Search Results

Search found 3120 results on 125 pages for 'php5 oop'.

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 45/125 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • Help dealing with data dependency between two registration forms

    - by franko75
    I have a tricky issue here with a registration of both a user and his/her pet. Both the user and the pet are treated as separate entities and both require separate registration forms. However, the user's pet has to be linked to the user via a foreign key in the database. The process is basically that when a new user joins the site, firstly they register their pet, then they register themselves. The reason for this order is to check their pet's eligibility for the site (there are some criteria to be met) first, instead of getting the user to sign up only to then find out their pet is ineligible. It is this ordering of the form submissions which is causing me a bit of a headache, as follows... The site is being developed with an MVC framework, and the User registration process is managed via a method in a User_form controller, while the pet registration process is managed via a method in the Pet_form controller. The pet registration form happens first, and the pet data can be saved without the owner_id at this stage, with the user id possibly being added (e.g by retrieving pet's id from session) following user registration. However, doing it this way could potentially result in redundant data, where pet records would be created in the database, but if the user doesn't actually register themselves too, then the pets will be ownerless records in the DB. Other option is to serialize the new pet's data at the pet registration stage, don't save it to the DB until the user fills out their registration form. Once the user is created, i can pass serialised data AND the owner_id to a method in the Pet Model which can update the DB. However, I also need to set the newly created $pet to $this-pet which I then access for a sequence of other related forms. Should I just set the session variable in the model method? Then in the Pet controller constructor, do a check for pet stored in session, if yes, assign to $this-pet... If this makes any sense to anybody and you have some advice, i'd be grateful to hear it!

    Read the article

  • java protected method accessibility

    - by JavaUser
    In the below code the Consumer class can access the protected method of Parent class.How is it possible since there is no relation between Parent and Consumer class.Please explain class Parent { public void method1(){ System.out.println("PUBLIC METHOD"); } private void method2(){ System.out.println("PRIVATE METHOD"); } protected void method3(){ System.out.println("PROTECTED METHOD"); } } public class Consumer { public static void main(String[] args){ Parent parentObj = new Parent(); parentObj.method1(); //parentObj.method2(); parentObj.method3(); } } Thanks

    Read the article

  • 'Static/Constant' business ojects

    - by UpTheCreek
    I don't quite know how to ask this question, so I'll phase it as an example: Imagine in an application you have a Country object. There are two properties of this object: Name, and a 'Bordering Countries' collection. More properties might be added later, but it will be the kind of information that would change very rarely (e.g. changes of country names/borders) Lets say this application needs to know about all of the countries in the world. Where would you store these object's state? How would you new them up? It seems silly to store all this state in the DB, since it won't change very often. One option might be to have an abstract 'country' base object, and have a class for each country inheriting from this with the details of each country. But this doesn't seem quite right to me. What is the proper way of dealing with these kinds of objects?

    Read the article

  • Are protected constructors considered good practice?

    - by Álvaro G. Vicario
    I'm writing some little helper classes to handle trees. Basically, I have a node and a special root node that represents the tree. I want to keep it generic and simple. This is part of the code: <?php class Tree extends TreeNode{ public function addById($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ if( $parent = $this->findNodeById($parent_id) ){ $parent->addChildById($node_id, $generic_content); } } } class TreeNode{ public function __construct($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ // ... } protected function addChildById($node_id, $generic_content){ $this->children[] = new TreeNode($this->node_id, $node_id, $generic_content); } } $Categories = new Tree; $Categories->addById(1, NULL, $foo); $Categories->addById(2, NULL, $bar); $Categories->addById(3, 1, $gee); ?> My questions: Is it sensible to force TreeNode instances to be created through TreeNode::addById()? If it's so, would it be good practise to declare TreeNode::__construct() as private/protected?

    Read the article

  • What happens to a class in PHP once its been instantiated?

    - by Caylem
    Hi I'm just playing around with some PHP and was wondering what happens when an object from a class is created within another PHP script? I assume once its created and been processed their is no way of then going back and 'playing' around with it from another script? The idea is i'm trying to create a kind of deck of cards using a card class, each card has specific data that is added to each individual object to make it unique, suit, value etc. Once its created i need to be able to go back to specific cards to use them. In java i'd have an arraylist of card objects, i'm not sure how to approach the same area in PHP. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Segmentation fault on instationation of more than 1 object

    - by ECE
    I have a class called "Vertex.hpp" which is as follows: #include <iostream> #include "Edge.hpp" #include <vector> using namespace std; /** A class, instances of which are nodes in an HCTree. */ class Vertex { public: Vertex(char * str){ *name=*str; } vector<Vertex*> adjecency_list; vector<Edge*> edge_weights; char *name; }; #endif When I instantiate an object of type Vector as follows: Vertex *first_read; Vertex *second_read; in.getline(input,256); str=strtok(input," "); first_read->name=str; str=strtok(NULL, " "); second_read->name=str; A segmentation fault occurs when more than 1 object of type Vector is instantiated. Why would this occur if more than 1 object is instantiated, and how can i allow multiple objects to be instantiated?

    Read the article

  • How can i split up a component using cfinclude and still use inheritance?

    - by rip747
    Note: this is just a simplized example of what i'm trying to do to get the idea across. The problem I'm having is that I want to use cfinclude inside cfcomponent so that i can group like methods into separate files for more manageability. The problem I'm running into is when i try to extend another component that also uses cfinclude to manage it's method as demostrated below. Note that ComponentA extends ComponentB: ComponentA ========== <cfcomponent output="false" extends="componentb"> <cfinclude template="componenta/methods.cfm"> </cfcomponent> componenta/methods.cfm ====================== <cffunction name="a"><cfreturn "componenta-a"></cffunction> <cffunction name="b"><cfreturn "componenta-b"></cffunction> <cffunction name="c"><cfreturn "componenta-c"></cffunction> <cffunction name="d"><cfreturn super.a()></cffunction> ComponentB ========== <cfcomponent output="false"> <cfinclude template="componentb/methods.cfm"> </cfcomponent> componentb/methods.cfm ====================== <cffunction name="a"><cfreturn "componentb-a"></cffunction> <cffunction name="b"><cfreturn "componentb-b"></cffunction> <cffunction name="c"><cfreturn "componentb-c"></cffunction> The issue is that when i try to initialize ComponentA I get an the error: "Routines cannot be declared more than once. The routine a has been declared twice in different templates." The whole reason for this is because when you use cfinclude it's evaluated at RUN TIME instead of COMPILE TIME. Short of moving the methods into the components themselves and eliminating the use of cfinclude, how can i get around this or does someone have a better idea splitting up large components?

    Read the article

  • Perl - Calling subclass constructor from superclass (OO)

    - by Emmel
    This may turn out to be an embarrassingly stupid question, but better than potentially creating embarrassingly stupid code. :-) This is an OO design question, really. Let's say I have an object class 'Foos' that represents a set of dynamic configuration elements, which are obtained by querying a command on disk, 'mycrazyfoos -getconfig'. Let's say that there are two categories of behavior that I want 'Foos' objects to have: Existing ones: one is, query ones that exist in the command output I just mentioned (/usr/bin/mycrazyfoos -getconfig`. Make modifications to existing ones via shelling out commands. Create new ones that don't exist; new 'crazyfoos', using a complex set of /usr/bin/mycrazyfoos commands and parameters. Here I'm not really just querying, but actually running a bunch of system() commands. Affecting changes. Here's my class structure: Foos.pm package Foos, which has a new($hashref-{name = 'myfooname',) constructor that takes a 'crazyfoo NAME' and then queries the existence of that NAME to see if it already exists (by shelling out and running the mycrazyfoos command above). If that crazyfoo already exists, return a Foos::Existing object. Any changes to this object requires shelling out, running commands and getting confirmation that everything ran okay. If this is the way to go, then the new() constructor needs to have a test to see which subclass constructor to use (if that even makes sense in this context). Here are the subclasses: Foos/Existing.pm As mentioned above, this is for when a Foos object already exists. Foos/Pending.pm This is an object that will be created if, in the above, the 'crazyfoo NAME' doesn't actually exist. In this case, the new() constructor above will be checked for additional parameters, and it will go ahead and, when called using -create() shell out using system() and create a new object... possibly returning an 'Existing' one... OR As I type this out, I am realizing it is perhaps it's better to have a single: (an alternative arrangement) Foos class, that has a -new() that takes just a name -create() that takes additional creation parameters -delete(), -change() and other params that affect ones that exist; that will have to just be checked dynamically. So here we are, two main directions to go with this. I'm curious which would be the more intelligent way to go.

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of calling new on an object instance?

    - by Geo
    I'm reading [Programming Perl][1], and I found this code snippet: sub new { my $invocant = shift; my $class = ref($invocant) || $invocant; my $self = { color => "bay", legs => 4, owner => undef, @_, # Override previous attributes }; return bless $self, $class; } With constructors like this one, what's the benefit of calling new on an object instance? I assume that it's what it's for, right? My guess is that if anyone would want to write such a constructor, he would have to add some more code that copies the attributes of the first object to the one about to be created.

    Read the article

  • How do you determine how coarse or fine-grained a 'responsibility' should be when using the single r

    - by Mark Rogers
    In the SRP, a 'responsibility' is usually described as 'a reason to change', so that each class (or object?) should have only one reason someone should have to go in there and change it. But if you take this to the extreme fine-grain you could say that an object adding two numbers together is a responsibility and a possible reason to change. Therefore the object should contain no other logic, because it would produce another reason for change. I'm curious if there is anyone out there that has any strategies for 'scoping', the single-responsibility principle that's slightly less objective?

    Read the article

  • How to override part of an overload function in JavaScript

    - by Guan Yuxin
    I create a class with a function like this var Obj=function(){this.children=[];this.parent=null;}//a base class Obj.prototype.index=function(child){ // the index of current obj if(arguments.length==0){ return this.parent?this.parent.index(this):0; } // the index of a child matchs specific obj [to be override] return -1; } basically it is just an overload function composed of index() and index(child). Then I create a sub class,SubObj or whatever, inherits from Obj SubObj.prototype.prototype=Obj; Now, it's time to override the index(child) function,however, index() is also in the function an I don't want to overwrite it too. One solution is to write like this var Obj=function(){this.children=[];this.parent=null;}//a base class Obj.prototype.index=function(child){ // the index of current obj if(arguments.length==0){ return this.parent?this.parent.index(this):0; } // the index of a child matchs specific obj [to be override] return this._index(this); } Obj.prototype._index=function(this){ return -1; } SubObj.prototype._index=function(this){/* overwriteing */} But this will easily mislead other coders as _index(child) should be both private(should not be used except index() function) and public(is an overload function of index(),which is public) you guys have better idea?

    Read the article

  • Where do you put your dependencies?

    - by The All Foo
    If I use the dependency injection pattern to remove dependencies they end up some where else. For example, Snippet 1, or what I call Object Maker. I mean you have to instantiate your objects somewhere...so when you move dependency out of one object, you end up putting it another one. I see that this consolidates all my dependencies into one object. Is that the point, to reduce your dependencies so that they all reside in a single ( as close to as possible ) location? Snippet 1 - Object Maker <?php class ObjectMaker { public function makeSignUp() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignUpObject = new ControlSignUp(); $SignUpObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignUpObject; } public function makeSignIn() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignInObject = new ControlSignIn(); $SignInObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignInObject; } public function makeTweet( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $TweetObject = new ControlTweet(); $TweetObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $TweetObject; } public function makeBookmark( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $BookmarkObject = new ControlBookmark(); $BookmarkObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject,$TextObject,$MessageObject); return $BookmarkObject; } }

    Read the article

  • Is it OK to write a constructor which does nothing?

    - by Roman
    To use methods of a class I need to instantiate a class. At the moment the class has not constructor (so I want to write it). But than I have realized that the constructor should do nothing (I do need to specify values of fields). In this context I have a question if it is OK to write constructor which does nothing. For example: public Point() { }

    Read the article

  • Confuse about which object should i assign the function to

    - by CliffC
    i have the following two class which convert object into xml string should i do something like class Person { public string GetXml() { //return a xml string } } or it is better to create another class which accept the person as a parameter and convert it into XML something like class PersonSerializer { public string Serialize(Person person) { // return a xml string } } Thanks

    Read the article

  • In perl, how can I call a method whose name I have in a string?

    - by Ryan Thompson
    I'm trying to write some abstract code for searching through a list of similar objects for the first one whose attributes match specific values. In order to do this, I need to call a bunch of accessor methods and check all their values one by one. I'd like to use an abstraction like this: sub verify_attribute { my ($object, $attribute_method, $wanted_value) = @_; if ( call_method($object, $attribute_method) ~~ $wanted_value ) { return 1; } else { return; } } Then I can loop through a hash whose keys are accessor method names and whose values are the values I'm looking for for those attributes. For example, if that hash is called %wanted, I might use code like this to find the object I want: my $found_object; FINDOBJ: foreach my $obj (@list_of_objects) { foreach my $accessor (keys %wanted) { next FINDOBJ unless verify_attribute($obj, $accessor, $wanted{$accessor}); } # All attrs verified $found_object = $obj; last FINDOBJ; } Of course, the only problem is that call_method does not exsit. Or does it? How can I call a method if I have a string containing its name? Or is there a better solution to this whole problem?

    Read the article

  • C++ (g++) Compile Error, Expected "="/etc. Before 'MyWindow" (my class name)

    - by Ell
    Hi all, I have a very strange problem and the following code wont compile: #ifndef MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED #define MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED class MyWindow{ private: WNDCLASSEX window_class; HWND window_handle; HDC device_context_handle; HGLRC open_gl_render_context; MSG message; BOOL quit; public: Window(int height=416, int width=544, WindowStyle window_style=WINDOWED); void Show(); void Close(); ~Window(); }; #endif // MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED I get the following error: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or 'attribute' before 'MyWindow' I can't see any syntax errors here, although I coukd be wrong as I am very (very) new in c++. Thanks in advance, ell.

    Read the article

  • What to call factory-like (java) methods used with immutable objects

    - by StaxMan
    When creating classes for "immutable objects" immutable meaning that state of instances can not be changed; all fields assigned in constructor) in Java (and similar languages), it is sometimes useful to still allow creation of modified instances. That is, using an instance as base, and creating a new instance that differs by just one property value; other values coming from the base instance. To give a simple example, one could have class like: public class Circle { final double x, y; // location final double radius; public Circle(double x, double y, double r) { this.x = x; this.y = y; this.r = r; } // method for creating a new instance, moved in x-axis by specified amount public Circle withOffset(double deltaX) { return new Circle(x+deltaX, y, radius); } } So: what should method "withOffset" be called? (note: NOT what its name ought to be -- but what is this class of methods called). Technically it is kind of a factory method, but somehow that does not seem quite right to me, since often factories are just given basic properties (and are either static methods, or are not members of the result type but factory type). So I am guessing there should be a better term for such methods. Since these methods can be used to implement "fluent interface", maybe they could be "fluent factory methods"? Better suggestions? EDIT: as suggested by one of answers, java.math.BigDecimal is a good example with its 'add', 'subtract' (etc) methods. Also: I noticed that there's this question (by Jon Skeet no less) that is sort of related (although it asks about specific name for method)

    Read the article

  • frameworks for coding a php library?

    - by ajsie
    there are plenty of frameworks for coding MVC web applications. this time im going to code a library (think of Doctrine or Solr) with a bunch of class files. u just include a bootstrap or a class file and you are ready to use my classes. i have never tried to code a library before and intend to code one for learning purpose so that i can use various design patterns i have learned. are there any great frameworks for this, how i should organize the different class files, where i can put configuration files and so on? tutorials or other information would be great too. thanks

    Read the article

  • Need help extrapolating Java code

    - by Berlioz
    If anyone familiar with Rebecca Wirfs-Brock, she has a piece of Java code found in her book titled, Object Design: Roles, Responsibilities, and Collaborations. Here is the quote Applying Double Dispatch to a Specific Problem To implement the game Rock, Paper, Scissors we need to write code that determines whether one object “beats” another. The game has nine possible outcomes based on the three kinds of objects. The number of interactions is the cross product of the kinds of objects. Case or switch statements are often governed by the type of data that is being operated on. The object-oriented language equivalent is to base its actions on the class of some other object. In Java, it looks like this Here is the piece of Java code on page 16 ' import java.util.*; import java.lang.*; public class Rock { public static void main(String args[]) { } public static boolean beats(GameObject object) { if (object.getClass.getName().equals("Rock")) { result = false; } else if (object.getClass.getName().equals("Paper")) { result = false; } else if(object.getClass.getName().equals("Scissors")) { result = true; } return result; } }' ===This is not a very good solution. First, the receiver needs to know too much about the argument. Second, there is one of these nested conditional statements in each of the three classes. If new kinds of objects could be added to the game, each of the three classes would have to be modified. Can anyone share with me how to get this "less than optimal" piece of code to work in order to see it 'working'. She proceeds to demonstrate a better way, but I will spare you. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Object Design catalog and resources

    - by Tauren
    I'm looking for web sites, books, or other resources that provide a catalog of object designs used in common scenarios. I'm not looking for generic design patterns, but for samples of actual object designs that were used to solve real problems. For instance, I'm about to build an internal messaging system for a web application, similar to Facebook's messaging system. This system will allow administrators to send messages to all members, to selected groups of members, or to individuals. Members can send messages to other members or groups of members. Fairly common stuff and a feature that I'm sure thousands of web applications require. I know each situation is different and there are a million ways to design this solution. Although this scenario isn't really all that complex, I'm sure the basic design of the necessary objects and relationships for a system like this has already been done many times. It would be nice to review other similar designs before building my own. Is there a place where people can share their designs and others can browse/search through the catalog to review and provide feedback on them? StackOverflow could be used to a degree for this, but doesn't really provide a catalog of designs. Any other resources that would relate?

    Read the article

  • How do I organize C# classes that inherit from one another, but also have properties that inherit from one another?

    - by Chris
    I have an application that has a concept of a Venue, a place where events happen. A Venue is owned by a Company and has many VenueParts. So, it looks like this: public abstract class Venue { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public virtual Company Company { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<VenuePart> VenueParts { get; set; } } A Venue can be a GolfCourseVenue, which is a Venue that has a Slope and a specific kind of VenuePart called a HoleVenuePart: public class GolfCourseVenue { public string Slope { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<HoleVenuePart> Holes { get; set; } } In the future, there may also be other kinds of Venues that all inherit from Venue. They might add their own fields, and will always have VenueParts of their own specific type. My declarations above seem wrong, because now I have a GolfCourseVenue with two collections, when really it should just have the one. I can't override it, because the type is different, right? When I run reports, I would like to refer to the classes generically, where I just spit out Venues and VenueParts. But, when I render forms and such, I would like to be specific. I have a lot of relationships like this and am wondering what I am doing wrong. For example, I have an Order that has OrderItems, but also specific kinds of Orders that have specific kinds of OrderItems.

    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 >