Search Results

Search found 101632 results on 4066 pages for 'source code'.

Page 14/4066 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Working with Legacy code #5: The blackhole.

    - by andrewstopford
    Someone creates a class or series of classes for something, the classes are big in size with large complicated methods. The effort is a sea of technical debt for the entire team but in the thick of the daily chaos it is lost. With out the coder talking to the team, with no team code policy and no code reviews (and action points) it remains. Pretty soon the team forget about that code. A few weeks\months\years goes by, some of the team may have left, some may remain but business asks for the team to add to that code. The team is now looking at a black hole, no one knows how it works, what it does, what it is for, it is a smelly hell hole and the deadline is fast approaching. The team now tries to change the code, with no approach at unit tests or refactoring in fear of breaking the black hole the team do just that and the business have just lost money. If you are faced with a black hole you need to look back over my series, even a black hole in what might seem like a clean unit tested application. Don't be fooled into thinking that legacy code does not apply to your code base.  The next stage is don't let blackholes in your codebase. Effective code reviews, team communication and good overal team coding policies will really help. Even if you are faced with a deadline do not let them appear, stop, take stock, what can be done and who can help. If you allow them through they will grow and grow and grow and the technical debt will hit you like a tidal wave soon enough,.  

    Read the article

  • Code Generation and IDE vs writing per Hand

    - by sytycs
    I have been programming for about a year now. Pretty soon I realized that I need a great Tool for writing code and learned Vim. I was happy with C and Ruby and never liked the idea of an IDE. Which was encouraged by a lot of reading about programming.[1] However I started with (my first) Java Project. In a CS Course we were using Visual Paradigm and encouraged to let the program generate our code from a class diagram. I did not like that Idea because: Our class diagram was buggy. Students more experienced in Java said they would write the code per hand. I had never written any Java before and would not understand a lot of the generated code. So I took a different approach and wrote all methods per Hand (getter and Setter included). My Team-members have written their parts (partly generated by VP) in an IDE and I was "forced" to use it too. I realized they had generated equal amounts of code in a shorter amount of time and did not spend a lot of time setting their CLASSPATH and writing scripts for compiling that son of a b***. Additionally we had to implement a GUI and I dont see how we could have done that in a sane matter in Vim. So here is my Problem: I fell in love with Vim and the Unix way. But it looks like for getting this job done (on time) the IDE/Code generation approach is superior. Do you have equal experiences? Is Java by the nature of the language just more suitable for an IDE/Code generated approach? Or am I lacking the knowledge to produce equal amounts of code "per Hand"? [1] http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/~matloff/eclipse.html

    Read the article

  • How to promote code reuse and documentation?

    - by Graviton
    As a team lead of about 10+ developers, I would want to promote code reuse. We have written a lot of code-- a lot of them are repetitive over the past few years. The problem now is that a lot of these code are just duplicate of some other code or a slight variation of them. I have started the movement ( discussion) on how to make code into components so that they can be reused for the future projects, but the problem is that I afraid the new developers or other developers who are ignorant of the components will just go forward and write their own thing. Is there anyway to remind the developers to reuse the components/ improve the documentation/ contribute to the underlying component instead of duplicating the existing code and tweaking on it or just write their own? How to make the components easily discover-able, easily usable so that everyone will use it? Edit: I think every developer knows about the benefit of reusable components and wants to use them, it's just that we don't know how to make them discoverable. Also, the developers when they are writing code, they know they should write reusable code but lack of the motivation to do so.

    Read the article

  • Code structure for multiple applications with a common core

    - by Azrael Seraphin
    I want to create two applications that will have a lot of common functionality. Basically, one system is a more advanced version of the other system. Let's call them Simple and Advanced. The Advanced system will add to, extend, alter and sometimes replace the functionality of the Simple system. For instance, the Advanced system will add new classes, add properties and methods to existing Simple classes, change the behavior of classes, etc. Initially I was thinking that the Advanced classes simply inherited from the Simple classes but I can see the functionality diverging quite significantly as development progresses, even while maintaining a core base functionality. For instance, the Simple system might have a Project class with a Sponsor property whereas the Advanced system has a list of Project.Sponsors. It seems poor practice to inherit from a class and then hide, alter or throw away significant parts of its features. An alternative is just to run two separate code bases and copy the common code between them but that seems inefficient, archaic and fraught with peril. Surely we have moved beyond the days of "copy-and-paste inheritance". Another way to structure it would be to use partial classes and have three projects: Core which has the common functionality, Simple which extends the Core partial classes for the simple system, and Advanced which also extends the Core partial classes for the advanced system. Plus having three test projects as well for each system. This seems like a cleaner approach. What would be the best way to structure the solution/projects/code to create two versions of a similar system? Let's say I later want to create a third system called Extreme, largely based on the Advanced system. Do I then create an AdvancedCore project which both Advanced and Extreme extend using partial classes? Is there a better way to do this? If it matters, this is likely to be a C#/MVC system but I'd be happy to do this in any language/framework that is suitable.

    Read the article

  • Code Chess: Fibonacci Sequence

    - by SLaks
    Building upon the proven success of Code Golf, I would like to introduce Code Chess. Unlike Code Golf, which strives for concision, Code Chess will strive for cleverness. Can you create a clever or unexpected Fibonacci generator? Your code must print or return either the nth Fibonacci number or the first n Fibonacci numbers.

    Read the article

  • dynamically load PHP code from external file

    - by jera
    code is in a static class in an external file eg. /home/test/public_html/fg2/templatecode/RecordMOD/photoslide.mod how do I load this into my script on demand, and be able to call its functions ? I am a novice at php , so please explain your code. help is appreciated. Jer

    Read the article

  • turning open source software into a consulting business ?

    - by sofreakinghigh
    just some general and specific questions about running a business which uses open source software and sells training, services, and other value added solutions utilizing the open source asset(s). 1) how much modification do you need to make to an existing open source software/framework to give a new brand ? open source (GPLv3) branding issues here.... for ex) Mambo and Joomla, i think they are pretty much same ? but they have different labels. 2) Is there a disadvantage of promoting open source software/framework/suite in hopes of selling value added services and solutions on top of the Open source asset ? 3) can Open source assets be marketing point for lowered Total Ownership Cost and transparency ? meaning, clients will not be using some mysterious, opaque proprietary asset ? 4) is competition fierce? cost of developing software is non existing because you are using an open source asset. barrier to entry is minimal ??

    Read the article

  • Reconciling the Boy Scout Rule and Opportunistic Refactoring with code reviews

    - by t0x1n
    I am a great believer in the Boy Scout Rule: Always check a module in cleaner than when you checked it out." No matter who the original author was, what if we always made some effort, no matter how small, to improve the module. What would be the result? I think if we all followed that simple rule, we'd see the end of the relentless deterioration of our software systems. Instead, our systems would gradually get better and better as they evolved. We'd also see teams caring for the system as a whole, rather than just individuals caring for their own small little part. I am also a great believer in the related idea of Opportunistic Refactoring: Although there are places for some scheduled refactoring efforts, I prefer to encourage refactoring as an opportunistic activity, done whenever and wherever code needs to cleaned up - by whoever. What this means is that at any time someone sees some code that isn't as clear as it should be, they should take the opportunity to fix it right there and then - or at least within a few minutes Particularly note the following excerpt from the refactoring article: I'm wary of any development practices that cause friction for opportunistic refactoring ... My sense is that most teams don't do enough refactoring, so it's important to pay attention to anything that is discouraging people from doing it. To help flush this out be aware of any time you feel discouraged from doing a small refactoring, one that you're sure will only take a minute or two. Any such barrier is a smell that should prompt a conversation. So make a note of the discouragement and bring it up with the team. At the very least it should be discussed during your next retrospective. Where I work, there is one development practice that causes heavy friction - Code Review (CR). Whenever I change anything that's not in the scope of my "assignment" I'm being rebuked by my reviewers that I'm making the change harder to review. This is especially true when refactoring is involved, since it makes "line by line" diff comparison difficult. This approach is the standard here, which means opportunistic refactoring is seldom done, and only "planned" refactoring (which is usually too little, too late) takes place, if at all. I claim that the benefits are worth it, and that 3 reviewers will work a little harder (to actually understand the code before and after, rather than look at the narrow scope of which lines changed - the review itself would be better due to that alone) so that the next 100 developers reading and maintaining the code will benefit. When I present this argument my reviewers, they say they have no problem with my refactoring, as long as it's not in the same CR. However I claim this is a myth: (1) Most of the times you only realize what and how you want to refactor when you're in the midst of your assignment. As Martin Fowler puts it: As you add the functionality, you realize that some code you're adding contains some duplication with some existing code, so you need to refactor the existing code to clean things up... You may get something working, but realize that it would be better if the interaction with existing classes was changed. Take that opportunity to do that before you consider yourself done. (2) Nobody is going to look favorably at you releasing "refactoring" CRs you were not supposed to do. A CR has a certain overhead and your manager doesn't want you to "waste your time" on refactoring. When it's bundled with the change you're supposed to do, this issue is minimized. The issue is exacerbated by Resharper, as each new file I add to the change (and I can't know in advance exactly which files would end up changed) is usually littered with errors and suggestions - most of which are spot on and totally deserve fixing. The end result is that I see horrible code, and I just leave it there. Ironically, I feel that fixing such code not only will not improve my standings, but actually lower them and paint me as the "unfocused" guy who wastes time fixing things nobody cares about instead of doing his job. I feel bad about it because I truly despise bad code and can't stand watching it, let alone call it from my methods! Any thoughts on how I can remedy this situation ?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3: Implicit and Explicit code nuggets with Razor

    - by ScottGu
    This is another in a series of posts I’m doing that cover some of the new ASP.NET MVC 3 features: New @model keyword in Razor (Oct 19th) Layouts with Razor (Oct 22nd) Server-Side Comments with Razor (Nov 12th) Razor’s @: and <text> syntax (Dec 15th) Implicit and Explicit code nuggets with Razor (today) In today’s post I’m going to discuss how Razor enables you to both implicitly and explicitly define code nuggets within your view templates, and walkthrough some code examples of each of them.  Fluid Coding with Razor ASP.NET MVC 3 ships with a new view-engine option called “Razor” (in addition to the existing .aspx view engine).  You can learn more about Razor, why we are introducing it, and the syntax it supports from my Introducing Razor blog post. Razor minimizes the number of characters and keystrokes required when writing a view template, and enables a fast, fluid coding workflow. Unlike most template syntaxes, you do not need to interrupt your coding to explicitly denote the start and end of server blocks within your HTML. The Razor parser is smart enough to infer this from your code. This enables a compact and expressive syntax which is clean, fast and fun to type. For example, the Razor snippet below can be used to iterate a collection of products and output a <ul> list of product names that link to their corresponding product pages: When run, the above code generates output like below: Notice above how we were able to embed two code nuggets within the content of the foreach loop.  One of them outputs the name of the Product, and the other embeds the ProductID within a hyperlink.  Notice that we didn’t have to explicitly wrap these code-nuggets - Razor was instead smart enough to implicitly identify where the code began and ended in both of these situations.  How Razor Enables Implicit Code Nuggets Razor does not define its own language.  Instead, the code you write within Razor code nuggets is standard C# or VB.  This allows you to re-use your existing language skills, and avoid having to learn a customized language grammar. The Razor parser has smarts built into it so that whenever possible you do not need to explicitly mark the end of C#/VB code nuggets you write.  This makes coding more fluid and productive, and enables a nice, clean, concise template syntax.  Below are a few scenarios that Razor supports where you can avoid having to explicitly mark the beginning/end of a code nugget, and instead have Razor implicitly identify the code nugget scope for you: Property Access Razor allows you to output a variable value, or a sub-property on a variable that is referenced via “dot” notation: You can also use “dot” notation to access sub-properties multiple levels deep: Array/Collection Indexing: Razor allows you to index into collections or arrays: Calling Methods: Razor also allows you to invoke methods: Notice how for all of the scenarios above how we did not have to explicitly end the code nugget.  Razor was able to implicitly identify the end of the code block for us. Razor’s Parsing Algorithm for Code Nuggets The below algorithm captures the core parsing logic we use to support “@” expressions within Razor, and to enable the implicit code nugget scenarios above: Parse an identifier - As soon as we see a character that isn't valid in a C# or VB identifier, we stop and move to step 2 Check for brackets - If we see "(" or "[", go to step 2.1., otherwise, go to step 3  Parse until the matching ")" or "]" (we track nested "()" and "[]" pairs and ignore "()[]" we see in strings or comments) Go back to step 2 Check for a "." - If we see one, go to step 3.1, otherwise, DO NOT ACCEPT THE "." as code, and go to step 4 If the character AFTER the "." is a valid identifier, accept the "." and go back to step 1, otherwise, go to step 4 Done! Differentiating between code and content Step 3.1 is a particularly interesting part of the above algorithm, and enables Razor to differentiate between scenarios where an identifier is being used as part of the code statement, and when it should instead be treated as static content: Notice how in the snippet above we have ? and ! characters at the end of our code nuggets.  These are both legal C# identifiers – but Razor is able to implicitly identify that they should be treated as static string content as opposed to being part of the code expression because there is whitespace after them.  This is pretty cool and saves us keystrokes. Explicit Code Nuggets in Razor Razor is smart enough to implicitly identify a lot of code nugget scenarios.  But there are still times when you want/need to be more explicit in how you scope the code nugget expression.  The @(expression) syntax allows you to do this: You can write any C#/VB code statement you want within the @() syntax.  Razor will treat the wrapping () characters as the explicit scope of the code nugget statement.  Below are a few scenarios where we could use the explicit code nugget feature: Perform Arithmetic Calculation/Modification: You can perform arithmetic calculations within an explicit code nugget: Appending Text to a Code Expression Result: You can use the explicit expression syntax to append static text at the end of a code nugget without having to worry about it being incorrectly parsed as code: Above we have embedded a code nugget within an <img> element’s src attribute.  It allows us to link to images with URLs like “/Images/Beverages.jpg”.  Without the explicit parenthesis, Razor would have looked for a “.jpg” property on the CategoryName (and raised an error).  By being explicit we can clearly denote where the code ends and the text begins. Using Generics and Lambdas Explicit expressions also allow us to use generic types and generic methods within code expressions – and enable us to avoid the <> characters in generics from being ambiguous with tag elements. One More Thing….Intellisense within Attributes We have used code nuggets within HTML attributes in several of the examples above.  One nice feature supported by the Razor code editor within Visual Studio is the ability to still get VB/C# intellisense when doing this. Below is an example of C# code intellisense when using an implicit code nugget within an <a> href=”” attribute: Below is an example of C# code intellisense when using an explicit code nugget embedded in the middle of a <img> src=”” attribute: Notice how we are getting full code intellisense for both scenarios – despite the fact that the code expression is embedded within an HTML attribute (something the existing .aspx code editor doesn’t support).  This makes writing code even easier, and ensures that you can take advantage of intellisense everywhere. Summary Razor enables a clean and concise templating syntax that enables a very fluid coding workflow.  Razor’s ability to implicitly scope code nuggets reduces the amount of typing you need to perform, and leaves you with really clean code. When necessary, you can also explicitly scope code expressions using a @(expression) syntax to provide greater clarity around your intent, as well as to disambiguate code statements from static markup. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu

    Read the article

  • what are the advantages and disadvantages of putting code for an unfinished project on github

    - by cori
    I'm stating to work on a project that I intend to release as open source via the githubs. What are the advantages of putting the code on github from the outset, as opposed to waiting until the project is in a working state before publishing. If it matters, this particular project is a C# app/service, and I have only a free github account (so I can't make it private and then pull back the covers later)

    Read the article

  • Copy a file from source directory to target base directory and maintain source path

    - by Citizen Dos
    Forgive me, I am probably not using the right terms to describe the problem and misunderstanding the most basic usage for a couple of common commands. I have a simple find statement that is locating files that I want to copy. I want to tack on the -exec cp {} and have cp copy the file from the source directory to a new base directory, but include the full path. For example: "find . -name *.txt" locates /user/username/projects/source.txt "cp {} [now what?]" copies the file to /user/newuser/projects/source.txt

    Read the article

  • Code Reuse and Abstraction in FP vs OOP

    - by Electric Coffee
    I've been told that code reuse and abstraction in OOP is far more difficult to do than it is in FP, and that all the claims that have been made about Object Orientedness (for lack of a better term) being great at reusing code have been flat out lies So I was wondering if anyone here could tell me why that is, and perhaps show me some code to back up these claims, I'm not saying I don't believe you Functional programmers, it's just that I've been "indoctrinated" to think Object Orientedly, and thus can't (yet) think Functionally enough to see it myself To quote Jimmy Hoffa (from an answer to one of my previous questions): The cake is a lie, code reuse in OO is far more difficult than in FP. For all that OO has claimed code reuse over the years, I have seen it follow through a minimum of times. (feel free to just say I must be doing it wrong, I'm comfortable with how well I write OO code having had to design and maintain OO systems for years, I know the quality of my own results) That quote is the basis of my question, I want to see if there's anything to the claim or not

    Read the article

  • Website where you can see how other programmers write their code

    - by CuiPengFei
    I remember seeing a website where people upload videos of themselves writing code. However, I can not find that site now. The purpose is to see how others code, to see how they refactor their code, to see how they use their paradigms, etc. Update: I remember that the video contains almost no audio, it's only one guy writing code, making mistakes, typos, fixing mistakes. If I read the final code, I can figure out how it works, but if I see how the code was wrote and what kind of mistakes were made along the way, then I can better understand it. I guess this is the main reason that they make this kind of video.

    Read the article

  • Self Documenting Code Vs. Commented Code

    - by Phill
    I had a search but didn't find what I was looking for, please feel free to link me if this question has already being asked. Earlier this month this post was made: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/php/why-youre-a-bad-php-programmer/ Basically to sum it up, you're a bad programmer if you don't write comments. My personal opinion is that code should be descriptive and mostly not require comment's unless the code cannot be self describing. In the example given // Get the extension off the image filename $pieces = explode('.', $image_name); $extension = array_pop($pieces); The author said this code should be given a comment, my personal opinion is the code should be a function call that is descriptive: $extension = GetFileExtension($image_filename); However in the comments someone actually made just that suggestion: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/php/why-youre-a-bad-php-programmer/comment-page-2/#comment-357130 The author responded by saying the commenter was "one of those people", i.e, a bad programmer. What are everyone elses views on Self Describing Code vs Commenting Code?

    Read the article

  • I sold my source code to a client, can I now re-build similar code and sell to someone else?

    - by flashhag
    So we built a website and software for a client, charged our fee and handed over the code. The client then got a request from another company about the software. The client passed on the request but said since they owned the code they would need to recieve money for it. I'm thinking there are 2 options here: Work with the client as requested We've actually re-built the software, made it much better and use it for other projects. Am i in my rights to sell that direct to the company that enquired about it instead of going through the client? Any help on this would be much appreciated

    Read the article

  • Is there any text editor for windows which can save files with code highlight for viewing

    - by user1713836
    I want some software for Windows where I can save code snippets and other daily usable commands in one file. Everyday I find some small code snippets which I want to save in a single file. Just like we have code snippet savers online, I want something offline on Windows, basically with all the features Microsoft Word has, but with code highlight. It should be lightweight like Notepad++. I mean if I select the code and then press some button, it should change the color according to the language. Currently I use Notepad++, but in it, I can't select small code snippets on one page. It either highlights the entire file or nothing.

    Read the article

  • How to code review without offending other developers [duplicate]

    - by Justin984
    This question already has an answer here: How to deal with someone who dislikes the idea of code reviews? 6 answers How can I tactfully suggest improvements to others' badly designed code during review? 14 answers How do I approach a coworker about his or her code quality? 12 answers I work on a team that does frequent code reviews. But it seems like more of a formality than anything. No one really points out problems in the code for fear of offending other developers. The few times I've tried to ask for changes were met with very defensive and reluctant attitudes. This is of course not good. Not only are we spending the time to code review, but we're getting literally zero value from it. Is this an issue that needs to be addressed by individual developers, or are there techniques for suggesting changes without stepping on other people's toes?

    Read the article

  • Tool to aid Code Review

    - by Prakash
    For our small team of 20 developers, we used do code review like: Make a label in svn and publish the label to the reviewers Reviewers checkout the code and add comments in line (with marker like: // REVIEWER_NAME::REVIEW COMMENT:) After all comments are in, reviewer checks in the code, preferably with new label. Developer checks the comments and makes changes (if appropriate) Developer keeps an excel sheet report for considered changes and reasons for ignored comments Problem: Developer needs to keep track of multiple labels which might have same comments Sometimes we even do One on One review and if we really have time, even do Table review (team of reviewers looks at the code on projector, on the fly, and pass comment) I was wondering: Are you guys using any specific tool which helps to do code reviews smoother? I have heard of Code Collaborator. But have anyone used that? Is it worth the money?

    Read the article

  • As our favorite imperative languages gain functional constructs, should loops be considered a code s

    - by Michael Buen
    In allusion to Dare Obasanjo's impressions on Map, Reduce, Filter (Functional Programming in C# 3.0: How Map/Reduce/Filter can Rock your World) "With these three building blocks, you could replace the majority of the procedural for loops in your application with a single line of code. C# 3.0 doesn't just stop there." Should we increasingly use them instead of loops? And should be having loops(instead of those three building blocks of data manipulation) be one of the metrics for coding horrors on code reviews? And why? [NOTE] I'm not advocating fully functional programming on those codes that could be simply translated to loops(e.g. tail recursions) Asking for politer term. Considering that the phrase "code smell" is not so diplomatic, I posted another question http://stackoverflow.com/questions/432492/whats-the-politer-word-for-code-smell about the right word for "code smell", er.. utterly bad code. Should that phrase have a place in our programming parlance?

    Read the article

  • cmake source and out-of-source navigation

    - by idimba
    Hi, cmake advises to use out-of-source builds. While in general I like the idea I find it not comfortable to navigate from out-of-source sub directory to the corresponding source directory. I frequently need the code to perform some actions with code (e.g. grep, svn command etc.). Is there an easy way in shell to navigate from out-of-source sub directory to the corresponding source directory? Thanks Dima

    Read the article

  • What exactly does the condition in the MIT license imply?

    - by Yannbane
    To quote the license itself: Copyright (C) [year] [copyright holders] Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. I am not exactly sure what the bold part implies. Lets say that I'm creating some library, and I license it under the MIT license. Someone decides to fork that library and to create a closed-source, commercial version. According to the license, he should be free to do that. However, what does he additionally need to do under those terms? Credit me as the creator? I guess the "above copyright notice" refers to the "Copyright (C) [..." part, but, wouldn't that list me as the author of his code (although I technically typed out the code)? And wouldn't including the "permission notice" in what is now his library practically license it under the same conditions that I licensed my own library in? Or, am I interpreting this incorrectly? Does that refer to my obligations to include the copyright and the permission notice?

    Read the article

  • Code Contracts: Unit testing contracted code

    - by DigiMortal
    Code contracts and unit tests are not replacements for each other. They both have different purpose and different nature. It does not matter if you are using code contracts or not – you still have to write tests for your code. In this posting I will show you how to unit test code with contracts. In my previous posting about code contracts I showed how to avoid ContractExceptions that are defined in code contracts runtime and that are not accessible for us in design time. This was one step further to make my randomizer testable. In this posting I will complete the mission. Problems with current code This is my current code. public class Randomizer {     public static int GetRandomFromRangeContracted(int min, int max)     {         Contract.Requires<ArgumentOutOfRangeException>(             min < max,             "Min must be less than max"         );           Contract.Ensures(             Contract.Result<int>() >= min &&             Contract.Result<int>() <= max,             "Return value is out of range"         );           var rnd = new Random();         return rnd.Next(min, max);     } } As you can see this code has some problems: randomizer class is static and cannot be instantiated. We cannot move this class between components if we need to, GetRandomFromRangeContracted() is not fully testable because we cannot currently affect random number generator output and therefore we cannot test post-contract. Now let’s solve these problems. Making randomizer testable As a first thing I made Randomizer to be class that must be instantiated. This is simple thing to do. Now let’s solve the problem with Random class. To make Randomizer testable I define IRandomGenerator interface and RandomGenerator class. The public constructor of Randomizer accepts IRandomGenerator as argument. public interface IRandomGenerator {     int Next(int min, int max); }   public class RandomGenerator : IRandomGenerator {     private Random _random = new Random();       public int Next(int min, int max)     {         return _random.Next(min, max);     } } And here is our Randomizer after total make-over. public class Randomizer {     private IRandomGenerator _generator;       private Randomizer()     {         _generator = new RandomGenerator();     }       public Randomizer(IRandomGenerator generator)     {         _generator = generator;     }       public int GetRandomFromRangeContracted(int min, int max)     {         Contract.Requires<ArgumentOutOfRangeException>(             min < max,             "Min must be less than max"         );           Contract.Ensures(             Contract.Result<int>() >= min &&             Contract.Result<int>() <= max,             "Return value is out of range"         );           return _generator.Next(min, max);     } } It seems to be inconvenient to instantiate Randomizer now but you can always use DI/IoC containers and break compiled dependencies between the components of your system. Writing tests for randomizer IRandomGenerator solved problem with testing post-condition. Now it is time to write tests for Randomizer class. Writing tests for contracted code is not easy. The main problem is still ContractException that we are not able to access. Still it is the main exception we get as soon as contracts fail. Although pre-conditions are able to throw exceptions with type we want we cannot do much when post-conditions will fail. We have to use Contract.ContractFailed event and this event is called for every contract failure. This way we find ourselves in situation where supporting well input interface makes it impossible to support output interface well and vice versa. ContractFailed is nasty hack and it works pretty weird way. Although documentation sais that ContractFailed is good choice for testing contracts it is still pretty painful. As a last chance I got tests working almost normally when I wrapped them up. Can you remember similar solution from the times of Visual Studio 2008 unit tests? Cannot understand how Microsoft was able to mess up testing again. [TestClass] public class RandomizerTest {     private Mock<IRandomGenerator> _randomMock;     private Randomizer _randomizer;     private string _lastContractError;       public TestContext TestContext { get; set; }       public RandomizerTest()     {         Contract.ContractFailed += (sender, e) =>         {             e.SetHandled();             e.SetUnwind();               throw new Exception(e.FailureKind + ": " + e.Message);         };     }       [TestInitialize()]     public void RandomizerTestInitialize()     {         _randomMock = new Mock<IRandomGenerator>();         _randomizer = new Randomizer(_randomMock.Object);         _lastContractError = string.Empty;     }       #region InputInterfaceTests     [TestMethod]     [ExpectedException(typeof(Exception))]     public void GetRandomFromRangeContracted_should_throw_exception_when_min_is_not_less_than_max()     {         try         {             _randomizer.GetRandomFromRangeContracted(100, 10);         }         catch (Exception ex)         {             throw new Exception(string.Empty, ex);         }     }       [TestMethod]     [ExpectedException(typeof(Exception))]     public void GetRandomFromRangeContracted_should_throw_exception_when_min_is_equal_to_max()     {         try         {             _randomizer.GetRandomFromRangeContracted(10, 10);         }         catch (Exception ex)         {             throw new Exception(string.Empty, ex);         }     }       [TestMethod]     public void GetRandomFromRangeContracted_should_work_when_min_is_less_than_max()     {         int minValue = 10;         int maxValue = 100;         int returnValue = 50;           _randomMock.Setup(r => r.Next(minValue, maxValue))             .Returns(returnValue)             .Verifiable();           var result = _randomizer.GetRandomFromRangeContracted(minValue, maxValue);           _randomMock.Verify();         Assert.AreEqual<int>(returnValue, result);     }     #endregion       #region OutputInterfaceTests     [TestMethod]     [ExpectedException(typeof(Exception))]     public void GetRandomFromRangeContracted_should_throw_exception_when_return_value_is_less_than_min()     {         int minValue = 10;         int maxValue = 100;         int returnValue = 7;           _randomMock.Setup(r => r.Next(10, 100))             .Returns(returnValue)             .Verifiable();           try         {             _randomizer.GetRandomFromRangeContracted(minValue, maxValue);         }         catch (Exception ex)         {             throw new Exception(string.Empty, ex);         }           _randomMock.Verify();     }       [TestMethod]     [ExpectedException(typeof(Exception))]     public void GetRandomFromRangeContracted_should_throw_exception_when_return_value_is_more_than_max()     {         int minValue = 10;         int maxValue = 100;         int returnValue = 102;           _randomMock.Setup(r => r.Next(10, 100))             .Returns(returnValue)             .Verifiable();           try         {             _randomizer.GetRandomFromRangeContracted(minValue, maxValue);         }         catch (Exception ex)         {             throw new Exception(string.Empty, ex);         }           _randomMock.Verify();     }     #endregion        } Although these tests are pretty awful and contain hacks we are at least able now to make sure that our code works as expected. Here is the test list after running these tests. Conclusion Code contracts are very new stuff in Visual Studio world and as young technology it has some problems – like all other new bits and bytes in the world. As you saw then making our contracted code testable is easy only to the point when pre-conditions are considered. When we start dealing with post-conditions we will end up with hacked tests. I hope that future versions of code contracts will solve error handling issues the way that testing of contracted code will be easier than it is right now.

    Read the article

  • Unable to get defined path in 'source' type on AIX node

    - by haris
    hi all, I am trying to create a set of users on my AIX node and trying to get their authorized_keys which are already hosted on my server with name like, 'myuser_id_dsa.pub'. Currently i am managing 2 nodes (1. SLES 2. AIX). I defined the 'source' file paths in 2 separate contexts in fileserver.conf; [AIX] path myfiles/users/ssh/ allow *.another.mydomain.com [SLES] path myfiles/users/keys/ssh/ allow *.mydomain.com but when I run puppet then it ended successfully on my SLES node but encountered failure on AIX; with following err; /* Could not describe /AIX/myuser_id_rsa.pub: Fileserver module 'AIX' not mounted*/ in my code i have defined the 'source' with $filserver variable as: case $operatingsystem { "AIX": { $fileserver = "AIX" } default: { $fileserver = "SLES" } } file { "${home}/${username}/.ssh/authorized_keys": source = "puppet:///$fileserver/${username}_is_dsa.pub", ... ... } why AIX is not able to get the source path from my fileserver.conf while SLES is running absolutely fine? and how can I do it? I have to run similar configuration across different servers so I can only deal it with case statement. looking forward for your help Thanks

    Read the article

  • Code Trivia #5

    - by João Angelo
    A quick one inspired by real life broken code. What’s wrong in this piece of code? class Planet { public Planet() { this.Initialize(); } public Planet(string name) : this() { this.Name = name; } private string name = "Unspecified"; public string Name { get { return name; } set { name = value; } } private void Initialize() { Console.Write("Planet {0} initialized.", this.Name); } }

    Read the article

  • Code reviews on the web for PHP and JavaScript code

    - by VirtuosiMedia
    What are the best places for freelancers or small companies to get code reviewed for PHP and JavaScript? Forums are an option, but are there any sites dedicated specifically to code reviews? Edit: Just for clarification, I'm looking more for a website to get the code critiqued by others than a tool that helps perform internal code reviews. I do appreciate the responses that offered a tool, though, and will keep those in mind for future use.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >