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 116/268 | < Previous Page | 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Patterns for avoiding jQuery silent fails

    - by Matias
    Is there any good practice to avoid your jQuery code silently fail? For example: $('.this #is:my(complexSelector)').doSomething(); I know that every time this line get executed, the selector is intended to match at least one element, or certain amount of elements. Is there any standard or good way to validate that? I thought about something like this: var $matchedElements = $('.this #is:my(complexSelector)'); if ($matchedElements.length < 0) throw 'No matched elements'; $matchedElements.doSomething(); Also I think unit testing would be a valid option instead of messing the code. My question may be silly, but I wonder whether there is a better option than the things that I'm currently doing or not. Also, maybe I'm in the wrong way checking if any element match my selector. However, as the page continues growing, the selectors could stop matching some elements and pieces of functionality could stop working inadvertently.

    Read the article

  • Is it a good or bad practice to call instance methods from a java constructor?

    - by Steve
    There are several different ways I can initialize complex objects (with injected dependencies and required set-up of injected members), are all seem reasonable, but have various advantages and disadvantages. I'll give a concrete example: final class MyClass { private final Dependency dependency; @Inject public MyClass(Dependency dependency) { this.dependency = dependency; dependency.addHandler(new Handler() { @Override void handle(int foo) { MyClass.this.doSomething(foo); } }); doSomething(0); } private void doSomething(int foo) { dependency.doSomethingElse(foo+1); } } As you can see, the constructor does 3 things, including calling an instance method. I've been told that calling instance methods from a constructor is unsafe because it circumvents the compiler's checks for uninitialized members. I.e. I could have called doSomething(0) before setting this.dependency, which would have compiled but not worked. What is the best way to refactor this? Make doSomething static and pass in the dependency explicitly? In my actual case I have three instance methods and three member fields that all depend on one another, so this seems like a lot of extra boilerplate to make all three of these static. Move the addHandler and doSomething into an @Inject public void init() method. While use with Guice will be transparent, it requires any manual construction to be sure to call init() or else the object won't be fully-functional if someone forgets. Also, this exposes more of the API, both of which seem like bad ideas. Wrap a nested class to keep the dependency to make sure it behaves properly without exposing additional API:class DependencyManager { private final Dependency dependency; public DependecyManager(Dependency dependency) { ... } public doSomething(int foo) { ... } } @Inject public MyClass(Dependency dependency) { DependencyManager manager = new DependencyManager(dependency); manager.doSomething(0); } This pulls instance methods out of all constructors, but generates an extra layer of classes, and when I already had inner and anonymous classes (e.g. that handler) it can become confusing - when I tried this I was told to move the DependencyManager to a separate file, which is also distasteful because it's now multiple files to do a single thing. So what is the preferred way to deal with this sort of situation?

    Read the article

  • Is it advisable to have an interface as the return type?

    - by wb
    I have a set of classes with the same functions but with different logic. However, each class function can return a number of objects. It is safe to set the return type as the interface? Each class (all using the same interface) is doing this with different business logic. protected IMessage validateReturnType; <-- This is in an abstract class public bool IsValid() <-- This is in an abstract class { return (validateReturnType.GetType() == typeof(Success)); } public IMessage Validate() { if (name.Length < 5) { validateReturnType = new Error("Name must be 5 characters or greater."); } else { validateReturnType = new Success("Name is valid."); } return validateReturnType; } Are there any pitfalls with unit testing the return type of an function? Also, is it considered bad design to have functions needing to be run in order for them to succeed? In this example, Validate() would have to be run before IsValid() or else IsValid() would always return false. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Should I *always* import my file references into the database in drupal?

    - by sprugman
    I have a cck type with an image field, and a unique_id text field. The file name of the image is based on the unique_id. All of the content, including the image itself is being generated automatically via another process, and I'm parsing what that generates into nodes. Rather than creating separate fields for the id and the image, and doing an official import of the image into the files table, I'm tempted to only create the id field and create the file reference in the theme layer. I can think of pros and cons: 1) Theme Layer Approach Pros: makes the import process much less complex don't have to worry about syncing the db with the file system as things change more flexible -- I can move my images around more easily if I want Cons: maybe not as much The Drupal Way™ not as pure -- I'll wind up with more logic on the theme side. 2) Import Approach Pros: import method is required if we ever wanted to make the files private (we won't.) safer? Maybe I'll know if there's a problem with the image at import time, rather than view time. Since I'll be bulk importing, that might make a difference. if I delete a node through the admin interface, drupal might be able to delete the file for me, as well. Con: more complex import and maintenance All else being equal, simpler is always better, so I'm leaning toward #1. Are there any other issues I'm missing? (Since this is an open ended question, I guess I'll make it a community wiki, whatever that means.)

    Read the article

  • organizing unit test

    - by soulmerge
    I have found several conventions to housekeeping unit tests in a project and I'm not sure which approach would be suitable for our next PHP project. I am trying to find the best convention to encourage easy development and accessibility of the tests when reviewing the source code. I would be very interested in your experience/opinion regarding each: One folder for productive code, another for unit tests: This separates unit tests from the logic files of the project. This separation of concerns is as much a nuisance as it is an advantage: Someone looking into the source code of the project will - so I suppose - either browse the implementation or the unit tests (or more commonly: the implementation only). The advantage of unit tests being another viewpoint to your classes is lost - those two viewpoints are just too far apart IMO. Annotated test methods: Any modern unit testing framework I know allows developers to create dedicated test methods, annotating them (@test) and embedding them in the project code. The big drawback I see here is that the project files get cluttered. Even if these methods are separated using a comment header (like UNIT TESTS below this line) it just bloats the class unnecessarily. Test files within the same folders as the implementation files: Our file naming convention dictates that PHP files containing classes (one class per file) should end with .class.php. I could imagine that putting unit tests regarding a class file into another one ending on .test.php would render the tests much more present to other developers without tainting the class. Although it bloats the project folders, instead of the implementation files, this is my favorite so far, but I have my doubts: I would think others have come up with this already, and discarded this option for some reason (i.e. I have not seen a java project with the files Foo.java and FooTest.java within the same folder.) Maybe it's because java developers make heavier use of IDEs that allow them easier access to the tests, whereas in PHP no big editors have emerged (like eclipse for java) - many devs I know use vim/emacs or similar editors with little support for PHP development per se. What is your experience with any of these unit test placements? Do you have another convention I haven't listed here? Or am I just overrating unit test accessibility to reviewing developers?

    Read the article

  • Why would you precede the main() function in C with a data type?

    - by Milktrader
    Many are familiar with the hello world program in C #include <stdio.h> main () { printf ("hello world"); return 0; } Why do some precede the main () function with int as in: int main() Also, I've seen the word 'void' entered inside the () as in: int main(void) It seems like extra typing for nothing, but maybe it's a best practice that pays dividends in other situations? Also, why precede main() with an int if you're returning a character string? If anything, one would expect: char main(void) I'm also foggy about why we return 0 at the end of the function.

    Read the article

  • Java: Inputting text from a file using split

    - by 00PS
    I am inputting an adjacency list for a graph. There are three columns of data (vertex, destination, edge) separated by a single space. Here is my implementation so far: FileStream in = new FileStream("input1.txt"); Scanner s = new Scanner(in); String buffer; String [] line = null; while (s.hasNext()) { buffer = s.nextLine(); line = buffer.split("\\s+"); g.add(line[0]); System.out.println("Added vertex " + line[0] + "."); g.addEdge(line[0], line[1], Integer.parseInt(line[2])); System.out.println("Added edge from " + line[0] + " to " + line[1] + " with a weight of " + Integer.parseInt(line[2]) + "."); } System.out.println("Size of graph = " + g.size()); Here is the output: Added vertex a. Added edge from a to b with a weight of 9. Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException at structure5.GraphListDirected.addEdge(GraphListDirected.java:93) at Driver.main(Driver.java:28) I was under the impression that line = buffer.split("\\s+"); would return a 2 dimensional array of Strings to the variable line. It seemed to work the first time but not the second. Any thoughts? I would also like some feedback on my implementation of this problem. Is there a better way? Anything to help out a novice! :)

    Read the article

  • How to have the controller change its behavior depending on the view?

    - by Ian Boyd
    If from one view a user enters some invalid data, e.g.:     E-mail: [email protected]     then i want the controller to: not place the data into the model color the text box reddish not allow the user to save But it's possible that if the user enters the same invalid data in a different view i want the controller to: place the data into the model color the text box reddish allow the user to save But it's possible that if the user enters the same invalid data in a different view i want the controller to: place the data into the model color the text box bluish allow the user to save And it's possible that another view will: place the data into the model leave the text box uncolored allow the user to save And it's possible that another view will: auto-correct the data, placing it into the model color the text-box reddish allow the user to have And it's possible for another view to: auto-correct the data, placing it into the model update the view with the new data color the text-box bluish allow the user to save [ad infinitum] Without using n-controllers for n-views, how do i do this?

    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

  • 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

  • effective counter for unique number of visits in PHP & MySQL

    - by Adnan
    Hello, I am creating a counter for unique number of visits on a post, so what I have until now is a table for storing data like this; cvp_post_id | cvp_ip | cvp_user_id In cases a registered user visits a post, for the first time a record is inserted with cpv_post_id and cvp_user_id, so for his next visit I query the table and if the record is available I do not count him as a new visitor. In cases of an anonymous user the same happens but now the cvp_ip and cpv_post_id are used. My concerns is that I do a query every time anyone visits a post for checking if there has been a visit, what would be a more effective way for doing this?

    Read the article

  • What do you do in your source control repository when you start a rewrite of a program?

    - by Max Schmeling
    I wrote an application a while back and have been maintaining it for a while now, but it's gotten to the point where there's several major new features to be added, a ton of changes that need made, and I know quite a few things I could do better, so I'm starting a rewrite of the entire program (using bits and pieces from original). My question is, what do you do with SVN at this point? Should I put the new version somewhere else, or should I delete the files I no longer need, add the new files, and just treat it like normal development in SVN? How have you handled this in the past?

    Read the article

  • Formating a date field in the Model (Codeigniter)

    - by Landitus
    Hi, I', trying to re-format a date from a table in Codeigniter. The Controller is for a blog. I was succesfull when the date conversion happens in the View. I was hoping to convert the date in the Model to have things in order. This is the Model: class Novedades_model extends Model { function getAll() { $this->db->order_by('date','desc'); $query = $this->db->get('novedades'); if($query->num_rows() > 0) { foreach ($query->result() as $row) { $data[] = $row; } } return $data; } } This is part of the controller $this->load->model('novedades_model'); $data['records'] = $this->novedades_model->getAll(); Here's the date conversion as it happens in the View. This is inside the posts loop: <?php foreach($records as $row) : ?> <?php $fdate = "%d <abbr>%M</abbr> %Y"; $dateConv = mdate($fdate, mysql_to_unix($row->date)); ?> <div class="article section"> <span class="date"><?php echo $dateConv ;?></span> ... Keeps going ... How can I convert the date in the Model? Can I access the date key and refactor it?

    Read the article

  • globally get any field value in user table of logged in user

    - by Jugga
    Im making a gaming community and i wanna be able to grab any info of the user on any page without so instead of having much of queries on all pages i made this function. Is it better to do this? Will this slow down the site? /** * ??????? ???????? ?? ????? ??????? authed ?????????????. */ function UserData($f) { global $_SESSION; return mysql_result(mysql_query("SELECT `$f` FROM `users` WHERE `id` = ".intval($_SESSION['id'])), 0, $f); }

    Read the article

  • Is it better for class data to be passed internally or accessed directly?

    - by AaronSzy
    Example: // access fields directly private void doThis() { return doSomeWork(this.data); } // receive data as an argument private void doThis(data) { return doSomeWork(data); } The first option is coupled to the value in this.data while the second option avoids this coupling. I feel like the second option is always better. It promotes loose coupling WITHIN the class. Accessing global class data willy-nilly throughout just seems like a bad idea. Obviously this class data needs to be accessed directly at some point. However, if accesses, to this global class data can be eliminated by parameter passing, it seems that this is always preferable. The second example has the advantage of working with any data of the proper type, whereas the first is bound to working with the just class data. Even if you don't NEED the additional flexibility, it seems nice to leave it as an option. I just don't see any advantage in accessing member data directly from private methods as in the first example. Whats the best practice here? I've referenced code complete, but was not able to find anything on this particular issue.

    Read the article

  • Is this multi line if statement too complex?

    - by AndHeCodedIt
    I am validating input on a form and attempting to prompt the user of improper input(s) based on the combination of controls used. For example, I have 2 combo boxes and 3 text boxes. The 2 combo boxes must always have a value other than the first (default) value, but one of three, or two of three, or all text boxes can be filled to make the form valid. In one such scenario I have a 6 line if statement to try to make the test easily readable: if ((!String.Equals(ComboBoxA.SelectedValue.ToString(), DEFAULT_COMBO_A_CHOICE.ToString()) && !String.IsNullOrEmpty(TextBoxA.Text) && !String.Equals(ComboBoxB.SelectedValue.ToString(), DEFAULT_COMBO_B_CHOICE.ToString())) || (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(TextBoxB.Text) || !String.IsNullOrEmpty(TextBoxC.Text))) { //Do Some Validation } I have 2 questions: Should this type of if statement be avoided at all cost? Would it be better to enclose this test in another method? (This would be a good choice as this validation will happen in more than one scenario) Thanks for your input(s)!

    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

  • Identifying a class which is extending an abstract class

    - by Simon A. Eugster
    Good Evening, I'm doing a major refactoring of http://wiki2xhtml.sourceforge.net/ to finally get better overview and maintainability. (I started the project when I decided to start programming, so – you get it, right? ;)) At the moment I wonder how to solve the problem I'll describe now: Every file will be put through several parsers (like one for links, one for tables, one for images, etc.): public class WikiLinks extends WikiTask { ... } public class WikiTables extends WikiTask { ... } The files will then be parsed about this way: public void parse() { if (!parse) return; WikiTask task = new WikiLinks(); do { task.parse(this); } while ((task = task.nextTask()) != null); } Sometimes I may want to use no parser at all (for files that only need to be copied), or only a chosen one (e.g. for testing purposes). So before running task.parse() I need to check whether this certain parser is actually necessary/desired. (Perhaps via Blacklist or Whitelist.) What would you suggest for comparing? An ID for each WikiTask (how to do?)? Comparing the task Object itself against a new instance of a WikiTask (overhead)?

    Read the article

  • jquery: How to deal with 'this' in ajax callbacks

    - by Svish
    I currently have code similar to this for a form: $('#some-form') .submit(function() { // Make sure we are not already busy if($(this).data('busy')) return false; $(this).data('busy', true); // Do post $.post("some/url", $(this).serialize(), function(data) { if(data.success) // Success is a boolean I set in the result on the server { // Deal with data } else { // Display error } $('#some-form') .removeData('busy'); }); return false; }); My issue is that I would like to somehow remove the need for knowing the form id in the post callback. In the end where I remove the busy data from the form, I'd like to somehow not have that hard coded. Is there any way I can do this? Is there a way I can hand whatever is in this to the post callback function? Since I know the id right now, I can get around it by doing what I have done, but I'd like to know how to not be dependant on knowing the id, since often I don't have an id. (For example if I have a link in each row in a table and all the rows have the same click handler.

    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 | 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123  | Next Page >