Search Results

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

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 181/348 | < Previous Page | 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188  | Next Page >

  • Should programmers use boolean variables to "document" their code?

    - by froadie
    I'm reading McConell's Code Complete, and he discusses using boolean variables to document your code. For example, instead of: if((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex) || (elementIndex == lastElementIndex)){ ... } He suggests: finished = ((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex)); repeatedEntry = (elementIndex == lastElementIndex); if(finished || repeatedEntry){ ... } This strikes me as logical, good practice, and very self-documenting. However, I'm hesitant to start using this technique regularly as I've almost never come across it; and perhaps it would be confusing just by virtue of being rare. However, my experience is not very vast yet, so I'm interested in hearing programmers' opinion of this technique, and I'd be curious to know if anyone uses this technique regularly or has seen it often when reading code. Is this a worthwhile convention/style/technique to adopt? Will other programmers understand and appreciate it, or consider it strange?

    Read the article

  • c# class design - what can I use instead of "static abstract"?

    - by Ryan
    I want to do the following public abstract class MyAbstractClass { public static abstract int MagicId { get; } public static void DoSomeMagic() { // Need to get the MagicId value defined in the concrete implementation } } public class MyConcreteClass : MyAbstractClass { public static override int MagicId { get { return 123; } } } However I can't because you can't have static abstract members. I understand why I can't do this - any recommendations for a design that will achieve much the same result? (For clarity - what I am trying to do is provide a library with an abstract base class but the concrete versions MUST implement a few properties/methods themselves and yes, there are good reasons for keeping it static.)

    Read the article

  • Session vs singleton pattern

    - by chobo
    Hi, I have a web application where I would like to pull user settings from a database and store them for Global access. Would it make more sense to store the data in a Singleton, or a Session object? What's the difference between the two? Is it better to store the data as an object reference or break it up into value type objects (ints and strings)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Assignment in conditional operator

    - by DuoSRX
    I've seen a lot this kind of code recently : if ($foo = $bar->getFoo()) { baz($foo); } Is this considered good or bad practice ? For example, Netbeans IDE give a notice if you use this kind of code : Possible accidental assignment, assignments in conditions should be avoided What do you think ?

    Read the article

  • Secrets of delivering .NET size large products?

    - by Joan Venge
    In software companies I have seen it's really hard to work on very large products where everything depends on everything else. For instance Microsoft works on C#, F#, .NET, WPF, Visual Studio where these things are interconnected. I don't know how many people are involved, but if it's in 100s, how do they keep in sync with everything, so they design and implement features without conflicting with other dependencies and future plans of other products? I am wondering that if MS is able to do this, they must have a very good system. Any guidelines or secrets for MS or non-MS very large software product delivering?

    Read the article

  • Many-to-many relationship in oop

    - by Manu
    what is best way to model many-to-many relationship? lets say we have a two classes , Team and Player any given Player can be in multiple Team s any Team can have as many Player s as they like I like to call methods like playerX.getTeamList() to get the list of all the Team s he/she is in teamY.getPlayerList() to get the list of all the Player s in the team (or have some other way to do this effectively) I can think of two ways of doing this , but they just don't feels like good oop pattens. can you think of any good ways , perhaps a design patten ?

    Read the article

  • STLifying C++ classes

    - by shambulator
    I'm trying to write a class which contains several std::vectors as data members, and provides a subset of vector's interface to access them: class Mesh { public: private: std::vector<Vector3> positions; std::vector<Vector3> normals; // Several other members along the same lines }; The main thing you can do with a mesh is add positions, normals and other stuff to it. In order to allow an STL-like way of accessing a Mesh (add from arrays, other containers, etc.), I'm toying with the idea of adding methods like this: public: template<class InIter> void AddNormals(InIter first, InIter last); Problem is, from what I understand of templates, these methods will have to be defined in the header file (seems to make sense; without a concrete iterator type, the compiler doesn't know how to generate object code for the obvious implementation of this method). Is this actually a problem? My gut reaction is not to go around sticking huge chunks of code in header files, but my C++ is a little rusty with not much STL experience outside toy examples, and I'm not sure what "acceptable" C++ coding practice is on this. Is there a better way to expose this functionality while retaining an STL-like generic programming flavour? One way would be something like this: (end list) class RestrictedVector<T> { public: RestrictedVector(std::vector<T> wrapped) : wrapped(wrapped) {} template <class InIter> void Add(InIter first, InIter last) { std::copy(first, last, std::back_insert_iterator(wrapped)); } private: std::vector<T> wrapped; }; and then expose instances of these on Mesh instead, but that's starting to reek a little of overengineering :P Any advice is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Do I need to cast the result of strtol to int?

    - by Kristo
    The following code does not give a warning with g++ 4.1.1 and -Wall. int octalStrToInt(const std::string& s) { return strtol(s.c_str(), 0, 8); } I was expecting a warning because strtol returns a long int but my function is only returning a plain int. Might other compilers emit a warning here? Should I cast the return value to int in this case as a good practice?

    Read the article

  • how to organize classes in ruby if they are literal subclasses

    - by RetroNoodle
    I know that title didn't make sense, Im sorry! Its hard to word what I am trying to ask. I had trouble googling it for the same reason. So this isn't even Ruby specific, but I am working in ruby and I am new to it, so bear with me. So you have a class that is a document. Inside each document, you have sentences, and each sentence has words. Words will have properties, like "noun" or a count of how many times they are used in the document, etc. I would like each of the elements, document, sentence, word be an object. Now, if you think literally - sentences are in documents, and words are in sentences. Should this be organized literally like this as well? Like inside the document class you will define and instantiate the sentence objects, and inside the sentence class you will define and instantiate the words? Or, should everything be separate and reference each other? Like the word class would sit outside the sentence class but the sentence class would be able to instantiate and work with words? This is a basic OOP question I guess, and I suppose you could argue to do it either way. What do you guys think? Each sentence in the document could be stored in a hash of sentence objects inside the document object, and each word in the sentence could be stored in a hash of word objects inside the sentence. I dont want to code myself into a corner here, thats why I am asking, plus I have wondered this before in other situations. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Do preconditions ALWAYS have to be checked?

    - by Pin
    These days I'm used to checking every single precondition for every function since I got the habit from an OS programming course back at uni. On the other hand, at the software engineering course we were taught that a common precondition should only be checked once, so for example, if a function is delegating to another function, the first function should check them but checking them again in the second one is redundant. I do see the redundancy point, but I certainly feel it's safer to always check them, plus you don't have to keep track of where they were checked previously. What's the best practice here?

    Read the article

  • Is it always bad idea to use inline css for used-once property?

    - by user93422
    I have a table, with 10 columns. I want to control the width of each column. Each column is unique, right now I create an external CSS style for each column: div#my-page table#members th.name-col { width: 40px; } I know there is a best practice to avoid inline style. I do approve using external CSS for anything look'n'feel related: fonts, colors, images. But is it really better to use external CSS in this case? It does not incur extra maintenance cost. It is easier to produce. Cons I can think of: If you have separate designers and development team - using inline styles will force designers to modify content-file (aspx in my case). It might use more bandwidth. Anything else I've missed?

    Read the article

  • Generating new tasks in a foreach loop

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I know from the codeing guidlines that I have read you should not do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(i)); } Console.ReadLine(); as it will write 5 5's, I understand that and I think i understand why it is happening. I know the solution is just to do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { int localI = i; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(localI)); } Console.ReadLine(); However is something like this ok to do? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; currentTask.Start(); foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { task.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; } } or do i need to do this? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { Task localTask = task; currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { localTask.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; }

    Read the article

  • Should I create a new extension for an xml file?

    - by macleojw
    I'm working with a data model stored in XML files. I want to create some metadata for the model and store it alongside, but would like to be able to distinguish between the two. The data model is imported into some software from time to time and we don't want it to try to import the meta data files. To get round this, I've been thinking of creating a new extension for the metadata xml files (say .mdml). Is this good practice?

    Read the article

  • When using out parameters in a function, is it good practice to initialize them in the function?

    - by adambox
    I have a function that uses out parameters to return multiple values to the caller. I would like to initialize them in the function, but I wasn't sure if that's a bad idea since you don't know when you call the function that it's going to change the values right away. The caller might assume that after the function returns, if whatever it was doing didn't work, the values would be whatever they were initialized to in the caller. Is it ok / good for me to initialize in the function? Example: public static void SomeFunction(int ixID, out string sSomething) { sSomething = ""; sSomething = something(ixID); if (sSomething = "") { somethingelse(); sSomething = "bar" } }

    Read the article

  • How to implement the disposable pattern in a class that inherits from another disposable class?

    - by TheRHCP
    Hi, I often used the disposable pattern in simple classes that referenced small amount of resources, but I never had to implement this pattern on a class that inherits from another disposable class and I am starting to be a bit confused in how to free the whole resources. I start with a little sample code: public class Tracer : IDisposable { bool disposed; FileStream fileStream; public Tracer() { //Some fileStream initialization } public void Dispose() { this.Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (!disposed) { if (disposing) { if (fileStream != null) { fileStream.Dispose(); } } disposed = true; } } } public class ServiceWrapper : Tracer { bool disposed; ServiceHost serviceHost; //Some properties public ServiceWrapper () { //Some serviceHost initialization } //protected override void Dispose(bool disposing) //{ // if (!disposed) // { // if (disposing) // { // if (serviceHost != null) // { // serviceHost.Close(); // } // } // disposed = true; // } //} } My real question is: how to implement the disposable pattern inside my ServiceWrapper class to be sure that when I will dispose an instance of it, it will dispose resources in both inherited and base class? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Am i using too much jquery? When i'm crossing the line?

    - by Andrea
    Lately i find myself using jquery and javascript a lot, often to do the same things that i did before using css. For example, i alternate table rows color or create buttons and links hover effects using javascript/jquery. Is this acceptable? Or should i keep using css for these kind of things? So the real question is: When i'm using too much jquery? How can i understand when i'm crossing the line? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Best way to make an attribute always an array?

    - by Shadowfirebird
    I'm using my MOO project to teach myself Test Driven Design, and it's taking me interesting places. For example, I wrote a test that said an attribute on a particular object should always return an array, so -- t = Thing.new("test") p t.names #-> ["test"] t.names = nil p t.names #-> [] The code I have for this is okay, but it doesn't seem terribly ruby to me: class Thing def initialize(names) self.names = names end def names=(n) n = [] if n.nil? n = [n] unless n.instance_of?(Array) @names = n end attr_reader :names end Is there a more elegant, Ruby-ish way of doing this? (NB: if anyone wants to tell me why this is a dumb test to write, that would be interesting too...)

    Read the article

  • Creating and Compiling a C++ project on Windows

    - by sc_ray
    I need to work on C++ project on my windows machine. My project will consist of various classes(.h and .cpp) as well as the startup file to start the application. The preliminary design is simple but the application has the potential to gain complexity as time goes by. What I need here is ideas to set up the C++ project compiler/IDE/Makefile etc..etc. as well as some standard tools besides Visual C++ to compile/build/link projects such as these on a Windows OS. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Avoiding repetition with libraries that use a setup + execute model

    - by lijie
    Some libraries offer the ability to separate setup and execution, esp if the setup portion has undesirable characteristics such as unbounded latency. If the program needs to have this reflected in its structure, then it is natural to have: void setupXXX(...); // which calls the setup stuff void doXXX(...); // which calls the execute stuff The problem with this is that the structure of setupXXX and doXXX is going to be quite similar (at least textually -- control flow will prob be more complex in doXXX). Wondering if there are any ways to avoid this. Example: Let's say we're doing signal processing: filtering with a known kernel in the frequency domain. so, setupXXX and doXXX would probably be something like... void doFilter(FilterStuff *c) { for (int i = 0; i < c->N; ++i) { doFFT(c->x[i], c->fft_forward_setup, c->tmp); doMultiplyVector(c->tmp, c->filter); doFFT(c->tmp, c->fft_inverse_setup, c->x[i]); } } void setupFilter(FilterStuff *c) { setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_forward_setup)); // assign the kernel to c->filter ... setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_inverse_setup)); }

    Read the article

  • Imposing email limits on web page

    - by Martin
    To avoid spammers, what's a good strategy for imposing limits on users when sending email from our site? A count limit per day on individual IPs? Sender emails? Domains? In general terms, but recommended figures will also be helpful. Our users can send emails through our web page. They can register and log in but are also allowed to do this without logging in, but with a captcha and with a field for the senders email. Certainly, there is a header, "The user has sent you the following message.", limiting the use for spammers, so perhaps it's not a big problem. Any comments on what I'm doing will be greatly appreciated.

    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 | 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188  | Next Page >