Search Results

Search found 53327 results on 2134 pages for 'key value coding'.

Page 165/2134 | < Previous Page | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >

  • Returning an anonymous class that uses a final primitive. How does it work?

    - by Tim P
    Hi, I was wondering if someone could explain how the following code works: public interface Result { public int getCount(); public List<Thing> getThings(); } class SomeClass { ... public Result getThingResult() { final List<Thing> things = .. populated from something. final int count = 5; return new Result { @Override public int getCount() { return count; } @Override public List<Thing> getThings(); return things; } } } ... } Where do the primitive int , List reference and List instance get stored in memory? It can't be on the stack.. so where? Is there a difference between how references and primitives are handled in this situation? Thanks a bunch, Tim P.

    Read the article

  • Java: repetition, overuse -- ?

    - by HH
    I try to be as minimalist as possible. Repetition is a problem. I hate it. When is it really a problem? what is static-overuse? what is field-method overuse? what is class-overuse? are there more types of overuse? Problem A: when it is too much to use of static? private static class Data { private static String fileContent; private static SizeSequence lineMap; private static File fileThing; private static char type; private static boolean binary; private static String name; private static String path; } private static class Print { //<1st LINE, LEFT_SIDE, 2nd LINE, RIGHT_SIDE> private Integer[] printPositions=new Integer[4]; private static String fingerPrint; private static String formatPrint; } Problem B: when it is too much to get field data with private methods? public Stack<Integer> getPositions(){return positions;} public Integer[] getPrintPositions(){return printPositions;} private Stack<String> getPrintViews(){return printViews;} private Stack<String> getPrintViewsPerFile(){return printViewsPerFile;} public String getPrintView(){return printView;} public String getFingerPrint(){return fingerPrint;} public String getFormatPrint(){return formatPrint;} public String getFileContent(){return fileContent;} public SizeSequence getLineMap(){return lineMap;} public File getFile(){return fileThing;} public boolean getBinary(){return binary;} public char getType(){return type;} public String getPath(){return path;} public FileObject getData(){return fObj;} public String getSearchTerm(){return searchTerm;} Related interface overuse

    Read the article

  • What's the reason for leaving an extra blank line at the end of a code file?

    - by Lord Torgamus
    Eclipse and MyEclipse create new Java files with an extra blank line after the last closing brace by default. I think CodeWarrior did the same thing a few years back, and that some people leave such blank lines in their code either by intention or laziness. So, this seems to be at least a moderately widespread behavior. As a former human language editor -- copy editing newspapers, mostly -- I find that those lines look like sloppiness or accidents, and I can't think of a reason to leave them in source files. I know they don't affect compilation in C-style languages, including Java. Are there benefits to having those lines, and if so, what are they?

    Read the article

  • XML: When to use attributes instead of child nodes?

    - by Rosarch
    For tree leaves in XML, when is it better to use attributes, and when is it better to use descendant nodes? For example, in the following XML document: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <savedGame> <links> <link rootTagName="zombies" packageName="zombie" /> <link rootTagName="ghosts" packageName="ghost" /> <link rootTagName="players" packageName="player" /> <link rootTagName="trees" packageName="tree" /> </links> <locations> <zombies> <zombie> <positionX>41</positionX> <positionY>100</positionY> </zombie> <zombie> <positionX>55</positionX> <positionY>56</positionY> </zombie> </zombies> <ghosts> <ghost> <positionX>11</positionX> <positionY>90</positionY> </ghost> </ghosts> </locations> </savedGame> The <link> tag has attributes, but it could also be written as: <link> <rootTagName>trees</rootTagName> <packageName>tree</packageName> </link> Similarly, the location tags could be written as: <zombie positionX="55" positionY="56" /> instead of: <zombie> <positionX>55</positionX> <positionY>56</positionY> </zombie> What reasons are there to prefer one over the other? Is it just a stylistic issue? Any performance considerations?

    Read the article

  • [Flex Beginner question] String and value object

    - by James
    Hi all, In php we can assign a method name to a variable and then use that variable to call the method. For example: $image_create_func = 'ImageCreateFromGIF'; $newImage = $image_create_func($oldImage); But can we do this in Flex? In flex, I have the string public var key:String = "email" And I also have a value object searchTerm:SearchTermVO which has a public property "email" (searchTerm.email). Now I want to do searchTerm.email by doing something like in php: searchTerm.key but it's not possible. Can anybody help me with this plz? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Multiple return points in scala closure/anonymous function

    - by Debilski
    As far as I understand it, there is no way in Scala to have multiple return points in an anonymous function, i.e. someList.map((i) => { if (i%2 == 0) return i // the early return allows me to avoid the else clause doMoreStuffAndReturnSomething(i) }) raises an error: return outside method definition. (And if it weren’t to raise that, the code would not work as I’d like it to work.) One workaround I could thing of would be the following someList.map({ def f(i: Int):Int = { if (i%2 == 0) return i doMoreStuffAndReturnSomething(i) } f }) however, I’d like to know if there is another ‘accepted’ way of doing this. Maybe a possibility to go without a name for the inner function? (A use case would be to emulate some valued continue construct inside the loop.)

    Read the article

  • How much of STL is too much?

    - by Darius Kucinskas
    I am using a lot of STL code with std::for_each, bind, and so on, but I noticed that sometimes STL usage is not good idea. For example if you have a std::vector and want to do one action on each item of the vector, your first idea is to use this: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), Foo()) and it is elegant and ok, for a while. But then comes the first set of bug reports and you have to modify code. Now you should add parameter to call Foo(), so now it becomes: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), std::bind2nd(Foo(), X)) but that is only temporary solution. Now the project is maturing and you understand business logic much better and you want to add new modifications to code. It is at this point that you realize that you should use old good: for(std::vector::iterator it = vec.begin(); it != vec.end(); ++it) Is this happening only to me? Do you recognise this kind of pattern in your code? Have you experience similar anti-patterns using STL?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to embed Cockburn style textual UML Use Case content in the code base to improve code

    - by fooledbyprimes
    experimenting with Cockburn use cases in code I was writing some complicated UI code. I decided to employ Cockburn use cases with fish,kite,and sea levels (discussed by Martin Fowler in his book 'UML Distilled'). I wrapped Cockburn use cases in static C# objects so that I could test logical conditions against static constants which represented steps in a UI workflow. The idea was that you could read the code and know what it was doing because the wrapped objects and their public contants gave you ENGLISH use cases via namespaces. Also, I was going to use reflection to pump out error messages that included the described use cases. The idea is that the stack trace could include some UI use case steps IN ENGLISH.... It turned out to be a fun way to achieve a mini,psuedo light-weight Domain Language but without having to write a DSL compiler. So my question is whether or not this is a good way to do this? Has anyone out there ever done something similar? c# example snippets follow Assume we have some aspx page which has 3 user controls (with lots of clickable stuff). User must click on stuff in one particular user control (possibly making some kind of selection) and then the UI must visually cue the user that the selection was successful. Now, while that item is selected, the user must browse through a gridview to find an item within one of the other user controls and then select something. This sounds like an easy thing to manage but the code can get ugly. In my case, the user controls all sent event messages which were captured by the main page. This way, the page acted like a central processor of UI events and could keep track of what happens when the user is clicking around. So, in the main aspx page, we capture the first user control's event. using MyCompany.MyApp.Web.UseCases; protected void MyFirstUserControl_SomeUIWorkflowRequestCommingIn(object sender, EventArgs e) { // some code here to respond and make "state" changes or whatever // // blah blah blah // finally we have this (how did we know to call fish level method?? because we knew when we wrote the code to send the event in the user control) UpdateUserInterfaceOnFishLevelUseCaseGoalSuccess(FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow.SelectedItemForPurchase) } protected void UpdateUserInterfaceOnFishLevelGoalSuccess(FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow goal) { switch (goal) { case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow.NewMasterItemSelected: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkFlow.DrillDownOnDetails: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkFlow.CancelMultiSelect: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; // more cases... } } } //also we have protected void UpdateUserInterfaceOnSeaLevelGoalSuccess(SeaLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow goal) { switch (goal) { case SeaLevel.CheckOutWorkflow.ChangedCreditCard: // do stuff // more cases... } } } So, in the MyCompany.MyApp.Web.UseCases namespace we might have code like this: class SeaLevel... class FishLevel... class KiteLevel... The workflow use cases embedded in the classes could be inner classes or static methods or enumerations or whatever gives you the cleanest namespace. I can't remember what I did originally but you get the picture.

    Read the article

  • When is JavaScript's eval() not evil?

    - by Richard Turner
    I'm writing some JavaScript to parse user-entered functions (for spreadsheet-like functionality). Having parsed the formula I could convert it into JavaScript and run eval() on it to yield the result. However, I've always shied away from using eval() if I can avoid it because it's evil (and, rightly or wrongly, I've always thought it is even more evil in JavaScript because the code to be evaluated might be changed by the user). Obviously one has to use eval() to parse JSON (I presume that JS libraries use eval() for this somewhere, even if they run the JSON through a regex check first), but when else, other than when manipulating JSON, it is OK to use eval()?

    Read the article

  • Returning new object, overwrite the existing one in Java

    - by lupin
    Note: This is an assignment. Hi, Ok I have this method that will create a supposedly union of 2 sets. i mport java.io.*; class Set { public int numberOfElements; public String[] setElements; public int maxNumberOfElements; // constructor for our Set class public Set(int numberOfE, int setE, int maxNumberOfE) { this.numberOfElements = numberOfE; this.setElements = new String[setE]; this.maxNumberOfElements = maxNumberOfE; } // Helper method to shorten/remove element of array since we're using basic array instead of ArrayList or HashSet from collection interface :( static String[] removeAt(int k, String[] arr) { final int L = arr.length; String[] ret = new String[L - 1]; System.arraycopy(arr, 0, ret, 0, k); System.arraycopy(arr, k + 1, ret, k, L - k - 1); return ret; } int findElement(String element) { int retval = 0; for ( int i = 0; i < setElements.length; i++) { if ( setElements[i] != null && setElements[i].equals(element) ) { return retval = i; } retval = -1; } return retval; } void add(String newValue) { int elem = findElement(newValue); if( numberOfElements < maxNumberOfElements && elem == -1 ) { setElements[numberOfElements] = newValue; numberOfElements++; } } int getLength() { if ( setElements != null ) { return setElements.length; } else { return 0; } } String[] emptySet() { setElements = new String[0]; return setElements; } Boolean isFull() { Boolean True = new Boolean(true); Boolean False = new Boolean(false); if ( setElements.length == maxNumberOfElements ){ return True; } else { return False; } } Boolean isEmpty() { Boolean True = new Boolean(true); Boolean False = new Boolean(false); if ( setElements.length == 0 ) { return True; } else { return False; } } void remove(String newValue) { for ( int i = 0; i < setElements.length; i++) { if ( setElements[i] != null && setElements[i].equals(newValue) ) { setElements = removeAt(i,setElements); } } } int isAMember(String element) { int retval = -1; for ( int i = 0; i < setElements.length; i++ ) { if (setElements[i] != null && setElements[i].equals(element)) { return retval = i; } } return retval; } void printSet() { for ( int i = 0; i < setElements.length; i++) { if (setElements[i] != null) { System.out.println("Member elements on index: "+ i +" " + setElements[i]); } } } String[] getMember() { String[] tempArray = new String[setElements.length]; for ( int i = 0; i < setElements.length; i++) { if(setElements[i] != null) { tempArray[i] = setElements[i]; } } return tempArray; } Set union(Set x, Set y) { String[] newXtemparray = new String[x.getLength()]; String[] newYtemparray = new String[y.getLength()]; int len = newYtemparray.length + newXtemparray.length; Set temp = new Set(0,len,len); newXtemparray = x.getMember(); newYtemparray = x.getMember(); for(int i = 0; i < newYtemparray.length; i++) { temp.add(newYtemparray[i]); } for(int j = 0; j < newXtemparray.length; j++) { temp.add(newXtemparray[j]); } return temp; } Set difference(Set x, Set y) { String[] newXtemparray = new String[x.getLength()]; String[] newYtemparray = new String[y.getLength()]; int len = newYtemparray.length + newXtemparray.length; Set temp = new Set(0,len,len); newXtemparray = x.getMember(); newYtemparray = x.getMember(); for(int i = 0; i < newXtemparray.length; i++) { temp.add(newYtemparray[i]); } for(int j = 0; j < newYtemparray.length; j++) { int retval = temp.findElement(newYtemparray[j]); if( retval != -1 ) { temp.remove(newYtemparray[j]); } } return temp; } } // This is the SetDemo class that will make use of our Set class class SetDemo { public static void main(String[] args) { //get input from keyboard BufferedReader keyboard; InputStreamReader reader; String temp = ""; reader = new InputStreamReader(System.in); keyboard = new BufferedReader(reader); try { System.out.println("Enter string element to be added" ); temp = keyboard.readLine( ); System.out.println("You entered " + temp ); } catch (IOException IOerr) { System.out.println("There was an error during input"); } /* ************************************************************************** * Test cases for our new created Set class. * ************************************************************************** */ Set setA = new Set(0,10,10); setA.add(temp); setA.add("b"); setA.add("b"); setA.add("hello"); setA.add("world"); setA.add("six"); setA.add("seven"); setA.add("b"); int size = setA.getLength(); System.out.println("Set size is: " + size ); Boolean isempty = setA.isEmpty(); System.out.println("Set is empty? " + isempty ); int ismember = setA.isAMember("sixb"); System.out.println("Element sixb is member of setA? " + ismember ); Boolean output = setA.isFull(); System.out.println("Set is full? " + output ); //setA.printSet(); int index = setA.findElement("world"); System.out.println("Element b located on index: " + index ); setA.remove("b"); //setA.emptySet(); int resize = setA.getLength(); System.out.println("Set size is: " + resize ); //setA.printSet(); Set setB = new Set(0,10,10); setB.add("b"); setB.add("z"); setB.add("x"); setB.add("y"); Set setC = setA.union(setB,setA); System.out.println("Elements of setA"); setA.printSet(); System.out.println("Union of setA and setB"); setC.printSet(); } } The union method works a sense that somehow I can call another method on it but it doesn't do the job, i supposedly would create and union of all elements of setA and setB but it only return element of setB. Sample output follows: java SetDemo Enter string element to be added hello You entered hello Set size is: 10 Set is empty? false Element sixb is member of setA? -1 Set is full? true Element b located on index: 2 Set size is: 9 Elements of setA Member elements on index: 0 hello Member elements on index: 1 world Member elements on index: 2 six Member elements on index: 3 seven Union of setA and setB Member elements on index: 0 b Member elements on index: 1 z Member elements on index: 2 x Member elements on index: 3 y thanks, lupin

    Read the article

  • Memory leak when returning object

    - by Yakattak
    I have this memory leak that has been very stubborn for the past week or so. I have a class method I use in a class called "ArchiveManager" that will unarchive a specific .dat file for me, and return an array with it's contents. Here is the method: +(NSMutableArray *)unarchiveCustomObject { NSMutableArray *array = [NSMutableArray arrayWithArray:[NSKeyedUnarchiver unarchiveObjectWithFile:/* Archive Path */]]; return array; } I understand I don't have ownership of it at this point, and I return it. CustomObject *myObject = [[ArchiveManager unarchiveCustomObject] objectAtIndex:0]; Then, later when I unarchive it in a view controller to be used (I don't even create an array of it, nor do I make a pointer to it, I just reference it to get something out of the array returned by unarchiveCustomIbject (objectAtIndex). This is where Instruments is calling a memory leak, yet I don't see how this can leak! Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Edit: CustomObject initWithCoder added: -(id)initWithCoder:(NSCoder *)aDecoder { if (self = [super init]) { self.string1 = [aDecoder decodeObjectForKey:kString1]; self.string2 = [aDecoder decodeObjectForKey:kString2]; self.string3 = [aDecoder decodeObjectForKey:kString3]; UIImage *picture = [[UIImage alloc] initWithData:[aDecoder decodeObjectForKey:kPicture]]; self.picture = picture; self.array = [aDecoder decodeObjectForKey:kArray]; [picture release]; } return self; }

    Read the article

  • Best practice - When to evaluate conditionals of function execution

    - by Tesserex
    If I have a function called from a few places, and it requires some condition to be met for anything it does to execute, where should that condition be checked? In my case, it's for drawing - if the mouse button is held down, then execute the drawing logic (this is being done in the mouse movement handler for when you drag.) Option one says put it in the function so that it's guaranteed to be checked. Abstracted, if you will. public function Foo() { DoThing(); } private function DoThing() { if (!condition) return; // do stuff } The problem I have with this is that when reading the code of Foo, which may be far away from DoThing, it looks like a bug. The first thought is that the condition isn't being checked. Option two, then, is to check before calling. public function Foo() { if (condition) DoThing(); } This reads better, but now you have to worry about checking from everywhere you call it. Option three is to rename the function to be more descriptive. public function Foo() { DoThingOnlyIfCondition(); } private function DoThingOnlyIfCondition() { if (!condition) return; // do stuff } Is this the "correct" solution? Or is this going a bit too far? I feel like if everything were like this function names would start to duplicate their code. About this being subjective: of course it is, and there may not be a right answer, but I think it's still perfectly at home here. Getting advice from better programmers than I is the second best way to learn. Subjective questions are exactly the kind of thing Google can't answer.

    Read the article

  • debugging scaffolding contingent upon degbugging boolean (java)

    - by David
    Recently i've found myself writing a lot of methods with what i can only think to call debugging scaffolding. Here's an example: public static void printArray (String[] array, boolean bug) { for (int i = 0; i<array.lenght; i++) { if (bug) System.out.print (i) ; //this line is what i'm calling the debugging scaffolding i guess. System.out.println(array[i]) ; } } in this method if i set bug to true, wherever its being called from maybe by some kind of user imput, then i get the special debugging text to let me know what index the string being printed as at just in case i needed to know for the sake of my debugging (pretend a state of affairs exists where its helpful). All of my questions more or less boil down to the question: is this a good idea? but with a tad bit more objectivity: Is this an effective way to test my methods and debug them? i mean effective in terms of efficiency and not messing up my code. Is it acceptable to leave the if (bug) stuff ; code in place after i've got my method up and working? (if a definition of "acceptability" is needed to make this question objective then use "is not a matter of programing controversy such as ommiting brackets in an if(boolean) with only one line after it, though if you've got something better go ahead and use your definition i won't mind) Is there a more effective way to accomplish the gole of making debugging easier than what i'm doing? Anything you know i mean to ask but that i have forgotten too (as much information as makes sense is appreciated).

    Read the article

  • Checkstyle for Python

    - by oneself
    Is there an application similar to Java's Checkstyle for Python? By which I mean, I tool that analyzes Python code, and can be run as part of continuous integration (e.g. CruiseControl or Hudson). After analyzing it should produce an online accessible report which outlines any problems found in the code. Thank you,

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between array parameters in C

    - by STeN
    Hi, what is the difference between following function declarations, which create and return the array in C/C++? Both methods create the array and fill it with proper values and returns true if everything passed. bool getArray(int* array); bool getArray(int* array[]); Thanks Best Regards, STeN

    Read the article

  • What to Return? Error String, Bool with Error String Out, or Void with Exception

    - by Ranger Pretzel
    I spend most of my time in C# and am trying to figure out which is the best practice for handling an exception and cleanly return an error message from a called method back to the calling method. For example, here is some ActiveDirectory authentication code. Please imagine this Method as part of a Class (and not just a standalone function.) bool IsUserAuthenticated(string domain, string user, string pass, out errStr) { bool authentic = false; try { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; // No exception thrown? We must be good, then. authentic = true; } catch (Exception e) { errStr = e.Message().ToString(); } return authentic; } The advantages of doing it this way are a clear YES or NO that you can embed right in your If-Then-Else statement. The downside is that it also requires the person using the method to supply a string to get the Error back (if any.) I guess I could overload this method with the same parameters minus the "out errStr", but ignoring the error seems like a bad idea since there can be many reasons for such a failure... Alternatively, I could write a method that returns an Error String (instead of using "out errStr") in which a returned empty string means that the user authenticated fine. string AuthenticateUser(string domain, string user, string pass) { string errStr = ""; try { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; } catch (Exception e) { errStr = e.Message().ToString(); } return errStr; } But this seems like a "weak" way of doing things. Or should I just make my method "void" and just not handle the exception so that it gets passed back to the calling function? void AuthenticateUser(string domain, string user, string pass) { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; } This seems the most sane to me (for some reason). Yet at the same time, the only real advantage of wrapping those 2 lines over just typing those 2 lines everywhere I need to authenticate is that I don't need to include the "LDAP://" string. The downside with this way of doing it is that the user has to put this method in a try-catch block. Thoughts? Is there another way of doing this that I'm not thinking of?

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidelines?

    - by SiegeX
    Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics?

    Read the article

  • Checklist for Launching public beta

    - by Vinayak
    I am developing a web app that is about to be opened for public beta. Does anyone know of or has prepared a checklist of the various steps that one needs to take to ensure a smooth beta implementation? The web app is coded using Java, MySQL on the server side and HTML, Javascript on the client side with a little Flash in one or two screens. I know this question is very non-specific, but I am looking for best practices/guidelines here. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Return enum instead of bool from function for clarity ?

    - by Moe Sisko
    This is similar to : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2908876/net-bool-vs-enum-as-a-method-parameter but concerns returning a bool from a function in some situations. e.g. Function which returns bool : public bool Poll() { bool isFinished = false; // do something, then determine if finished or not. return isFinished; } Used like this : while (!Poll()) { // do stuff during wait. } Its not obvious from the calling context what the bool returned from Poll() means. It might be clearer in some ways if the "Poll" function was renamed "IsFinished()", but the method does a bit of work, and (IMO) would not really reflect what the function actually does. Names like "IsFinished" also seem more appropriate for properties. Another option might be to rename it to something like : "PollAndReturnIsFinished" but this doesn't feel right either. So an option might be to return an enum. e.g : public enum Status { Running, Finished } public Status Poll() { Status status = Status.Running; // do something, then determine if finished or not. return status; } Called like this : while (Poll() == Status.Running) { // do stuff during wait. } But this feels like overkill. Any ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Way to get VS 2008 to stop forcing indentation on namespaces?

    - by Earlz
    I've never really been a big fan of the way most editors handle namespaces. They always force you to add an extra pointless level of indentation. For instance, I have a lot of code in a page that I would much rather prefer formatted as namespace mycode{ class myclass{ void function(){ foo(); } void foo(){ bar(); } void bar(){ //code.. } } } and not something like namespace mycode{ class myclass{ void function(){ foo(); } void foo(){ bar(); } void bar(){ //code.. } } } Honestly, I don't really even like the class thing being indented most of the time because I usually only have 1 class per file. And it doesn't look as bad here, but when you get a ton of code and lot of scopes, you can easily have indentation that forces you off the screen, and plus here I just used 2-space tabs and not 4-space as is used by us. Anyway, is there some way to get Visual Studio to stop trying to indent namespaces for me like that?

    Read the article

  • Quick question about open_basedir

    - by Gio
    Hello, On my server, I have following setting: open_basedir /home/ :/usr/lib/php :/usr/local/lib/php :/tmp/ :/usr/local/ :/usr/bin Now, I am little bit confused about ending / in the / home / setting, does that mean that all subfolders inside home have same rights? or does it mean that only home files can be accessed? So, basically what is the main difference between: /home/ and /home With example if possible Thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • Good programming style when handling multiple objects

    - by Glitch
    I've been programming a software version of a board game. Thus far I have written the classes which will correspond to physical objects on the game board. I'm well into writing the program logic, however I've found that many of the logic classes require access to the same objects. At first I was passing the appropriate objects to methods as they were called, but this was getting very tedious, particularly when the methods required many objects to perform their tasks. To solve this, I created a class which initialises and stores all the objects I need. This allows me to access an object from any class by calling Assets.dice(), for example. But now that I've thought about it, this doesn't seem right. This is why I'm here, I fear that I've created some sort of god class. Is this fear unfounded, or have I created a recipe for disaster?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >