Search Results

Search found 53100 results on 2124 pages for 'web 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 556/2124 | < Previous Page | 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563  | Next Page >

  • When to update audit fields? DDD

    - by user676767
    I have a Meeting Object: Meeting{id, name, time, CreatedBy, UpdatedBy} and a MeetingAssignee{id, MeetingID, EmployeeId, CreatedBy, UpdatedBy) Meeting, as Aggregate root, has a method AssignEmployee. I was about to pass in the current user to the Meeting object as I call AssignEmployee, so that it can update its audit fields accordingly. But this doesn't seem right - is it? Obviously I can keep the audit fields public and change them later - perhaps at service level? What is everyone's else preferred method for updating these fields? Please note: We are not using Nhibernate, but a custom ORM which does not have anything automatic in place. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to make 2 incompatible types, but with the same members, interchangeable?

    - by Quigrim
    Yesterday 2 of the guys on our team came to me with an uncommon problem. We are using a third-party component in one of our winforms applications. All the code has already been written against it. They then wanted to incorporate another third-party component, by the same vender, into our application. To their delight they found that the second component had the exact same public members as the first. But to their dismay, the 2 components have completely separate inheritance hierarchies, and implement no common interfaces. Makes you wonder... Well, makes me wonder. An example of the problem: public class ThirdPartyClass1 { public string Name { get { return "ThirdPartyClass1"; } } public void DoThirdPartyStuff () { Console.WriteLine ("ThirdPartyClass1 is doing its thing."); } } public class ThirdPartyClass2 { public string Name { get { return "ThirdPartyClass2"; } } public void DoThirdPartyStuff () { Console.WriteLine ("ThirdPartyClass2 is doing its thing."); } } Gladly they felt copying and pasting the code they wrote for the first component was not the correct answer. So they were thinking of assigning the component instant into an object reference and then modifying the code to do conditional casts after checking what type it was. But that is arguably even uglier than the copy and paste approach. So they then asked me if I can write some reflection code to access the properties and call the methods off the two different object types since we know what they are, and they are exactly the same. But my first thought was that there goes the elegance. I figure there has to be a better, graceful solution to this problem.

    Read the article

  • How to handle request/response propagation up and down a widget hierarchy in a GUI app?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Given a GUI application where widgets can be composed of other widgets: If the user triggers an event resulting in a lower level widget needing data from a model, what's the cleanest way to be able to send that request to a controller (or the datastore itself)? And subsequently get the response back to that widget? Presumably one wouldn't want the controller or datastore to be a singleton directly available to all levels of widgets, or is this an acceptable use of singleton? Or should a top level controller be injected as a dependency through a widget hierarchy, as far down as the lowest level widget that might need that controller? Or a different approach entirely?

    Read the article

  • Mocking a namespace in a partial class.

    - by Nix
    I am messing around with Entity Framework 3.5 SP1 and I am trying to find a cleaner way to do the below. Basically I have an EF model and I am adding some Eager Loaded entities and i want to put them in the partial class context Eager namespace. Currently I am using composition but I feel like there is an easier way to do what I want. namespace Entities{ public partial class TestObjectContext { EagerExtensions Eager { get;set;} public TestObjectContext(){ Eager = new EagerExtensions (this); } } public partial class EagerExtensions { TestObjectContext context; public EagerExtensions(TestObjectContext _context){ context = _context; } public IQueryable<TestEntity> TestEntity { get { return context.TestEntity .Include("TestEntityType") .Include("Test.Attached.AttachedType") .AsQueryable(); } } } } public class Tester{ public void ShowHowIWantIt(){ TestObjectContext context= new TestObjectContext(); var query = from a in context.Eager.TestEntity select a; } }

    Read the article

  • How much to put in a Repository class?

    - by chobo
    When using the repository pattern is it recommended to have one Repository class for each database table? Would I also map one service layer class to one repository class. I'm having a hard time trying to understand how much stuff one repository or service layer class should have. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Add custom method to string object [closed]

    - by cru3l
    Possible Duplicate: Can I add custom methods/attributes to built-in Python types? In Ruby you can override any built-in object class with custom method, like this: class String def sayHello return self+" is saying hello!" end end puts 'JOHN'.downcase.sayHello # >>> 'john is saying hello!' How can i do that in python? Is there a normally way or just hacks?

    Read the article

  • Sharing logic across different platforms

    - by Pranz
    Hello all, We have a business logic that works with the file systems on OS that we want to implement on both Linux and Windows platforms. The language we have selected is Python for Linux and C# for Windows. GUI is not a priority for now. We were looking for ways to abstract the business logic in a way that we dont have to repeat the business logic (ofcourse I understand since it is related to file system, some code will differ from platform to platform). Any ideas on how to implement it? Is C/C++ the only option. We dont want to use Java. Thanks, Pranz

    Read the article

  • Is passing a struct value to a method by-reference in C# an acceptable optimization?

    - by Arc
    Say I have a struct: struct MyStruct { public int X public int Y } And a method in some class that is iterated over many times elsewhere: public bool MyMethod( MyStruct myStruct ) { return ... } Is changing the MyMethod signature to the following an acceptable optimization? public bool MyMethod( ref MyStruct myStruct ) If so, how much of an advantage would it really be? If not, about how many fields would a struct need for a big enough advantage using ref this way?

    Read the article

  • I need to create a contest....

    - by creocare
    I'm working on a contest where users vote for contestants. Each contestant will have a bio. I was wondering what would be the best way to approach this? Should I do this in php or javascript? Should I use a database to collect data? Should I use sqlite3? If I use sqlite3 how do i install that on my mac? I'm very new to all this but I'm a quick learner. Thanks for any advice.

    Read the article

  • 3D Mesh Joining

    - by morlst
    I have 2 (or more) intersecting meshes, which require joining into 1 mesh object. I want to have some control over the resulting seam vertex insertion, so looking to write myself rather than use a library. Has anyone come across some open source code to base the algorithm on / ideas on the process? Initial impressions are: 1. Present in every 3D modelling program - mostly reinventing existing process (hence search for examples) 2. Potential for fiddly-ness around the polygon face direction and just touching conditions. (see above point)

    Read the article

  • Should i use TabContainer for multiple pages?

    - by Tim
    I'm considering if it is a good idea to use an ASP.Net TabContainer-Control in the way that every TabPanel contains content of a different page. For example: Next i want to implement in my application is the masterdata management. Normally i would create one aspx page for every masterdata-table (f.e. Customer - MD_Customer.aspx). Then i would add a link into my Menu to this page. Now i'm thinking of creating one aspx page for all(Masterdata.aspx) with a Tabcontainer and an UpdatePanel for every type of Masterdata. The link it the menu could have an additional MDType as URL-Parameter. My main concerns are related to performance(one "page" for every TabPanel currently means 7 "pages" in one) and maintainability because of increasing complexity. Is it a good approach or a bad idea? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Domain model for an online WYSYWG webpage generator / runtime

    - by CharlieBrown
    Hi all, I'm using C#, MVC, NHibernate and StructureMap as my IoC container, and need some ideas regarding my domain model. The application I'm working has two parts: an Authoring part and a Runtime part. The idea is to allow the user to create a webpage in Authoring (mostly a form actually) by choosing from a set of predefined controls. That webpage will be later used as a form in a call center environment (Runtime part), or may be used in an intranet portal, etc. Basically something similar to what a CMS would do. The difference is, of course, that the webpage/form the author generates will be used and fulfilled in runtime, and that authros should be able to freely create the webpage they want without limitations. I have a draft working model that allows a RunController to iterate over the ScriptPage (my class for the "generated webpage") Controls collection and uses partial views to render each of them. Works kind of fine. Basically I have a common ScriptControl class, and then I can create for example a TextInputControl or a DropDownControl by inheriting from that base class. I can also figure out the Authoring part of the app, although that will surely be fun in itself for sure. :) The biggest problem I have now is persistance. In order to be flexible, I want to be able to add more controls, and template controls (think of an Address composite control) in sepparate DLLs, so I think having a relational model that handles very possible control is not the way to go. My current thinking is using a kind of ObjectStore: binary-serializing the ScriptPage object that contains the List collection and deserializing at Runtime, but I'm not sure how good will it work with NHibernate and how good the performance will be. Serializing a small "page" with 10 controls results in 7964 bytes, for example. Any ideas out there? Thanks in advance, excuse the length. ;)

    Read the article

  • Is throwing an exception a healthy way to exit?

    - by ramaseshan
    I have a setup that looks like this. class Checker { // member data Results m_results; // see below public: bool Check(); private: bool Check1(); bool Check2(); // .. so on }; Checker is a class that performs lengthy check computations for engineering analysis. Each type of check has a resultant double that the checker stores. (see below) bool Checker::Check() { // initilisations etc. Check1(); Check2(); // ... so on } A typical Check function would look like this: bool Checker::Check1() { double result; // lots of code m_results.SetCheck1Result(result); } And the results class looks something like this: class Results { double m_check1Result; double m_check2Result; // ... public: void SetCheck1Result(double d); double GetOverallResult() { return max(m_check1Result, m_check2Result, ...); } }; Note: all code is oversimplified. The Checker and Result classes were initially written to perform all checks and return an overall double result. There is now a new requirement where I only need to know if any of the results exceeds 1. If it does, subsequent checks need not be carried out(it's an optimisation). To achieve this, I could either: Modify every CheckN function to keep check for result and return. The parent Check function would keep checking m_results. OR In the Results::SetCheckNResults(), throw an exception if the value exceeds 1 and catch it at the end of Checker::Check(). The first is tedious, error prone and sub-optimal because every CheckN function further branches out into sub-checks etc. The second is non-intrusive and quick. One disadvantage is I can think of is that the Checker code may not necessarily be exception-safe(although there is no other exception being thrown anywhere else). Is there anything else that's obvious that I'm overlooking? What about the cost of throwing exceptions and stack unwinding? Is there a better 3rd option?

    Read the article

  • Separation of business logic

    - by bruno
    When I was optimizing my architecture of our applications in our website, I came to a problem that I don't know the best solution for. Now at the moment we have a small dll based on this structure: Database <-> DAL <-> BLL the Dal uses Business Objects to pass to the BLL that will pass it to the applications that uses this dll. Only the BLL is public so any application that includes this dll, can see the bll. In the beginning, this was a good solution for our company. But when we are adding more and more applications on that Dll, the bigger the Bll is getting. Now we dont want that some applications can see Bll-logic from other applications. Now I don't know what the best solution is for that. The first thing I thought was, move and separate the bll to other dll's which i can include in my application. But then must the Dal be public, so the other dll's can get the data... and that I seems like a good solution. My other solution, is just to separate the bll in different namespaces, and just include only the namespaces you need in the applications. But in this solution, you can get directly access to other bll's if you want. So I'm asking for your opinions.

    Read the article

  • Organizing development teams

    - by Patrick
    A long time ago, when my company was much smaller, dividing the development work over teams was quite easy: the 'application' team developed the applications-specific logic, often requiring a deep insight of specific industry problems) the 'generic' team developed the parts that were common/generic for all applications (user interface related stuff, database access, low-level Windows stuff, ...) Over the years the boundaries between the teams have become fuzzy: the 'application' teams often write application-specific functionality with a 'generic' part, so instead of asking the 'generic' team to write that part for them, they write it themselves to speed up the developments; then donate it to the 'generic' team the 'generic' team's focus seems to be more 'maintenance oriented'. All of the 'very generic' code has already been written, so no new developments are needed in it, but instead they continuously have to support all the functionality donated by the application teams. All this seems to indicate that it's not a good idea anymore to have this split in teams. Maybe the 'generic' team should evolve into a 'software quality' team (defining and guarding the rules for writing good quality software), or into a 'software deployment' team (defining how software should be deployed, installed, ...). How do you split up the work in different teams if you have different applications? everybody can write generic code and donates it to a central 'generic' team? everybody can write generic code, but nobody 'manages' this generic code (everybody is the owner) generic code is written by a 'generic' team only and the applications have to wait until the 'generic' team delivers the generic part (via a library, via a DLL) there is no overlap in code between the different applications some other way? Notice that thee advantage of having the mix (allowing everybody to write everywhere in the code) is that: code is written in a more flexible way it's easier to debug the code since you can easily step into the 'generic' code in the debugger But the big (and maybe only) disadvantage is that this generic code may become nobody's responsibility if there is no clear team that manages it anymore. What is your vision?

    Read the article

  • How to simplify the code?

    - by Tattat
    I have objectA, and objectB.... also I have objectAs, and objectBs. the objectA is only have the init method, and ObjectAs have somethings like this: #import "ObjectAs.h" @implementation ObjectAs @synthesize objectAs; -(id) init{ if( (self=[super init])) { self.objectAs = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; } return self; } -(int)getObjectAsNumber{ return [self.objectAs count]; } -(void)addObjectA:(ObjectA *)newObjectA{ [self.objectAs addObject:newObjectA]; } -(id)getObjectAByIdx:(int)objectAIdx{ return [self.objectAs objectAtIndex:objectAIdx]; } -(void)dealloc{ [super dealloc]; [objectAs release]; } @end The objectBs have similar have, I know that I can copy and paste, and replace it. Is there any way to simplify the objectBs, and objectAs? thz a lot.

    Read the article

  • Which database should I use for best performance

    - by _simon_
    Hello, I am working in Visual Studio 2005, .NET 2.0. I need to write an application, which listens on COM port and saves incoming data to a database. Main feature: save incoming data (series of 13-digits numbers), if this number allready exists, then mark it as double. For example, there could be these records in database: 0000000000001 OK 0000000000002 OK 0000000000002 Double 0000000000003 OK 0000000000004 OK I could use SQL database, but I don't know if it is fast enough... Database should be able to store up to 10.000.000 records and write up to 100 records per minute (so it needs to check 100 times per minute if this record allready exists). Which database should I use? Maybe the whole database would need to be in RAM. Where could I learn more about this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • When designing an event, is it a good idea to prevent listeners from being added twice?

    - by Matt
    I am creating an event-based API where a user can subscribe to an event by adding listener objects (as is common in Java or C#). When the event is raised, all subscribed listeners are invoked with the event information. I initially decided to prevent adding an event listener more than once. If a listener is added that already exists in the listener collection, it is not added again. However, after thinking about it some more, it doesn't seem that most event-based structures actually prevent this. Was my initial instinct wrong? I'm not sure which way to go here. I guess I thought that preventing addition of an existing listener would help to avoid a common programming error. Then again, it could also hide a bug that would lead to code being run multiple times when it shouldn't.

    Read the article

  • Where does the query language sit within the MVC pattern?

    - by weesilmania
    I'd assume that since the query language sits within the controller (typically) that it belongs to that component, but if I play devil's advocate I'd argue that the query language is execute within the domain of the model, and is tightly coupled to that component so it might also be a part of it. Anyone know the answer? Is there a straight answer or is it technology specific?

    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 | 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563  | Next Page >