Search Results

Search found 13692 results on 548 pages for 'bad practices'.

Page 132/548 | < Previous Page | 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139  | Next Page >

• 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

• Best ways to reuse Java methods

  - by carillonator

  I'm learning Java and OOP, and have been doing the problems at Project Euler for practice (awesome site btw). I find myself doing many of the same things over and over, like: checking if an integer is prime/generating primes generating the Fibonacci series checking if a number is a palindrome What is the best way to store and call these methods? Should I write a utility class and then import it? If so, do I import a .class file or the .java source? I'm working from a plain text editor and the Mac terminal. Thanks!

  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

• Multiple-File Template Implementation

  - by Maxpm

  With normal functions, the declaration and definition are often separated across multiple files like so: // Foo.h namespace Foo { void Bar(); } . // Foo.cpp #include "Foo.h" void Foo::Bar() { cout << "Inside function." << endl; } It is my understanding that this cannot be done with templates. The declaration and definition must not be separate because the appropriate form of the template is created "on-demand" when needed. So, how and where are templates typically defined in a multiple-file project like this? My intuition is that it would be in Foo.cpp because that's where the "meat" of functions normally is, but on the other hand it's the header file that's going to be included.

  Read the article

• Trying to trigger php script, get EXC_BAD_ACCESS iPhone development

  - by Brennan Kastner

  This below is my code, when it gets to the end of the function, the debugger throws an EXC_BAD_ACCESS error and when I check the website's logs, the url was never visited. If anyone could help me fix this issue, it would be greatly appreciated: -(IBAction)submitEmail:(id)sender { NSString *urlStringRaw = [[NSString alloc] init]; urlStringRaw = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"http://vedev.org/AnonMail/sendEmail.php?from=%@&to=%@&subject=%@&body=%@", from.text, to.text, subject.text, bodyContent.text]; NSString *urlString = [urlStringRaw stringByAddingPercentEscapesUsingEncoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding]; [urlStringRaw release]; NSURL * url = [NSURL URLWithString:urlString]; [urlString release]; NSURLRequest *requestObj = [NSURLRequest requestWithURL:url]; [url release]; NSURLConnection *connection = [NSURLConnection connectionWithRequest:requestObj delegate:nil]; [connection release]; [requestObj release]; }

  Read the article

• Should HTTP POST be discouraged?

  - by Tomas Sedovic

  Quoting from the CouchDB documentation: It is recommended that you avoid POST when possible, because proxies and other network intermediaries will occasionally resend POST requests, which can result in duplicate document creation. To my understanding, this should not be happening on the protocol level (a confused user armed with a doubleclick is a completely different story). What is the best course of action, then? Should we really try to avoid POST requests and replace them by PUT? I don't like that as they convey a different meaning. Should we anticipate this and protect the requests by unique IDs where we want to avoid accidental duplication? I don't like that either: it complicates the code and prevents situations where multiple identical posts may be desired.

  Read the article

• How to handle too many files in Qt

  - by mree

  I'm not sure how to ask this, but here goes the question: I'm migrating from J2SE to Qt. After creating some small applications in Qt, I noticed that I've created way too many files compared to what I would've create if I was developing in Java (I use Netbeans). For an example, for a GUI to Orders, I'd have to create Main Order Search Window Edit Order Dialog Manage Order Dialog Maybe some other dialogs... For Java, I don't have to create a new file for every new Dialog, the Dialog will be created in the JFrame class itself. So, I will only be seeing 1 file for Orders which has other Dialogs in it. However, in Qt, I'd have to create 1 ui file, 1 header file, 1 cpp file for each of the Dialog (I know I can just put the cpp in the header, but it's easier to view codes in seperate files). So, in the end, I might end up with 3 (if there are 3 dialogs) x3 files = 9 files for the GUI in Qt, compared to Java which is only 1 file. I do know that I can create a GUI by coding it manually. But it seems easy on small GUIs but not some on complicated GUIs with lots of inputs, tabs and etc. So, is there any suggestion on how to minimize the file created in Qt?

  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

• Is Unit Testing worth the effort?

  - by The Talking Walnut

  I am working to integrate unit testing into the development process on the team I work on and there are some skeptics. What are some good ways to convince the skeptical developers on the team of the value of Unit Testing? In my specific case we would be adding Unit Tests as we add functionality or fixed bugs. Unfortunately our code base does not lend itself to easy testing.

  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

• Error handling inside or out of class?

  - by Rin

  Usually I do all what I can inside a class, in every method (try and catch). Am I doing it wrong? Recently I heard better way is handle error in program body... What is good habit?

  Read the article

• how should i create my own 'now' / DateTime.Now ?

  - by Michel

  Hi all, i'm starting to build a part of a system which will hold a lot of DateTime validations, and a lot of 'if it was done before now' or 'if it will start in an hour etc'. Usual way to go is to use DateTime.Now to get the actual time. I predict however, that during unit test that will give me a real headache because i will have to setup my testdata for the time when the test will run in stead of use a default set of test data. So i thought: why not use my own 'now' so i can set the current datetime to any moment in time. As i don't want to set the testservers internal clock i was thinking about this solution, and i was wondering what you think of it. Base thought is that i use my own DateTime class. That class gives you the current datetime, but you can also set your own time from outside. public static class MyDateTime { private static TimeSpan _TimeDifference = TimeSpan.Zero; public static DateTime Now { get { return DateTime.Now + _TimeDifference; } } public static void SetNewNow(DateTime newNow) { _TimeDifference = newNow - DateTime.Now; } public static void AddToRealTime(TimeSpan timeSpan ) { _TimeDifference = timeSpan; } public static void SubtractFromRealTime(TimeSpan timeSpan) { _TimeDifference = - timeSpan; } }

  Read the article

• The Java interface doesn't declare any exception. How to manage checked exception of the implementat

  - by Frór

  Let's say I have the following Java interface that I may not modify: public interface MyInterface { public void doSomething(); } And now the class implementing it is like this: class MyImplementation implements MyInterface { public void doSomething() { try { // read file } catch (IOException e) { // what to do? } } } I can't recover from not reading the file. A subclass of RuntimeException can clearly help me, but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do: the problem is that that exception would then not be documented in the class and a user of the class would possibly get that exception an know nothing about solving this. What can I do?

  Read the article

• Wait For Return Key Press Using Java Scanner

  - by Gordon

  What would be the best way to wait for a return key press from the user using the Java Scanner Class? In a command line tool I would like the user to confirm before carrying out an action. Please correct me if there a more standard way of doing this in a command line tool.

  Read the article

• Storing "derived" values vs calculating them on extraction

  - by kemp

  When you have values which only depends on one or more other fields +/- constants (say retail price & discount price), is it better to store those values too or to calculate them "on the fly" when retrieving the data?

  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

• Whats the best semantic default/starting layout for html5?

  - by John Isaacks

  I am a little confused on how the new tags should go. Is this correct: <!DOCTYPE HTML> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> <title></title> </head> <body> <section> <header> <nav></nav> </header> <section> </section> <footer> </footer> <section> </body> </html> Or should one of the sections be an <article>? What should be the starting layout?

  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

• How should I architect JasperReports with a PHP front+backend system

  - by Itay Moav

  Our system is written completely in PHP. For various business reasons (which are a given) I need to build the reports of the system using JasperReports. What architecture should I use? Should I put the Jasper as a stand alone server (if possible) and let the php query against it, should I have it generate the reports with a cron, and then let the PHP scoop up the files and send them to the web client/browser...

  Read the article

• Saving a Django form with a Many2Many field with through table

  - by PhilGo20

  So I have this model with multiple Many2Many relationship. 2 of those (EventCategorizing and EventLocation are through tables/intermediary models) class Event(models.Model): """ Event information for Way-finding and Navigator application""" categories = models.ManyToManyField('EventCategorizing', null=True, blank=True, help_text="categories associated with the location") #categories associated with the location images = models.ManyToManyField(KMSImageP, null=True, blank=True) #images related to the event creator = models.ForeignKey(User, verbose_name=_('creator'), related_name="%(class)s_created") locations = models.ManyToManyField('EventLocation', null=True, blank=True) In my view, I first need to save the creator as the request user, so I use the commit=False parameter to get the form values. if event_form.is_valid(): event = event_form.save(commit=False) #we save the request user as the creator event.creator = request.user event.save() event = event_form.save_m2m() event.save() I get the following error: *** TypeError: 'EventCategorizing' instance expected I can manually add the M2M relationship to my "event" instance, but I am sure there is a simpler way. Am I missing on something ?

  Read the article

• Does OOP make sense for small scripts?

  - by Fabian

  I mostly write small scripts in python, about 50 - 250 lines of code. I usually don't use any objects, just straightforward procedural programming. I know OOP basics and I have used object in other programming languages before, but for small scripts I don't see how objects would improve them. But maybe that is just my limited experience with OOP. Am I missing something by not trying harder to use objects, or does OOP just not make a lot of sense for small scripts?

  Read the article

• Should a developer write their own test plan for Q/A?

  - by Mat Nadrofsky

  Who writes the test plans in your shop? Who should write them? I realize developers (like me) regularly do their own unit testing whilst developing and in some cases even their own Q/A depending on the size of the shop and the nature of the business, but in a big software shop with a full development team and Q/A team, who should be writing those official "my changes are done now" test plans? Soon, we'll be bringing on another Q/A member to our development team. My question is, going forward, is it a good practice to get your developers to write their own test plans? Something tells me that part of that might make sense but another part might not... What I like about that: Developer is very familiar with the changes made, thus it's easy to produce a document... What I don't like about that: Developer knows how it's supposed to work and might write a test plan that caters to this without knowing it. So, with the above in mind, what is the general stance on this topic? I'm of course already reading books like the Mythical Man-Month, Code Complete and a few others which really do help, but I'd like to get some input from the group as well.

  Read the article

• Is "for(;;)" faster than "while (TRUE)"? If not, why do people use it?

  - by Chris Cooper

  for (;;) { //Something to be done repeatedly } I have seen this sort of thing used a lot, but I think it is rather strange... Wouldn't it be much clearer to say while (TRUE), or something along those lines? I'm guessing that (as is the reason for many-a-programmer to resort to cryptic code) this is a tiny margin faster? Why, and is it REALLY worth it? If so, why not just define it this way: #DEFINE while(TRUE) for(;;)

  Read the article

• Best practice for using Wcf service by silverlight?

  - by bonefisher

  How would you structure the code for calling a wcf service in silverlight application? Using only-once instanciated wcf service-proxy (aka singleton) and using it across the whole SL app? If so, how did you solve the unsubscribing controls from ws-call-completed event? or creating the wcf service-proxy for each ws-call? Where do you close the proxy then?

  Read the article

• Should a C++ constructor do real work?

  - by Wade Williams

  I'm strugging with some advice I have in the back of my mind but for which I can't remember the reasoning. I seem to remember at some point reading some advice (can't remember the source) that C++ constructors should not do real work. Rather, they should initialize variables only. The advice when on to explain that real work should be done in some sort of init() method, to be called separately after the instance was created. The situation is I have a class that represents a hardware device. It makes logical sense to me for the constructor to call the routines that query the device in order to build up the instance variables that describe the device. In other words, once new instantiates the object, the developer receives an object which is ready to be used, no separate call to object-init() required. Is there a good reason why constructors shouldn't do real work? Obviously it could slow allocation time, but that wouldn't be any different if calling a separate method immediately after allocation. Just trying to figure out what gotchas I not currently considering that might have lead to such advice.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139  | Next Page >