Search Results

Search found 30896 results on 1236 pages for 'best buy'.

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 131/1236 | < Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >

  • Using GET instead of POST to delete data behind authenticated pages

    - by Matt Spradley
    I know you should use POST whenever data will be modified on a public website. There are several reasons including the fact that search engines will follow all the links and modify the data. My question is do you think it is OK to use GET behind authenticated pages in something like an admin interface? One example would be a list of products with a delete link on each row. Since the only way to get to the page is if you are logged in, is there any harm in just using a link with the product ID in the query string?

    Read the article

  • Standard Workflow when working with JPA

    - by jschoen
    I am currently trying to wrap my head around working with JPA. I can't help but feel like I am missing something or doing it the wrong way. It just seems forced so far. What I think I know so far is that their are couple of ways to work with JPA and tools to support this. You can do everything in Java using annotations, and let JPA (whatever implementation you decide to use) create your schema and update it when changes are made. You can use a tool to reverse engineer you database and generate the entity classes for you. When the schema is updated you have to regenerate these classes, or manually update them. There seems to be drawbacks to both, and benefits to both (as with all things). My question is in an ideal situation what is the standard workflow with JPA? Most schemas will require updates during the maintenance phase and especially during the development phase, so how is this handled?

    Read the article

  • must have tools for better quality code

    - by leon
    I just started my real development career and I want to know what set of tools/strategy that the community is using to write better quality code. To start, I use astyle to format my code doxygen to document my code gcc -Wall -Wextra -pedantic and clang -Wall -Wextra -pedantic to check all warnings What tools/strategy do you use to write better code? This question is open to all language and all platform.

    Read the article

  • "requiresuniqueemail=true" implementation in asp.net site

    - by domineer
    Hi people I got a social networking site that is running live right now.The first time I launched my site I let requiresuniqueemail=false set-up on my web.config inorder for me to create dummy accounts for testing purposes and to start up the site you know.However the site is kind of stable right now w/ almost 5k members.So I would like to set-up the requiresuniqueemail to true so that users cannot reuse their existing email address and for me to make it sure that there will be unique email ad for each site user.I know the site got like 100 users with the same email address.My question is what could be the problem I'm going to face if I do this right now(requiresuniqueemail="true") and how to do this efficiently(without errors and if possible sitewide say in the global assax)?I tested and I already got an error if I logout an account.Like say a user try to click log-out this code runs: Dim d As DateTime = DateTime.Now.AddMinutes(-1 * Membership.UserIsOnlineTimeWindow) Dim theuser As MembershipUser = Membership.GetUser() theuser.LastActivityDate = d Membership.UpdateUser(theuser) If Not Cache(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") Is Nothing Then Cache.Remove(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") End If Then an exception occured on updateuser() function saying System.Configuration.Provider.ProviderException: The E-mail supplied is invalid. This is just one instance I know that I encountered a problem. Hoping to hear your ideas guys.....

    Read the article

  • Why is using a common-lookup table to restrict the status of entity wrong?

    - by FreshCode
    According to Five Simple Database Design Errors You Should Avoid by Anith Sen, using a common-lookup table to store the possible statuses for an entity is a common mistake. Why is this wrong? I disagree that it's wrong, citing the example of jobs at a repair service with many possible statuses that generally have a natural flow, eg.: Booked In Assigned to Technician Diagnosing problem Waiting for Client Confirmation Repaired & Ready for Pickup Repaired & Couriered Irreparable & Ready for Pickup Quote Rejected Arguably, some of these statuses can be normalised to tables like Couriered Items, Completed Jobs and Quotes (with Pending/Accepted/Rejected statuses), but that feels like unnecessary schema complication. Another common example would be order statuses that restrict the status of an order, eg: Pending Completed Shipped Cancelled Refunded The status titles and descriptions are in one place for editing and are easy to scaffold as a drop-down with a foreign key for dynamic data applications. This has worked well for me in the past. If the business rules dictate the creation of a new order status, I can just add it to OrderStatus table, without rebuilding my code.

    Read the article

  • Are regexes really maintainable?

    - by Rich Bradshaw
    Any code I've seen that uses Regexes tends to use them as a black box: Put in string Magic Regex Get out string This doesn't seem a particularly good idea to use in production code, as even a small change can often result in a completely different regex. Apart from cases where the standard is permanent and unchanging, are regexes the way to do things, or is it better to try different methods?

    Read the article

  • What are the 'big' advantages to have Poco with ORM?

    - by bonefisher
    One advantage that comes to my mind is, if you use Poco classes for Orm mapping, you can easily switch from one ORM to another, if both support Poco. Having an ORM with no Poco support, e.g. mappings are done with attributes like the DataObjects.Net Orm, is not an issue for me, as also with Poco-supported Orms and theirs generated proxy entities, you have to be aware that entities are actually DAO objects bound to some context/session, e.g. serializing is a problem, etc..

    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

  • Observer pattern and violation of Single Responsibility Principle

    - by Devil Jin
    I have an applet which repaints itself once the text has changed Design 1: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet implements Listener{ private DynamicText text = null; public void init(){ text = new DynamicText("Welcome"); } public void paint(Graphics g){ g.drawString(text.getText(), 50, 30); } //implement Listener update() method public void update(){ repaint(); } } //DynamicText.java public class DynamicText implements Publisher{ // implements Publisher interface methods //notify listeners whenever text changes } Isn't this a violation of Single Responsibility Principle where my Applet not only acts as Applet but also has to do Listener job. Same way DynamicText class not only generates the dynamic text but updates the registered listeners. Design 2: //MyApplet.java public class MyApplet extends Applet{ private AppletListener appLstnr = null; public void init(){ appLstnr = new AppletListener(this); // applet stuff } } // AppletListener.java public class AppletListener implements Listener{ private Applet applet = null; public AppletListener(Applet applet){ this.applet = applet; } public void update(){ this.applet.repaint(); } } // DynamicText public class DynamicText{ private TextPublisher textPblshr = null; public DynamicText(TextPublisher txtPblshr){ this.textPblshr = txtPblshr; } // call textPblshr.notifyListeners whenever text changes } public class TextPublisher implments Publisher{ // implements publisher interface methods } Q1. Is design 1 a SPR violation? Q2. Is composition a better choice here to remove SPR violation as in design 2.

    Read the article

  • Is code clearness killing application performance?

    - by Jorge Córdoba
    As today's code is getting more complex by the minute, code needs to be designed to be maintainable - meaning easy to read, and easy to understand. That being said, I can't help but remember the programs that ran a couple of years ago such as Winamp or some games in which you needed a high performance program because your 486 100 Mhz wouldn't play mp3s with that beautiful mp3 player which consumed all of your CPU cycles. Now I run Media Player (or whatever), start playing an mp3 and it eats up a 25-30% of one of my four cores. Come on!! If a 486 can do it, how can the playback take up so much processor to do the same? I'm a developer myself, and I always used to advise: keep your code simple, don't prematurely optimize for performance. It seems that we've gone from "trying to get it to use the least amount of CPU as possible" to "if it doesn't take too much CPU is all right". So, do you think we are killing performance by ignoring optimizations?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate/JPA DB Schema Generation Best Practices

    - by Bytecode Ninja
    I just wanted to hear the opinion of Hibernate experts about DB schema generation best practices for Hibernate/JPA based projects. Especially: What strategy to use when the project has just started? Is it recommended to let Hibernate automatically generate the schema in this phase or is it better to create the database tables manually from earliest phases of the project? Pretending that throughout the project the schema was being generated using Hibernate, is it better to disable automatic schema generation and manually create the database schema just before the system is released into production? And after the system has been released into production, what is the best practice for maintaining the entity classes and the DB schema (e.g. adding/renaming/updating columns, renaming tables, etc.)? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Where do you extend classes in your rails application?

    - by ro
    Just about to extend the Array class with the following extension: class Array def shuffle! size.downto(1) { |n| push delete_at(rand(n)) } self end end However, I was wondering where a good place to keep these sort of extensions. I was thinking environment.rb or putting in its own file in the initializers directory.

    Read the article

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Most common software development mistakes

    - by hgulyan
    Inspired by Dealing with personal failure, I remembered my own failed software development experience. Finally I agreed to rewrite existing application. It took me less than a week to rewrite existing app and more up to 2 months to write from zero my own. That 2 months were really hard and interesting. It was my first big software development process. I researched almost everything concerning to my application. Read Code Complete. Even some articles on how to create user interface. Some psychology stuff. Typography, Colors. DAL, DB Structure, SOA, Patterns, UML, Load testing etc. I hope, that after a month or 2 I would get opportunity to continue working on my failed project, but before that, I would like to ask: What are common mistakes in software development? What you shouldn't do in any case?

    Read the article

  • standard debugging way for javascript/jquery

    - by ZX12R
    This is my usual way to debug javascript. Include alert(0); to break the flow and find out what is happening. sometimes when i need multiple check points i do alert('the flow is now in function 1'); alert('the flow is now in function 2'); or sometimes just alert('success'); i would like to know if there is any standard way for debugging adopted as i am finding my current method very intrusive. thanks in advance..:)

    Read the article

  • anti-if campaign

    - by Andrew Siemer
    I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

    Read the article

  • How to handle 'this' pointer in constructor?

    - by Kyle
    I have objects which create other child objects within their constructors, passing 'this' so the child can save a pointer back to its parent. I use boost::shared_ptr extensively in my programming as a safer alternative to std::auto_ptr or raw pointers. So the child would have code such as shared_ptr<Parent>, and boost provides the shared_from_this() method which the parent can give to the child. My problem is that shared_from_this() cannot be used in a constructor, which isn't really a crime because 'this' should not be used in a constructor anyways unless you know what you're doing and don't mind the limitations. Google's C++ Style Guide states that constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method. This solves the 'this-in-constructor' problem as well as a few others as well. What bothers me is that people using your code now must remember to call Init() every time they construct one of your objects. The only way I can think of to enforce this is by having an assertion that Init() has already been called at the top of every member function, but this is tedious to write and cumbersome to execute. Are there any idioms out there that solve this problem at any step along the way?

    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 | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >