Search Results

Search found 10115 results on 405 pages for 'coding 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 120/405 | < Previous Page | 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127  | Next Page >

  • Where to draw the line between efficiency and practicality

    - by dclowd9901
    I understand very well the need for websites' front ends to be coded and compressed as much as possible, however, I feel like I have more lax standards than others when it comes to practical applications. For instance, while I understand why some would, I don't see anything wrong with putting selectors in the <html> or <body> tags on a website with an expected small visitation rate. I would only do this for a cheap website for a small client, because I can't really justify the cost of time otherwise. So, that said, do you think it's okay to draw a line? Where do you draw yours?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to identify which form has been submitted?

    - by Rupert
    Currently, when I design my forms, I like to keep the name of the submit button equal to the id of the form. Then, in my php, I just do if(isset($_POST['submitName'])) in order to check if a form has been submitted and which form has been submitted. Firstly, are there any security problems or design flaws with this method? One problem I have encountered is when I wish to overlay my forms with javascript in order to provide faster validation to the user. For example, whilst I obviously need to retain server side validation, it is more convenient for the user if an error message is displayed inline, upon blurring an input. Additionally, it would be good to provide entire form validation, upon clicking the submit button. Therefore, when the user clicks on the form's submit button, I am stopping the default action, doing my validation, and then attempting to renable the traditional submit functionality, if the validation passes. In order to do this, I am using the form.submit() method but, unfortunately, this doesn't send the submit button variable (as it should be as form.submit() can be called without any button being clicked). This means my PHP script fails to detect that the form has been submitted. What is the correct way to work around this? It seems like the standard solution is to add a hidden field into the form, upon passing validation, which has the name of form's id. Then when form.submit() is called, this is passed along in place of the submit button. However, this solution seems very ungraceful to me and so I am wondering whether I should: a) Use an alternative method to detect which form has been submitted which doesn't rely rely on passing the submit button. If so what alternative is there? Obviously, just having an extra hidden field from the start isn't any better. b) Use an alternative Javascript solution which allows me to retain my non-Javascript design. For example, is there an alternative to form.submit() which allows me to pass in extra data? c) Suck it up and just insert a hidden field using Javascript.

    Read the article

  • Is a "Confirm Email" input good practice when user changes email address?

    - by dibson
    My organization has a form to allow users to update their email address with us. It's suggested that we have two input boxes for email: the second as an email confirmation. I always copy/paste my email address when faced with the confirmation. I'm assuming most of our users are not so savvy. Regardless, is this considered a good practice? I can't stand it personally, but I also realize it probably isn't meant for me. If someone screws up their email, they can't login, and they must call to sort things out.

    Read the article

  • HTTP POST with URL query parameters -- good idea or not?

    - by Steven Huwig
    I'm designing an API to go over HTTP and I am wondering if using the HTTP POST command, but with URL query parameters only and no request body, is a good way to go. Considerations: "Good Web design" requires non-idempotent actions to be sent via POST. This is a non-idempotent action. It is easier to develop and debug this app when the request parameters are present in the URL. The API is not intended for widespread use. It seems like making a POST request with no body will take a bit more work, e.g. a Content-Length: 0 header must be explicitly added. It also seems to me that a POST with no body is a bit counter to most developer's and HTTP frameworks' expectations. Are there any more pitfalls or advantages to sending parameters on a POST request via the URL query rather than the request body? Edit: The reason this is under consideration is that the operations are not idempotent and have side effects other than retrieval. See the HTTP spec: In particular, the convention has been established that the GET and HEAD methods SHOULD NOT have the significance of taking an action other than retrieval. These methods ought to be considered "safe". This allows user agents to represent other methods, such as POST, PUT and DELETE, in a special way, so that the user is made aware of the fact that a possibly unsafe action is being requested. ... Methods can also have the property of "idempotence" in that (aside from error or expiration issues) the side-effects of N 0 identical requests is the same as for a single request. The methods GET, HEAD, PUT and DELETE share this property. Also, the methods OPTIONS and TRACE SHOULD NOT have side effects, and so are inherently idempotent.

    Read the article

  • If you were developing shareware softwares for windows, would you target the .Net Framework or use n

    - by bohoo
    For the sake of the question, by 'shareware' I mean a software which is relatively small in size (up to few dozens of mb) and available for download and evaluation through a web site. I'm asking this question, because I don't understand something regarding the current state of windows commercial desktop development. It seems to me that: There is no reliable statistic regarding the extent of windows systems with .Net Framework installed. It makes no sense to force the end user to install the 20-60mb .Net for an application which may be smaller. Applications conforms to the term 'shareware' above have a big share on the win os market. Much of them don't need the capabilities of low level languages like c++, and therefore ideally they should be developed with a RAD enviroment. So, One would suppose there will be a blossom of RAD enviroments for native win code. But I know about only one - Delphi, and Delphi is so unpopular. How is that?

    Read the article

  • Should I use IDisposable for purely managed resources?

    - by John Gietzen
    Here is the scenario: I have an object called a Transaction that needs to make sure that only one entity has permission to edit it at any given time. In order to facilitate a long-lived lock, I have the class generating a token object that can be used to make the edits. You would use it like this: var transaction = new Transaction(); using (var tlock = transaction.Lock()) { transaction.Update(data, tlock); } Now, I want the TransactionLock class to implement IDisposable so that its usage can be clear. But, I don't have any unmanaged resources to dispose. however, the TransctionLock object itself is a sort of "unmanaged resource" in the sense that the CLR doesn't know how to properly finalize it. All of this would be fine and dandy, I would just use IDisposable and be done with it. However, my issue comes when I try to do this in the finalizer: ~TransactionLock() { this.Dispose(false); } I want the finalizer to release the transaction from the lock, if possible. How, in the finalizer, do I detect if the parent transaction (this.transaction) has already been finalized? Is there a better pattern I should be using? The Transaction class looks something like this: public sealed class Transaction { private readonly object lockMutex = new object(); private TransactionLock currentLock; public TransactionLock Lock() { lock (this.lockMutex) { if (this.currentLock != null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); this.currentLock = new TransactionLock(this); return this.currentLock; } } public void Update(object data, TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); // ... } } internal void ValidateLock(TransactionLock tlock) { if (this.currentLock == null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); if (this.currentLock != tlock) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); } internal void Unlock(TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); this.currentLock = null; } } }

    Read the article

  • What is the procedure for debugging a production-only error?

    - by Lord Torgamus
    Let me say upfront that I'm so ignorant on this topic that I don't even know whether this question has objective answers or not. If it ends up being "not," I'll delete or vote to close the post. Here's the scenario: I just wrote a little web service. It works on my machine. It works on my team lead's machine. It works, as far as I can tell, on every machine except for the production server. The exception that the production server spits out upon failure originates from a third-party JAR file, and is skimpy on information. I search the web for hours, but don't come up with anything useful. So what's the procedure for tracking down an issue that occurs only on production machines? Is there a standard methodology, or perhaps category/family of tools, for this? The error that inspired this question has already been fixed, but that was due more to good fortune than a solid approach to debugging. I'm asking this question for future reference. Some related questions: Test accounts and products in a production system Running test on Production Code/Server

    Read the article

  • Is it against best practice to throw Exception on most JUnit tests?

    - by Chris Knight
    Almost all of my JUnit tests are written with the following signature: public void testSomething() throws Exception My reasoning is that I can focus on what I'm testing rather than exception handling which JUnit appears to give me for free. But am I missing anything by doing this? Is it against best practice? Would I gain anything by explicitly catching specific exceptions in my test and then fail()'ing on them?

    Read the article

  • With MVVM, does each UI window have its own ViewModel?

    - by j0rd4n
    When I'm designing multiple views under the MVVM pattern, does each view get its own ViewModel or do they all share the same one? I understand that this is ultimately a flexible decision, but what is the best practice? My gut tells me to have a ViewModel for each view (i.e. each separate UI window). All of the blog examples of MVVM show a single view but not much beyond that.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server error handling: exceptions and the database-client contract

    - by gbn
    We’re a team of SQL Servers database developers. Our clients are a mixed bag of C#/ASP.NET, C# and Java web services, Java/Unix services and some Excel. Our client developers only use stored procedures that we provide and we expect that (where sensible, of course) they treat them like web service methods. Some our client developers don’t like SQL exceptions. They understand them in their languages but they don’t appreciate that the SQL is limited in how we can communicate issues. I don’t just mean SQL errors, such as trying to insert “bob” into a int column. I also mean exceptions such as telling them that a reference value is wrong, or that data has already changed, or they can’t do this because his aggregate is not zero. They’d don’t really have any concrete alternatives: they’ve mentioned that we should output parameters, but we assume an exception means “processing stopped/rolled back. How do folks here handle the database-client contract? Either generally or where there is separation between the DB and client code monkeys. Edits: we use SQL Server 2005 TRY/CATCH exclusively we log all errors after the rollback to an exception table already we're concerned that some of our clients won't check output paramaters and assume everything is OK. We need errors flagged up for support to look at. everything is an exception... the clients are expected to do some message parsing to separate information vs errors. To separate our exceptions from DB engine and calling errors, they should use the error number (ours are all 50,000 of course)

    Read the article

  • How to use a 3rd party control inside the viewmodel?

    - by Sander
    I have a 3rd party control which among other things performs loading of some data. I want my viewmodel to keep track of this load operation and adjust its own state accordingly. If it were up to me, I'd do the data loading far away from the view, but it is not. So, I seem to be in the situation where my viewmodel depends on my view. How do I best handle this? I feel rather dirty making the view publish events to the viewmodel but I don't see any other reasonable way to get this info into the viewmodel. A similar situation might crop up with standard controls, too - imagine if your viewmodel depends on the events coming from a MediaElement - how do you properly model this? Do you put the MediaElement into the viewmodel? That doesn't sound right. If publishing the events to the viewmodel is indeed the most reasonable way, is there some common pattern used for this? How do you do it?

    Read the article

  • When are global variables acceptable?

    - by dsimcha
    Everyone here seems to hate global variables, but I see at least one very reasonable use for them: They are great for holding program parameters that are determined at program initialization and not modified afterwords. Do you agree that this is an exception to the "globals are evil" rule? Is there any other exception that you can think of, besides in quick and dirty throwaway code where basically anything goes? If not, why are globals so fundamentally evil that you do not believe that there are any exceptons?

    Read the article

  • Win7: Right place to install a program that may be 'shared' with other computers

    - by robsoft
    We have an app that currently installs itself into 'program files\our app', and it puts the internal data files into the common Application Data folder. This means the program is available to any user on that particular PC. Now we want to make a multi-user version of this program, multiple PCs accessing the program at the same time across the network. In the bad old days, under XP, we'd just have the user who installed the app 'share' the app directory and off we'd go. In principle, is this still the 'right' way to do it under Vista/Windows 7? We'd like to do this 'properly' and be as compliant as possible! Is there a recommended 'Microsoft' approach for doing this, or is it largely down to whatever we can get away with and subsequently support (hah!). I've tried researching this on the MS websites but not found anything too helpful at all - it'd be really useful to have a 'if you're trying to install this kind of thing, put it here' type guide for developers!

    Read the article

  • Best practice -- Content Tracking Remote Data (cURL, file_get_contents, cron, et. al)?

    - by user322787
    I am attempting to build a script that will log data that changes every 1 second. The initial thought was "Just run a php file that does a cURL every second from cron" -- but I have a very strong feeling that this isn't the right way to go about it. Here are my specifications: There are currently 10 sites I need to gather data from and log to a database -- this number will invariably increase over time, so the solution needs to be scalable. Each site has data that it spits out to a URL every second, but only keeps 10 lines on the page, and they can sometimes spit out up to 10 lines each time, so I need to pick up that data every second to ensure I get all the data. As I will also be writing this data to my own DB, there's going to be I/O every second of every day for a considerably long time. Barring magic, what is the most efficient way to achieve this? it might help to know that the data that I am getting every second is very small, under 500bytes.

    Read the article

  • Should my validator have access to my entire model?

    - by wb
    As the title states I'm wondering if it's a good idea for my validation class to have access to all properties from my model. Ideally, I would like to do that because some fields require 10+ other fields to verify whether it is valid or not. I could but would rather not have functions with 10+ parameters. Or would that make the model and validator too coupled with one another? Here is a little example of what I mean. This code however does not work because it give an infinite loop! Class User Private m_UserID Private m_Validator Public Sub Class_Initialize() End Sub Public Property Let Validator(value) Set m_Validator = value m_Validator.Initialize(Me) End Property Public Property Get Validator() Validator = m_Validator End Property Public Property Let UserID(value) m_UserID = value End property Public Property Get UserID() UserID = m_Validator.IsUserIDValid() End property End Class Class Validator Private m_User Public Sub Class_Initialize() End Sub Public Sub Initialize(value) Set m_User = value End Sub Public Function IsUserIDValid() IsUserIDValid = m_User.UserID > 13 End Function End Class Dim mike : Set mike = New User mike.UserID = 123456 mike.Validator = New Validator Response.Write mike.UserID If I'm right and it is a good idea, how can I go a head and fix the infinite loop with the get property UserID? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Send through Email, or store in database?

    - by user156814
    I have wondered when it is best to send an email, and when its best to store data in a database/log file. Everytime a user wants to contact me or inform me of soething, I suppose an email is best.. but is an email always preferred over other ways, and in what cases. Possible reasons for being contacted I can think of are questions, suggestions, feedback, reporting abuse, advertising, etc... I assume email, "why add unnecessary things to the DB?", but I figure data in DB would be a lot easier to manage. Whats the better/best way to be informed of things like this.. What is the best way for you (webmaster) to be informed of something by users? through email, or some other way

    Read the article

  • How do we name test methods where we are checking for more than one condition?

    - by Sandbox
    I follow the technique specified in Roy Osherove's The Art Of Unit Testing book while naming test methods - MethodName_Scenario_Expectation. It suits perfectly well for my 'unit' tests. But,for tests that I write in 'controller' or 'coordinator' class, there isn't necessarily a method which I want to test. For these tests, I generate multiple conditions which make up one scenario and then I verify the expectation. For example, I may set some properties on different instances, generate an event and then verify that my expectation from controller/coordinator is being met. Now, my controller handles events using a private event handler. Here my scenario is that, I set some properties, say 3 condition1,condition2 and condition3 Also, my scenario includes an event is raised I don't have a method name as my event handler is private. How do I name such a test method?

    Read the article

  • What lessons can you learn from software maintanence?

    - by Vasil Remeniuk
    Hello everyone, In the perfect world, all the software developers would work with the cutting edge technologies, creating systems from the scratch. In the real life, almost all of us have to maintain software from time to time (unlucky ones do it on a regular basis). Personally I first 2 years of my career was fixing bugs in the company that no longer exists (it has been taken up by Oracle). And probably the biggest lesson I've learned that time - despite of the pressure, always try to get as much information about the domain as possible (even if it's irrelevant to fixing a specific bug or adding a feature) - abstract domain knowledge doesn't lose value as fast as knowledge about trendy frameworks or methodologies. What lessons have you learned from maintenance?

    Read the article

  • C# Async call garbage collection

    - by Troy
    Hello. I am working on a Silverlight/WCF application and of course have numerous async calls throughout the Silverlight program. I was wondering on how is the best way to handle the creation of the client classes and subscribing. Specifically, if I subscribe to an event in a method, after it returns does it fall out of scope? internal MyClass { public void OnMyButtonClicked() { var wcfClient = new WcfClient(); wcfClient.SomeMethodFinished += OnMethodCompleted; wcfClient.SomeMethodAsync(); } private void OnMethodCompleted(object sender, EventArgs args) { //Do something with the result //After this method does the subscription to the event //fall out of scope for garbage collection? } } Will I run into problems if I call the function again and create another subscription? Thanks in advance to anyone who responds.

    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 | 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127  | Next Page >