Search Results

Search found 41035 results on 1642 pages for 'object oriented design'.

Page 389/1642 | < Previous Page | 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396  | Next Page >

  • Responsive grid, floated elements move underneath one another when min-width is reached

    - by Francesca
    I'm in the process of creating a responsive site (currently only working on the main content.) I've created two floated divs with percentage based widths. One contains an image which resizes with the browser resizing. The image has a min-width of 100px. Can anyone tell me why when put into a mobile sized width it doesn't drop down? How can I make the image stack underneath the text? JS Fiddle Live site

    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

  • How would you organize this in asp.net mvc?

    - by chobo
    I have an asp.net mvc 2.0 application that contains Areas/Modules like calendar, admin, etc... There may be cases where more than one area needs to access the same Repo, so I am not sure where to put the Data Access Layers and Repositories. First Option: Should I create Data Access Layer files (Linq to SQL in my case) with their accompanying Repositories for each area, so each area only contains the Tables, and Repositories needed by those areas. The benefit is that everything needed to run that module is one place, so it is more encapsulated (in my mind anyway). The downside is that I may have duplicate queries, because other modules may use the same query. Second Option Or, would it be better to place the DAL and Repositories outside the Area's and treat them as Global? The advantage is I won't have any duplicate queries, but I may be loading a lot of unnecessary queries and DAL tables up for certain modules. It is also more work to reuse or modify these modules for future projects (though the chance of reusing them is slim to none :)) Which option makes more sense? If someone has a better way I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Architecture of a single-page JavaScript web application?

    - by fig-gnuton
    How should a complex single-page JS web application be structured on the client-side? Specifically I'm curious about how to cleanly structure the application in terms of its model objects, UI components, any controllers, and objects handling server persistence. MVC seemed like a fit at first. But with UI components nested at various depths (each with their own way of acting on/reacting to model data, and each generating events which they themselves may or may not handle directly), it doesn't seem like MVC can be cleanly applied. (But please correct me if that's not the case.) -- (This question resulted in two suggestions of using ajax, which is obviously needed for anything other than the most trivial one-page app.)

    Read the article

  • What is the standard way to add an icon to a link with CSS?

    - by ewernli
    I'm used to use padding + background-image to place an icon next to a link. There are many example of this approach. Here is one from here: <a class="external" href="http://www.othersite.com/">link</a> a.external { padding-right: 15px; background: transparent url(images/external-link-icon.gif) no-repeat top right; } But most browser don't print background image, which is annoying. What is the standard to place icon next to links which is semantically correct and works in all cases? (I couldn't find an exact similar question. If there is one, just close this one as duplicate)

    Read the article

  • Pagination in a Rich Domain Model

    - by user246790
    I use rich domain model in my app. The basic ideas were taken there. For example I have User and Comment entities. They are defined as following: <?php class Model_User extends Model_Abstract { public function getComments() { /** * @var Model_Mapper_Db_Comment */ $mapper = $this->getMapper(); $commentsBlob = $mapper->getUserComments($this->getId()); return new Model_Collection_Comments($commentsBlob); } } class Model_Mapper_Db_Comment extends Model_Mapper_Db_Abstract { const TABLE_NAME = 'comments'; protected $_mapperTableName = self::TABLE_NAME; public function getUserComments($user_id) { $commentsBlob = $this->_getTable()->fetchAllByUserId((int)$user_id); return $commentsBlob->toArray(); } } class Model_Comment extends Model_Abstract { } ?> Mapper's getUserComments function simply returns something like: return $this->getTable->fetchAllByUserId($user_id) which is array. fetchAllByUserId accepts $count and $offset params, but I don't know to pass them from my Controller to this function through model without rewriting all the model code. So the question is how can I organize pagination through model data (getComments). Is there a "beatiful" method to get comments from 5 to 10, not all, as getComments returns by default.

    Read the article

  • Unique visitor counting in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Max
    I'd like to do visitor tracking similar to how stackoverflow does it.. By reading through numerous posts, I've figured out some details already: Count only 1 IP hit per 15 minutes (if anonymous) Count only 1 unique user-Login (per day?) Now that leaves the question of the real implementation.. Should I log the two factors live into a table (and increase count) | IP | timestamp | pageurl | Or do the counting AFTERWARDS (e.g. using IIS log files - which don't include the user, right? I know there're some similar posts outside, but NONE really has a great solution in my opinion yet..

    Read the article

  • many-to-many-to-many, incl alignment of data from diff sources

    - by JefeCoon
    Re-factoring dbase to support many:many:many. At the second and third levels we need to preserve end-user 'mapping' or aligning of data from different sources, e.g. Order 17 FirstpartyOrderID => aha LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => AA-1 # maps to 77-a LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => AA-2 # maps to 77-b, 77-c LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-x # maps to 77-zulu, 77-alpha, 99-foxtrot LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-y # maps to 77-zulu, 99-foxtrot LineItem_for_LittleWidget => AA-z # maps to 77-alpha ThirdpartyOrderID => foo LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-a LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-b LineItem_for_BigShinyThingy => 77-c LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 77-zulu LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 77-alpha ThirdpartyOrderID => bar LineItem_for_LittleWidget => 99-foxtrot Each LineItem has daily datapoints reported from its own source (Firstparty|Thirdparty). In our UI & app we provide tools to align these, then we'd like to save them into the cleanest possible schema for querying, enabling us to diff the reported daily datapoints, and perform other daily calculations (which we'll store in the dbase also, fortunately that should be cake once we've nailed this). We need to map related [firstparty|thirdparty]line_items which have their own respective datapoints. We'll be using the association to pull each line_items collection of datapoints for summary and discrepancy calculations. I'm considering two options, std has_many,through x2 --or-- possibly (scary) ubermasterjoin table OptionA: order<<-->> order_join_table[id,order_id,firstparty_order_id,thirdparty_order_id] <<-->>line_item order_join_table[firstparty_order_id]-->raw_order[id] order_join_table[thirdparty_order_id]-->raw_order[id] raw_order-->raw_line_items[raw_order_id] line_item<<-->> line_item_join[id,LI_join_id,firstparty_LI,thirdparty_LI <<-->>raw_line_items line_item_join[firstparty_LI]-->raw_line_item[id] line_item_join[thirdparty_LI]-->raw_line_item[id] raw_line_item<<-->>datapoints = we rely upon join to store all mappings of first|third orders & line_items = keys to raw_* enable lookup of these order & line_item details = concerns about circular references and/or lack of correct mapping logic, e.g order--line_item--raw_line_items vs. order--raw_order--raw_line_items OptionB: order<<-->> join_master[id,order_id,FP_order_id,TP_order_id,FP_line_item_id,TP_line_item_id] join_master[FP_order_id & TP_order_id]-->raw_order[id] join_master[FP_line_item_id & TP_line_item_id]-->raw_line_item[id] = every combo of FP_line_item + TP_line_item writes a record into the join_master table = "theoretically" queries easy/fast/flexible/sexy At long last, my questions: a) any learnings from painful firsthand experience about how best to implement/tune/optimize many-to-many-to-many relationships b) in rails? c) any painful gotchas (circular references, slow queries, spaghetti-monsters) to watch out for? d) any joy & goodness in Rails3 that makes this magically easy & joyful? e) anyone written the "how to do many-to-many-to-many schema in Rails and make it fast & sexy?" tutorial that I somehow haven't found? If not, I'll follow up with our learnings in the hope it's helpful.. Thanks in advance- --Jeff

    Read the article

  • ruby on rails has_many through relationship

    - by BennyB
    Hi i'm having a little trouble with a has_many through relationship for my app and was hoping to find some help. So i've got Users & Lectures. Lectures are created by one user but then other users can then "join" the Lectures that have been created. Users have their own profile feed of the Lectures they have created & also have a feed of Lectures friends have created. This question however is not about creating a lecture but rather "Joining" a lecture that has been created already. I've created a "lecturerelationships" model & controller to handle this relationship between Lectures & the Users who have Joined (which i call "actives"). Users also then MUST "Exit" the Lecture (either by clicking "Exit" or navigating to one of the header navigation links). I'm grateful if anyone can work through some of this with me... I've got: Users.rb model Lectures.rb model Users_controller Lectures_controller then the following model lecturerelationship.rb class lecturerelationship < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :active_id, :joinedlecture_id belongs_to :active, :class_name => "User" belongs_to :joinedlecture, :class_name => "Lecture" validates :active_id, :presence => true validates :joinedlecture_id, :presence => true end lecturerelationships_controller.rb class LecturerelationshipsController < ApplicationController before_filter :signed_in_user def create @lecture = Lecture.find(params[:lecturerelationship][:joinedlecture_id]) current_user.join!(@lecture) redirect_to @lecture end def destroy @lecture = Lecturerelationship.find(params[:id]).joinedlecture current_user.exit!(@user) redirect_to @user end end Lectures that have been created (by friends) show up on a users feed in the following file _activity_item.html.erb <li id="<%= activity_item.id %>"> <%= link_to gravatar_for(activity_item.user, :size => 200), activity_item.user %><br clear="all"> <%= render :partial => 'shared/join', :locals => {:activity_item => activity_item} %> <span class="title"><%= link_to activity_item.title, lecture_url(activity_item) %></span><br clear="all"> <span class="user"> Joined by <%= link_to activity_item.user.name, activity_item.user %> </span><br clear="all"> <span class="timestamp"> <%= time_ago_in_words(activity_item.created_at) %> ago. </span> <% if current_user?(activity_item.user) %> <%= link_to "delete", activity_item, :method => :delete, :confirm => "Are you sure?", :title => activity_item.content %> <% end %> </li> Then you see I link to the the 'shared/join' partial above which can be seen in the file below _join.html.erb <%= form_for(current_user.lecturerelationships.build(:joinedlecture_id => activity_item.id)) do |f| %> <div> <%= f.hidden_field :joinedlecture_id %> </div> <%= f.submit "Join", :class => "btn btn-large btn-info" %> <% end %> Some more files that might be needed: config/routes.rb SampleApp::Application.routes.draw do resources :users do member do get :following, :followers, :joined_lectures end end resources :sessions, :only => [:new, :create, :destroy] resources :lectures, :only => [:create, :destroy, :show] resources :relationships, :only => [:create, :destroy] #for users following each other resources :lecturerelationships, :only => [:create, :destroy] #users joining existing lectures So what happens is the lecture comes in my activity_feed with a Join button option at the bottom...which should create a lecturerelationship of an "active" & "joinedlecture" (which obviously are supposed to be coming from the user & lecture classes. But the error i get when i click the join button is as follows: ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid in LecturerelationshipsController#create SQLite3::ConstraintException: constraint failed: INSERT INTO "lecturerelationships" ("active_id", "created_at", "joinedlecture_id", "updated_at") VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?) Also i've included my user model (seems the error is referring to it) user.rb class User < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :email, :name, :password, :password_confirmation has_secure_password has_many :lectures, :dependent => :destroy has_many :lecturerelationships, :foreign_key => "active_id", :dependent => :destroy has_many :joined_lectures, :through => :lecturerelationships, :source => :joinedlecture before_save { |user| user.email = email.downcase } before_save :create_remember_token validates :name, :presence => true, :length => { :maximum => 50 } VALID_EMAIL_REGEX = /\A[\w+\-.]+@[a-z\d\-.]+\.[a-z]+\z/i validates :email, :presence => true, :format => { :with => VALID_EMAIL_REGEX }, :uniqueness => { :case_sensitive => false } validates :password, :presence => true, :length => { :minimum => 6 } validates :password_confirmation, :presence => true def activity # This feed is for "My Activity" - basically lectures i've started Lecture.where("user_id = ?", id) end def friendactivity Lecture.from_users_followed_by(self) end # lECTURE TO USER (JOINING) RELATIONSHIPS def joined?(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.find_by_joinedlecture_id(selected_lecture.id) end def join!(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.create!(:joinedlecture_id => selected_lecture.id) end def exit!(selected_lecture) lecturerelationships.find_by_joinedlecture_id(selected_lecture.id).destroy end end Thanks for any and all help - i'll be on here for a while so as mentioned i'd GREATLY appreciate someone who may have the time to work through my issues with me...

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern [.net/c#]

    - by gsharp
    Hi We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-) Thanks for you help.

    Read the article

  • how to tackle a custom forms database

    - by Neil Hickman
    I'm currently researching a project for the place that I work in. We are trying to create a system that will allow forms to be set up dynamically from a database. My question is what database structure would best suit something like this? I currently have a structure of: forms_form forms_formfields forms_formdata I don't think this is the most appropriate layout for this. Basically to make is make sense I need to be able to make a form within the database that can have infinite fields all customized and have the data when submitted stored in the database.

    Read the article

  • What's the most common scenario for Cocoa app setup during first launch?

    - by Eimantas
    I am creating an app and I would like a user to set some obligatory preferences during first app launch. What is the most common scenario to achieve this? Should I set some user defaults to see if the app has been setup? Also - if I determine that the app is being launched for the first time - how should I display "Setup" window? If I load it from the separte xib file - how will I deffer the display of main app window?

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern

    - by gsharp
    We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-)

    Read the article

  • Does introducing foreign keys to MySQL reduce performance

    - by Tam
    I'm building Ruby on Rails 2.3.5 app. By default, Ruby on Rails doesn't provide foreign key contraints so I have to do it manually. I was wondering if introducing foreign keys reduces query performance on the database side enough to make it not worth doing. Performance in this case is my first priority as I can check for data consistency with code. What is your recommendation in general? do you recommend using foreign keys? and how do you suggest I should measure this?

    Read the article

  • Responsive logo (image replacement) in html5boilerplate

    - by Barbara
    I'm using the responsive version of html5 boilerplate via initializr.com. My site uses a custom logo so i added the .ir class to h1 .ir { background-color: transparent; border: 0; overflow: hidden; *text-indent: -9999px; } like this <h1 class="title ir">h1.title</h1> The documentation says Add the .ir class to any element you are applying image-replacement to. When replacing an element's content with an image, make sure to also set a specific background-image: url(pathtoimage.png);, width, and height so that your replacement image appears. So I added to the code these lines .ir { background-image: url(http://i.imgur.com/yYnyJ.jpg); background-size: 100% auto; width:450px; height:450px } The problem are the specific width and height. I can't get rid of them but the logo is not responsive this way. Ideas? Here's the fiddle. http://jsfiddle.net/qeW3e/

    Read the article

  • Usability: Save changes using "Apply" button or after every single change?

    - by mr.b
    I am interested in hearing opinions and experiences of fellow developers on topic of designing user interface, usability AND maintainability-wise. Common approach is to allow users to tweak options and after form gets "dirty", enable "Apply" button, and user has possibility to back out by pressing cancel. This is most common approach on Windows platform (I believe MS usability guidelines say to do so as well). Another way is to apply changes after every single change has been made to options. Example, user checks some checkbox, and change is applied. User changes value of some text box, and change is applied after box looses focus, etc. You get the point. This approach is most common on Mac OSX. Regardless of my personal opinion (which is that Apple is better at usability, but software I usually write targets Windows users), what do you people think?

    Read the article

  • Am I trying to Implement Multiple Inheritance. How can I do this.

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I have created a class say A which has some functions defined as protected. Now Class B inherits A and class C inherits B. Class A has private default constructor and protected parameterized constructor. I want Class B to be able to access all the protected functions defined in Class A but class C can have access on some of the functions only not all the functions and class C is inheriting class B. How can I restrict access to some of the functions of Class A from Class C ? EDIT: namespace Db { public Class A { private A(){} protected A(string con){assign this value} protected DataTable getTable(){return Table;} protected Sqlparameters setParameters(){return parameter;} } } namespace Data { public Class B:A { protected B():base("constring"){} protected DataTable output(){return getTable();} protected sqlparameter values(param IDataParameter[] parameter){} } } namespace Bsns { public Class C:B { protected C():base(){} protected DataTable show() {return values(setparameter());} } } EDIT I think what I am trying to do here is Multiple inheritance. Please check. Class A { //suppose 10 functions are declared } Class B:A { //5 functions declared which are using A's function in internal body } Class C:B { //using all functions of B but require only 4 functions of A to be accessible by C. }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396  | Next Page >