Search Results

Search found 6690 results on 268 pages for 'worst practices'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 103/268 | < Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >

  • Partial class or "chained inheritance"

    - by Charlie boy
    Hi From my understanding partial classes are a bit frowned upon by professional developers, but I've come over a bit of an issue; I have made an implementation of the RichTextBox control that uses user32.dll calls for faster editing of large texts. That results in quite a bit of code. Then I added spellchecking capabilities to the control, this was made in another class inheriting RichTextBox control as well. That also makes up a bit of code. These two functionalities are quite separate but I would like them to be merged so that I can drop one control on my form that has both fast editing capabilities and spellchecking built in. I feel that simply adding the code form one class to the other would result in a too large code file, especially since there are two very distinct areas of functionality, so I seem to need another approach. Now to my question; To merge these two classes should I make the spellchecking RichTextBox inherit from the fast edit one, that in turn inherits RichTextBox? Or should I make the two classes partials of a single class and thus making them more “equal” so to speak? This is more of a question of OO principles and exercise on my part than me trying to reinvent the wheel, I know there are plenty of good text editing controls out there. But this is just a hobby for me and I just want to know how this kind of solution would be managed by a professional. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using different numeric variable types

    - by DataPimp
    Im still pretty new so bear with me on this one, my question(s) are not meant to be argumentative or petty but during some reading something struck me as odd. Im under the assumption that when computers were slow and memory was expensive using the correct variable type was much more of a necessity than it is today. Now that memory is a bit easier to come by people seem to have relaxed a bit. For example, you see this sample code everywhere: for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) int? (-2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,648) for length? Isnt byte (0-255) a better choice? So Im curious of your opinion and what you believe to be best practice, I hate to think this would be used only because the acronym "int" is more intuitive for a beginner...or has memory just become so cheap that we really dont need to concern ourselves with such petty things and therefore we should just use long so we can be sure any other numbers/types(within reason) used can be cast automagically? ...or am Im just being silly by concerning myself with such things?

    Read the article

  • "requiresuniqueemail=true" implementation in asp.net site

    - by domineer
    Hi people I got a social networking site that is running live right now.The first time I launched my site I let requiresuniqueemail=false set-up on my web.config inorder for me to create dummy accounts for testing purposes and to start up the site you know.However the site is kind of stable right now w/ almost 5k members.So I would like to set-up the requiresuniqueemail to true so that users cannot reuse their existing email address and for me to make it sure that there will be unique email ad for each site user.I know the site got like 100 users with the same email address.My question is what could be the problem I'm going to face if I do this right now(requiresuniqueemail="true") and how to do this efficiently(without errors and if possible sitewide say in the global assax)?I tested and I already got an error if I logout an account.Like say a user try to click log-out this code runs: Dim d As DateTime = DateTime.Now.AddMinutes(-1 * Membership.UserIsOnlineTimeWindow) Dim theuser As MembershipUser = Membership.GetUser() theuser.LastActivityDate = d Membership.UpdateUser(theuser) If Not Cache(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") Is Nothing Then Cache.Remove(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") End If Then an exception occured on updateuser() function saying System.Configuration.Provider.ProviderException: The E-mail supplied is invalid. This is just one instance I know that I encountered a problem. Hoping to hear your ideas guys.....

    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

  • 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

  • Does it ever make sense to make a fundamental (non-pointer) parameter const?

    - by Scott Smith
    I recently had an exchange with another C++ developer about the following use of const: void Foo(const int bar); He felt that using const in this way was good practice. I argued that it does nothing for the caller of the function (since a copy of the argument was going to be passed, there is no additional guarantee of safety with regard to overwrite). In addition, doing this prevents the implementer of Foo from modifying their private copy of the argument. So, it both mandates and advertises an implementation detail. Not the end of the world, but certainly not something to be recommended as good practice. I'm curious as to what others think on this issue. Edit: OK, I didn't realize that const-ness of the arguments didn't factor into the signature of the function. So, it is possible to mark the arguments as const in the implementation (.cpp), and not in the header (.h) - and the compiler is fine with that. That being the case, I guess the policy should be the same for making local variables const. One could make the argument that having different looking signatures in the header and source file would confuse others (as it would have confused me). While I try to follow the Principle of Least Astonishment with whatever I write, I guess it's reasonable to expect developers to recognize this as legal and useful.

    Read the article

  • Preprocessor "macro function" vs. function pointer - best practice?

    - by Dustin
    I recently started a small personal project (RGB value to BGR value conversion program) in C, and I realised that a function that converts from RGB to BGR can not only perform the conversion but also the inversion. Obviously that means I don't really need two functions rgb2bgr and bgr2rgb. However, does it matter whether I use a function pointer instead of a macro? For example: int rgb2bgr (const int rgb); /* * Should I do this because it allows the compiler to issue * appropriate error messages using the proper function name, * not to mention possible debugging benefits? */ int (*bgr2rgb) (const int bgr) = rgb2bgr; /* * Or should I do this since it is merely a convenience * and they're really the same function anyway? */ #define bgr2rgb(bgr) (rgb2bgr (bgr)) I'm not necessarily looking for a change in execution efficiency as it's more of a subjective question out of curiosity. I am well aware of the fact that type safety is neither lost nor gained using either method. Would the function pointer merely be a convenience or are there more practical benefits to be gained of which I am unaware?

    Read the article

  • Should old/legacy/unused code be deleted from source control repository?

    - by Checkers
    I've encountered this in multiple projects. As the code base evolves, some libraries, applications, and components get abandoned and/or deprecated. Most people prefer to keep them in. The usual argument is that the code does not really take any space, it can be left alone until needed again. So a repository slowly turns into a cesspool of legacy code, where it's hard to find anything. Some people delete old code, since it creates clutter, raises more questions for new people, and you can restore any old snapshot of the code base anyway. However you can't always find the old code if you don't know where to look, as none of the (common) VCS I know offer search over the entire repository including all historical revisions, and the only way to search the old files is to check out the revision where the deleted file exists. What would be a good approach to repository management?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • How does the verbosity of identifiers affect the performance of a programmer?

    - by DR
    I always wondered: Are there any hard facts which would indicate that either shorter or longer identifiers are better? Example: clrscr() opposed to ClearScreen() Short identifiers should be faster to read because there are fewer characters but longer identifiers often better resemble natural language and therefore also should be faster to read. Are there other aspects which suggest either a short or a verbose style? EDIT: Just to clarify: I didn't ask: "What would you do in this case?". I asked for reasons to prefer one over the other, i.e. this is not a poll question. Please, if you can, add some reason on why one would prefer one style over the other.

    Read the article

  • Decimal rounding strategies in enterprise applications

    - by Sapphire
    Well, I am wondering about a thing with rounding decimals, and storing them in DB. Problem is like this: Let's say we have a customer and a invoice. The invoice has total price of $100.495 (due to some discount percentage which is not integer number), but it is shown as $100.50 (when rounded, just for print on invoice). It is stored in the DB with the price of $100.495, which means that when customer makes a deposit of $100.50 it will have $0.005 extra on the account. If this is rounded, it will appear as $0, but after couple of invoices it would keep accumulating, which would appear wrong (although it actually is not). What is best to do in this case. Store the value of $100.50, or leave everything as-is?

    Read the article

  • Scrum backlog sizing is taking forever

    - by zachary
    I work on a huge project. While we program we end up meeting for endless backlog sizing sessions where all the developers sit down with the team and size user stories. Scrum doubters are saying that this process is taking too long and development time is being wasted. My question is how long should it take to size a user story on average? And does anyone have any tips to make these sizing sessions go quicker?

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern [.net/c#]

    - by gsharp
    Hi We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-) Thanks for you help.

    Read the article

  • In .NET which loop runs faster for or foreach

    - by Binoj Antony
    In c#/VB.NET/.NET which loop runs faster for or foreach? Ever since I read that for loop works faster than foreach a long time ago I assumed it stood true for all collections, generic collection all arrays etc. I scoured google and found few articles but most of them are inconclusive (read comments on the articles) and open ended. What would be ideal is to have each scenarios listed and the best solution for the same e.g: (just example of how it should be) for iterating an array of 1000+ strings - for is better than foreach for iterating over IList (non generic) strings - foreach is better than for Few references found on the web for the same: Original grand old article by Emmanuel Schanzer CodeProject FOREACH Vs. FOR Blog - To foreach or not to foreach that is the question asp.net forum - NET 1.1 C# for vs foreach [Edit] Apart from the readability aspect of it I am really interested in facts and figures, there are applications where the last mile of performance optimization squeezed do matter.

    Read the article

  • Is "for(;;)" faster than "while (TRUE)"? If not, why do people use it?

    - by Chris Cooper
    for (;;) { //Something to be done repeatedly } I have seen this sort of thing used a lot, but I think it is rather strange... Wouldn't it be much clearer to say while (TRUE), or something along those lines? I'm guessing that (as is the reason for many-a-programmer to resort to cryptic code) this is a tiny margin faster? Why, and is it REALLY worth it? If so, why not just define it this way: #DEFINE while(TRUE) for(;;)

    Read the article

  • Atomic operations on several transactionless external systems

    - by simendsjo
    Say you have an application connecting 3 different external systems. You need to update something in all 3. In case of a failure, you need to roll back the operations. This is not a hard thing to implement, but say operation 3 fails, and when rolling back, the rollback for operation 1 fails! Now the first external system is in an invalid state... I'm thinking a possible solution is to shut down the application and forcing a manual fix of the external system, but then again... It might already have used this information (and perhaps that's why it failed), or we might not have sufficient access. Or it might not even be a good way to rollback the action! Are there some good ways of handling such cases? EDIT: Some application details.. It's a multi user web application. Most of the work is done with scheduled jobs (through Quartz.Net), so most operations is run in it's own thread. Some user actions should trigger jobs that update several systems though. The external systems are somewhat unstable. I Was thinking of changing the application to use the Command and Unit Of Work pattern

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >