Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 176/348 | < Previous Page | 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183  | Next Page >

• Correct way to protect a private API key when versioning a python application on a public git repo

  - by systempuntoout

  I would like to open-source a python project on Github but it contains an API key that should not be distributed. I guess there's something better than removing the key each time a "push" is committed to the repo. Imagine a simplified foomodule.py : import urllib2 API_KEY = 'XXXXXXXXX' urllib2.urlopen("http://example.com/foo?id=123%s" % API_KEY ).read() What i'm thinking is: Move the API_KEY in a second key.py module importing it on foomodule.py; i would then add key.py on .gitignore file. Same as 1 but using ConfigParser Do you know a good programmatic way to handle this scenario?

  Read the article

• Rails: Pass association object to the View

  - by Fedyashev Nikita

  Model Item belongs_to User. In my controller I have code like this: @items = Item.find(:all) I need to have a corresponding User models for each item in my View templates. it works in controller(but not in View template): @items.each { |item| item.user } But manual looping just to build associations for View template kinda smells. How can I do this not in a creepy way?

  Read the article

• CSS Brace Styles

  - by Nimbuz

  I'm unable to figure how the standard (or just popular) brace style names apply to CSS. Here're all the brace styles: /* one - pico? */ selector { property: value; property: value; } /* two */ selector { property: value; /* declaration starts on newline */ property: value; } /* three */ selector { property: value; property: value; } /* four - Allman or GNU?*/ selector { property: value; /* declaration starts on newline */ property: value; }? /* five */ selector { property: value; property: value; } /* six - horstmann? */ selector { property: value; /* declaration starts on newline */ property: value; } /* seven - banner?*/ selector { property: value; property: value; } /* eight */ selector { property: value; /* declaration starts on newline */ property: value; } Can someone please name each brace style for me? Many thanks!

  Read the article

• Is there anything wrong with having a few private methods exposing IQueryable<T> and all public meth

  - by Nate Bross

  I'm wondering if there is a better way to approach this problem. The objective is to reuse code. Let’s say that I have a Linq-To-SQL datacontext and I've written a "repository style" class that wraps up a lot of the methods I need and exposes IQueryables. (so far, no problem). Now, I'm building a service layer to sit on top of this repository, many of the service methods will be 1<-1 with repository methods, but some will not. I think a code sample will illustrate this better than words. public class ServiceLayer { MyClassDataContext context; IMyRepository rpo; public ServiceLayer(MyClassDataContext ctx) { context = ctx; rpo = new MyRepository(context); } private IQueryable<MyClass> ReadAllMyClass() { // pretend there is some complex business logic here // and maybe some filtering of the current users access to "all" // that I don't want to repeat in all of the public methods that access // MyClass objects. return rpo.ReadAllMyClass(); } public IEnumerable<MyClass> GetAllMyClass() { // call private IQueryable so we can do attional "in-database" processing return this.ReadAllMyClass(); } public IEnumerable<MyClass> GetActiveMyClass() { // call private IQueryable so we can do attional "in-database" processing // in this case a .Where() clause return this.ReadAllMyClass().Where(mc => mc.IsActive.Equals(true)); } #region "Something my class MAY need to do in the future" private IQueryable<MyOtherTable> ReadAllMyOtherTable() { // there could be additional constrains which define // "all" for the current user return context.MyOtherTable; } public IEnumerable<MyOtherTable> GetAllMyOtherTable() { return this.ReadAllMyOtherTable(); } public IEnumerable<MyOtherTable> GetInactiveOtherTable() { return this.ReadAllMyOtherTable.Where(ot => ot.IsActive.Equals(false)); } #endregion } This particular case is not the best illustration, since I could just call the repository directly in the GetActiveMyClass method, but let’s presume that my private IQueryable does some extra processing and business logic that I don't want to replicate in both of my public methods. Is that a bad way to attack an issue like this? I don't see it being so complex that it really warrants building a third class to sit between the repository and the service class, but I'd like to get your thoughts. For the sake of argument, lets presume two additional things. This service is going to be exposed through WCF and that each of these public IEnumerable methods will be calling a .Select(m => m.ToViewModel()) on each returned collection which will convert it to a POCO for serialization. The service will eventually need to expose some context.SomeOtherTable which wont be wrapped into the repository.

  Read the article

• Design pattern suggestion

  - by Avinash

  Following is the problem statement. There are n numbers of match strings, If event A occurs and then in certain period of time event B occurs then I do not raise alarm. but if B do not occurs then i have to raise alarm. There can be multiple chain of events which defines whether to raise alarm or not.

  Read the article

• Ignoring (serious) errors to keep the program alive?

  - by SQuirreL bites

  One of the main things I wanted to achieve in my experimental programming language was: When errors occur (Syntax, Name, Type, etc.) keep the program running, no matter how serious or devastating it is. I know that this is probably very bad, but I just wanted something that doesn't kill itself on every error - I find it interesting what happens when a serious error occurs but the program continues. Does this "paradigm" have a name? I mean expect for How bad is it to do the above? Are there programs in use out there that just follow: "Hey, this is a fatal, unexpected error - but you know what? I don't care!"?

  Read the article

• Unit testing directory structure

  - by zachary

  Huge project tons of classes and directories. Do I make my unit test project mirror these directories or do I put them all at the root directory? Somewhat annoying to have to make directory changes and class name changes twice.

  Read the article

• Static method,new thread performance question

  - by ylazez

  Hey guys i just have two questions about two methods used in many controllers/servlets in my app: 1-what is the difference between calling a static method in a util class or a non static method (like methods dealing with dates i.e getting current time,converting between timezones), which is better ? 2-what is the difference between calling a method(contain too many logic like sending emails) in the controller directly or running this method in a different thread ?

  Read the article

• What is the correct way to open and close window/dialog?

  - by mree

  I'm trying to develop a new program. The work flow looks like this: Login --> Dashboard (Window with menus) --> Module 1 --> Module 2 --> Module 3 --> Module XXX So, to open Dashboard from Login (a Dialog), I use Dashboard *d = new Dashboard(); d->show(); close(); In Dashboard, I use these codes to reopen the Login if the user closes the Window (by clicking the 'X') closeEvent(QCloseEvent *) { Login *login = new Login(); login->show(); } With a Task Manager opened, I ran the program and monitor the memory usage. After clicking open Dashboard from Login and closing Dashboard to return to Login, I noticed that the memory keeps increasing about 500 KB. It can goes up to 20 MB from 12 MB of memory usage by just opening and closing the window/dialog. So, what did I do wrong here ? I need to know it before I continue developing those modules which will definitely eat more memory with my programming. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• how can I "force" a branch upon the trunk, in the case I can't "reintegrate"?

  - by davka

  We created a branch from the trunk on which a major refactoring was done. Meanwhile, the trunk advanced a few revisions with some fixes. We don't want these changes on the branch, so we don't want to "catch-up" merge the trunk to the branch, because we don't want to mix the old and new code. But without this I can't reintegrate the branch back to the trunk. Is there a way to impose the branch on the trunk "as-is"? (an idea I considered is to undo ("reverse-merge") the trunk back to the revision where the branch started, and then it is safe to merge it on branch - nothing should happen. Then I can reintegrate. What do you think?) thanks!

  Read the article

• Dependency injection in C++

  - by Yorgos Pagles

  This is also a question that I asked in a comment in one of Miško Hevery's google talks that was dealing with dependency injection but it got buried in the comments. I wonder how can the factory / builder step of wiring the dependencies together can work in C++. I.e. we have a class A that depends on B. The builder will allocate B in the heap, pass a pointer to B in A's constructor while also allocating in the heap and return a pointer to A. Who cleans up afterwards? Is it good to let the builder clean up after it's done? It seems to be the correct method since in the talk it says that the builder should setup objects that are expected to have the same lifetime or at least the dependencies have longer lifetime (I also have a question on that). What I mean in code: class builder { public: builder() : m_ClassA(NULL),m_ClassB(NULL) { } ~builder() { if (m_ClassB) { delete m_ClassB; } if (m_ClassA) { delete m_ClassA; } } ClassA *build() { m_ClassB = new class B; m_ClassA = new class A(m_ClassB); return m_ClassA; } }; Now if there is a dependency that is expected to last longer than the lifetime of the object we are injecting it into (say ClassC is that dependency) I understand that we should change the build method to something like: ClassA *builder::build(ClassC *classC) { m_ClassB = new class B; m_ClassA = new class A(m_ClassB, classC); return m_ClassA; } What is your preferred approach?

  Read the article

• DataObjects.NET: a good (flawless, documented, support) ORM?

  - by David_CSharp

  I am looking for ORM frameworks, came along to NHibernate, Genome, L2S, Entity Framework and now the DataObjects.NET.. So far a I read the documentation it seems pretty cabable, but have you ever tried this ORM? Any issues/bugs with DO.NET would be approciated :)

  Read the article

• effective counter for unique number of visits in PHP & MySQL

  - by Adnan

  Hello, I am creating a counter for unique number of visits on a post, so what I have until now is a table for storing data like this; cvp_post_id | cvp_ip | cvp_user_id In cases a registered user visits a post, for the first time a record is inserted with cpv_post_id and cvp_user_id, so for his next visit I query the table and if the record is available I do not count him as a new visitor. In cases of an anonymous user the same happens but now the cvp_ip and cpv_post_id are used. My concerns is that I do a query every time anyone visits a post for checking if there has been a visit, what would be a more effective way for doing this?

  Read the article

• How to have the controller change its behavior depending on the view?

  - by Ian Boyd

  If from one view a user enters some invalid data, e.g.:     E-mail: [email protected]     then i want the controller to: not place the data into the model color the text box reddish not allow the user to save But it's possible that if the user enters the same invalid data in a different view i want the controller to: place the data into the model color the text box reddish allow the user to save But it's possible that if the user enters the same invalid data in a different view i want the controller to: place the data into the model color the text box bluish allow the user to save And it's possible that another view will: place the data into the model leave the text box uncolored allow the user to save And it's possible that another view will: auto-correct the data, placing it into the model color the text-box reddish allow the user to have And it's possible for another view to: auto-correct the data, placing it into the model update the view with the new data color the text-box bluish allow the user to save [ad infinitum] Without using n-controllers for n-views, how do i do this?

  Read the article

• how to get started with TopCoder to update/develop algorithm skills ?

  - by KaluSingh Gabbar

  at workplace, the work I do is hardly near to challenging and doing that I think I might be loosing the skills to look at a completely new problem and think about different ideas to solve it. A friend suggested TopCoder.com to me, but looking at the overwhelming number of problems I can not decide how to get started? what I want is to sharpen my techniques ( not particular language or framework ).

  Read the article

• The Wheel Invention - Beneficial For Learning?

  - by Sarfraz

  Hello, Chris Coyier of css-tricks.com has written a good article titled Regarding Wheel Invention. In a paragraph he says: On the “reinventing” side, you benefit from complete control and learning from the process. And on the very next line he says: On the other side, you benefit from speed, reliability, and familiarity. Also often at odds are time spent and cost. He is right in both statements I think. I really like his first statement. I do actually sometimes re-invent the wheel to learn more and gain complete control over what I am inventing. I wonder why people are so much against that or rather biased. Isn't there the benefit of learning and getting complete control or probably some other benefits too. I would love to see what you have to say about this.

  Read the article

• Alternative to singleton for unique resources

  - by user1320881

  I keep reading over and over again that one should avoid using singletons for various reasons. I'm wondering how to correctly handle a situation where a class represents a unique system resource. For example, a AudioOutput class using SDL. Since SDL_OpenAudio can only be open once at a time it makes no sense having more then one object of this type and it seems to me preventing accidentally making more then one object would actually be good. Just wondering what experienced programmers think about this, am i missing another option ?

  Read the article

• Is it a good or bad practice to call instance methods from a java constructor?

  - by Steve

  There are several different ways I can initialize complex objects (with injected dependencies and required set-up of injected members), are all seem reasonable, but have various advantages and disadvantages. I'll give a concrete example: final class MyClass { private final Dependency dependency; @Inject public MyClass(Dependency dependency) { this.dependency = dependency; dependency.addHandler(new Handler() { @Override void handle(int foo) { MyClass.this.doSomething(foo); } }); doSomething(0); } private void doSomething(int foo) { dependency.doSomethingElse(foo+1); } } As you can see, the constructor does 3 things, including calling an instance method. I've been told that calling instance methods from a constructor is unsafe because it circumvents the compiler's checks for uninitialized members. I.e. I could have called doSomething(0) before setting this.dependency, which would have compiled but not worked. What is the best way to refactor this? Make doSomething static and pass in the dependency explicitly? In my actual case I have three instance methods and three member fields that all depend on one another, so this seems like a lot of extra boilerplate to make all three of these static. Move the addHandler and doSomething into an @Inject public void init() method. While use with Guice will be transparent, it requires any manual construction to be sure to call init() or else the object won't be fully-functional if someone forgets. Also, this exposes more of the API, both of which seem like bad ideas. Wrap a nested class to keep the dependency to make sure it behaves properly without exposing additional API:class DependencyManager { private final Dependency dependency; public DependecyManager(Dependency dependency) { ... } public doSomething(int foo) { ... } } @Inject public MyClass(Dependency dependency) { DependencyManager manager = new DependencyManager(dependency); manager.doSomething(0); } This pulls instance methods out of all constructors, but generates an extra layer of classes, and when I already had inner and anonymous classes (e.g. that handler) it can become confusing - when I tried this I was told to move the DependencyManager to a separate file, which is also distasteful because it's now multiple files to do a single thing. So what is the preferred way to deal with this sort of situation?

  Read the article

• How much to put in a Repository class?

  - by chobo

  When using the repository pattern is it recommended to have one Repository class for each database table? Would I also map one service layer class to one repository class. I'm having a hard time trying to understand how much stuff one repository or service layer class should have. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Java Interfaces Methodology: Should every class implement an interface?

  - by Amir Rachum

  I've been programming in Java for a few courses in the University and I have the following question: Is it methodologically accepted that every class should implement an interface? Is it considered bad practice not to do so? Can you describe a situation where it's not a good idea to use interfaces? Edit: Personally, I like the notion of using Interfaces for everything as a methodology and habit, even if it's not clearly beneficial. Eclipse automatically created a class file with all the methods, so it doesn't waste any time anyway.

  Read the article

• Identifying a class which is extending an abstract class

  - by Simon A. Eugster

  Good Evening, I'm doing a major refactoring of http://wiki2xhtml.sourceforge.net/ to finally get better overview and maintainability. (I started the project when I decided to start programming, so – you get it, right? ;)) At the moment I wonder how to solve the problem I'll describe now: Every file will be put through several parsers (like one for links, one for tables, one for images, etc.): public class WikiLinks extends WikiTask { ... } public class WikiTables extends WikiTask { ... } The files will then be parsed about this way: public void parse() { if (!parse) return; WikiTask task = new WikiLinks(); do { task.parse(this); } while ((task = task.nextTask()) != null); } Sometimes I may want to use no parser at all (for files that only need to be copied), or only a chosen one (e.g. for testing purposes). So before running task.parse() I need to check whether this certain parser is actually necessary/desired. (Perhaps via Blacklist or Whitelist.) What would you suggest for comparing? An ID for each WikiTask (how to do?)? Comparing the task Object itself against a new instance of a WikiTask (overhead)?

  Read the article

• Class.Class vs Namespace.Class for top level general use class libraries?

  - by Joan Venge

  Which one is more acceptable (best-practice)?: namespace NP public static class IO public static class Xml ... // extension methods using NP; IO.GetAvailableResources (); vs public static class NP public static class IO public static class Xml ... // extension methods NP.IO.GetAvailableResources (); Also for #2, the code size is managed by having partial classes so each nested class can be in a separate file, same for extension methods (except that there is no nested class for them) I prefer #2, for a couple of reasons like being able to use type names that are already commonly used, like IO, that I don't want to replace or collide. Which one do you prefer? Any pros and cons for each? What's the best practice for this case? EDIT: Also would there be a performance difference between the two?

  Read the article

• I'd want a method to be called only by objects of a specific class

  - by mp

  Suppose you have this class: public class A { private int number; public setNumber(int n){ number = n; } } I'd like the method setNumber could be called only by objects of a specific class. Does it make sense? I know it is not possible, is it? Which are the design alternatives? Some well known design pattern? Sorry for the silly question, but I'm a bit rusty in OO design.

  Read the article

• which design choose? - pros and cons

  - by Guarava Makanili

  Which of these 3 approches would choose and why? // This is the one I would choose class Car { } class FeeCalculator { public double calculateFee(Car car) { return 0; } } // in that case the problem might be when we use ORM framework and we try to invoke save with parameter Car class Car { private FeeCalculator calculator; public double calculateFee() { return calculator.calculateFee(this); } } class FeeCalculator { public double calculateFee(Car car) { return 0; } } // in that case the problem mentioned above is solved, but I don't like this design class Car { public double calculateFee(FeeCalculator calculator) { return calculator.calculateFee(this); } } class FeeCalculator { public double calculateFee(Car car) { return 0; } }

  Read the article

• sql: DELETE + INSERT vs UPDATE + INSERT

  - by user93422

  A similar question has been asked, but since it always depends, I'm asking for my specific situation separately. I have a web-site page that shows some data that comes from a database, and to generate the data from that database I have to do some fairly complex multiple joins queries. The data is being updated once a day (nightly). I would like to pre-generate the data for the said view to speed up the page access. For that I am creating a table that contains exact data I need. Question: for my situation, is it reasonable to do complete table wipe followed by insert? or should I do update,insert? SQL wise seems like DELETE + INSERT will be easier (it is single SQL expression). EDIT: RDBMS: MS SQL Server 2008 Ent

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183  | Next Page >