Search Results

Search found 30896 results on 1236 pages for 'best buy'.

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 145/1236 | < Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >

  • Mandatory method documentation

    - by Sjoerd
    On my previous job, providing all methods with javadoc was mandatory, which resulted in things like this: /** * Sets the Frobber. * * @param frobber The frobber */ public setFrobber(Frobber frobber) { ... } As you can see, the documentation adds little to the code, but takes up space and work. Should documenting all methods be mandatory or optional? Is there a rule for which methods to document? What are pros and cons of requiring every method to be documented?

    Read the article

  • Correct approach to validate attributes of an instance of class

    - by systempuntoout
    Having a simple Python class like this: class Spam(object): __init__(self, description, value): self.description = description self.value = value Which is the correct approach to check these constraints: "description cannot be empty" "value must be greater than zero" Should i: 1.validate data before creating spam object ? 2.check data on __init__ method ? 3.create an is_valid method on Spam class and call it with spam.isValid() ? 4.create an is_valid static method on Spam class and call it with Spam.isValid(description, value) ? 5.check data on setters declaration ? 6.... Could you recommend a well designed\Pythonic\not verbose (on class with many attributes)\elegant approach?

    Read the article

  • How to refactor logging in C#?

    - by Jader Dias
    In my services all exposed methods have: try { // the method core is written here } catch(Exception ex) { Log.Append(ex); } It's boring and ugly to repeat it over and over again. There is any way to avoid that? There is better way to keep the service working even if exceptions occurs and keep sending the exception details to the Log class?

    Read the article

  • Foreach loop and tasks.

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I know from the codeing guidlines that I have read you should not do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(i)); } Console.ReadLine(); as it will write 5 5's, I understand that and I think i understand why it is happening. I know the solution is just to do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { int localI = i; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(localI)); } Console.ReadLine(); However is something like this ok to do? foreach (MyClass myClass in myClassList) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => myClass.DoAction()); } Console.ReadLine(); Or do I need to do the same thing I did in the for loop. foreach (MyClass myClass in myClassList) { MyClass localMyClass = myClass; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => localMyClass.DoAction()); } Console.ReadLine();

    Read the article

  • What are the standard practices for throwing Javascript Exceptions?

    - by T.R.
    w3schools says that exceptions can be strings, integers, booleans, or objects, but the example given doesn't strike me as good practice, since exception type checking is done through string comparison. Is this the preferred method of exception handling in Javascript? Are there built-in exception types (like NullPointerException)? (if so, what are they, what kind of inheritance do they use, and are they preferred over other options?)

    Read the article

  • Code casing question for private class fields

    - by user200295
    Take the following example public class Class1{ public string Prop1{ get {return m_Prop1;} set {m_Prop1 = value; } } private string m_Prop1; // this is standard private property variable name // how do we cap this variable name? While the compiler can figure out same casing // it makes it hard to read private Class2 Class2; // we camel case the parameter public Class1(Class2 class2){ this.Class2 = class2; } } Here are my stock rules The class name is capitalized (Class1) The public properties are capitalized (Prop1) The private field tied to a public property has m_ to indicate this. My coworker prefers _ There is some debate if using m_ or _ should be used at all, as it is like Hungarian notation. Private class fields are capitalized. The part I am trying to figure out is what do I do if when the Class name of a private field matches the private field name. For example, private Class2 Class2; This is confusing. If the private field name is not the same class, for example private string Name; , there isn't much issue. Or am I thinking about the issue wrong. Should my classes and private fields be named in such a way that they don't collide?

    Read the article

  • How should nested components interact with model in a GUI application?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Broad design/architecture question. If you have nested components in a GUI, what's the most common way for those components to interact with data? For example, let's say a component receives a click on one of its buttons to save data. Should the save request be delegated up that component's ancestors, with the uppermost ancestor ultimately passing the request to a controller? Or are models/datastores in a GUI application typically singletons, so that a component at any level of a hierarchy can directly get/set data? Or is a controller injected as a dependency down the hierarchy of components, so that any given component is only one intermediary away from the datastore/model?

    Read the article

  • Could this be considered a well-written class (am I using OOP correctly)?

    - by Ben Dauphinee
    I have been learning OOP principals on my own for a while, and taken a few cracks at writing classes. What I really need to know now is if I am actually using what I have learned correctly, or if I could improve as far as OOP is concerned. I have chopped a massive portion of code out of a class that I have been working on for a while now, and pasted it here. To all you skilled and knowledgeable programmers here I ask: Am I doing it wrong? class acl extends genericAPI{ // -- Copied from genericAPI class protected final function sanityCheck($what, $check, $vars){ switch($check){ case 'set': if(isset($vars[$what])){return(1);}else{return(0);} break; } } // --------------------------------- protected $db = null; protected $dataQuery = null; public function __construct(Zend_Db_Adapter_Abstract $db, $config = array()){ $this->db = $db; if(!empty($config)){$this->config = $config;} } protected function _buildQuery($selectType = null, $vars = array()){ // Removed switches for simplicity sake $this->dataQuery = $this->db->select( )->from( $this->config['table_users'], array('tf' => '(CASE WHEN count(*) > 0 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END)') )->where( $this->config['uidcol'] . ' = ?', $vars['uid'] ); } protected function _sanityRun_acl($sanitycheck, &$vars){ switch($sanitycheck){ case 'uid_set': if(!$this->sanityCheck('uid', 'set', $vars)){ throw new Exception(ERR_ACL_NOUID); } $vars['uid'] = settype($vars['uid'], 'integer'); break; } } private function user($action = null, $vars = array()){ switch($action){ case 'exists': $this->_sanityRun_acl('uid_set', $vars); $this->_buildQuery('user_exists_idcheck', $vars); return($this->db->fetchOne($this->dataQuery->__toString())); break; } } public function user_exists($uid){ return($this->user('exists', array('uid' => $uid))); } } $return = $acl_test->user_exists(1);

    Read the article

  • Efficiently store last X items in an MySQL Database

    - by Saif Bechan
    I want to store the last 3 items in an MySQL database in an efficient way. So when the 4th item is stored the first should be deleted. The way I do this not is first run a query getting the items. Than check what I should do then insert/delete. There has to be a better way to do this. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • new Integer vs valueOf

    - by LB
    Hi, I was using Sonar to make my code cleaner, and it pointed that I'm using new Integer(1) instead of Integer.valueOf(1). Because it seems that valueOf does not instantiate a new object so is more memory-friendly. How can valueOf not instantiate a new object ? How does it work ? Is this true for all integers ? thanks.

    Read the article

  • which type is best for three radiobuttons?

    - by Manog
    Maybe you consider this question trivial but im just curious what is your opinion. I have three radiobuttons. "Show blue", "Show red" and "Show all". I did it with nullable boolean. There is collumn in database where blue is 0 and red is 1 so in metode i have to translate bool to int to compare those values (i do it in c#).Of course it works, but i wonder if it is the best solution. And question is wich type is best in this case? nullable bool, int, or maybe string?

    Read the article

  • group by country with ActiveRecords in Rails

    - by Adnan
    Hello, I have a table with users: name | country | .. | UK | .. | US | .. | US | .. | UK | .. | FR | .. | FR | .. | UK | .. | UK | .. | DE | .. | DE | .. | UK | .. | CA | . . What is the most efficient way with ActiveRecords to get the list of countries in my view and for each country how many users are from, so: US 123 UK 54 DE 33 . . .

    Read the article

  • Boost shared_ptr use_count function

    - by photo_tom
    My application problem is the following - I have a large structure foo. Because these are large and for memory management reasons, we do not wish to delete them when processing on the data is complete. We are storing them in std::vector<boost::shared_ptr<foo>>. My question is related to knowing when all processing is complete. First decision is that we do not want any of the other application code to mark a complete flag in the structure because there are multiple execution paths in the program and we cannot predict which one is the last. So in our implementation, once processing is complete, we delete all copies of boost::shared_ptr<foo>> except for the one in the vector. This will drop the reference counter in the shared_ptr to 1. Is it practical to use shared_ptr.use_count() to see if it is equal to 1 to know when all other parts of my app are done with the data. One additional reason I'm asking the question is that the boost documentation on the shared pointer shared_ptr recommends not using "use_count" for production code.

    Read the article

  • list all files from directories and subdirectories in Java

    - by Adnan
    What would be the fastest way to list the names of files from 1000+ directories and sub-directories? EDIT; The current code I use is: import java.io.File; public class DirectoryReader { static int spc_count=-1; static void Process(File aFile) { spc_count++; String spcs = ""; for (int i = 0; i < spc_count; i++) spcs += " "; if(aFile.isFile()) System.out.println(spcs + "[FILE] " + aFile.getName()); else if (aFile.isDirectory()) { System.out.println(spcs + "[DIR] " + aFile.getName()); File[] listOfFiles = aFile.listFiles(); if(listOfFiles!=null) { for (int i = 0; i < listOfFiles.length; i++) Process(listOfFiles[i]); } else { System.out.println(spcs + " [ACCESS DENIED]"); } } spc_count--; } public static void main(String[] args) { String nam = "D:/"; File aFile = new File(nam); Process(aFile); } }

    Read the article

  • Why is 'using namespace std;' considered a bad practice in C++?

    - by Mana
    Okay, sorry for the simplistic question, but this has been bugging me ever since I finished high school C++ last year. I've been told by others on numerous occasions that my teacher was wrong in saying that we should have "using namespace std;" in our programs, and that std::cout and std::cin are more proper. However, they would always be vague as to why this is a bad practice. So, I'm asking now: Why is "using namespace std;" considered bad? Is it really that inefficient, or risk declaring ambiguous vars(variables that share the same name as a function in std namespace) that much? Or does this impact program performance noticeably as you get into writing larger applications? I'm sorry if this is something I should have googled to solve; I figured it would be nice to have this question on here regardless in case anyone else was wondering.

    Read the article

  • How should I use try...except while defining a function?

    - by SpawnCxy
    Hi all, I find I've been confused by the problem that when I needn't to use try..except.For last few days it was used in almost every function I defined which I think maybe a bad practice.For example: class mongodb(object): def getRecords(self,tname,conditions=''): try: col = eval("self.db.%s" %tname) recs = col.find(condition) return recs except Exception,e: #here make some error log with e.message What I thought is ,exceptions may be raised everywhere and I have to use try to get them. And my question is,is it a good practice to use it everywhere when defining functions?If not are there any principles for it?Help would be appreciated! Regards

    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 | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >