Search Results

Search found 5915 results on 237 pages for 'practices'.

Page 101/237 | < Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >

• What are the 'big' advantages to have Poco with ORM?

  - by bonefisher

  One advantage that comes to my mind is, if you use Poco classes for Orm mapping, you can easily switch from one ORM to another, if both support Poco. Having an ORM with no Poco support, e.g. mappings are done with attributes like the DataObjects.Net Orm, is not an issue for me, as also with Poco-supported Orms and theirs generated proxy entities, you have to be aware that entities are actually DAO objects bound to some context/session, e.g. serializing is a problem, etc..

  Read the article

• must have tools for better quality code

  - by leon

  I just started my real development career and I want to know what set of tools/strategy that the community is using to write better quality code. To start, I use astyle to format my code doxygen to document my code gcc -Wall -Wextra -pedantic and clang -Wall -Wextra -pedantic to check all warnings What tools/strategy do you use to write better code? This question is open to all language and all platform.

  Read the article

• anti-if campaign

  - by Andrew Siemer

  I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

  Read the article

• Multiple REPLACE function in Oracle

  - by Adnan

  I am using the REPLACE function in oracle to replace values in my string like; SELECT REPLACE('THE NEW VALUE IS #VAL1#','#VAL1#','55') from dual So this is OK to replace one value, but what about 20+, should I use 20+ REPLACE function or is there a more practical solution. All ideas are welcome.

  Read the article

• Why is hibernate open session in view considered a bad practice?

  - by HeDinges

  And what kind of alternative strategies do you use for avoiding LazyLoadExceptions? I do understand that open session in view has issues with: Layered applications running in different jvm's Transactions are committed only at the end, and most probably you would like the results before. But, if you know that your application is running on a single vm, why not ease your pain by using an open session in view strategy?

  Read the article

• Under what circumstances is jQuery's document.ready() not required?

  - by Phil.Wheeler

  While John Resig's recommendation is, quite rightly, to declare all events within a jquery.document.ready() function, I know that you don't actually have to put everything in there. In fact, there are cases where it may be more appropriate to deliberately put methods outside of the ready event. But what are those cases? Obviously best practice dictates that all events are declared within the ready event, so what would best practice be for declarations outside that event?

  Read the article

• Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

  - by Mendelt

  I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

  Read the article

• CSS selectors : should I minimise my use of the class attribute in the HTML or optimise the speed

  - by Laurent Bourgault-Roy

  As I was working on a small website, I decided to use the PageSpeed extension to check if their was some improvement I could do to make the site load faster. However I was quite surprise when it told me that my use of CSS selector was "inefficient". I was always told that you should keep the usage of the class attribute in the HTML to a minimum, but if I understand correctly what PageSpeed tell me, it's much more efficient for the browser to match directly against a class name. It make sense to me, but it also mean that I need to put more CSS classes in my HTML. It also make my .css file a little harder to read. I usually tend to mark my CSS like this : #mainContent p.productDescription em.priceTag { ... } Which make it easy to read : I know this will affect the main content and that it affect something in a paragraph tag (so I wont start to put all sort of layout code in it) that describe a product and its something that need emphasis. However it seem I should rewrite it as .priceTag { ... } Which remove all context information about the style. And if I want to use differently formatted price tag (for example, one in a list on the sidebar and one in a paragraph), I need to use something like that .paragraphPriceTag { ... } .listPriceTag { ... } Which really annoy me since I seem to duplicate the semantic of the HTML in my classes. And that mean I can't put common style in an unqualified .priceTag { ... } and thus I need to replicate the style in both CSS rule, making it harder to make change. (Altough for that I could use multiple class selector, but IE6 dont support them) I believe making code harder to read for the sake of speed has never been really considered a very good practice . Except where it is critical, of course. This is why people use PHP/Ruby/C# etc. instead of C/assembly to code their site. It's easier to write and debug. So I was wondering if I should stick with few CSS classes and complex selector or if I should go the optimisation route and remove my fancy CSS selectors for the sake of speed? Does PageSpeed make over the top recommandation? On most modern computer, will it even make a difference?

  Read the article

• Why do I need to give my options a value attribute in my dropdown? JQuery related.

  - by Alex

  So far in my web developing experiences, I've noticed that almost all web developers/designers choose to give their options in a select a value like so: <select name="foo"> <option value="bar">BarCheese</option> // etc. // etc. </select> Is this because it is best practice to do so? I ask this because I have done a lot of work with jQuery and dropdown's lately, and sometimes I get really annoyed when I have to check something like: $('select[name=foo]').val() == "bar"); To me, many times that seems less clear than just being able to check the val() against BarCheese. So why is it that most web developers/designers specify a value paramater instead of just letting the options actual value be its value? And yes, if the option has a value attribute I know I can do something like this: $('select[name=foo] option:contains("BarCheese")').attr('selected', 'selected'); But I would still really like to know why this is done. Thanks!!

  Read the article

• Is code clearness killing application performance?

  - by Jorge Córdoba

  As today's code is getting more complex by the minute, code needs to be designed to be maintainable - meaning easy to read, and easy to understand. That being said, I can't help but remember the programs that ran a couple of years ago such as Winamp or some games in which you needed a high performance program because your 486 100 Mhz wouldn't play mp3s with that beautiful mp3 player which consumed all of your CPU cycles. Now I run Media Player (or whatever), start playing an mp3 and it eats up a 25-30% of one of my four cores. Come on!! If a 486 can do it, how can the playback take up so much processor to do the same? I'm a developer myself, and I always used to advise: keep your code simple, don't prematurely optimize for performance. It seems that we've gone from "trying to get it to use the least amount of CPU as possible" to "if it doesn't take too much CPU is all right". So, do you think we are killing performance by ignoring optimizations?

  Read the article

• Are there any downsides in using C++ for network daemons?

  - by badcat

  Hey guys! I've been writing a number of network daemons in different languages over the past years, and now I'm about to start a new project which requires a new custom implementation of a properitary network protocol. The said protocol is pretty simple - some basic JSON formatted messages which are transmitted in some basic frame wrapping to have clients know that a message arrived completely and is ready to be parsed. The daemon will need to handle a number of connections (about 200 at the same time) and do some management of them and pass messages along, like in a chat room. In the past I've been using mostly C++ to write my daemons. Often with the Qt4 framework (the network parts, not the GUI parts!), because that's what I also used for the rest of the projects and it was simple to do and very portable. This usually worked just fine, and I didn't have much trouble. Being a Linux administrator for a good while now, I noticed that most of the network daemons in the wild are written in plain C (of course some are written in other languages, too, but I get the feeling that 80% of the daemons are written in plain C). Now I wonder why that is. Is this due to a pure historic UNIX background (like KISS) or for plain portability or reduction of bloat? What are the reasons to not use C++ or any "higher level" languages for things like daemons? Thanks in advance! Update 1: For me using C++ usually is more convenient because of the fact that I have objects which have getter and setter methods and such. Plain C's "context" objects can be a real pain at some point - especially when you are used to object oriented programming. Yes, I'm aware that C++ is a superset of C, and that C code is basically C++. But that's not the point. ;)

  Read the article

• Can i change the view without changing the controller?

  - by Ian Boyd

  Pretend1 there is a place to type in a name:     Name: __________________ When the text box changes, the value is absorbed into the controller, who stores it in data model. Business rules require that a name be entered: if there is no text entered the TextBox should be colored something in the view to indicate baddness; otherwise it can be whatever color the view likes. The TextBox contains a String, the controller handles a String, and the model stores a String. Now lets say i want to improve the view. There is a new kind of text box2 that can be fed not only string-based keyboard input, but also an image. The view (currently) knows how to determine if the image is in the proper format to perform the processing required to extract text out of it. If there is text, then that text can be fed to the controller, who feeds it to the data model. But if the image is invalid, e.g.3 wrong file format invalid dimensions invalid bit depth unhandled or unknown encoding format missing or incorrectly located registration marks contents not recognizable the view can show something to the user that the image is bad. But the telling the user that something is bad is supposed to be the job of the controller. i'm, of course, not going to re-write the controller to handle Image based text-input (e.g. image based names). a. the code is binary locked inside a GUI widget4 b. there other views besides this one, i'm not going to impose a particular view onto the controller c. i just don't wanna. If i have to change things outside of this UI improvement, then i'll just leave the UI unimproved5 So what's the thinking on having different views for the same Model and Controller? Nitpicker's Corner 1 contrived hypothetical example 2 e.g. bar code, g-mask, ocr 3 contrived hypothetical reasons 4 or hardware of a USB bar-code scanner 5 forcing the user to continue to use a DateTimePicker rather than a TextBox

  Read the article

• True or False: Good design calls for every table to have a primary key, if nothing else, a running i

  - by Velika

  Consider a grocery store scenario (I'm making this up) where you have FACT records that represent a sale transaction, where the columns of the Fact table include SaleItemFact Table ------------------ CustomerID ProductID Price DistributorID DateOfSale Etc Etc Etc Even if there are duplicates in the table when you consider ALL the keys, I would contend that a surrogate running numeric key (i.e. identity column) should be made up, e.g., TransactionNumber of type Integer. I can see someone arguing that a Fact table might not have a unique key (though I'd invent one and waste the 4 bytes, but how about a dimension table?

  Read the article

• GWT use of interface instead of widget

  - by Yannick Eurin

  Hello, in a définition of a widget, what is a better practice, and why, use the widget himself or the type "higher", example, it's a better practice to do 1) Button myButton; or 2) Hastext myButton; (and set a button later) thanks for your answer.

  Read the article

• Giving the script tag an ID

  - by The Code Pimp

  Hi guys, i came across a scenario where giving a <script> element an "ID" would solve a problem easily. However, after reading about the script tag at w3schools and quirksmode, it seems doing so could have some unforeseen consequences. Has anyone come across any of these issues with modern browsers such as Chrome, Safari, FF3 up and IE 7 up? Thanks

  Read the article

• Observer pattern and violation of Single Responsibility Principle

  - by Devil Jin

  I have an applet which repaints itself once the text has changed Design 1: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet implements Listener{ private DynamicText text = null; public void init(){ text = new DynamicText("Welcome"); } public void paint(Graphics g){ g.drawString(text.getText(), 50, 30); } //implement Listener update() method public void update(){ repaint(); } } //DynamicText.java public class DynamicText implements Publisher{ // implements Publisher interface methods //notify listeners whenever text changes } Isn't this a violation of Single Responsibility Principle where my Applet not only acts as Applet but also has to do Listener job. Same way DynamicText class not only generates the dynamic text but updates the registered listeners. Design 2: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet{ private AppletListener appLstnr = null; public void init(){ appLstnr = new AppletListener(this); // applet stuff } } // AppletListener.java public class AppletListener implements Listener{ private Applet applet = null; public AppletListener(Applet applet){ this.applet = applet; } public void update(){ this.applet.repaint(); } } // DynamicText public class DynamicText{ private TextPublisher textPblshr = null; public DynamicText(TextPublisher txtPblshr){ this.textPblshr = txtPblshr; } // call textPblshr.notifyListeners whenever text changes } public class TextPublisher implments Publisher{ // implements publisher interface methods } Q1. Is design 1 a SPR violation? Q2. Is composition a better choice here to remove SPR violation as in design 2.

  Read the article

• Howto mix TDD and RAII

  - by f4

  I'm trying to make extensive tests for my new project but I have a problem. Basically I want to test MyClass. MyClass makes use of several other class which I don't need/want to do their job for the purpose of the test. So I created mocks (I use gtest and gmock for testing) But MyClass instantiate everything it needs in it's constructor and release it in the destructor. That's RAII I think. So I thought, I should create some kind of factory, which creates everything and gives it to MyClass's constructor. That factory could have it's fake for testing purposes. But's thats no longer RAII right? Then what's the good solution here?

  Read the article

• Is VERIFY(...) a good practice in C++ coding?

  - by sevaxx

  Also, how does it compare to throwing an exception when something goes wrong ?

  Read the article

• Doing a ajax / json add to database, and have a "wait doing operation" icon

  - by Dejan.S

  Hi. I got a part on my page I want to improve. It's a file upload that users can add their contacts from files like excel, csv & outlook. I read the contacts and place them in the database, so what I would like to do is to have a regular icon that spins while that operation is doing that, how could I do that? Ajax? I don't want progress bar for the file upload but the operation for reading the file EDIT: I want to know how to make this work with the add to database using ajax. like should I use a updatepanel? Thanks

  Read the article

• Are regexes really maintainable?

  - by Rich Bradshaw

  Any code I've seen that uses Regexes tends to use them as a black box: Put in string Magic Regex Get out string This doesn't seem a particularly good idea to use in production code, as even a small change can often result in a completely different regex. Apart from cases where the standard is permanent and unchanging, are regexes the way to do things, or is it better to try different methods?

  Read the article

• C# 4.0 Named Parameters - should they always be used when calling non-Framework methods?

  - by David Neale

  I really this is a hugely subjective topic but here is my current take: When calling methods which do not form part of the .NET BCL named parameters should always be used as the method signatures may well change, especially during the development cycle of my own applications. Although they might appear more verbose they are also far clearer. Is the above a reasonable approach to calling methods or have I overlooked something fundamental?

  Read the article

• Javascript clarity of purpose

  - by JesDaw

  Javascript usage has gotten remarkably more sophisticated and powerful in the past five years. One aspect of this sort of functional programming I struggle with, esp with Javascript’s peculiarities, is how to make clear either through comments or code just what is happening. Often this sort of code takes a while to decipher, even if you understand the prototypal, first-class functional Javascript way. Any thoughts or techniques for making perfectly clear what your code does and how in Javascript? I've asked this question elsewhere, but haven't gotten much response.

  Read the article

• When are global variables acceptable?

  - by dsimcha

  Everyone here seems to hate global variables, but I see at least one very reasonable use for them: They are great for holding program parameters that are determined at program initialization and not modified afterwords. Do you agree that this is an exception to the "globals are evil" rule? Is there any other exception that you can think of, besides in quick and dirty throwaway code where basically anything goes? If not, why are globals so fundamentally evil that you do not believe that there are any exceptons?

  Read the article

• Is it Bad Practice to use C++ only for the STL containers?

  - by gmatt

  First a little background ... In what follows, I use C,C++ and Java for coding (general) algorithms, not gui's and fancy program's with interfaces, but simple command line algorithms and libraries. I started out learning about programming in Java. I got pretty good with Java and I learned to use the Java containers a lot as they tend to reduce complexity of book keeping while guaranteeing great performance. I intermittently used C++, but I was definitely not as good with it as with Java and it felt cumbersome. I did not know C++ enough to work in it without having to look up every single function and so I quickly reverted back to sticking to Java as much as possible. I then made a sudden transition into cracking and hacking in assembly language, because I felt I was concentrated too much attention on a much too high level language and I needed more experience with how a CPU interacts with memory and whats really going on with the 1's and 0's. I have to admit this was one of the most educational and fun experiences I've had with computers to date. For obviously reasons, I could not use assembly language to code on a daily basis, it was mostly reserved for fun diversions. After learning more about the computer through this experience I then realized that C++ is so much closer to the "level of 1's and 0's" than Java was, but I still felt it to be incredibly obtuse, like a swiss army knife with far too many gizmos to do any one task with elegance. I decided to give plain vanilla C a try, and I quickly fell in love. It was a happy medium between simplicity and enough "micromanagent" to not abstract what is really going on. However, I did miss one thing about Java: the containers. In particular, a simple container (like the stl vector) that expands dynamically in size is incredibly useful, but quite a pain to have to implement in C every time. Hence my code currently looks like almost entirely C with containers from C++ thrown in, the only feature I use from C++. I'd like to know if its consider okay in practice to use just one feature of C++, and ignore the rest in favor of C type code?

  Read the article

• Opinions regarding C++ programming practice

  - by Sagar

  I have a program that I am writing, not too big. Apart from the main function, it has about 15 other functions that called for various tasks at various times. The code works just fine all in one file, and as it is right now. However, I was wondering if anyone had any advice on whether it is smarter/more efficient/better programming to put those functions in a separate file different from where main is, or whether it even matters at all. If yes, why? If no, why not? I am not new at C++, but definitely not an expert either, so if you think this question is stupid, feel free to tell me so. Thanks for your time!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >