Search Results

Search found 33509 results on 1341 pages for 'good practices'.

Page 115/1341 | < Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >

  • Java Date vs Calendar

    - by Marty Pitt
    Could someone please advise the current "best practice" around Date and Calendar types. When writing new code, is it best to always favour Calendar over Date, or are there circumstances where Date is the more appropriate datatype?

    Read the article

  • To be effective on your home projects is it better using the same technologies used at work?

    - by systempuntoout
    To be more productive and effective, is it better to start developing an home project using the same technologies used at work? 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

  • How to record different authentication types (username / password vs token based) in audit log

    - by RM
    I have two types of users for my system, normal human users with a username / password, and delegation authorized accounts through OAuth (i.e. using a token identifier). The information that is stored for each is quite different, and are managed by different subsytems. They do however interact with the same tables / data within the system, so I need to maintain the audit trail regardless of whether human user, or token-based user modified the data. My solution at the moment is to have a table called something like AuditableIdentity, and then have the two types inheriting off that table (either in the single table, or as two seperate tables with 1 to 1 PK with AuditableIdentity. All operations would use the common AuditableIdentity PK for CreatedBy, ModifiedBy etc columns. There isn't any FK constraint on the audit columns, so any text can go in there, but I want an easy way to easily determine whether it was a human or system that made the change, and joining to the one AuditableIdentity table seems like a clean way to do that? Is there a best practice for this scenario? Is this an appropriate way of approaching the problem - or would you not bother with the common table and just rely on joins (to the two seperate un-related user / token tables) later to determine which user type matches which audit records?

    Read the article

  • Is there a Standard or Best Practice for Perl Progams, as opposed to Perl Modules?

    - by swestrup
    I've written any number of perl modules in the past, and more than a few stand-alone perl programs, but I've never released a multi-file perl program into the wild before. I have a perl program that is almost at the beta stage and is going to be released open source. It requires a number of data files, as well as some external perl modules -- some I've written myself, and some from CPAN -- that I'll have to bundle with it so as to ensure that someone can just download my program and install it without worrying about hunting for obscure modules. So, it sounds to me like I need to write an installer to copy all the files to standard locations so that a user can easily install everything. The trouble is, I have no idea what the standard practice would be for this. I have found lots of tutorials on perl module standards, but none on perl program standards. Does anyone have any pointers to standard paths, installation proceedures, etc, for perl programs? This is going to be complicated by the fact that the program is multi-platform. I've been testing it in Linux, but its designed to work equally well in Windows.

    Read the article

  • Performance Related features for migration from .net 2003 Framework 1.1 to .net 2008 framework 3.5?

    - by KuldipMCA
    I am work on VB.net 2003 Framework 1.1 for last 3.5 years in windows Application. We are currently migrating to VB.net 2008 framework 3.5, but i don't know about the features which related to ADO.net and which is important to performance. I know linq to SQL but our architecture is made in .net 2003 so we should follow this. Any features which is very important to enhance the performance?

    Read the article

  • Only perform jquery effects/operations on certain pages

    - by Galen
    Up until now i've been dropping all my jquery code right inside the document.ready function. I'm thinking that for certain situations this isnt the best way to go. for example: If i want an animation to perform when a certain page loads what is the best way to go about that. $(document).ready(function() { $("#element_1").fadeIn(); $("#element_2").delay('100').fadeIn(); $("#element_3").delay('200').fadeIn(); }); If this is right inside of document.ready then every time ANY page loads it's going to check each line and look for that element. What is the best way to tell jquery to only perform a chunk of code on a certain page to avoid this issue.

    Read the article

  • Is jQuery always the answer?

    - by Kibbee
    I've come across a couple questions, such as this one, and I really have to wonder why "Use jQuery" seems to be the answer when somebody asks how to do something in JavaScript. I understand that jQuery can save you a lot of time, and can help you out a lot, especially when you are doing a lot of fancy JavaScript in your site. However, in instances like this, and in many other instances, it seems like it's just jumping around the problem instead of answering the question. I also feel like this builds too much dependency into libraries. I've seen way too many developers that simply rely too much on libraries, and if they encounter a situation where they didn't have the library, they would be completely unable to function. I feel like there are already enough developers who don't know JavaScript, without just telling everybody to not learn JavaScript, and use jQuery. So, just to reiterate the question. Do you think there's too much of a tendency to use jQuery, for small pieces of JavaScript, when most of the functionality of jQuery isn't being used. Should developers be fluent in the use of bare JavaScript so they don't get too dependent on using libraries? [Additional related conversation topic] Does the existence of jQuery give too much slack to web browser developers who write the JavaScript engines? If we just have workarounds to cover all the inconsistencies in JavaScript, what pressure is there on browser makers to ensure that their JavaScript library works as it should. I feel like this extrapolates the same problem discussed in SO Podcast #36 of "be conservative in what you send, liberal in what you accept". By being so liberal with bad JavaScript engines, and using a common library to work around the flaws, we are promoting their use, and extending the problem.

    Read the article

  • Is there a compelling reason to use quantifiers in Perl regular expressions instead of just repeatin

    - by Morinar
    I was performing a code review for a colleague and he had a regular expression that looked like this: if ($value =~ /^\d\d\d\d$/) { #do stuff } I told him he should change it to: if ($value =~ /^\d{4}$/) { #do stuff } To which he replied that he preferred the first for readability (I find the second more readable, but that's a religious debate I'll save for another day). My question: is there an actual benefit to one over the other?

    Read the article

  • Abstract Factory Using Generics: Is Explicitly Converting a Specified Type to Generic a Bad Practice

    - by Merritt
    The question's title says it all. I like how it fits into the rest of my code, but does it smell? public interface IFoo<T> { T Bar { get; set; } } public class StringFoo : IFoo<string> { public string Bar { get; set; } } public static class FooFactory { public static IFoo<T> CreateFoo<T>() { if (typeof(T) == typeof(string)) { return new StringFoo() as IFoo<T>; } throw new NotImplementedException(); } } UPDATE: this is sort of a duplicate of Is the StaticFactory in codecampserver a well known pattern?

    Read the article

  • "Nearly divisible"

    - by bobobobo
    I want to check if a floating point value is "nearly" a multiple of 32. E.g. 64.1 is "nearly" divisible by 32, and so is 63.9. Right now I'm doing this: #define NEARLY_DIVISIBLE 0.1f float offset = fmodf( val, 32.0f ) ; if( offset < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from above } // if it was 63.9, then the remainder would be large, so add some then and check again else if( fmodf( val + 2*NEARLY_DIVISIBLE, 32.0f ) < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from below } Got a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • C# - Removing event handlers - FormClosing event or Dispose() method

    - by Andy
    Suppose I have a form opened via the .ShowDialog() method. At some point I attach some event handlers to some controls on the form. e.g. // Attach radio button event handlers. this.rbLevel1.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel2.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel3.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); When the form closes, I need to remove these handlers, right? At present, I am doing this when the FormClosing event is fired. e.g. private void Foo_FormClosing(object sender, FormClosingEventArgs e) { // Detach radio button event handlers. this.rbLevel1.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel2.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel3.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); } However, I have seen some examples where handlers are removed in the Dispose() method. Is there a 'best-practice' way of doing this? (Using C#, Winforms, .NET 2.0) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Best approach for coding ?

    - by ahmed
    What should or how should I decide the best approach for coding as a smart programmer. I have just started programming last year in VB, and I keep on listening this statement. But I never could find by myself to choose the best approach for coding. When I search for a coding example on internet I find different types of approach to achieve the same target. So help me finding the best approach. (asp.net,vb.net)

    Read the article

  • Which is better Java programming practice for looping up to an int value: a converted for-each loop

    - by Arvanem
    Hi folks, Given the need to loop up to an arbitrary int value, is it better programming practice to convert the value into an array and for-each the array, or just use a traditional for loop? FYI, I am calculating the number of 5 and 6 results ("hits") in multiple throws of 6-sided dice. My arbitrary int value is the dicePool which represents the number of multiple throws. As I understand it, there are two options: Convert the dicePool into an array and for-each the array: public int calcHits(int dicePool) { int[] dp = new int[dicePool]; for (Integer a : dp) { // call throwDice method } } Use a traditional for loop. public int calcHits(int dicePool) { for (int i = 0; i < dicePool; i++) { // call throwDice method } } I apologise for the poor presentation of the code above (for some reason the code button on the Ask Question page is not doing what it should). My view is that option 1 is clumsy code and involves unnecessary creation of an array, even though the for-each loop is more efficient than the traditional for loop in Option 2. Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have.

    Read the article

  • JDBC/OSGi and how to dynamically load drivers without explicitly stating dependencies in the bundle?

    - by Chris
    Hi, This is a biggie. I have a well-structured yet monolithic code base that has a primitive modular architecture (all modules implement interfaces yet share the same classpath). I realize the folly of this approach and the problems it represents when I go to deploy on application servers that may have different conflicting versions of my library. I'm dependent on around 30 jars right now and am mid-way though bnding them up. Now some of my modules are easy to declare the versioned dependencies of, such as my networking components. They statically reference classes within the JRE and other BNDded libraries but my JDBC related components instantiate via Class.forName(...) and can use one of any number of drivers. I am breaking everything up into OSGi bundles by service area. My core classes/interfaces. Reporting related components. Database access related components (via JDBC). etc.... I wish for my code to be able to still be used without OSGi via single jar file with all my dependencies and without OSGi at all (via JARJAR) and also to be modular via the OSGi meta-data and granular bundles with dependency information. How do I configure my bundle and my code so that it can dynamically utilize any driver on the classpath and/or within the OSGi container environment (Felix/Equinox/etc.)? Is there a run-time method to detect if I am running in an OSGi container that is compatible across containers (Felix/Equinox/etc.) ? Do I need to use a different class loading mechanism if I am in a OSGi container? Am I required to import OSGi classes into my project to be able to load an at-bundle-time-unknown JDBC driver via my database module? I also have a second method of obtaining a driver (via JNDI, which is only really applicable when running in an app server), do I need to change my JNDI access code for OSGi-aware app servers?

    Read the article

  • Saving a reference to a int.

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    Here is a much simplified version of what I am trying to do static void Main(string[] args) { int test = 0; int test2 = 0; Test A = new Test(ref test); Test B = new Test(ref test); Test C = new Test(ref test2); A.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 B.write(); //Writes 1 should write 2 C.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 Console.ReadLine(); } class Test { int _a; public Test(ref int a) { _a = a; //I loose the reference here } public void write() { var b = System.Threading.Interlocked.Increment(ref _a); Console.WriteLine(b); } } In my real code I have a int that will be incremented by many threads however where the threads a called it will not be easy to pass it the parameter that points it at the int(In the real code this is happening inside a IEnumerator). So a requirement is the reference must be made in the constructor. Also not all threads will be pointing at the same single base int so I can not use a global static int either. I know I can just box the int inside a class and pass the class around but I wanted to know if that is the correct way of doing something like this? What I think could be the correct way: static void Main(string[] args) { Holder holder = new Holder(0); Holder holder2 = new Holder(0); Test A = new Test(holder); Test B = new Test(holder); Test C = new Test(holder2); A.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 B.write(); //Writes 2 should write 2 C.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 Console.ReadLine(); } class Holder { public Holder(int i) { num = i; } public int num; } class Test { Holder _holder; public Test(Holder holder) { _holder = holder; } public void write() { var b = System.Threading.Interlocked.Increment(ref _holder.num); Console.WriteLine(b); } } Is there a better way than this?

    Read the article

  • Legacy code - when to move on

    - by Mmarquee
    My team and support a large number of legacy applications all of which are currently functional but problematic to support and maintain. They all depend on code that the compiler manufacture has officially no support for. So the question is should we leave the code as is, and risk a new compiler breaking our code, or should we bite the bullet and update all the code?

    Read the article

  • Code Analysis - Treat as Error

    - by Brian Schmitt
    Looking to enable the "Enable code Analysis on Build" feature in Visual Studio. Obviously the Rules are a best practice, and I am working with an existing code base that currently fails many of the rules. I am looking for input as to which rules are the most egregious and should be treated as an Error.

    Read the article

  • What is best practice (and implications) for packaging projects into JAR's?

    - by user245510
    What is considered best practice deciding how to define the set of JAR's for a project (for example a Swing GUI)? There are many possible groupings: JAR per layer (presentation, business, data) JAR per (significant?) GUI panel. For significant system, this results in a large number of JAR's, but the JAR's are (should be) more re-usable - fine-grained granularity JAR per "project" (in the sense of an IDE project); "common.jar", "resources.jar", "gui.jar", etc I am an experienced developer; I know the mechanics of creating JAR's, I'm just looking for wisdom on best-practice. Personally, I like the idea of a JAR per component (e.g. a panel), as I am mad-keen on encapsulation, and the holy-grail of re-use accross projects. I am concerned, however, that on a practical, performance level, the JVM would struggle class loading over dozens, maybe hundreds of small JAR's. Each JAR would contain; the GUI panel code, necessary resources (i.e. not centralised) so each panel can stand alone. Does anyone have wisdom to share?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >