Search Results

Search found 646 results on 26 pages for 'codebase'.

Page 12/26 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• How can I unit test rendering output?

  - by stephelton

  I've been embracing Test-Driven Development (TDD) recently and it's had wonderful impacts on my development output and the resiliency of my codebase. I would like to extend this approach to some of the rendering work that I do in OpenGL, but I've been unable to find any good approaches to this. I'll start with a concrete example so we know what kinds of things I want to test; lets say I want to create a unit cube that rotates about some axis, and that I want to ensure that, for some number of frames, each frame is rendered correctly. How can I create an automated test case for this? Preferably, I'd even be able to write a test case before writing any code to render the cube (per usual TDD practices.) Among many other things, I'd want to make sure that the cube's size, location, and orientation are correct in each rendered frame. I may even want to make sure that the lighting equations in my shaders are correct in each frame. The only remotely useful approach to this that I've come across involves comparing rendered output to a reference output, which generally precludes TDD practice, and is very cumbersome. I could go on about other desired requirements, but I'm afraid the ones I've listed already are out of reach.

  Read the article

• Apache randomly timing out

  - by Zaid

  I've been wrestling with this problem for few days now. Apache works fine. Then suddenly starts timing out. There is nothing in the error log. Few more things: - I've gone so far as to reinstall the box. - The codebase has not been touched in months. - I've done the speech test so I know it's not a bandwidth overload problem - Restart apache does not necessarily fix the issue, even temporarily (only thing that does is random attempts) If you can guide me to tools that can help me figure this out or if you know any specifics I should see, appreciate it.

  Read the article

• Change Directory Browsing Page in IIS 7.5

  - by Gabriel Ryan Nahmias

  NOTE: This post is tagged ASP Classic but really that's just one of the languages in which I could write it. I really need assistance with configuring IIS (7.5). I have found many scripts and ideas to effect this but I require that it's not be a "drop-in" replacement, as in it must work globally for any possibly directory from one codebase. Here are several links related to this goal: http://mvolo.com/get-nice-looking-directory-listings-for-your-iis-website-with-directorylistingmodule: Best example of what I want and the one with which I can't seem to follow through. http://www.daleanderson.ca/edb/: This is an example of a "drop-in" replacement (at least it's oriented for that purpose). It still has viable code that could be useful to serve as the main file that processes directory traversal.

  Read the article

• Tips for achieving "continual" delivery

  - by Ben

  A team is experiencing difficulty releasing software on a frequent basis (once every week). What follows is a typical release timeline: During the iteration: Developers work on stories on the backlog on short-lived (this is enthusiastically enforced) feature branches based on the master branch. Developers frequently pull their feature branches into the integration branch, which is continually built and tested (as far as the test coverage goes) automatically. The testers have the ability to auto-deploy integration to a staging environment and this occurs multiple times per week, enabling continual running of their test suites. Every Monday: there is a release planning meeting to determine which stories are "known good" (based on the testers' work), and hence will be in the release. If there is a known issue with a story, the source branch is pulled out of integration. no new code (only bug fixes requested by the testers) may be pulled into integration on this Monday to ensure the testers have a stable codebase to cut a release from. Every Tuesday: The testers have tested the integration branch as much as they possibly can have given the time available and there are no known bugs so a release is cut and pushed out to the production nodes slowly. This sounds OK in practise, but we have found that it is incredibly difficult to achieve. The team sees the following symptoms "subtle" bugs are found on production that were not identified on the staging environment. last minute hot-fixes continue into the Tuesday. problems on the production environment require roll-backs which blocks continued development until a successful live deployment is achieved and the master branch can be updated (and hence branched from). I think test coverage, code quality, ability to regression test quickly, last minute changes and environmental differences are at play here. Can anyone offer any advice regarding how best to achieve "continual" delivery?

  Read the article

• How to dissuade a customer who just learned a technology and wants to use it everywhere?

  - by MainMa

  My customer recently discovered what is URL Rewriting, without completely understanding what it is, how it works and the pros and cons of it. Now, he asks for lots of strange changes in actual requirements of current projects and changes in old projects in order to implement what he believes is URL Rewriting. On one hand, I'm annoyed being asked to do things which doesn't make any sense instead of doing real work. On the other hand, I can't tell my customer that he doesn't understand anything in the subject despite his interest in it. I think many people have had situations when their manager or their customer just learned a new buzzword or a new technology, and he loved it so much than he wanted to use it in every project, everywhere, rewrite the whole codebase just to use this new thing, etc. Also, I've recently read something related on Programmers.SE where people told about their experiences when there was a huge buzz around XML, and some managers would ask to introduce XML in every project just to show to everyone that they have used it. So those who have been in similar situation, how have you managed it?

  Read the article

• Designing web-based plugin systems correctly so they don't waste as many resources?

  - by Xeoncross

  Many CMS systems which rely on third parties for much of their code often build "plugin" or "hooks" systems to make it easy for developers to modify the codebase's actions without editing the core files. This usually means an Observer or Event design pattern. However, when you look at systems like wordpress you see that on every page they load some kind of bootstrap file from each of the plugin's folders to see if that plugin will need to run that request. Its this poor design that causes systems like wordpress to spend many extra MB's of memory loading and parsing unneeded items each page. Are there alternative ways to do this? I'm looking for ideas in building my own. For example, Is there a way to load all this once and then cache the results so that your system knows how to lazy-load plugins? In other words, the system loads a configuration file that specifies all the events that plugin wishes to tie into and then saves it for future requests? If that also performs poorly, then perhaps there is a special file-structure that could be used to make educated guesses about when certain plugins are unneeded to fullfil the request. Any ideas? If anyone wants an example of the "plugin" concept you can find one here.

  Read the article

• Is there ever a reason to do all an object's work in a constructor?

  - by Kane

  Let me preface this by saying this is not my code nor my coworkers' code. Years ago when our company was smaller, we had some projects we needed done that we did not have the capacity for, so they were outsourced. Now, I have nothing against outsourcing or contractors in general, but the codebase they produced is a mass of WTFs. That being said, it does (mostly) work, so I suppose it's in the top 10% of outsourced projects I've seen. As our company has grown, we've tried to take more of our development in house. This particular project landed in my lap so I've been going over it, cleaning it up, adding tests, etc etc. There's one pattern I see repeated a lot and it seems so mindblowingly awful that I wondered if maybe there is a reason and I just don't see it. The pattern is an object with no public methods or members, just a public constructor that does all the work of the object. For example, (the code is in Java, if that matters, but I hope this to be a more general question): public class Foo { private int bar; private String baz; public Foo(File f) { execute(f); } private void execute(File f) { // FTP the file to some hardcoded location, // or parse the file and commit to the database, or whatever } } If you're wondering, this type of code is often called in the following manner: for(File f : someListOfFiles) { new Foo(f); } Now, I was taught long ago that instantiated objects in a loop is generally a bad idea, and that constructors should do a minimum of work. Looking at this code it looks like it would be better to drop the constructor and make execute a public static method. I did ask the contractor why it was done this way, and the response I got was "We can change it if you want". Which was not really helpful. Anyway, is there ever a reason to do something like this, in any programming language, or is this just another submission to the Daily WTF?

  Read the article

• How to handle coworker with "obsessive refactoring disorder"

  - by ThuneGrill

  My coworker (who is very clever, but with severly limited inter-personal skills), keeps refactoring my code even when it is work in progress and assigned to me as a task. Whereas I fully subscribed to the idea of collective ownership of code, I find this extremely irritating, but attempts to have him stop seem to have no effect. My analysis of his personality is that he considers himself the best, and if it had not been for him, the codebase would have been in a mess. I should add that I am not a novice, I know my skills and I produce quality work. Some of the refactorings are indeed to the better, most are basically just introduction of a style that he likes better than mine. In addition, he has a almost child-like need to have the last word in any discussion and has never any word of praise for work done by co-workers. There is always something that he, the master, would have done differently. I feel this is strongly affecting the quality of my work-life. What should I do ?

  Read the article

• Is there an excuse for short variable names?

  - by KChaloux

  This has become a large frustration with the codebase I'm currently working in; many of our variable names are short and undescriptive. I'm the only developer left on the project, and there isn't documentation as to what most of them do, so I have to spend extra time tracking down what they represent. For example, I was reading over some code that updates the definition of an optical surface. The variables set at the start were as follows: double dR, dCV, dK, dDin, dDout, dRin, dRout dR = Convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[0].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); dCV = convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[1].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); ... and so on Maybe it's just me, but it told me essentially nothing about what they represented, which made understanding the code further down difficult. All I knew was that it was a variable parsed out specific row from a specific table, somewhere. After some searching, I found out what they meant: dR = radius dCV = curvature dK = conic constant dDin = inner aperture dDout = outer aperture dRin = inner radius dRout = outer radius I renamed them to essentially what I have up there. It lengthens some lines, but I feel like that's a fair trade off. This kind of naming scheme is used throughout a lot of the code however. I'm not sure if it's an artifact from developers who learned by working with older systems, or if there's a deeper reason behind it. Is there a good reason to name variables this way, or am I justified in updating them to more descriptive names as I come across them?

  Read the article

• Is there an excuse for excessively short variable names?

  - by KChaloux

  This has become a large frustration with the codebase I'm currently working in; many of our variable names are short and undescriptive. I'm the only developer left on the project, and there isn't documentation as to what most of them do, so I have to spend extra time tracking down what they represent. For example, I was reading over some code that updates the definition of an optical surface. The variables set at the start were as follows: double dR, dCV, dK, dDin, dDout, dRin, dRout dR = Convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[0].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); dCV = convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[1].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); ... and so on Maybe it's just me, but it told me essentially nothing about what they represented, which made understanding the code further down difficult. All I knew was that it was a variable parsed out specific row from a specific table, somewhere. After some searching, I found out what they meant: dR = radius dCV = curvature dK = conic constant dDin = inner aperture dDout = outer aperture dRin = inner radius dRout = outer radius I renamed them to essentially what I have up there. It lengthens some lines, but I feel like that's a fair trade off. This kind of naming scheme is used throughout a lot of the code however. I'm not sure if it's an artifact from developers who learned by working with older systems, or if there's a deeper reason behind it. Is there a good reason to name variables this way, or am I justified in updating them to more descriptive names as I come across them?

  Read the article

• Augmenting functionality of subclasses without code duplication in C++

  - by Rob W

  I have to add common functionality to some classes that share the same superclass, preferably without bloating the superclass. The simplified inheritance chain looks like this: Element -> HTMLElement -> HTMLAnchorElement Element -> SVGElement -> SVGAlement The default doSomething() method on Element is no-op by default, but there are some subclasses that need an actual implementation that requires some extra overridden methods and instance members. I cannot put a full implementation of doSomething() in Element because 1) it is only relevant for some of the subclasses, 2) its implementation has a performance impact and 3) it depends on a method that could be overridden by a class in the inheritance chain between the superclass and a subclass, e.g. SVGElement in my example. Especially because of the third point, I wanted to solve the problem using a template class, as follows (it is a kind of decorator for classes): struct Element { virtual void doSomething() {} }; // T should be an instance of Element template<class T> struct AugmentedElement : public T { // doSomething is expensive and uses T virtual void doSomething() override {} // Used by doSomething virtual bool shouldDoSomething() = 0; }; class SVGElement : public Element { /* ... */ }; class SVGAElement : public AugmentedElement<SVGElement> { // some non-trivial check bool shouldDoSomething() { /* ... */ return true; } }; // Similarly for HTMLAElement and others I looked around (in the existing (huge) codebase and on the internet), but didn't find any similar code snippets, let alone an evaluation of the effectiveness and pitfalls of this approach. Is my design the right way to go, or is there a better way to add common functionality to some subclasses of a given superclass?

  Read the article

• Joomla 1.5 Media Manager sets incorrect file permissions when uploading

  - by Scott Mayfield

  Howdy all, I have a Joomla 1.5 installation running on Windows Server 2008, installed via the Web Platform Installer. When uploading images with the media manager (native uploader, not the flash bulk uploader), the files arrive on the server correctly, but are given incorrect permissions. Specifically, the IIS_IUSRS group is not given access to the file. I might be incorrect about what group/user is SUPPOSED to get access to the files, but so far, I've found that unless I give IIS_IUSRS access to the uploaded files, they won't appear on the site or in the media manager (appear as broken images). Once I give IIS_IUSRS permission to the files, they work fine. So far, all the research I've done has led me to linux specific fixes that involve either changing the umask on the server, or directly modifying the Joomla codebase to add an appropriate chmod command to the upload process, but I really don't want to modify Joomla directly. I have to believe there's a setting here somewhere that will do the job, either on the Joomla or Windows side of the equation. Any thoughts? Scott

  Read the article

• variables in batch scripts [closed]

  - by richzilla

  I'm trying to set up a batch file to automatically deploy a php app to a web server. Basically, what I want is an entirely automated process: I would just give it a revision number from the repository and it would then export the files, upload via ftp and then update deployment info at the repo host (codebase). However, I'm starting from scratch here. How would I set up a batch file to accept a variable when it was run? For example, the command myfile.bat /revision 42 should deploy revision 42 to my server. If anyone can point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.

  Read the article

• Are Intel compilers really better than the Microsoft ones?

  - by Rocket Surgeon

  Years ago, I was surprised when I discovered that Intel sells Visual Studio compatible compilers. I tried it in particular for C/C++ as well as fantastic diagnostic tools. But the code was simply not that computationally intensive to notice the difference. The only impression was: did Intel really do it for me just now, wow, amazing tools with nanoseconds resolution, unbelievable. But the trial ended and the team never seriously considered a purchase. From your experience, if license cost does not matter, which vendor is the winner? It is not a broad or vague question or attemt to spark a holy war. This sort of question is about two very visible tools. Nobody likes when tools have any mysteries or surprises. And choices between best and best are always the pain. I also understand the grass is always greener argument. I want to hear all "what ifs" stories. What if Intel just locally optimizes it for the chip stepping of the month, and not every hardware target will actually work as well as Microsoft compiled? What if AMD hardware is the target and everything will slow down for no reason? Or on the other hand, what if Intel's hardware has so many unnoticable opportunities, that Microsoft compiler writers are too slow to adopt and never implement it in the compiler? What if both are the same exactly, actually a single codebase just wrapped into two different boxes and licensed to both vendors by some third-party shop? And so on. But someone knows some answers.

  Read the article

• How to get feedback from the community on large chunks of code?

  - by MainMa

  Code Review.SE is great when you need feedback on a precise, short piece of code. But where to get similar feedback about the code itself when: you have thousands of LOC, don't have colleagues in your workplace ready or willing to review the code¹, don't have thousands of dollars to spend for a professional review by a third party developer?² Places like CodePlex are a good idea to get your project known³, but from what I've seen, the feedback you get on known projects are consumer feedback, i.e. concerns the bugs and feature requests, not the quality of the source code itself. What are the social way to get the community involved in the code review of the codebase of a certain size for an open source project which doesn't have the scale of Firefox or similar products? ¹ Which is the case for most personal and open source projects, or projects done in companies where the practice of regular and complete code review is nonexistent. ² Which is, again, the case for most personal and open source projects. ³ Even if too many projects published on CodePlex never get known, either because nobody cares or because they are presented not very well.

  Read the article

• When writing tests for a Wordpress plugin, should i run them inside wordpress or in a normal browser?

  - by Nicola Peluchetti

  I have started using BDD for a wordpress plugin i'm working on and i'm rewriting the js codebase to do tests. I've encountered a few problems but i'm going steady now, i was wondering if i had the right approach, because i'm writing test that should pass in a normal browser environment and not inside wordpress. I choose to do this because i want my plugin to be totally indipendent from the wordpress environment, i'm using requirejs in a way that i don't expose any globals and i'm loading my version of jQuery that doesn't override the one that ships with Wordpress. In this way my plugin would work the same on every wordpress version and my code would not break if they cheange the jQuery version or someone use my plugin on an old wordpress version. I wonder if this is the right approach or if i should always test inside the environment i'm working in. Since wordpress implies some globals i had to write some function purely for testing purpose, like "get_ajax_url": function() { if( typeof window.ajaxurl === "undefined" ) { return "http://localhost/wordpress/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php"; } else { return window.ajaxurl; } }, but apart from that i got everything working right. What do you think?

  Read the article

• Python/Lesta.A worm

  - by Hanks

  My Nod32 have been catching something that is apparently identified as Python/Lesta.A worm. No matter how many times I tell Nod32 to delete and quarantine the file, it always re-appear, the situation will repeat about 3-4 times a day. This thing has been creating a folder called "pamela" in one of my drives, it sometimes also creates a "xxx.folder" file, which Nod32 identifies as "Exploit/CodeBase virus". I have Googled, and done pretty much everything related to this: a full scan in safe mode with no networking turned on, and also ran Ad-Aware, SpyBot, SpyHunter, ComboFix and cleaned the registry. Any idea how I can completely get rid of this annoying virus/worm?

  Read the article

• Tech Article: Tired of Null Pointer Exceptions? Use Java SE 8's Optional!

  - by Tori Wieldt

  A wise man once said you are not a real Java programmer until you've dealt with a null pointer exception. The null reference is the source of many problems because it is often used to denote the absence of a value. Java SE 8 introduces a new class called java.util.Optional that can alleviate some of these problems. In the tech article "Tired of Null Pointer Exceptions? Use Java SE 8's Optional!" Java expert Raoul-Gabriel Urma shows you how to make your code more readable and protect it against null pointer exceptions. Urma explains "The purpose of Optional is not to replace every single null reference in your codebase but rather to help design better APIs in which—just by reading the signature of a method—users can tell whether to expect an optional value. In addition, Optional forces you to actively unwrap an Optional to deal with the absence of a value; as a result, you protect your code against unintended null pointer exceptions." Learn how to go from writing painful nested null checks to writing declarative code that is composable, readable, and better protected from null pointer exceptions. Read "Tired of Null Pointer Exceptions? Use Java SE 8's Optional!"

  Read the article

• I just started a job with Scrum and something seems to be missing. I am new to Scrum

  - by punkouter

  The code is a complete mess of a combination of classic ASP/ASP.NET. The scrum consist of us patching up the big mess or making additions to it. We are all too busy doing that to start a rewrite so I am wondering.. Where is the part in Scrum where the developers can have the power to say that enough is enough and demand that they are given time to start the big rewrite? We seem in an endless loop of just patching old code with 'Stories'. So things are being run by the non-technical people who seem to have no desire to push for a rewrite because they don't understand how bad the codebase has gotten.. So who is in charge of making this big rewrite change happen? The developers? The Scrum Master? The current strategy is just to find time and do it ourselves without the higher-ups involved since they are mostly to blame for the current mess we are in.. <- insert rant about non-technical people telling technical people what to do here ->.

  Read the article

• I seem to be missing a few important concepts with PhoneGap

  - by garethdn

  I'm planning on developing an app on multiple platforms and I'm thinking that PhoneGap might be perfect for me. I had been reading that it's one codebase for all platforms but looking at the PhoneGap guide it seems there are separate instructions for each platform. So if i want to develop for iOS, Android, BB and WP7 I need to write 4 different sets of code? I'm sure i'm missing something fundamental here. Aside from that, how do people usually approach a PhoneGap build? You obviously / probably want the finished app to look like a native app - is it more common than not to use jQuery Mobile together with PhoneGap? Is there a preferred IDE? I see, in the guide, for iOS they seem to suggest Xcode. I'm fine using Xcode but it seems a bit overkill for HTML & CSS. Do I need to develop in Xcode and if not how do i approach it? Use a different IDE / Text Editor and then copy paste into Xcode for building and testing? I know this question is long-winded and fundamental but it something which i don't think is properly addressed in the guides. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Does it make sense to write tests for legacy code when there is no time for a complete refactoring?

  - by is4

  I usually try to follow the advice of the book Working Effectively with Legacy Code. I break dependencies, move parts of the code to @VisibleForTesting public static methods and to new classes to make the code (or at least some part of it) testable. And I write tests to make sure that I don't break anything when I'm modifying or adding new functions. A colleague says that I shouldn't do this. His reasoning: The original code might not work properly in the first place. And writing tests for it makes future fixes and modifications harder since devs have to understand and modify the tests too. If it's GUI code with some logic (~12 lines, 2-3 if/else block, for example), a test isn't worth the trouble since the code is too trivial to begin with. Similar bad patterns could exist in other parts of the codebase, too (which I haven't seen yet, I'm rather new); it will be easier to clean them all up in one big refactoring. Extracting out logic could undermine this future possibility. Should I avoid extracting out testable parts and writing tests if we don't have time for complete refactoring? Is there any disadvantage to this that I should consider?

  Read the article

• Caching by in-memory dictionaries. Are we doing it all wrong?

  - by user73983

  This approach is pretty much the accepted way to do anything in our company. A simple example : when a piece of data for a customer is requested from a service, we fetch all the data for that customer(relevant part to the service) and save it in a in-memory dictionary then serve it from there on following requests(we run singleton services). Any update goes to DB, then updates the in memory dictionary. It seems all simple and harmless but as we implement more complicated business rules the cache gets out of sync and we have to deal with hard to find bugs. Sometimes we defer writing to database, keeping new data in cache till then. There are cases when we store millions of rows in memory because the table has many relations to other tables and we need to show aggregate data quickly. All this cache handling is a big part of our codebase and I sense this is not the right way to do it. All of this juggling adds too much noise to the code and it makes it hard to understand the actual business logic. However I don't think we can serve data in a reasonable amount of time if we have to hit the database every time. I am unhappy about the current situation but I don't have a better alternative. My only solution would be to use NHibernate 2nd level cache but I have nearly no experience with it. I know many campanies use Redis or MemCached heavily to gain performance but I have no idea how I would integrate them into our system. I also don't know if they can perform better than in-memory data structures and queries. Are there any alternative approaches that I should look into?

  Read the article

• Is version history really sacred or is it better to rebase?

  - by dukeofgaming

  I've always agreed with Mercurial's mantra, however, now that Mercurial comes bundled with the rebase extension and it is a popular practice in git, I'm wondering if it could really be regarded as a "bad practice", or at least bad enough to avoid using. In any case, I'm aware of rebasing being dangerous after pushing. OTOH, I see the point of trying to package 5 commits in a single one to make it look niftier (specially at in a production branch), however, personally I think would be better to be able to see partial commits to a feature where some experimentation is done, even if it is not as nifty, but seeing something like "Tried to do it way X but it is not as optimal as Y after all, doing it Z taking Y as base" would IMHO have good value to those studying the codebase and follow the developers train of thought. My very opinionated (as in dumb, visceral, biased) point of view is that programmers like rebase to hide mistakes... and I don't think this is good for the project at all. So my question is: have you really found valuable to have such "organic commits" (i.e. untampered history) in practice?, or conversely, do you prefer to run into nifty well-packed commits and disregard the programmers' experimentation process?; whichever one you chose, why does that work for you? (having other team members to keep history, or alternatively, rebasing it).

  Read the article

• Storing editable site content?

  - by hmp

  We have a Django-based website for which we wanted to make some of the content (text, and business logic such as pricing plans) easily editable in-house, and so we decided to store it outside the codebase. Usually the reason is one of the following: It's something that non-technical people want to edit. One example is copywriting for a website - the programmers prepare a template with text that defaults to "Lorem ipsum...", and the real content is inserted later to the database. It's something that we want to be able to change quickly, without the need to deploy new code (which we currently do twice a week). An example would be features currently available to the customers at different tiers of pricing. Instead of hardcoding these, we read them from database. The described solution is flexible but there are some reasons why I don't like it. Because the content has to be read from the database, there is a performance overhead. We mitigate that by using a caching scheme, but this also adds some complexity to the system. Developers who run the code locally see the system in a significantly different state compared to how it runs on production. Automated tests also exercise the system in a different state. Situations like testing new features on a staging server also get trickier - if the staging server doesn't have a recent copy of the database, it can be unexpectedly different from production. We could mitigate that by committing the new state to the repository occasionally (e.g. by adding data migrations), but it seems like a wrong approach. Is it? Any ideas how best to solve these problems? Is there a better approach for handling the content that I'm overlooking?

  Read the article

• Single complex or multiple simple autoload functions [on hold]

  - by Tyson of the Northwest

  Using the spl_autoload_register(), should I use a single autoload function that contains all the logic to determine where the include files are or should I break each include grouping into it's own function with it's own logic to include the files for the called function? As the places where include files may reside expands so too will the logic of a single function. If I break it into multiple functions I can add functions as new groupings are added, but the functions will be copy/pastes of each other with minor alterations. Currently I have a tool with a single registered autoload function that picks apart the class name and tries to predict where it is and then includes it. Due to naming conventions for the project this has been pretty simple. if has namespace if in template namespace look in Root\Templates else look in Root\Modules\Namespace else look in Root\System if file exists include But we are starting to include Interfaces and Traits into our codebase and it hurts me to include the type of a thing in it's name. So we are looking at instead of a single autoload function that digs through the class name and looks for the file and has increasingly complex logic to it, we are looking at having multiple autoload functions registered. But each one follows the same pattern and any time I see that I get paranoid about code copying. function systemAutoloadFunc logic to create probable filename if filename exists in system include it and return true else return false function moduleAutoloadFunc logic to create probable filename if filename exists in modules include it and return true else return false Every autoload function will follow that pattern and the last of each function if filename exists, include return true else return false is going to be identical code. This makes me paranoid about having to update it later across the board if the file_exists include pattern we are using ever changes. Or is it just that, paranoia and the multiple functions with some identical code is the best option?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >