Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 121/348 | < Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >

  • What are the Worst Software Project Failures Ever?

    - by Warren P
    Is there a good list of "worst software project failures ever" in the history of software development? For example in Canada a "gun registry" project spent around two billion dollars. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_registry). This is of course, insane, even if the final product "sort of worked". I have heard of an FBI Case file system which there have been several attempts to rewrite, all of them so far, failures. There is a book on the subject (Software Runaways). There doesn't seem to be be a software "boondoggle" list or "fiasco" list on Wikipedia that I can see. (Update: Therac-25 would be the 'winner' of this question, except that I was internally thinking more of Software projects that had as their deliverable, mainly software, as opposed to firmware projects like Therac-25, where the hardware and firmware together are capable of killing people. In terms of pure software monetary debacles, which was my intended question, there are several contenders.)

    Read the article

  • How to record different authentication types (username / password vs token based) in audit log

    - by RM
    I have two types of users for my system, normal human users with a username / password, and delegation authorized accounts through OAuth (i.e. using a token identifier). The information that is stored for each is quite different, and are managed by different subsytems. They do however interact with the same tables / data within the system, so I need to maintain the audit trail regardless of whether human user, or token-based user modified the data. My solution at the moment is to have a table called something like AuditableIdentity, and then have the two types inheriting off that table (either in the single table, or as two seperate tables with 1 to 1 PK with AuditableIdentity. All operations would use the common AuditableIdentity PK for CreatedBy, ModifiedBy etc columns. There isn't any FK constraint on the audit columns, so any text can go in there, but I want an easy way to easily determine whether it was a human or system that made the change, and joining to the one AuditableIdentity table seems like a clean way to do that? Is there a best practice for this scenario? Is this an appropriate way of approaching the problem - or would you not bother with the common table and just rely on joins (to the two seperate un-related user / token tables) later to determine which user type matches which audit records?

    Read the article

  • Abstract Factory Using Generics: Is Explicitly Converting a Specified Type to Generic a Bad Practice

    - by Merritt
    The question's title says it all. I like how it fits into the rest of my code, but does it smell? public interface IFoo<T> { T Bar { get; set; } } public class StringFoo : IFoo<string> { public string Bar { get; set; } } public static class FooFactory { public static IFoo<T> CreateFoo<T>() { if (typeof(T) == typeof(string)) { return new StringFoo() as IFoo<T>; } throw new NotImplementedException(); } } UPDATE: this is sort of a duplicate of Is the StaticFactory in codecampserver a well known pattern?

    Read the article

  • Performance Related features for migration from .net 2003 Framework 1.1 to .net 2008 framework 3.5?

    - by KuldipMCA
    I am work on VB.net 2003 Framework 1.1 for last 3.5 years in windows Application. We are currently migrating to VB.net 2008 framework 3.5, but i don't know about the features which related to ADO.net and which is important to performance. I know linq to SQL but our architecture is made in .net 2003 so we should follow this. Any features which is very important to enhance the performance?

    Read the article

  • What is best practice (and implications) for packaging projects into JAR's?

    - by user245510
    What is considered best practice deciding how to define the set of JAR's for a project (for example a Swing GUI)? There are many possible groupings: JAR per layer (presentation, business, data) JAR per (significant?) GUI panel. For significant system, this results in a large number of JAR's, but the JAR's are (should be) more re-usable - fine-grained granularity JAR per "project" (in the sense of an IDE project); "common.jar", "resources.jar", "gui.jar", etc I am an experienced developer; I know the mechanics of creating JAR's, I'm just looking for wisdom on best-practice. Personally, I like the idea of a JAR per component (e.g. a panel), as I am mad-keen on encapsulation, and the holy-grail of re-use accross projects. I am concerned, however, that on a practical, performance level, the JVM would struggle class loading over dozens, maybe hundreds of small JAR's. Each JAR would contain; the GUI panel code, necessary resources (i.e. not centralised) so each panel can stand alone. Does anyone have wisdom to share?

    Read the article

  • Is there a compelling reason to use quantifiers in Perl regular expressions instead of just repeatin

    - by Morinar
    I was performing a code review for a colleague and he had a regular expression that looked like this: if ($value =~ /^\d\d\d\d$/) { #do stuff } I told him he should change it to: if ($value =~ /^\d{4}$/) { #do stuff } To which he replied that he preferred the first for readability (I find the second more readable, but that's a religious debate I'll save for another day). My question: is there an actual benefit to one over the other?

    Read the article

  • Code Analysis - Treat as Error

    - by Brian Schmitt
    Looking to enable the "Enable code Analysis on Build" feature in Visual Studio. Obviously the Rules are a best practice, and I am working with an existing code base that currently fails many of the rules. I am looking for input as to which rules are the most egregious and should be treated as an Error.

    Read the article

  • Refering to javascript instance methods with a pound/hash sign

    - by Josh
    This question is similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/736120/why-are-methods-in-ruby-documentation-preceded-by-a-pound-sign I understand why in Ruby instance methods are proceeded with a pound sign, helping to differentiate talking about SomeClass#someMethod from SomeObject.someMethod and allowing rdoc to work. And I understand that the authors of PrototypeJS admire Ruby (with good reason) and so they use the hash mark convention in their documentation. My question is: is this a standard practice amongst JavaScript developers or is it just Prototype developers who do this? Asked another way, is it proepr for me to refer to instance methods in comments/documentation as SomeClass#someMethod? Or should my documentation refer to `SomeClass.someMethod?

    Read the article

  • When should I implement IDisposable?

    - by Bobby
    What is the best practice for when to implement IDisposable? Is the best rule of thumb to implement it if you have one managed object in the class, or does it depend if the object was created in the class or just passed in? Should I also do it for classes with no managed objects at all?

    Read the article

  • "do it all" page structure and things to watch out for?

    - by Andrew Heath
    I'm still getting my feet wet in PHP (my 1st language) and I've reached the competency level where I can code one page that handles all sorts of different related requests. They generally have a structure like this: (psuedo code) <?php include 'include/functions.php'; IF authorized IF submit (add data) ELSE IF update (update data) ELSE IF list (show special data) ELSE IF tab switch (show new area) ELSE display vanilla (show default) ELSE "must be registered/logged-in" ?> <HTML> // snip <?php echo $output; ?> // snip </HTML> and it all works nicely, and quite quickly which is cool. But I'm still sorta feeling my way in the dark... and would like some input from the pros regarding this type of page design... is it a good long-term structure? (it seems easily expanded...) are there security risks particular to this design? are there corners I should avoid painting myself into? Just curious about what lies ahead, really...

    Read the article

  • when to use the abstract factory pattern?

    - by hguser
    Hi: I want to know when we need to use the abstract factory pattern. Here is an example,I want to know if it is necessary. The UML THe above is the abstract factory pattern, it is recommended by my classmate. THe following is myown implemention. I do not think it is necessary to use the pattern. And the following is some core codes: package net; import java.io.IOException; import java.util.HashMap; import java.util.Map; import java.util.Properties; public class Test { public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException, InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException, ClassNotFoundException { DaoRepository dr=new DaoRepository(); AbstractDao dao=dr.findDao("sql"); dao.insert(); } } class DaoRepository { Map<String, AbstractDao> daoMap=new HashMap<String, AbstractDao>(); public DaoRepository () throws IOException, InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException, ClassNotFoundException { Properties p=new Properties(); p.load(DaoRepository.class.getResourceAsStream("Test.properties")); initDaos(p); } public void initDaos(Properties p) throws InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException, ClassNotFoundException { String[] daoarray=p.getProperty("dao").split(","); for(String dao:daoarray) { AbstractDao ad=(AbstractDao)Class.forName(dao).newInstance(); daoMap.put(ad.getID(),ad); } } public AbstractDao findDao(String id) {return daoMap.get(id);} } abstract class AbstractDao { public abstract String getID(); public abstract void insert(); public abstract void update(); } class SqlDao extends AbstractDao { public SqlDao() {} public String getID() {return "sql";} public void insert() {System.out.println("sql insert");} public void update() {System.out.println("sql update");} } class AccessDao extends AbstractDao { public AccessDao() {} public String getID() {return "access";} public void insert() {System.out.println("access insert");} public void update() {System.out.println("access update");} } And the content of the Test.properties is just one line: dao=net.SqlDao,net.SqlDao So any ont can tell me if this suitation is necessary?

    Read the article

  • Perform Grouping of Resultsets in Code, not on Database Level

    - by NinjaBomb
    Stackoverflowers, I have a resultset from a SQL query in the form of: Category Column2 Column3 A 2 3.50 A 3 2 B 3 2 B 1 5 ... I need to group the resultset based on the Category column and sum the values for Column2 and Column3. I have to do it in code because I cannot perform the grouping in the SQL query that gets the data due to the complexity of the query (long story). This grouped data will then be displayed in a table. I have it working for specific set of values in the Category column, but I would like a solution that would handle any possible values that appear in the Category column. I know there has to be a straightforward, efficient way to do it but I cannot wrap my head around it right now. How would you accomplish it? EDIT I have attempted to group the result in SQL using the exact same grouping query suggested by Thomas Levesque and both times our entire RDBMS crashed trying to process the query. I was under the impression that Linq was not available until .NET 3.5. This is a .NET 2.0 web application so I did not think it was an option. Am I wrong in thinking that? EDIT Starting a bounty because I believe this would be a good technique to have in the toolbox to use no matter where the different resultsets are coming from. I believe knowing the most concise way to group any 2 somewhat similar sets of data in code (without .NET LINQ) would be beneficial to more people than just me.

    Read the article

  • Should I worry about reigning in namespace number/length/scope?

    - by Jay
    I've recently reorganized a solution-in-progress from 24 projects to 4. To keep the copious files organized in the "main" project, things are in folders in folders in folders. I think I've preserved a logical, discoverable arrangement of the solution content. As a result, of course, I end up with namespaces like AppName.DataAccess.NHibernate.Fluent.Mappings. Is there any compelling reason that I should care about flattening out the namespace hierarchy when my project has a somewhat deeply nested folder structure? (I am not concerned about resolving or managing using directives; I let ReSharper do all the heavy lifting here.)

    Read the article

  • Is ASP.NET MVC is really MVC? Or how to separate model from controller?

    - by Andrey
    Hi all, This question is a bit rhetorical. At some point i got a feeling that ASP.NET MVC is not that authentic implementation of MVC pattern. Or i didn't understood it. Consider following domain: electric bulb, switch and motion detector. They are connected together and when you enter the room motion detector switches on the bulb. If i want to represent them as MVC: switch is model, because it holds the state and contains logic bulb is view, because it presents the state of model to human motion detector is controller, because it converts user actions to generic model commands Switch has one private field (On/Off) as a State and two methods (PressOn, PressOff). If you call PressOn when it is Off it goes to On, if you call it again state doesn't change. Bulb can be replaced with buzzer, motion detector with timer or button, but the model still represent the same logic. Eventually system will have same behavior. This is how i understand classical MVC decomposition, please correct me if i am wrong. Now let's decompose it in ASP.Net MVC way. Bulb is still a view Controller will be switch + motion detector Model is some object that will just pass state to bulb. So the logic that defines behavior moves to controller. Question 1: Is my understanding of MVC and ASP.NET MVC correct? Question 2: If yes, do you agree that ASP.NET MVC is not 100% accurate implementation? And back to life. The final question is how to separate model from controller in case of ASP.NET MVC. There can be two extremes. Controller does basic stuff and call model to do all the logic. Another is controller does all the logic and model is just something like class with properties that is mapped to DB. Question 3: Where should i draw the line between this extremes? How to balance? Thanks, Andrey

    Read the article

  • Validation with State Pattern for Multi-Page Forms in ASP.NET

    - by philrabin
    I'm trying to implement the state pattern for a multi-page registration form. The data on each page will be accumulated and stored in a session object. Should validation (including service layer calls to the DB) occur on the page level or inside each state class? In other words, should the concrete implementation of IState be concerned with the validation or should it be given a fully populated and valid object? See "EmptyFormState" class below: namespace Example { public class Registrar { private readonly IState formEmptyState; private readonly IState baseInformationComplete; public RegistrarSessionData RegistrarSessionData { get; set;} public Registrar() { RegistrarSessionData = new RegistrarSessionData(); formEmptyState = new EmptyFormState(this); baseInformationComplete = new BasicInfoCompleteState(this); State = formEmptyState; } public IState State { get; set; } public void SubmitData(RegistrarSessionData data) { State.SubmitData(data); } public void ProceedToNextStep() { State.ProceedToNextStep(); } } //actual data stored in the session //to be populated by page public class RegistrarSessionData { public string FirstName { get; set; } public string LastName { get; set; } //will include values of all 4 forms } //State Interface public interface IState { void SubmitData(RegistrarSessionData data); void ProceedToNextStep(); } //Concrete implementation of IState //Beginning state - no data public class EmptyFormState : IState { private readonly Registrar registrar; public EmptyFormState(Registrar registrar) { this.registrar = registrar; } public void SubmitData(RegistrarSessionData data) { //Should Validation occur here? //Should each state object contain a validation class? (IValidator ?) //Should this throw an exception? } public void ProceedToNextStep() { registrar.State = new BasicInfoCompleteState(registrar); } } //Next step, will have 4 in total public class BasicInfoCompleteState : IState { private readonly Registrar registrar; public BasicInfoCompleteState(Registrar registrar) { this.registrar = registrar; } public void SubmitData(RegistrarSessionData data) { //etc } public void ProceedToNextStep() { //etc } } }

    Read the article

  • Refactoring a C# derived class with method dependancies

    - by drelihan
    Hi Folks, I want to get your opinion on this. I have a class which is derived from a base class. I don't have control over the code in the base class and it is critical to the system that I derive from it. In my class I inherite two methods that are critical to the system and are used in pretty much every function, many times. I intend to refactor this derived class and extract some classes from it - this won't be a problem. What I'm not sure about is, is it worth extracting class if I have to constantly make call backs to my main class to access the two methods (or public wrappers to the methods)??? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Legacy code - when to move on

    - by Mmarquee
    My team and support a large number of legacy applications all of which are currently functional but problematic to support and maintain. They all depend on code that the compiler manufacture has officially no support for. So the question is should we leave the code as is, and risk a new compiler breaking our code, or should we bite the bullet and update all the code?

    Read the article

  • Double associative array or indexed + associative array

    - by clover
    I'm undecided what's the best-practice approach for what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to enter data into an array where the data will look like this: apple color: red price: 2 orange color: orange price: 3 banana color: yellow price: 2 pineapple color: yellow price: 5 When I get input, let's say green apple (notice it's a combo of color + name of fruit), I'm going to check if the name of fruit part exists in the array and display its data (if it exists). What's the right way to compose those arrays? How would I do an indexed array containing an associative array? (or would this be better as 2 nested associative arrays, I'm guessing not)

    Read the article

  • "Nearly divisible"

    - by bobobobo
    I want to check if a floating point value is "nearly" a multiple of 32. E.g. 64.1 is "nearly" divisible by 32, and so is 63.9. Right now I'm doing this: #define NEARLY_DIVISIBLE 0.1f float offset = fmodf( val, 32.0f ) ; if( offset < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from above } // if it was 63.9, then the remainder would be large, so add some then and check again else if( fmodf( val + 2*NEARLY_DIVISIBLE, 32.0f ) < NEARLY_DIVISIBLE ) { // its near from below } Got a better way to do this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >