Search Results

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

Page 119/237 | < Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >

• Should programmers use boolean variables to "document" their code?

  - by froadie

  I'm reading McConell's Code Complete, and he discusses using boolean variables to document your code. For example, instead of: if((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex) || (elementIndex == lastElementIndex)){ ... } He suggests: finished = ((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex)); repeatedEntry = (elementIndex == lastElementIndex); if(finished || repeatedEntry){ ... } This strikes me as logical, good practice, and very self-documenting. However, I'm hesitant to start using this technique regularly as I've almost never come across it; and perhaps it would be confusing just by virtue of being rare. However, my experience is not very vast yet, so I'm interested in hearing programmers' opinion of this technique, and I'd be curious to know if anyone uses this technique regularly or has seen it often when reading code. Is this a worthwhile convention/style/technique to adopt? Will other programmers understand and appreciate it, or consider it strange?

  Read the article

• Why do I see javascript arrays getting created with string.split()?

  - by Matthew

  I see code like this all over the web var days= "Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday".split(" "); Why do that instead of var days = ["Monday", "Tuesday", "Wednesday", "Thursday", "Friday", "Saturday", "Sunday"];

  Read the article

• When using out parameters in a function, is it good practice to initialize them in the function?

  - by adambox

  I have a function that uses out parameters to return multiple values to the caller. I would like to initialize them in the function, but I wasn't sure if that's a bad idea since you don't know when you call the function that it's going to change the values right away. The caller might assume that after the function returns, if whatever it was doing didn't work, the values would be whatever they were initialized to in the caller. Is it ok / good for me to initialize in the function? Example: public static void SomeFunction(int ixID, out string sSomething) { sSomething = ""; sSomething = something(ixID); if (sSomething = "") { somethingelse(); sSomething = "bar" } }

  Read the article

• Creating and Compiling a C++ project on Windows

  - by sc_ray

  I need to work on C++ project on my windows machine. My project will consist of various classes(.h and .cpp) as well as the startup file to start the application. The preliminary design is simple but the application has the potential to gain complexity as time goes by. What I need here is ideas to set up the C++ project compiler/IDE/Makefile etc..etc. as well as some standard tools besides Visual C++ to compile/build/link projects such as these on a Windows OS. Thanks

  Read the article

• Imposing email limits on web page

  - by Martin

  To avoid spammers, what's a good strategy for imposing limits on users when sending email from our site? A count limit per day on individual IPs? Sender emails? Domains? In general terms, but recommended figures will also be helpful. Our users can send emails through our web page. They can register and log in but are also allowed to do this without logging in, but with a captcha and with a field for the senders email. Certainly, there is a header, "The user has sent you the following message.", limiting the use for spammers, so perhaps it's not a big problem. Any comments on what I'm doing will be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Project reference vs. DLL Reference - Which is better?

  - by Zannjaminderson

  I know there are other questions regarding this subject, and I've looked at this question, but I'd like to see a little bit more discussion and information on both sides of this - is it a better practice to add a project to a solution and reference the project, or to add a reference to the .dll?

  Read the article

• Am i using too much jquery? When i'm crossing the line?

  - by Andrea

  Lately i find myself using jquery and javascript a lot, often to do the same things that i did before using css. For example, i alternate table rows color or create buttons and links hover effects using javascript/jquery. Is this acceptable? Or should i keep using css for these kind of things? So the real question is: When i'm using too much jquery? How can i understand when i'm crossing the line? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Any reason to clean up unused imports in Java, other than reducing clutter?

  - by Kip

  Is there any good reason to avoid unused import statements in Java? As I understand it, they are there for the compiler, so lots of unused imports won't have any impacts on the compiled code. Is it just to reduce clutter and to avoid naming conflicts down the line? (I ask because Eclipse gives a warning about unused imports, which is kind of annoying when I'm developing code because I don't want to remove the imports until I'm pretty sure I'm done designing the class.)

  Read the article

• Best way to make an attribute always an array?

  - by Shadowfirebird

  I'm using my MOO project to teach myself Test Driven Design, and it's taking me interesting places. For example, I wrote a test that said an attribute on a particular object should always return an array, so -- t = Thing.new("test") p t.names #-> ["test"] t.names = nil p t.names #-> [] The code I have for this is okay, but it doesn't seem terribly ruby to me: class Thing def initialize(names) self.names = names end def names=(n) n = [] if n.nil? n = [n] unless n.instance_of?(Array) @names = n end attr_reader :names end Is there a more elegant, Ruby-ish way of doing this? (NB: if anyone wants to tell me why this is a dumb test to write, that would be interesting too...)

  Read the article

• Do preconditions ALWAYS have to be checked?

  - by Pin

  These days I'm used to checking every single precondition for every function since I got the habit from an OS programming course back at uni. On the other hand, at the software engineering course we were taught that a common precondition should only be checked once, so for example, if a function is delegating to another function, the first function should check them but checking them again in the second one is redundant. I do see the redundancy point, but I certainly feel it's safer to always check them, plus you don't have to keep track of where they were checked previously. What's the best practice here?

  Read the article

• Should I create a new extension for an xml file?

  - by macleojw

  I'm working with a data model stored in XML files. I want to create some metadata for the model and store it alongside, but would like to be able to distinguish between the two. The data model is imported into some software from time to time and we don't want it to try to import the meta data files. To get round this, I've been thinking of creating a new extension for the metadata xml files (say .mdml). Is this good practice?

  Read the article

• Is it always bad idea to use inline css for used-once property?

  - by user93422

  I have a table, with 10 columns. I want to control the width of each column. Each column is unique, right now I create an external CSS style for each column: div#my-page table#members th.name-col { width: 40px; } I know there is a best practice to avoid inline style. I do approve using external CSS for anything look'n'feel related: fonts, colors, images. But is it really better to use external CSS in this case? It does not incur extra maintenance cost. It is easier to produce. Cons I can think of: If you have separate designers and development team - using inline styles will force designers to modify content-file (aspx in my case). It might use more bandwidth. Anything else I've missed?

  Read the article

• Implement abstract class as a local class? pros and cons

  - by sinec

  Hi, for some reason I'm thinking on implementing interface within a some function(method) as local class. Consider following: class A{ public: virtual void MethodToOverride() = 0; }; A * GetPtrToAImplementation(){ class B : public A { public: B(){} ~B(){} void MethodToOverride() { //do something } }; return static_cast<A *>(new B()); } int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { A * aInst = GetPtrToAImplementation(); aInst->MethodToOverride(); delete aInst; return 0; } the reason why I'm doing this are: I'm lazy to implement class (B) in separate files MethodToOverride just delegates call to other class Class B shouldn't be visible to other users no need to worry about deleting aInst since smart pointers are used in real implementation So my question is if I'm doing this right? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Avoiding repetition with libraries that use a setup + execute model

  - by lijie

  Some libraries offer the ability to separate setup and execution, esp if the setup portion has undesirable characteristics such as unbounded latency. If the program needs to have this reflected in its structure, then it is natural to have: void setupXXX(...); // which calls the setup stuff void doXXX(...); // which calls the execute stuff The problem with this is that the structure of setupXXX and doXXX is going to be quite similar (at least textually -- control flow will prob be more complex in doXXX). Wondering if there are any ways to avoid this. Example: Let's say we're doing signal processing: filtering with a known kernel in the frequency domain. so, setupXXX and doXXX would probably be something like... void doFilter(FilterStuff *c) { for (int i = 0; i < c->N; ++i) { doFFT(c->x[i], c->fft_forward_setup, c->tmp); doMultiplyVector(c->tmp, c->filter); doFFT(c->tmp, c->fft_inverse_setup, c->x[i]); } } void setupFilter(FilterStuff *c) { setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_forward_setup)); // assign the kernel to c->filter ... setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_inverse_setup)); }

  Read the article

• Defining implicit and explicit casts for C# interfaces

  - by ehdv

  Is there a way to write interface-based code (i.e. using interfaces rather than classes as the types accepted and passed around) in C# without giving up the use of things like implicit casts? Here's some sample code - there's been a lot removed, but these are the relevant portions. public class Game { public class VariantInfo { public string Language { get; set; } public string Variant { get; set; } } } And in ScrDictionary.cs, we have... public class ScrDictionary: IScrDictionary { public string Language { get; set; } public string Variant { get; set; } public static implicit operator Game.VariantInfo(ScrDictionary s) { return new Game.VariantInfo{Language=sd.Language, Variant=sd.Variant}; } } And the interface... public interface IScrDictionary { string Language { get; set; } string Variant { get; set; } } I want to be able to use IScrDictionary instead of ScrDictionary, but still be able to implicitly convert a ScrDictionary to a Game.VariantInfo. Also, while there may be an easy way to make this work by giving IScrDictionary a property of type Game.VariantInfo my question is more generally: Is there a way to define casts or operator overloading on interfaces? (If not, what is the proper C# way to maintain this functionality without giving up interface-oriented design?)

  Read the article

• Where to put SVN repository directory in Linux?

  - by alexloh

  I am setting up a new SVN server on Ubuntu Linux. Where is a good place (best practice) to put the repositories? Should I create a new user? The server will be accessed via http:// so no need to create user accounts etc (as was the case for svn://). Many thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Fastest way to check for value existance.

  - by Itay Moav

  I have a list of values I have to check my input against it for existence. What is the faster way? This is really out of curiosity on how the internals work, not any stuff about premature optimization etc... 1. $x=array('v'=>'','c'=>'','w'=>); .. .. array_key_exists($input,$x); 2. $x=array('v','c','w'); .. .. in_array($input,$x);

  Read the article

• list all files from directories and subdirectories in Java

  - by Adnan

  What would be the fastest way to list the names of files from 1000+ directories and sub-directories? EDIT; The current code I use is: import java.io.File; public class DirectoryReader { static int spc_count=-1; static void Process(File aFile) { spc_count++; String spcs = ""; for (int i = 0; i < spc_count; i++) spcs += " "; if(aFile.isFile()) System.out.println(spcs + "[FILE] " + aFile.getName()); else if (aFile.isDirectory()) { System.out.println(spcs + "[DIR] " + aFile.getName()); File[] listOfFiles = aFile.listFiles(); if(listOfFiles!=null) { for (int i = 0; i < listOfFiles.length; i++) Process(listOfFiles[i]); } else { System.out.println(spcs + " [ACCESS DENIED]"); } } spc_count--; } public static void main(String[] args) { String nam = "D:/"; File aFile = new File(nam); Process(aFile); } }

  Read the article

• Should I put a try-finally block after every Object.Create?

  - by max

  I have a general question about best practice in OO Delphi. Currently, I put try-finally blocks anywhere I create an object to free that object after usage (to avoid memory leaks). E.g.: aObject := TObject.Create; try aOBject.AProcedure(); ... finally aObject.Free; end; instead of: aObject := TObject.Create; aObject.AProcedure(); .. aObject.Free; Do you think it is good practice, or too much overhead? And what about the performance?

  Read the article

• How to change the value of progressbar in C#?

  - by shekhar

  Hi, I want to add an progress bar into my C# based application. I would like to know what is the good way of updating its value at particular events? My problem is, I have single function in UI which does all the processing.This function in turn calls many more functions, creates objects, updates database, etc. (basically performs all the work) and returns values in an output file. I have access to that function only. So in this how to update the progressbar's value at the end of each step? What is the best practice for this kind of situation? What is the good way to keep UI logic and business logic seperate? I want to avoid writting progressbar related code in my library code. Please suggest some solution. Thanks and Regards,

  Read the article

• Should I go back and fix work when you learn something new/better?

  - by SnOrfus

  Considering that we're all constantly learning, we've all got to come across a point where we learn something just awesome that improves our code or parts of it significantly. The question is, when you've learned some new technique, strategy or whatever, do your or should you go back to code that you know works, but could be so much better/maintainable/faster/generally improved and implement this new knowledge? I understand the concept of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but when does that become losing pride in code you've already written and what does it say for refactoring.

  Read the article

• CSS: Base styles on body or html?

  - by Svish

  When I declare some base styles for my site I have used to do that on the body tag. Like for example body { font-size: medium; line-height: 1.3em; } But I have also seen people do things like that on the html tag. And on both. Where should it be done? Should some be at one and some at the other? Should all be on one of them? Or does it simply not matter at all? Or?

  Read the article

• can I put the break on the same line

  - by brett

  I have a switch statement that has over 300 case statements. case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break; Why is it that the break is always on a separate line? Is this required? Is there anything syntactically incorrect about me doing this: case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break;

  Read the article

• AS3: Performance question calling an event function with null param

  - by adehaas

  Lately I needed to call a listener function without an actual listener like so: foo(null); private function foo(event:Event):void { //do something } So I was wondering if there is a significant difference regarding performance between this and using the following, in which I can prevent the null in calling the function without the listener, but am still able to call it with a listener as well: foo(); private function foo(event:Event = null):void { } I am not sure wether it is just a question of style, or actually bad practice and I should write two similar functions, one with and one without the event param (which seems cumbersome to me). Looking forward to your opinions, thx.

  Read the article

• When using Sessions is bad thing, and whats wrong with it?

  - by Amr ElGarhy

  I know that in community server which means that you can't use Sessions, and few years ago i remember i was working on a website where we were not allowed to use sessions. In my point of view sessions are a very helpful tool if we managed how to use the right way, but is using session variable in a website is something bad, when its bad and when its not?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >