Search Results

Search found 674 results on 27 pages for 'refactor'.

Page 10/27 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• Colleague unwilling to use unit tests "as it's more to code"

  - by m.edmondson

  A colleague is unwilling to use unit tests and instead opting for a quick test, pass it to the users, and if all is well it is published live. Needless to say some bugs do get through. I mentioned we should think about using unit tests - but she was all against it once it was realised more code would have to be written. This leaves me in the position of modifying something and not being sure the output is the same, especially as her code is spaghetti and I try to refactor it when I get a chance. So whats the best way forward for me?

  Read the article

• .NET - refactoring code

  - by w0051977

  I have inherited and now further develop a large application consisting of an ASP.NET application, VB6 and VB.NET application. The software was poorly written. I am trying to refactor the code as I go along. The changes I am making are not live (they are contained in a folder on my development machine). This is proving to be time consuming and I am doing this along side other work which is the prioritiy. My question is: is this a practical approach or is there a better methodology for refactoring code? I don't have any experience with version control software or source control software and I am wandering if this is what I am missing. I am a sole developer.

  Read the article

• Scala factory pattern returns unusable abstract type

  - by GGGforce

  Please let me know how to make the following bit of code work as intended. The problem is that the Scala compiler doesn't understand that my factory is returning a concrete class, so my object can't be used later. Can TypeTags or type parameters help? Or do I need to refactor the code some other way? I'm (obviously) new to Scala. trait Animal trait DomesticatedAnimal extends Animal trait Pet extends DomesticatedAnimal {var name: String = _} class Wolf extends Animal class Cow extends DomesticatedAnimal class Dog extends Pet object Animal { def apply(aType: String) = { aType match { case "wolf" => new Wolf case "cow" => new Cow case "dog" => new Dog } } } def name(a: Pet, name: String) { a.name = name println(a +"'s name is: " + a.name) } val d = Animal("dog") name(d, "fred") The last line of code fails because the compiler thinks d is an Animal, not a Dog.

  Read the article

• How do you dive into large code bases?

  - by miku

  What tools and techniques do you use for exploring and learning an unknown code base? I am thinking of tools like grep, ctags, unit-tests, functional test, class-diagram generators, call graphs, code metrics like sloccount and so on. I'd be interested in your experiences, the helpers you used or wrote yourself and the size of the codebase, with which you worked with. I realize, that this is also a process (happening over time) and that learning can mean "can give a ten minute intro" to "can refactor and shrink this to 30% of the size". Let's leave that open for now.

  Read the article

• How to write good code with new stuff?

  - by Reza M.

  I always try to write easily readable code that is well structured. I face a particular problem when I am messing around with something new. I keep changing the code, structure and so many other things. In the end, I look at the code and am annoyed at how complicated it became when I was trying to do something so simple. Once I've completed something, I refactor it heavily so that it's cleaner. This occurs after completion most of the time and it is annoying because the bigger the code the more annoying it is the rewrite it. I am curious to know how people deal with such agony, especially on big projects shared between many people ?

  Read the article

• How to explain to non-technical person why the task will take much longer then they think?

  - by Mag20

  Almost every developer has to answer questions from business side like: Why is going to take 2 days to add this simple contact form? When developer estimates this task, they may divide it into steps: make some changes to Database optimize DB changes for speed add front end HTML write server side code add validation add client side javascript use unit tests make sure SEO is setup is working implement email confirmation refactor and optimize the code for speed ... These maybe hard to explain to non-technical person, who basically sees the whole task as just putting together some HTML and creating a table to store the data. To them it could be 2 hours MAX. So is there a better way to explain why the estimate is high to non-developer?

  Read the article

• Game-a-Week One Completed

  - by Matt Christian

  Last night I finished my Game-a-Week One and felt and extreme sense of accomplishment with what I finished in a single week. I removed all traces of the JigLibX code since it wasn't working properly due to my implementation and got my collision working thanks to some BoundingSpheres and Riemer's tutorials.  However, since the characters are Corndogs a rectangle bounding box would have made more sense although the bullets are only able to move forward currently. While developing it in a week was a challenge, developing it in a week while maintaining proper coding standards and clean, reusable code was damn near impossible.  It's possible my next step will be to either refactor it or move onto Game-a-Week Two. I will post a link to the game ZIP in the future.

  Read the article

• Why write clean, refactored code?

  - by Shamal Karunarathne

  Hi programming lovers, This is a question I've been asking myself for a long time. Thought of throwing out it to you. From my experience of working on several Java based projects, I've seen tons of codes which we call 'dirty'. The unconventional class/method/field naming, wrong way of handling of exceptions, unnecessarily heavy loops and recursion etc. But the code gives the intended results. Though I hate to see dirty code, it's time taking to clean them up and eventually comes the question of "is it worth? it's giving the desired results so what's the point of cleaning?" In team projects, should there be someone specifically to refactor and check for clean code? Or are there situations where the 'dirty' codes fail to give intended results or make the customers unhappy? Do feel free to comment and reply. And tell me if I'm missing something here. Thanks.

  Read the article

• When to decide to introduce interfaces (pure abstract base classes) in C++?

  - by Honza Brabec

  Assume that you are developing a functionality and are 90% sure that the implementation class will stay alone. If I was in this position in Java I would probably not use the interface right now to keep the things simple. In Java it is easy to refactor the code and extract the interface later. In C++ the refactoring is not always so easy. It may require replacing values with smart pointers (because of the introduction of polymorphism) and other non-trivial tasks. On the other hand I don't much like the idea of introducing virtual calls when I am 90% sure they won't be needed. After all speed is one of the reasons to prefer C++ over simpler languages.

  Read the article

• What approaches can I take to lower the odds of introducing new bugs in a complex legacy app?

  - by m.edmondson

  Where I work I often have to develop (and bug fix) in an old system (.NET 1) whos code is complete spaghetti - with little thought given to variable names, program structure nor comments. Because of this it takes me ages to understand what bits need changed, and I often 'break' the existing software because I've made a modification. I really really want to spend a couple of months (with colleagues) going through it to refactor but existing developers both can't see the need - nor think theres time for this (the system is massive). I dread having to work on its code as it takes days to fix something only to find out I've broken something else. This obviously makes me look incompetent - so how can I deal with this?

  Read the article

• Code refactoring with Visual Studio 2010 Part-4

  - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama

  I have been writing few post with code refactoring features in Visual Studio 2010. This post also will be part of series and this post will be last of the series. In this post I am going explain two features 1) Encapsulate Field and 2) Extract Interface. Let’s explore both features in details. Encapsulate Field: This is a nice code refactoring feature provides by Visual Studio 2010. With help of this feature we can create properties from the existing private field of the class. Let’s take a simple example of Customer Class. In that I there are two private field called firstName and lastName. Below is the code for the class. public class Customer { private string firstName; private string lastName; public string Address { get; set; } public string City { get; set; } } Now lets encapsulate first field firstName with Encapsulate feature. So first select that field and goto refactor menu in Visual Studio 2010 and click on Encapsulate Field. Once you click that a dialog box will appear like following. Now once you click OK a preview dialog box will open as we have selected preview reference changes. I think its a good options to check that option to preview code that is being changed by IDE itself. Dialog will look like following. Once you click apply it create a new property called FirstName. Same way I have done for the lastName and now my customer class code look like following. public class Customer { private string firstName; public string FirstName { get { return firstName; } set { firstName = value; } } private string lastName; public string LastName { get { return lastName; } set { lastName = value; } } public string Address { get; set; } public string City { get; set; } } So you can see that its very easy to create properties with existing fields and you don’t have to change anything there in code it will change all the stuff itself. Extract Interface: When you are writing software prototype and You don’t know the future implementation of that then its a good practice to use interface there. I am going to explain here that How we can extract interface from the existing code without writing a single line of code with the help of code refactoring feature of Visual Studio 2010. For that I have create a Simple Repository class called CustomerRepository with three methods like following. public class CustomerRespository { public void Add() { // Some code to add customer } public void Update() { //some code to update customer } public void Delete() { //some code delete customer } } In above class there are three method Add,Update and Delete where we are going to implement some code for each one. Now I want to create a interface which I can use for my other entities in project. So let’s create a interface from the above class with the help of Visual Studio 2010. So first select class and goto refactor menu and click Extract Interface. It will open up dialog box like following. Here I have selected all the method for interface and Once I click OK then it will create a new file called ICustomerRespository where it has created a interface. Just like following. Here is a code for that interface. using System; namespace CodeRefractoring { interface ICustomerRespository { void Add(); void Delete(); void Update(); } } Now let's see the code for the our class. It will also changed like following to implement the interface. public class CustomerRespository : ICustomerRespository { public void Add() { // Some code to add customer } public void Update() { //some code to update customer } public void Delete() { //some code delete customer } } Isn't that great we have created a interface and implemented it without writing a single line of code. Hope you liked it. Stay tuned for more.. Till that Happy Programming.

  Read the article

• Java dev learning Python: what concepts do I need to wrap my head around?

  - by LRE

  I've run through a few tutorials and written some small projects. I'm right in the middle of a small project now infact. All is going well enough thanks in no small part to Uncle Google (who usually points me to Stackoverflow ;-) Several times in the last few days I've found myself wondering "what am I missing?" - I feel that I'm still thinking in Java as I write in Python. This question over at StackOverflow is full of tips about what resources to read up on for learning Python, but I still feel that I'm a Java dev with a dictionary (pun unintended) to translate into Python. What I really want to do is refactor my head to be able to write Pythonic Python instead of Java disguised as Python (not that I want to loose my Java skills). So, the crux of my question is: what concepts does a Java dev really need to learn to think Pythonic? This includes anything that needs to be un-learnt. ps: I consider language syntax to not be particularly relevant to this question.

  Read the article

• Bringing in New Architecture During Maintenance on Legacy Systems

  - by Mike L.

  I have been tasked with adding some new features to a legacy ASP.NET MVC2 project. The codebase is a disaster and I want to write these new features with some thought behind the implementation and not just throw these new features into the mess. I would like to introduce things like dependency injection and the orchestrator pattern; just to the code that I am going to write. I don't have enough time to try to refactor the entire system. Is it OK to not be consistent with the rest of the codebase and add new features following different design principles? Should I not introduce new patterns and just get the features implemented? I feel like it might be confusing to the next person to see parts of the system using a design that other parts are not following.

  Read the article

• CAM XML Editor version 2.2.1 now available.

  - by drrwebber

  CAM Editor v2.2.1 release is now available. Lots of nice enhancements, CAMV performance boost and important bug fixes for DoD, NIEM and LEXS schema. Download is available from the CAM XML Editor Resource Site. The CAM editor is the leading open source XML Editor/Validation/Schema designer for rapidly building and deploying complete XML information exchanges. Provides a visual WYSIWYG structure with rule entry wizards and drag and drop dictionary components. Will import, analyze and refactor existing XML Schema. Oracle is a proud sponsor of the project and its use on the NIEM.gov initiative.Creates XSD schema + JAXB bindings, Mindmap or UML models (XMI), XML test suite examples, HTML documentation + spreadsheets (NIEM IEPDs). XSD schema export in default, flatten, NIEM, and OASIS modes. Generates canonical component dictionaries from schema sets, ERwin models, or spreadsheets.

  Read the article

• Harmful temptations in programming

  - by gaearon

  Just curious, what kinds of temptations in programming turned out to be really harmful in your projects? Like when you really feel the urge to do something and you believe it's going to benefit the project or else you just trick yourself into believing it is, and after a week you realize you haven't solved any real problems but instead created new ones or, in the best case, pleased your inner beast with no visible impact. Personally, I find it very hard to not refactor bad code. I work with a lot of bad legacy code, and it takes some deep breaths to not touch it when I have no tests to prove my refactoring doesn't not break anything. Another demon for me in user interface, I can literally spend hours changing UI layout just because I enjoy doing it. Sometimes I tell myself I'm working on usability, but the truth is just I love moving buttons around. What are your programming demons, and how do you avoid them?

  Read the article

• Java dev learning Python: what concepts do I need to wrap my head around?

  - by LRE

  I've run through a few tutorials and written some small projects. I'm right in the middle of a small project now infact. All is going well enough thanks in no small part to Uncle Google (who usually points me to Stackoverflow ;-) Several times in the last few days I've found myself wondering "what am I missing?" - I feel that I'm still thinking in Java as I write in Python. This question over at StackOverflow is full of tips about what resources to read up on for learning Python, but I still feel that I'm a Java dev with a dictionary (no pun intended) to translate into Python. What I really want to do is refactor my head to be able to write Pythonic Python instead of Java disguised as Python (not that I want to loose my Java skills). So, the crux of my question is: what concepts does a Java dev really need to learn to think Pythonic? This includes anything that needs to be un-learnt. ps: I consider language syntax to not be particularly relevant to this question.

  Read the article

• DDD / Layers and legacy systems

  - by CSM

  I have to refactor a complex C# app (many dialogs, mixed logic and so on). There is a part managing the communication with special hardware equipments (sending commands and receive data via asynchronous c# callbacks). The code is "spaghetti" with mixed UI/Logic/Communication/etc and my task is to split the layers in a DDD sense. So, to which layer belongs a callback driver routine? The callbacks are creating "bubbles" in the system, up to the UI layer and because of this I cannot enforce the essential principle that any element of a layer depends only on other elements in the same layer or on elements of the layers "beneath" it. Thank you in advance.

  Read the article

• Is having 'Util' classes a cause for concern? [closed]

  - by Matt Fenwick

  I sometimes create 'Util' classes which primarily serve to hold methods and values that don't really seem to belong elsewhere. But every time I create one of these classes, I think "uh-oh, I'm gonna regret this later ...", because I read somewhere that it's bad. But on the other hand, there seem to be two compelling (at least for me) cases for them: implementation secrets that are used in multiple classes within a package providing useful functionality to augment a class, without cluttering its interface Am I on the way to destruction? What you say !! Should I refactor?

  Read the article

• How should I write new code when the old codebase and the environment uses lots of globals in PHP

  - by Nicola Peluchetti

  I'm working in the Wordpress environment which itself heavily relies on globals and the codebase I'm maintaining introduces some more. I want this to change and so I'm trying to think how should I handle this. For the globals our code has introduced I think I will set them as dependencies in the constructor or in getter / setter so that I don't rely on them being globals and then refactor the old codebase little by little so that we have no globals. With Wordpress globals I was thinking to wrap all WP globals inside a Wrapper class and hide them in there. Like this class WpGlobals { public static function getDb() { global $wpdb; return $wpdb; } } Would this be of any help? The idea is that I centralize all globals in one class and do not scatter them through the code, so that if Wordpress kills one of them I need to modify code only in one place. What would you do?

  Read the article

• Strategies for porting application from Win32 API to GTK+

  - by Vitor Braga

  I have a legacy application written in C, using the raw Win32 API. The general level of abstraction is low and raw dependency on <windows.h> is common. I would like to port this application to GTK+. There are any kind of guidelines or best practices on how to do this? I've previously ported a MFC application to Qt, but the application was very abstracted - it draw it's own set of widgets, for example - and initial porting was very straightforward. I've been thinking at first using Wine to build a native Linux executable and then trying to slowly refactor it into a GTK+ app. Does some one have best practices or previous experiences to share about this?

  Read the article

• Why do i keep forgetting things? [closed]

  - by Mr.Anubis

  I am currently learning many things at the same time in C++ and coded many data structures and algorithms and some small applications. When I suddenly try to remember something that I coded many months ago, my mind completely goes blank. It's like I'll have to re-learn the whole thing. For example, recently I was thinking to refactor my BST data structure, when I realized that I don't even remember how I coded it or how does it works internally. Does this happen with many others? Or is it me only? How do I overcome this problem?

  Read the article

• Build graph of dependencies (calls) in javascript [on hold]

  - by Maximus

  I'm new to a project and I see that everything is so interwoven that small changes here makes stuff break there. I'd like to refactor it and separate into modules. For that I'm going to need a tool that can build a graph of dependencies (calls) to visualize the connections. There are many tools like that for languages like C#, but I've found little information about the available tools for JavaScript. Has anyone done something like this? What tools have you used?

  Read the article

• Finding the try for an except or finally [migrated]

  - by ?s?

  I'm dealing with some code that has fantastically long methods (10k lines!) and some odd use of try-finally and try-except blocks. Some of the latter are long by themselves, and don't always have the try at the start of the method. Obviously I'm trying to refactor the code, but in the meantime just being able to fix a couple of common pathologies would be much easier if I could jump to the start of a block and see what is happening there. When it's 20+ pages away finding it even with the CNPack rainbows is just tedious. I'm using D2010 and have GExperts (with DelForExp), CNPack and DDevExtensions installed, but I can't find anything that lets me jump from the try to the finally or back. Am I missing something? Is there another add-in that I can use that will get me this?

  Read the article

• Why not write all tests at once when doing TDD? [closed]

  - by RichK

  Possible Duplicate: Why not write all tests at once when doing TDD? The Red - Green - Refactor cycle for TDD is well established and accepted. We write one failing unit test and make it pass as simply as possible. What are the benefits to this approach over writing many failing unit tests for a class and make them all pass in one go. The test suite still protects you against writing incorrect code or making mistakes in the refactoring stage, and code coverage should be just as high, so what's the harm? Sometimes it's easier to write all the tests first as a form of 'brain dump' to quickly write down all the expected behavior in one go.

  Read the article

• Why not write all tests at once when doing TDD?

  - by RichK

  The Red - Green - Refactor cycle for TDD is well established and accepted. We write one failing unit test and make it pass as simply as possible. What are the benefits to this approach over writing many failing unit tests for a class and make them all pass in one go. The test suite still protects you against writing incorrect code or making mistakes in the refactoring stage, so what's the harm? Sometimes it's easier to write all the tests first as a form of 'brain dump' to quickly write down all the expected behavior in one go.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >