Search Results

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

Page 4/1642 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Design for a plugin based application

    - by Varun Naik
    I am working on application, details of which I cannot discuss here. We have core framework and the rest is designed as plug in. In the core framework we have a domain object. This domain object is updated by the plugins. I have defined an interface in which I have function as DomainObject doProcessing(DomainObject object) My intention here is I pass the domain object, the plug in will update it and return it. This updated object is then passed again to different plugin to be updated. I am not sure if this is a good approach. I don't like passing the DomainObject to plugin. Is there a better way I can achieve this? Should I just request data from plugin and update the domain object myself?

    Read the article

  • Need advice on design in Ruby On Rails

    - by Elad
    For personal educational purposes I am making a site for a conference. One of the object that exist in a conference is a session, which has different states and in each state it has slightly different attributes: When submitted it has a speaker (User in the system), Title and abstract. When under review it has reviews and comments (in addition to the basic data) When accepted it has a defined time-slot but no reviewers anymore. I feel that it is not the best thing to add a "status" attributes and start adding many if statements... So I thought it would be better to have different classes for each state each with it's own validations and behaviors. What do you think about this design? Do you have a better idea? *I must add this out of frustration: I had several edits of the question, including one major change but no one actually gave any hint or clue on which direction should i take or where is a better place to ask this... Hardly helpful.

    Read the article

  • how to improve design ability

    - by Cong Hui
    I recently went on a couple of interviews and all of them asked a one or two design questions, like how you would design a chess, monopoly, and so on. I didn't do good on those since I am a college student and lack of the experience of implementing big and complex systems. I figure the only way to improve my design capability is to read lots of others' code and try to implement myself. Therefore, for those companies that ask these questions, what are their real goals in this? I figure most of college grads start off working in a team guided by a senior leader in their first jobs. They might not have lots of design experience fresh out of colleges. Anyone could give pointers about how to practice those skills? Thank you very much

    Read the article

  • Class design for calling "the same method" on different classes from one place

    - by betatester07
    Let me introduce my situation: I have Java EE application and in one package, I want to have classes which will act primarily as cache for some data from database, for example: class that will hold all articles for our website class that will hold all categories etc. Every class should have some update() method, which will update data for that class from database and also some other methods for data manipulation specific for that data type. Now, I would like to call update() method for all class instances (there will be exactly one class instance for every class) from one place. What is the best design?

    Read the article

  • What is the better design decision approach?

    - by palm snow
    I have two classes (MyFoo1 and MyFoo2) that share some common functionality. So far it does not seem like I need any polymorphic inheritence but at this point I am considering the following options: Have the common functionality in a utility class. Both of these classes call these methods from that utility class. Have an abstract class and implement common methods in that abstract class. Then derive MyFoo1 and MyFoo2 from that abstract class. Any suggestion on what would be a better design decision?

    Read the article

  • Information Spilling Across Object Boundaries

    - by Winston Ewert
    Many times my business objects tend to have situations where information needs to cross object boundaries too often. When doing OO, we want information to be in one object and as much as possible all code dealing with that information should be in that object. However, business rules do not follow this principle giving me trouble. As an example suppose that we have an Order which has a number of OrderItems which refers to an InventoryItem which has a price. I invoke Order.GetTotal() which sums the result of OrderItem.GetPrice() which multiples a quantity by InventoryItem.GetPrice(). So far so good. But then we find out that some items are sold with a two for one deal. We can handle this by having OrderItem.GetPrice() do something like InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity ) and letting InventoryItem deal with this. However, then we find out that the two-for-one deal only lasts for a particular time period. This time period needs to be based on the date of the order. Now we change OrderItem.GetPrice() to be InventoryItem.GetPrice( quatity, order.GetDate() ) But then we need to support different prices depending on how long the customer has been in the system: InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity, order.GetDate(), order.GetCustomer() ) But then it turns out that the two-for-one deals apply not just to buying multiple of the same inventory item but multiple for any item in a InventoryCategory. At this point we throw up our hands and just give the InventoryItem the order item and allow it to travel over the object reference graph via accessors to get the information its needs: InventoryItem.GetPrice( this ) TL;DR I want to have coupling in objects, but business rules often force me to access information from all over the place in order to make particular decisions. Are there good techniques for dealing with this? Do others find the same problem?

    Read the article

  • Help with design structure choice: Using classes or library of functions

    - by roverred
    So I have GUI Class that will call another class called ImageProcessor that contains a bunch functions that will perform image processing algorithms like edgeDetection, gaussianblur, contourfinding, contour map generations, etc. The GUI passes an image to ImageProcessor, which performs one of those algorithm on it and it returns the image back to the GUI to display. So essentially ImageProcessor is a library of independent image processing functions right now. It is called in the GUI like so Image image = ImageProcessor.EdgeDetection(oldImage); Some of the algorithms procedures require many functions, and some can be done in a single function or even one line. All these functions for the algorithms jam packed into ImageProcessor can be pretty messy, and ImageProcessor doesn't sound it should be a library. So I was thinking about making every algorithm be a class with a shared interface say IAlgorithm. Then I pass the IAlgorithm interface from the GUI to the ImageProcessor. public interface IAlgorithm{ public Image Process(); } public class ImageProcessor{ public Image Process(IAlgorithm TheAlgorithm){ return IAlgorithm.Process(); } } Calling in the GUI like so Image image = ImageProcessor.Process(new EdgeDetection(oldImage)); I think it makes sense in an object point of view, but the problem is I'll end up with some classes that are just one function. What do you think is a better design, or are they both crap and you have a much better idea? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • OOP Design: relationship between entity classes

    - by beginner_
    I have at first sight a simple issue but can't wrap my head around on how to solve. I have an abstract class Compound. A Compound is made up of Structures. Then there is also a Container which holds 1 Compound. A "special" implementation of Compound has Versions. For that type of Compound I want the Container to hold the Versionof the Compound and not the Compound itself. You could say "just create an interface Containable" and a Container holds 1 Containable. However that won't work. The reason is I'm creating a framework and the main part of that framework is to simplify storing and especially searching for special data type held by Structure objects. Hence to search for Containers which contain a Compound made up of a specific Structure requires that the "Path" from Containerto Structure is well defined (Number of relationships or joins). I hope this was understandable. My question is how to design the classes and relationships to be able to do what I outlined.

    Read the article

  • OO Design - polymorphism - how to design for handing streams of different file types

    - by Kache4
    I've little experience with advanced OO practices, and I want to design this properly as an exercise. I'm thinking of implementing the following, and I'm asking if I'm going about this the right way. I have a class PImage that holds the raw data and some information I need for an image file. Its header is currently something like this: #include <boost/filesytem.hpp> #include <vector> namespace fs = boost::filesystem; class PImage { public: PImage(const fs::path& path, const unsigned char* buffer, int bufferLen); const vector<char> data() const { return data_; } const char* rawData() const { return &data_[0]; } /*** other assorted accessors ***/ private: fs::path path_; int width_; int height_; int filesize_; vector<char> data_; } I want to fill the width_ and height_ by looking through the file's header. The trivial/inelegant solution would be to have a lot of messy control flow that identifies the type of image file (.gif, .jpg, .png, etc) and then parse the header accordingly. Instead of using vector<char> data_, I was thinking of having PImage use a class, RawImageStream data_ that inherits from vector<char>. Each type of file I plan to support would then inherit from RawImageStream, e.g. RawGifStream, RawPngStream. Each RawXYZStream would encapsulate the respective header-parsing functions, and PImage would only have to do something like height_ = data_.getHeight();. Am I thinking this through correctly? How would I create the proper RawImageStream subclass for data_ to be in the PImage ctor? Is this where I could use an object factory? Anything I'm forgetting?

    Read the article

  • What OO Design to use ( is there a Design Pattern )?

    - by Blundell
    I have two objects that represent a 'Bar/Club' ( a place where you drink/socialise). In one scenario I need the bar name, address, distance, slogon In another scenario I need the bar name, address, website url, logo So I've got two objects representing the same thing but with different fields. I like to use immutable objects, so all the fields are set from the constructor. One option is to have two constructors and null the other fields i.e: class Bar { private final String name; private final Distance distance; private final Url url; public Bar(String name, Distance distance){ this.name = name; this.distance = distance; this.url = null; } public Bar(String name, Url url){ this.name = name; this.distance = null; this.url = url; } // getters } I don't like this as you would have to null check when you use the getters In my real example the first scenario has 3 fields and the second scenario has about 10, so it would be a real pain having two constructors, the amount of fields I would have to declare null and then when the object are in use you wouldn't know which Bar you where using and so what fields would be null and what wouldn't. What other options do I have? Two classes called BarPreview and Bar? Some type of inheritance / interface? Something else that is awesome?

    Read the article

  • Advice on designing a robust program to handle a large library of meta-information & programs

    - by Sam Bryant
    So this might be overly vague, but here it is anyway I'm not really looking for a specific answer, but rather general design principles or direction towards resources that deal with problems like this. It's one of my first large-scale applications, and I would like to do it right. Brief Explanation My basic problem is that I have to write an application that handles a large library of meta-data, can easily modify the meta-data on-the-fly, is robust with respect to crashing, and is very efficient. (Sorta like the design parameters of iTunes, although sometimes iTunes performs more poorly than I would like). If you don't want to read the details, you can skip the rest Long Explanation Specifically I am writing a program that creates a library of image files and meta-data about these files. There is a list of tags that may or may not apply to each image. The program needs to be able to add new images, new tags, assign tags to images, and detect duplicate images, all while operating. The program contains an image Viewer which has tagging operations. The idea is that if a given image A is viewed while the library has tags T1, T2, and T3, then that image will have boolean flags for each of those tags (depending on whether the user tagged that image while it was open in the Viewer). However, prior to being viewed in the Viewer, image A would have no value for tags T1, T2, and T3. Instead it would have a "dirty" flag indicating that it is unknown whether or not A has these tags or not. The program can introduce new tags at any time (which would automatically set all images to "dirty" with respect to this new tag) This program must be fast. It must be easily able to pull up a list of images with or without a certain tag as well as images which are "dirty" with respect to a tag. It has to be crash-safe, in that if it suddenly crashes, all of the tagging information done in that session is not lost (though perhaps it's okay to loose some of it) Finally, it has to work with a lot of images (10,000) I am a fairly experienced programmer, but I have never tried to write a program with such demanding needs and I have never worked with databases. With respect to the meta-data storage, there seem to be a few design choices: Choice 1: Invidual meta-data vs centralized meta-data Individual Meta-Data: have a separate meta-data file for each image. This way, as soon as you change the meta-data for an image, it can be written to the hard disk, without having to rewrite the information for all of the other images. Centralized Meta-Data: Have a single file to hold the meta-data for every file. This would probably require meta-data writes in intervals as opposed to after every change. The benefit here is that you could keep a centralized list of all images with a given tag, ect, making the task of pulling up all images with a given tag very efficient

    Read the article

  • How To Deal With Terrible Design Decisions

    - by splatto
    I'm a consultant at one company. There is another consultant who is a year older than me and has been here 3 months longer than I have, and a full time developer. The full-time developer is great. My concern is that I see the consultant making absolutely terrible design decisions. For example, M:M relationships are being stored in the database as a comma-delimited string rather than using a conjunction table to hold the relationships. For example, consider two tables, Car and Property: Car records: Camry Volvo Mercedes Property records: Spare Tire Satellite Radio Ipod Support Standard Rather than making a table CarProperties to represent this, he has made a "Property" attribute on the Car table whose data looks like "1,3,7,13,19,25," I hate how this decision and others are affecting the quality of my code. We have butted heads over this design three times in the past two months since I've been here. He asked me why my suggestion was better, and I responded that our database would be eliminating redundant data by converting to a higher normal form. I explained that this design flaw in particular is discussed and discouraged in entry level college programs, and he responded with a shot at me saying that these comma-separated-value database properties are taught when you do your masters (which neither of us have). Needless to say, he became very upset and demanded I apologize for criticizing his work, which I did in the interest of not wanting to be the consultant to create office drama. Our project manager is focused on delivering a product ASAP and is a very strong personality - Suggesting to him at this point that we spend some time to do this right will set him off. There is a strong likelihood that both of our contracts will be extended to work on a second project coming up. How will I be able to exert dominant influence over the design of the system and the data model to ensure that such terrible mistakes are not repeated in the next project? A glimpse at the dynamics: I can be a strong personality if I don't measure myself. The other consultant is not a strong personality, is a poor communicator, is quite stubborn and thinks he is better than everyone else. The project manager is an extremely strong personality who is focused on releasing tomorrow's product yesterday. The full-time developer is very laid back and easy going, a very effective communicator, but is someone who will accept bad design if it means not rocking the boat. Code reviews or anything else that takes "time" will be out of the question - there is no way our PM will be sold on such a thing by anybody.

    Read the article

  • Using visitor pattern with large object hierarchy

    - by T. Fabre
    Context I've been using with a hierarchy of objects (an expression tree) a "pseudo" visitor pattern (pseudo, as in it does not use double dispatch) : public interface MyInterface { void Accept(SomeClass operationClass); } public class MyImpl : MyInterface { public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } } This design was, however questionnable, pretty comfortable since the number of implementations of MyInterface is significant (~50 or more) and I didn't need to add extra operations. Each implementation is unique (it's a different expression or operator), and some are composites (ie, operator nodes that will contain other operator/leaf nodes). Traversal is currently performed by calling the Accept operation on the root node of the tree, which in turns calls Accept on each of its child nodes, which in turn... and so on... But the time has come where I need to add a new operation, such as pretty printing : public class MyImpl : MyInterface { // Property does not come from MyInterface public string SomeProperty { get; set; } public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } public void Accept(SomePrettyPrinter printer) { printer.PrettyPrint(this.SomeProperty); } } I basically see two options : Keep the same design, adding a new method for my operation to each derived class, at the expense of maintainibility (not an option, IMHO) Use the "true" Visitor pattern, at the expense of extensibility (not an option, as I expect to have more implementations coming along the way...), with about 50+ overloads of the Visit method, each one matching a specific implementation ? Question Would you recommand using the Visitor pattern ? Is there any other pattern that could help solve this issue ?

    Read the article

  • Object model design: collections on classes

    - by Luke Puplett
    Hi all, Consider Train.Passengers, what type would you use for Passengers where passengers are not supposed to be added or removed by the consuming code? I'm using .NET Framework, so this discussion would suit .NET, but it could apply to a number of modern languages/frameworks. In the .NET Framework, the List is not supposed to be publicly exposed. There's Collection and ICollection and guidance, which I tend to agree with, is to return the closest concrete type down the inheritance tree, so that'd be Collection since it is already an ICollection. But Collection has read/write semantics and so possibly it should be a ReadOnlyCollection, but its arguably common sense not to alter the contents of a collection that you don't have intimate knowledge about so is it necessary? And it requires extra work internally and can be a pain with (de)serialization. At the extreme ends I could just return Person[] (since LINQ now provides much of the benefits that previously would have been afforded by a more specified collection) or even build a strongly-typed PersonCollection or ReadOnlyPersonCollection! What do you do? Thanks for your time. Luke

    Read the article

  • A design pattern for data binding an object (with subclasses) to asp.net user control

    - by Rohith Nair
    I have an abstract class called Address and I am deriving three classes ; HomeAddress, Work Address, NextOfKin address. My idea is to bind this to a usercontrol and based on the type of Address it should bind properly to the ASP.NET user control. My idea is the user control doesn't know which address it is going to present and based on the type it will parse accordingly. How can I design such a setup, based on the fact that, the user control can take any type of address and bind accordingly. I know of one method like :- Declare class objects for all the three types (Home,Work,NextOfKin). Declare an enum to hold these types and based on the type of this enum passed to user control, instantiate the appropriate object based on setter injection. As a part of my generic design, I just created a class structure like this :- I know I am missing a lot of pieces in design. Can anybody give me an idea of how to approach this in proper way.

    Read the article

  • design a model for a system of dependent variables

    - by dbaseman
    I'm dealing with a modeling system (financial) that has dozens of variables. Some of the variables are independent, and function as inputs to the system; most of them are calculated from other variables (independent and calculated) in the system. What I'm looking for is a clean, elegant way to: define the function of each dependent variable in the system trigger a re-calculation, whenever a variable changes, of the variables that depend on it A naive way to do this would be to write a single class that implements INotifyPropertyChanged, and uses a massive case statement that lists out all the variable names x1, x2, ... xn on which others depend, and, whenever a variable xi changes, triggers a recalculation of each of that variable's dependencies. I feel that this naive approach is flawed, and that there must be a cleaner way. I started down the path of defining a CalculationManager<TModel> class, which would be used (in a simple example) something like as follows: public class Model : INotifyPropertyChanged { private CalculationManager<Model> _calculationManager = new CalculationManager<Model>(); // each setter triggers a "PropertyChanged" event public double? Height { get; set; } public double? Weight { get; set; } public double? BMI { get; set; } public Model() { _calculationManager.DefineDependency<double?>( forProperty: model => model.BMI, usingCalculation: (height, weight) => weight / Math.Pow(height, 2), withInputs: model => model.Height, model.Weight); } // INotifyPropertyChanged implementation here } I won't reproduce CalculationManager<TModel> here, but the basic idea is that it sets up a dependency map, listens for PropertyChanged events, and updates dependent properties as needed. I still feel that I'm missing something major here, and that this isn't the right approach: the (mis)use of INotifyPropertyChanged seems to me like a code smell the withInputs parameter is defined as params Expression<Func<TModel, T>>[] args, which means that the argument list of usingCalculation is not checked at compile time the argument list (weight, height) is redundantly defined in both usingCalculation and withInputs I am sure that this kind of system of dependent variables must be common in computational mathematics, physics, finance, and other fields. Does someone know of an established set of ideas that deal with what I'm grasping at here? Would this be a suitable application for a functional language like F#? Edit More context: The model currently exists in an Excel spreadsheet, and is being migrated to a C# application. It is run on-demand, and the variables can be modified by the user from the application's UI. Its purpose is to retrieve variables that the business is interested in, given current inputs from the markets, and model parameters set by the business.

    Read the article

  • How to design database having multiple interrelated entities

    - by Sharath Chandra
    I am designing a new system which is more of a help system for core applications in banks or healthcare sector. Given the nature of the system this is not a heavy transaction oriented system but more of read intensive. Now within this application I have multiple entities which are related to each other. For e.g. Assume the following entities in the system User Training Regulations Now each of these entities have M:N Relationship with each other. Assuming the usage of a standard RDBMS, the design may involve many relationship tables each containing the relationships one other entity ("User_Training", "User_Regulations", "Training_Regulations"). This design is limiting since I have more than 3 entities in the system and maintaining the relationship graph is difficult this way. The most frequently used operation is "given an entity get me all the related entities" . I need to design the database where this operation is relatively inexpensive. What are the different recommendations for modelling this kind of database.

    Read the article

  • Design for object with optional and modifiable attributtes?

    - by Ikuzen
    I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

    Read the article

  • Is OOP hard because it is not natural?

    - by zvrba
    One can often hear that OOP naturally corresponds to the way people think about the world. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: We (or at least I) conceptualize the world in terms of relationships between things we encounter, but the focus of OOP is designing individual classes and their hierarchies. Note that, in everyday life, relationships and actions exist mostly between objects that would have been instances of unrelated classes in OOP. Examples of such relationships are: "my screen is on top of the table"; "I (a human being) am sitting on a chair"; "a car is on the road"; "I am typing on the keyboard"; "the coffee machine boils water", "the text is shown in the terminal window." We think in terms of bivalent (sometimes trivalent, as, for example in, "I gave you flowers") verbs where the verb is the action (relation) that operates on two objects to produce some result/action. The focus is on action, and the two (or three) [grammatical] objects have equal importance. Contrast that with OOP where you first have to find one object (noun) and tell it to perform some action on another object. The way of thinking is shifted from actions/verbs operating on nouns to nouns operating on nouns -- it is as if everything is being said in passive or reflexive voice, e.g., "the text is being shown by the terminal window". Or maybe "the text draws itself on the terminal window". Not only is the focus shifted to nouns, but one of the nouns (let's call it grammatical subject) is given higher "importance" than the other (grammatical object). Thus one must decide whether one will say terminalWindow.show(someText) or someText.show(terminalWindow). But why burden people with such trivial decisions with no operational consequences when one really means show(terminalWindow, someText)? [Consequences are operationally insignificant -- in both cases the text is shown on the terminal window -- but can be very serious in the design of class hierarchies and a "wrong" choice can lead to convoluted and hard to maintain code.] I would therefore argue that the mainstream way of doing OOP (class-based, single-dispatch) is hard because it IS UNNATURAL and does not correspond to how humans think about the world. Generic methods from CLOS are closer to my way of thinking, but, alas, this is not widespread approach. Given these problems, how/why did it happen that the currently mainstream way of doing OOP became so popular? And what, if anything, can be done to dethrone it?

    Read the article

  • Where, in an object oriented system should you, if at all, choose (C-style) structs over classes?

    - by Anto
    C and most likely many other languages provide a struct keyword for creating structures (or something in a similar fashion). These are (at least in C), from a simplified point of view like classes, but without polymorphism, inheritance, methods, and so on. Think of an object-oriented (or multi paradigm) language with C-style structs. Where would you choose them over classes? Now, I don't believe they are to be used with OOP as classes seem to replace their purposes, but I wonder if there are situations where they could be preferred over classes in otherwise object-oriented programs and in what kind of situations. Are there such situations?

    Read the article

  • New design patterns/design strategies

    - by steven
    I've studied and implemented design patterns for a few years now, and I'm wondering. What are some of the newer design patterns (since the GOF)? Also, what should one, similar to myself, study [in the way of software design] next? Note: I've been using TDD, and UML for some time now. I'm curious about the newer paradigm shifts, and or newer design patterns.

    Read the article

  • JS closures - Passing a function to a child, how should the shared object be accessed

    - by slicedtoad
    I have a design and am wondering what the appropriate way to access variables is. I'll demonstrate with this example since I can't seem to describe it better than the title. Term is an object representing a bunch of time data (a repeating duration of time defined by a bunch of attributes) Term has some print functionality but does not implement the print functions itself, rather they are passed in as anonymous functions by the parent. This would be similar to how shaders can be passed to a renderer rather than defined by the renderer. A container (let's call it Box) has a Schedule object that can understand and use Term objects. Box creates Term objects and passes them to Schedule as required. Box also defines the print functions stored in Term. A print function usually takes an argument and uses it to return a string based on that argument and Term's internal data. Sometime the print function could also use data stored in Schedule, though. I'm calling this data shared. So, the question is, what is the best way to access this shared data. I have a lot of options since JS has closures and I'm not familiar enough to know if I should be using them or avoiding them in this case. Options: Create a local "reference" (term used lightly) to the shared data (data is not a primitive) when defining the print function by accessing the shared data through Schedule from Box. Example: var schedule = function(){ var sched = Schedule(); var t1 = Term( function(x){ // Term.print() return (x + sched.data).format(); }); }; Bind it to Term explicitly. (Pass it in Term's constructor or something). Or bind it in Sched after Box passes it. And then access it as an attribute of Term. Pass it in at the same time x is passed to the print function, (from sched). This is the most familiar way for my but it doesn't feel right given JS's closure ability. Do something weird like bind some context and arguments to print. I'm hoping the correct answer isn't purely subjective. If it is, then I guess the answer is just "do whatever works". But I feel like there are some significant differences between the approaches that could have a large impact when stretched beyond my small example.

    Read the article

  • Object-Oriented equivalent of LISP's progn function?

    - by Archer
    I'm currently writing a LISP parser that iterates through some AutoLISP code and does its best to make it a little easier to read (changing prefix notation to infix notation, changing setq assignments to "=" assignments, etc.) for those that aren't used to LISP code/only learned object oriented programming. While writing commands that LISP uses to add to a "library" of LISP commands, I came across the LISP command "progn". The only problem is that it looks like progn is simply executing code in a specific order and sometimes (not usually) assigning the last value to a variable. Am I incorrect in assuming that for translating progn to object-oriented understanding that I can simply forgo the progn function and print the statements that it contains? If not, what would be a good equivalent for progn in an object-oriented language?

    Read the article

  • Design Pattern Advice for Bluetooth App for Android

    - by Aimee Jones
    I’m looking for some advice on which patterns would apply to some of my work. I’m planning on doing a project as part of my college work and I need a bit of help. My main project is to make a basic Android bluetooth tracking system where the fixed locations of bluetooth dongles are mapped onto a map of a building. So my android app will regularly scan for nearby dongles and triangulate its location based on signal strength. The dongles location would be saved to a database along with their mac addresses to differentiate between them. The android phones location will then be sent to a server. This information will be used to show the phone’s location on a map of the building, or map of a route taken, on a website. My side project is to choose a suitable design pattern that could be implemented in this main project. I’m still a bit new to design patterns and am finding it hard to get my head around ones that may be suitable. I’ve heard maybe some that are aimed at web applications for the server side of things may be appropriate. My research so far is leading me to the following: Navigation Strategy Pattern Observer Pattern Command Pattern News Design Pattern Any advice would be a great help! Thanks

    Read the article

  • From a DDD perspective is a report generating service a domain service or an infrastructure service?

    - by Songo
    Let assume we have the following service whose responsibility is to generate Excel reports: class ExcelReportService{ public String generateReport(String fileFormatFilePath, ResultSet data){ ReportFormat reportFormat = new ReportFormat(fileFormatFilePath); ExcelDataFormatterService excelDataFormatterService = new ExcelDataFormatterService(); FormattedData formattedData = excelDataFormatterService.format(data); ExcelFileService excelFileService = new ExcelFileService(); String reportPath= excelFileService.generateReport(reportFormat,formattedData); return reportPath; } } This is pseudo code for the service I want to design where: fileFormatFilePath: path to a configuration file where I'll keep the format of my excel file (headers, column widths, number of columns,..etc) data: the actual records returned from the database. This data can't be used directly coz I might need to make further calculations to the data before inserting them to the excel file. ReportFormat: Value object to hold the report format, has methods like getHeaders(), getColumnWidth(),...etc. ExcelDataFormatterService: a service to hold any logic that need to be applied to the data returned from the database before inserting it to the file. FormattedData: Value object the represents the formatted data to be inserted. ExcelFileService: a wrapper top the 3rd party library that generates the excel file. Now how do you determine whether a service is an infrastructure or domain service? I have the following 3 services here: ExcelReportService, ExcelDataFormatterService and ExcelFileService?

    Read the article

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