Search Results

Search found 5751 results on 231 pages for 'analysis patterns'.

Page 76/231 | < Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >

• Good case for a Null Object Pattern? (Provide some service with a mailservice)

  - by fireeyedboy

  For a website I'm working on, I made an Media Service object that I use in the front end, as well as in the backend (CMS). This Media Service object manipulates media in a local repository (DB); it provides the ability to upload/embed video's and upload images. In other words, website visitors are able to do this in the front end, but administrators of the site are also able to do this in the backend. I'ld like this service to mail the administrators when a visitor has uploaded/embedded a new medium in the frontend, but refrain from mailing them when they upload/embed a medium themself in the backend. So I started wondering whether this is a good case for passing a null object, that mimicks the mail funcionality, to the Media Service in the backend. I thought this might come in handy when they decide the backend needs to have implemented mail functionality as well. In simplified terms I'ld like to do something like this: Frontend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new StandardMailService() ); Backend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new NullMailService() ); How do you feel about this? Does this make sense? Or am I setting myself up for problems down the road?

  Read the article

• Singletons and other design issues

  - by Ahmed Saleh

  I have worked using different languages like C++/Java and currently AS3. Most applications were computer vision, and small 2D computer games. Most companies that I have worked for, they use Singletons in a language like AS3, to retrieve elements or classes in an easy way. Their problem is basically they needs some variables or to call other functions from other classes. In a language like AS3, there is no private constructor, and they write a hacky code to prevent new instances. In Java and C++ I also faced the situation that I need to use other classe's members or to call their functions in different classes. The question is, is there a better or another design, to let other classes interact with each others without using singletons? I feel that composition is the answer, but I need more detailed solutions or design suggestions.

  Read the article

• What is the difference between the Facade and Addapter Pattern?

  - by devoured elysium

  I've been reading both definitions and they seem quite the same. Could anyone point out what are their differences? Thanks

  Read the article

• How to properly implement the Strategy pattern in a web MVC framework?

  - by jboxer

  In my Django app, I have a model (lets call it Foo) with a field called "type". I'd like to use Foo.type to indicate what type the specific instance of Foo is (possible choices are "Number", "Date", "Single Line of Text", "Multiple Lines of Text", and a few others). There are two things I'd like the "type" field to end up affecting; the way a value is converted from its normal type to text (for example, in "Date", it may be str(the_date.isoformat())), and the way a value is converted from text to the specified type (in "Date", it may be datetime.date.fromtimestamp(the_text)). To me, this seems like the Strategy pattern (I may be completely wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am). My question is, what's the proper way to code this in a web MVC framework? In a client-side app, I'd create a Type class with abstract methods "serialize()" and "unserialize()", override those methods in subclasses of Type (such as NumberType and DateType), and dynamically set the "type" field of a newly-instantiated Foo to the appropriate Type subclass at runtime. In a web framework, it's not quite as straightforward for me. Right now, the way that makes the most sense is to define Foo.type as a Small Integer field and define a limited set of choices (0 = "Number", 1 = "Date", 2 = "Single Line of Text", etc.) in the code. Then, when a Foo object is instantiated, use a Factory method to look at the value of the instance's "type" field and plug in the correct Type subclass (as described in the paragraph above). Foo would also have serialize() and unserialize() methods, which would delegate directly to the plugged-in Type subclass. How does this design sound? I've never run into this issue before, so I'd really like to know if other people have, and how they've solved it.

  Read the article

• Best practice to modularise a large Grails app?

  - by Mulone

  Hi all, A Grails app I'm working on is becoming pretty big, and it would be good to refactor it into several modules, so that we don't have to redeploy the whole thing every time. In your opinion, what is the best practice to split a Grails app in several modules? In particular I'd like to create a package of domain classes + relevant services and use it in the app as a module. Is this possible? Is it possible to do it with plugins? Cheers, Mulone

  Read the article

• JavaScript Module Pattern - What about using "return this"?

  - by Rob

  After doing some reading about the Module Pattern, I've seen a few ways of returning the properties which you want to be public. One of the most common ways is to declare your public properties and methods right inside of the "return" statement, apart from your private properties and methods. A similar way (the "Revealing" pattern) is to provide simply references to the properties and methods which you want to be public. Lastly, a third technique I saw was to create a new object inside your module function, to which you assign your new properties before returning said object. This was an interesting idea, but requires the creation of a new object. So I was thinking, why not just use "this.propertyName" to assign your public properties and methods, and finally use "return this" at the end? This way seems much simpler to me, as you can create private properties and methods with the usual "var" or "function" syntax, or use the "this.propertyName" syntax to declare your public methods. Here's the method I'm suggesting: (function() { var privateMethod = function () { alert('This is a private method.'); } this.publicMethod = function () { alert('This is a public method.'); } return this; })(); Are there any pros/cons to using the method above? What about the others?

  Read the article

• anti-if campaign

  - by Andrew Siemer

  I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

  Read the article

• Is MFC is based on any design pattern,if so which design pattern??

  - by Vikram

  Is MFC is based on any design pattern,if so which design pattern??

  Read the article

• Should Factories Persist Entities?

  - by mxmissile

  Should factories persist entities they build? Or is that the job of the caller? Pseudo Example Incoming: public class OrderFactory { public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); .... return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public OrderController(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); repository.Insert(order); ... } } or public class OrderFactory { public OrderFactory(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); ... repository.Insert(order); return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); ... } } Is there a recommended practice here?

  Read the article

• What should go in each MVVM triad?

  - by Harry

  OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

  Read the article

• What's the best way to write a maintainable web scraping app?

  - by Benj

  I wrote a perl script a while ago which logged into my online banking and emailed me my balance and a mini-statement every day. I found it very useful for keeping track of my finances. The only problem is that I wrote it just using perl and curl and it was quite complicated and hard to maintain. After a few instances of my bank changing their webpage I got fed up of debugging it to keep it up to date. So what's the best way of writing such a program in such a way that it's easy to maintain? I'd like to write a nice well engineered version in either Perl or Java which will be easy to update when the bank inevitably fiddle with their web site.

  Read the article

• Design pattern for adding / removing elements

  - by de3

  Wikipedia's definition for Iterator pattern design: the Iterator pattern is a design pattern in which iterators are used to access the elements of an aggregate object sequentially without exposing its underlying implementation. Iterator interface in java provides the following methods hasNext() next() remove() Is there a pattern design, or a java interface for inserting / deleting elements, and getting length of the aggregate object, in addition to iterating them? I know remove() is an optional method that can be used once per call to next(), but I am implementing a circular FIFO array and need a method delete() independent of iterator's next().

  Read the article

• Is this class + constructor definition pattern overly redundant?

  - by Protector one

  I often come across a pattern similar to this: class Person { public string firstName, lastName; public Person(string firstName, string lastName) { this.firstName = firstName; this.lastName = lastName; } } This feels overly redundant (I imagine typing "firstName" once, instead of thrice could be enough…), but I can't think of a proper alternative. Any ideas? Maybe I just don't know about a certain design pattern I should be using here? Edit - I think I need to elaborate a little. I'm not asking how to make the example code "better", but rather, "shorter". In its current state, all member names appear 3 times (declaration, initialization, constructor arguments), and it feels rather redundant. So I'm wondering if there is a pattern (or semantic sugar) to get (roughly) the same behavior, but with less bloat. I apologize for being unclear initially.

  Read the article

• What is the best Design/Way to keep user connected ?

  - by Fasih Hansmukh

  Am working on a POC for self learning in which I want to keep my user connected in LIVE pattern. For example, A game in which 4 user can play at a time , here I need to keep this user connected to my game . M not good at Socket type of programming and love to do that in Services way.What i wana know is 'What is the best way of doing this'. According to my initial Brain Storming, I have decided that I will use SilverLight(In Browser Or Out of Browser) as Front end [I have no issue in that]. I m more concern in back end. Either I make an handler or make a WCF service or use full duplex service and use pooling mechanism for that. As a random thought I come up with a Timer type logic that will fire every after 10 seconds at clients end and get status like Is it now Its turn to roll a dice Home many user left (in case if some of them left) What are connected user status in game like there score/points ect and update game view according to this at his end Kindly place your best answers here that will help me to learn this. Regards and thanks in Advance EDIT: Starting Bounty as i need more feedback. FH

  Read the article

• How to make a jQuery plugin (the right way)?

  - by macek

  I know there are jQuery cookie plugins out there, but I wanted to write one for the sake of better learning the jQuery plugin pattern. I like the separation of "work" in small, manageable functions, but I feel like I'm passing name, value, and options arguments around too much. Is there a way this can be refactored? I'm looking for snippets of code to help illustrate examples provided with in answers. Any help is appreciated. Thanks :) example usage $.cookie('foo', 'bar', {expires:7}); $.cookie('foo'); //=> bar $.cookie('foo', null); $.cookie('foo'); //=> undefined Edit: I did a little bit of work on this. You can view the revision history to see where this has come from. It still feels like more refactoring can be done to optimize the flow a bit. Any ideas? the plugin (function($){ $.cookie = function(name, value, options) { if (typeof value == 'undefined') { return get(name); } else { options = $.extend({}, $.cookie.defaults, options || {}); return (value != null) ? set(name, value, options) : unset(name, options); } }; $.cookie.defaults = { expires: null, path: '/', domain: null, secure: false }; var set = function(name, value, options){ console.log(options); return document.cookie = options_string(name, value, options); }; var get = function(name){ var cookies = {}; $.map(document.cookie.split(';'), function(pair){ var c = $.trim(pair).split('='); cookies[c[0]] = c[1]; }); return decodeURIComponent(cookies[name]); }; var unset = function(name, options){ value = ''; options.expires = -1; set(name, value, options); }; var options_string = function(name, value, options){ var pairs = [param.name(name, value)]; $.each(options, function(k,v){ pairs.push(param[k](v)); }); return $.map(pairs, function(p){ return p === null ? null : p; }).join(';'); }; var param = { name: function(name, value){ return name + "=" + encodeURIComponent(value); }, expires: function(value){ // no expiry if(value === null){ return null; } // number of days else if(typeof value == "number"){ d = new Date(); d.setTime(d.getTime() + (value * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000)); } // date object else if(typeof value == "object" && value instanceof "Date") { d = value; } return "expires=" + d.toUTCString(); }, path: function(value){ return "path="+value; }, domain: function(value){ return value === null ? null : "domain=" + value; }, secure: function(bool){ return bool ? "secure" : null; } }; })(jQuery);

  Read the article

• How does the Repository Pattern relate to the Business Logic Layer? [closed]

  - by Mustafa Dingil

  Should the Repository Pattern, as used in the context of Domain-driven design (DDD), be implemented within the business logic layer of an application? Or should it be part of the data access layer and just consumed by the business logic layer in turn?

  Read the article

• Question about factory classes

  - by devoured elysium

  Currently I have created a ABCFactory class that has a single method creating ABC objects. Now that I think of it, maybe instead of having a factory, I could just make a static method in my ABC Method. What are the pro's and con's on making this change? Will it not lead to the same? I don't foresee having other classes inherit ABC, but one never knows! Thanks

  Read the article

• Are we using IoC effectively?

  - by Juliet

  So my company uses Castle Windsor IoC container, but in a way that feels "off": All the data types are registered in code, not the config file. All data types are hard-coded to use one interface implementation. In fact, for nearly all given interfaces, there is and will only ever be one implementation. All registered data types have a default constructor, so Windsor doesn't instantiate an object graph for any registered types. The people who designed the system insist the IoC container makes the system better. We have 1200+ public classes, so its a big system, the kind where you'd expect to find a framework like Windsor. But I'm still skeptical. Is my company using IoC effectively? Is there an advantage to new'ing objects with Windsor than new'ing objects with the new keyword?

  Read the article

• Should I create subclass NSManagedObject or not?

  - by TP

  Hi, I have spent a few days learning and writing NSCoding and finally got it working. However, it took very long to archive and unarchive the (quite complex) object graph, which is unacceptable. After searching the internet for some time, I think the better way is to use core data. Do you recommend that 1) I should rewrite all my classes as subclasses of NSManagedObject or 2) should I create an instance variable of NSManagedObject in each of my class so that any changes to the class also updates its core data representation? Doing either way will need significant changes to the exiting classes and I think I have to update lots of unit test cases as well if it changes the way the classes are initialized. What do you recommend? I really don't want to head to the wrong approach again... Thanks!

  Read the article

• Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

  - by MatthewMartin

  This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

  Read the article

• Projects with browsable source using dependency injection w/ guice?

  - by André

  I often read about dependency injection and I did research on google and I understand in theory what it can do and how it works, but I'd like to see an actual code base using it (Java/guice would be preferred). Can anyone point me to an open source project, where I can see, how it's really used? I think browsing the code and seeing the whole setup shows me more than the ususal snippets in the introduction articles you find around the web. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Is there a pattern for this?

  - by Timmy

  i have something that requires a matrix of values, similar to pokemon: i have a class object for each of the types, is there a pattern or a good way to implement this, as a middle layer or in the classes?

  Read the article

• Configuration and Model-View

  - by HH

  I am using the Model-View pattern on a small application I'm writing. Here's the scenario: The model maintains a list of directories from where it can extract the data that it needs. The View has a Configuration or a Setting dialog where the user can modify this list of directories (the dialog has a JList displaying the list in addition to add and remove buttons). I need some advice from the community: The View needs to communicate these changes to the model. I thought first of adding to the model these methods: addDirectory() and removeDirectory(). But I am trying to limit the number of methods (or channels) that the View can use to communicate with and manipulate the model. Is there any good practice for this? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

  - by Jeff

  I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

  Read the article

• Visitor Pattern can be replaced with Callback functions?

  - by getit

  Is there any significant benefit to using either technique? In case there are variations, the Visitor Pattern I mean is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_pattern And below is an example of using a delegate to achieve the same effect (at least I think it is the same) Say there is a collection of nested elements: Schools contain Departments which contain Students Instead of using the Visitor pattern to perform something on each collection item, why not use a simple callback (Action delegate in C#) Say something like this class Department { List Students; } class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student> actionDelegate) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu); } } } } School A = new School(); ...//populate collections A.Visit((student)=> { ...Do Something with student... }); *EDIT Example with delegate accepting multiple params Say I wanted to pass both the student and department, I could modify the Action definition like so: Action class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student, Department> actionDelegate, Action<Department> d2) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { d2(dep); //This performs a different process. //Using Visitor pattern would avoid having to keep adding new delegates. //This looks like the main benefit so far foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu, dep); } } } }

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >