logo
down
shadow

Is a huge class ok for the sake of simplicity?


Is a huge class ok for the sake of simplicity?

By : Li Zichen
Date : November 19 2020, 01:01 AM
seems to work fine Rather than pulling all the code into a new class, you could make a new class that itself contains no logic, but simply wraps around a Movie and exposes a large collection of methods that each call the neccesary methods on Movie and Decoder.
This is basically an implementation of the Facade Pattern:
code :


Share : facebook icon twitter icon
About redefining a name of Java method with a typo for simplicity sake

About redefining a name of Java method with a typo for simplicity sake


By : Mark Mettin
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
Hope that helps I'm really hoping that this post is a joke. I pity the poor person who would have to maintain that code in the future. How many misspellings do you want to support?
code :
public Company getComapny(){
public Company getCmopany(){
public Company getCompayn(){
public Company getCoampny(){
public Company getCimpany(){
public Company getCimapny(){
public Company getCimapyn(){
Base Entity class for the sake of ID in EF Code First

Base Entity class for the sake of ID in EF Code First


By : Alexander Lorenzo
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
should help you out Speaking from experience of this exact thing - yes it makes sense. Note that this EF base class doesn't have to be the heirarchical root though - it could inherit from a base class that implements things like INotifyPropertyChanged, IChangeTracking, etc. So your inheritance chain would look like this:
I have an image metadata database. For simplicity's sake, there are three tables: image, imageperson, and person

I have an image metadata database. For simplicity's sake, there are three tables: image, imageperson, and person


By : Kennylovesprograming
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
I hope this helps . Depending on the database you're using, you can accomplish this a couple of ways. Here's one option using COUNT with CASE:
code :
SELECT i.id
FROM image i
  JOIN imageperson ip ON i.id = ip.imageid
  JOIN person p ON ip.personid = p.id
GROUP BY i.id
HAVING COUNT(CASE WHEN p.id IN (5,6) THEN 1 END) = 2
Is it good practice to make a class abstract if I no other class in my application inherits from it, just for the sake o

Is it good practice to make a class abstract if I no other class in my application inherits from it, just for the sake o


By : Gabriel Inácio
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
I wish this help you If you want to prevent a class from being instantiated, you should make it static.
An abstract class that cannot be inherited doesn't really make sense.
Class for the sake of readability

Class for the sake of readability


By : Camilo Martinez
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
Does that help I'd make a PingResult class that contain the target ip, the result and maybe a timestamp
shadow
Privacy Policy - Terms - Contact Us © ourworld-yourmove.org