Search Results

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

Page 133/548 | < Previous Page | 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140  | 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

• Is it OK to write code after [super dealloc]? (Objective-C)

  - by Richard J. Ross III

  I have a situation in my code, where I cannot clean up my classes objects without first calling [super dealloc]. It is something like this: // Baseclass.m @implmentation Baseclass ... -(void) dealloc { [self _removeAllData]; [aVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [anotherVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [super dealloc]; } ... @end This works great. My problem is, when I went to subclass this huge and nasty class (over 2000 lines of gross code), I ran into a problem: when I released my objects before calling [super dealloc] I had zombies running through the code that were activated when I called the [self _removeAllData] method. // Subclass.m @implementation Subclass ... -(void) deallloc { [super dealloc]; [someObjectUsedInTheRemoveAllDataMethod release]; } ... @end This works great, and It didn't require me to refactor any code. My question Is this: Is it safe for me to do this, or should I refactor my code? Or maybe autorelease the objects? I am programming for iPhone if that matters any.

  Read the article

• Approaching Java from a Ruby perspective

  - by Travis

  There are plenty of resources available to a Java developer for getting a jump-start into Ruby/Rails development. The reverse doesn't appear to be true. What resources would you suggest for getting up-to-date on the current state of java technologies? How about learning how to approach DRY (don't repeat yourself) without the use of metaprogramming? Or how to approach various scenarios where a ruby developer is used to passing in a function (proc/lambda/block) as an argument (callbacks, etc)?

  Read the article

• Use the serialVersionUID or suppress warnings?

  - by Okami

  Dear all, first thing to note is the serialVersionUID of a class implementing Interface Serializable is not in question. What if we create a class that for example extends HttpServlet? It also should have a serialVersionUID. If someone knows that this object will never be serialized should he define it or add an annotation to suppress those warnings? What would you do and why? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Okami

  Read the article

• How work with common utils project.

  - by ais

  For example, I have some project Common.Utils.csproj and use it in all other projects. I can store its (Utils) sourses in one repository and modify it only there, register dll in gac and use it as dll in other projects, or I can clone sourse anywhere I need, include project in solution, use it as source and push modifications. So, what is best practice?

  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

• Haskell function composition (.) and function application ($) idioms: 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

• Using different numeric variable types

  - by DataPimp

  Im still pretty new so bear with me on this one, my question(s) are not meant to be argumentative or petty but during some reading something struck me as odd. Im under the assumption that when computers were slow and memory was expensive using the correct variable type was much more of a necessity than it is today. Now that memory is a bit easier to come by people seem to have relaxed a bit. For example, you see this sample code everywhere: for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) int? (-2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,648) for length? Isnt byte (0-255) a better choice? So Im curious of your opinion and what you believe to be best practice, I hate to think this would be used only because the acronym "int" is more intuitive for a beginner...or has memory just become so cheap that we really dont need to concern ourselves with such petty things and therefore we should just use long so we can be sure any other numbers/types(within reason) used can be cast automagically? ...or am Im just being silly by concerning myself with such things?

  Read the article

• Can you have 2 tables with identical structure in a good DB schema?

  - by Emanuil

  2 tables: - views - downloads Same structure: item_id, user_id, time Should I be worried?

  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

• Is it weird or strange to make multiple WCF Calls to build a ViewModel before presenting it?

  - by Nate Bross

  Am I doing something wrong if I need code like this in a Controller? Should I be doing something differently? public ActionResult Details(int id) { var svc = new ServiceClient(); var model = new MyViewModel(); model.ObjectA = svc.GetObjectA(id); model.ObjectB = svc.GetObjectB(id); model.ObjectC = svc.GetObjectC(id); return View(model); } The reason I ask, is because I've got Linq-To-Sql on the back end and a WCF Service which exposes functionality through a set of DTOs which are NOT the Linq-To-Sql generated classes and thus do not have the parent/child properties; but in the detail view, I would like to see some of the parent/child data.

  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

• Should frontend and backend be handled by different controllers?

  - by DR

  In my previous learning projects I always used a single controller, but now I wonder if that is good practice or even always possible. In all RESTful Rails tutorials the controllers have a show, an edit and an index view. If an authorized user is logged on, the edit view becomes available and the index view shows additional data manipulation controls, like a delete button or a link to the edit view. Now I have a Rails application which falls exactly into this pattern, but the index view is not reusable: The normal user sees a flashy index page with lots of pictures, complex layout, no Javascript requirement, ... The Admin user index has a completly different minimalistic design, jQuery table and lots of additional data, ... Now I'm not sure how to handle this case. I can think of the following: Single controller, single view: The view is split into two large blocks/partials using an if statement. Single controller, two views: index and index_admin. Two different controllers: BookController and BookAdminController None of these solutions seems perfect, but for now I'm inclined to use the 3rd option. What's the preferred way to do this?

  Read the article

• How to insert an n:m-relationship with technical primary keys generated by a sequence?

  - by bitschnau

  Let's say I have two tables with several fields and in every table there is a primary key which is a technical id generated by a database sequence: table1 table2 ------------- ------------- field11 <pk> field21 <pk> field12 field22 field11 and field21 are generated by sequences. Also there is a n:m-relationship between table1 und table2, designed in table3: table3 ------------- field11 <fk> field21 <fk> The ids in table1 und table2 are generated during the insert statement: INSERT INTO table1 VALUES (table1_seq1.NEXTVAL, ... INSERT INTO table2 VALUES (table2_seq1.NEXTVAL, ... Therefore I don't know the primary key of the added row in the data-access-layer of my program, because the generation of the pk happens completely in the database. What's the best practice to update table3 now? How can I gain access to the primary key of the rows I just inserted?

  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

• Can anyone suggest any good example R packages written using runit or roxygen

  - by PaulHurleyuk

  Hello all, I'm writing an R package that's going to be used by others, so I'm trying to get this one right ! I want to use roxygen for documentation and runit for unit testing, but I haven't used them before. Can anyone suggest any packages (either on CRAN or elsewhere) that use either of these tools well ?

  Read the article

• To "null" or not to "null" my class's attributes

  - by Helper Method

  When I write a class in Java, I like to initialize the attributes which are set to a default value directly and attributes which are set by the caller in the constructor, something like this: public class Stack<E> { private List<E> list; private size = 0; public Stack(int initialCapacity) { list = new ArrayList<E>(initialCapacity); } // remainder omitted } Now suppose I have a Tree class: public class Tree<E> { private Node<E> root = null; // no constructor needed, remainder omitted } Shall I set the root attribute to null, to mark that it is set to null by default, or omit the null value?

  Read the article

• What is the difference between a private and public funtion?

  - by Kyle

  I am a new programmer, and I started in C and am now starting to enjoy JavaScript and a tiny bit of PHP more. Lately I've heard the terms 'private' and 'public' functions a lot. Could anybody give an explanation of the both and how they are of use to a programmer? And I'm probably totally wrong here... but is a (function(){}) in javascript a private function?

  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

• highlite text parts with jquery, best practice

  - by helle

  Hey guys, i have a list of items containig names. then i have a eventlistener, which ckecks for keypress event. if the user types i.g. an A all names starting with an A should be viewed with the A bold. so all starting As should be bold. what is the best way using jquery to highlite only a part of a string? thanks for your help

  Read the article

• Should JavaDoc comments be added to the implementation

  - by Vaishak Suresh

  Is it correct practice to add Javadoc comments in Interface and add non Javadoc comments in the implementation? Most IDEs generate non JavaDoc comments for implementations when you auto generate comments. Shouldn't the concrete method have the description?

  Read the article

• Application Engineering and Number of Users

  - by Kramii

  Apart from performance concerns, should web-based applications be built differently according to the number of (concurrent) users? If so, what are the main differences for (say) 4, 40, 400 and 4000 users? I'm particularly interested in how logging, error handling, design patterns etc. would be be used according to the number of concurrent users.

  Read the article

• Is it correct to use Array.CopyTo to copy elements or should a for-loop always be used?

  - by Arc

  It's easier to write intArray1.CopyTo( intArray2, 0 ) than the for-loop equivalent, but System.Array does not provide any generic Copy/CopyTo methods. Is it better to write the for-loop? Or is using Copy/CopyTo compiled or JIT'd efficiently enough?

  Read the article

• Sequential Asynchronous calls are gross. Is there a more readable solution?

  - by Fletcher Moore

  The problem is this is hard to follow: ajaxOne(function() { // do something ajaxTwo(function() { // do something ajaxThree() }); }); I'm using a third party API to make the AJAX calls, so I need a generic solution.

  Read the article

• Is this bad style of programming(C#) ?

  - by m0s

  Hi, so in my program I have parts where I use try catch blocks like this try { DirectoryInfo dirInfo = new DirectoryInfo(someString); //I don't know if that directory exists //I don't know if that string is valid path string... it could be anything //Some operations here } catch(Exception iDontCareWhyItFailed) { //Didn't work? great... we will say: somethings wrong, try again/next one } Of course I probably could do checks to see if the string is valid path (regex), then I would check if directory exists, then I could catch various exceptions to see why my routine failed and give more info... But in my program it's not really necessary. Now I just really need to know if this is acceptable, and what would a pro say/think about that. Thanks a lot for attention.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140  | Next Page >