Search Results

Search found 5422 results on 217 pages for 'coding convention'.

Page 12/217 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• User defined type for healthcare / Medical Records variable name prefixes?

  - by Peter Turner

  I was reading Code Complete regarding variable naming in trying to find an answer to this question and stumbled on a table of commonly accepted prefixes for programming word processor software. Well, I'm not a word processor software programmer, but if I was, I'd be happy to use those user defined types. Since I'm a programmer for a smallish healthcare ISV, and have no contact with the larger community of healthcare software programmers (other than the neglected and forsaken HealthCareIT.SE where I never had the chance to ask this question). I want to know if there is a coding convention for medical records. Like Patient = pnt and Chart = chrt and Medication = med or mdctn or whatever. I'm not talking full on hungarian notation, but just a standard that would fit in code complete in place of that wonderful chart of word processor UDT's which are of so little use to me.

  Read the article

• if ('constant' == $variable) vs. if ($variable == 'constant')

  - by Tom Auger

  Lately, I've been working a lot in PHP and specifically within the WordPress framework. I'm noticing a lot of code in the form of: if ( 1 == $options['postlink'] ) Where I would have expected to see: if ( $options['postlink'] == 1 ) Is this a convention found in certain languages / frameworks? Is there any reason the former approach is preferable to the latter (from a processing perspective, or a parsing perspective or even a human perspective?) Or is it merely a matter of taste? I have always thought it better when performing a test, that the variable item being tested against some constant is on the left. It seems to map better to the way we would ask the question in natural language: "if the cake is chocolate" rather than "if chocolate is the cake".

  Read the article

• Why does Zend discourage "floating functions"?

  - by kojiro

  Zend's Coding Standard Naming Convention says Functions in the global scope (a.k.a "floating functions") are permitted but discouraged in most cases. Consider wrapping these functions in a static class. The common wisdom in Python says practically the opposite: Finally, use staticmethod sparingly! There are very few situations where static-methods are necessary in Python, and I've seen them used many times where a separate "top-level" function would have been clearer. (Not only does the above StackOverflow answer warn against overuse of static methods, but more than one Python linter will warn the same.) Is this something that can be generalized across programming languages, and if so, why does Python differ so from PHP? If it's not something that can be generalized, what is the basis for one approach or the other, and is there a way to immediately recognize in a language whether you should prefer bare functions or static methods?

  Read the article

• Accepting a numerical range in a function call

  - by dekpos

  I have encountered two ways of doing it: void foo(int from, int to); /* 'from' inclusive, 'to' exclusive */ void foo(int startIndex, int rangelength); Has one style historically been preferred over the other? If so, was it just a matter of convention or was it due to some deeper underlying reason? I'm currently programming in Java and noticed that the Arrays class uses the former style. The exclusivity of the to argument felt somewhat unintuitive to me, which led me to ask this question.

  Read the article

• Div : A Table Less Coding

  - by Raaj Dhanjal

  I am a web Developer. Even I do web design but I use the TABLE method for HTML, I want to learn Tableless coding (Div based). Can anybody suggest me Few Best sites for learn Div Based Coding.

  Read the article

• Coding for fun

  - by Klelky

  I would describe myself as a career coder - i.e. a developer at work but never really coded for fun. Early in my career I've hit the management track though. I really like my current job and can't see me going back to coding anytime soon so: Whats the best way to develop my coding skills and learn new languages in my spare time?

  Read the article

• xhtml-css coding before Drupal Implementing?

  - by artmania

  Hi friends, I'm going to start my first Drupal project :) pretty excited. I have many questions in my head :/ but I will find out the answers and learn many about Drupal while working on this project. ok, I have the design completed. now is it better to make xhtml-css coding of all pages, and then implementing these codes to Drupal? or is it better to make xhtml-css coding straight into Drupal theme? Appreciate advices!

  Read the article

• Best Practises - Increase Mood for Coding

  - by Lukas Šalkauskas

  I recently find my self stuck in state where I feel not very into code, I need some kind of inspiration, so sometimes I just review somebody's code, watch some kind of movie about coding or something like that, but not always I get what I need, if you know what I mean. How do you increase your mood for coding ?

  Read the article

• Visual Studio 2008 not detecting Errors while coding

  - by mouthpiec

  Hi, I just installed VS on another PC, but this time, while I am coding, it is not marking syntax errors while I am coding..... I need to press F6 to get the errors. Normally when for example typing the line below, I get 's' underlined saying that there is a mismatch. Any ideas how I can enable this option? string s = 4;

  Read the article

• Ways to prepare your mind before coding?

  - by kmilo

  Coding is a very attention consuming exercise, how do you prepare yourself to begin a good coding session? I use to be more calm and ready to think in a useful way after reading some insightful new posts from my rss reader.

  Read the article

• asp.net MVC DisplayTemplates and EditorTemplate naming convention

  - by Simon G

  Hi, I've got a couple of questions about the naming convention for the DisplayTemplates and EditorTemplates in MVC 2. If for example I have a customer object with a child list of account how do I: Create a display template for the list of accounts, what is the file called? When I'm doing a foreach( var c in Model.Accounts ) how do I call a display temple while in the foreach loop? When I do Html.DisplayFor( x => x ) inside the foreach x is the model and not in this case c. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• What's the convention for extending Linq with set based helper operations

  - by Luke Rohde

  Hi All I might be vaguing out here but I'm looking for a nice place to put set based helper operations in linq so I can do things like; db.Selections.ClearTemporary() which does something like db.DeleteAllOnSubmit(db.Selections.Where(s => s.Temporary)) Since I can figure out how to extend Table<Selection> the best I can do is create a static method in partial class of Selection (similar to Ruby) but I have to pass in the datacontext like; Selection.ClearTemporary(MyDataContext) This kind of sucks because I have two conventions for doing set based operations and I have to pass the data context to the static class. I've seen other people recommending piling helper methods into a partial of the datacontext like; myDataContext.ClearTemporarySelections(); But I feel this makes the dc a dumping ground for in-cohesive operations. Surely I'm missing something. I hope so. What's the convention? TIA

  Read the article

• What's the convention for extending Linq datacontext with set based helper operations specific to on

  - by Luke Rohde

  Hi All I might be vaguing out here but I'm looking for a nice place to put set based helper operations in linq so I can do things like; db.Selections.ClearTemporary() which does something like db.DeleteAllOnSubmit(db.Selections.Where(s => s.Temporary)) Since I can figure out how to extend Table<Selection> the best I can do is create a static method in partial class of Selection (similar to Ruby) but I have to pass in the datacontext like; Selection.ClearTemporary(MyDataContext) This kind of sucks because I have two conventions for doing set based operations and I have to pass the data context to the static class. I've seen other people recommending piling helper methods into a partial of the datacontext like; myDataContext.ClearTemporarySelections(); But I feel this makes the dc a dumping ground for in-cohesive operations. Surely I'm missing something. I hope so. What's the convention? TIA

  Read the article

• Naming convention in Objective C /C , start with "_"?

  - by Tattat

  Something I see ppl define the variable like this: b2World *_world; b2Body *_body; CCSprite *_ball; instead of b2World *world; b2Body *body; CCSprite *ball; I familiar with the second one, but not the first one. So, I checked the Wikipedia about naming convention: Names beginning with double underscore or an underscore and a capital letter are reserved for implementation (compiler, standard library) and should not be used (e.g. __reserved or _Reserved). So, is that any special meaning which is start with "_"? The wiki page.

  Read the article

• Objective-C convention to prevent "local declaration hides instance variable" warning

  - by Nippysaurus

  Is there a common convention for dealing with these scenarios? The following code is what I am using .. -(id) initWithVariableName: (NSString*)variableName withComparisonValue:(NSString*)comparisonValue { self.mustExist = NO; self.reverseCondition = NO; self.regularExpression = NO; self.variableName = variableName; self.comparisonValue = comparisonValue; return self; } But I am getting "Local declaration of 'variableName' hides instance variable" and the same for "comparisonValue". The function signature seems logical to me, but surely there must be a more "acceptable" standard which will still make sense and be accurate but not generate annoying warnings?

  Read the article

• abstract method signature, inheritance, and "Do" naming convention

  - by T. Webster

  I'm learning about design patterns and in examples of code I've seen a convention where the abstract class declares a method, for example: public abstract class ServiceBase { ... public virtual object GetSomething(); and then protected abstract object DoGetSomething(); My question is on why these two methods exist, since they appear to serve the same purpose. Is this so that the base class GetSomething() method logic cannot be overridden by inherited classes? But then again, the method is marked virtual, so it can be overridden anyway. What is the usefulness here in requiring derived class implementers to implement the abstract method when the virtual method can be called anyway?

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC 2: Data DataAnnotations validation be convention

  - by stacker

  I have a required attribute that used with resources: public class ArticleInput : InputBase { [Required(ErrorMessageResourceType = typeof(ArticleResources), ErrorMessageResourceName = "Body_Validation_Required")] public string Body { get; set; } } I want to specify the resources be convention, like this: public class ArticleInput : InputBase { [Required2] public string Body { get; set; } } Basically, Required2 implements the values based on this data: ErrorMessageResourceType = typeof(ClassNameWithoutInput + Resources); // ArticleResources ErrorMessageResourceName = typeof(PropertyName + "_Validation_Required"); // Body_Validation_Required Is there any way to achieve something like this? maybe I need to implement a new ValidationAttribute.

  Read the article

• Interface naming convention

  - by Frederick

  This is a subjective thing of course, but I don't see anything positive in prefixing interface names with an 'I'. To me, Thing is practically always more readable than IThing. My question is, why does this convention exist then? Sure, it makes it easier to tell interfaces from other types. But wouldn't that argument extend to retaining the Hungarian notation, which is now widely censured? What's your argument for that awkward 'I'? Or, more importantly, what could be Microsoft's?

  Read the article

• SQL Server Management Studio – tips for improving the TSQL coding process

  - by kristof

  I used to work in a place where a common practice was to use Pair Programming. I remember how many small things we could learn from each other when working together on the code. Picking up new shortcuts, code snippets etc. with time significantly improved our efficiency of writing code. Since I started working with SQL Server I have been left on my own. The best habits I would normally pick from working together with other people which I cannot do now. So here is the question: What are you tips on efficiently writing TSQL code using SQL Server Management Studio? Please keep the tips to 2 – 3 things/shortcuts that you think improve you speed of coding Please stay within the scope of TSQL and SQL Server Management Studio 2005/2008 If the feature is specific to the version of Management Studio please indicate: e.g. “Works with SQL Server 2008 only" Thanks EDIT: I am afraid that I could have been misunderstood by some of you. I am not looking for tips for writing efficient TSQL code but rather for advice on how to efficiently use Management Studio to speed up the coding process itself. The type of answers that I am looking for are: use of templates, keyboard-shortcuts, use of IntelliSense plugins etc. Basically those little things that make the coding experience a bit more efficient and pleasant. Thanks again

  Read the article

• What "bad practice" do you do, and why?

  - by coppro

  Well, "good practice" and "bad practice" are tossed around a lot these days - "Disable assertions in release builds", "Don't disable assertions in release builds", "Don't use goto.", we've got all sorts of guidelines above and beyond simply making your program work. So I ask of you, what coding practices do you violate all the time, and more importantly, why? Do you disagree with the establishment? Do you just not care? Why should everyone else do the same? cross links: What's your favorite abandoned rule? Rule you know you should follow but don't

  Read the article

• What's wrong with relative imports in Python?

  - by Oddthinking

  I recently upgraded versions of pylint, a popular Python style-checker. It has gone ballistic throughout my code, pointing out places where I import modules in the same package, without specifying the full package path. The new error message is W0403. W0403: Relative import %r, should be %r Used when an import relative to the package directory is detected. Example For example, if my packages are structured like this: /cake /__init__.py /icing.py /sponge.py /drink and in the sponge package I write: import icing instead of import cake.icing I will get this error. While I understand that not all Pylint messages are of equal importance, and I am not afraid to dismiss them, I don't understand why such a practice is considered a poor idea. I was hoping someone could explain the pitfalls, so I could improve my coding style rather than (as I currently plan to do) turning off this apparently spurious warning.

  Read the article

• Why is trailing whitespace a big deal?

  - by EpsilonVector

  Trailing whitespace is enough of a problem for programmers that editors like Emacs have special functions that highlight it or get rid of it automatically, and many coding standards require you to eliminate all instances of it. I'm not entirely sure why though. I can think of one practical reason of avoiding unnecessary whitespace, and it is that if people are not careful about avoiding it, then they might change it in between commits, and then we get diffs polluted with seemingly unchanged lines, just because someone removed or added a space. This already sounds like a pretty good reason to avoid it, but I do want to see if there's more to it than that. So, why is trailing whitespace such a big deal?

  Read the article

• Code maintenance: keeping a bad pattern when extending new code for being consistent or not ?

  - by Guillaume

  I have to extend an existing module of a project. I don't like the way it has been done (lots of anti-pattern involved, like copy/pasted code). I don't want to perform a complete refactor. Should I: create new methods using existing convention, even if I feel it wrong, to avoid confusion for the next maintainer and being consistent with the code base? or try to use what I feel better even if it is introducing another pattern in the code ? Precison edited after first answers: The existing code is not a mess. It is easy to follow and understand. BUT it is introducing lots of boilerplate code that can be avoided with good design (resulting code might become harder to follow then). In my current case it's a good old JDBC (spring template inboard) DAO module, but I have already encounter this dilemma and I'm seeking for other dev feedback. I don't want to refactor because I don't have time. And even with time it will be hard to justify that a whole perfectly working module needs refactoring. Refactoring cost will be heavier than its benefits. Remember: code is not messy or over-complex. I can not extract few methods there and introduce an abstract class here. It is more a flaw in the design (result of extreme 'Keep It Stupid Simple' I think) So the question can also be asked like that: You, as developer, do you prefer to maintain easy stupid boring code OR to have some helpers that will do the stupid boring code at your place ? Downside of the last possibility being that you'll have to learn some stuff and maybe you will have to maintain the easy stupid boring code too until a full refactoring is done)

  Read the article

• Should a programmer take writing lessons to enhance code expressiveness?

  - by Jose Faeti

  Given that programmers are authors and write code to express abstract thoughts and concepts, and good code should be read by other programmers without difficulties and misunderstandings, should a programmer take writing lessons to write better code? Abstracting concepts and real world problems/entities is an important part of writing good code, and a good mastery of the language used for coding should allow the programmer to express his thoughts more easily, or in a better way. Besides, when trying to write or rewrite some code to make it better, much time can be spent in deciding the names for functions, variables or data structures. I think this could also help to avoid writing code with more than one meaning, often cause of misunderstanding between different programmers. Code should always express clearly its function unambiguously.

  Read the article

• Should *'s go next to the type or the variable name? [closed]

  - by derekerdmann

  Possible Duplicate: int* i; or int *i; or int * i; When working in C or C++, how should pointers be declared? Like this: char* derp; or this: char *derp; I typically use the first method, because the variable is a character pointer, but I know that it can create confusion when declaring multiple variables at once: char* herp, derp; herp becomes a character pointer, while derp is just a character. I know it often comes down to coding style, but which one is "better?" Should I sacrifice clarity to eliminate potential confusion?

  Read the article

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