Search Results

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

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 360/2272 | < Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >

  • Using Doctrine to abstract CRUD operations

    - by TomWilsonFL
    This has bothered me for quite a while, but now it is necessity that I find the answer. We are working on quite a large project using CodeIgniter plus Doctrine. Our application has a front end and also an admin area for the company to check/change/delete data. When we designed the front end, we simply consumed most of the Doctrine code right in the controller: //In semi-pseudocode function register() { $data = get_post_data(); if (count($data) && isValid($data)) { $U = new User(); $U->fromArray($data); $U->save(); $C = new Customer(); $C->fromArray($data); $C->user_id = $U->id; $C->save(); redirect_to_next_step(); } } Obviously when we went to do the admin views code duplication began and considering we were in a "get it DONE" mode so it now stinks with code bloat. I have moved a lot of functionality (business logic) into the model using model methods, but the basic CRUD does not fit there. I was going to attempt to place the CRUD into static methods, i.e. Customer::save($array) [would perform both insert and update depending on if prikey is present in array], Customer::delete($id), Customer::getObj($id = false) [if false, get all data]. This is going to become painful though for 32 model objects (and growing). Also, at times models need to interact (as the interaction above between user data and customer data), which can't be done in a static method without breaking encapsulation. I envision adding another layer to this (exposing web services), so knowing there are going to be 3 "controllers" at some point I need to encapsulate this CRUD somewhere (obviously), but are static methods the way to go, or is there another road? Your input is much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Saving Abstract and Sub classes to database

    - by bretddog
    Hi, I have an abstract class "StrategyBase", and a set of sub classes, StrategyA/B/C etc. The sub classes use some of the properties of the base class, and have some individual properties. My question is how to save this to a database. I'm currently using SqlCE, and Linq-To-Sql by creating entity classes automatically with SqlMetal.exe. I've seen there are three solutions shown in this question, but I'm not able to see how these solutions will work or not with SqlMetal/entity classes. Though it seems to me the "concrete table inheritance" would probably work without any manual modifying. What about the other two, would they be problematic? For "Single Table Inheritance" wouldn't all classes get all variables, even though they don't need them? And for the "Class table inheritance" solution I can't really see at all how that will map into the entity-classes for a useful purpose. I may note that I extend these partial entity classes for making the classes of my business objects. I may also consider moving to EntityFramework instead of SqlMetal/Linq2Sql, so would be nice also to know if that makes any difference to what schema is easy to implement. One likely important thing to note is that I will constantly be develop new strategies, which makes me have to modify the program code, and probably the database shcema; when adding a new strategy. Sorry the question is a bit "all over the place", but hopefully it's some clear advantages/disadvantages here that you may be able to advice. ? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Table with a lot of attributes

    - by Robert
    Hi, I'm planing to build some database project. One of the tables have a lot of attributes. My question is: What is better, to divide the the class into 2 separate tables or put all of them into one table. below is an example create table User { id, name, surname,... show_name, show_photos, ...) or create table User { id, name, surname,... ) create table UserPrivacy {usr_id, show_name, show_photos, ...) The performance i suppose is similar due to i can use index.

    Read the article

  • Is MVVM killing silverlight development?

    - by DeanMc
    This is a question I have had rattling around in my head for some time. I had a chat with a guy the other night who told me he would not be using the navigational framework because he could not figure out how it works with MVVM. As much as I tried to explain that patterns should be taken with a pinch of salt he would not listen. My point is this, patterns are great when they solve some problem. Sometimes only part of the pattern solves a particular problem while the other parts of it cause different problems. The goal of any developer is to build a solid application using a combination of patterns know how and foresight. I feel MVVM is becoming the one pattern to rule them all. As it is not directly supported by .Net some fancy business is needed to make it work. I feel that people are missing the point of the pattern, which is loosely coupled, testable code and instead jumping through hoops and missing out on great experiences trying to follow MVVM to the letter. MVVM is great but I wish it came with a warning or disclaimer for newbies as my fear is people will shy away from silverlight development for fear of being smacked with the mvvm stick. EDIT: Can I just add as an edit, I use and agree with MVVM as a pattern I know when it is and isn't feasible in my projects. My issue is with the encompassing nature it is taking, as if it HAS to be used as part of development. It is being used as an integral feature and not a pattern, which it is.

    Read the article

  • How should i organize authority code?

    - by acidzombie24
    I have users that fall into the following Not logged in Not Verified Verified Moderator Admin All code that only admin and moderators can access (like banning) is in ModeratorUser which inherits from verified which inherits from BaseUser. Some pages are accessible to all users such as public profiles. If a user is logged in he can leave a comment. To check this i use if (IsVerifiedUser). Now here is the problem. To avoid problems if a user is banned he is not recognized as a verified user. However in the rare case i need to know if he is verified i can use usertype & Verified. Should i not be doing this? I have a bunch of code in my VerifiedUser class and find i am moving tons of it to BaseUser. Is this something i help because a not logged in user can access the page? Should i handle the ban user in a different way and allow IsVerifiedUser to be true even if the user is banned?

    Read the article

  • Android ignoring my setWidth() and setHeight()

    - by popoffka
    So, why does this code: package org.popoffka.apicross; import android.app.Activity; import android.os.Bundle; import android.widget.Button; public class Game extends Activity { @Override protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); Button testButton = new Button(this); testButton.setBackgroundResource(R.drawable.cell); testButton.setWidth(20); testButton.setHeight(20); setContentView(testButton); } } ...produce this thing: http://i42.tinypic.com/2hgdzme.png even though there's a setWidth(20) and setHeight(20) in the code? (R.drawable.cell is actually a 20x20 PNG image containing a white cell with a silver border)

    Read the article

  • Am I abusing Policies?

    - by pmr
    I find myself using policies a lot in my code and usually I'm very happy with that. But from time to time I find myself confronted with using that pattern in situations where the Policies are selected and runtime and I have developed habbits to work around such situations. Usually I start with something like that: class DrawArrays { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; class DrawElements { protected: void sendDraw() const; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public Policy { using Policy::sendDraw(); public: void render() const; }; When the policy is picked at runtime I have different choices of working around the situation. Different code paths: if(drawElements) { Vertices<DrawElements> vertices; } else { Vertices<DrawArrays> vertices; } Inheritance and virtual calls: class PureVertices { public: void render()=0; }; template<class Policy> class Vertices : public PureVertices, public Policy { //.. }; Both solutions feel wrong to me. The first creates an umaintainable mess and the second introduces the overhead of virtual calls that I tried to avoid by using policies in the first place. Am I missing the proper solutions or do I use the wrong pattern to solve the problem?

    Read the article

  • Game AI: Pattern for implementing Sense-Think-Act components?

    - by Rosarch
    I'm developing a game. Each entity in the game is a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. (Or inheritants thereof.) For NPCs, the GameObjectController is split into: IThinkNPC: reads current state and makes a decision about what to do IActNPC: updates state based on what needs to be done ISenseNPC: reads current state to answer world queries (eg "am I being in the shadows?") My question: Is this ok for the ISenseNPC interface? public interface ISenseNPC { // ... /// <summary> /// True if `dest` is a safe point to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="dest"></param> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <param name="range"></param> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeToRetreat(Vector2 dest, float angleToThreat, float range); /// <summary> /// Finds a new location to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <returns></returns> Vector2 newRetreatDest(float angleToThreat); /// <summary> /// Returns the closest LightSource that illuminates the NPC. /// Null if the NPC is not illuminated. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> ILightSource ClosestIlluminatingLight(); /// <summary> /// True if the NPC is sufficiently far away from target. /// Assumes that target is the only entity it could ever run from. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeFromTarget(); } None of the methods take any parameters. Instead, the implementation is expected to maintain a reference to the relevant GameObjectController and read that. However, I'm now trying to write unit tests for this. Obviously, it's necessary to use mocking, since I can't pass arguments directly. The way I'm doing it feels really brittle - what if another implementation comes along that uses the world query utilities in a different way? Really, I'm not testing the interface, I'm testing the implementation. Poor. The reason I used this pattern in the first place was to keep IThinkNPC implementation code clean: public BehaviorState RetreatTransition(BehaviorState currentBehavior) { if (sense.IsCollidingWithTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "is colliding with target"); return BehaviorState.ATTACK; } if (sense.IsSafeFromTarget() && sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() == null) { return BehaviorState.WANDER; } if (sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() != null && sense.SeesTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "collides with target"); return BehaviorState.CHASE; } return currentBehavior; } Perhaps the cleanliness isn't worth it, however. So, if ISenseNPC takes all the params it needs every time, I could make it static. Is there any problem with that?

    Read the article

  • c# - pull records from database without timeout

    - by BhejaFry
    Hi folks, i have a sql query with multiple joins & it pulls data from a database for processing. This is supposed to be running on some scheduled basis. So day 1, it might pull 500, day 2 say 400. Now, if the service is stopped for some reason & the data not processed, then on day3 there could be as much as 1000 records to process. This is causing timeout on the sql query. How best to handle this situation without causing timeout & gradually reducing workload to process? TIA

    Read the article

  • Designing a general database interface in PHP

    - by lamas
    I'm creating a small framework for my web projects in PHP so I don't have to do the basic work over and over again for every new website. It is not my goal to create a second CakePHP or Codeigniter and I'm also not planning to build my websites with any of the available frameworks as I prefer to use things I've created myself in general. I have no problems in designing that framework when it comes to parts like the core structure, request handling, and so on but I'm getting stuck with designing the database interface for my modules. I've already thought about using the MVC pattern but thought that it would be a bit of a overkill. So the exact problem I'm facing is how my frameworks modules (viewCustomers could be a module, for example) should interact with the database. Is it a good idea to write SQL directly in PHP (mysql_query( 'SELECT firstname, lastname(.....))? How could I abstract a query like SELECT firstname, lastname FROM customers WHERE id=X Would MySQL helper functions like $this->db->get( array('firstname', 'lastname'), array('id'=>X) ) be a good idea? I suppose not because they actually make everything more complicated by requiring arrays to be created and passed. Is the Model pattern from MVC my only real option?

    Read the article

  • Avoid loading unnecessary data from db into objects (web pages)

    - by GmGr
    Really newbie question coming up. Is there a standard (or good) way to deal with not needing all of the information that a database table contains loaded into every associated object. I'm thinking in the context of web pages where you're only going to use the objects to build a single page rather than an application with longer lived objects. For example, lets say you have an Article table containing id, title, author, date, summary and fullContents fields. You don't need the fullContents to be loaded into the associated objects if you're just showing a page containing a list of articles with their summaries. On the other hand if you're displaying a specific article you might want every field loaded for that one article and maybe just the titles for the other articles (e.g. for display in a recent articles sidebar). Some techniques I can think of: Don't worry about it, just load everything from the database every time. Have several different, possibly inherited, classes for each table and create the appropriate one for the situation (e.g. SummaryArticle, FullArticle). Use one class but set unused properties to null at creation if that field is not needed and be careful. Give the objects access to the database so they can load some fields on demand. Something else? All of the above seem to have fairly major disadvantages. I'm fairly new to programming, very new to OOP and totally new to databases so I might be completely missing the obvious answer here. :)

    Read the article

  • What's the standard way to organize the contents of Java packages -- specifically the location of in

    - by RenderIn
    I suppose this could go for many OO languages. I'm building my domain objects and am not sure where the best place is for the interfaces & abstract classes. If I have a pets package with various implementations of the APet abstract class: should it live side-by-side with them or in the parent package? How about interfaces? It seems like they almost have to live above the implementations in the parent package, since there could potentially be other subpackages which implement it, while there seems to be a stronger correlation between one abstract class and a subpackage. e.g. com.foo com.foo.IConsumer (interface) com.foo.APet (abstract) com.foo.pets.Dog extends APet implements IConsumer OR com.foo com.foo.IConsumer (interface) com.foo.pets.APet (abstract) com.foo.pets.Dog extends APet implements IConsumer or something else?

    Read the article

  • Elegant way of parsing Data files for Simulation

    - by sc_ray
    I am working on this project where I need to read in a lot of data from .dat files and use the data to perform simulations. The data in my .dat file looks as follows: DeviceID InteractingDeviceID InteractionStartTime InteractionEndTime 1 2 1101 1105 1,2 1101 and 1105 are tab delimited and it means Device 1 interacted with Device 2 at 1101 ms and ended the interaction at 1105ms. I have a trace data sets that compile thousands of such interactions and my job is to analyze these interactions. The first step is to parse the file. The language of choice is C++. The approach I was thinking of taking was to read the file, for every line that's read create a Device Object. This Device object will contain the property DeviceId and an array/vector of structs, that will contain a list of all the devices the given DeviceId interacted with over the course of the simulation.The struct will contain the Interacting Device Id, Interaction Start Time and Interaction End Time. I have a two fold question here: Is my approach correct? If I am on the right track, how do I rapidly parse these tab delimited data files and create Device objects without excessive memory overhead using C++? A push in the right direction will be much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Many-To-Many dimensional model

    - by Mevdiven
    Folks, I have a dimension table called DIM_FILE which holds information of the files we received from customers. Each file has detail records which constitutes my FACT table, CUST_DETAIL. In the main process, file is gone through several stages and each stage tags a status to it. Long in a short, I have many-to-many relationship. Any ideas around star schema dimensional modeling. A customer record only belong to a single file and a file can have multiple statuses. FACT ---- CustID FileID AmountDue DIM_FILE -------- FileID FileName DateReceived FILE_STATUS ----------- FileID StatusDateTime StatusCode

    Read the article

  • Three level database - foreign keys

    - by poke
    I have a three level database with the following structure (simplified to only show the primary keys): Table A: a_id Table B: a_id, b_id Table C: a_id, b_id, c_id So possible values for table C would be something like this: a_id b_id c_id 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 ... I am now unsure, how foreign keys should be set; or if they should be set for the primary keys at all. My idea was to have a foreign key on table B B.a_id -> A.a_id, and two foreign key on C C.a_id -> A.a_id and ( C.a_id, C.b_id ) -> ( B.a_id, B.b_id ). Is that the way I should set up the foreign keys? Is the foreign key from C->A necessary? Or do I even need foreign keys at all given that all those columns are part of the primary keys? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Class hierarchy problem (with generic's variance!)

    - by devoured elysium
    The problem: class StatesChain : IState, IHasStateList { private TasksChain tasks = new TasksChain(); ... public IList<IState> States { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } } IList<ITask> IHasTasksCollection.Tasks { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } <-- ERROR! You can't do this in C#! I want to return an IList<ITask> from an IList<IStates>. } } Assuming the IList returned will be read-only, I know that what I'm trying to achieve is safe (or is it not?). Is there any way I can accomplish what I'm trying? I wouldn't want to try to implement myself the TasksChain algorithm (again!), as it would be error prone and would lead to code duplication. Maybe I could just define an abstract Chain and then implement both TasksChain and StatesChain from there? Or maybe implementing a Chain<T> class? How would you approach this situation? The Details: I have defined an ITask interface: public interface ITask { bool Run(); ITask FailureTask { get; } } and a IState interface that inherits from ITask: public interface IState : ITask { IState FailureState { get; } } I have also defined an IHasTasksList interface: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> Tasks { get; } } and an IHasStatesList: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> States { get; } } Now, I have defined a TasksChain, that is a class that has some code logic that will manipulate a chain of tasks (beware that TasksChain is itself a kind of ITask!): class TasksChain : ITask, IHasTasksList { IList<ITask> tasks = new List<ITask>(); ... public List<ITask> Tasks { get { return _tasks; } } ... } I am implementing a State the following way: public class State : IState { private readonly TaskChain _taskChain = new TaskChain(); public State(Precondition precondition, Execution execution) { _taskChain.Tasks.Add(precondition); _taskChain.Tasks.Add(execution); } public bool Run() { return _taskChain.Run(); } public IState FailureState { get { return (IState)_taskChain.Tasks[0].FailureTask; } } ITask ITask.FailureTask { get { return FailureState; } } } which, as you can see, makes use of explicit interface implementations to "hide" FailureTask and instead show FailureState property. The problem comes from the fact that I also want to define a StatesChain, that inherits both from IState and IHasStateList (and that also imples ITask and IHasTaskList, implemented as explicit interfaces) and I want it to also hide IHasTaskList's Tasks and only show IHasStateList's States. (What is contained in "The problem" section should really be after this, but I thought puting it first would be way more reader friendly). (pff..long text) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using free function as pseudo-constructors to exploit template parameter deduction

    - by Poita_
    Is it a common pattern/idiom to use free functions as pseudo-constructors to avoid having to explicitly specify template parameters? For example, everyone knows about std::make_pair, which uses its parameters to deduce the pair types: template <class A, class B> std::pair<A, B> make_pair(A a, B b) { return std::pair<A, B>(a, b); } // This allows you to call make_pair(1, 2), // instead of having to type pair<int, int>(1, 2) // as you can't get type deduction from the constructor. I find myself using this quite often, so I was just wondering if many other people use it, and if there is a name for this pattern?

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC best way to update cached table

    - by Eddy Mishiyev
    There are certain tables that get called often but updated rarely. One of these tables is Departments. So to save DB trips, I think it is ok to cache this table taking into consideration that the table has very small size. However, once you cached it an issue of keeping the table data fresh occurs. So what is the best way to determine that the table is dirty and therefore requires a reload and how that code should be invoked. I look for solution that will be scalable. So updating the cache right after inserting will not work. So if one machine inserted the record all other on network should get notified to reload the cache. I was thinking for calling corresponding web service from T-SQL but don't really like the idea of consuming recourses on sql server. So what are the best practices to resolve this type of problems. Thanks in advance Eddy

    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

  • [C++]Advantage of using a static member function instead of an equivalent non-static member function

    - by jonathanasdf
    I was wondering whether there's any advantages to using a static member function when there is a non-static equivalent. Will it result in faster execution (because of not having to care about all of the member variables), or maybe less use of memory (because of not being included in all instances)? Basically, the function I'm looking at is an utility function to rotate an integer array representing pixel colours an arbitrary number of degrees around an arbitrary centre point. It is placed in my abstract Bullet base class, since only the bullets will be using it and I didn't want the overhead of calling it in some utility class. It's a bit too long and used in every single derived bullet class, making it probably not a good idea to inline. How would you suggest I define this function? As a static member function of Bullet, of a non-static member function of Bullet, or maybe not as a member of Bullet but defined outside of the class in Bullet.h? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?

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