Is there any way to generate comments during serialization? I serialize some objects that I would like to decorate with comments.
The serializer does not support emitting comments. This is so because comments are a presentation detail and are not associated with a particular node. If you really want comments, you can create a YamlDocument, which allows you to add comments to it.
Related
Hybris tell us that Converters should use populators and not vice versa because can be critical for performance considerations.
But when I am digging in hybris code you can see populators like DefaultAbstractOrderEntryPopulator, ProductFeatureListPopulator which
are wiring converters.And I have also find Populators using other populators such as ProductPopulator.
I read the following links but I cannot find anything about using a converter inside a populator or populator inside of populators:
Wiki Hybris - Converters and Populators
Wiki Hybris - DTOS best practice
Wiki Hybris 6
so, can we use converters inside populator like Hybris does? and populators inside populators?
I would like to give my point of view to answer this question. One common mistake when working with converters and populators is to confuse them.
Converters creates a DTO and populators filling the DTO.
We have to be very careful when we are going to use a converter inside of a populator and to be completely sure that
we need to do that.
If we have a long chain of populators using converters we can have a performance risk. For instance
C1->P1->C2->P2->C3->P3....
I think the best practise to follow is:
1) Be aware of the converters are already done, and ckeck if we have to add our populator to an existing Converter
(for example using the modifyPopulatorList)
2) If our DTO has another dependency with other DTO
We should ask ourselves if that dependency it is really necessary.I will decide this according to if that second DTO is used in many places
or not.Because if you are the only one who use it maybe you can merge the properties in only one DTO and avoid to have two different converters.
3) Other possibility It is to use differents converter in parallel as we can see in
WIKI HYBRIS - Facades and DTOs
To sum up, the design of our converters and populators is our responsability, and we have to get the best design posible of them to avoid
performance problems.
Basically the way to do it is: never write a concrete converter class and never call a populator directly.
But this is how the product is built for extensibility and frankly you can do whatever you like.
I need to select a modeling method for documenting extensions to an existing collection of web services. The method/tool needs to be used by tech business analysts. The existing API is defined in XML Schema. XML Schema work well with the one exception. Take a PaymentInformation class as an example. One partner might accept Visa and Mastercard as an example. Another also excepts Amex. We want to be able to extend PaymentInformation for PartnerA and PartnerB.
class PaymentInformation
method // CASH,CC
ccNumber
ccType // MC,V,AMEX
class PaymentInformationPartnerA
method // CASH,CC,PAYPAL
ccNumber
ccType // MC, V
The problem with XML Schema is that to apply a restriction to a class requires redefining the whole type. This seems like a maintenance nightmare. UML doesn't seem to support restricted strings (patterns, length, etc). What tool/method do you recommend for this? We have a preference, but not a requirement for Eclipse IDE.
You can add an UML constraint or a condition on your class. This is either a graphical note or directly an information hand coded on the UML metamodel.
The UML model is already an XMI 2.1 therefore like a XML but using specific rules.
Don't do that. If PaymentInformationPartnerA extends PaymentInformation then for all uses of PaymentInformation you can use PaymentInformationPartnerA, whereas you are saying that for some uses ( assigning a value to ccType of "AMEX" ) it is not covariant.
You're probably better off putting the constraint as a pre-condition of the endpoint receiving the message rather than as a constraint on the message type itself.
I am using NHibernate for persistence, but i read somewhere that NHibernate acts as unitofwork container. So do i need to create a separate UnitOfWork implementation. ?
Or continue with Nhibernate's unitofwork.
You don't need to create separate UoW implementation.
I suggest you to read this post: nhibernate.info
According to Martin Fowler, the Unit of Work pattern "maintains a list of objects affected by a business transaction and coordinates the writing out of changes and the resolution of concurrency problems."
Nhibernate internally already implements this pattern tracking all the objects has been modified (added,updated,deleted). You don't need to do anything because it already use this pattern itself
just to make this concept clear it is like if for each row of your resultset there is a "magic" column that says if the row has been added,updated or deleted
This is an embarrassingly basic n-tier question.
I've created a DAL project in VS2008 with subsonic. It's got a widget class, a widgetcollection class, and a widgetcontroller class.
I've created my Business logic project (no I can't put it in the same tier) that references it. Using certain business criteria, it selects a collection of widgets in a function that returns a widgetcollection.
My question is: how does my GUI layer bind the collection to a grid? I know that the widgetcollection is a valid datasource for a datagrid, but how does the GUI layer know what a widget and widgetcollection are? Surely I don't have to reference the DAL from the GUI, that negates the whole point.
Firstly, I dont think this is an embarrasingly basic n-tier question.
It is a very interesting subject and one I attempted to stimulate discussion for in the old Subsonic Forums.
I share your reluctance to expose my GUI layer to the DAL.
My GUI layer only talks to BLL using the vocabulary and topics of my own Entity Model and only returns my own entities or lists or in some cases Data Tables.
My BLL only talks to a MAPping layer which maps Fetches,Saves etc to the appropriate DAL CRUD methods and converts the returned Subsonic types to my Entity types.
In doing this I was suprised at how much of Subsonic I had to duplicate and at times I felt I was going down the wrong road, I am feeling more comfortable with it now, though it still needs refactoring and refining.
For example, finding a flexible, generic means of indicating to my BLL which row(s) I wanted returned in a fetch was a challenge I hadn't expected and I finished up writing a generic queryClass with fluent interface which looks a lot like a Subsonic Select.
FWIW, I think you are headed down the right track, I guess what you have to do though is decide how you want to define those Subsonic types to your GUI.
Rob has an interesting discussion you may be interested in.
(using SubSonic 2.x) In my BLL classes I have a property which gives an object reference to the relevant DAL class. My UI form has a reference to the BLL class, so from the form I can address the DAL properties and methods via .BLL.DAL.xxxx
FWIW, I have never managed to successfully bind a SubSonic collection to a DataGridView. As alternatives, I sometimes use the collections .ToTable() method to create a DataTable and then bind to that, or alternatively I manually bind using .AddRow()
Look at the documentation for IBindingList Interface in MSDN, it has a pretty good sample.
Create, for example, a CustomersList class in your model that uses a Customer class in your BLL. Bind the grid to an instance of the CustomersList class. The presentation layer has no knowledge of the subsonic table classes.
You probably need to use an Interface. You can easily create an interface based off of the Widget in your Dal(right click on the class and create an Interface from the class). Next take the Interface and add it to your Business Logic Layer or a seperate project just for interfaces. Once you have done that you can add a reference to the Interface both in the DAL and in the GUI. This can also help if you ever change your data storage from a Database to XML etc. etc.
I designed a data model which is represented by an XSD scheme.
The data model also provides the types that are being used as web service parameters in a WSDL descriptor.
I would like to send the XSD scheme around and ask the people involved to peer review the data model.
What tool or presentation method would you suggest to be used as a basis for peer reviews? The data model should be readable for non-skilled people, at least when it comes to the semantic meanings of the parameters
Edit:
To be more specific: Of course, syntactically, the scheme validates. Actually I'm already working on code which is based on JAXB generated classes. My goal is
to freeze the data model and thus
the input parameters
to make sure
nothing got lost or forgotten from a
semantic (in the meaning of
business-relevant) point of view.
Edit 2
I've been thinking about how it probably would be best to spread a datamodel around. I'm thinking of something like a JavaDoc for XSD schemas. Anyone knows if something like that exists? Basically it would be done with a set of XSLTs, right?
I know the following tools that generate documentation from XML Schema files (XSD):
xs3p
XSLT stylesheet that generates single XHTML from XSD
xsddoc
free / LGPL
mainly XSLT based
JavaDoc like output
see xsddoc examples
xnsdoc
improved commercial version of xsddoc
free for personal/educational use
JavaDoc like output
XSDdoc 2.0
commercial
JavaDoc like output
For small a XML schema, I would probably suggest using the xs3p XSLT stylesheet. For more a complex schema, I suggest using xsddoc.
I recommend using the XSD for something. Specifically, show some actual applications, with examples as real code.
Actual applications are what make a schema interesting. The examples don't have to be big, sophisticated or completely realistic. They just have to compile. Other people will want to copy and paste the code samples.
These examples are the "hello world" of the schema. And they act as a kind of unit test for the schema.
The closest thing to Javadoc for an XML schema that I've seen is running the Javadoc tool on source generated from the schema. This requires two things: 1) That your schema has internal annotation elements documenting it, and that 2) your source generator uses those annotations as Javadoc elements.
The very useful Oxygen XML developer also supports generating documentation, see
http://www.oxygenxml.com/xml_schema_documentation.html
(commercial, but there's a fully functional 30 day trial available)
I'll try it out now, need a simple way to generate a document with all types and available xsd:documentation description as a simple interface description...
** Disclosure : I work for Innovasys, the producer of the documentation tool mentioned below *
You could take a look at Innovasys Document! X. As well as automatically generating a structured and linked page for every element, simple type, complex type, group and attribute group it will also generate linked XSD diagrams (including sequences/choice etc.) and structure tables that include the annotations from your XSDs and make sense of the relationships between the elements in your schemas. The output is template based so you can adapt it to your preferred style and structure. It will build output to web ready html or compiled help files.
Uniquely it also includes a WYSIWYG editor that allows you author additional content to supplement the stuff that's automatically generated and the annotations from the XSD source - so you can provide additional contextual information for your peer review. There is also a Community Extensions feature that allows people viewing the generated output to record comments and feedback and that can be viewed and actioned directly from within Document! X.