Search Results

Search found 25779 results on 1032 pages for 'custom model binder'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 45/1032 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • How To Create Your Own Custom Google Search Engine

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Have you ever wanted to create a custom Google search engine that searches only specific websites? You can easily do this with Google’s Custom Search Engine tool. You can bookmark your search engine and even share it with other people. This trick works similarly to Google’s site: operator, but you won’t have to type the operator every time you search. It’s particularly useful if you want to search a large number of sites at once. How To Create a Customized Windows 7 Installation Disc With Integrated Updates How to Get Pro Features in Windows Home Versions with Third Party Tools HTG Explains: Is ReadyBoost Worth Using?

    Read the article

  • Redirecting from blogger to custom domain [closed]

    - by mdhar9e
    Possible Duplicate: How to have a blogspot blog in my domain? i have a blog from blogger named as www.myclipta.blogspot.com. i am updating regulary. Then i bought a custom domain with myclipta.com. Now i want to redirect from blogger domain to my custom domain. i don't know how to do this . i heard that to set dns name servers and CNAME..But i am not able to do this.. can any one can guide me please..

    Read the article

  • Should Business Interfaces be part of the Model layer?

    - by Mik378
    In an oriented-services enterprise application, isn't it an antipattern to mix Service APIs (containing interface that external users depends on) with Model objects (entities, custom exceptions objects etc...) ? According to me, Services should only depends on Model layer but never mixed with it. In fact, my colleague told me that it doesn't make sense to separate it since client need both. (model and service interfaces) But I notice that everytime a client asks for some changes, like adding a new method in some interface (means a new service), Model layer has to be also delivered... Thus, client who has not interested by this "addition" is constrained to be concerned by this update of Model... and in a large enterprise application, this kind of delivery is known to be very risked... What is the best practice ? Separate services(only interfaces so) and model objects or mix it ?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to customize how the value for a custom Model Field is displayed in a template?

    - by Jordan Reiter
    I am storing dates as an integer field in the format YYYYMMDD, where month or day is optional. I have the following function for formatting the number: def flexibledateformat(value): import datetime, re try: value = str(int(value)) except: return None match = re.match(r'(\d{4})(\d\d)(\d\d)$',str(value)) if match: year_val, month_val, day_val = [int(v) for v in match.groups()] if day_val: return datetime.datetime.strftime(datetime.date(year_val,month_val,day_val),'%b %e, %Y') elif month_val: return datetime.datetime.strftime(datetime.date(year_val,month_val,1),'%B %Y') else: return str(year_val) Which results in the following outputs: >>> flexibledateformat(20100415) 'Apr 15, 2010' >>> flexibledateformat(20100400) 'April 2010' >>> flexibledateformat(20100000) '2010' So I'm wondering if there's a function I can add under the model field class that would automatically call flexibledateformat. So if there's a record r = DataRecord(name='foo',date=20100400) when processed in the form the value would be 20100400 but when output in a template using {{ r.date }} it shows up as "April 2010". Further clarification I do normally use datetime for storing date/time values. In this specific case, I need to record non-specific dates: "x happened in 2009", "y happened sometime in June 1996". The easiest way to do this while still preserving most of the functionality of a date field, including sorting and filtering, is by using an integer in the format of yyyymmdd. That is why I am using an IntegerField instead of a DateTimeField. This is what I would like to happen: I store what I call a "Flexible Date" in a FlexibleDateField as an integer with the format yyyymmdd. I render a form that includes a FlexibleDateField, and the value remains an integer so that functions necessary for validating it and rendering it in widgets work correctly. I call it in a template, as in {{ object.flexibledate }} and it is formatted according to the flexibledateformat rules: 20100416 - April 16, 2010; 20100400 - April 2010; 20100000 - 2010. This also applies when I'm not calling it directly, such as when it's used as a header in admin (http://example.org/admin/app_name/model_name/). I'm not aware if these specific things are possible.

    Read the article

  • [Database] How to model this one-to-one relation?

    - by pbean
    I have several entities which respresent different types of users who need to be able to log in to a particular system. Additionally, they have different types of information associated with them. For example: a "general user", which has an e-mail address and "admin user", which has a workstation number (note that this a hypothetical case). Both entities also share common properties like first name, surname, address and telephone number. Finally, they naturally need to have a (unique) user name and a password to log in. In the application, the user just has to fill in his user name and password, and the functionality of the application changes slightly according to the type of the user. You can imagine that the username needs to be unique for this work. How should I model this effectively? I can't just create two tables, because then I can't force a unique constaint on the user name. I also can't put them all in just one table, because they have different types of specific information associated to them. I think I might need 3 seperate tables, one for "users" (with user name and password), one for the "general users" and another one for the "admin users", but how would the relations between these work? Or is there another solution? (By the way, the target DBMS is MySQL, so I don't think generalization is supported in the database system itself).

    Read the article

  • How to do an additional search on archive in rails if record not found, by extending model?

    - by Nick Gorbikoff
    Hello, I was wondering if somebody knows an elegant solution to the following: Suppose I have a table that holds orders, with a bunch of data. So I'm at 1M records, and searches begin to take time. So I want to speed it up by archiving some data that is more than 3 years old - saving it into a table called orders-archive, and then purging them from the orders table. So if we need to research something or customer wants to pull older information - they still can, but 99% of the lookups are done on the orders no older than a year and a half - so there is no reason to keep looking through older data all the time. These move & purge operations can be then croned to be done on a weekly basis. I already did some tests and I know that I will slash my search times by about 4 times. So far so good, right? However I was thinking about how to implement older archival lookups and the only reasonable thing I can think of is some sort of if-else If not found in orders, do a search in orders-archive. However - I have about 20 tables that I want to archive and god knows how many searches / finds are done through out the code, that I don't want to modify. So I was wondering if there is an elegant rails-way solution to this problem, by extending a model somehow? Has anyone dealt with similar case before? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • What do you call a generalized (non-GUI-related) "Model-View-Controller" architecture?

    - by dcuccia
    I am currently refactoring code that coordinates multiple hardware components for data acquisition, and feeling a bit like I'm recreating the wheel. In particular, an MVC-like pattern seems to be emerging. Except, this has nothing to do with a GUI and I'm worried that I'm forcing this particular pattern where another might be more appropriate. Here's my scenario: Individual hardware "component" classes obey interface contracts for each hardware type. Previously, component instances were orchestrated by a single monolithic InstrumentController class, which relied heavily on configuration + branching logic for executing a specific acquisition sequence. After an iteration, I have a separate controller for each component, with these controllers all managed by a small InstrumentControllerBase (or its derivatives). The composite system will receive "input" either programmatically or via inter-hardware component triggering - in either case these interactions are routed to, and handled by, the appropriate controller. So, I have something that feels MVC-esque, but I don't know if that's because I'm forcing the point. With little direct MVC experience in application development, it's hard to know if I'm just trying to make my scenario fit MVC, where another pattern might be a good alternative or complimentary. My problem is, search results and wiki documentation of these family of patterns seems to immediately drop me into GUI-specific discussions. I understand "M means Model data and the V means View" - but do you call the superset pattern? Component-Commander-Controller? Whence can I exhume examples exemplary?

    Read the article

  • How do I get my custom WPF textbox to fill correctly?

    - by Dan Ryan
    I am trying to create a custom WPF textbox control that extends the standard textbox control but the extended textbox behaves differently when placed in control containers. Within my Window I have a stackpanel with a standard textbox and my extended textbox: <StackPanel Margin="10"> <TextBox Height="21" /> <l:SearchTextBox Search="SearchTextBox_Search" Height="21" Margin="0, 10, 0, 0" SearchMode="Delayed" HorizontalAlignment="Left" /> </StackPanel> The standard textbox stretches the length of the StackPanel whereas the custom textbox does not. How can I get the controls to behave the same? The styling for the custom textbox is shown below: <Style x:Key="{x:Type UIControls:SearchTextBox}" BasedOn="{StaticResource {x:Type TextBox}}" TargetType="{x:Type UIControls:SearchTextBox}"> <Setter Property="Template"> <Setter.Value> <ControlTemplate TargetType="{x:Type UIControls:SearchTextBox}"> <TextBox /> </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> </Setter> </Style>

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >