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 126/405 | < Previous Page | 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133  | Next Page >

  • Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

    - by Luki
    I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

    Read the article

  • How to expose a constructor variable(sic!) as read-only?

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have this rather simple question about Scala. Given that i have to following class definition: class Foo(var bar: Int) The code which is able to construct an instance of Foo must be able to pass the initial value for bar. But if I define bar as var the User is also able to change its value at runtime which is not what I want. The User should only be able to read bar. bar itself is modified internally so a val is not an option. I think I might be getting an answer very soon as this question is so simple. :-) Cheers, Malax

    Read the article

  • Should checkins be small steps or complete features?

    - by Caspin
    Two of version controls uses seem to dictate different checkin styles. distibution centric: changesets will generally reflect a complete feature. In general these checkins will be larger. This style is more user/maintainer friendly. rollback centric: changesets will be individual small steps so the history can function like an incredibly powerful undo. In general these checkins will be smaller. This style is more developer friendly. I like to use my version control as really powerful undo while while I banging away at some stubborn code/bug. In this way I'm not afraid to make drastic changes just to try out a possible solution. However, this seems to give me a fragmented file history with lots of "well that didn't work" checkins. If instead I try to have my changeset reflect complete features I loose the use of my version control software for experimentation. However, it is much easier for user/maintainers to figure out how the code is evolving. Which has great advantages for code reviews, managing multiple branches, etc. So what's a developer to do? checkin small steps or complete features?

    Read the article

  • Ideal way to set global uncaught exception Handler in Android

    - by Samuh
    I want to set a global uncaught exception handler for all the threads in my Android application. So, in my Application subclass I set an implementation of Thread.UncaughtExceptionHandler as default handler for uncaught exceptions. Thread.setDefaultUncaughtExceptionHandler( new DefaultExceptionHandler(this)); In my implementation, I am trying to display an AlertDialog displaying appropriate exception message. However, this doesn't seem to work. Whenever, an exception is thrown for any thread which goes un-handled, I get the stock, OS-default dialog (Sorry!-Application-has-stopped-unexpectedly dialog). What is the correct and ideal way to set a default handler for uncaught exceptions? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC Handle Drop Down Boxes that are not part of the Model

    - by Pino
    I have a small form which the user must fill in and consists of the following fields. Name (Text) Value (Text) Group (Group - Is a list of option pulled from a database table) Now the Model for this View looks like so, public string Name { get; set; } public string Value { get; set; } public int GroupID { get; set; } Now the view is Strongly Typed to the above model. What method would one use to populate the drop down list? Since the data is not contained within the Model (It could be contained in the Model) should we be using Temp/View data? A HTML Helper? What would be the ideal way to achieve this.

    Read the article

  • Being pressured to GOTO the dark-side

    - by Dan McG
    We have a situation at work where developers working on a legacy (core) system are being pressured into using GOTO statements when adding new features into existing code that is already infected with spagetti code. Now, I understand there may be arguments for using 'just one little GOTO' instead of spending the time on refactoring to a more maintainable solution. The issue is, this isolated 'just one little GOTO' isn't so isolated. At least once every week or so there is a new 'one little GOTO' to add. This codebase is already a horror to work with due to code dating back to or before 1984 being riddled with GOTOs that would make many Pastafarians believe it was inspired by the Flying Spagetti Monster itself. Unfortunately the language this is written in doesn't have any ready made refactoring tools, so it makes it harder to push the 'Refactor to increase productivity later' because short-term wins are the only wins paid attention to here... Has anyone else experienced this issue whereby everybody agrees that we cannot be adding new GOTOs to jump 2000 lines to a random section, but continually have Anaylsts insist on doing it just this one time and having management approve it? tldr; How can one go about addressing the issue of developers being pressured (forced) to continually add GOTO statements (by add, I mean add to jump to random sections many lines away) because it 'gets that feature in quicker'? I'm beginning to fear we may loses valuable developers to the raptors over this...

    Read the article

  • Haskel dot (.) and dollar ($) composition: correct use.

    - by Robert Massaioli
    I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Me As Child Type In General Function

    - by Steven
    I have a MustInherit Parent class with two Child classes which Inherit from the Parent. How can I use (or Cast) Me in a Parent function as the the child type of that instance? EDIT: My actual goal is to be able to serialize (BinaryFormatter.Serialize(Stream, Object)) either of my child classes. However, "repeating the code" in each child "seems" wrong. EDIT2: This is my Serialize function. Where should I implement this function? Copying and pasting to each child doesn't seem right, but casting the parent to a child doesn't seem right either. Public Function Serialize() As Byte() Dim bFmt As New BinaryFormatter() Dim mStr As New MemoryStream() bFmt.Serialize(mStr, Me) Return mStr.ToArray() End Function

    Read the article

  • Stateless singleton VS Static methods

    - by Sebastien Lorber
    Hey, Don't find any good answer to this simple question about helper/utils classes: Why would i create a singleton (stateless) rather than static methods? Why an object instance could be needed while the object has no state? Sometimes i really don't know what to use...

    Read the article

  • Same project...multiple apps?

    - by greypoint
    We have a an iPhone app project that we wish to deploy multiple times under different client names. The individual apps will be very similar but will have different resources (icon, images etc) and config settings stored in plists (server names, options etc). What is the preferred means to manage this in Xcode? Obviously we really don't want different XCode projects for each App deployment since it's 90% shared code.

    Read the article

  • How strict should I be in the "do the simplest thing that could possible work" while doing TDD

    - by Support - multilanguage SO
    For TDD you have to Create a test that fail Do the simplest thing that could possible work to pass the test Add more variants of the test and repeat Refactor when a pattern emerge With this approach you're supposing to cover all the cases ( that comes to my mind at least) but I'm wonder if am I being too strict here and if it is possible to "think ahead" some scenarios instead of simple discover them. For instance, I'm processing a file and if it doesn't conform to a certain format I am to throw an InvalidFormatException So my first test was: @Test void testFormat(){ // empty doesn't do anything... processor.validate("empty.txt"); try { processor.validate("invalid.txt"); assert false: "Should have thrown InvalidFormatException"; } catch( InvalidFormatException ife ) { assert "Invalid format".equals( ife.getMessage() ); } } I run it and it fails because it doesn't throw an exception. So the next thing that comes to my mind is: "Do the simplest thing that could possible work", so I : public void validate( String fileName ) throws InvalidFormatException { if(fileName.equals("invalid.txt") { throw new InvalidFormatException("Invalid format"); } } Doh!! ( although the real code is a bit more complicated, I found my self doing something like this several times ) I know that I have to eventually add another file name and other test that would make this approach impractical and that would force me to refactor to something that makes sense ( which if I understood correctly is the point of TDD, to discover the patterns the usage unveils ) but: Q: am I taking too literal the "Do the simplest thing..." stuff?

    Read the article

  • which version of the code below is right?

    - by TheVillageIdiot
    Hi I found this function in a utilities code file: Version 1: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { bool result = true; try { long tmp = long.Parse(strLong); } catch (Exception ex) { result = false; } return result; } I want to replace this (and validators for other types) with following: Version 2: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { long l; return long.TryParse(strLong, out l); } which version is better and why?

    Read the article

  • How to refactor this Ruby on Rails code?

    - by yuval
    I want to fetch posts based on their status, so I have this code inside my PostsController index action. It seems to be cluttering the index action, though, and I'm not sure it belongs here. How could I make it more concise and where would I move it in my application so it doesn't clutter up my index action (if that is the correct thing to do)? if params[:status].empty? status = 'active' else status = ['active', 'deleted', 'commented'].include?(params[:status]) ? params[:status] : 'active' end case status when 'active' #active posts are not marked as deleted and have no comments is_deleted = false comments_count_sign = "=" when 'deleted' #deleted posts are marked as deleted and have no comments is_deleted = true comments_count_sign = "=" when 'commented' #commented posts are not marked as deleted and do have comments is_deleted = false comments_count_sign = ">" end @posts = Post.find(:all, :conditions => ["is_deleted = ? and comments_count_sign #{comments_count_sign} 0", is_deleted])

    Read the article

  • Is Area what I am looking for?

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi I'm new to MVC2 or MVC in general. I'm gone do basic app with a backend. Now I been thinking about how I should do with the folders, views, controllers & routes for the AdminFolder. Now I just saw something called Areas. Is that a way to go for me?

    Read the article

  • Why are there magic attributes exposed in the Servlet spec?

    - by Brabster
    It's always seemed a little at odds with the principles of Java that the Java Servlet Spec (2.5 version here) includes a set of magic attributes containing info about included resources, namely: javax.servlet.include.request_uri javax.servlet.include.context_path javax.servlet.include.servlet_path javax.servlet.include.path_info javax.servlet.include.query_string It's not even specifically pointed out in the API documentation, only in the spec where it is a must for correct implementation. This approach feels very wrong, an exposed implementation detail that clients will use and depend on. Why is this information exposed in this way?

    Read the article

  • How to check for undefined or null variable in javascript

    - by Thomas Wanner
    We are frequently using the following code pattern in our javascript code if(typeof(some_variable) != 'undefined' && some_variable != null) { // do something with some_variable } and I'm wondering whether there is a less verbose way of checking that has the same effect. According to some forums and literature saying simply if(some_variable) { // do something with some_variable } should have the same effect. Unfortunately, Firebug evaluates such a statement as error on runtime when some_variable is undefined, whereas the first one is just fine for him. Is this only an (unwanted) behavior of Firebug or is there really some difference between those two ways ?

    Read the article

  • How do I correct feature envy in this case?

    - by RMorrisey
    I have some code that looks like: class Parent { private Intermediate intermediateContainer; public Intermediate getIntermediate(); } class Intermediate { private Child child; public Child getChild() {...} public void intermediateOp(); } class Child { public void something(); public void somethingElse(); } class Client { private Parent parent; public void something() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().something(); } public void somethingElse() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().somethingElse(); } public void intermediate() { parent.getIntermediate().intermediateOp(); } } I understand that is an example of the "feature envy" code smell. The question is, what's the best way to fix it? My first instinct is to put the three methods on parent: parent.something(); parent.somethingElse(); parent.intermediateOp(); ...but I feel like this duplicates code, and clutters the API of the Parent class (which is already rather busy). Do I want to store the result of getIntermediate(), and/or getChild(), and keep my own references to these objects?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

    - by Roman
    I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • Are protected constructors considered good practice?

    - by Álvaro G. Vicario
    I'm writing some little helper classes to handle trees. Basically, I have a node and a special root node that represents the tree. I want to keep it generic and simple. This is part of the code: <?php class Tree extends TreeNode{ public function addById($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ if( $parent = $this->findNodeById($parent_id) ){ $parent->addChildById($node_id, $generic_content); } } } class TreeNode{ public function __construct($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ // ... } protected function addChildById($node_id, $generic_content){ $this->children[] = new TreeNode($this->node_id, $node_id, $generic_content); } } $Categories = new Tree; $Categories->addById(1, NULL, $foo); $Categories->addById(2, NULL, $bar); $Categories->addById(3, 1, $gee); ?> My questions: Is it sensible to force TreeNode instances to be created through TreeNode::addById()? If it's so, would it be good practise to declare TreeNode::__construct() as private/protected?

    Read the article

  • How do I create a safe local development environment?

    - by docgnome
    I'm currently doing web development with another developer on a centralized development server. In the past this has worked alright, as we have two separate projects we are working on and rarely conflict. Now, however, we are adding a third (possible) developer into the mix. This is clearly going to create problems with other developers changes affecting my work and vice versa. To solve this problem, I'm thinking the best solution would be to create a virtual machine to distribute between the developers for local use. The problem I have is when it comes to the database. Given that we all develop on laptops, simply keeping a local copy of the live data is plain stupid. I've considered sanitizing the data, but I can't really figure out how to replace the real data, with data that would be representative of what people actually enter with out repeating the same information over and over again, e.g. everyone's address becomes 123 Testing Lane, Test Town, WA, 99999 or something. Is this really something to be concerned about? Are there tools to help with this sort of thing? I'm using MySQL. Ideally, if I sanitized the db it should be done from a script that I can run regularly. If I do this I'd also need a way to reduce the size of the db itself. (I figure I could select all the records created after x and whack them and all the records in corresponding tables out so that isn't really a big deal.) The second solution I've thought of is to encrypt the hard drive of the vm, but I'm unsure of how practical this is in terms of speed and also in the event of a lost/stolen laptop. If I do this, should the vm hard drive file itself be encrypted or should it be encrypted in the vm? (I'm assuming the latter as it would be portable and doesn't require the devs to have any sort of encryption capability on their OS of choice.) The third is to create a copy of the database for each developer on our development server that they are then responsible to keep the schema in sync with the canonical db by means of migration scripts or what have you. This solution seems to be the simplest but doesn't really scale as more developers are added. How do you deal with this problem?

    Read the article

  • MVP pattern. Presenter requires new view instance. Best practice

    - by Andrew Florko
    I try to apply MVP pattern for win.forms application. I have 2 forms: main & child. Main has a button and when you click it - child form should appear. There are 2 views interfaces that forms implement IMainView { event OnClick; ... } IChildView { ... } There are two presenters MainPresenter(IMainView) & ChildPresenter(IChildView) MainPresenter listens to OnClick event and then should create IChildView implementation. MainPresenter { ... MainClicked() { // it's required to create IChildView instance here } } How would you implement such creation typically? Shall IMainView has factory method for IChildView or may be it should be separate Views factory. What would you advise? Or maybe there is some misunderstanding of MVP here? Thank you in advance!

    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 | 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133  | Next Page >