Search Results

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

Page 166/2134 | < Previous Page | 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173  | Next Page >

  • 'AND' vs '&&' as operator

    - by ts
    Actually, i am facing a codebase where developpers decided to use 'AND' and 'OR' instead of '&&' and '||'. I know that there is difference in operators precedence (&& goes before 'and'), but with given framework (prestashop to be precise) is clearly not a reason. So, my question: which version are you using? Is 'and' more readable than '&&'? || there is ~ difference?

    Read the article

  • C++ Returning Multiple Items

    - by Travis Parks
    I am designing a class in C++ that extracts URLs from an HTML page. I am using Boost's Regex library to do the heavy lifting for me. I started designing a class and realized that I didn't want to tie down how the URLs are stored. One option would be to accept a std::vector<Url> by reference and just call push_back on it. I'd like to avoid forcing consumers of my class to use std::vector. So, I created a member template that took a destination iterator. It looks like this: template <typename TForwardIterator, typename TOutputIterator> TOutputIterator UrlExtractor::get_urls( TForwardIterator begin, TForwardIterator end, TOutputIterator dest); I feel like I am overcomplicating things. I like to write fairly generic code in C++, and I struggle to lock down my interfaces. But then I get into these predicaments where I am trying to templatize everything. At this point, someone reading the code doesn't realize that TForwardIterator is iterating over a std::string. In my particular situation, I am wondering if being this generic is a good thing. At what point do you start making code more explicit? Is there a standard approach to getting values out of a function generically?

    Read the article

  • special debugging lines (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

  • Default type-parametrized function literal class parameter

    - by doom2.wad
    Is this an intended behavior or is it a bug? Consider the following trait (be it a class, doesn't matter): trait P[T] { class Inner(val f: T => Unit = _ => println("nope")) } This is what I would have expected: scala> val p = new P[Int] { | val inner = new Inner | } p: java.lang.Object with P[Int]{def inner: this.Inner} = $anon$1@12192a9 scala> p.inner.f(5) nope But this? scala> val p = new P[Int] { | val inner = new Inner() { | println("some primary constructor code in here") | } | } <console>:6: error: type mismatch; found : (T) => Unit required: (Int) => Unit val inner = new Inner() { ^

    Read the article

  • Use continue or Checked Exceptions when checking and processing objects

    - by Johan Pelgrim
    I'm processing, let's say a list of "Document" objects. Before I record the processing of the document successful I first want to check a couple of things. Let's say, the file referring to the document should be present and something in the document should be present. Just two simple checks for the example but think about 8 more checks before I have successfully processed my document. What would have your preference? for (Document document : List<Document> documents) { if (!fileIsPresent(document)) { doSomethingWithThisResult("File is not present"); continue; } if (!isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(document)) { doSomethingWithThisResult("Something is not in the document"); continue; } doSomethingWithTheSucces(); } Or for (Document document : List<Document> documents) { try { fileIsPresent(document); isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(document); doSomethingWithTheSucces(); } catch (ProcessingException e) { doSomethingWithTheExceptionalCase(e.getMessage()); } } public boolean fileIsPresent(Document document) throws ProcessingException { ... throw new ProcessingException("File is not present"); } public boolean isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(Document document) throws ProcessingException { ... throw new ProcessingException("Something is not in the document"); } What is more readable. What is best? Is there even a better approach of doing this (maybe using a design pattern of some sort)? As far as readability goes my preference currently is the Exception variant... What is yours?

    Read the article

  • Issue with 'selected' value within form

    - by JM4
    I currently have a form built in which after validation, if errors exist, the data stays on screen for the consumer to correct. An example of how this works for say the 'Year of Birth' is: <select name="DOB3"> <option value="">Year</option> <?php for ($i=date('Y'); $i>=1900; $i--) { echo "<option value='$i'"; if ($fields["DOB3"] == $i) echo " selected"; echo ">$i</option>"; } ?> </select> If an error is found, the year of birth value returns the year previously entered. I am able to have this work on all field with the exception of my 'State' field. I build the array and function for the drop down with the following code: <?php $states_arr = array('AL'=>"Alabama",'AK'=>"Alaska",'AZ'=>"Arizona",'AR'=>"Arkansas",'CA'=>"California",'CO'=>"Colorado",'CT'=>"Connecticut",'DE'=>"Delaware",'DC'=>"District Of Columbia",'FL'=>"Florida",'GA'=>"Georgia",'HI'=>"Hawaii",'ID'=>"Idaho",'IL'=>"Illinois", 'IN'=>"Indiana", 'IA'=>"Iowa", 'KS'=>"Kansas",'KY'=>"Kentucky",'LA'=>"Louisiana",'ME'=>"Maine",'MD'=>"Maryland", 'MA'=>"Massachusetts",'MI'=>"Michigan",'MN'=>"Minnesota",'MS'=>"Mississippi",'MO'=>"Missouri",'MT'=>"Montana",'NE'=>"Nebraska",'NV'=>"Nevada",'NH'=>"New Hampshire",'NJ'=>"New Jersey",'NM'=>"New Mexico",'NY'=>"New York",'NC'=>"North Carolina",'ND'=>"North Dakota",'OH'=>"Ohio",'OK'=>"Oklahoma", 'OR'=>"Oregon",'PA'=>"Pennsylvania",'RI'=>"Rhode Island",'SC'=>"South Carolina",'SD'=>"South Dakota",'TN'=>"Tennessee",'TX'=>"Texas",'UT'=>"Utah",'VT'=>"Vermont",'VA'=>"Virginia",'WA'=>"Washington",'WV'=>"West Virginia",'WI'=>"Wisconsin",'WY'=>"Wyoming"); function showOptionsDrop($array, $active, $echo=true){ $string = ''; foreach($array as $k => $v){ $s = ($active == $k)? ' selected="selected"' : ''; $string .= '<option value="'.$k.'"'.$s.'>'.$v.'</option>'."\n"; } if($echo) { echo $string;} else { return $string;} } ?> I then call the function from within the form using: <td><select name="State"><option value="">Choose a State</option><?php showOptionsDrop($states_arr, null, true); ?></select></td> Not sure what I'm missing but would love any assistance if somebody sees the error in my code. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Check request type in Django

    - by Art
    While it is recommended to use the following construct to check whether request is POST, if request.method == 'POST': pass It is likely that people will find if request.POST: pass to be more elegant and concise. Are there any reasons not to use it, apart from personal preference?

    Read the article

  • Safest way to change variable names in a project

    - by kamziro
    So I've been working on a relatively large project by myself, and I've come to realise that some of the variable names earlier on were.. less than ideal. But how does one change variable names in a project easily? Is there such a tool that can go through a project directory, parse all the files, and then replace the variable names to the desired one? It has to be smart enough to understand the language I imagine. I was thinking of using regexp (sed/awk on linux?) tools to just replace the variable name, but there were many times where my particular variable is also included as a part of strings. There's also the issue about changing stuff on a c++ namespace, because there is actually two classes in my project that share the same name, but are in different namespaces. I remember visual stuio being able to do this, but what's the safest and most elegant way to do this on linux?

    Read the article

  • How do you assign a variable with the result of a if..else block?

    - by Pierre Olivier Martel
    I had an argument with a colleague about the best way to assign a variable in an if..else block. His orignal code was : @products = if params[:category] Category.find(params[:category]).products else Product.all end I rewrote it this way : if params[:category] @products = Category.find(params[:category]).products else @products = Product.all end This could also be rewritten with a one-liner using a ternery operator (? :) but let's pretend that product assignment was longer than a 100 character and couldn't fit in one line. Which of the two is clearer to you? The first solution takes a little less space but I thought that declaring a variable and assigning it three lines after can be more error prone. I also like to see my if and else aligned, makes it easier for my brain to parse it!

    Read the article

  • PHP Serialize Function - Adding serialized data to mysql and then fetch and display

    - by Abhilash Shukla
    I want to know whether the PHP serialize function is 100% secure, also if we store serialized data into a database and want to do something after fetching it, will it be a nice way. For example:- I have a website with different user privileges, now i want to store the permissions settings for a particular privilege to my database (This data i want to store is to be done through php serialize function), now when a user logs in i want to fetch this data and set the privilege for the customer. Now i am ok to do this thing, what i want to know is, whether it is the best way to do or something more efficient can be done. Also, i was going through php manual and found this code, can anybody explain me a bit what's happening in this code:- [Specially why base64_encode is used?] <?php mySerialize( $obj ) { return base64_encode(gzcompress(serialize($obj))); } myUnserialize( $txt ) { return unserialize(gzuncompress(base64_decode($txt))); } ?> Also if somebody can provide me their own code to show me to do this thing in the most efficient manner. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • what is middleware exactly?

    - by michel
    I hear a lot of people talking last days about middleware, but what is the exact definition of middleware. If I look in information about middleware I found a lot of information and some definitions, but while reading this information and defintions it seems that mostly all 'wares' are in the middle of something. So from my opinion all things are middleware? or do you have an example of a ware that doesn't is middleware?

    Read the article

  • What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    - by gargantaun
    Since I can't find a chuffing job, I've been reading up on ReST and creating web services. The way I've interpreted it, the future is all about creating a web service for all your data before you build the web app. Which seems like a good idea. However, there seems to be a lot of contradictory thoughts on what the best scheme is for ReSTful URLs. Some people advocate simple pretty urls http://api.myapp.com/resource/1 In addition, some people like to add the API version to the url like so http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1 And to make things even more confusing, some people advocate adding the content-type to get requests http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.xml http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.json http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.txt Whereas others think the content-type should be sent in the HTTP header. Soooooooo.... That's a lot of variation, which has left me unsure of what the best URL scheme is. I personally see the merits of the most comprehensive URL that includes a version number, resource locator and content-type, but I'm new to this so I could be wrong. On the other hand, you could argue that you should do "whatever works best for you". But that doesn't really fit with the ReST mentality as far as I can tell since the aim is to have a standard. And since a lot of you people will have more experience than me with ReST, I thought I'd ask for some guidance. So, with all that in mind... What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    Read the article

  • Should I use fork or threads?

    - by shadyabhi
    In my script, I have a function foo which basically uses pynotify to notify user about something repeatedly after a time interval say 15 minutes. def foo: while True: """Does something""" time.sleep(900) My main script has to interact with user & does all other things so I just cant call the foo() function. directly. Whats the better way of doing it and why? Using fork or threads?

    Read the article

  • Does anyone change the Visual Studio default bracing style in C# - Is there a standard?

    - by El Ronnoco
    I find the default bracing style a bit wasteful on line count eg... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } would, if I was writing in JavaScript for example be written like... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } ...which I understand may also not be to peoples' tastes. But the question(s) is/are do you turn off the VS formatting style and use your own rules? What is the opinion of this in the industry when many people are working on the same code-base? Is it better just to stick to the default just for simplicity/uniformity?

    Read the article

  • Vim 80 column layout concerns

    - by cdleary
    I feel like the way I do 80-column indication in Vim is incorrect: set columns=80. At times I also set textwidth but I like to be able to see and anticipate line overflow with the set columns alternative. This has some unfortunate side effects -- I can't set number for fear of splitting between files that have different orders of line numbers; i.e. < 100 line files and = 100 line files will require two different set columns values because of the extra column used for the additional digit display. I also start new (g)Vim sessions instead of splitting windows vertically, which forces me to use the window manager's clipboard -- vsplits force me to do set columns every time I open or close a pane, so starting a new session is less hassle. How do you handle the 80-character indication when you want to set numbers, vertically split, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Python alignment of assignments (style)

    - by ikaros45
    I really like following style standards, as those specified in PEP 8. I have a linter that checks it automatically, and definitely my code is much better because of that. There is just one point in PEP 8, the E251 & E221 don't feel very good. Coming from a JavaScript background, I used to align the variable assignments as following: var var1 = 1234; var2 = 54; longer_name = 'hi'; var lol = { 'that' : 65, 'those' : 87, 'other_thing' : true }; And in my humble opinion, this improves readability dramatically. Problem is, this is dis-recommended by PEP 8. With dictionaries, is not that bad because spaces are allowed after the colon: dictionary = { 'something': 98, 'some_other_thing': False } I can "live" with variable assignments without alignment, but what I don't like at all is not to be able to pass named arguments in a function call, like this: some_func(length= 40, weight= 900, lol= 'troll', useless_var= True, intelligence=None) So, what I end up doing is using a dictionary, as following: specs = { 'length': 40, 'weight': 900, 'lol': 'troll', 'useless_var': True, 'intelligence': None } some_func(**specs) or just simply some_func(**{'length': 40, 'weight': 900, 'lol': 'troll', 'useless_var': True, 'intelligence': None}) But I have the feeling this work around is just worse than ignoring the PEP 8 E251 / E221. What is the best practice?

    Read the article

  • How do people handle working with Code Names for their projects?

    - by Mark
    Hi All, Recently we started using some code names for several different types of prototype applications all following a theme. This made things a little more fun and was a great idea. The problem is that Im not too sure how people deal with migrating a codebase from "codename" state into version 1.0 state which may have a proper name... not something that a client really shouldnt see :) We are using Visual Studio at the moment, and I can see that you can change the assembly name, but there are references to the namespaces, etc... that would really be a large change to make. Do people both changing things like namespaces before the v1.0 release?

    Read the article

  • What does 'foo' really mean?

    - by Prakash
    I hope this qualifies as a programming question, as in any programming tutorial, you eventually come across 'foo' in the code examples. (yeah, right?) what does 'foo' really mean? If it is meant to mean nothing, when did it begin to be used so? Cheers

    Read the article

  • Consistency vs Design Guidelines

    - by Adrian Faciu
    Lets say that you get involved in the development of a large project that is already in development for a long period ( more than one year ). The projects follows some of the current design guidelines, but also has a few different, that are currently discouraged ( mostly at naming guidelines ). Supposing that you can't/aren't allowed to change the whole project: What should be more important, consistency, follow the existing ones and defy current guidelines or the usage of the guidelines, creating differences between modules of the same project ? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173  | Next Page >