Search Results

Search found 8219 results on 329 pages for 'less'.

Page 149/329 | < Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >

  • How to minimize the usage of static variables and objects

    - by Peter Penzov
    I'm trying to implement this JavaFX code where I want to call remote Java class and pass boolean flag: final CheckMenuItem toolbarSubMenuNavigation = new CheckMenuItem("Navigation"); toolbarSubMenuNavigation.setOnAction(new EventHandler<ActionEvent>() { @Override public void handle(ActionEvent e) { //DataTabs.renderTab = toolbarSubMenuNavigation.isSelected(); DataTabs.setRenderTab(toolbarSubMenuNavigation.isSelected()); // call here the getter setter and send boolean flag System.out.println("subsystem1 #1 Enabled!"); } }); Java class which I want to call: public class DataTabs { private static boolean renderTab; // make members *private* private static TabPane tabPane; public static boolean isRenderTab() { return DataTabs.renderTab; } public static void setRenderTab(boolean renderTab) { DataTabs.renderTab = renderTab; tabPane.setVisible(renderTab); } // somewhere below // set visible the tab pane TabPane tabPane = DataTabs.tabPane = new TabPane(); tabPane.setVisible(renderTab); } This implementation works but I want to optimize it to use less static variables and objects. Can you tell me which sections of the code how can be optimized?

    Read the article

  • How to keep background requests in sequence

    - by Jason Lewis
    I'm faced with implementing interfaces for some rather archaic systems, for handling online deposits to stored value accounts (think campus card accounts for students). Here's my dilemma: stage 1 of the process involves passing the user off to a thrid-party site for the credit card transaction, like old-school PayPal. Step two involves using a proprietary protocol for communicating with a legacy system for conducting the actual deposit. Step two requires that each transaction have a unique sequence number, and that the requests' seqnums are in order. Since we're logging each transaction in Postgres, my first thought was to take a number from a sequence in the DB, guaranteeing uniqueness. But since we're dealing with web requests that might come in near-simultaneously, and since latency with the return from the off-ste payment processor is beyond our control, there's always the chance for a race condition in the order of requests passed back to the proprietary system, and if the seqnums are out of order, the request fails silently (brilliant, right?). I thought about enqueuing the requests in Redis and using Resque workers to process them (single worker, single process, so they are processed in order), but we need to be able to give the user feedback as to whether the transaction was processed successfully, so this seems less feasible to me. I've tried to make this application handle concurrency well (as much as possible for a Ruby on Rails app), but now we're in a situation where we have to interact with a system that is designed to be single process, single threaded, and sequential. If it at least gave an "out of order" error, I could just increment (or take the next value off the sequence), but it's designed to fail silently in the event of ANY error. We are handling timeouts in a way that blocks on I/O, but since the application uses multiple workers (Unicorn), that's no guarantee. Any ideas/suggestions would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • I'm applying for a position at a startup. To whom should I address my cover letter?

    - by sapphiremirage
    One of the co-founders answered questions about the company when the job was posted, but I feel like I shouldn't assume that he's the one who is in charge of hiring. Since it's relatively new and has a lot of name overlap with other things already on the web, it's hard to find any information about the company online, much less the name of their hiring manager. I'm not even certain that they do have a hiring manager, since I seem to remember that they are just an 8 person team. I've heard that "To whom it may concern" is tacky, and normally I would say something along the lines of "Dear Head of Human Resources", but that clearly doesn't work in this case. Any idea what my salutation should be? Later Edits: Final Version: To Joe Programmer and/or the AwesomeStartup.com hiring team, (+ a few words in first paragraph explaining why I am addressing Joe Programmer) I've already sent the email, so nothing you say here will save me. However, feel free to comment on my decision if you think your words be useful to future generations. Old Version (left here because some people responded to it): To the hiring manager for internships at Awesomestartup.com, Additionally, because so many people made comments about the content of my letter: I did spent several hours writing the cover letter itself and making sure that it was awesome. After spending such a long time working on the important part, I asked this question because I wanted to make sure that it wouldn't get passed over by some human who was having a bad day and decided that my salutation was inappropriate. Not likely when the most likely reader of that email is a programmer type, I know, but I figured that it wouldn't hurt not to be sloppy.

    Read the article

  • What is the value to checking in broken unit tests?

    - by Adam W.
    While there are ways of keeping unit tests from being executed, what is the value of checking in broken unit tests? I will use a simple example. Case sensitivity. The current code is Case Sensitive. A valid input into the method is "Cat" and it would return an enum of Animal.Cat. However, the desired functionality of the method should not be case sensitive. So if the method described was passed "cat" it could possibly return something like Animal.Null instead of Animal.Cat and the unit test would fail. Though a simple code change would make this work, a more complex issue may take weeks to fix, but identifying the bug with a unit test could be a less complex task. The application currently being analyzed has 4 years of code that "works". However, recent discussions regarding unit tests has found flaws in the code. Some just need explicit implementation documentation (ex. case sensitive or not), or code that does not execute the bug based on how it is currently called. But unit tests can be created executing specific scenarios that will cause the bug to be seen and are valid inputs. What is the value of checking in unit tests that exercise the bug until someone can get around to fixing the code? Should this unit test be flagged with ignore, priority, category etc, to determine whether a build was successful based on tests executed? Eventually the unit test should be created to execute the code once someone fixes it. On one hand it shows that identified bugs have not been fixed. On the other, there could be hundreds of failed unit tests showing up in the logs and weeding through the ones that should fail vs. failures due to a code check-in would be difficult to find.

    Read the article

  • Who should be the architect in an agile project?

    - by woni
    We are developing the agile way for a few months now and I have some troubles understanding the agile manifesto as interpreted by my colleagues. The project we are developing is a framework for future projects and will be reused many times in the next years. Code is only written to fulfill the needs of the current user story. The product owner tells us what to do, but not how to do it. What would be right, in my opinion, because he is not implicitly a programmer. The project advanced and in my eyes it messed up a little bit. After I recognized an assembly that was responsible for 3 concerns (IoC-Container, communication layer and project internal things), I tried to address this to my colleagues. They answered that this would be the result of applying YAGNI, because know one told them to respect that functionalities have to be split up in different assemblies for further use. In my opinion no one has to tell us that we should respect the Separation of Concerns principle. On the other side, they mentioned to prefer YAGNI over SoC because it is less effort to implement and therefore faster and cheaper. We had changing requirements a lot at the beginning of the project and ended up in endless refactoring sessions, because to much has to be adapted. Is it better to make such rather simple design decisions up front, even there is no need in the current situation, or do we have to change a lot in the later progress of the project?

    Read the article

  • Two graphical entities, smooth blending between them (e.g. asphalt and grass)

    - by Gabriel Conrad
    Supposedly in a scenario there are, among other things, a tarmac strip and a meadow. The tarmac has an asphalt texture and its model is a triangle strip long that might bifurcate at some point into other tinier strips, and suppose that the meadow is covered with grass. What can be done to make the two graphical entities seem less cut out from a photo and just pasted one on top of the other at the edges? To better understand the problem, picture a strip of asphalt and a plane covered with grass. The grass texture should also "enter" the tarmac strip a little bit at the edges (i.e. feathering effect). My ideas involve two approaches: put two textures on the tarmac entity, but that involves a serious restriction in how the strip is modeled and its texture coordinates are mapped or try and apply a post-processing filter that mimics a bloom effect where "grass" is used instead of light. This could be a terrible failure to achieve correct results. So, is there a better or at least a more obvious way that's widely used in the game dev industry?

    Read the article

  • Deciding on a company-wide javascript strategy [on hold]

    - by drogon
    Our company is moving most of its software from thick-client winforms apps to web apps. We are using asp.net mvc on the server side. Most of the developers are brand new to the web and need to become efficient and knowledgeable at writing client-side web code (javascript). We are deciding on a number of things and would appreciate feedback on the following: Angular.js or Backbone.js? Backbone (w/ Underscore) is certainly more light weight, but requires more custom development. Angular seems to be a full-fledged framework, but would require everyone to embrace it and probably a longer learning curve(??). (Note: I know nothing about Angular at this point) Require.js or script includes w/ MVC bundleconfig? Require.js makes development "feel like" c# (importing namespaces). But, integrating the build/minification process can be a pain (especially the configuration). Bundling via mvc requires developers to worry more about which scripts to include but has less overall development friction. Typescript vs Javascript Regardless of frameworks, our developers are going to need to learn the basics. Typescript is more like c# and MAY be easier for c# developers to understand. However, learning TypeScript before javascript may hinder their mastery of javascript at the expense of efficiency.

    Read the article

  • Finding a job: feedback on my current prodicument and my relentless efforts [closed]

    - by Michael
    I am a very well rounded IT guy, with a passion for programming in particular. I have been through a BS program less the internship as I refuse to go lower than minimum wage (i.e. free) and/or such opportunities find the institution lacking. Since then, the catalog for my degree has changed, so I am making peace without it. I go up for job interviews and get myself no farther than a submitted resume. I have even changed my strategy and made this website: http://goo.gl/qqpN8 to showcase my highlights (but not at all exhaustive) for specific areas in the US and paid for classified ads. The 'internship' is notable as I am just trying to get my foot in the door. Because IT is so vast, with programming and engineering in particular, I spend my time researching the requirements for the job I am applying for. This has made me that well rounded guy I spoke of earlier, but has made me a victim of being a jack-of-all-trades; unfortunately being a master of none. I embrace my gung-ho attitude and find it to be a trait that has powered my career before. But I am starting to lose steam. I want it straight. What is not appealing about everything I am doing? What are the technologies that I need to focus on that are in great demand at the moment?

    Read the article

  • Student Life in Nigeria

    - by FelixWehmeyer
    They say that the Nigerian way of life involves being able and ready to succeed in life no matter the obstacles. My name is Olawale Obasola, graduated from Covenant University ’07 and presently working as a graduate consultant in Oracle. I will give you an insight into the student life in Nigeria. Nowadays, being a graduate in Nigeria is not the easiest thing; the life after graduation is much harder than one would normally imagine. I guess it isn’t helped with the Economical uproar of the last few years but it’s as grueling as it can get.  Also the Upper vs Lower class phenomena makes the journey a little too much hurried as it is easier to lose one’s way. Joining Oracle is a dream come-true as it further enhances my stance of taking Technology to the core of Nigeria. My initial perception about joining Oracle is that am going to be monitored every single second and my life would practically revolve around work but ever since I stepped in here, it has been an amazing experience. As much as the work can be stressful at times, it’s also the best place I have ever worked in and the atmosphere is great. My team is the best Pre-Sales team in the region and I gain invaluable knowledge every minute, we have a bond and understanding that helps propel each other to achieve more. The Life of a Nigerian graduate isn’t a bed of roses but I have a strong will and personality to emerge from any hardship to succeed. We show the true strength and spirit of Africa, we never give up and would never settle for anything less than the best.

    Read the article

  • How do you keep your basic skills from atrophy?

    - by kojiro
    I've been programming for about 10 years, and I've started to migrate to more of a project management position. I still do coding, but less often now. One of the things that I think is holding me back in my career is that I can't "let go". I think I fear letting hard-won programming skills atrophy while I sit in meetings and annotate requirements. (Not to mention I don't trust people to write requirements who don't understand the code.) I can't just read books and magazines about coding. I'm involved in some open source projects in my free time, and stackoverflow and friends help a bit, because I get the opportunity to help people solve their programming problems without micromanaging, but neither of these are terribly structured, so it's tempting to work first on the problems I can solve easily. I guess what I'd like to find is a structured set of exercises (don't care what language or environment) that… …I can do periodically …has some kind of time requirement so I can tell if I've been goofing off …has some kind of scoring so I can tell if I'm making mistakes Is there such a thing? What would you do to keep your skills fresh?

    Read the article

  • What are `Developmental Milestones` for programming skills?

    - by Holmes
    I studied in the field of Computer Science for 6 years, bachelor's degree and master's degree. I have studied all the basic programming like C, Java, VB, C#, Python, and etc. When I have free times, I will learn new programming languages and follow new programming trends by myself , such as PHP, HTML5, CSS5, LESS, Bootstrap, Symfony2, and GitHub. So, if someone wants me to write some instructions using these languages, I'm certain that I can do it, not so good but I can get a job done. However, I don't have any favorite programming language. Moreover, I also have studied about algorithms, database, and etc. Everything I just wrote so far seems that I know a lot in this field. In fact, I feel I am very stupid. I cannot answer 80% of the questions on SO. In spite of those languages??, I have studied. Perhaps it is because I have never worked before. As there is the Developmental Milestones for children, which refers to how a child becomes able to do more complex things as they get older, I would like to evaluate the same thing but for programming skills. What are the set of functional skills or age-specific tasks that most programmers can do at a certain age range? In order to evaluate myself, I would like to ask your opinions that all of the skills I mentioned above, are they enough for programmers to know when they are 25 years old? What are your suggestions in order to improve the skills in this field?

    Read the article

  • Is the Alternate Ubuntu installer still required for LVM or Software RAID setup?

    - by jimp
    Over the past 5 years, I have been setting up Ubuntu servers using the Alternate installer. I need to provision a new server today, and I'm curious if the Alternate CD is still the only way to setup LVM/RAID at installation time. I'm my limited experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux, I noticed it's single installer configures LVM automatically. Has Ubuntu's installer, at least the standard "Server" installer, added support for LVM/RAID, or is the Alternate installer still required for that kind of server setup? http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso/DVDs/ubuntu/12.04.1/release/ Alternate install CD The alternate install CD allows you to perform certain specialist installations of Ubuntu. It provides for the following situations: setting up automated deployments; upgrading from older installations without network access; LVM and/or RAID partitioning; installs on systems with less than about 384MiB of RAM (although note that low-memory systems may not be able to run a full desktop environment reasonably). LVM has always been fundamental for our server needs, so I'm surprised if it is still not considered a server-worthy feature.

    Read the article

  • Are long methods always bad?

    - by wobbily_col
    So looking around earlier I noticed some comments about long methods being bad practice. I am not sure I always agree that long methods are bad (and would like opinions from others). For example I have some Django views that do a bit of processing of the objects before sending them to the view, a long method being 350 lines of code. I have my code written so that it deals with the paramaters - sorting / filtering the queryset, then bit by bit does some processing on the objects my query has returned. So the processing is mainly conditional aggregation, that has complex enough rules it can't easily be done in the database, so I have some variables declared outside the main loop then get altered during the loop. varaible_1 = 0 variable_2 = 0 for object in queryset : if object.condition_condition_a and variable_2 > 0 : variable 1+= 1 ..... ... . more conditions to alter the variables return queryset, and context So according to the theory I should factor out all the code into smaller methods, so That I have the view method as being maximum one page long. However having worked on various code bases in the past, I sometimes find it makes the code less readable, when you need to constantly jump from one method to the next figuring out all the parts of it, while keeping the outermost method in your head. I find that having a long method that is well formatted, you can see the logic more easily, as it isn't getting hidden away in inner methods. I could factor out the code into smaller methods, but often there is is an inner loop being used for two or three things, so it would result in more complex code, or methods that don't do one thing but two or three (alternatively I could repeat inner loops for each task, but then there will be a performance hit). So is there a case that long methods are not always bad? Is there always a case for writing methods, when they will only be used in one place?

    Read the article

  • Where is Oracle Utilities Application Framework V3?

    - by Anthony Shorten
    You may of noticed that the latest version of the Oracle Utilities Application Framework is V4.0.1. The last release of the Framework was V2.2. So what happened to V3? The short answer is that there is no V3 of the framework. The long answer is that the Oracle Utilities Application Framework has long been associated with Oracle Utilities Customer Care And Billing and Oracle Enterprise Taxation Management only. As more and more of the Oracle Tax And Utilities products are migrated onto the framework the association betweent eh original products on the framework is less appropriate. Therefore it was decided to pick a version number to emphasize the decouplinf of the releases of the Framework with any particular product. To illustrate this, the Oracle Mobile Workforce Management (MWM) V2.0.0 product uses Oracle Utilities Applicaton Framework V4.0.1. If we used the old numberings schema then MWM would be V4.0.1 which makes no sense, given the last release of MWM was V1.x The framework has its own development team and product management. It basicaly has its own schedule (though it is influenced by the products that use it still - which makes sense). So that s the reasoning around the version numbering change for the framework.

    Read the article

  • Speed up ADF Mobile Deployment to Android with Keystore

    - by Shay Shmeltzer
    As you might have noticed from my latest ADF Mobile entries, I'm doing most of my ADF Mobile development on a windows machine and testing on an Android device. Unfortunately the Android/windows experience is not as fast as the iOS/Mac one. However, there is one thing I learned today that can make this a bit less painful in terms of the speed to deploy and test your application - and this is to use the "Release" mode when deploying your application instead of the "Debug" mode. To do this you'll first need to define a keystore, but as Joe from our Mobile team showed me today, this is quite easy. Here are the steps: Open a command line in your JDK bin directory (I just used the JDK that comes with the JDeveloper install). Issue the following command: keytool –genkey –v –keystore <Keystore Name>.keystore –alias <Alias Name> -keyalg RSA –keysize 2048 –validity 10000 Both keystore name and alias names are strings that you decide on. The keytool utility will then prompt you with various questions that you'll need to answer. Once this is done, the next step is to configure your JDeveloper preferences->ADF Mobile to add this keystore there under the release tab:  Then for your application specific deployment profile - switch the build mode from debug to release. The end result is a much smaller mobile application (for example from 60 to 21mb) and a much faster deployment cycle (for me it is about twice as fast as before).

    Read the article

  • Account Listings on APress and O'Reilly

    - by TATWORTH
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TATWORTH/archive/2013/06/20/e-books-from-apress-and-oreilly.aspxIn recent days both APress and O'Reilly have radically improved the way they display items registered against your account with them.APress now show only one line per e-book and the multitude of formats is handled by a drop-down list. The result is that the list of APress books I have bought now requires less paging through. The only things that the APress lacks are:The ability to show all on the page (currently options for 10,20 and 50 per page)The ability to sort on title or date bought or date updatedO'Reilly have always shown the formats available by a series of hyperlinks along one line. They have improved their list as follows:You can sort on title or date bought or date updatedClicking on a line shows full detail of the item (include image, download details, errata link and catalog page). Clicking again collapses the detail.You can select all your purchased items together or just show E-Books or Print or VideosNow why is the date updated important? Updates are issued for various books  (particularly those made available whilst still being written) - the publishers very kindly email you when an update is available but finding it in the list to download it again is not as easy as you think, however sort on release date and they are easy to find!

    Read the article

  • Should you always pass the bare minimum data needed into a function

    - by Anders Holmström
    Let's say I have a function IsAdmin that checks whether a user is an admin. Let's also say that the admin checking is done by matching user id, name and password against some sort of rule (not important). In my head there are then two possible function signatures for this: public bool IsAdmin(User user); public bool IsAdmin(int id, string name, string password); I most often go for the second type of signature, thinking that: The function signature gives the reader a lot more info The logic contained inside the function doesn't have to know about the User class It usually results in slightly less code inside the function However I sometimes question this approach, and also realize that at some point it would become unwieldy. If for example a function would map between ten different object fields into a resulting bool I would obviously send in the entire object. But apart from a stark example like that I can't see a reason to pass in the actual object. I would appreciate any arguments for either style, as well as any general observations you might offer. I program in both object oriented and functional styles, so the question should be seen as regarding any and all idioms.

    Read the article

  • Object construction design

    - by James
    I recently started to use c# to interface with a database, and there was one part of the process that appeared odd to me. When creating a SqlCommand, the method I was lead to took the form: SqlCommand myCommand = new SqlCommand("Command String", myConnection); Coming from a Java background, I was expecting something more similar to SqlCommand myCommand = myConnection.createCommand("Command String"); I am asking, in terms of design, what is the difference between the two? The phrase "single responsibility" has been used to suggest that a connection should not be responsible for creating SqlCommands, but I would also say that, in my mind, the difference between the two is partly a mental one of the difference between a connection executing a command and a command acting on a connection, the latter of which seems less like what I have been lead to believe OOP should be. There is also a part of me wondering if the two should be completely separate, and should only come together in some sort of connection.execute(command) method. Can anyone help clear up these differences? Are any of these methods "more correct" than the others from an OO point of view? (P.S. the fact that c# is used is completely irrelevant. It just highlighted to me that different approaches were used)

    Read the article

  • Lead Programmer definition clarification

    - by Junaid
    I am working on PHP and MySQL based web application for more than 5 years now. I started my career from Intern - Jr Developer - Software Developer - Sr. Software Engineer [Team Lead] that's what I am nowadays. I was looking at the link at Wikipedia regarding who is a lead programmer. The link states the following: A lead programmer is a software engineer in charge of one or more software projects. Alternative titles include Development Lead, Technical Lead, Senior Software Engineer, Software Design Engineer Lead (SDE Lead), Software Manager, or Senior Applications Developer. When primarily contributing in a high-level enterprise software design role, the title Software Architect (or similar) is often used. All of these titles can have different meanings depending on the context. My current job responsibilities are more or less like a Development Lead and to some extent near Software Architect because I usually design the core structure of new products and managing 2-3 project simultaneously and in the meantime involved in assisting other teams regarding the structural design of their projects, I am usually on call with clients along with project managers, I code most of the time when my team stuck somewhere / workload / integrating some third party API and etc. Primary reason of this writing is to know if I qualify for a Development Lead Title? in accordance with my above mentioned job descriptions?

    Read the article

  • Modular Database Structures

    - by John D
    I have been examining the code base we use in work and I am worried about the size the packages have grown to. The actual code is modular, procedures have been broken down into small functional (and testable) parts. The issue I see is that we have 100 procedures in a single package - almost an entire domain model. I had thought of breaking these packages down - to create sub domains that are centered around the procedure relationships to other objects. Group a bunch of procedures that have 80% of their relationships to three tables etc. The end result would be a lot more packages, but the packages would be smaller and I feel the entire code base would be more readable - when procedures cross between two domain models it is less of a struggle to figure which package it belongs to. The problem I now have is what the actual benefit of all this would really be. I looked at the general advantages of modularity: 1. Re-usability 2. Asynchronous Development 3. Maintainability Yet when I consider our latest development, the procedures within the packages are already reusable. At this advanced stage we rarely require asynchronous development - and when it is required we simply ladder the stories across iterations. So I guess my question is if people know of reasons why you would break down classes rather than just the methods inside of classes? Right now I do believe there is an issue with these mega packages forming but the only benefit I can really pin down to break them down is readability - something that experience gained from working with them would solve.

    Read the article

  • Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

    - by Bob Horn
    Disclaimer: The intent of this question isn't to discern what is better for the individual developer, but for the system as a whole. I've worked in environments where small teams managed certain areas. For example, there would be a small team for every one of these functions: UI Framework code Business/application logic Database I've also worked on teams where the developers were responsible for all of these areas and more (QA, analsyt, etc...). My current environment promotes agile development (specifically scrum) and everyone has their hands in every area mentioned above. While there are pros and cons to each approach, I'd be curious to know if there are more pros and cons than I list below, and also what the generally feeling is about which approach is better. Devs Do It All Pros 1. Developers may be more well-rounded 2. Developers know more of the system Cons 1. Everyone has their hands in all areas, increasing the probability of creating less-than-optimal results in that area 2. It can take longer to do something with which you are unfamiliar (jack of all trades, master of none) Devs Specialize Pros 1. Developers can create policies and procedures for their area of expertise and more easily enforce them 2. Developers have more of a chance to become deeply knowledgeable about their specific area and make it the best it can be 3. Other developers don't cross boundaries and degrade another area Cons 1. As one colleague put it: "Why would you want to pigeon-hole yourself like that?" (Meaning some developers won't get a chance to work in certain areas.) It's easy to say how wonderful agile is, and that we should do it all, but I'm somewhat of a fan of having areas of expertise. Without that expertise, I've seen code degrade, database schemas become difficult to manage, hack UI code, etc... Let's face it, some people make careers out of doing just UI work, or just database work. It's not that easy to just fill in and do as good of a job as an expert in that area.

    Read the article

  • Should we test all our methods?

    - by Zenzen
    So today I had a talk with my teammate about unit testing. The whole thing started when he asked me "hey, where are the tests for that class, I see only one?". The whole class was a manager (or a service if you prefer to call it like that) and almost all the methods were simply delegating stuff to a DAO so it was similar to: SomeClass getSomething(parameters) { return myDao.findSomethingBySomething(parameters); } A kind of boilerplate with no logic (or at least I do not consider such simple delegation as logic) but a useful boilerplate in most cases (layer separation etc.). And we had a rather lengthy discussion whether or not I should unit test it (I think that it is worth mentioning that I did fully unit test the DAO). His main arguments being that it was not TDD (obviously) and that someone might want to see the test to check what this method does (I do not know how it could be more obvious) or that in the future someone might want to change the implementation and add new (or more like "any") logic to it (in which case I guess someone should simply test that logic). This made me think, though. Should we strive for the highest test coverage %? Or is it simply an art for art's sake then? I simply do not see any reason behind testing things like: getters and setters (unless they actually have some logic in them) "boilerplate" code Obviously a test for such a method (with mocks) would take me less than a minute but I guess that is still time wasted and a millisecond longer for every CI. Are there any rational/not "flammable" reasons to why one should test every single (or as many as he can) line of code?

    Read the article

  • How do you price your work?

    - by Dr.Kameleon
    Well, let me explain : This has really been an issue for me, for such a long time. And what is worse - since coding is something I simply ADORE (I would definitely do it, even if there was no payment involved whatsoever..) - is that I always end up feeling somewhat awkward... Anyway... So, here's the deal : You start working on a project, you may have something in your mind, and even if you're lucky enough and the client needs no "cost estimates" beforehand, sooner or later you'll face the ultimate dilemma of pricing your own work. So, how do YOU do it? By estimating the time you put into it? (obviously, this is not exact, 'coz perhaps a more capable coder will need much less time for the very same thing than a not-so-competent coder + even the very same coder may not "perform" equally at all times) By the Lines of code you've written? (obviously, this is not a measure either : a 10-line script that does exactly the same with a 1000-line script is, at least for me, "better") By taking into account the level of complexity of the project and, perhaps, how specialised the subject is? By taking into account other factors? (e.g. the value of the project for your customer)

    Read the article

  • Tiled Editor: How is this Map Handling Collision?

    - by user2736286
    BrowserQuest map in question. From what I understand, with tiled, there are two main ways to specify collision: Create an object layer, and interpret the shapes in the engine as collision objects. Create a tiled layer, and make all tiles in the layer have a collision property, and interpret all tiles in the layer as collision objects. I'm using BrowserQuest as a big source of inspiration for my project, and I want to know how they handled collision on the level editing side. I've checked through all their layers, expecting an object layer to be handling cliff collision like: But there are no such object layers to be found. Furthermore, the tile layers containing the tiles for such cliffs have no properties at all, meaning that they didn't just specify "collision" for such tile layers. I especially need to know how they handled less rectangular shapes like: I could imagine that they are not using explicit collision layers, but instead determining collision in the actual engine, based off the presence of specific tile layer sprites. Only because BrowserQuest has whole-tile movement, and it wouldn't look too odd if a small apple, taking up only a fraction of the tile size, prevents movement over that entire tile. But I'm creating a game with more precise movement, so collision has to be tight to the apple, and I really want to know how BrowserQuest approached collision defining. If anyone knowledgeable with Tiled could take a quick look at the map, I'd appreciate it! I'm tearing my hair out here :). Thanks

    Read the article

  • Centring an HTML element relative to its parent when its width is greater than its parent. [closed]

    - by casr
    I mocked up my intended outcome. So the blue element is the main content of the website and the yellow element represents something like a diagram or an image that has a greater width than the blue element. Ideally, I would like a purely CSS solution that is able to deal with various sizes of images. I have tried various things but have failed so far. I hope you can help! Here’s some example markup to set you on your way. <!DOCTYPE HTML> <html> <head> <title>Example</title> <style> #el1 { display: block; margin: 0 auto; width: 30em; background-color: #8cabde } #el2 { /* works when the width is less than the parent */ display: block; margin: 0 auto; } </style> </head> <body> <article id=el1> <p>Some content above.</p> <img id=el2 src=http://i.imgur.com/JFfGG.gif title=spaceball width=600 height=400> <p>Some content below.</p> </article> </body> </html>

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >