Search Results

Search found 5915 results on 237 pages for '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 113/237 | < Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >

  • Are upper bounds of indexed ranges always assumed to be exclusive?

    - by polygenelubricants
    So in Java, whenever an indexed range is given, the upper bound is almost always exclusive. From java.lang.String: substring(int beginIndex, int endIndex) Returns a new string that is a substring of this string. The substring begins at the specified beginIndex and extends to the character at index endIndex - 1 From java.util.Arrays: copyOfRange(T[] original, int from, int to) from - the initial index of the range to be copied, inclusive to - the final index of the range to be copied, exclusive. From java.util.BitSet: set(int fromIndex, int toIndex) fromIndex - index of the first bit to be set. toIndex - index after the last bit to be set. As you can see, it does look like Java tries to make it a consistent convention that upper bounds are exclusive. My questions are: Is this the official authoritative recommendation? Are there notable violations that we should be wary of? Is there a name for this system? (ala "0-based" vs "1-based")

    Read the article

  • Number of characters recommended for a statement

    - by liaK
    Hi, I have been using Qt 4.5 and so do C++. I have been told that it's a standard practice to maintain the length of each statement in the application to 80 characters. Even in Qt creator we can make a right border visible so that we can know whether we are crossing the 80 characters limit. But my question is, Is it really a standard being followed? Because in my application, I use indenting and all, so it's quite common that I cross the boundary. Other cases include, there might be a error statement which will be a bit explanatory one and which is in an inner block of code, so it too will cross the boundary. Usually my variable names look bit lengthier so as to make the names meaningful. When I call the functions of the variable names, again I will cross. Function names will not be in fewer characters either. I agree a horizontal scroll bar shows up and it's quite annoying to move back and forth. So, for function calls including multiple arguments, when the boundary is reached I will make the forth coming arguments in the new line. But besides that, for a single statement (for e.g a very long error message which is in double quotes " " or like longfun1()->longfun2()->...) if I use an \ and split into multiple lines, the readability becomes very poor. So is it a good practice to have those statement length restrictions? If this restriction in statement has to be followed? I don't think it depends on a specific language anyway. I added C++ and Qt tags since if it might. Any pointers regarding this are welcome.

    Read the article

  • Rapid Opening and Closing System.IO.StreamWriter in C#

    - by ccomet
    Suppose you have a file that you are programmatically logging information into with regards to a process. Kinda like your typical debug Console.WriteLine, but due to the nature of the code you're testing, you don't have a console to write onto so you have to write it somewhere like a file. My current program uses System.IO.StreamWriter for this task. My question is about the approach to using the StreamWriter. Is it better to open just one StreamWriter instance, do all of the writes, and close it when the entire process is done? Or is it a better idea to open a new StreamWriter instance to write a line into the file, then immediately close it, and do this for every time something needs to be written in? In the latter approach, this would probably be facilitated by a method that would do just that for a given message, rather than bloating the main process code with excessive amounts of lines. But having a method to aid in that implementation doesn't necessarily make it the better choice. Are there significant advantages to picking one approach or the other? Or are they functionally equivalent, leaving the choice on the shoulders of the programmer?

    Read the article

  • MemoryStream instance timing help

    - by rod
    Hi All, Is it ok to instance a MemoryStream at the top of my method, do a bunch of stuff to it, and then use it? For instance: public static byte[] TestCode() { MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream(); ... ... whole bunch of stuff in between ... ... //finally using(m) { return m.ToArray(); } } Updated code public static byte[] GetSamplePDF() { using (MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream()) { Document document = new Document(); PdfWriter.GetInstance(document, m); document.Open(); PopulateTheDocument(document); document.Close(); return m.ToArray(); } } private static void PopulateTheDocument(Document document) { Table aTable = new Table(2, 2); aTable.AddCell("0.0"); aTable.AddCell("0.1"); aTable.AddCell("1.0"); aTable.AddCell("1.1"); document.Add(aTable); for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) { document.Add(new Phrase("Hello World, Hello Sun, Hello Moon, Hello Stars, Hello Sea, Hello Land, Hello People. ")); } } My point was to try to reuse building the byte code. In other words, build up any kind of document and then send it to TestCode() method.

    Read the article

  • The standard map/associative-array structure to use in flash actionscript 3?

    - by tstyle
    I'm relatively new to flash, and is confused about what I should use to store and retrieve key value pairs. After some googling I've found various map-like things to choose from: 1) Use a Object: var map:Object = new Object(); map["key"] = "value"; The problem is that it seems to lack some very basic features. For example to even get the size of map I'd have to write a util method. 2) Use a Dictionary What does this standard library class provide over the simple object? It seems silly for it to exist if it's functionally identical to Object. 3) Go download some custom HashMap/HashTable implementation from the web. I've used a lot of modern languages, and this is the first time I haven't been able to find a library implementation of an associative array within 5 minutes. So I'd like to get some best-practice advice from an experienced flash developer. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Returning back to the results after editing

    - by Parhs
    Hello, I am developing an application which has several CRUD actions... I am using Java and i am forced to use Struts framework. My problem is: I have a search page which returns some results.The user can click at a result and then he goes to another edit-page... He may apply changes or not...What i need is a way to return at the result page again and at the same scroll position.Javascript must be enabled for this project however.. I am wondering which is the best practice to achieve this effect... A solution would be to save the last search URL but i know that this wouldnt work if the user has multiple results. I know how to do it but i am lloking for a good practice!

    Read the article

  • java swt design patterns

    - by zachary
    What are some good design patterns for creating a form in java? I have an app that has 6 tabs with a different form in each. How does the typical java programmer go about making these items accessible? For example as a wpf programmer I might databind all these controls to underlying objects. What do java programmers like to do?

    Read the article

  • How to format dates in Jahia 6 CMS?

    - by dpb
    I am helping a friend of mine put up a site for his business. I’ve read different posts and sites trying to find the ideal CMS tool, but people have different views of what is the best, so I finally just picked one of them at random. So I went for an evaluation of Jahia 6.0-CE. As you’ve probably guessed by now, I don’t have so much experience with CMS tools. I just want to setup the CMS, write the templates for the site and let my friend manage the content from there on. So I extracted the sources from SVN and went for a test drive. I managed to create some simple templates to get a hang of things but now I have an issue with a date format. In my definitions.cnd I declared the field like so: date myDateField (datetimepicker[format='dd.MM.yyyy']) This is formatted in the page and the selector also presents this in the dd.MM.yyyy format when inserting the content. But how about sites in other countries, countries that represent the date as MM.dd.yyyy for example? If I specify the format in the CND, hard coded, how can I change this later on so that it adapts based on the browser’s language? Do I extract the content from the repository and format it by hand in the JSP template based on a Locale, or is there a better way? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • What's a unit test? [closed]

    - by Tyler
    Possible Duplicates: What is unit testing and how do you do it? What is unit testing? I recognize that to 95% of you, this is a very WTF question. So. What's a unit test? I understand that essentially you're attempting to isolate atomic functionality but how do you test for that? When is it necessary? When is it ridiculous? Can you give an example? (Preferably in C? I mostly hear about it from Java devs on this site so maybe this is specific to Object Oriented languages? I really don't know.) I know many programmers swear by unit testing religiously. What's it all about? EDIT: Also, what's the ratio of time you typically spend writing unit tests to time spent writing new code?

    Read the article

  • Which user account to assign as owner when attaching an SQL Server database?

    - by FreshCode
    This is a simple database security & performance question, but I've always used either a special user (eg. mydbuser), or Windows' built-in NETWORK SECURITY account as the owner when attaching databases to my SQL Server instances. When deploying my database to a production server, is there a specific user I should stick to or avoid? I would think that using an account with a set password could open the database up to a potential security issue.

    Read the article

  • Method returns an IDisposable - Should I dispose of the result, even if it's not assigned to anythin

    - by mjd79
    This seems like a fairly straightforward question, but I couldn't find this particular use-case after some searching around. Suppose I have a simple method that, say, determines if a file is opened by some process. I can do this (not 100% correctly, but fairly well) with this: public bool IsOpen(string fileName) { try { File.Open(fileName, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, FileShare.None); } catch { // if an exception is thrown, the file must be opened by some other process return true; } } (obviously this isn't the best or even correct way to determine this - File.Open throws a number of different exceptions, all with different meanings, but it works for this example) Now the File.Open call returns a FileStream, and FileStream implements IDisposable. Normally we'd want to wrap the usage of any FileStream instantiations in a using block to make sure they're disposed of properly. But what happens in the case where we don't actually assign the return value to anything? Is it still necessary to dispose of the FileStream, like so: try { using (File.Open(fileName, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, FileShare.None)); { /* nop */ } } catch { return true; } Should I create a FileStream instance and dispose of that? try { using (FileStream fs = File.Open(fileName, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, FileShare.None)); } ... Or are these totally unnecessary? Can we simply call File.Open and not assign it to anything (first code example), and let the GC dispose of it right away?

    Read the article

  • Where do I put the Current user query so as to not repeat per controller?

    - by Kevin
    I have a standard query that gets the current user object: @user = User.find_by_email(session[:email]) but I'm putting it as the first line in every single controller action which is obviously not the best way to do this. What is the best way to refactor this? Do I put this as a method in the Application controller (and if so, can you just show me a quick example)? Do I put the entire @user object into the session (has about 50 columns and some sensitive ones like is_admin)? Or is there another way to remove this kind of redundancy?

    Read the article

  • what if i keep my class members are public?

    - by anish
    In c++ instance variables are private by default,in Python variables are public by default i have two questions regarding the same:- 1: why Python have all the members are public by default? 2: People say you should your member data should be private what if i make my data to be public? what are the disadvantages of this approch? why it is a bad design?

    Read the article

  • Using a message class static method taking in an action to wrap Try/Catch

    - by Chris Marisic
    I have a Result object that lets me pass around a List of event messages and I can check whether an action was successful or not. I've realized I've written this code in alot of places Result result; try { //Do Something ... //New result is automatically a success for not having any errors in it result = new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { //Extension method that returns a Result from the exception result = exception.ToResult(); } if(result.Success) .... What I'm considering is replacing this usage with public static Result CatchException(Action action) { try { action(); return new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { return exception.ToResult(); } } And then use it like var result = Result.CatchException(() => _model.Save(something)); Does anyone feel there's anything wrong with this or that I'm trading reusability for obscurity?

    Read the article

  • Can I use an abstract class instead of a private __construct() when creating a singleton in PHP?

    - by Pheter
    When creating a Singleton in PHP, I ensure that it cannot be instantiated by doing the following: class Singleton { private function __construct() {} private function __clone() {} public static function getInstance() {} } However, I realised that defining a class as 'abstract' means that it cannot be instantiated. So is there anything wrong with doing the following instead: abstract class Singleton { public static function getInstance() {} } The second scenario allows me to write fewer lines of code which would be nice. (Not that it actually makes much of a difference.)

    Read the article

  • Is it considered bad practice to have ViewModel objects hold the Dispatcher?

    - by stiank81
    My WPF application is structured using the MVVM pattern. The ViewModels will communicate asynchronously with a server, and when the requested data is returned a callback in the ViewModel is triggered, and it will do something with this data. This will run on a thread which is not the UI Thread. Sometimes these callbacks involve work that needs to be done on the UI thread, so I need the Dispatcher. This might be things such as: Adding data to an ObservableCollection Trigger Prism commands that will set something to be displayed in the GUI Creating WPF objects of some kind. I try to avoid the latter, but the two first points here I find to be reasonable things for ViewModels to do. So; is it okay to have ViewModels hold the Dispatcher to be able to Invoke commands for the UI thread? Or is this considered bad practice? And why?

    Read the article

  • help me to choose between two designs

    - by alex
    // stupid title, but I could not think anything smarter I have a code (see below, sorry for long code but it's very-very simple): namespace Option1 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public AuxClass1 AuxClass { get { return _auxClass; } set { _auxClass = value; } } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } namespace Option2 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public string Field1 { get { return _auxClass.Field1; } set { _auxClass.Field1 = value; } } public void Method1() { _auxClass.Method1(); } public void Method2() { _auxClass.Method2(); } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { // Option1 Option1.MainClass mainClass1 = new Option1.MainClass(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Field1 = "string1"; mainClass1.AuxClass.Method1(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Method2(); // Option2 Option2.MainClass mainClass2 = new Option2.MainClass(); mainClass2.Field1 = "string2"; mainClass2.Method1(); mainClass2.Method2(); Console.ReadKey(); } } What option (option1 or option2) do you prefer ? In which cases should I use option1 or option2 ? Is there any special name for option1 or option2 (composition, aggregation) ?

    Read the article

  • Is there any difference between var name = function() {} & function name() {} in Javascript?

    - by Fletcher Moore
    Suppose we are inside a function and not in the global namespace. function someGlobalFunction() { var utilFunction1 = function() { } function utilFunction2 () { } utilFunction1(); utilFunction2(); } Are these synonymous? And do these functions completely cease to exist when someGlobalFunction returns? Should I prefer one or the other for readability or some other reason?

    Read the article

  • Generating new tasks in a foreach loop

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I know from the codeing guidlines that I have read you should not do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(i)); } Console.ReadLine(); as it will write 5 5's, I understand that and I think i understand why it is happening. I know the solution is just to do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { int localI = i; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(localI)); } Console.ReadLine(); However is something like this ok to do? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; currentTask.Start(); foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { task.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; } } or do i need to do this? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { Task localTask = task; currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { localTask.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; }

    Read the article

  • Validation - Data Integrity

    - by Thomas
    A table can only store 10 records in a particular state, 10 users over 30 years for example, the others must be less than 30 years. It is a business rule and as such should be respected. How to ensure that state? Think: multiple users accessing this table.

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