Search Results

Search found 40339 results on 1614 pages for 'best settings'.

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 171/1614 | < Previous Page | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178  | Next Page >

  • HTTP POST with URL query parameters -- good idea or not?

    - by Steven Huwig
    I'm designing an API to go over HTTP and I am wondering if using the HTTP POST command, but with URL query parameters only and no request body, is a good way to go. Considerations: "Good Web design" requires non-idempotent actions to be sent via POST. This is a non-idempotent action. It is easier to develop and debug this app when the request parameters are present in the URL. The API is not intended for widespread use. It seems like making a POST request with no body will take a bit more work, e.g. a Content-Length: 0 header must be explicitly added. It also seems to me that a POST with no body is a bit counter to most developer's and HTTP frameworks' expectations. Are there any more pitfalls or advantages to sending parameters on a POST request via the URL query rather than the request body? Edit: The reason this is under consideration is that the operations are not idempotent and have side effects other than retrieval. See the HTTP spec: In particular, the convention has been established that the GET and HEAD methods SHOULD NOT have the significance of taking an action other than retrieval. These methods ought to be considered "safe". This allows user agents to represent other methods, such as POST, PUT and DELETE, in a special way, so that the user is made aware of the fact that a possibly unsafe action is being requested. ... Methods can also have the property of "idempotence" in that (aside from error or expiration issues) the side-effects of N 0 identical requests is the same as for a single request. The methods GET, HEAD, PUT and DELETE share this property. Also, the methods OPTIONS and TRACE SHOULD NOT have side effects, and so are inherently idempotent.

    Read the article

  • What Getters and Setters should and shouldn't do.

    - by cyclotis04
    I've run into a lot of differing opinions on Getters and Setters lately, so I figured I should make it into it's own question. A previous question of mine received an immediate comment (later deleted) that stated setters shouldn't have any side effects, and a SetProperty method would be a better choice. Indeed, this seems to be Microsoft's opinion as well. However, their properties often raise events, such as Resized when a form's Width or Height property is set. OwenP also states "you shouldn't let a property throw exceptions, properties shouldn't have side effects, order shouldn't matter, and properties should return relatively quickly." Yet Michael Stum states that exceptions should be thrown while validating data within a setter. If your setter doesn't throw an exception, how could you effectively validate data, as so many of the answers to this question suggest? What about when you need to raise an event, like nearly all of Microsoft's Control's do? Aren't you then at the mercy of whomever subscribed to your event? If their handler performs a massive amount of information, or throws an error itself, what happens to your setter? Finally, what about lazy loading within the getter? This too could violate the previous guidelines. What is acceptable to place in a getter or setter, and what should be kept in only accessor methods?

    Read the article

  • Should I make sure arguments aren't null before using them in a function.

    - by Nathan W
    The title may not really explain what I'm really trying to get at, couldn't really think of a way to describe what I mean. I was wondering if it is good practice to check the arguments that a function accepts for nulls or empty before using them. I have this function which just wraps some hash creation like so. Public Shared Function GenerateHash(ByVal FilePath As IO.FileInfo) As String If (FilePath Is Nothing) Then Throw New ArgumentNullException("FilePath") End If Dim _sha As New Security.Cryptography.MD5CryptoServiceProvider Dim _Hash = Convert.ToBase64String(_sha.ComputeHash(New IO.FileStream(FilePath.FullName, IO.FileMode.Open, IO.FileAccess.Read))) Return _Hash End Function As you can see I just takes a IO.Fileinfo as an argument, at the start of the function I am checking to make sure that it is not nothing. I'm wondering is this good practice or should I just let it get to the actual hasher and then throw the exception because it is null.? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • C# 4.0 Named Parameters - should they always be used when calling non-Framework methods?

    - by David Neale
    I really this is a hugely subjective topic but here is my current take: When calling methods which do not form part of the .NET BCL named parameters should always be used as the method signatures may well change, especially during the development cycle of my own applications. Although they might appear more verbose they are also far clearer. Is the above a reasonable approach to calling methods or have I overlooked something fundamental?

    Read the article

  • PHP: Where to place return 'false' value?

    - by Mike
    Is one of the following functions better than the other, in terms of where to place the 'return false' statement? Function #1: function equalToTwo($a, $b) { $c = $a + $b; if($c == 2) { return true; } return false; } Function #2: function equalToTwo($a, $b) { $c = $a + $b; if($c == 2) { return true; } else { return false; } } Thanks!

    Read the article

  • In M-V-VM where does my code go?

    - by Nate Bross
    So, this is a pretty basic question I hope. I have a web service that I've added through Add Service Reference. It has some methods to get list and get detail of a perticular table in my database. What I'm trying to do is setup a UI as follows: App Load Load service proxy Call the GetList(); method display the results in a ListBox control User Double Clicks item in ListBox, display a modal dialog with a "detail" view I'm extremely new to using MVVM, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Additional information: // Service Interface (simplification): interface IService { IEnumerable<MyObject> GetList(); MyObject GetDetail(int id); } // Data object (simplification) class MyObject { public int ID { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } } I'm thinking I should have something like this: MainWindow MyObjectViewUserControl Displays list Opens modal window on double click Specific Questions: What would my ViewModel class look like? Where does the code to handle the double click go? Inside the UserControl? Sorry for the long details, but I'm very new to the whole thing and I'm not educated enough to ask the right questions. I checked out the MVVM Sample from wpf.codeplex.com and something isn't quite clicking for me yet, because it seems very confusing.

    Read the article

  • Is Area what I am looking for?

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi I'm new to MVC2 or MVC in general. I'm gone do basic app with a backend. Now I been thinking about how I should do with the folders, views, controllers & routes for the AdminFolder. Now I just saw something called Areas. Is that a way to go for me?

    Read the article

  • Doing a ajax / json add to database, and have a "wait doing operation" icon

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi. I got a part on my page I want to improve. It's a file upload that users can add their contacts from files like excel, csv & outlook. I read the contacts and place them in the database, so what I would like to do is to have a regular icon that spins while that operation is doing that, how could I do that? Ajax? I don't want progress bar for the file upload but the operation for reading the file EDIT: I want to know how to make this work with the add to database using ajax. like should I use a updatepanel? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it better to adopt the same technologies used at work to be effective on your home projects ?

    - by systempuntoout
    Is it better to start developing an home project using the same technologies used at work to be more productive and effective? I'm not talking about a simple hello world web page but an home project with all bells and whistles that one day, maybe, you could sell on internet. This dilemma is often subject of flames between me and a friend. He thinks that if you want to make a great home-made project you need to use the same technologies used daily at work staying in the same scope too; for example, a c++ computer game programmer should develope an home-made c++ game. I'm pretty sure that developing using the same technologies used at work can be more productive at beginning, but surely less exciting and stimulating of working with other languages\ides\libraries out of your daily job. What's your opinion about that?

    Read the article

  • How does the verbosity of identifiers affect the performance of a programmer?

    - by DR
    I always wondered: Are there any hard facts which would indicate that either shorter or longer identifiers are better? Example: clrscr() opposed to ClearScreen() Short identifiers should be faster to read because there are fewer characters but longer identifiers often better resemble natural language and therefore also should be faster to read. Are there other aspects which suggest either a short or a verbose style? EDIT: Just to clarify: I didn't ask: "What would you do in this case?". I asked for reasons to prefer one over the other, i.e. this is not a poll question. Please, if you can, add some reason on why one would prefer one style over the other.

    Read the article

  • Why is using a common-lookup table to restrict the status of entity wrong?

    - by FreshCode
    According to Five Simple Database Design Errors You Should Avoid by Anith Sen, using a common-lookup table to store the possible statuses for an entity is a common mistake. Why is this wrong? I disagree that it's wrong, citing the example of jobs at a repair service with many possible statuses that generally have a natural flow, eg.: Booked In Assigned to Technician Diagnosing problem Waiting for Client Confirmation Repaired & Ready for Pickup Repaired & Couriered Irreparable & Ready for Pickup Quote Rejected Arguably, some of these statuses can be normalised to tables like Couriered Items, Completed Jobs and Quotes (with Pending/Accepted/Rejected statuses), but that feels like unnecessary schema complication. Another common example would be order statuses that restrict the status of an order, eg: Pending Completed Shipped Cancelled Refunded The status titles and descriptions are in one place for editing and are easy to scaffold as a drop-down with a foreign key for dynamic data applications. This has worked well for me in the past. If the business rules dictate the creation of a new order status, I can just add it to OrderStatus table, without rebuilding my code.

    Read the article

  • Multiple REPLACE function in Oracle

    - by Adnan
    I am using the REPLACE function in oracle to replace values in my string like; SELECT REPLACE('THE NEW VALUE IS #VAL1#','#VAL1#','55') from dual So this is OK to replace one value, but what about 20+, should I use 20+ REPLACE function or is there a more practical solution. All ideas are welcome.

    Read the article

  • Best approach to send data from a server to an Android device

    - by ElectricDialect
    I am developing an Android app that needs to communicate bi-directionally with a server. By that, I mean either the server or the device can send a message at any time, with an arbitrary amount of time in between messages. Sending data from the device to the server is a common and I think well understood task, but I'm not as sure what the best approach is to go in the opposite direction from the server to the device. I think having the device periodically poll the server may be a bad idea due to latency and the drain on the battery, but I'd be willing to consider this option. My plan at the moment is to send text messages from the server via an email-to-SMS bridge, and to have my app run a service to receive and handle these messages. The question I have is if there are any best practices for this scenario, and if using text messages has some downsides that I have failed to consider. For the sake of this question, I want to assume that users have an unlimited text data plan, so paying per text won't be an issue.

    Read the article

  • Communication with different social networks, strategy pattern?

    - by bclaessens
    Hi For the last few days I've been thinking how I can solve the following programming problem and find the ideal, flexible programming structure. (note: I'm using Flash as my platform technology but that shouldn't matter since I'm just looking for the ideal design pattern). Our Flash website has multiple situations in which it has to communicate with different social networks (Facebook, Netlog and Skyrock). Now, the communication strategy doesn't have to change multiple times over one "run". The strategy should be picked once (at launch time) for that session. The real problem is the way the communication works between each social network and our website. Some networks force us to ask for a token, others force us to use a webservice, yet another forces us to set up its communication through javascript. The problem becomes more complicated when our website has to run in each network's canvas. Which results in even more (different) ways of communicating. To sum up, our website has to work in the following cases: standalone on the campaign website url (user chooses their favourite network) communicate with netlog OR communicate with facebook OR communicate with skyrock run in a netlog canvas and log in automatically (website checks for netlog parameters) run in a facebook canvas and log in automatically (website checks for facebook params) run in a skyrock canvas and log in automatically (website checks for skyrock params) As you can see, our website needs 6 different ways to communicate with a social network. To be honest, the actual significant difference between all communication strategies is the way they have to connect to their individual network (as stated above in my example). Posting an image, make a comment, ... is the same whether it runs standalone or in the canvas url. WARNING: posting an image, posting a comment DOES differ from network to network. Should I use the strategy pattern and make 6 different communication strategies or is there a better way? An example would be great but isn't required ;) Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • HTTP headers: Last-Modified - how can it mimimize server load?

    - by gotts
    Imagine the following use case: I use an AJAX request for getting some info about Item and use this URL: http://domain/items/show/1 In my database all items have a field called modified_at where we store the moment when this item was previously modified. How can Last-Modified server HTTP header in response can minimize load/reduce requests/increase responsiveness if we need to process this request every time on the server side? It looks like we don't reduce the number of HTTP requests with that response and we don't reduce the load on server. Who needs this anyway?

    Read the article

  • I don't like Python functions that take two or more iterables. Is it a good idea?

    - by Xavier Ho
    This question came from looking at this question on Stackoverflow. def fringe8((px, py), (x1, y1, x2, y2)): Personally, it's been one of my pet peeves to see a function that takes two arguments with fixed-number iterables (like a tuple) or two or more dictionaries (Like in the Shotgun API). It's just hard to use, because of all the verbosity and double-bracketed enclosures. Wouldn't this be better: >>> class Point(object): ... def __init__(self, x, y): ... self.x = x ... self.y = y ... >>> class Rect(object): ... def __init__(self, x1, y1, x2, y2): ... self.x1 = x1 ... self.y1 = y1 ... self.x2 = x2 ... self.y2 = y2 ... >>> def fringe8(point, rect): ... # ... ... >>> >>> point = Point(2, 2) >>> rect = Rect(1, 1, 3, 3) >>> >>> fringe8(point, rect) Is there a situation where taking two or more iterable arguments is justified? Obviously the standard itertools Python library needs that, but I can't see it being pretty in maintainable, flexible code design.

    Read the article

  • which version of the code below is right?

    - by TheVillageIdiot
    Hi I found this function in a utilities code file: Version 1: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { bool result = true; try { long tmp = long.Parse(strLong); } catch (Exception ex) { result = false; } return result; } I want to replace this (and validators for other types) with following: Version 2: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { long l; return long.TryParse(strLong, out l); } which version is better and why?

    Read the article

  • How strict should I be in the "do the simplest thing that could possible work" while doing TDD

    - by Support - multilanguage SO
    For TDD you have to Create a test that fail Do the simplest thing that could possible work to pass the test Add more variants of the test and repeat Refactor when a pattern emerge With this approach you're supposing to cover all the cases ( that comes to my mind at least) but I'm wonder if am I being too strict here and if it is possible to "think ahead" some scenarios instead of simple discover them. For instance, I'm processing a file and if it doesn't conform to a certain format I am to throw an InvalidFormatException So my first test was: @Test void testFormat(){ // empty doesn't do anything... processor.validate("empty.txt"); try { processor.validate("invalid.txt"); assert false: "Should have thrown InvalidFormatException"; } catch( InvalidFormatException ife ) { assert "Invalid format".equals( ife.getMessage() ); } } I run it and it fails because it doesn't throw an exception. So the next thing that comes to my mind is: "Do the simplest thing that could possible work", so I : public void validate( String fileName ) throws InvalidFormatException { if(fileName.equals("invalid.txt") { throw new InvalidFormatException("Invalid format"); } } Doh!! ( although the real code is a bit more complicated, I found my self doing something like this several times ) I know that I have to eventually add another file name and other test that would make this approach impractical and that would force me to refactor to something that makes sense ( which if I understood correctly is the point of TDD, to discover the patterns the usage unveils ) but: Q: am I taking too literal the "Do the simplest thing..." stuff?

    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 | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178  | Next Page >