Search Results

Search found 13692 results on 548 pages for 'bad practices'.

Page 113/548 | < Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >

• Should ActionResult perform other tasks too

  - by Ori

  In Asp.net MVC one is encouraged to derive custom ActionResults, however should these classes handle other tasks unrelated to views, perhaps a EmailActionResult would render a view then send an email. What is best practice for the class ActionResult, is it only view specific? I want to keep things DRY too. Should the sending of the email be factored into a service class? perhaps using a filter would work. what are your thoughts?

  Read the article

• Avoid loading unnecessary data from db into objects (web pages)

  - by GmGr

  Really newbie question coming up. Is there a standard (or good) way to deal with not needing all of the information that a database table contains loaded into every associated object. I'm thinking in the context of web pages where you're only going to use the objects to build a single page rather than an application with longer lived objects. For example, lets say you have an Article table containing id, title, author, date, summary and fullContents fields. You don't need the fullContents to be loaded into the associated objects if you're just showing a page containing a list of articles with their summaries. On the other hand if you're displaying a specific article you might want every field loaded for that one article and maybe just the titles for the other articles (e.g. for display in a recent articles sidebar). Some techniques I can think of: Don't worry about it, just load everything from the database every time. Have several different, possibly inherited, classes for each table and create the appropriate one for the situation (e.g. SummaryArticle, FullArticle). Use one class but set unused properties to null at creation if that field is not needed and be careful. Give the objects access to the database so they can load some fields on demand. Something else? All of the above seem to have fairly major disadvantages. I'm fairly new to programming, very new to OOP and totally new to databases so I might be completely missing the obvious answer here. :)

  Read the article

• Password reset by email without a database table

  - by jpatokal

  The normal flow for resetting a user's password by mail is this: Generate a random string and store it in a database table Email string to user User clicks on link containing string String is validated against database; if it matches, user's pw is reset However, maintaining a table and expiring old strings etc seems like a bit of an unnecessary hassle. Are there any obvious flaws in this alternative approach? Generate a MD5 hash of the user's existing password Email hash string to user User clicks on link containing string String is validated by hashing existing pw again; if it matches, user's pw is reset Note that the user's password is already stored in a hashed and salted form, and I'm just hashing it once more to get a unique but repeatable string. And yes, there is one obvious "flaw": the reset link thus generated will not expire until the user changes their password (clicks the link). I don't really see why this would be a problem though -- if the mailbox is compromised, the user is screwed anyway.

  Read the article

• What is the Proper approach for Constructing a PhysicalAddress object from Byte Array

  - by Paul Farry

  I'm trying to understand what the correct approach for a constructor that accepts a Byte Array with regard to how it stores it's data (specifically with PhysicalAddress) I have an array of 6 bytes (theAddress) that is constructed once. I have a source array of 18bytes (theAddresses) that is loaded from a TCP Connection. I then copy the 6bytes from theAddress+offset into theAddress and construct the PhysicalAddress from it. Problem is that the PhysicalAddress just stores the Reference to the array that was passed in. Therefore if you subsequently check the addresses they only ever point to the last address that was copied in. When I took a look inside the PhysicalAddress with reflector it's easy to see what's going on. public PhysicalAddress(byte[] address) { this.changed = true; this.address = address; } Now I know this can be solved by creating theAddress array on each pass, but I wanted to find out what really is the best practice for this. Should the constructor of an object that accepts a byte array create it's own private Variable for holding the data and copy it from the original Should it just hold the reference to what was passed in. Should I just created theAddress on each pass in the loop

  Read the article

• Best strategy for synching data in iPhone app

  - by iamj4de

  I am working on a regular iPhone app which pulls data from a server (XML, JSON, etc...), and I'm wondering what is the best way to implement synching data. Criteria are speed (less network data exchange), robustness (data recovery in case update fails), offline access and flexibility (adaptable when the structure of the database changes slightly, like a new column). I know it varies from app to app, but can you guys share some of your strategy/experience? For me, I'm thinking of something like this: 1) Store Last Modified Date in iPhone 2) Upon launching, send a message like getNewData.php?lastModifiedDate=... 3) Server will process and send back only modified data from last time. 4) This data is formatted as so: <+><data id="..."></data></+> // add this to SQLite/CoreData <-><data id="..."></data></-> // remove this <%><data id="..."><attribute>newValue</attribute></data></%> // new modified value I don't want to make <+, <-, <%... for each attribute as well, because it would be too complicated, so probably when receive a <% field, I would just remove the data with the specified id and then add it again (assuming id here is not some automatically auto-incremented field). 5) Once everything is downloaded and updated, I will update the Last Modified Date field. The main problem with this strategy is: If the network goes down when I am updating something = the Last Modified Date is not yet updated = next time I relaunch the app, I will have to go through the same thing again. Not to mention potential inconsistent data. If I use a temporary table for update and make the whole thing atomic, it would work, but then again, if the update is too long (lots of data change), the user has to wait a long time until new data is available. Should I use Last-Modified-Date for each of the data field and update data gradually?

  Read the article

• If terminating a hung thread is a good idea, how do I do it safely?

  - by Steve

  My Delphi program relies heavily on Outlook automation. Outlook versions prior to 2007-SP2 tend to get stuck in memory due to badly written addins and badly written Outlook code. If Outlook is stuck, calling CreateOleObject('Outlook.Application') or GetActiveObject ... doesn't return and keeps my application hanging till Outlook.exe is closed in the task manager. I've thought of a solution, but I'm unsure whether it's good practice or not. I'd start Outlook with CreateOleObject in a separate thread, wait 10 seconds in my main thread and if Outlook hangs (CreateOleObject doesn't return), offer the user to kill the Outlook.exe process from my program. But since I don't want to force the user to kill the Outlook.exe process, as an alternative I also need a way to kill the new thread in my program which keeps hanging now. Is this good practice? How can I terminate a hanging thread in Delphi without leaking memory?

  Read the article

• Should a Unit-test replicate functionality or Test output?

  - by Daniel Beardsley

  I've run into this dilemma several times. Should my unit-tests duplicate the functionality of the method they are testing to verify it's integrity? OR Should unit tests strive to test the method with numerous manually created instances of inputs and expected outputs? I'm mainly asking the question for situations where the method you are testing is reasonably simple and it's proper operation can be verified by glancing at the code for a minute. Simplified example (in ruby): def concat_strings(str1, str2) return str1 + " AND " + str2 end Simplified functionality-replicating test for the above method: def test_concat_strings 10.times do str1 = random_string_generator str2 = random_string_generator assert_equal (str1 + " AND " + str2), concat_strings(str1, str2) end end I understand that most times the method you are testing won't be simple enough to justify doing it this way. But my question remains; is this a valid methodology in some circumstances (why or why not)?

  Read the article

• When should I be cautious using data binding in .NET?

  - by Ben McCormack

  I just started working on a small team of .NET programmers about a month ago and recently got in a discussion with our team lead regarding why we don't use databinding at all in our code. Every time we work with a data grid, we iterate through a data table and populate the grid row by row; the code usually looks something like this: Dim dt as DataTable = FuncLib.GetData("spGetTheData ...") Dim i As Integer For i = 0 To dt.Rows.Length - 1 '(not sure why we do not use a for each here)' gridRow = grid.Rows.Add() gridRow(constantProductID).Value = dt("ProductID").Value gridRow(constantProductDesc).Value = dt("ProductDescription").Value Next '(I am probably missing something in the code, but that is basically it)' Our team lead was saying that he got burned using data binding when working with Sheridan Grid controls, VB6, and ADO recordsets back in the nineties. He's not sure what the exact problem was, but he remembers that binding didn't work as expected and caused him some major problems. Since then, they haven't trusted data binding and load the data for all their controls by hand. The reason the conversation even came up was because I found data binding to be very simple and really liked separating the data presentation (in this case, the data grid) from the in-memory data source (in this case, the data table). "Loading" the data row by row into the grid seemed to break this distinction. I also observed that with the advent of XAML in WPF and Silverlight, data-binding seems like a must-have in order to be able to cleanly wire up a designer's XAML code with your data. When should I be cautious of using data-binding in .NET?

  Read the article

• SOAP - Why do I need to query for the values for an update?

  - by Phill Pafford

  I'm taking over a project and wanted to understand if this is common practice using SOAP. The process that is currently in place I have to query all the values before I do an update cause I need to pass back all the values that are not being updated. Does this sound right? Example Values: fname=phill lname=pafford address=123 main phone:222-555-1212 So if I just wanted to update the phone number I need to query for the record, get all the values and submit these values for an update. Example Update Values: fname=phill lname=pafford address=123 main phone:111-555-1212 I just want to know if this is common practice or should I change the functionality of this?

  Read the article

• Specification: Use cases for CRUD

  - by Mario Ortegón

  I am writing a Product requirements specification. In this document I must describe the ways that the user can interact with the system in a very high level. Several of these operations are "Create-Read-Update-Delete" on some objects. The question is, when writing use cases for these operations, what is the right way to do so? Can I write only one Use Case called "Manage Object x" and then have these operations as included Use Cases? Or do I have to create one use case per operation, per object? The problem I see with the last approach is that I would be writing quite a few pages that I feel do not really contribute to the understanding of the problem. What is the best practice?

  Read the article

• Design patterns to avoid

  - by Brian Rasmussen

  A lot of people seem to agree, that the Singleton pattern has a number of drawbacks and some even suggest to avoid the pattern all together. There's an excellent discussion here. Please direct any comments about the Singleton pattern to that question. Are there other design patterns, that should be avoided or used with great care?

  Read the article

• Reverting after a merge, bad idea?

  - by Clean

  Hi, I'm a newcomer to subversion. Recently, I've done some development in two different branches, where one of the branches was a branch of the other branch. I've merged down some changes from the first branch down to the trunk. However, when trying to merge down changes from the other branch to trunk, everything went haywire. That is, I've had a lot of conflicts, some of which I resolved (but not commited) and some of which are not. What worse is, a lot of the changes I made to the branch were for some reason not merged into the trunk. Now, my only question is, can I just do a revert on my working copy to return the trunk into its previous state? That is, will I mess something up by doing this? My taught is to start all over again and do it more carefully "by hand". Thanx!

  Read the article

• How do you go from an abstract project description to actual code?

  - by Jason

  Maybe its because I've been coding around two semesters now, but the major stumbling block that I'm having at this point is converting the professor's project description and requirements to actual code. Since I'm currently in Algorithms 101, I basically do a bottom-up process, starting with a blank whiteboard and draw out the object and method interactions, then translate that into classes and code. But now the prof has tossed interfaces and abstract classes into the mix. Intellectually, I can recognize how they work, but am stubbing my toes figuring out how to use these new tools with the current project (simulating a web server). In my professors own words, mapping the abstract description to Java code is the real trick. So what steps are best used to go from English (or whatever your language is) to computer code? How do you decide where and when to create an interface, or use an abstract class?

  Read the article

• How to document object-oriented MATLAB code?

  - by jjkparker

  I'm writing a sizable application using object-oriented MATLAB, and this has gotten me thinking about how to document the code. If this was C, I would use Doxygen. For Java, I'd use JavaDoc. Both have mostly agreed-upon standards for how class and method documentation should look and what it should contain. But what about MATLAB code? The most I've seen in TMW's own classes is a short sentence or two at the top of the class, and I can't find any topics devoted to documenting sizable MATLAB applications. So how do you document your MATLAB classes? Any particular style issues or additional tools?

  Read the article

• Should image size be defined in the img tag height/width attributes or in CSS?

  - by Benjamin Manns

  Is it better coding practice to define an images size in the img tag's width and height attributes? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" width="740" height="382" alt="" /> Or in the CSS style with width/height? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" style="width:740px; height:382px;" alt="" /> Or both? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" width="740" height="382" style="width:740px; height:382px" alt="" />

  Read the article

• Repository vs Data Access

  - by vdh_ant

  Hi guys In the context of the n-tier application, is there a difference between what you would consider your data access classes to be and your repositories? I tend to think yes but I just wanted to see what other thought. My thinking is that the job of the repository is just to contain and execute the raw query itself, where as the data access class would create the context, execute the repository (passing in the context), handle mapping the data model to the domain model and return the result back up... What do you guys think? Also do you see any of this changing in a Linq to XML scenario (assuming that you change the context for the relevant XDocument)? Cheers Anthony

  Read the article

• Should I define a single "DataContext" and pass references to it around or define muliple "DataConte

  - by Nate Bross

  I have a Silverlight application that consists of a MainWindow and several classes which update and draw images on the MainWindow. I'm now expanding this to keep track of everything in a database. Without going into specifics, lets say I have a structure like this: MainWindow Drawing-Surface Class1 -- Supports Drawing DataContext + DataServiceCollection<T> w/events Class2 -- Manages "transactions" (add/delete objects from drawing) Class3 Each "Class" is passed a reference to the Drawing Surface so they can interact with it independently. I'm starting to use WCF Data Services in Class1 and its working well; however, the other classes are also going to need access to the WCF Data Services. (Should I define my "DataContext" in MainWindow and pass a reference to each child class?) Class1 will need READ access to the "transactions" data, and Class2 will need READ access to some of the drawing data. So my question is, where does it make the most sense to define my DataContext? Does it make sense to: Define a "global" WCF Data Service "Context" object and pass references to that in all of my subsequent classes? Define an instance of the "Context" for each Class1, Class2, etc Have each method that requires access to data define its own instance of the "Context" and use closures handle the async load/complete events? Would a structure like this make more sense? Is there any danger in keeping an active "DataContext" open for an extended period of time? Typical usecase of this application could range from 1 minute to 40+ minutes. MainWindow Drawing-Surface DataContext Class1 -- Supports Drawing DataServiceCollection<DrawingType> w/events Class2 -- Manages "transactions" (add/delete objects from drawing) DataServiceCollection<TransactionType> w/events Class3 DataServiceCollection<T> w/events

  Read the article

• Use of (non) qualified names

  - by AProgrammer

  If I want to use the name baz defined in package foo|bar|quz, I've several choices: provide fbq as a short name for foo|bar|quz and use fbq|baz use foo|bar|quz|baz import baz from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz (or an alias given in the import process) import all public symbols from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz For the languages I know, my perception is that the best practice is to use the first two ways (I'll use one or the other depending on the specific package full name and the number of symbols I need from it). I'd use the third only in a language which doesn't provide the first and hunt for supporting tools to write the import statements. And in my opinion the fourth should be reserved to package designed with than import in mind, for instance if all exported symbols start with a prefix or contains the name of the package. My questions: what is in your opinion the best practice for your favorite languages? what would you suggest in a new language? what would you suggest in an old language adding such a feature?

  Read the article

• Avoid writing SQL queries altogether in SSIS

  - by Jonn

  Working on a Data Warehouse project, the guy that gave us the tutorial advised that we stick to using SQL queries over defining a lot of data flow transformations, citing points like it'll consume a lot of memory on the ETL box so we'd rather leave the processing to the DB box. Is this really advisable? Where's the balance between relying on GUI tools over executing a bunch of SQL scripts on your Integration package? And honestly, I'd like to avoid writing SQL queries as much as I can.

  Read the article

• DateTime::Astro::Sunrise is giving bad values

  - by BozoJoe

  Using the example code included in the man page for DateTime::Astro::Sunrise I'm getting back ~14:00 for the sunrise and ~2:00 for the sunset. my machine's time and timezone are set correctly (AFAIK) Am I reading something wrong? 2am and 2pm are just so brutually wrong.

  Read the article

• bash: getting rid of '.' and '..' when looping over files that begin with '.' in a folder

  - by TheOsp

  I want to loop over the files that begin with '.' in directory x (x might be any path): $ for file in x/.* > do > echo -n $file" " > done x/. x/.. x/.a x/.b What is the best way to get rid of x/., and x/.. ?

  Read the article

• Extension methods for encapsulation and reusability

  - by tzaman

  In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself?

  Read the article

• In Java it seems Public constructors are always a bad coding practice

  - by Adam Gent

  This maybe a controversial question and may not be suited for this forum (so I will not be insulted if you choose to close this question). It seems given the current capabilities of Java there is no reason to make constructors public ... ever. Friendly, private, protected are OK but public no. It seems that its almost always a better idea to provide a public static method for creating objects. Every Java Bean serialization technology (JAXB, Jackson, Spring etc...) can call a protected or private no-arg constructor. My questions are: I have never seen this practice decreed or written down anywhere? Maybe Bloch mentions it but I don't own is book. Is there a use case other than perhaps not being super DRY that I missed? EDIT: I explain why static methods are better. .1. For one you get better type inference. For example See Guava's http://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/wiki/CollectionUtilitiesExplained .2. As a designer of the class you can later change what is returned with a static method. .3. Dealing with constructor inheritance is painful especially if you have to pre-calculate something.

  Read the article

• Large PHP arrays or MySQL temporary memory tables?

  - by Mads Jensen

  How would you temporarily store several thousands key => value or key => array pairs within a single process. Lookups on key will be done continuously within the process, and the data is discarded when the process ends. Should i use arrays? temporary MySQL tables? Or something in between?

  Read the article

• Really Java and Regex? "////" to match a single slash? Really?

  - by Soldier.moth

  I know that the following works but it is not that readable, is there any way to make it more readable in the code itself without the addition of a comment? //Start her off String sampleregex = "////"; if (input.matches(sampleregex)) //do something //do some more

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >