Search Results

Search found 60436 results on 2418 pages for 'application design'.

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 77/2418 | < Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >

  • Object Oriented Database - why most of the companies do not use them

    - by GigaPr
    Hi, I am pretty new to programming(just finished University). I have been thought in the last 4 years about Object Oriented development and the numerous advantages of this approach. My question is Isn't it easier to use a pure Object Oriented database in development applications? Why Object Oriented database are not as much diffuse as relational? From my point of view makes sense to use OO database, the latter will avoid the numerous construction necessary for the mapping of complex objects on the tables.

    Read the article

  • How can i return abstract class from any factory?

    - by programmerist
    using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; namespace EfTestFactory { public abstract class _Company { public abstract List<Personel> GetPersonel(); public abstract List<Prim> GetPrim(); public abstract List<Finans> GetFinans(); } public abstract class _Radyoloji { public abstract List<string> GetRadyoloji(); } public abstract class _Satis { public abstract List<string> GetSatis(); } public abstract class _Muayene { public abstract List<string> GetMuayene(); } public class Company : _Company { public override List<Personel> GetPersonel() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override List<Prim> GetPrim() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override List<Finans> GetFinans() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Radyoloji : _Radyoloji { public override List<string> GetRadyoloji() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Satis : _Satis { public override List<string> GetSatis() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class Muayene : _Muayene { public override List<string> GetMuayene() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public class GenoTipController { public object CreateByEnum(DataModelType modeltype) { string enumText = modeltype.ToString(); // will return for example "Company" Type classType = Type.GetType(enumText); // the Type for Company class object t = Activator.CreateInstance(classType); // create an instance of Company class return t; } } public class AntsController { static Dictionary<DataModelType, Func<object>> s_creators = new Dictionary<DataModelType, Func<object>>() { { DataModelType.Radyoloji, () => new _Radyoloji() }, { DataModelType.Company, () => new _Company() }, { DataModelType.Muayene, () => new _Muayene() }, { DataModelType.Satis, () => new _Satis() }, }; public object CreateByEnum(DataModelType modeltype) { return s_creators[modeltype](); } } public class CompanyView { public static List<Personel> GetPersonel() { GenoTipController controller = new GenoTipController(); _Company company = controller.CreateByEnum(DataModelType.Company) as _Company; return company.GetPersonel(); } } public enum DataModelType { Radyoloji, Satis, Muayene, Company } } if i write above codes i see some error: Cannot create an instance of abstract class or interface 'EfTestFactory_Company'How can i solve it? Look please below pic.

    Read the article

  • Hierarchy / Flyweight / Instancing Problem in Python

    - by Dan
    Here is the problem I am trying to solve, (I have simplified the actual problem, but this should give you all the relevant information). I have a hierarchy like so: 1.A 1.B 1.C 2.A 3.D 4.B 5.F (This is hard to illustrate - each number is the parent, each letter is the child). Creating an instance of the 'letter' objects is expensive (IO, database costs, etc), so should only be done once. The hierarchy needs to be easy to navigate. Children in the hierarchy need to have just one parent. Modifying the contents of the letter objects should be possible directly from the objects in the hierarchy. There needs to be a central store containing all of the 'letter' objects (and only those in the hierarchy). 'letter' and 'number' objects need to be possible to create from a constructor (such as Letter(**kwargs) ). It is perfectably acceptable to expect that when a letter changes from the hierarchy, all other letters will respect the same change. Hope this isn't too abstract to illustrate the problem. What would be the best way of solving this? (Then I'll post my solution) Here's an example script: one = Number('one') a = Letter('a') one.addChild(a) two = Number('two') a = Letter('a') two.addChild(a) for child in one: child.method1() for child in two: print '%s' % child.method2()

    Read the article

  • Conventions for the behavior of double or triple "click to select text" features?

    - by John Sullivan
    Almost any mature program that involves text implements "double click to select the word" and, in some cases, "triple click to select additional stuff like an entire line" as a feature. I find these features useful but they are often inconsistent between programs. Example - some programs' double clicks do not select the ending space after a word, but most do. Some recognize the - character as the end of a word, others do not. SO likes to select the entire paragraph as I write this post when I triple click it, VS web developer 2005 has no triple click support, and ultra-edit 32 will select one line upon triple clicking. We could come up with innumerable inconsistencies about how double and triple click pattern matching is implemented across programs. I am concerned about how to implement this behavior in my program if nobody else has achieved a convention about how the pattern matching should work. My question is, does a convention (conventions? maybe an MS or Linux convention?) exist that dictates how these features are supposed to behave to the end user? What, if any, are they?

    Read the article

  • Can a binary tree or tree be always represented in a Database as 1 table and self-referencing?

    - by Jian Lin
    I didn't feel this rule before, but it seems that a binary tree or any tree (each node can have many children but children cannot point back to any parent), then this data structure can be represented as 1 table in a database, with each row having an ID for itself and a parentID that points back to the parent node. That is in fact the classical Employee - Manager diagram: one boss can have many people under him... and each person can have n people under him, etc. This is a tree structure and is represented in database books as a common example as a single table Employee.

    Read the article

  • How to call one android application from another android application

    - by Akshata
    I want to call one android application from another application I have tried example on site http://www.anddev.org/install-run_applications_from_within_another_application-t6909.html but it is not working for me It is giving Package parse error.. Please replay as soon as possible. Consider there are two applications: Application1 and Application2 I want to call Application2 from Application1 I got some sample code to do this: Intent i = new Intent(); i.setAction(android.content.Intent.ACTION_VIEW); i.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(fileName),"application/vnd.android.package-archive"); startActivity(i); here fileName = "file://data/data/package_name/files/Application1.apk"; But I am getting Package Error and skipping file://data/data/package_name/files/Application1.apk

    Read the article

  • Simply doing modelType.ToString() isn't sufficient, How can i use it via Activator.CreateInstance?

    - by programmerist
    public class MyController { public object CreateByEnum(DataModelType modeltype) { string enumText = modeltype.ToString(); // will return for example "Company" Type classType = Type.GetType(enumText); // the Type for Company class object t = Activator.CreateInstance(classType); // create an instance of Company class return t; } } public class CompanyView { public static List<Personel> GetPersonel() { MyController controller = new MyController(); _Company company = controller.CreateByEnum(DataModelType.Company) as _Company; return company.GetPersonel(); } } public enum DataModelType { xyz, klm, tucyz, Company } Yes, I agree Activator.CreateInstance() is very useful. Unfortunately, I need to pass in the correct type. That means building the correct string to pass to Type.GetType(). If I trace through the call to Controller.CreatebyEnum() in the code I posted above, simply doing modelType.ToString() isn't sufficient, even for the case of DataModelType.Company. My solution'll be maintenance bottleneck. What would be better is something that takes the results of modelType.ToString() and then recursively searches through all the types found in all the assemblies loaded in the current AppDomain. According to MSDN, Type.GetType() only searches the current calling assembly, and mscorlib.dll. How can i do that? . i need best performance?

    Read the article

  • Some basic UML questions

    - by devoured elysium
    What does it mean when you have something as the following picture? Each Customer has none, one or more Orders while each Order has only one Customer? And in relationship to the following one: What does the black diamond mean in this context? How is that black diamond called? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it good to subclass a class only to separate some functional parts?

    - by prostynick
    Suppose we have abstract class A (all examples in C#) public abstract class A { private Foo foo; public A() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //a lot of other stuff... } But we are able to split it into two classes A and B: public abstract class A { public A() { } //a lot of stuff... } public abstract class B : A { private Foo foo; public B() : base() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //nothing else or just some overrides of A stuff } That's good, but we are 99.99% sure, that no one will ever subclass A, because functionality in B is very important. Is it still good to have two separate classes only to split some code into two parts and to separate functional elements?

    Read the article

  • date representation in user interface

    - by Samuel
    Most of the sites capture the date (e.g. birth date) information as either a single entity (i.e via a calendar control) or instead as separate fields (date, month, year). Are there any benefits in showing them as separate fields? Are they represented in the database as DATE data type or as separate fields. I am just trying to understand the pros & cons of representing the date field.

    Read the article

  • Facade controller, is it efficient?

    - by Berlioz
    Using a facade controller pattern in .net. It seems as if though it is not efficient BECAUSE, for every event that happens in a domain object(Sales, Register, Schedule, Car) it has to be subscribed to by the controller(use case controller) and then the controller in turn has to duplicate that same event to make it available for the presentation, so that the presentation can show it to the user. Does this make sense? Please comment!

    Read the article

  • Grasp Controller, Does it really need a UI to exist?

    - by dbones
    I have a Domain model which can be in multiple states, and if these states go out of a given range it the domain should automatically react. For example I have a Car which is made of multiple things which have measurements the Engine - Rev counter and Temperature the Fuel Tank - capacity Is is plaseable to have a CarStateController, which observses the engine and the tank, and if these states go out of range IE the engine temperature goes above range, turn the engine fan on?? There is no UI, (you could argue it would show a light on the dash board, but for this case it does not) is this a valid use of a GRASP controller pattern? if not what is this CarStateController Called? Or have I completely missed the point and this should be the State Pattern?

    Read the article

  • Migrating a simple application from Application Delegate to ViewController Class

    - by eco_bach
    Hi Frst of all wanted to send out a huge thanks for the great feedback and support. I have a simple application working, right now simply loads a sequence of images and alows the user to step thru the images by clicking a button. All of my logic is in my Application Delegate class, with the image loading, initialization of UIImage Views etc happening in my applicationDidFinishLaunching method. My next step is to migrate as much as possible all of the logic from this class to a ViewController, to take advantage of the extra functionality etc in viewcontrollers. All my images and imageViews are initialized like the following in my applicationDidFinishLaunching. img = [UIImage imageWithContentsOfFile:[[NSBundle mainBundle] pathForResource:@image1.jpg" ofType:nil]]; imgView = [[UIImageView alloc] initWithImage:img]; How would I migrate this to a ViewController based application? Where would I put all of the logic currently in my applicationDidFinishLaunching method, or for loading of images, is it necessary to only load them here? Any feedback, tips, suggestions appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Is Abstract Factory Pattern implemented correctly for given scenario.... ???

    - by Amit
    First thing... I am novice to pattern world, so correct me if wrong anywhere Scenario: There are multiple companies providing multiple products of diff size so there are 3 entities i.e. Companies, Their Product and size of product I have implement Abstract Pattern on this i.e. so that I will create instance of IProductFactory interface to get desired product... Is below implementation of Abstract Factory Pattern correct ??? If not then please correct the approach + Also tell me if any other pattern can be used for such scenario Thanks in advance... public enum Companies { Samsung = 0, LG = 1, Philips = 2, Sony = 3 } public enum Product { PlasmaTv = 0, DVD = 1 } public enum ProductSize { FortyTwoInch, FiftyFiveInch } interface IProductFactory { IPhilips GetPhilipsProduct(); ISony GetSonyProduct(); } interface ISony { string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size); } interface IPhilips { string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size); } class ProductFactory : IProductFactory { public IPhilips GetPhilipsProduct() { return new Philips(); } public ISony GetSonyProduct() { return new Sony(); } } class Philips : IPhilips { #region IPhilips Members public string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size) {// I have ingnore size for now.... string output = string.Empty; if (product == Product.PlasmaTv) { output = "Plasma TV Created !!!"; } else if (product == Product.DVD) { output = "DVD Created !!!"; } return output; } #endregion } class Sony : ISony {// I have ingnore size for now.... #region ISony Members public string CreateProducts(Product product, ProductSize size) { string output = string.Empty; if (product == Product.PlasmaTv) { output = "Plasma TV Created !!!"; } else if (product == Product.DVD) { output = "DVD Created !!!"; } return output; } #endregion } IProductFactory prodFactory = new ProductFactory(); IPhilips philipsObj = prodFactory.GetPhilipsProduct(); MessageBox.Show(philipsObj.CreateProducts(Product.DVD, ProductSize.FortyTwoInch)); or //ISony sonyObj = prodFactory.GetSonyProduct(); //MessageBox.Show(sonyObj.CreateProducts(Product.DVD, ProductSize.FortyTwoInch));

    Read the article

  • Java init method

    - by Johan Sjöberg
    What's a good way to make sure an init method is invoked in java? The alternatives I see are Don't test it, let the method fail by itself, likely by a NullPointerException Test if method was initialized or throw public void foo() { if (!inited) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("not initalized"); } ... } Delagate public void foo() { if (!inited) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("not initalized"); } fooInternal(); } private void fooInternal(){ ... }; Always init, and make init a noop otherwise public void foo() { init(); ... } public void init() { if(!inited) { ... } } Silently init public void foo() { if (!inited) { init(); } ... } Most of these approaches are very verbose and decreases overall readability.

    Read the article

  • Can a binary tree or tree be always represented in a Database table as 1 table and self-referencing?

    - by Jian Lin
    I didn't feel this rule before, but it seems that a binary tree or any tree (each node can have many children but children cannot point back to any parent), then this data structure can be represented as 1 table in a database, with each row having an ID for itself and a parentID that points back to the parent node. That is in fact the classical Employee - Manager diagram: one boss can have many people under him... and each person under him can have n people under him, etc. This is a tree structure and is represented in database books as a common example as a single table Employee.

    Read the article

  • how to share a variable between two threads

    - by prmatta
    I just inherited some code, two threads within this code need to perform a system task. One thread should do the system task before the other thread. They should not be performing the system task together. The two threads do not have references to each other. Now, I know I can use some sort of a semaphore to achieve this. But my question is what is the right way to get both threads to access this semaphore. I could create a static variable/method a new class : public class SharedSemaphore { private static Semaphore s = new Semaphore (1, true); public static void performSystemTask () { s.acquire(); } public static void donePerformingSystemTask() { s.release(); } } This would work (right?) but this doesn't seem like the right thing to do. Because, the threads now have access to a semaphore, without ever having a reference to it. This sort of thing doesn't seem like a good programming practice. Am I wrong?

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to static methods on interfaces for enforcing consistency

    - by jayshao
    In Java, I'd like to be able to define marker interfaces, that forced implementations to provide static methods. For example, for simple text-serialization/deserialization I'd like to be able to define an interface that looked something like this: public interface TextTransformable<T>{ public static T fromText(String text); public String toText(); Since interfaces in Java can't contain static methods though (as noted in a number of other posts/threads: here, here, and here this code doesn't work. What I'm looking for however is some reasonable paradigm to express the same intent, namely symmetric methods, one of which is static, and enforced by the compiler. Right now the best we can come up with is some kind of static factory object or generic factory, neither of which is really satisfactory. Note: in our case our primary use-case is we have many, many "value-object" types - enums, or other objects that have a limited number of values, typically carry no state beyond their value, and which we parse/de-parse thousands of time a second, so actually do care about reusing instances (like Float, Integer, etc.) and its impact on memory consumption/g.c. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Can we create a class from a xml file ?

    - by panzerschreck
    Hello, Is it possible to create a class dynamically by reading an xml file ( in java preferably) ? if yes, please provide pointers on how to do it. In the process of development, we have come up with a class that has 5 attributes, all these attributes correspond to an entry in the xml file, now if the user adds/modifies the xml entry the object corresponding to it must change automatically, one approach would be generate the source code, before compile time.Is there any other way ? Is there any common pattern to model such changes in the system ? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Where are the readonly/const in .NET?

    - by acidzombie24
    In C++ you'll see void func(const T& t) everywhere. However, i havent seen anything similar in .NET. Why? I have notice a nice amount of parameters using struct. But i see no functions with readonly/const. In fact now that i tried it i couldnt use those keywords to make a function that promises to not modify a list being passed in. Is there no way to promise the caller that this function will never modify the contents of list? Is there no way to say to call code and say this list should never be modified? (I know i can clone the list or look at documentation but i like compile errors sometime)

    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 | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >