Search Results

Search found 29753 results on 1191 pages for 'best practices'.

Page 142/1191 | < Previous Page | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | 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

• Asp.Net MVC Handle Drop Down Boxes that are not part of the Model

  - by Pino

  I have a small form which the user must fill in and consists of the following fields. Name (Text) Value (Text) Group (Group - Is a list of option pulled from a database table) Now the Model for this View looks like so, public string Name { get; set; } public string Value { get; set; } public int GroupID { get; set; } Now the view is Strongly Typed to the above model. What method would one use to populate the drop down list? Since the data is not contained within the Model (It could be contained in the Model) should we be using Temp/View data? A HTML Helper? What would be the ideal way to achieve this.

  Read the article

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

  - by Michel

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

  Read the article

• Is it okay if my ViewModel 'creates' bindable user controls for my View?

  - by j0rd4n

  I have an entry-point View with a tab control. Each tab is going to have a user control embedded within it. Each embedded view inherits from the same base class and will need to be updated as a key field on the entry-point view is updated. I'm thinking the easiest way to design this page is to have the entry-point ViewModel create and expose a collection of the tabbed views so the entry-point View can just bind to the user control elements using a DataTemplate on the tab control. Is it okay for a ViewModel to instantiate and provide UI elements for its View?

  Read the article

• tutorials/books to create a plugin/module/library?

  - by fayer

  i wonder if there are tutorials/books explaining how you create a library/plugin/module for other to implement? libraries/frameworks like solr, doctrine, codeigniter etc. cause it seems that they follow the same pattern. having one "bootstrap" file to load configurations, other classes and so on. i aim to understand the basics, so i can create a such library. cause at the moment i want to code an address book that other can use. just include a bootstrap file and they are ready to use my classes (like Doctrine). recommendations of sources to learn these things of stuff? you experienced guys, how did you learn it? thanks.

  Read the article

• Prims vs Polys: what are the pros and cons of each?

  - by Richard Inglis

  I've noticed that most 3d gaming/rendering environments represent solids as a mesh of (usually triangular) 3d polygons. However some examples, such as Second Life, or PovRay use solids built from a set of 3d primitives (cube, sphere, cone, torus etc) on which various operations can be performed to create more complex shapes. So my question is: why choose one method over the other for representing 3d data? I can see there might be benefits for complex ray-tracing operations to be able to describe a surface as a single mathematical function (like PovRay does), but SL surely isn't attempting anything so ambitious with their rendering engine. Equally, I can imagine it might be more bandwidth-efficient to serve descriptions of generalised solids instead of arbitrary meshes, but is it really worth the downside that SL suffers from (ie modelling stuff is really hard, and usually the results are ugly) - was this just a bad decision made early in SL's development that they're now stuck with? Or is it an artefact of what's easiest to implement in OpenGL?

  Read the article

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

  - by Itay Moav

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

  Read the article

• 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 there a particular naming convention for Java methods that throw exceptions?

  - by lyates

  I'm tempted to add a suffix like "Ex" to differentiate methods (with similar signatures) that throw Exceptions from those that don't. Is there such a convention?

  Read the article

• Are protected constructors considered good practice?

  - by Álvaro G. Vicario

  I'm writing some little helper classes to handle trees. Basically, I have a node and a special root node that represents the tree. I want to keep it generic and simple. This is part of the code: <?php class Tree extends TreeNode{ public function addById($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ if( $parent = $this->findNodeById($parent_id) ){ $parent->addChildById($node_id, $generic_content); } } } class TreeNode{ public function __construct($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ // ... } protected function addChildById($node_id, $generic_content){ $this->children[] = new TreeNode($this->node_id, $node_id, $generic_content); } } $Categories = new Tree; $Categories->addById(1, NULL, $foo); $Categories->addById(2, NULL, $bar); $Categories->addById(3, 1, $gee); ?> My questions: Is it sensible to force TreeNode instances to be created through TreeNode::addById()? If it's so, would it be good practise to declare TreeNode::__construct() as private/protected?

  Read the article

• 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

• Correct structure and way of website versioning

  - by Saif Bechan

  Recently I use GIT to version my website. It makes it all really easy to see how my project develops and I always have save backups on different places on the web. Now my main question is if it is recommended to version your whole root of the website. I have a basic structure that looks something like this: /httpdocs /config /media /application index.php .htaccess 1) Should I use the /httpdocs folder to version, or should I use the content of the folder. 2) Is it recommended to version the media folder. In the media version I have several images for the overall layout, and some other images for the website. These imagas can be quite large. I work on these images from time to time and so they change. I hardly never need the old image again, so is this not just taking up precious storage space. I would highly appreciate just some basic recommendation on this topic.

  Read the article

• Same project...multiple apps?

  - by greypoint

  We have a an iPhone app project that we wish to deploy multiple times under different client names. The individual apps will be very similar but will have different resources (icon, images etc) and config settings stored in plists (server names, options etc). What is the preferred means to manage this in Xcode? Obviously we really don't want different XCode projects for each App deployment since it's 90% shared code.

  Read the article

• How to handle too many files in Qt

  - by mree

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

  Read the article

• Being pressured to GOTO the dark-side

  - by Dan McG

  We have a situation at work where developers working on a legacy (core) system are being pressured into using GOTO statements when adding new features into existing code that is already infected with spagetti code. Now, I understand there may be arguments for using 'just one little GOTO' instead of spending the time on refactoring to a more maintainable solution. The issue is, this isolated 'just one little GOTO' isn't so isolated. At least once every week or so there is a new 'one little GOTO' to add. This codebase is already a horror to work with due to code dating back to or before 1984 being riddled with GOTOs that would make many Pastafarians believe it was inspired by the Flying Spagetti Monster itself. Unfortunately the language this is written in doesn't have any ready made refactoring tools, so it makes it harder to push the 'Refactor to increase productivity later' because short-term wins are the only wins paid attention to here... Has anyone else experienced this issue whereby everybody agrees that we cannot be adding new GOTOs to jump 2000 lines to a random section, but continually have Anaylsts insist on doing it just this one time and having management approve it? tldr; How can one go about addressing the issue of developers being pressured (forced) to continually add GOTO statements (by add, I mean add to jump to random sections many lines away) because it 'gets that feature in quicker'? I'm beginning to fear we may loses valuable developers to the raptors over this...

  Read the article

• is the below a good approach to returning a safe list enumerator?

  - by user200295

  public class Foo{ public string Prop1 {get;set;} public string Prop2 {get;set;} public Foo(Foo source) { this.Prop1 = source.Prop1; this.Prop2 = source.Prop2; } } public class Main { private List<Foo> items = new List<Foo>(); public IEnumerable<Foo> GetItems() { foreach (Foo foo in items) { yield return new Foo(foo); } } }

  Read the article

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

  - by Chris Cooper

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

  Read the article

• To trigger everytime with .click()?

  - by Dejan.S

  I tried to have a .click() on a <a> to find out it wont trigger every time I click, what it suppose to do is open a dialog. That is not the only problem I would need to pass a value to my jquery to. I just cant figure this one out. I need it to be a <a> because it's gone be in a dropdown menu. Do you got any suggestions? this is the code I use so far $(document).ready(function() { $('a').click(function() { var first = "<iframe style='width: 100%; height: 100%;' src='" + need to put value here + "'</iframe>'"; $('.iframe').html(first); $('#dialog').dialog({ bgiframe: true, modal: true, height: 600, width: 1000 }); }); }); thanks guys

  Read the article

• Why turning magic_quotes_gpc on in PHP is considered a bad practice?

  - by Itay Moav

  Why turning magic_quotes_gpc on in PHP is considered a bad practice?

  Read the article

• How to use interfaces in exception handling

  - by vikp

  Hi, I'm working on the exception handling layer for my application. I have read few articles on interfaces and generics. I have used inheritance before quite a lot and I'm comfortable with in that area. I have a very brief design that I'm going to implement: public interface IMyExceptionLogger { public void LogException(); // Helper methods for writing into files,db, xml } I'm slightly confused what I should be doing next. public class FooClass: IMyExceptionLogger { // Fields // Constructors } Should I implement LogException() method within FooClass? If yes, than I'm struggling to see how I'm better of using an interface instead of the concrete class... I have a variety of classes that will make a use of that interface, but I don't want to write an implementation of that interface within each class. In the same time If I implement an interface in one class, and then use that class in different layers of the application I will be still using concrete classes instead of interfaces, which is a bad OO design... I hope this makes sense. Any feedback and suggestions are welcome. Please notice that I'm not interested in using net4log or its competitors because I'm doing this to learn. Thank you Edit: Wrote some more code. So I will implement variety of loggers with this interface, i.e. DBExceptionLogger, CSVExceptionLogger, XMLExceptionLogger etc. Than I will still end up with concrete classes that I will have to use in different layers of my application.

  Read the article

• typeof === "undefined" vs. != null

  - by Thor Thurn

  I often see JavaScript code which checks for undefined parameters etc. this way: if (typeof input !== "undefined") { // do stuff } This seems kind of wasteful, since it involves both a type lookup and a string comparison, not to mention its verbosity. It's needed because 'undefined' could be renamed, though. My question is: How is that code any better than this approach: if (input != null) { // do stuff } As far as I know, you can't redefine null, so it's not going to break unexpectedly. And, because of the type-coercion of the != operator, this checks for both undefined and null... which is often exactly what you want (e.g. for optional function parameters). Yet this form does not seem widespread, and it even causes JSLint to yell at you for using the evil != operator. Why is this considered bad style?

  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

• Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

  - by Roman

  I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

  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 are the pros and cons of putting as much logic as possible in a minimum(one-liners) piece of co

  - by Jonas42

  Is it cool? IMO one-liners reduces the readability and makes debugging/understanding more difficult.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | Next Page >