Search Results

Search found 13692 results on 548 pages for 'bad 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 135/548 | < Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >

  • Elegant solution for line-breaks (PHP)

    - by Nimbuz
    $var = "Hi there"."<br/>"."Welcome to my website"."<br/>;" echo $var; Is there an elegant way to handle line-breaks in PHP? I'm not sure about other languages, but C++ has eol so something thats more readable and elegant to use? Thanks

    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

  • Pattern for database-wrapper in java

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I am currently writing a java-class that wraps an SQLite database. This class has two ways to be instantiated: Open an existing database. Create a new database. This is what I cam up with: public class SQLiteDatabaseWrapper { public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper openExisting(File PathToDB) { return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper createNew(File PathToDB) { CreateAndInitializeNewDatabase(PathToDB); return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } private SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(File PathToDB) { // Open connection and setup wrapper } } Is this the way to go in Java, or is there any other best practice for this situation?

    Read the article

  • When to rewrite vs. upgrade?

    - by MrGumbe
    All custom legacy software needs changing, or so say our users. Sometimes they want a feature or two added and all that is necessary to change a bit of code, add a control, or some other minor upgrade task. Sometimes they want to ditch their error-prone VB5 desktop solution and rewrite the whole thing as a rich Web 2.0 ASP.NET MVC application. More often, however, the scope of changes to legacy functionality lies somewhere between these two extremes. What rules of thumb to you use to decide whether you should upgrade an existing application or start from scratch?

    Read the article

  • Connection Pool Strategy: Good, Bad or Ugly?

    - by Drew
    I'm in charge of developing and maintaining a group of Web Applications that are centered around similar data. The architecture I decided on at the time was that each application would have their own database and web-root application. Each application maintains a connection pool to its own database and a central database for shared data (logins, etc.) A co-worker has been positing that this strategy will not scale because having so many different connection pools will not be scalable and that we should refactor the database so that all of the different applications use a single central database and that any modifications that may be unique to a system will need to be reflected from that one database and then use a single pool powered by Tomcat. He has posited that there is a lot of "meta data" that goes back and forth across the network to maintain a connection pool. My understanding is that with proper tuning to use only as many connections as necessary across the different pools (low volume apps getting less connections, high volume apps getting more, etc.) that the number of pools doesn't matter compared to the number of connections or more formally that the difference in overhead required to maintain 3 pools of 10 connections is negligible compared to 1 pool of 30 connections. The reasoning behind initially breaking the systems into a one-app-one-database design was that there are likely going to be differences between the apps and that each system could make modifications on the schema as needed. Similarly, it eliminated the possibility of system data bleeding through to other apps. Unfortunately there is not strong leadership in the company to make a hard decision. Although my co-worker is backing up his worries only with vagueness, I want to make sure I understand the ramifications of multiple small databases/connections versus one large database/connection pool.

    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

  • Creating an interface and swappable implementations in python

    - by Blankman
    Hi, Would it be possible to create a class interface in python and various implementations of the interface. Example: I want to create a class for pop3 access (and all methods etc.). If I go with a commercial component, I want to wrap it to adhere to a contract. In the future, if I want to use another component or code my own, I want to be able to swap things out and not have things very tightly coupled. Possible? I'm new to python.

    Read the article

  • Continuous integration with multiple branch development

    - by ryanprayogo
    In the project that I'm working on, we are using SVN with 'Stable Trunk' strategy. What that means is that for each bug that is found, QA opens a bug ticket and assigns it to a developer. Then, a developer fixes that bug and checks it in a branch (off trunk, let's call this the bug branch) and that branch will only contain fixes for that particular bug ticket When we decided to do a release, for each bug fixes that we want to release to the customer, a developer will merge all the fixes from several bug branch to trunk and proceed with the normal QA cycle. The problem is that we use trunk as the codebase for our CI job (Hudson, specifically), and therefore, for all commits to the bug branch, it will miss the daily build until it gets merged to trunk when we decided to release the new version of the software. Obviously, that defeats the purpose of having CI. What is the proper way to fix this issue?

    Read the article

  • How to pass non-fatal warnings from a library

    - by wRAR
    A library function parses a file and returns an object. If a parser encounters unknown data, missing values etc., it shouldn't throw an exception and stop parsing (because this is not fatal), but there should be a way to pass information about these things to a caller (so that warnings can be displayed in the UI, for example). How can these warning be returned? I'm thinking of passing a callback function/object into the library, are there any other possible solutions?

    Read the article

  • Documentation style: how do you differentiate variable names from the rest of the text within a comm

    - by Alix
    Hi, This is a quite superfluous and uninteresting question, I'm afraid, but I always wonder about this. When you're commenting code with inline comments (as opposed to comments that will appear in the generated documentation) and the name of a variable appears in the comment, how do you differentiate it from normal text? E.g.: // Try to parse type. parsedType = tryParse(type); In the comment, "type" is the name of the variable. Do you mark it in any way to signify that it's a symbol and not just part of the comment's text? I've seen things like this: // Try to parse "type". // Try to parse 'type'. // Try to parse *type*. // Try to parse <type>. // Try to parse [type]. And also: // Try to parse variable type. (I don't think the last one is very helpful; it's a bit confusing; you could think "variable" is an adjective there) Do you have any preference? I find that I need to use some kind of marker; otherwise the comments are sometimes ambiguous, or at least force you to reread them when you realise a particular word in the comment was actually the name of a variable. (In comments that will appear in the documentation I use the appropriate tags for the generator, of course: @code, <code></code>, etc) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Nested Array with one foreach Loop?

    - by streetparade
    I need to have access to a array which looks like this. Array ( [0] => Array ( [54] => Array ( [test] => 54 [tester] => result ) ) ) foreach($array as $key=>$value) { echo $key;// prints 0 echo $value;// prints Array /* now i can iterate through $value but i dont want it solve that way example: foreach($value as $k=>$v) { echo $k;//prints test echo $v; //prints 54 } */ } How can iterate just once ? to get the values of test and tester? I hope i could explain my problem clear

    Read the article

  • What's quicker and better to determine if an array key exists in PHP?

    - by alex
    Consider these 2 examples $key = 'jim'; // example 1 if (isset($array[$key])) { doWhatIWant(); } // example 2 if (array_key_exists($key, $array)) { doWhatIWant(); } I'm interested in knowing if either of these are better. I've always used the first, but have seen a lot of people use the second example on this site. So, which is better? Faster? Clearer intent? Update Thanks for the quality answers. I now understand the difference between the 2. A benchmark states that isset() alone is quicker than array_key_exists(). However, if you want the isset() to behave like array_key_exists() it is slower.

    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

  • Why do I need to give my options a value attribute in my dropdown? JQuery.

    - by Alex
    So far in my web developing experiences, I've noticed that almost all web developers/designers choose to give their options in a select a value like so: <select name="foo"> <option value="bar">BarCheese</option> // etc. // etc. </select> Is this because it is best practice to do so? I ask this because I have done a lot of work with jQuery and dropdown's lately, and sometimes I get really annoyed when I have to check something like: $('select[name=foo]').val() == "bar"); To me, many times that seems less clear than just being able to check the val() against BarCheese. So why is it that most web developers/designers specify a value paramater instead of just letting the options actual value be its value?

    Read the article

  • Use of properties vs backing-field inside owner class

    - by whatispunk
    I love auto-implemented properties in C# but lately there's been this elephant standing in my cubicle and I don't know what to do with him. If I use auto-implemented properties (hereafter "aip") then I no longer have a private backing field to use internally. This is fine because the aip has no side-effects. But what if later on I need to add some extra processing in the get or set? Now I need to create a backing-field so I can expand my getters and setters. This is fine for external code using the class, because they won't notice the difference. But now all of the internal references to the aip are going to invoke these side-effects when they access the property. Now all internal access to the once aip must be refactored to use the backing-field. So my question is, what do most of you do? Do you use auto-implemented properties or do you prefer to always use a backing-field? What do you think about properties with side-effects?

    Read the article

  • Preprocessor #define vs. function pointer - best practice?

    - by Dustin
    I recently started a small personal project (RGB value to BGR value conversion program) in C, and I realised that a function that converts from RGB to BGR can not only perform the conversion but also the inversion. Obviously that means I don't really need two functions rgb2bgr and bgr2rgb. However, does it matter whether I use a function pointer instead of a macro? For example: int rgb2bgr (const int rgb); /* * Should I do this because it allows the compiler to issue * appropriate error messages using the proper function name, * not to mention possible debugging benefits? */ int (*bgr2rgb) (const int bgr) = rgb2bgr; /* * Or should I do this since it is merely a convenience * and they're really the same function anyway? */ #define bgr2rgb(bgr) (rgb2bgr (bgr)) I'm not necessarily looking for a change in execution efficiency as it's more of a subjective question out of curiosity. I am well aware of the fact that type safety is neither lost nor gained using either method. Would the function pointer merely be a convenience or are there more practical benefits to be gained of which I am unaware?

    Read the article

  • Check if web form values has changed. Best practice

    - by Andrew Florko
    Hello everybody, I have multi-step form and user can navigate to any page to modify or add information. There is a menu that shows progress and steps user completed. This menu allows to navigate to any step user completed or going to complete. Inspite of big button "Save and Continue" some users click this menu to navigate further. I have to check - if values have changed in a form and ask: "Save changes? Yes/No". What is the best way (with minimum code) you suggest me to check if form values have changed. Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • why copy and paste codes is dangerous

    - by Yigang Wu
    sometimes, my boss will complain us why we need so long time to implement a feature, actually, the feature has been implemented in other AP before, you just need to copy and paste codes from there. The cost should be low. It's really a hard question, because copy and paste codes is not a easy thing from my point. Do you have any good reason to explain your boss who doesn't know technology?

    Read the article

  • PHP explode and set to empty string the missing pieces

    - by Marco Demaio
    What's the best way to accomplish the following. I have strings in this format: $s1 = "name1|type1"; //(pipe is the separator) $s2 = "name2|type2"; $s3 = "name3"; //(in some of them type can be missing) Let's assume namen/typen are strings and they can not contain a pipe. Since I need to exctract the name/type separetly, I do: $temp = explode($s1, '|'); $name = $temp[0]; $type = ( isset($temp[1]) ? $temp[1] : '' ); Is there an easier (smarter whatever faster) way to do this without having to do isset($temp[1]) or count($temp). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to evade writing a lot of repetitive code when mapping?

    - by JPCF
    I have a data access layer (DAL) using Entity Framework, and I want to use Automapper to communicate with upper layers. I will have to map data transfer objects (DTOs) to entities as the first operation on every method, process my inputs, then proceed to map from entities to DTOs. What would you do to skip writing this code? As an example, see this: //This is a common method in my DAL public CarDTO getCarByOwnerAndCreditStatus(OwnerDTO ownerDto, CreditDto creditDto) { //I want to automatize this code on all methods similar to this Mapper.CreateMap<OwnerDTO,Owner>(); Mapper.CreateMap<CreditDTO,Credit>(); Owner owner = Mapper.map(ownerDto); Owner credit = Mapper.map(creditDto) //... Some code processing the mapped DTOs //I want to automatize this code on all methods similar to this Mapper.CreateMap<Car,CarDTO>(); Car car = Mapper.map(ownedCar); return car; }

    Read the article

  • Getting up to speed on modern architecture

    - by Matt Thrower
    Hi, I don't have any formal qualifications in computer science, rather I taught myself classic ASP back in the days of the dotcom boom and managed to get myself a job and my career developed from there. I was a confident and, I think, pretty good programmer in ASP 3 but as others have observed one of the problems with classic ASP was that it did a very good job of hiding the nitty-gritty of http so you could become quite competent as a programmer on the basis of relatively poor understanding of the technology you were working with. When I changed on to .NET at first I treated it like classic ASP, developing stand-alone applications as individual websites simply because I didn't know any better at the time. I moved jobs at this point and spent the next several years working on a single site whose architecture relied heavily on custom objects: in other words I gained a lot of experience working with .NET as a middle-tier development tool using a quite old-fashioned approach to OO design along the lines of the classic "car" class example that's so often used to teach OO. Breaking down programs into blocks of functionality and basing your classes and methods around that. Although we worked under an Agile approach to manage the work the whole setup was classic client/server stuff. That suited me and I gradually got to grips with .NET and started using it far more in the manner that it should be, and I began to see the power inherent in the technology and precisely why it was so much better than good old ASP 3. In my latest job I have found myself suddenly dropped in at the deep end with two quite young, skilled and very cutting-edge programmers. They've built a site architecture which is modelling along a lot of stuff which is new to me and which, in truth I'm having a lot of trouble understanding. The application is built on a cloud computing model with multi-tenancy and the architecture is all loosely coupled using a lot of interfaces, factories and the like. They use nHibernate a lot too. Shortly after I joined, both these guys left and I'm now supposedly the senior developer on a system whose technology and architecture I don't really understand and I have no-one to ask questions of. Except you, the internet. Frankly I feel like I've been pitched in at the deep end and I'm sinking. I'm not sure if this is because I lack the educational background to understand this stuff, if I'm simply not mathematically minded enough for modern computing (my maths was never great - my approach to design is often to simply debug until it works, then refactor until it looks neat), or whether I've simply been presented with too much of too radical a nature at once. But the only way to find out which it is is to try and learn it. So can anyone suggest some good places to start? Good books, tutorials or blogs? I've found a lot of internet material simply presupposes a level of understanding that I just don't have. Your advice is much appreciated. Help a middle-aged, stuck in the mud developer get enthusastic again! Please!

    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 | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >