Search Results

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

Page 106/237 | < Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >

• Truth tables in code? How to structure state machine?

  - by HanClinto

  I have a (somewhat) large truth table / state machine that I need to implement in my code (embedded C). I anticipate the behavior specification of this state machine to change in the future, and so I'd like to keep this easily modifiable in the future. My truth table has 4 inputs and 4 outputs. I have it all in an Excel spreadsheet, and if I could just paste that into my code with a little formatting, that would be ideal. I was thinking I would like to access my truth table like so: u8 newState[] = decisionTable[input1][input2][input3][input4]; And then I could access the output values with: setOutputPin( LINE_0, newState[0] ); setOutputPin( LINE_1, newState[1] ); setOutputPin( LINE_2, newState[2] ); setOutputPin( LINE_3, newState[3] ); But in order to get that, it looks like I would have to do a fairly confusing table like so: static u8 decisionTable[][][][][] = {{{{ 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }}, {{ 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }}}, {{{ 0, 0, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}}, {{{{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}, {{{ 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}}; Those nested brackets can be somewhat confusing -- does anyone have a better idea for how I can keep a pretty looking table in my code? Thanks! Edit based on HUAGHAGUAH's answer: Using an amalgamation of everyone's input (thanks -- I wish I could "accept" 3 or 4 of these answers), I think I'm going to try it as a two dimensional array. I'll index into my array using a small bit-shifting macro: #define SM_INPUTS( in0, in1, in2, in3 ) ((in0 << 0) | (in1 << 1) | (in2 << 2) | (in3 << 3)) And that will let my truth table array look like this: static u8 decisionTable[][] = { { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}; And I can then access my truth table like so: decisionTable[ SM_INPUTS( line1, line2, line3, line4 ) ] I'll give that a shot and see how it works out. I'll also be replacing the 0's and 1's with more helpful #defines that express what each state means, along with /**/ comments that explain the inputs for each line of outputs. Thanks for the help, everyone!

  Read the article

• Saving a Django form with a Many2Many field with through table

  - by PhilGo20

  So I have this model with multiple Many2Many relationship. 2 of those (EventCategorizing and EventLocation are through tables/intermediary models) class Event(models.Model): """ Event information for Way-finding and Navigator application""" categories = models.ManyToManyField('EventCategorizing', null=True, blank=True, help_text="categories associated with the location") #categories associated with the location images = models.ManyToManyField(KMSImageP, null=True, blank=True) #images related to the event creator = models.ForeignKey(User, verbose_name=_('creator'), related_name="%(class)s_created") locations = models.ManyToManyField('EventLocation', null=True, blank=True) In my view, I first need to save the creator as the request user, so I use the commit=False parameter to get the form values. if event_form.is_valid(): event = event_form.save(commit=False) #we save the request user as the creator event.creator = request.user event.save() event = event_form.save_m2m() event.save() I get the following error: *** TypeError: 'EventCategorizing' instance expected I can manually add the M2M relationship to my "event" instance, but I am sure there is a simpler way. Am I missing on something ?

  Read the article

• typeof === "undefined" vs. != null

  - by Thor Thurn

  I often see JavaScript code which checks for undefined parameters etc. this way: if (typeof input !== "undefined") { // do stuff } This seems kind of wasteful, since it involves both a type lookup and a string comparison, not to mention its verbosity. It's needed because 'undefined' could be renamed, though. My question is: How is that code any better than this approach: if (input != null) { // do stuff } As far as I know, you can't redefine null, so it's not going to break unexpectedly. And, because of the type-coercion of the != operator, this checks for both undefined and null... which is often exactly what you want (e.g. for optional function parameters). Yet this form does not seem widespread, and it even causes JSLint to yell at you for using the evil != operator. Why is this considered bad style?

  Read the article

• Is it OK to write code after [super dealloc]? (Objective-C)

  - by Richard J. Ross III

  I have a situation in my code, where I cannot clean up my classes objects without first calling [super dealloc]. It is something like this: // Baseclass.m @implmentation Baseclass ... -(void) dealloc { [self _removeAllData]; [aVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [anotherVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [super dealloc]; } ... @end This works great. My problem is, when I went to subclass this huge and nasty class (over 2000 lines of gross code), I ran into a problem: when I released my objects before calling [super dealloc] I had zombies running through the code that were activated when I called the [self _removeAllData] method. // Subclass.m @implementation Subclass ... -(void) deallloc { [super dealloc]; [someObjectUsedInTheRemoveAllDataMethod release]; } ... @end This works great, and It didn't require me to refactor any code. My question Is this: Is it safe for me to do this, or should I refactor my code? Or maybe autorelease the objects? I am programming for iPhone if that matters any.

  Read the article

• Wait For Return Key Press Using Java Scanner

  - by Gordon

  What would be the best way to wait for a return key press from the user using the Java Scanner Class? In a command line tool I would like the user to confirm before carrying out an action. Please correct me if there a more standard way of doing this in a command line tool.

  Read the article

• How to use interfaces in exception handling

  - by vikp

  Hi, I'm working on the exception handling layer for my application. I have read few articles on interfaces and generics. I have used inheritance before quite a lot and I'm comfortable with in that area. I have a very brief design that I'm going to implement: public interface IMyExceptionLogger { public void LogException(); // Helper methods for writing into files,db, xml } I'm slightly confused what I should be doing next. public class FooClass: IMyExceptionLogger { // Fields // Constructors } Should I implement LogException() method within FooClass? If yes, than I'm struggling to see how I'm better of using an interface instead of the concrete class... I have a variety of classes that will make a use of that interface, but I don't want to write an implementation of that interface within each class. In the same time If I implement an interface in one class, and then use that class in different layers of the application I will be still using concrete classes instead of interfaces, which is a bad OO design... I hope this makes sense. Any feedback and suggestions are welcome. Please notice that I'm not interested in using net4log or its competitors because I'm doing this to learn. Thank you Edit: Wrote some more code. So I will implement variety of loggers with this interface, i.e. DBExceptionLogger, CSVExceptionLogger, XMLExceptionLogger etc. Than I will still end up with concrete classes that I will have to use in different layers of my application.

  Read the article

• Should a C++ constructor do real work?

  - by Wade Williams

  I'm strugging with some advice I have in the back of my mind but for which I can't remember the reasoning. I seem to remember at some point reading some advice (can't remember the source) that C++ constructors should not do real work. Rather, they should initialize variables only. The advice when on to explain that real work should be done in some sort of init() method, to be called separately after the instance was created. The situation is I have a class that represents a hardware device. It makes logical sense to me for the constructor to call the routines that query the device in order to build up the instance variables that describe the device. In other words, once new instantiates the object, the developer receives an object which is ready to be used, no separate call to object-init() required. Is there a good reason why constructors shouldn't do real work? Obviously it could slow allocation time, but that wouldn't be any different if calling a separate method immediately after allocation. Just trying to figure out what gotchas I not currently considering that might have lead to such advice.

  Read the article

• How do you determine how coarse or fine-grained a 'responsibility' should be when using the single r

  - by Mark Rogers

  In the SRP, a 'responsibility' is usually described as 'a reason to change', so that each class (or object?) should have only one reason someone should have to go in there and change it. But if you take this to the extreme fine-grain you could say that an object adding two numbers together is a responsibility and a possible reason to change. Therefore the object should contain no other logic, because it would produce another reason for change. I'm curious if there is anyone out there that has any strategies for 'scoping', the single-responsibility principle that's slightly less objective?

  Read the article

• Use the serialVersionUID or suppress warnings?

  - by Okami

  Dear all, first thing to note is the serialVersionUID of a class implementing Interface Serializable is not in question. What if we create a class that for example extends HttpServlet? It also should have a serialVersionUID. If someone knows that this object will never be serialized should he define it or add an annotation to suppress those warnings? What would you do and why? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Okami

  Read the article

• Is it better to adopt the same technologies used at work to be effective on your home projects ?

  - by systempuntoout

  Is it better to start developing an home project using the same technologies used at work to be more productive and effective? I'm not talking about a simple hello world web page but an home project with all bells and whistles that one day, maybe, you could sell on internet. This dilemma is often subject of flames between me and a friend. He thinks that if you want to make a great home-made project you need to use the same technologies used daily at work staying in the same scope too; for example, a c++ computer game programmer should develope an home-made c++ game. I'm pretty sure that developing using the same technologies used at work can be more productive at beginning, but surely less exciting and stimulating of working with other languages\ides\libraries out of your daily job. What's your opinion about that?

  Read the article

• Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

  - by Roman

  I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

  Read the article

• Displaying performance metrics in a modern web app?

  - by Charles

  We're updating our ancient internal PHP application at work. Right now, we gather extensive performance measurements on every pageview, and log them to the database. Additionally, users requested that some of the metrics be displayed at the bottom of the page. This worked out pretty well for us, because the last thing that the application does on every request is include the file containing the HTML footer. The updated parts of the application use an MVC framework and a Dispatch/Request/Response loop. The page footer is no longer the last thing done. In fact, it could very well be the first thing done, before the rest of the page is created. Because we can grab the Response before it's returned to the user, we could try to include placeholders for the performance metrics in the footer and simply replace them with the actual numbers, but this strikes me as a bad idea somehow. How do you handle this in your modern web app? While we're using PHP, I'm curious how it's done in a Ruby/Rails app, and in your favorite Python framework.

  Read the article

• DRY way of calling a method in every rails model

  - by Tim

  Along the same lines as this question, I want to call acts_as_reportable inside every model so I can do one-off manual reports in the console in my dev environment (with a dump of the production data). What's the best way to do this? Putting acts_as_reportable if ENV['RAILS_ENV'] == "development" in every model is getting tedious and isn't very DRY at all. Everyone says monkey patching is the devil, but a mixin seems overkill. Thanks!

  Read the article

• To "null" or not to "null" my class's attributes

  - by Helper Method

  When I write a class in Java, I like to initialize the attributes which are set to a default value directly and attributes which are set by the caller in the constructor, something like this: public class Stack<E> { private List<E> list; private size = 0; public Stack(int initialCapacity) { list = new ArrayList<E>(initialCapacity); } // remainder omitted } Now suppose I have a Tree class: public class Tree<E> { private Node<E> root = null; // no constructor needed, remainder omitted } Shall I set the root attribute to null, to mark that it is set to null by default, or omit the null value?

  Read the article

• Is Unit Testing worth the effort?

  - by The Talking Walnut

  I am working to integrate unit testing into the development process on the team I work on and there are some skeptics. What are some good ways to convince the skeptical developers on the team of the value of Unit Testing? In my specific case we would be adding Unit Tests as we add functionality or fixed bugs. Unfortunately our code base does not lend itself to easy testing.

  Read the article

• What are the pros and cons of putting as much logic as possible in a minimum(one-liners) piece of co

  - by Jonas42

  Is it cool? IMO one-liners reduces the readability and makes debugging/understanding more difficult.

  Read the article

• Is Area what I am looking for?

  - by Dejan.S

  Hi I'm new to MVC2 or MVC in general. I'm gone do basic app with a backend. Now I been thinking about how I should do with the folders, views, controllers & routes for the AdminFolder. Now I just saw something called Areas. Is that a way to go for me?

  Read the article

• Should frontend and backend be handled by different controllers?

  - by DR

  In my previous learning projects I always used a single controller, but now I wonder if that is good practice or even always possible. In all RESTful Rails tutorials the controllers have a show, an edit and an index view. If an authorized user is logged on, the edit view becomes available and the index view shows additional data manipulation controls, like a delete button or a link to the edit view. Now I have a Rails application which falls exactly into this pattern, but the index view is not reusable: The normal user sees a flashy index page with lots of pictures, complex layout, no Javascript requirement, ... The Admin user index has a completly different minimalistic design, jQuery table and lots of additional data, ... Now I'm not sure how to handle this case. I can think of the following: Single controller, single view: The view is split into two large blocks/partials using an if statement. Single controller, two views: index and index_admin. Two different controllers: BookController and BookAdminController None of these solutions seems perfect, but for now I'm inclined to use the 3rd option. What's the preferred way to do this?

  Read the article

• read files from directory and filter files from Java

  - by Adnan

  The following codes goes through all directories and sub-directories and outputs just .java files; import java.io.File; public class DirectoryReader { private static String extension = "none"; private static String fileName; public static void main(String[] args ){ String dir = "C:/tmp"; File aFile = new File(dir); ReadDirectory(aFile); } private static void ReadDirectory(File aFile) { File[] listOfFiles = aFile.listFiles(); if (aFile.isDirectory()) { listOfFiles = aFile.listFiles(); if(listOfFiles!=null) { for(int i=0; i < listOfFiles.length; i++ ) { if (listOfFiles[i].isFile()) { fileName = listOfFiles[i].toString(); int dotPos = fileName.lastIndexOf("."); if (dotPos > 0) { extension = fileName.substring(dotPos); } if (extension.equals(".java")) { System.out.println("FILE:" + listOfFiles[i] ); } } if(listOfFiles[i].isDirectory()) { ReadDirectory(listOfFiles[i]); } } } } } } Is this efficient? What could be done to increase the speed? All ideas are welcome.

  Read the article

• Haskel dot (.) and dollar ($) composition: correct use.

  - by Robert Massaioli

  I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

  Read the article

• How to insert an n:m-relationship with technical primary keys generated by a sequence?

  - by bitschnau

  Let's say I have two tables with several fields and in every table there is a primary key which is a technical id generated by a database sequence: table1 table2 ------------- ------------- field11 <pk> field21 <pk> field12 field22 field11 and field21 are generated by sequences. Also there is a n:m-relationship between table1 und table2, designed in table3: table3 ------------- field11 <fk> field21 <fk> The ids in table1 und table2 are generated during the insert statement: INSERT INTO table1 VALUES (table1_seq1.NEXTVAL, ... INSERT INTO table2 VALUES (table2_seq1.NEXTVAL, ... Therefore I don't know the primary key of the added row in the data-access-layer of my program, because the generation of the pk happens completely in the database. What's the best practice to update table3 now? How can I gain access to the primary key of the rows I just inserted?

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC Filters: How to set Viewdata for Dropdown based on action paramter

  - by CRice

  Hi, Im loading an entity 'Member' from its id in route data. [ListItemsForMembershipType(true)] public ActionResult Edit(Member someMember) {...} The attribute on the action loads the membership type list items for a dropdown box and sticks it in viewdata. This is fine for add forms, and search forms (it gets all active items) but I need the attribute to execute BASED ON THE VALUE someMember.MembershipTypeId, because its current value must always be present when loading the item (i.e. all active items, plus the one from the loaded record). So the question is, what is the standard pattern for this? How can my attribute accept the value or should I be loading the viewdata for the drop down in a controller supertype or during model binding or something else? It is in an attribute now because the code to set the viewdata would otherwise be duplicated in each usage in each action.

  Read the article

• How might a C# programmer approach writing a solution in javascript?

  - by Ben McCormack

  UPDATE: Perhaps this wasn't clear from my original post, but I'm mainly interested in knowing a best practice for how to structure javascript code while building a solution, not simply learning how to use APIs (though that is certainly important). I need to add functionality to a web site and our team has decided to approach the solution using a web service that receives a call from a JSON-formatted AJAX request from within the web site. The web service has been created and works great. Now I have been tasked with writing the javascript/html side of the solution. If I were solving this problem in C#, I would create separate classes for formatting the request, handling the AJAX request/response, parsing the response, and finally inserting the response somehow into the DOM. I would build properties and methods appropriately into each class, doing my best to separate functionality and structure where appropriate. However, I have to solve this problem in javascript. Firstly, how could I approach my solution in javascript in the way I would approach it from C# as described above? Or more importantly, what's a better way to approach structuring code in javascript? Any advice or links to helpful material on the web would be greatly appreciated. NOTE: Though perhaps not immediately relevant to this question, it may be worth noting that we will be using jQuery in our solution.

  Read the article

• Best ways to reuse Java methods

  - by carillonator

  I'm learning Java and OOP, and have been doing the problems at Project Euler for practice (awesome site btw). I find myself doing many of the same things over and over, like: checking if an integer is prime/generating primes generating the Fibonacci series checking if a number is a palindrome What is the best way to store and call these methods? Should I write a utility class and then import it? If so, do I import a .class file or the .java source? I'm working from a plain text editor and the Mac terminal. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to nicely inform to the user that an unknown error has happened?

  - by Jaime Soriano

  There are several guidelines for error reporting, that are usually based on giving to the user useful information when he or she does something wrong, but to give this kind of information you need to be handling the error and know that it can happen. There are also tons of articles about designing 404 error pages. But, what can you do when it's a new, unhandled error provoked by a failure in the shoftware? Are there some guidelines about how to nicely report totally unexpected errors in a web site, as an unexpected error 500? What header message should be shown in that case? something like "Sorry, an unexpected error has ocurred" would be enough? What information should be given? Should it have mechanisms to help to report the failure to developers? Which ones?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >