Search Results

Search found 4243 results on 170 pages for 'anti patterns'.

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 62/170 | < Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >

  • Singleton Properties

    - by coffeeaddict
    Ok, if I create a singleton class and expose the singleton object through a public static property...I understand that. But my singleton class has other properties in it. Should those be static? Should those also be private? I just want to be able to access all properties of my singleton class by doing this: MySingletonClass.SingletonProperty.SomeProperty2 Where SingletonProperty returns me the single singleton instance. I guess my question is, how do you expose the other properties in the singleton class..make them private and then access them through your public singleton static property?

    Read the article

  • Delegates in Action -Help

    - by Amutha
    I am learning delegates.I am very curious to apply delegates to the following chain-of-responsibility pattern. Kindly help me the way to apply delegates to the following piece. Thanks in advance.Thanks for your effort. #region Chain of Responsibility Pattern namespace Chain { public class Player { public string Name { get; set; } public int Score { get; set; } } public abstract class PlayerHandler { protected PlayerHandler _Successor = null; public abstract void HandlePlayer(Player _player); public void SetupHandler(PlayerHandler _handler) { _Successor = _handler; } } public class Employee : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score <= 100) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Employee", _player.Name)); } else { _Successor.HandlePlayer(_player); } } } public class Supervisor : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score >100 && _player.Score<=200) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Supervisor", _player.Name)); } else { _Successor.HandlePlayer(_player); } } } public class Manager : PlayerHandler { public override void HandlePlayer(Player _player) { if (_player.Score > 200) { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} is greeted by Manager", _player.Name)); } else { MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} got low score", _player.Name)); } } } } #endregion #region Main() void Main() { Chain.Player p1 = new Chain.Player(); p1.Name = "Jon"; p1.Score = 100; Chain.Player p2 = new Chain.Player(); p2.Name = "William"; p2.Score = 170; Chain.Player p3 = new Chain.Player(); p3.Name = "Robert"; p3.Score = 300; Chain.Employee emp = new Chain.Employee(); Chain.Manager mgr = new Chain.Manager(); Chain.Supervisor sup = new Chain.Supervisor(); emp.SetupHandler(sup); sup.SetupHandler(mgr); emp.HandlePlayer(p1); emp.HandlePlayer(p2); emp.HandlePlayer(p3); } #endregion

    Read the article

  • Designing a general database interface in PHP

    - by lamas
    I'm creating a small framework for my web projects in PHP so I don't have to do the basic work over and over again for every new website. It is not my goal to create a second CakePHP or Codeigniter and I'm also not planning to build my websites with any of the available frameworks as I prefer to use things I've created myself in general. I have no problems in designing that framework when it comes to parts like the core structure, request handling, and so on but I'm getting stuck with designing the database interface for my modules. I've already thought about using the MVC pattern but thought that it would be a bit of a overkill. So the exact problem I'm facing is how my frameworks modules (viewCustomers could be a module, for example) should interact with the database. Is it a good idea to write SQL directly in PHP (mysql_query( 'SELECT firstname, lastname(.....))? How could I abstract a query like SELECT firstname, lastname FROM customers WHERE id=X Would MySQL helper functions like $this->db->get( array('firstname', 'lastname'), array('id'=>X) ) be a good idea? I suppose not because they actually make everything more complicated by requiring arrays to be created and passed. Is the Model pattern from MVC my only real option?

    Read the article

  • Separate functionality depending on Role in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Andrew Bullock
    I'm looking for an elegant pattern to solve this problem: I have several user roles in my system, and for many of my controller actions, I need to deal with slightly different data. For example, take /Users/Edit/1 This allows a Moderator to edit a users email address, but Administrators to edit a user's email address and password. I'd like a design for separating the two different bits of action code for the GET and the POST. Solutions I've come up with so far are: Switch inside each method, however this doesn't really help when i want different model arguments on the POST :( Custom controller factory which chooses a UsersController_ForModerators and UsersController_ForAdmins instead of just UsersController from the controller name and current user role Custom action invoker which choose the Edit_ForModerators method in a similar way to above Have an IUsersController and register a different implementation of it in my IoC container as a named instance based on Role Build an implementation of the controller at runtime using Castle DynamicProxy and manipulate the methods to those from role-based implementations Im preferring the named IoC instance route atm as it means all my urls/routing will work seamlessly. Ideas? Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • One executable with cmd-line params or just many satellite executables?

    - by Nikos Baxevanis
    I design an application back-end. For now, it is a .NET process (a Console Application) which hosts various communication frameworks such as Agatha and NServiceBus. I need to periodically update my datastore with values (coming from the application while it's running). I found three possible ways: Accept command line arguments, so I can call my console app with -update. On start up a background thread will periodically invoke the update method. Create an updater.exe app which will do the updates, but I will have code duplication since in some way it will need to query the data from the source in order to save it to the datastore. Which one is better?

    Read the article

  • Question about design (inheritance, polymorphism)

    - by Dan
    Hi, I have a question about a problem I'm struggling with. Hope you can bear with me. Imagine I have an Object class representing the base class of a hierarchy of physical objects. Later I inherit from it to create an Object1D, Object2D and Object3D classes. Each of these derived classes will have some specific methods and attributes. For example, the 3d object might have functionality to download a 3d model to be used by a renderer. So I'd have something like this: class Object {}; class Object1D : public Object { Point mPos; }; class Object2D : public Object { ... }; class Object3D : public Object { Model mModel; }; Now I'd have a separate class called Renderer, which simply takes an Object as argument and well, renders it :-) In a similar way, I'd like to support different kinds of renderers. For instance, I could have a default one that every object could rely on, and then provide other specific renderers for some kind of objects: class Renderer {}; // Default one class Renderer3D : public Renderer {}; And here comes my problem. A renderer class needs to get an Object as an argument, for example in the constructor in order to retrieve whatever data it needs to render the object. So far so good. But a Renderer3D would need to get an Object3D argument, in order to get not only the basic attributes but also the specific attributes of a 3d object. Constructors would look like this: CRenderer(Object& object); CRenderer3D(Object3D& object); Now how do I specify this in a generic way? Or better yet, is there a better way to design this? I know I could rely on RTTI or similar but I'd like to avoid this if possible as I feel there is probably a better way to deal with this. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC best way to update cached table

    - by Eddy Mishiyev
    There are certain tables that get called often but updated rarely. One of these tables is Departments. So to save DB trips, I think it is ok to cache this table taking into consideration that the table has very small size. However, once you cached it an issue of keeping the table data fresh occurs. So what is the best way to determine that the table is dirty and therefore requires a reload and how that code should be invoked. I look for solution that will be scalable. So updating the cache right after inserting will not work. So if one machine inserted the record all other on network should get notified to reload the cache. I was thinking for calling corresponding web service from T-SQL but don't really like the idea of consuming recourses on sql server. So what are the best practices to resolve this type of problems. Thanks in advance Eddy

    Read the article

  • how to get access to private members of nested class?

    - by macias
    Background: I have enclosed (parent) class E with nested class N with several instances of N in E. In the enclosed (parent) class I am doing some calculations and I am setting the values for each instance of nested class. Something like this: n1.field1 = ...; n1.field2 = ...; n1.field3 = ...; n2.field1 = ...; ... It is one big eval method (in parent class). My intention is -- since all calculations are in parent class (they cannot be done per nested instance because it would make code more complicated) -- make the setters only available to parent class and getters public. And now there is a problem: when I make the setters private, parent class cannot acces them when I make them public, everybody can change the values and C# does not have friend concept I cannot pass values in constructor because lazy evaluation mechanism is used (so the instances have to be created when referencing them -- I create all objects and the calculation is triggered on demand) I am stuck -- how to do this (limit access up to parent class, no more, no less)? I suspect I'll get answer-question first -- "but why you don't split the evaluation per each field" -- so I answer this by example: how do you calculate min and max value of a collection? In a fast way? The answer is -- in one pass. This is why I have one eval function which does calculations and sets all fields at once.

    Read the article

  • dynamic behavior of factory class

    - by manu1001
    I have a factory class that serves out a bunch of properties. Now, the properties might come either from a database or from a properties file. This is what I've come up with. public class Factory { private static final INSTANCE = new Factory(source); private Factory(DbSource source) { // read from db, save properties } private Factory(FileSource source) { // read from file, save properties } // getInstance() and getProperties() here } What's a clean way of switching between these behaviors based on the environment. I want to avoid having to recompile the class each time.

    Read the article

  • Expose subset of a class - design question

    - by thanikkal
    Suppose i have a product class with about close to 100 properties. Now for some operations (Say tax calculation) i dont really need this bulky product type, rather only a subset that has price related properties. I am not sure if i should create different snap shots(class) of products that just has the properties that i am interested in. what would be the ideal approach so that i don't unnecessarily pass around unsought fluff? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • asp.mvc model design

    - by Radu D
    Hi, I am pretty new to MVC and I am looking for a way to design my models. I have the MVC web site project and another class library that takes care of data access and constructing the business objects. If I have in that assembly a class named Project that is a business object and I need to display all projects in a view ... should I make another model class Project? In this case the classes will be identical. Do I gain something from doing a new model class? I don't like having in views references to objects from another dll ... but i don't like duplicating the code neither. Did you encounter the same problem?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for Fat Client - Thin Client to use Common code?

    - by kurozakura
    Windows-based client application and web-client application(consuming the same code which windows-client uses) what is the preferable pattern for this scenario? Is it ok to have the code in the common place where both the projects and refer it as dll i.e one which is a windows app and other which is going consume the same code which windows client will be exposing.

    Read the article

  • javascript: execute a bunch of asynchronous method with one callback

    - by Samuel Michelot
    I need to execute a bunch of asynchronous methods (client SQLite database), and call only one final callback. Of course, the ugly way is: execAll : function(callBack) { asynch1(function() { asynch2(function() { ... asynchN(function() { callBack(); }) }) }); } But I know there are better ways to do it. Intuitively I would detect when all call back has been called with a counter to call the final callback. I think this is a common design-pattern, so if someone could point me in the right direction... Thanks in advance !

    Read the article

  • PHP: Best solution for links breaking in a mod_rewrite app

    - by psil
    I'm using mod rewrite to redirect all requests targeting non-existent files/directories to index.php?url=* This is surely the most common thing you do with mod_rewrite yet I have a problem: Naturally, if the page url is "mydomain.com/blog/view/1", the browser will look for images, stylesheets and relative links in the "virtual" directory "mydomain.com/blog/view/". Problem 1: Is using the base tag the best solution? I see that none of the PHP frameworks out there use the base tag, though. I'm currently having a regex replace all the relative links to point to the right path before output. Is that "okay"? Problem 2: It is possible that the server doesn't support mod_rewrite. However, all public files like images, stylesheets and the requests collector index.php are located in the directory /myapp/public. Normally mod_rewrite points all request to /public so it seems as if public was actually the root directory too all users. However if there is no mod_rewrite, I then have to point the users to /public from the root directory with a header() call. That means, however that all links are broken again because suddenly all images, etc. have to be called via /public/myimage.jpg Additional info: When there is no mod_rewrite the above request would look like this: mydomain.com/public/index.php/blog/view/1 What would be the best solutions for both problems?

    Read the article

  • Lackadaisical One-to-One between Char and Byte Streams

    - by Vaibhav Bajpai
    I expected to have a one-to-one correspondence between the character streams and byte streams in terms of how the classes are organized in their hierarchy. FilterReader and FilterWriter (character streams) correspond back to FilterInputStream and FilterOutputStream (byte stream) classes. However I noticed few changes as - BufferedInputStream extends FilterInputStream, but BufferedReader does NOT extend FilterReader. BufferedOutputStream and PrintStream both extend FilterOutputStream, but BufferedWriter and PrintWriter does NOT extend FilterWriter. FilterInputStream and FilterOutputStream are not abstract classes, but FilterReader and FilterWriter are. I am not sure if I am being too paranoid to point out such differences, but was just curious to know if there was design reasoning behind such decision.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: I don't get where to start!

    - by Andy
    I have several articles about Dependency Injection, and I can see the benefits, especially when it comes to unit testing. The units can me loosely coupled, and mocking of dependencies can be made. The trouble is - I just don't get where to start. Consider this snippet below of (much edited for the purpose of this post) code that I have. I am instantiating a Plc object from the main form, and passing in a communications mode via the Connect method. In it's present form it becomes hard to test, because I can't isolate the Plc from the CommsChannel to unit test it. (Can I?) The class depends on using a CommsChannel object, but I am only passing in a mode that is used to create this channel within the Plc itself. To use dependancy injection, I should really pass in an already created CommsChannel (via an 'ICommsChannel' interface perhaps) to the Connect method, or maybe via the Plc constructor. Is that right? But then that would mean creating the CommsChannel in my main form first, and this doesn't seem right either, because it feels like everything will come back to the base layer of the main form, where everything begins. Somehow it feels like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. Where do you start? You have to create an instance of something somewhere, but I'm struggling to understand where that should be. public class Plc() { public bool Connect(CommsMode commsMode) { bool success = false; // Create new comms channel. this._commsChannel = this.GetCommsChannel(commsMode); // Attempt connection success = this._commsChannel.Connect(); return this._connected; } private CommsChannel GetCommsChannel(CommsMode mode) { CommsChannel channel; switch (mode) { case CommsMode.RS232: channel = new SerialCommsChannel( SerialCommsSettings.Default.ComPort, SerialCommsSettings.Default.BaudRate, SerialCommsSettings.Default.DataBits, SerialCommsSettings.Default.Parity, SerialCommsSettings.Default.StopBits); break; case CommsMode.Tcp: channel = new TcpCommsChannel( TCPCommsSettings.Default.IP_Address, TCPCommsSettings.Default.Port); break; default: // Throw unknown comms channel exception. } return channel; } }

    Read the article

  • Is it ok to dynamic cast "this" as a return value?

    - by Panayiotis Karabassis
    This is more of a design question. I have a template class, and I want to add extra methods to it depending on the template type. To practice the DRY principle, I have come up with this pattern (definitions intentionally omitted): template <class T> class BaseVector: public boost::array<T, 3> { protected: BaseVector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z); public: bool operator == (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator + (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator - (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> &operator += (const Vector<T> &other) { (*this)[0] += other[0]; (*this)[1] += other[1]; (*this)[2] += other[2]; return *dynamic_cast<Vector<T> * const>(this); } } template <class T> class Vector : public BaseVector<T> { public: Vector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z) : BaseVector<T>(x, y, z) { } }; template <> class Vector<double> : public BaseVector<double> { public: Vector<double>(const double x, const double y, const double z); Vector<double>(const Vector<int> &other); double norm() const; }; I intend BaseVector to be nothing more than an implementation detail. This works, but I am concerned about operator+=. My question is: is the dynamic cast of the this pointer a code smell? Is there a better way to achieve what I am trying to do (avoid code duplication, and unnecessary casts in the user code)? Or am I safe since, the BaseVector constructor is private?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC: post-redirect-get pattern, with only two overloaded action methods

    - by Rafi
    Is it possible to implement post-redirect-get pattern, with two overloaded action methods(One for GET action and the other for POST action) in ASP.NET MVC. In all of the MVC post-redirect-get pattern samples, I have seen three different action methods for the post-redirect-get process, each having different names. Is this really required? For Eg:(Does the code shown below, follows Post-Redirect-Get pattern?) public class SalaryTransferController : Controller { // // GET: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index(int id) { SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm = new SalaryTransferIndexViewModel(id) { SelectedDivision = DivisionEnum.Contracting }; //Do some processing here return View(vm); } // // POST: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpPost] public ActionResult Index(SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm) { bool validationsuccess = false; //validate if (validationsuccess) return RedirectToAction("Index", new {id=1234 }); else return View(vm); } } Thank you for your responses.

    Read the article

  • How to create new account using servlets

    - by Alvin
    I want to know how can I create new account using servlets in post method? I'm currently following MVC design pattern, and I want to know if I pass the required data to register new account from JSP page, then how can I get that data in post method? As request.getParameter() method returning me null. How can I know that post method is calling to create new account? How can I pass all the relevant user information from servlets to model class for registering data to the database table?

    Read the article

  • Singleton Pattern combine with a Decorator

    - by Mike
    Attached is a classic Decorator pattern. My question is how would you modify the below code so that you can wrap zero or one of each topping on to the Pizza Right now I can have a Pepporini - Sausage -- Pepporini -- Pizza class driving the total cost up to $10, charging twice for Pepporini. I don't think I want to use the Chain of Responsibility pattern as order does not matter and not all toppings are used? Thank you namespace PizzaDecorator { public interface IPizza { double CalculateCost(); } public class Pizza: IPizza { public Pizza() { } public double CalculateCost() { return 8.00; } } public abstract class Topping : IPizza { protected IPizza _pizzaItem; public Topping(IPizza pizzaItem) { this._pizzaItem = pizzaItem; } public abstract double CalculateCost(); } public class Pepporini : Topping { public Pepporini(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 0.50; } } public class Sausage : Topping { public Sausage(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + 1.00; } } public class Onions : Topping { public Onions(IPizza pizzaItem) : base(pizzaItem) { } public override double CalculateCost() { return this._pizzaItem.CalculateCost() + .25; } } }

    Read the article

  • how can i use switch statement on type-safe enum pattern

    - by Fer
    I found a goodlooking example about implementation enums in a different way. That is called type-safe enum pattern i think. I started using it but i realized that i can not use it in a switch statement. My implementation looks like the following: public sealed class MyState { private readonly string m_Name; private readonly int m_Value; public static readonly MyState PASSED= new MyState(1, "OK"); public static readonly MyState FAILED= new MyState(2, "ERROR"); private MyState(int value, string name) { m_Name = name; m_Value = value; } public override string ToString() { return m_Name; } public int GetIntValue() { return m_Value; } } What can i add to my class in order to be able to use this pattern in switch statements in C#? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Which is the better C# class design for dealing with read+write versus readonly

    - by DanM
    I'm contemplating two different class designs for handling a situation where some repositories are read-only while others are read-write. (I don't foresee any need to a write-only repository.) Class Design 1 -- provide all functionality in a base class, then expose applicable functionality publicly in sub classes public abstract class RepositoryBase { protected virtual void SelectBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void InsertBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void UpdateBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void DeleteBase() { // implementation... } } public class ReadOnlyRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } } public class ReadWriteRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } public void Insert() { InsertBase(); } public void Update() { UpdateBase(); } public void Delete() { DeleteBase(); } } Class Design 2 - read-write class inherits from read-only class public class ReadOnlyRepository { public void Select() { // implementation... } } public class ReadWriteRepository : ReadOnlyRepository { public void Insert() { // implementation... } public void Update() { // implementation... } public void Delete() { // implementation... } } Is one of these designs clearly stronger than the other? If so, which one and why? P.S. If this sounds like a homework question, it's not, but feel free to use it as one if you want :)

    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 | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >