Search Results

Search found 6690 results on 268 pages for 'worst 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 121/268 | < Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >

  • Fastest way to check for value existance.

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

    Read the article

  • Best way to make an attribute always an array?

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

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice in case something goes wrong in Perl code?

    - by Geo
    I saw code which works like this: do_something($param) || warn "something went wrong\n"; and I also saw code like this: eval { do_something_else($param); }; if($@) { warn "something went wrong\n"; } Should I use eval/die in all my subroutines? Should I write all my code based on stuff returned from subroutines? Isn't eval'ing the code ( over and over ) gonna slow me down?

    Read the article

  • Call a non member funcion on an instance before is constructed.

    - by Tom
    Hi everyone. I'm writing a class, and this doubt came up. Is this undef. behaviour? On the other hand, I'm not sure its recommended, or if its a good practice. Is it one if I ensure no exceptions to be thrown in the init function? //c.h class C{ float vx,vy; friend void init(C& c); public: C(); ~C(); }; //c.cpp C::C() { init(*this); } void init(C& c) //throws() to ensure no exceptions ? { c.vx = 0; c.vy = 0; } Thanks in advance

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • moving a website built on struts to a CMS

    - by fabiobeta
    Hi. Imagine having developed a classical website with java&struts. Now you customer is learning that redeploying the application to change an image or a text is a significant cost. And it asks to add a function to the site: cms-like handling of the contents (editing, versioning, approved publishing). How would you handle this request? Would you develop it in the webapp? Would you merge the webapp with a CMS? Would tou MOVE the webapp into a cms? Would you run away?

    Read the article

  • Handling missing data

    - by soppotare
    Say I have a simple helpdesk application which logs calls made by users. I would typically have such fields in a table relating to the call e.g. CallID, Description, CustomerID etc. I Would also have a table of customers including CustomerID, Username, Password, FullName etc. Now when a user is deleted from the customers table then the inner join between the calls table and the users table to find out historically which user logged a call would produce no results. How do people usually deal with this? Have seperate customer and useraccount tables Just disable the accounts so the data is still available Record the customers name in the calls table as a seperate field. or any other methods / suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Flexible array members in C - bad?

    - by Lionel
    I recently read that using flexible array members in C was poor software engineering practice. However, that statement was not backed by any argument. Is this an accepted fact? (Flexible array members are a C feature introduced in C99 whereby one can declare the last element to be an array of unspecified size. For example: ) struct header { size_t len; unsigned char data[]; };

    Read the article

  • Where to put SVN repository directory in Linux?

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

    Read the article

  • UI to allow 700+ multiple choices

    - by Refracted Paladin
    In my desktop .NET application I have written(for internal use) where I need to allow my users to apply diagnosis's to a Member Plan. There are currently 700 in the system and growing. I need to allow them to add multiple diapnosis's at once. I currently am allowing this through a combo check list box. This works but is INSANELY unweildly for both myself and the users. What I am looking for is a how I could go about displaying these to the users. Ideally I would need to show two criteria for each each as well. Diagnosis Name and Diagnosis Code Ideas? How would you tackle this? I am using .Net 3.5sp1 and SQL 2005 for the backend. I don't care if the solution is WPF or Winforms.

    Read the article

  • Generating new tasks in a foreach loop

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I know from the codeing guidlines that I have read you should not do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(i)); } Console.ReadLine(); as it will write 5 5's, I understand that and I think i understand why it is happening. I know the solution is just to do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { int localI = i; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(localI)); } Console.ReadLine(); However is something like this ok to do? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; currentTask.Start(); foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { task.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; } } or do i need to do this? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { Task localTask = task; currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { localTask.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; }

    Read the article

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

    - by user93422
    I have a table, with 10 columns. I want to control the width of each column. Each column is unique, right now I create an external CSS style for each column: div#my-page table#members th.name-col { width: 40px; } I know there is a best practice to avoid inline style. I do approve using external CSS for anything look'n'feel related: fonts, colors, images. But is it really better to use external CSS in this case? It does not incur extra maintenance cost. It is easier to produce. Cons I can think of: If you have separate designers and development team - using inline styles will force designers to modify content-file (aspx in my case). It might use more bandwidth. Anything else I've missed?

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad programming practise to have "Public" members inside an "Internal" class?

    - by Amby
    I mean, won;t it be more specific and appropriate if i "only" keep "protected","internal" and "private" members (field,method,property,event) in a class which is declared as "internal" ? I have seen this practice ( having "public" members in an "internal" class) in various code so just wanted to know is it a bad practice or does it has some benefit or advantage. [Only concerned about C#] Thanks for your interest.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • int i vs int index etc. Which one is better?

    - by Earlz
    Coming from a C background I've always used int i for generic loop variables. Of course in big nested loops or other complex things I may use a descriptive name but which one had you rather see? int i; for(i=0;i<Controls.Count;i++){ DoStuff(Controls[i]); } or int index; for(index=0;index<Controls.Count;index++){ DoStuff(Controls[index]); } In the current project I am working on there are both of these styles and index being replaced by ndx. Which one is better? Is the i variable too generic? Also what about the other C style names? i, j, k Should all of these be replaced by actual descriptive variables?

    Read the article

  • Call a non member function on an instance before is constructed.

    - by Tom
    Hi everyone. I'm writing a class, and this doubt came up. Is this undef. behaviour? On the other hand, I'm not sure its recommended, or if its a good practice. Is it one if I ensure no exceptions to be thrown in the init function? //c.h class C{ float vx,vy; friend void init(C& c); public: C(); }; //c.cpp C::C() { init(*this); } void init(C& c) //throws() to ensure no exceptions ? { c.vx = 0; c.vy = 0; } Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • how to organize classes in ruby if they are literal subclasses

    - by RetroNoodle
    I know that title didn't make sense, Im sorry! Its hard to word what I am trying to ask. I had trouble googling it for the same reason. So this isn't even Ruby specific, but I am working in ruby and I am new to it, so bear with me. So you have a class that is a document. Inside each document, you have sentences, and each sentence has words. Words will have properties, like "noun" or a count of how many times they are used in the document, etc. I would like each of the elements, document, sentence, word be an object. Now, if you think literally - sentences are in documents, and words are in sentences. Should this be organized literally like this as well? Like inside the document class you will define and instantiate the sentence objects, and inside the sentence class you will define and instantiate the words? Or, should everything be separate and reference each other? Like the word class would sit outside the sentence class but the sentence class would be able to instantiate and work with words? This is a basic OOP question I guess, and I suppose you could argue to do it either way. What do you guys think? Each sentence in the document could be stored in a hash of sentence objects inside the document object, and each word in the sentence could be stored in a hash of word objects inside the sentence. I dont want to code myself into a corner here, thats why I am asking, plus I have wondered this before in other situations. Thank you!

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Using try vs if in python

    - by artdanil
    Is there a rationale to decide which one of try or if constructs to use, when testing variable to have a value? For example, there is a function that returns either a list or doesn't return a value. I want to check result before processing it. Which of the following would be more preferable and why? result = function(); if (result): for r in result: #process items or result = function(); try: for r in result: #process items except TypeError: pass; Related discussion: Checking for member existence in Python

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