should go in each MVVM triad?

    - by Harry
    OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to handle customers with multiple addresses in CakePHP

    - by Ryan
    I'm putting together a system to track customer orders. Each order will have three addresses; a Main contact address, a billing address and a shipping address. I do not want to have columns in my orders table for the three addresses, I'd like to reference them from a separate table and have some way to enumerate the entry so I can determine if the addressing is main, shipping or billing. Does it make sense to create a column in the address table for AddressType and enumerate that or create another table - AddressTypes - that defines the address enumeration and link to that table? I have found other questions that touch on this topic and that is where I've taken my model. The problem I'm having is taking that into the cakePHP convention. I've been struggling to internalize the direction OneToMany relationships are formed - the way the documentation states feels backwards to me. Any help would be appreciated, Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

    - by Jeff
    I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

    Read the article

  • Routing redirection decision

    - by programming late night
    I have really no idea why I'm asking this as this a really completely irrelevant question for which I should have figured out an answer within milliseconds, yet I'm doing it. So in my project I have a Router class which splits up the request and selects the right page to be loaded. Fine so far. Now I have a page displayed when the user requests a page that doesn't exist, you know, 404. So theoretically, if the user entered mydomain.com/404 (I use mod_rewrite with a requests collector via index.php?req=*) the 404 error would be shown to him, but in fact there was no error - the 404 page would be displayed as a perfectly normal page. So if someone would try out requesting the 404 page via /404, he would be shown the page but he can't tell if the 404 page he requested doesn't exist and he is actually getting a, you guessed it, 404 error or if he actually found some flaw in the system that makes him able to see an error page when there is no error. I don't know how dumb this whole thing here is but I'm sure some of you have in fact ran into this problem already. Short version: If the user enters mydomain.com/404 the 404 page is shown even though there is no 404 error. I know this is a completely irrelevant question, please don't tell me, but I just spontaneously wanted to hear your thoughts on it. Strange eh? Should I redirect direct access to my 404-page to the home page? Should I do nothing? Should I just go to bed and stop asking irrelevant stuff?

    Read the article

  • Java - Calling all methods of a class

    - by Thomas Eschemann
    I'm currently working on an application that has to render several Freemarker templates. So far I have a Generator class that handles the rendering. The class looks more or less like this: public class Generator { public static void generate(…) { renderTemplate1(); renderTemplate2(); renderTemplate3(); } private static void render(…) { // renders the template } private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; private static void renderTemplate1() { // Create config object for the rendering // and calls render(); }; … } This works, but it doesn't really feel right. What I would like to do is create a class that holds all the renderTemplate...() methods and then call them dynamically from my Generator class. This would make it cleaner and easier to extend. I was thinking about using something like reflection, but it doesn't really feel like a good solution either. Any idea on how to implement this properly ?

    Read the article

  • How to use Unique Composite Key

    - by LifeH2O
    I have a table Item(ItemName*, ItemSize*, Price, Notes) I was making composite key of (ItemName,ItemSize) to uniquely identify item. And now after reading some answers on stackoverflow suggesting the use of UNIQUE i revised it as Item(ItemID*, ItemName, ItemSize, Price, Notes) But How to apply UNIQUE constraint on ItemName and ItemSize please correct if there is something wrong in question

    Read the article

  • Best approch to dynamically filter .net objects

    - by maxba
    The project i´m working currently on has a way to define a filter to filter objects from a database. This filter is a pretty straitforward class containing filtercriteria that will be combined to a sql where-clause. The goal now is to use this filter class to filter .net objects as well. So the filter for example defines, that the title property of the object that it is applied to must contain some userdefined string etc. What are ways to approch this problem? What should the filter return instead of the sql where-clause and how can it be applied to the object? I´m thinking about this for hours and don´t yet have even a slight idea how to solve this. Been thinking about reflection, dynamic code execution, building expressions but still haven´t found an acutal starting point.

    Read the article

  • Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

    - by MatthewMartin
    This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

    Read the article

  • Element Content Versus Attribute for Simple XML Value

    - by MB
    I know the elements versus attributes debate has come up many times here and elsewhere (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here) but I haven't seen much discussion of elements versus attributes for simple property values. So which of the following approaches do you think is better for storing a simple value? A: Value in Element Content: <TotalCount>553</TotalCount> <CelsiusTemperature>23.5</CelsiusTemperature> <SingleDayPeriod>2010-05-29</SingleDayPeriod> <ZipCodeLocation>12203</ZipCodeLocation> or B: Value in Attribute: <TotalCount value="553"/> <CelsiusTemperature value="23.5"/> <SingleDayPeriod day="2010-05-29"/> <ZipCodeLocation code="12203"/> I suspect that putting the value in the element content (A) might look a little more familiar to most folks (though I'm not sure about that). Putting the value in an attribute (B) might use less characters, but that depends on the length of the element and attribute names. Putting the value in an attribute (B) might be more extensible, because you could potentially include all sorts of extra information as nested elements. Whereas, by putting the value inside the element content (A), you're restricting extensibility to adding more attributes. But then extensibility often isn't a concern for really simple properties - sometimes you know that you'll never need to add additional data. Bottom line might be that it simply doesn't matter, but it would still be great to hear some thoughts and see some votes for the two options.

    Read the article

  • Is this physical collection class that contains only static methods an Anti-Pattern?

    - by Tj Kellie
    I'm trying to figure out if I should continue on with a current pattern in an application I'm working in, or refactor this into something else. I have a set of collection classes off a generic base of List. These classes have public constructors but contain only static methods that return collections. They look like this: public class UserObjCollection : BaseCollection<UserObj> { public static UserObjCollection GetAllUserObj() { UserObjCollection obj = new UserObjCollection(); obj.MapObjects(new UserObjDataService().GetAllUserObj()); return obj; } } Is this a Pattern or Anti-Pattern and what are the merits of this over a straight factory pattern?

    Read the article

  • Correct model for a database with a table for each user.

    - by BAH
    Kinda stuck here... I have an application with lets say 5000 rows of data per user and was wondering if it was right or wrong to do it this way: On user account creation a new table is created (UserData_[UserID]) or should I just have 1 table for userdata and have everything in there with a column for userid? The reason I am stuck at the moment is that it seems NHibernate isn't able to be mapped to dynamic table names without creating another ISessionFactory which has alot of overhead AFAIK. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >