Search Results

Search found 441 results on 18 pages for 'duplication'.

Page 4/18 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is there a design pattern to cut down on code duplication when subclassing Activities in Android?

    - by Daniel Lew
    I've got a common task that I do with some Activities - downloading data then displaying it. I've got the downloading part down pat; it is, of course, a little tricky due to the possibility of the user changing the orientation or cancelling the Activity before the download is complete, but the code is there. There is enough code handling these cases such that I don't want to have to copy/paste it to each Activity I have, so I thought to create an abstract subclass Activity itself such that it handles a single background download which then launches a method which fills the page with data. This all works. The issue is that, due to single inheritance, I am forced to recreate the exact same class for any other type of Activity - for example, I use Activity, ListActivity and MapActivity. To use the same technique for all three requires three duplicate classes, except each extends a different Activity. Is there a design pattern that can cut down on the code duplication? As it stands, I have saved much duplication already, but it pains me to see the exact same code in three classes just so that they each subclass a different type of Activity.

    Read the article

  • Does Google punish content duplication across multiple country domains?

    - by Logan Koester
    I like the way Google handles internationalization, with domains such as google.co.uk, google.nl, google.de etc. I'd like to do this for my own site, but I'm concerned that Google will interpret this as content duplication, particularly across countries that speak the same human language, as there won't be any translation to hint that the content is different. My site is a web application, not a content farm, so is this a legitimate concern? Would I be better off with subdomains of my .com? Directories?

    Read the article

  • Subjective question...would you use the Action delegate to avoid duplication of code?

    - by Seth Spearman
    Hello, I just asked a question that helps about using generics (or polymorphism) to avoid duplication of code. I am really trying to follow the DRY principle. So I just ran into the following code... Sub OutputDataToExcel() OutputLine("Output DataBlocks", 1) OutputDataBlocks() OutputLine("") OutputLine("Output Numbered Inventory", 1) OutputNumberedInventory() OutputLine("") OutputLine("Output Item Summaries", 1) OutputItemSummaries() OutputLine("") End Sub Should I rewrite this code to be as follows using the Action delegate... Sub OutputDataToExcel() OutputData("Output DataBlocks", New Action(AddressOf OutputDataBlocks)) OutputData("Output Numbered Inventory", New Action(AddressOf OutputNumberedInventory)) OutputData("Output Item Summaries", New Action(AddressOf OutputItemSummaries)) End Sub Sub OutputData(ByVal outputDescription As String, ByVal outputType As Action) OutputLine(outputDescription, 1) outputType() OutputLine("") End Sub I realize this question is subjective. I am just wondering about how religiously you follow DRY. Would you do this? Seth

    Read the article

  • JavaScript: One ID, two functions. How can I do this with minimal code duplication?

    - by user1775598
    I've got an ID and I'd like to assign two functions to it. Here's what it currently looks like: document.getElementById(this.config.dragArea).addEventListener("drop", this._dropFiles, false); document.getElementById(this.config.dragArea).addEventListener("drop", this._handleFileDrop, false); How can I rewrite this file without so much duplication? I tried doing document.getElementById(this.config.dragArea).addEventListener("drop", this._dropFiles, this._handleFileDrop, false); and document.getElementById(this.config.dragArea).addEventListener("drop", function(){this._dropFiles; this._handleFileDrop}, false); All to no avail :(

    Read the article

  • From where to send mails in a MVC framework, so that there is no duplication of code?

    - by Sabya
    It's a MVC question. Here is the situation: I am writing an application where I have "groups". You can invite other persons to your groups by typing their email and clicking "invite". There are two ways this functionality can be called: a) web interface and b) API After the mail sending is over I want to report to the user which mails were sent successfully (i.e., if the SMTP send succeeded. Currently, I am not interested in reporting mail bounces). So, I am thinking how should I design so that there is no code duplication. That is, API and web-interface should share the bulk of the code. To do this, I can create the method "invite" inside the model "group". So, the API and and the Web-interface can just call: group-invite($emailList); This method can send the emails. But the, problem is, then I have to access the mail templates, create the views for the mails, and then send the mails. Which should actually be in the "View" part or at least in the "Controller" part. What is the most elegant design in this situation? Note: I am really thinking to write this in the Model. My only doubt is: previously I thought sending mails also as "presentation". Since it is may be considered as a different form of generating output.

    Read the article

  • Is there any open source DVD duplication software like Nero?

    - by johnny
    Nero Essentials isn't working right and I wondered if there was anything open source that I could use. I need to duplicate a DVD that I have authored - not a data disc a "real" dvd (with vob files, etc.) CDBurnerXP did not have this. Or, if I create an .iso is that the same thing when I burn it back to my duplicate? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way of using one method to handle others to avoid code duplication?

    - by Artur
    I wonder if there is a way of writing a method or a class that would add to any method some code that is shared between many methods. The methods return different things and some of them are just void. Below is a part of the code that is duplicated in the methods. StartTimer(MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name); try { // Actual method body } catch (Exception ex) { bool rethrow = ExceptionPolicy.HandleException(ex, "DALPolicy"); if (rethrow) { throw; } } finally { StopTimer(MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name); } Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can I loop through variables in SPSS? I want to avoid code duplication.

    - by chucknelson
    Is there a "native" SPSS way to loop through some variable names? All I want to do is take a list of variables (that I define) and run the same procedure for them: pseudo-code - not really a good example, but gets the point across... for i in varlist['a','b','c'] do FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=varlist[i] / ORDER=ANALYSIS. end I've noticed that people seem to just use R or Python SPSS plugins to achieve this basic array functionality, but I don't know how soon I can get those configured (if ever) on my installation of SPSS. SPSS has to have some native way to do this...right?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to utilize internal methods on controllers to reduce duplication?

    - by Maslow
    in a partial view I have the following: <%Html.RenderAction(MVC.User.GetComments(Model.UserGroupName)); %> can I render a Controller's PartialViewResult in a View without going through routing so I can pass arguments directly from the model so that the arguments I'm passing to the controller never get sent to the user or seen by the user? Currently the method I'm showing at the top throws an exception because no overload is public. I've got it marked as internal so that a user can not access it, only the rendering engine was my intent.

    Read the article

  • 11gr2 DataGuard: Restarting DUPLICATE After a Failure

    - by rene.kundersma
    One of the great new features that comes in very handy when databases get larger and larger these days is RMAN's capability to duplicate from an active database and even restart a duplicate when it fails. Imagine yourself the problem I had lately; I used the duplicate from active database feature and had to wait for an hour or 6 before all datafiles where transferred.At the end of the process some error occurred because of the syntax. While this error was easily to solve I was afraid I had to redo the complete procedure and transfer the 2.5 TB again. Well, 11gr2 RMAN surprised when I re-ran my command with the following output: Using previous duplicated file +DATA/fin2prod/datafile/users.2968.719237649 for datafile 12 with checkpoint SCN of 183289288148 Using previous duplicated file +DATA/fin2prod/datafile/users.2703.719237975 for datafile 13 with checkpoint SCN of 183289295823 Above I only show a small snippet, but what happend is that RMAN smartly skipped all files that where already transferred ! The documentation says this: RMAN automatically optimizes a DUPLICATE command that is a repeat of a previously failed DUPLICATE command. The repeat DUPLICATE command notices which datafiles were successfully copied earlier and does not copy them again. This applies to all forms of duplication, whether they are backup-based (with and without a target connection) or active database duplication. The automatic optimization of the DUPLICATE command can be especially useful when a failure occurs during the duplication of very large databases. If a DUPLICATE operation fails, you need only run the DUPLICATE again, using the same parameters contained in the original DUPLICATE command. Please see chapter 23 of the 11g Release 2 Database Backup and Recovery User's Guide for more details. B.w.t. be very careful with the duplicate command. A small mistake in one of the 'convert' parameters can potentially overwrite your target's controlfile without prompting ! Rene Kundersma Technical Architect Oracle Technology Services

    Read the article

  • Is loose coupling w/o use cases an anti-pattern?

    - by dsimcha
    Loose coupling is, to some developers, the holy grail of well-engineered software. It's certainly a good thing when it makes code more flexible in the face of changes that are likely to occur in the foreseeable future, or avoids code duplication. On the other hand, efforts to loosely couple components increase the amount of indirection in a program, thus increasing its complexity, often making it more difficult to understand and often making it less efficient. Do you consider a focus on loose coupling without any use cases for the loose coupling (such as avoiding code duplication or planning for changes that are likely to occur in the foreseeable future) to be an anti-pattern? Can loose coupling fall under the umbrella of YAGNI?

    Read the article

  • Compare text of two methods

    - by The Talking Walnut
    Is there a tool that can do a diff of two methods? I'm working on some legacy code that has several 100-200 line methods that contain a lot of duplication and I would like to abstract the duplication out. Being able to diff the two methods would be a huge help. In case it matters, I'm working with .NET and Visual Studio 2008.

    Read the article

  • 'Binary XML' for game data?

    - by bluescrn
    I'm working on a level editing tool that saves its data as XML. This is ideal during development, as it's painless to make small changes to the data format, and it works nicely with tree-like data. The downside, though, is that the XML files are rather bloated, mostly due to duplication of tag and attribute names. Also due to numeric data taking significantly more space than using native datatypes. A small level could easily end up as 1Mb+. I want to get these sizes down significantly, especially if the system is to be used for a game on the iPhone or other devices with relatively limited memory. The optimal solution, for memory and performance, would be to convert the XML to a binary level format. But I don't want to do this. I want to keep the format fairly flexible. XML makes it very easy to add new attributes to objects, and give them a default value if an old version of the data is loaded. So I want to keep with the hierarchy of nodes, with attributes as name-value pairs. But I need to store this in a more compact format - to remove the massive duplication of tag/attribute names. Maybe also to give attributes native types, so, for example floating-point data is stored as 4 bytes per float, not as a text string. Google/Wikipedia reveal that 'binary XML' is hardly a new problem - it's been solved a number of times already. Has anyone here got experience with any of the existing systems/standards? - are any ideal for games use - with a free, lightweight and cross-platform parser/loader library (C/C++) available? Or should I reinvent this wheel myself? Or am I better off forgetting the ideal, and just compressing my raw .xml data (it should pack well with zip-like compression), and just taking the memory/performance hit on-load?

    Read the article

  • Rawr Code Clone Analysis&ndash;Part 0

    - by Dylan Smith
    Code Clone Analysis is a cool new feature in Visual Studio 11 (vNext).  It analyzes all the code in your solution and attempts to identify blocks of code that are similar, and thus candidates for refactoring to eliminate the duplication.  The power lies in the fact that the blocks of code don't need to be identical for Code Clone to identify them, it will report Exact, Strong, Medium and Weak matches indicating how similar the blocks of code in question are.   People that know me know that I'm anal enthusiastic about both writing clean code, and taking old crappy code and making it suck less. So the possibilities for this feature have me pretty excited if it works well - and thats a big if that I'm hoping to explore over the next few blog posts. I'm going to grab the Rawr source code from CodePlex (a World Of Warcraft gear calculator engine program), run Code Clone Analysis against it, then go through the results one-by-one and refactor where appropriate blogging along the way.  My goals with this blog series are twofold: Evaluate and demonstrate Code Clone Analysis Provide some concrete examples of refactoring code to eliminate duplication and improve the code-base Here are the initial results:   Code Clone Analysis has found: 129 Exact Matches 201 Strong Matches 300 Medium Matches 193 Weak Matches Also indicated is that there was a total of 45,181 potentially duplicated lines of code that could be eliminated through refactoring.  Considering the entire solution only has 109,763 lines of code, if true, the duplicates lines of code number is pretty significant. In the next post we’ll start examining some of the individual results and determine if they really do indicate a potential refactoring.

    Read the article

  • SEO with duplicate content

    - by user16831
    I have a nature photography site with multiple types of photo galleries. Each photo and associated caption on my site appears in several galleries. For instance, a photo of a goldfinch that was taken on a trip to New Mexico in 2008 will appear in the "goldfinch.php" gallery, in the "finches.php" gallery, and in the "New_Mexico_2008.php" gallery. This duplication is useful for my site visitors - User A may want to see goldfinch photos, whereas User B wants to see photos from New Mexico - but I am concerned about the SEO implications. The typical suggestions to deal with duplicate content, such as 301 redirects and canonical tags, probably won't work in this case, because the page content is substantially different (ranging from ~1% to ~90% duplication, depending on the specific example chosen). The obvious solution to me would be to edit robots.txt to only allow search engines to crawl one type of gallery - for instance, if they crawled only the galleries organized by species(e.g. goldfinch.php), all the photos on my site would be found exactly once. However, the Google content guidelines recommend against blocking crawler access to duplicate information. Should I go ahead and use robots.txt anyway? Or is there a better solution?

    Read the article

  • share code between check and process methods

    - by undu
    My job is to refactor an old library for GIS vector data processing. The main class encapsulates a collection of building outlines, and offers different methods for checking data consistency. Those checking functions have an optional parameter that allows to perform some process. For instance: std::vector<Point> checkIntersections(int process_mode = 0); This method tests if some building outlines are intersecting, and return the intersection points. But if you pass a non null argument, the method will modify the outlines to remove the intersection. I think it's pretty bad (at call site, a reader not familiar with the code base will assume that a method called checkSomething only performs a check and doesn't modifiy data) and I want to change this. I also want to avoid code duplication as check and process methods are mostly similar. So I was thinking to something like this: // a private worker std::vector<Point> workerIntersections(int process_mode = 0) { // it's the equivalent of the current checkIntersections, it may perform // a process depending on process_mode } // public interfaces for check and process std::vector<Point> checkIntersections() /* const */ { workerIntersections(0); } std::vector<Point> processIntersections(int process_mode /*I have different process modes*/) { workerIntersections(process_mode); } But that forces me to break const correctness as workerIntersections is a non-const method. How can I separate check and process, avoiding code duplication and keeping const-correctness?

    Read the article

  • Repository query conditions, dependencies and DRY

    - by vFragosop
    To keep it simple, let's suppose an application which has Accounts and Users. Each account may have any number of users. There's also 3 consumers of UserRepository: An admin interface which may list all users Public front-end which may list all users An account authenticated API which should only list it's own users Assuming UserRepository is something like this: class UsersRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { private function query() { return $this->database()->select('users.*'); } public function getAll() { return $this->query()->exec(); } // IMPORTANT: // Tons of other methods for searching, filtering, // joining of other tables, ordering and such... } Keeping in mind the comment above, and the necessity to abstract user querying conditions, How should I handle querying of users filtering by account_id? I can picture three possible roads: 1. Should I create an AccountUsersRepository? class AccountUsersRepository extends UserRepository { public function __construct(Account $account) { $this->account = $account; } private function query() { return parent::query() ->where('account_id', '=', $this->account->id); } } This has the advantage of reducing the duplication of UsersRepository methods, but doesn't quite fit into anything I've read about DDD so far (I'm rookie by the way) 2. Should I put it as a method on AccountsRepository? class AccountsRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { public function getAccountUsers(Account $account) { return $this->database() ->select('users.*') ->where('account_id', '=', $account->id) ->exec(); } } This requires the duplication of all UserRepository methods and may need another UserQuery layer, that implements those querying logic on chainable way. 3. Should I query UserRepository from within my account entity? class Account extends Entity { public function getUsers() { return UserRepository::findByAccountId($this->id); } } This feels more like an aggregate root for me, but introduces dependency of UserRepository on Account entity, which may violate a few principles. 4. Or am I missing the point completely? Maybe there's an even better solution? Footnotes: Besides permissions being a Service concern, in my understanding, they shouldn't implement SQL query but leave that to repositories since those may not even be SQL driven.

    Read the article

  • Where does ASP.NET Web API Fit?

    - by Rick Strahl
    With the pending release of ASP.NET MVC 4 and the new ASP.NET Web API, there has been a lot of discussion of where the new Web API technology fits in the ASP.NET Web stack. There are a lot of choices to build HTTP based applications available now on the stack - we've come a long way from when WebForms and Http Handlers/Modules where the only real options. Today we have WebForms, MVC, ASP.NET Web Pages, ASP.NET AJAX, WCF REST and now Web API as well as the core ASP.NET runtime to choose to build HTTP content with. Web API definitely squarely addresses the 'API' aspect - building consumable services - rather than HTML content, but even to that end there are a lot of choices you have today. So where does Web API fit, and when doesn't it? But before we get into that discussion, let's talk about what a Web API is and why we should care. What's a Web API? HTTP 'APIs' (Microsoft's new terminology for a service I guess)  are becoming increasingly more important with the rise of the many devices in use today. Most mobile devices like phones and tablets run Apps that are using data retrieved from the Web over HTTP. Desktop applications are also moving in this direction with more and more online content and synching moving into even traditional desktop applications. The pending Windows 8 release promises an app like platform for both the desktop and other devices, that also emphasizes consuming data from the Cloud. Likewise many Web browser hosted applications these days are relying on rich client functionality to create and manipulate the browser user interface, using AJAX rather than server generated HTML data to load up the user interface with data. These mobile or rich Web applications use their HTTP connection to return data rather than HTML markup in the form of JSON or XML typically. But an API can also serve other kinds of data, like images or other binary files, or even text data and HTML (although that's less common). A Web API is what feeds rich applications with data. ASP.NET Web API aims to service this particular segment of Web development by providing easy semantics to route and handle incoming requests and an easy to use platform to serve HTTP data in just about any content format you choose to create and serve from the server. But .NET already has various HTTP Platforms The .NET stack already includes a number of technologies that provide the ability to create HTTP service back ends, and it has done so since the very beginnings of the .NET platform. From raw HTTP Handlers and Modules in the core ASP.NET runtime, to high level platforms like ASP.NET MVC, Web Forms, ASP.NET AJAX and the WCF REST engine (which technically is not ASP.NET, but can integrate with it), you've always been able to handle just about any kind of HTTP request and response with ASP.NET. The beauty of the raw ASP.NET platform is that it provides you everything you need to build just about any type of HTTP application you can dream up from low level APIs/custom engines to high level HTML generation engine. ASP.NET as a core platform clearly has stood the test of time 10+ years later and all other frameworks like Web API are built on top of this ASP.NET core. However, although it's possible to create Web APIs / Services using any of the existing out of box .NET technologies, none of them have been a really nice fit for building arbitrary HTTP based APIs. Sure, you can use an HttpHandler to create just about anything, but you have to build a lot of plumbing to build something more complex like a comprehensive API that serves a variety of requests, handles multiple output formats and can easily pass data up to the server in a variety of ways. Likewise you can use ASP.NET MVC to handle routing and creating content in various formats fairly easily, but it doesn't provide a great way to automatically negotiate content types and serve various content formats directly (it's possible to do with some plumbing code of your own but not built in). Prior to Web API, Microsoft's main push for HTTP services has been WCF REST, which was always an awkward technology that had a severe personality conflict, not being clear on whether it wanted to be part of WCF or purely a separate technology. In the end it didn't do either WCF compatibility or WCF agnostic pure HTTP operation very well, which made for a very developer-unfriendly environment. Personally I didn't like any of the implementations at the time, so much so that I ended up building my own HTTP service engine (as part of the West Wind Web Toolkit), as have a few other third party tools that provided much better integration and ease of use. With the release of Web API for the first time I feel that I can finally use the tools in the box and not have to worry about creating and maintaining my own toolkit as Web API addresses just about all the features I implemented on my own and much more. ASP.NET Web API provides a better HTTP Experience ASP.NET Web API differentiates itself from the previous Microsoft in-box HTTP service solutions in that it was built from the ground up around the HTTP protocol and its messaging semantics. Unlike WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX with ASMX, it’s a brand new platform rather than bolted on technology that is supposed to work in the context of an existing framework. The strength of the new ASP.NET Web API is that it combines the best features of the platforms that came before it, to provide a comprehensive and very usable HTTP platform. Because it's based on ASP.NET and borrows a lot of concepts from ASP.NET MVC, Web API should be immediately familiar and comfortable to most ASP.NET developers. Here are some of the features that Web API provides that I like: Strong Support for URL Routing to produce clean URLs using familiar MVC style routing semantics Content Negotiation based on Accept headers for request and response serialization Support for a host of supported output formats including JSON, XML, ATOM Strong default support for REST semantics but they are optional Easily extensible Formatter support to add new input/output types Deep support for more advanced HTTP features via HttpResponseMessage and HttpRequestMessage classes and strongly typed Enums to describe many HTTP operations Convention based design that drives you into doing the right thing for HTTP Services Very extensible, based on MVC like extensibility model of Formatters and Filters Self-hostable in non-Web applications  Testable using testing concepts similar to MVC Web API is meant to handle any kind of HTTP input and produce output and status codes using the full spectrum of HTTP functionality available in a straight forward and flexible manner. Looking at the list above you can see that a lot of functionality is very similar to ASP.NET MVC, so many ASP.NET developers should feel quite comfortable with the concepts of Web API. The Routing and core infrastructure of Web API are very similar to how MVC works providing many of the benefits of MVC, but with focus on HTTP access and manipulation in Controller methods rather than HTML generation in MVC. There’s much improved support for content negotiation based on HTTP Accept headers with the framework capable of detecting automatically what content the client is sending and requesting and serving the appropriate data format in return. This seems like such a little and obvious thing, but it's really important. Today's service backends often are used by multiple clients/applications and being able to choose the right data format for what fits best for the client is very important. While previous solutions were able to accomplish this using a variety of mixed features of WCF and ASP.NET, Web API combines all this functionality into a single robust server side HTTP framework that intrinsically understands the HTTP semantics and subtly drives you in the right direction for most operations. And when you need to customize or do something that is not built in, there are lots of hooks and overrides for most behaviors, and even many low level hook points that allow you to plug in custom functionality with relatively little effort. No Brainers for Web API There are a few scenarios that are a slam dunk for Web API. If your primary focus of an application or even a part of an application is some sort of API then Web API makes great sense. HTTP ServicesIf you're building a comprehensive HTTP API that is to be consumed over the Web, Web API is a perfect fit. You can isolate the logic in Web API and build your application as a service breaking out the logic into controllers as needed. Because the primary interface is the service there's no confusion of what should go where (MVC or API). Perfect fit. Primary AJAX BackendsIf you're building rich client Web applications that are relying heavily on AJAX callbacks to serve its data, Web API is also a slam dunk. Again because much if not most of the business logic will probably end up in your Web API service logic, there's no confusion over where logic should go and there's no duplication. In Single Page Applications (SPA), typically there's very little HTML based logic served other than bringing up a shell UI and then filling the data from the server with AJAX which means the business logic required for data retrieval and data acceptance and validation too lives in the Web API. Perfect fit. Generic HTTP EndpointsAnother good fit are generic HTTP endpoints that to serve data or handle 'utility' type functionality in typical Web applications. If you need to implement an image server, or an upload handler in the past I'd implement that as an HTTP handler. With Web API you now have a well defined place where you can implement these types of generic 'services' in a location that can easily add endpoints (via Controller methods) or separated out as more full featured APIs. Granted this could be done with MVC as well, but Web API seems a clearer and more well defined place to store generic application services. This is one thing I used to do a lot of in my own libraries and Web API addresses this nicely. Great fit. Mixed HTML and AJAX Applications: Not a clear Choice  For all the commonality that Web API and MVC share they are fundamentally different platforms that are independent of each other. A lot of people have asked when does it make sense to use MVC vs. Web API when you're dealing with typical Web application that creates HTML and also uses AJAX functionality for rich functionality. While it's easy to say that all 'service'/AJAX logic should go into a Web API and all HTML related generation into MVC, that can often result in a lot of code duplication. Also MVC supports JSON and XML result data fairly easily as well so there's some confusion where that 'trigger point' is of when you should switch to Web API vs. just implementing functionality as part of MVC controllers. Ultimately there's a tradeoff between isolation of functionality and duplication. A good rule of thumb I think works is that if a large chunk of the application's functionality serves data Web API is a good choice, but if you have a couple of small AJAX requests to serve data to a grid or autocomplete box it'd be overkill to separate out that logic into a separate Web API controller. Web API does add overhead to your application (it's yet another framework that sits on top of core ASP.NET) so it should be worth it .Keep in mind that MVC can generate HTML and JSON/XML and just about any other content easily and that functionality is not going away, so just because you Web API is there it doesn't mean you have to use it. Web API is not a full replacement for MVC obviously either since there's not the same level of support to feed HTML from Web API controllers (although you can host a RazorEngine easily enough if you really want to go that route) so if you're HTML is part of your API or application in general MVC is still a better choice either alone or in combination with Web API. I suspect (and hope) that in the future Web API's functionality will merge even closer with MVC so that you might even be able to mix functionality of both into single Controllers so that you don't have to make any trade offs, but at the moment that's not the case. Some Issues To think about Web API is similar to MVC but not the Same Although Web API looks a lot like MVC it's not the same and some common functionality of MVC behaves differently in Web API. For example, the way single POST variables are handled is different than MVC and doesn't lend itself particularly well to some AJAX scenarios with POST data. Code Duplication I already touched on this in the Mixed HTML and Web API section, but if you build an MVC application that also exposes a Web API it's quite likely that you end up duplicating a bunch of code and - potentially - infrastructure. You may have to create authentication logic both for an HTML application and for the Web API which might need something different altogether. More often than not though the same logic is used, and there's no easy way to share. If you implement an MVC ActionFilter and you want that same functionality in your Web API you'll end up creating the filter twice. AJAX Data or AJAX HTML On a recent post's comments, David made some really good points regarding the commonality of MVC and Web API's and its place. One comment that caught my eye was a little more generic, regarding data services vs. HTML services. David says: I see a lot of merit in the combination of Knockout.js, client side templates and view models, calling Web API for a responsive UI, but sometimes late at night that still leaves me wondering why I would no longer be using some of the nice tooling and features that have evolved in MVC ;-) You know what - I can totally relate to that. On the last Web based mobile app I worked on, we decided to serve HTML partials to the client via AJAX for many (but not all!) things, rather than sending down raw data to inject into the DOM on the client via templating or direct manipulation. While there are definitely more bytes on the wire, with this, the overhead ended up being actually fairly small if you keep the 'data' requests small and atomic. Performance was often made up by the lack of client side rendering of HTML. Server rendered HTML for AJAX templating gives so much better infrastructure support without having to screw around with 20 mismatched client libraries. Especially with MVC and partials it's pretty easy to break out your HTML logic into very small, atomic chunks, so it's actually easy to create small rendering islands that can be used via composition on the server, or via AJAX calls to small, tight partials that return HTML to the client. Although this is often frowned upon as to 'heavy', it worked really well in terms of developer effort as well as providing surprisingly good performance on devices. There's still plenty of jQuery and AJAX logic happening on the client but it's more manageable in small doses rather than trying to do the entire UI composition with JavaScript and/or 'not-quite-there-yet' template engines that are very difficult to debug. This is not an issue directly related to Web API of course, but something to think about especially for AJAX or SPA style applications. Summary Web API is a great new addition to the ASP.NET platform and it addresses a serious need for consolidation of a lot of half-baked HTTP service API technologies that came before it. Web API feels 'right', and hits the right combination of usability and flexibility at least for me and it's a good fit for true API scenarios. However, just because a new platform is available it doesn't meant that other tools or tech that came before it should be discarded or even upgraded to the new platform. There's nothing wrong with continuing to use MVC controller methods to handle API tasks if that's what your app is running now - there's very little to be gained by upgrading to Web API just because. But going forward Web API clearly is the way to go, when building HTTP data interfaces and it's good to see that Microsoft got this one right - it was sorely needed! Resources ASP.NET Web API AspConf Ask the Experts Session (first 5 minutes) © Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Linq to Sql saying that item by 'Customer' already exists. Choose a different name.

    - by Anthony Potts
    I have been going round and round with a linq to sql file while using svn for quite some time. The latest is that my dbml file shows as having an error which states that An item named "Customer" already exists. Please choose a different name. And then it repeats that again. In fact, it says it for almost every object. What is my fix? I have tried renaming the one named Customer, but that didn't fix it. I don't know where to go to fix this. I went to the .dbml file and don't see any duplication, and I went to the .dbml.layout file and didn't see any duplication there either.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to convert code to a string and vice versa in Python?

    - by Dragos Toader
    The original question was: Is there a way to declare macros in Python as they are declared in C: #define OBJWITHSIZE(_x) (sizeof _x)/(sizeof _x[0]) Here's what I'm trying to find out: Is there a way to avoid code duplication in Python? In one part of a program I'm writing, I have a function: def replaceProgramFilesPath(filenameBr): def getProgramFilesPath(): import os return os.environ.get("PROGRAMFILES") + chr(92) return filenameBr.replace("<ProgramFilesPath>",getProgramFilesPath() ) In another part, I've got this code embedded in a string that will later be output to a python file that will itself be run: """ def replaceProgramFilesPath(filenameBr): def getProgramFilesPath(): import os return os.environ.get("PROGRAMFILES") + chr(92) return filenameBr.replace("<ProgramFilesPath>",getProgramFilesPath() ) """ How can I build a "macro" that will avoid this duplication?

    Read the article

  • How to organize Windows Phone code base to target both 7.x and 8 platforms

    - by ljubomir
    I took over a Windows Phone project which was previously targeting WP 7.1 platform, and with the recent announcement of the new platform it should target WP 8 as well. My VS 2010 solution consists on several projects (Data access, Model, Tests and WP7 client app) and i am wandering on how to include support for WP8. I have to note that the code-base is not compatible with WP8, due to usage of Toolkit controls and other 3rd party libraries targeted for WP7.1 specifically. Also there is another problem with the Visual Studio versions - WP7.1 can work with VS 2010, but WP8 requires VS 2012. Should i move the whole code-base to VS 2012? Any good advice on how to organize code-base in a most meaningful way in order to avoid duplication and possible painful maintenance? I am thinking between one solution - multiple projects vs. multiple solutions - reusable projects approach. Code duplication (like two separate folders/solutions) should be the least possible approach (fallback).

    Read the article

  • Aspect-oriented Programming and Code Contracts in ASP.NET MVC

    There are some aspects to application programming, such as logging, tracing, profiling, authentication and authorization that cut across the business objects. These are difficult to deal with in an object-oriented paradigm without resorting to code-injection, code-duplication or interdependencies. In ASP.NET MVC, you can use attributes in the form of action filters to provide a neater way of implementing these cross-curring concerns.

    Read the article

  • To reorganize code, what to choose between library and service?

    - by essbeev
    I want to reorganize a large application with lot of code duplication into multiple components. Plus, some code is also duplicated over other applications. The common set of functionality that can be taken out of main application is clearly defined. Now, do I write a library or do I write a service for this functionality; so that all such applications continue to work and there is only one code-base (of common functionality) to maintain ?

    Read the article

  • From 20,663 issues to 1 issue&ndash;style-copping C5.Tests

    - by TATWORTH
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TATWORTH/archive/2014/05/28/from-20663-issues-to-1-issuendashstyle-copping-c5.tests.aspxI recently became interested in the potential of the C5 Collections solution from http://www.itu.dk/research/c5/, however I was dismayed at the state of the code in the unit test project, so I set about fixing the 20,663 issues detected by StyleCop. The tools I used were the latest versions of: My 64-bit development PC running Windows 8 Update with 8Gb RAM Visual Studio 2013 Ultimate with SP2 ReSharper GhostDoc Pro My first attempt had to be abandoned due to collision of class names which broke one of the unit tests. So being aware of this duplication of class names, I started again and planned to prepend the class names with the namespace name. In some cases I additionally prepended the item of the C5 collection that was being tested. So what was the condition of code at the start? Besides the sprawl of C# code not written to style cop standard, there was: 1) Placing of many classes within one physical file. 2) Namespace within name space that did not follow the project structure. 3) As already mentioned, duplication of class names across namespaces. 4) A copyright notice that spawled but had to be preserved. 5) Project sub-folders were all lower case instead of initial letter capitalised. The first step was to add a stylecop heading plus the original heading contained within a region, to every file. The next step was to run GhostDoc Pro using its “Document File” option on every file but not letting it replace the headers, I had added. This brought the number of issues down to 18,192. I then went through each file collapsing each class and prepending names as appropriate. At each step, I saved the changes to my local Git. The step was to move each class to its own file and to style-cop each file. ReSharper provides a very useful feature for doing this which also fixes missing “this.” and moves using statements inside the namespace. Some classes required minimal work whereas others required extensive work to reach the stylecop standard. The unit tests were run at each split and when each class was completed. When all was done, one issue remained which I will need to submit to stylecop team for their advice (and possibly a fix to stylecop). The updated solution has been made available at https://c5stylecopped.codeplex.com/releases/view/122785.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >