| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments:
<0> It isn't, but it's closer to what I was saying than what you said is.
<1> it's a shame they lost work, but not that php is capable of that
<0> It could also happen to certain domains of normal programming, and already is doing.
<2> it is happening to much of the grunt work
<2> I'm not going to moan about the loss of the need to do work I detested doing anyway
<2> I write most code by hand. This doesn't mean I don't use the tools when it saves me time. I'l get the IDE to write getters and setters for me mostly. It does it quickly and easily. Why would I want to spend an hour typing that by hand?
<2> I think mainly it's the grunt work that's being done by the tools, leaving the programmers/designers to get on with the interesting/creative stuff. I think it's great
<2> luckily I virtually never have to do UI design. I **** at it :)
<2> for the quick hacks I generally have to do for UI it's fine to do getContentPane().setLayout(null); You can't really do that for "real" work though :)
<0> If your code has so many getters and setters, then perhaps you're in the wrong programming language.
<2> happily, the IDEs now produce reqasonable code in the drag and drool UI builder things
<2> rickety: I have a Patient cl***. It has about 40 fields. That's a lot of getters and setters to write by hand
<0> That's an insane number of fields. Surely some of those can be grouped logically and sent off to live in other objects.
<2> I let the UI write them, then I edit a few and I'm done. A couple of hours of uninteresting gruntwork saved
<0> Hell, why not just make the fields public?
<2> rickety: yes, they could. But why? For the domain it would just add complexity for no real advantage
<2> because that violates encapsulation...and some of them need to be range checked whilst setting
<2> and yes, some of them are groupes in other objects. Rather than have surname, forename, initials, title, there's a Name cl***
<2> lots of different things use Names
<2> Doctors have Names, Patients, NOKs, Users...
<2> that subcl*** makes sense
<2> stuff like diabeticFlag though, how can I put that in a different cl*** sanely?
<0> You're already violating encapsulation by providing getters/setters, possibly.
<2> how am I?
<0> cl*** Patient { Set<Disease> diseases; }
<0> Then if the patient has diabetes, patient.getDiseases().add(new Diabetes()); or something.
<0> Or you could still have Patient.setDiabetes(boolean hasDiabetes) and implement it internally as I just did.
<2> cl*** Patient { private boolean diabeticFlag; ... public boolean isDiabetic() { return diabeticFlag; }
<0> See, you can separate the implementation from the interface, it has some use sometimes.
<2> how does that violate encapsulation?
<2> sometimes, yes
<0> That cl*** needs editing whenever you want to support a new disease, or bit of information.
<0> In other words, it isn't scalable.
<0> 40 fields is probbaly on the edge, 400 fields or 4000 fields is silly.
<0> s/probbaly/probably/
<2> those fields are (mainly) pointers to rows in a database
<2> I *could* parcel them up and make the hierarchy nicely complex, but I'm not going to
<2> the Patient cl*** is quite big, but it's not complex
<2> I prefer big to complex, given the choice
<3> my application is done! hurrayy!
<3> \o/
<0> Actually, in general, complexity goes down as the number of types goes up.
<2> but not always
<3> what do you guys think? http://temp.corgrath.com/demo_ces.avi (or .mov)
<2> if a cl*** naturqally has 40 fields, I'm not going to artificially split it up for the sake of it
<4> smsie: agreed. but when such numbers are reached i'd consider harder and more often wether it is the right design.
<0> smsie: Right, but you could split it up for simplicity.
<1> smsie I agree
<2> rickety: in this case, there's no real simplicity to be achieved
<2> it already is simple
<5> bye
<5> good night
<2> you read a row of the database matching the patient you want, you set the fields, you read/update whatever is required, you commit() which writes it back. Simple and clean
<5> salam
<4> Bouncy: what's it for again?
<0> smsie: isDiabetic suggests you may have lots of isThings, all doing the same job, that might be better achieved through less repetitive code.
<3> Clackwell: cant you see? it will save me huge amount of time starting applications, instead of going via startmenu
<2> rickety: not really. isDiabetic is there because there's a sattelite system that only wants diabetic patient details. It's there for ease
<2> there's also isMale
<2> isBaby
<2> isMother
<2> they're useful things for the problem in this case
<4> Bouncy: a) there is keyboard shortcut support in windows, b) there are more powerful keyboard shortcut tools, c) java does not easily lend itself for small work on end user machines because it often weighs in so heavily on the memory.
<0> I'd have thought 'baby' is in the eye of the beholder, e.g., isBaby(){return age<5;}
<0> s/5/1/
<0> Rather than storing two values that might contradict each other.
<2> rickety: no, isBaby returns true IFF the patient is on a maternity ward and is <1
<0> smsie: Which is odd. ;)
<3> Clackwell: thanks for supporting my work by giving me pleasent and and warming comments.
<2> isBaby is worked out from other values, it's not a flag
<2> rickety: not really. One of the satellite systems needs to know
<4> Bouncy: if you want warmth, coziness and lunacy, this isn't always the right place. :)
<3> Clackwell: if you code just to earn $$$ then youre not a real coder.
<4> Bouncy: you should welcome reality checks.
<4> you possibly chose the wrong tool. be a man about it. :)
<2> isMale is worked out from Gender. isMother is worked out from Ward and whether there's a key in another table matching that patient
<0> smsie: Ok, you're obviously fairly closed-minded on this particular app.
<3> Clackwell: this is MY tool, which i created from scratch and have total control over.
<4> Bouncy: how much ram does the process take up? :)
<3> that?
<2> rickety: all this stuff is specifically designed so I can easily generate messages to tell sattelite systems stuff they want to know. It's not a general purpose Patient object, it exists in a specific domain, and it's designed for that domain
<3> around 15MB perhaps
<3> yea
<4> i wrote a little cache for our current project. i tried to keep it flexible and stored the (varying) values in a hashmap at first. the boss developer asked me to change this to having a subcl*** for each cache "type" and respective fields instead, to be more explicit, because otherwise, he argued, he'd have to carefully scan all the code where the cache cl*** is being used to know which values (and keys) are being used.
<3> Clackwell: obviously, apart from you, I code some stuff for fun and not only work. I love to code. Its just not my work.
<4> while more redundant, i tend to agree with him on accepting a little redundancy for a bit more explicitness.
<2> rickety: it's designed to read data from the database (which I don't control the structure of). I could make it all more generic, sure. But it buys me nothing and makes the whole thing harder to read
<0> If it's just a mapping to a database record, then yes, it will be as poor as the database is.
<0> If not worse.
<4> Bouncy: i fail to see what my person has to do with this. don't shoot the messenger. if you don't want to hear suggestions and people pointing out that you possible picked the wrong tool, regardless of the target audience of your solution, then...well, don't go public i guess. :)
<2> rickety: the database was first designed 10 years ago. Needs have changed a LOT since then. The database has never been redesigned to reflect this. Any and all attempts to suggest that this might be a plan are met with stunned silence at best and more likely hostility. I work with what I have
<4> by the way, for windows autohotkey is nice, for developers with keyboard macro, etc. needs. but it certainly lacks joe-average appeal.
<3> So this channel is only door to world-wide marketing? =) not a cousy basement somewhere where coders and can meet and just share funky apps with each other.
<2> "normalise the database? what's normalise mean?"
<6> Bouncy: now you're being childish
<6> at least IMO
<2> Bouncy: not at all. You are annoyed because we don't think your tool is useful to us? That's silly
<4> Bouncy: you shared and got feedback. i don't see the problem or reason to sulk.
<0> smsie: Normalisation is a fancy word meaning "remove duplicated data so that the DB can't contradict itself".
<3> I coded for myself. getting "[01:42] <4> Bouncy: a) there is keyboard shortcut support in windows, b) there are more powerful keyboard shortcut tools, c) java does not easily lend itself for small work on end user machines because it often weighs in so heavily on the memory." is more of a public release comment.
<3> anyway.
<2> rickety: I know :)
<0> smsie: So why ask?
<2> rickety: I didn't. Note the ""?
<0> smsie: I'm doing other things. ;)
<2> perhaps I should be more explicit. That's the reaction I get when I suggest that perhaps normalisation would be a good plan
<4> Bouncy: that's an interesting way to thank me for the insights that i shared with you, which i, by the way, gained through working on our current project for about two years.
<3> Clackwell: thank you for your comments.
<2> Bouncy: if you didn't want comments, why ask?
<0> Bouncy: Calm down dear, it's only an IRC channel.
<2> "it's a lovely tool. I'm sure it will gain you worldwide fame and recognition. Make sure you patent the idea!"
<0> smsie: What's a lovely tool?
<2> was that what you wanted?
<0> Oh, "" again.
<3> no
<2> well, what did you want?
<4> "if you don't have anything positive to say about my tool, don't say anything please."
<6> then say so up front.
<3> please dont put words in my mouth.
<2> I'm sure it's very clever. I just fail to see the need for it
<0> I just can't be bothered watching a .avi
<2> how did you say it got the list of commands to run?
<3> text-file
<3> with a propery-syntax
<2> oh
<2> so the user has to write the textfile?
<3> user, as in me, yes
<0> The user contacts Bouncy, who charges $10k.
<3> why charge myself?
<2> no way to glom it from the start menu tree?
<0> It increases your company's apparent revenue.
<3> well, i dont have a company.
<2> is there a java API for reading the registry?
<2> maybe you can pinch the values from there or something
<3> smsie: hm? gloom? you mean check the apps from your Applications folder in the start menu?
<2> or go on a trawl for .exes
<6> lol
<6> I thought it was actually searching the current PATH
<2> Bouncy: "glom": acquire by stealth. Basically be sneaky so you don't need a text file
<2> nah, the run command does that already
<3> sure but.. but i want to start the application with its name not its file. for example, Paint shop pro might have psp.exe, how would my app know "Paint Shop Pro" should exec psp.exe
<6> Bouncy: by skimming both the menu & the path ?
<7> Can someone answer an easy question for me please? When using the scanner cl*** to read a string from the keyboard I use vehicleMake = input.nextLine(); how do I read a char?
<3> All "files" in your Application-menu are a Windows .lnk files (shortcuts). Learning their format is just overkill, imo, for this.
<6> or the registry I suppose, but thats way beyond the Java scope and as such my personal interest at the moment.
Return to
#java
or
Go to some related
logs:
#AllNiteCafe
#chatzone
#linux
XieX 9
WHAT IS CONSIDERED THE MOST HIGHLY SPECIALISED MAMMAL ?
mmm-hmmm wav
TARGOVİSTE GİRLS
puiu codreanu manele
sid_meyer
#AllNiteCafe
|
|