Search Results

Search found 2923 results on 117 pages for 'naming standards'.

Page 18/117 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

• How can I promote clean coding at my workplace?

  - by Michael

  I work with a lot of legacy Java and RPG code on an internal company application. As you might expect, a lot of the code is written in many different styles, and often is difficult to read because of poorly named variables, inconsistent formatting, and contradictory comments (if they're there at all). Also, a good amount of code is not robust. Many times code is pushed to production quickly by the more experienced programmers, while code by newer programmers is held back by "code reviews" that IMO are unsatisfactory. (They usually take the form of, "It works, must be ok," than a serious critique of the code.) We have a fair number of production issues, which I feel could be lessened by giving more thought to the original design and testing. I have been working for this company for about 4 months, and have been complimented on my coding style a couple of times. My manager is also a fan of cleaner coding than is the norm. Is it my place to try to push for better style and better defensive coding, or should I simply code in the best way I can, and hope that my example will help others see how cleaner, more robust code (as well as aggressive refactoring) will result in less debugging and change time?

  Read the article

• Should classes from the same namespace be kept in the same assembly?

  - by Dan Rasmussen

  For example, ISerializable and the Serializable Attribute are both in the System.Runtime.Serialization namespace, but not the assembly of the same name. On the other hand, DataContract attributes are in the namespace/assembly System.Runtime.Serialization. This causes confusion when a class can have using System.Runtime.Serialization but still not have reference to the System.Runtime.Serialization assembly, meaning DataContract cannot be found. Should this be avoided in practice, or is it common for namespaces to be split over multiple assemblies? What other issues should one be careful of when doing this?

  Read the article

• Tellago Devlabs: A RESTful API for BizTalk Server Business Rules

  - by gsusx

  Tellago DevLabs keeps growing as the primary example of our commitment to open source! Today, we are very happy to announce the availability of the BizTalk Business Rules Data Service API which extends our existing BizTalk Data Services solution with an OData API for the BizTalk Server Business Rules engine. Tellago’s Vishal Mody led the implementation of this version of the API with some input from other members of our technical staff. The motivation The fundamental motivation behind the BRE Data...(read more)

  Read the article

• Has Little Endian won?

  - by espertus

  When teaching recently about the Big vs. Little Endian battle, a student asked whether it had been settled, and I realized I didn't know. Looking at the Wikipedia article, it seems that the most popular current OS/architecture pairs use Little Endian but that Internet Protocol specifies Big Endian for transferring numeric values in packet headers. Would that be a good summary of the current status? Do current network cards or CPUs provide hardware support for switching byte order?

  Read the article

• I need help with some terminology

  - by Christine

  I'm not a programmer; I'm a freelance writer and researcher. I have a client who'd looking for stats on certain "threats" to the apps market. One of them is cowboy coding. (I know what that means; that's not my question.) Specifically, he wants to see numbers regarding how many apps have failed/crashed/removed because of errors made by, in essence, sloppy coding. (I'm not here to debate the merits of cowboy coding, and whether or not it is sloppy; work with me here.) I've used every possible search term/phrase I can think of, but I can't find any hard numbers, just anecdotal evidence. Have any of you seen any reports that have this kind of data?

  Read the article

• Are 'edited by' inline comments the norm in shops which use revision control?

  - by Joshua Smith

  The senior dev in our shop insists that whenever code is modified, the programmer responsible should add an inline comment stating what he did. These comments usually look like // YYYY-MM-DD <User ID> Added this IF block per bug 1234. We use TFS for revision control, and it seems to me that comments of this sort are much more appropriate as check-in notes rather than inline noise. TFS even allows you to associate a check-in with one or more bugs. Some of our older, often-modified class files look like they have a comment-to-LOC ratio approaching 1:1. To my eyes, these comments make the code harder to read and add zero value. Is this a standard (or at least common) practice in other shops?

  Read the article

• Where does the "mm" come from in GTKmm, glibmm, etc

  - by Cole Johnson

  I understand that the "mm" suffix [in various GTK-associated C++ binding libraries] means "minus minus," but where exactly does it come from? I understand that there is a programming language called "C--," but if there were bindings (and I'm pretty sure I've seen some), they would be suffixed "--". TL;DR: Is there some page on gnu.org that explains the "mm" suffix in various C++ bindings or is it just a de facto standard adopted by the open source community with no reasoning behind it?

  Read the article

• Please help me give this principle a name

  - by Brent Arias

  As a designer, I like providing interfaces that cater to a power/simplicity balance. For example, I think the LINQ designers followed that principle because they offered both dot-notation and query-notation. The first is more powerful, but the second is easier to read and follow. If you disagree with my assessment of LINQ, please try to see my point anyway; LINQ was just an example, my post is not about LINQ. I call this principle "dial-able power". But I'd like to know what other people call it. Certainly some will say "KISS" is the common term. But I see KISS as a superset, or a "consumerism" practice. Using LINQ as my example again, in my view, a team of programmers who always try to use query notation over dot-notation are practicing KISS. Thus the LINQ designers practiced "dial-able power", whereas the LINQ consumers practice KISS. The two make beautiful music together. I'll give another example. Imagine a C# logging tool that has two signatures allowing two uses: void Write(string message); void Write(Func<string> messageCallback); The purpose of the two signatures is to fulfill these needs: //Every-day "simple" usage, nothing special. myLogger.Write("Something Happened" + error.ToString() ); //This is performance critical, do not call ToString() if logging is //disabled. myLogger.Write( () => { "Something Happened" + error.ToString() }); Having these overloads represents "dial-able power," because the consumer has the choice of a simple interface or a powerful interface. A KISS-loving consumer will use the simpler signature most of the time, and will allow the "busy" looking signature when the power is needed. This also helps self-documentation, because usage of the powerful signature tells the reader that the code is performance critical. If the logger had only the powerful signature, then there would be no "dial-able power." So this comes full-circle. I'm happy to keep my own "dial-able power" coinage if none yet exists, but I can't help think I'm missing an obvious designation for this practice. p.s. Another example that is related, but is not the same as "dial-able power", is Scott Meyer's principle "make interfaces easy to use correctly, and hard to use incorrectly."

  Read the article

• Self Documenting Code Vs. Commented Code

  - by Phill

  I had a search but didn't find what I was looking for, please feel free to link me if this question has already being asked. Earlier this month this post was made: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/php/why-youre-a-bad-php-programmer/ Basically to sum it up, you're a bad programmer if you don't write comments. My personal opinion is that code should be descriptive and mostly not require comment's unless the code cannot be self describing. In the example given // Get the extension off the image filename $pieces = explode('.', $image_name); $extension = array_pop($pieces); The author said this code should be given a comment, my personal opinion is the code should be a function call that is descriptive: $extension = GetFileExtension($image_filename); However in the comments someone actually made just that suggestion: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/php/why-youre-a-bad-php-programmer/comment-page-2/#comment-357130 The author responded by saying the commenter was "one of those people", i.e, a bad programmer. What are everyone elses views on Self Describing Code vs Commenting Code?

  Read the article

• Can someone explain to me C#'s coding convention?

  - by AedonEtLIRA

  I recently started working with Unity3D and primarily scripting with C#. As, I normally program in Java, the differences aren't too great but I still referred to a crash course just to make sure I am on the right track. However, My biggest curiosity with C# is that is capitalises the first letter its method names (eg. java: getPrime() C#: GetPrime() aka: Pascal Case?). Is there a good reason for this? I understand from the crash course page that I read that apparently it's convention for .Net and I have no way of ever changing it, but I am curious to hear why it was done like this as opposed to the normal (relative?) camel case that, say, Java uses. Note: I understand that languages have their own coding conventions (python methods are all lower case which also applies in this question) but I've never really understood why it isn't formalised into a standard.

  Read the article

• How to deal with different programming styles in a team?

  - by user3287

  We have a small dev team (only 3 developers) and we recently got a new team member. While he is a smart coder, his coding style is completely different from ours. Our existing code base contains mostly readable, clean and maintainable code, but the new team member is quickly changing many files, introducing ugly hacks and shortcuts, using defines all over the place, adding functions in the wrong places, etc. My question is if others have experienced such a situation before, and if anyone has tips on how to talk to him.

  Read the article

• Calling methods on Objects

  - by Mashael

  Let's say we have a class called 'Automobile' and we have an instance of that class called 'myCar'. I would like to ask why do we need to put the values that our methods return in a variable for the object? Why just don't we call the method? For example: Why should we write: string message = myCar.SpeedMessage(); Console.WriteLine(message); instead of: Console.WriteLine(myCar.SpeedMessage());

  Read the article

• Static classes and/or singletons -- How many does it take to become a code smell?

  - by Earlz

  In my projects I use quite a lot of static classes. These are usually classes that naturally seem to fit into a single-instance type of thing. Many times I use static classes and recently I've started using some singletons. How many of these does it take to become a code smell? For instance, in my recent project which has a lot of static classes is an Authentication library for ASP.Net. I use a static class for a helper class that fixes ASP.Net error codes so it can be used like CustomErrorsFixer.Fix(Context); Or my authentication class itself is a static class //in global.asax's begin_application Authentication.SomeState="blah"; Authentication.SomeOption=true; //etc //in global.asax's begin_request Authentication.Authenticate(); When are static or singleton classes bad to use? Am I doing it wrong, or am I just in a project that by definition has very little per-instance state associated with it? The only per-instance state I have is stored in HttpContext.Current.Items like so: /// <summary> /// The current user logged in for the HTTP request. If there is not a user logged in, this will be null. /// </summary> public static UserData CurrentUser{ get{ return HttpContext.Current.Items["fscauth_currentuser"] as UserData; //use HttpContext.Current as a little place to persist static data for this request } private set{ HttpContext.Current.Items["fscauth_currentuser"]=value; } }

  Read the article

• Is a coding standard even needed any more?

  - by SomeKittens

  I know that it's been proven that a coding standard helps enormously. However, there are many different tools and IDEs that will format to whatever standard the programmer prefers. So long as the code's neat/commented (and not a spaghetti mess), I don't see the need for a coding standard. Are there any arguments for the development of a coding standard (we don't have one, but I was looking into creating one)?

  Read the article

• Is a coding standard even needed anymore?

  - by SomeKittens

  I know that it's been proven that a coding standard helps enormously. However, there are many different tools and IDEs that will format to whatever standard the programmer prefers. So long as the code's neat/commented (and not a spaghetti mess), I don't see the need for a coding standard. Are there any arguments for the development of a coding standard (we don't have one, but I was looking into creating one)?

  Read the article

• Working on someone else's code

  - by Xavi Valero

  I have hardly a year's experience in coding. After I started working, most of the time I would be working on someone else's code, either adding new features over the existing ones or modifying the existing features. The guy who has written the actual code doesn't work in my company any more. I am having a hard time understanding his code and doing my tasks. Whenever I tried modifying the code, I have in some way messed with the working features. What all should I keep in mind, while working over someone else's code?

  Read the article

• Create new variable or make multiple chained calls?

  - by Rodrigo

  What is the best way to get this attributes, thinking in performance and code quality? Using chained calls: name = this.product.getStock().getItems().get(index).getName(); id = this.product.getStock().getItems().get(index).getId(); Creating new variable: final item = this.product.getStock().getItems().get(index); name = item.getName(); it = item.getId(); I prefer the second way, to let the code cleaner. But I would like to see some opinions about it. Thank you!

  Read the article

• Are there deprecated practices for multithread and multiprocessor programming that I should no longer use?

  - by DeveloperDon

  In the early days of FORTRAN and BASIC, essentially all programs were written with GOTO statements. The result was spaghetti code and the solution was structured programming. Similarly, pointers can have difficult to control characteristics in our programs. C++ started with plenty of pointers, but use of references are recommended. Libraries like STL can reduce some of our dependency. There are also idioms to create smart pointers that have better characteristics, and some version of C++ permit references and managed code. Programming practices like inheritance and polymorphism use a lot of pointers behind the scenes (just as for, while, do structured programming generates code filled with branch instructions). Languages like Java eliminate pointers and use garbage collection to manage dynamically allocated data instead of depending on programmers to match all their new and delete statements. In my reading, I have seen examples of multi-process and multi-thread programming that don't seem to use semaphores. Do they use the same thing with different names or do they have new ways of structuring protection of resources from concurrent use? For example, a specific example of a system for multithread programming with multicore processors is OpenMP. It represents a critical region as follows, without the use of semaphores, which seem not to be included in the environment. th_id = omp_get_thread_num(); #pragma omp critical { cout << "Hello World from thread " << th_id << '\n'; } This example is an excerpt from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenMP Alternatively, similar protection of threads from each other using semaphores with functions wait() and signal() might look like this: wait(sem); th_id = get_thread_num(); cout << "Hello World from thread " << th_id << '\n'; signal(sem); In this example, things are pretty simple, and just a simple review is enough to show the wait() and signal() calls are matched and even with a lot of concurrency, thread safety is provided. But other algorithms are more complicated and use multiple semaphores (both binary and counting) spread across multiple functions with complex conditions that can be called by many threads. The consequences of creating deadlock or failing to make things thread safe can be hard to manage. Do these systems like OpenMP eliminate the problems with semaphores? Do they move the problem somewhere else? How do I transform my favorite semaphore using algorithm to not use semaphores anymore?

  Read the article

• Approach on Software Development Architecture

  - by john ryan

  Hi i am planning to standardize our way of creating project for our new projects. Currently we are using 3tier architecture where we have our ClassLibrary Project where it includes our Data Access Layer and Business Layer Something like: Solution ClassLibrary >ClassLibrary Project : >DAL(folder) > DAL Classes >BAL(folder) > BAL Classes And this Class Library dll was reference on our presentation Layer Project which are the Application(web/desktop) Something like: Solution WebUniversitySystem >Libraries(folder) > ClassLibrary.dll >WebUniversitySystem(Project): >Reference ClassLibrary.dll >Pages etc... Now i am planning to do is something like: Solution WebUniversitySystem >DataAccess(Project) >BusinesLayer(Project) >Reference DAL >WebUniversitySystem(Project): >Reference BAL >Pages etc... Is this Ok ? Or there is a good Approach that we can follow? Thanks In Regards

  Read the article

• Are there well-known PowerShell coding conventions?

  - by Tahir Hassan

  Are there any well-defined conventions when programming in PowerShell? For example, in scripts which are to be maintained long-term, do we need to: Use the real cmdlet name or alias? Specify the cmdlet parameter name in full or only partially (dir -Recurse versus dir -r) When specifying string arguments for cmdlets do you enclose them in quotes (New-Object 'System.Int32' versus New-Object System.Int32 When writing functions and filters do you specify the types of parameters? Do you write cmdlets in the (official) correct case? For keywords like BEGIN...PROCESS...END do you write them in uppercase only? It seems that MSDN lack coding conventions document for PowerShell, while such document exist for example for C#.

  Read the article

• Is my Document Type Definition Still Up to Date?

  - by Sam

  Hi folks, currently all my php generated rich html webpages start with this line, which I have been adding to my tempaltes YEARS ago... <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> Am I still up to date and 2011-proof? or Should I be changing this into something fasterloaden/more agile/more flexible? I have heard of XHTML 1.1. When I remove this line all still works fine. Is it very much needed still? What are my alternatives? Thanks very much for your suggestions.

  Read the article

• TechCast Live: "Java and Oracle, One Year Later" Replay Now Available

  - by Justin Kestelyn

  Earlier this week I had the opportunity to chat with Ajay Patel, Oracle's VP leading the Java Evangelist team, about "the state of the union" wrt Oracle and Java. Take a look: And here are some choice quotes, some paraphrased, as helpfully transcribed by Java evangelist Terrence Barr: "One key thing we have learned ... Java is not just a platform, it is also an ecosystem, and you can't have an ecosystem without a community." "The objectives, strategically [for Java at Oracle] have been pretty clear: How do we drive adoption, how do we build a larger, stronger developer community, how do we really make the platform much more competitive." "It's about transparency, involvement. IBM, RedHat, Apple have all agreed to working with us to make OpenJDK the best platform for open source development ... it is a sign that the community has been waiting to move the Java platform forward." "It's not just about Oracle anymore, it's about Java, the technology, the community, the developer base, and how we work with them to move the innovation forward." "Java is strategic to Oracle, and the community is strategic for Java to be successful ... it is critical to our business." On JavaFX 2.0: "... is coming to beta soon, with a release planned in second half [of 2011] ... will give you a new, high-performance graphics engine, the new API for JavaFX ... you will see a very strong, relevant platform for levering rich media platforms." On the JDK and SE: "... aggressively moving forward, JDK 7 is now code complete ... looking good for getting JDK 7 out by summer as we promised. Started work on JDK 8, Jigsaw and Lambda are moving along nicely, on track for JDK 8 release next year ... good progress." On Java EE and Glassfish: "... Very excited to have Glassfish 3.1 released, with clustering and management capabilities ... working with the JCP to shortly submit a number of JSRs for Java EE 7 ... You'll see Java EE 7 becoming the platform for cloud-based development." "You will see Oracle continue to step up to this role of Java steward, making sure that the language, the technology, the platform ... is competitive, relevant, and widely adopted." Making progress!

  Read the article

• Studies on code documentation productivity gains/losses

  - by J T

  Hi everyone, After much searching, I have failed to answer a basic question pertaining to an assumed known in the software development world: WHAT IS KNOWN: Enforcing a strict policy on adequate code documentation (be it Doxygen tags, Javadoc, or simply an abundance of comments) adds over-head to the time required to develop code. BUT: Having thorough documentation (or even an API) brings with it productivity gains (one assumes) in new and seasoned developers when they are adding features, or fixing bugs down the road. THE QUESTION: Is the added development time required to guarantee such documentation offset by the gains in productivity down-the-road (in a strictly economical sense)? I am looking for case studies, or answers that can bring with them objective evidence supporting the conclusions that are drawn. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Matching the superclass's constructor's parameter list, is treating a null default value as a non-null value within a constructor a violation of LSP?

  - by Panzercrisis

  I kind of ran into this when messing around with FlashPunk, and I'm going to use it as an example. Essentially the main sprite class is pretty much class Entity. Entity's constructor has four parameters, each with a default value. One of them is graphic, whose default value is null. Entity is designed to be inherited from, with many such subclasses providing their own graphic within their own internal workings. Normally these subclasses would not have graphic in their constructor's parameter lists, but would simply pick something internally and go with it. However I was looking into possibly still adhering to the Liskov Substitution Principal. Which led me to the following example: package com.blank.graphics { import net.flashpunk.*; import net.flashpunk.graphics.Image; public class SpaceGraphic extends Entity { [Embed(source = "../../../../../../assets/spaces/blank.png")] private const BLANK_SPACE:Class; public function SpaceGraphic(x:Number = 0, y:Number = 0, graphic:Graphic = null, mask:Mask = null) { super(x, y, graphic, mask); if (!graphic) { this.graphic = new Image(BLANK_SPACE); } } } } Alright, so now there's a parameter list in the constructor that perfectly matches the one in the super class's constructor. But if the default value for graphic is used, it'll exhibit two different behaviors, depending on whether you're using the subclass or the superclass. In the superclass, there won't be a graphic, but in the subclass, it'll choose the default graphic. Is this a violation of the Liskov Substitution Principal? Does the fact that subclasses are almost intended to use different parameter lists have any bearing on this? Would minimizing the parameter list violate it in a case like this? Thanks.

  Read the article

• How do you overcome your own coding biases when handed legacy code?

  - by Bryan M.

  As programmers, we often take incredible pride in our skills and hold very strong opinions about what is 'good' code and 'bad' code. At any given point in our careers, we've probably had some legacy system dropped in our laps, and thought 'My god, this code sucks!' because it didn't fit into our notion of what good code should be, despite the fact that it may have well been perfectly functional, maintainable code. How do you prepare yourself mentally when trying to get your head around another programmer's work?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >