Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns and practices'.

Page 136/348 | < Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >

• If terminating a hung thread is a good idea, how do I do it safely?

  - by Steve

  My Delphi program relies heavily on Outlook automation. Outlook versions prior to 2007-SP2 tend to get stuck in memory due to badly written addins and badly written Outlook code. If Outlook is stuck, calling CreateOleObject('Outlook.Application') or GetActiveObject ... doesn't return and keeps my application hanging till Outlook.exe is closed in the task manager. I've thought of a solution, but I'm unsure whether it's good practice or not. I'd start Outlook with CreateOleObject in a separate thread, wait 10 seconds in my main thread and if Outlook hangs (CreateOleObject doesn't return), offer the user to kill the Outlook.exe process from my program. But since I don't want to force the user to kill the Outlook.exe process, as an alternative I also need a way to kill the new thread in my program which keeps hanging now. Is this good practice? How can I terminate a hanging thread in Delphi without leaking memory?

  Read the article

• Large PHP arrays or MySQL temporary memory tables?

  - by Mads Jensen

  How would you temporarily store several thousands key => value or key => array pairs within a single process. Lookups on key will be done continuously within the process, and the data is discarded when the process ends. Should i use arrays? temporary MySQL tables? Or something in between?

  Read the article

• Extension methods for encapsulation and reusability

  - by tzaman

  In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself?

  Read the article

• What are the worst examples of moral failure in the history of software engineering?

  - by Amanda S

  Many computer science curricula include a class or at least a lecture on disasters caused by software bugs, such as the Therac-25 incidents or Ariane 5 Flight 501. Indeed, Wikipedia has a list of software bugs with serious consequences, and a question on StackOverflow addresses some of them too. We study the failures of the past so that we don't repeat them, and I believe that rather than ignoring them or excusing them, it's important to look at these failures squarely and remind ourselves exactly how the mistakes made by people in our profession cost real money and real lives. By studying failures caused by uncaught bugs and bad process, we learn certain lessons about rigorous testing and accountability, and we make sure that our innocent mistakes are caught before they cause major problems. There are kinds of less innocent failure in software engineering, however, and I think it's just as important to study the serious consequences caused by programmers motivated by malice, greed, or just plain amorality. Thus we can learn about the ethical questions that arise in our profession, and how to respond when we are faced with them ourselves. Unfortunately, it's much harder to find lists of these failures--the only one I can come up with is that apocryphal "DOS ain't done 'til Lotus won't run" story. What are the worst examples of moral failure in the history of software engineering?

  Read the article

• Rails Full Engine using a Full Engine

  - by SirLenz0rlot

  I've got this full rails engine Foo with functionality X. I want to make another engine, engine Bar, that is pretty much the same, but override funcitonality x with y. (it basically does the same, but a few controller actions and views are differently implemented). (I might split this later in several mountable engines, but for now, this will be the setup: project Baz, using engine Bar, which uses engine Foo) I would like to know if there are any pitfalls. It doesn't seem like a pattern that is often used? Anybody else using this 'some sort of engine inheritance'?

  Read the article

• Advice on Factory Method

  - by heath

  Using php 5.2, I'm trying to use a factory to return a service to the controller. My request uri would be of the format www.mydomain.com/service/method/param1/param2/etc. My controller would then call a service factory using the token sent in the uri. From what I've seen, there are two main routes I could go with my factory. Single method: class ServiceFactory { public static function getInstance($token) { switch($token) { case 'location': return new StaticPageTemplateService('location'); break; case 'product': return new DynamicPageTemplateService('product'); break; case 'user' return new UserService(); break; default: return new StaticPageTemplateService($token); } } } or multiple methods: class ServiceFactory { public static function getLocationService() { return new StaticPageTemplateService('location'); } public static function getProductService() { return new DynamicPageTemplateService('product'); } public static function getUserService() { return new UserService(); } public static function getDefaultService($token) { return new StaticPageTemplateService($token); } } So, given this, I will have a handful of generic services in which I will pass that token (for example, StaticPageTemplateService and DynamicPageTemplateService) that will probably implement another factory method just like this to grab templates, domain objects, etc. And some that will be specific services (for example, UserService) which will be 1:1 to that token and not reused. So, this seems to be an ok approach (please give suggestions if it is not) for a small amount of services. But what about when, over time and my site grows, I end up with 100s of possibilities. This no longer seems like a good approach. Am I just way off to begin with or is there another design pattern that would be a better fit? Thanks. UPDATE: @JSprang - the token is actually sent in the uri like mydomain.com/location would want a service specific to loction and mydomain.com/news would want a service specific to news. Now, for a lot of these, the service will be generic. For instance, a lot of pages will call a StaticTemplatePageService in which the token is passed in to the service. That service in turn will grab the "location" template or "links" template and just spit it back out. Some will need DynamicTemplatePageService in which the token gets passed in, like "news" and that service will grab a NewsDomainObject, determine how to present it and spit that back out. Others, like "user" will be specific to a UserService in which it will have methods like Login, Logout, etc. So basically, the token will be used to determine which service is needed AND if it is generic service, that token will be passed to that service. Maybe token isn't the correct terminology but I hope you get the purpose. I wanted to use the factory so I can easily swap out which Service I need in case my needs change. I just worry that after the site grows larger (both pages and functionality) that the factory will become rather bloated. But I'm starting to feel like I just can't get away from storing the mappings in an array (like Stephen's solution). That just doesn't feel OOP to me and I was hoping to find something more elegant.

  Read the article

• What's the best method in ASP.NET to obtain the current domain?

  - by Graphain

  Hi, I am wondering what the best way to obtain the current domain is in ASP.NET? For instance: http://www.domainname.com/subdir/ should yield http://www.domainname.com http://www.sub.domainname.com/subdir/ should yield http://sub.domainname.com As a guide, I should be able to add a url like "/Folder/Content/filename.html" (say as generated by Url.RouteUrl() in ASP.NET MVC) straight onto the URL and it should work.

  Read the article

• Separate functionality depending on Role in ASP.NET MVC

  - by Andrew Bullock

  I'm looking for an elegant pattern to solve this problem: I have several user roles in my system, and for many of my controller actions, I need to deal with slightly different data. For example, take /Users/Edit/1 This allows a Moderator to edit a users email address, but Administrators to edit a user's email address and password. I'd like a design for separating the two different bits of action code for the GET and the POST. Solutions I've come up with so far are: Switch inside each method, however this doesn't really help when i want different model arguments on the POST :( Custom controller factory which chooses a UsersController_ForModerators and UsersController_ForAdmins instead of just UsersController from the controller name and current user role Custom action invoker which choose the Edit_ForModerators method in a similar way to above Have an IUsersController and register a different implementation of it in my IoC container as a named instance based on Role Build an implementation of the controller at runtime using Castle DynamicProxy and manipulate the methods to those from role-based implementations Im preferring the named IoC instance route atm as it means all my urls/routing will work seamlessly. Ideas? Suggestions?

  Read the article

• Avoid writing SQL queries altogether in SSIS

  - by Jonn

  Working on a Data Warehouse project, the guy that gave us the tutorial advised that we stick to using SQL queries over defining a lot of data flow transformations, citing points like it'll consume a lot of memory on the ETL box so we'd rather leave the processing to the DB box. Is this really advisable? Where's the balance between relying on GUI tools over executing a bunch of SQL scripts on your Integration package? And honestly, I'd like to avoid writing SQL queries as much as I can.

  Read the article

• Singleton Properties

  - by coffeeaddict

  Ok, if I create a singleton class and expose the singleton object through a public static property...I understand that. But my singleton class has other properties in it. Should those be static? Should those also be private? I just want to be able to access all properties of my singleton class by doing this: MySingletonClass.SingletonProperty.SomeProperty2 Where SingletonProperty returns me the single singleton instance. I guess my question is, how do you expose the other properties in the singleton class..make them private and then access them through your public singleton static property?

  Read the article

• What is the advantage of the 'src/main/java'' convention?

  - by Chris

  I've noticed that a lot of projects have the following structure: Project-A bin lib src main java RootLevelPackageClass.java I currently use the following convention (as my projects are 100% java): Project-A bin lib src RootLevelPackageClass.java I'm not currently using Maven but am wondering if this is a Maven convention or not or if there is another reason. Can someone explain why the first version is so popular these days and if I should adopt this new convention or not? Chris

  Read the article

• Generic data input form in asp.net mvc application

  - by Diego

  Hello, I have an application that have EF 16 classes that share this information: They all are classes only with a key field and a description. I think it should be a waste if I make a controller with just 1 method just to present a form to fill these classes info, then I was thinking in to make a generic form(with key, description) and dynamically fill the right class through a sort of selection the selected info in any way, any good suggestion or pattern to do that? Where the generic methods should be located.

  Read the article

• dynamic behavior of factory class

  - by manu1001

  I have a factory class that serves out a bunch of properties. Now, the properties might come either from a database or from a properties file. This is what I've come up with. public class Factory { private static final INSTANCE = new Factory(source); private Factory(DbSource source) { // read from db, save properties } private Factory(FileSource source) { // read from file, save properties } // getInstance() and getProperties() here } What's a clean way of switching between these behaviors based on the environment. I want to avoid having to recompile the class each time.

  Read the article

• Method hiding with interfaces

  - by fearofawhackplanet

  interface IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; } } class Foo : IFoo { int MyReadOnlyVar { get; set; } } public IFoo GetFoo() { return new Foo { MyReadOnlyVar = 1 }; } Is the above an acceptable way of implementing a readonly/immutable object? The immutability of IFoo can be broken with a temporary cast to Foo. In general (non-critical) cases, is hiding functionality through interfaces a common pattern? Or is it considered lazy coding? Or even an anti-pattern?

  Read the article

• keep viewdata on RedirectToAction

  - by Thomas Stock

  [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult CreateUser([Bind(Exclude = "Id")] User user) { ... db.SubmitChanges(); ViewData["info"] = "The account has been created."; return RedirectToAction("Index", "Admin"); } This doesnt keep the "info" text in the viewdata after the redirectToAction. How would I get around this issue in the most elegant way? My current idea is to put the stuff from the Index controlleraction in a [NonAction] and call that method from both the Index action and in the CreateUser action, but I have a feeling there must be a better way. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Using grep to find files that doesn't contain a given string pattern

  - by Senthil Kumar

  I'm using the following command in my web application to find all files in the current directory that contain the string foo (leaving out svn directories). find . -not -ipath '.*svn*' -exec grep -H -E -o "foo" {} \; > grep_results.txt How do I find out the files that doesn't contain the word foo?

  Read the article

• Should I put constants for my Rails project in environment.rb?

  - by Chad Johnson

  I want to store a path for a special directory used by my Rails application. Should I store that in environment.rb, or is there another place this is meant to go? THE_DIRECTORY_PATH = '/path/to/directory'

  Read the article

• Returning true or error message in Ruby

  - by seaneshbaugh

  I'm wondering if writing functions like this is considered good or bad form. def test(x) if x == 1 return true else return "Error: x is not equal to one." end end And then to use it we do something like this: result = test(1) if result != true puts result end result = test(2) if result != true puts result end Which just displays the error message for the second call to test. I'm considering doing this because in a rails project I'm working on inside my controller code I make calls to a model's instance methods and if something goes wrong I want the model to return the error message to the controller and the controller takes that error message and puts it in the flash and redirects. Kinda like this def create @item = Item.new(params[:item]) if [email protected]? result = @item.save_image(params[:attachment][:file]) if result != true flash[:notice] = result redirect_to(new_item_url) and return end #and so on... That way I'm not constructing the error messages in the controller, merely passing them along, because I really don't want the controller to be concerned with what the save_image method itself does just whether or not it worked. It makes sense to me, but I'm curious as to whether or not this is considered a good or bad way of writing methods. Keep in mind I'm asking this in the most general sense pertaining mostly to ruby, it just happens that I'm doing this in a rails project, the actual logic of the controller really isn't my concern.

  Read the article

• Should image size be defined in the img tag height/width attributes or in CSS?

  - by Benjamin Manns

  Is it better coding practice to define an images size in the img tag's width and height attributes? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" width="740" height="382" alt="" /> Or in the CSS style with width/height? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" style="width:740px; height:382px;" alt="" /> Or both? <img src="images/academia_vs_business.png" width="740" height="382" style="width:740px; height:382px" alt="" />

  Read the article

• bash: getting rid of '.' and '..' when looping over files that begin with '.' in a folder

  - by TheOsp

  I want to loop over the files that begin with '.' in directory x (x might be any path): $ for file in x/.* > do > echo -n $file" " > done x/. x/.. x/.a x/.b What is the best way to get rid of x/., and x/.. ?

  Read the article

• What's the smartest way to organize SVN for translated versions of the same project?

  - by brandonjp

  I apologize because I know this has been covered over and over again, but I'm trying to understand the smartest way to cleverly use subversion to our benefit. (*Note: I know our method is not the BEST way to handle localized versions, but external factors are forcing us to work this way on current projects) We have a fairly static website in English...html, css, js, etc. After the site comes back from the translator we will have 5 variations of the same code (this week...then potentially 25 more in the future!). So we'll soon have a folder for EN, FR, SP, DE, etc. Most files (css, js, img) will remain exactly the same; and html files (structure, id's, classes) will only vary based on the localized text inside the elements. Is there any way to use clever SVN folder structuring that would help us out in the event that if a small change is needed, we don't have to manually change the files in each and every translated version of the site? Thanks! --bp

  Read the article

• index 'enabled' fields good idea?

  - by sibidiba

  Content of a website is stored in a MySQL database. 99% of the content will be enabled, but some (users, posts etc.) will be disabled. Most of the queries end as WHERE (...) AND enabled Is it a good idea to create an index on the field 'enabled'?

  Read the article

• Consistency vs Design Guidelines

  - by Adrian Faciu

  Lets say that you get involved in the development of a large project that is already in development for a long period ( more than one year ). The projects follows some of the current design guidelines, but also has a few different, that are currently discouraged ( mostly at naming guidelines ). Supposing that you can't/aren't allowed to change the whole project: What should be more important, consistency, follow the existing ones and defy current guidelines or the usage of the guidelines, creating differences between modules of the same project ? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Why is "#{String}" a common idiom in Ruby

  - by Tetsujin no Oni

  A Ruby dev I know asked this; my answer is below... Are there other, better reasons? Why do so many Ruby programmers do "{string}" rather than string since the second form is simpler and more efficient?

  Read the article

• ASP.Net MVC: Showing the same data using different layouts...

  - by vdh_ant

  Hi guys I'm wanting to create a page that allows the users to select how they would like to view their data - i.e. summary (which supports grouping), grid (which supports grouping), table (which supports grouping), map, time line, xml, json etc. Now each layout would probably have different use a different view model, which inherit from a common base class/view model. The reason being that each layout needs the object structure that it deals with to be different (some need hierarchical others a flatter structure). Each layout would call the same repository method and each layout would support the same functionality, i.e. searching and filtering (hence these controls would be shared between layouts). The main exception to this would be sorting which only grid and table views would need to support. Now my question is given this what do people think is the best approach. Using DisplayFor to handle the rendering of the different types? Also how do I work this with the actions... I would imagine that I would use the one action, and pass in the layout types, but then how does this support the grouping required for the summary, grid and table views. Do i treat each grouping as just a layout type Also how would this work from a URL point of view - what do people think is the template to support this layout functionality Cheers Anthony

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >