Search Results

Search found 20785 results on 832 pages for 'idea'.

Page 21/832 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Style question: Writing "this." before instance variable and methods: good or bad idea?

    - by Uri
    One of my nasty (?) programming habits in C++ and Java is to always precede calls or accesses to members with a this. For example: this.process(this.event). A few of my students commented on this, and I'm wondering if I am teaching bad habits. My rationale is: 1) Makes code more readable — Easier to distinguish fields from local variables. 2) Makes it easier to distinguish standard calls from static calls (especially in Java) 3) Makes me remember that this call (unless the target is final) could end up on a different target, for example in an overriding version in a subclass. Obviously, this has zero impact on the compiled program, it's just readability. So am I making it more or less readable? Related Question Note: I turned it into a CW since there really isn't a correct answer.

    Read the article

  • Detecting Screen Resolution to load alternative CSS a good idea?

    - by jdln
    Im working with a graphic designer who constantly wants to make websites larger than the 960 pixels i recommend. I can do a certain amount with liquid layouts but id really love to be able to load different CSS for larger resolutions. I googled it and found the link below, but im worried that I havnt heard more about this. Is this is a reliable method? Im concerned as I would have thought that more people would want to do this. http://www.ilovecolors.com.ar/detect-screen-size-css-style/ Thanks

    Read the article

  • Give me better idea to do Marquee tag in asp.net page.

    - by Ayyappan.Anbalagan
    The bellow code working, but i don’t know it the write way or not? <td align="center" style=" height:50px; width:100%; background-color:Red;width:10%;"> <div id="divremview" > <marquee behavior="scroll" direction="up"> <div id="div1"><asp:Label ID="Label1" runat="server" Text="Label">Hi</asp:Label></div> </marquee> </div> </td> Also it not in center alignment. As usual it in left alignment

    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

  • ingenious idea needed: how to declare different sizes for different fonts? @font-face?

    - by Haroldo
    I've never seen this done, but i get a feeling that there's gotta be a clever way of doing it. css font-size-adjust looks like it was never meant to be, but when i look around I'm seeing some really ingenious css techniques going on. Take this on nettuts yesterday for using @font-face for vector icons. my challenge: if(user has calibri ) { font-family: calibri; font-size: 12px; } if(user hasn't calibri ) { font-family: arial; font-size: 10px; }

    Read the article

  • Is locking on the requested object a bad idea?

    - by Quick Joe Smith
    Most advice on thread safety involves some variation of the following pattern: public class Thing { private static readonly object padlock = new object(); private string stuff, andNonsense; public string Stuff { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Threadsafe!"; } return this.stuff; } } public string AndNonsense { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.andNonsense == null) this.andNonsense = "Also threadsafe!"; } return this.andNonsense; } } // Rest of class... } In cases where the get operations are expensive and unrelated, a single locking object is unsuitable because a call to Stuff would block all calls to AndNonsense, degrading performance. And rather than create a lock object for each call, wouldn't it be better to acquire the lock on the member itself (assuming it is not something that implements SyncRoot or somesuch for that purpose? For example: public string Stuff { get { lock (this.stuff) { // Pretend that this is a very expensive operation. if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Still threadsafe and good?"; } return this.stuff; } } Strangely, I have never seen this approach recommended or warned against. Am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • Using static strings to define input field names in JSPs - good idea or not?

    - by Derek Clarkson
    Hi all, I've just be asked to work on a large portal project and have been looking through the established code. I keep finding this in the jsps: <input class="portlet-form-button" name="<%=ModifyUserProfile.FORM_FIRST_TIME_LOGIN_SUBMIT%>" type="submit" ... The authors are using static strings defined in classes to define the names of input fields and buttons in jsp forms. I've never seen this done before and was wondering if this is common practice. I'm inclined to think not, but I'm asking because, apart from centralising names which I would have thought are not likely to change, I can't see the reason why. Any thoughts on this?

    Read the article

  • Bad idea to have the same object, have a different side effect after method call.

    - by Nathan W
    Hi all, I'm having a bit of a gesign issue(again). Say I have this Buttonpad object: now this object is a wrapper object over one in a com object. At the moment it has a method on it called CreateInto(IComObject). Now to make a new button pad in the Com Object. You do: ButtonPad pad = new ButtonPad(); pad.Title = "Hello"; // Set some more properties. pad.CreateInto(Cominstance); The createinfo method will excute the right commands to buid the button pad in the com object. After it has been created it any calls against it are foward to the underlying object for change so: pad.Title = "New title"; will call the com object to set the title and also set the internal title variable. Basically any calls before the CreateInfo method only affect the .NET object anything after has the side effect of calling the com object also. I'm not very good at sequence diagrams but here is my attempt to explain whats going on: This doesn't feel good to me, it feels like I'm lying to the user about what the button pad does. I was going to have a object called WrappedButtonPad, which is returned from CreateInto and the user could make calls against that to make changes to the Com Object, but I feel having two objects that almost do the same thing but only differ by names might be even worse. Are these valid designs, or am I right to be worried? How else would you handle a object the can create and query a com object?

    Read the article

  • Give me some idea : How do I match photographer?

    - by user231430
    I have photographer in my database such as PhotographerID, PhotographerName, JobArea, BestPhotography, FavoritePhotography. And I want to match some photographer from my database. The question that I will ask the user before matching photographer is.. Area or province that you want to hire a photographer? Type of photography? How do I match?

    Read the article

  • In Ruby or Python can the very idea of Class be rewritten?

    - by John Berryman
    Howdy All... first time at stack overflow. I'm looking into using some of the metaprogramming features provided by Ruby or Python, but first I need to know the extent to which they will allow me to extend the language. The main thing I need to be able to do is to rewrite the concept of Class. This doesn't mean that I want to rewrite a specific class during run time, but rather I want to make my own conceptualization of what a Class is. To be a smidge more specific here, I want to make something that is like what people normally call a Class, but I want to follow an "open world" assumption. In the "closed world" of normal Classes, if I declare Poodle to be a subclass of Dog to be a subclass of Animal, then I know that Poodle is not going to also be a type of FurCoat. However, in an open world Class, then the Poodle object I've defined may or may not be and object of type FurCoat and we won't know for sure until I explain that I can wear the poodle. (Poor poodle.) This all has to do with a study I'm doing concerning OWL ontologies. Just so you know, I've tried to find information online, but due to the overloading of terms here I haven't found anything helpful. Super thanks, John

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea for me to learn Python before C or some other Compiler language?

    - by Dream Lane
    Right now I am going through MIT's introduction to Computer Science course via OpenCourseWare. As a part of this course I am learning the Python Language. I've read a lot of things about the benefits of learning C. Before I dig any deeper into Python I wonder if I will be hindered or helped by learning Python first. Do you think that I will develop any bad habits or anything like that from Python?

    Read the article

  • Any idea about WPF ScrollViewer to make it smooth scroolling like Android?

    - by jimi
    I have trying a simple ScrollViewer in xaml like below: <ScrollViewer Height="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource FindAncestor, AncestorType={x:Type StackPanel}}, Path=Height}" ScrollViewer.VerticalScrollBarVisibility="Visible" CanContentScroll="True"> <DockPanel> <StackPanel Name="StackPanel1" OverridesDefaultStyle="False" Width="230" Height="803" VerticalAlignment="Top" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="23,1,0,0"> ....Something here ....Something here ....Something here </StackPanel> </DockPanel> </ScrollViewer> But my question is..is it possible for us to create any smooth scrolling likes any android or iphone using WPF? Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • When designing an event, is it a good idea to prevent listeners from being added twice?

    - by Matt
    I am creating an event-based API where a user can subscribe to an event by adding listener objects (as is common in Java or C#). When the event is raised, all subscribed listeners are invoked with the event information. I initially decided to prevent adding an event listener more than once. If a listener is added that already exists in the listener collection, it is not added again. However, after thinking about it some more, it doesn't seem that most event-based structures actually prevent this. Was my initial instinct wrong? I'm not sure which way to go here. I guess I thought that preventing addition of an existing listener would help to avoid a common programming error. Then again, it could also hide a bug that would lead to code being run multiple times when it shouldn't.

    Read the article

  • When is it a good idea to use the CSS display property?

    - by allyourcode
    I think I first learned of this property when I thought "I should put this list of items in a ul, but I want it to be laid out horizontally. I wonder if I can do that with CSS?" When I googled this, I found a couple of sites suggesting that I create a CSS rule that would change the value of the display property of the li elements to inline. I've also seen the suggestion that a div (or other block element) be given display: table-cell in order to force the vertical align property to work. These techniques seem kind of hacky. Does that make sense? This might not be a good analogy, but it seems like trying to ride a car as if it were a motorcycle. Yeah, I could replace the steering wheel with handle bars, wear a helmet, and remove all the passenger seating, but how the heck is a car going to drive on two wheels??

    Read the article

  • Why would 1.000 subforms in a db be a bad idea?

    - by KlaymenDK
    Warm-up I'm trying to come up with a good way to implement customized document forms. It's for a tool to request access to applications; each application will want to ask its own specific questions. The thing is, we have one kind of (common) user who needs to fill in and submit documents based on templates, and another kind of (super) user who needs to be able to define what each template needs to contain. One implementation option would be to use a form (with the basic mandatory stuff), and have that form dynamically include a subform appropriate to the specific task at hand. The gist of the matter is that we could (=will!) quite easily end up having many hundreds of different subforms! (NB. These subforms will be maintained in an automated manner, but that is another topic that may be considered outside the scope of this Question.) Question It's common knowledge that having a lot of views in a Notes database is Bad Thing. But has anyone tried pushing the number of forms or subforms and made any experiences regarding performance?

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad idea to create tests that rely on each other within a test fixture?

    - by nbolton
    For example: // NUnit-like pseudo code (within a TestFixture) Ctor() { m_globalVar = getFoo(); } [Test] Create() { a(m_globalVar) } [Test] Delete() { // depends on Create being run b(m_globalVar) } … or… // NUnit-like pseudo code (within a TestFixture) [Test] CreateAndDelete() { Foo foo = getFoo(); a(foo); // depends on Create being run b(foo); } … I’m going with the later, and assuming that the answer to my question is: No, at least not with NUnit, because according to the NUnit manual: The constructor should not have any side effects, since NUnit may construct the class multiple times in the course of a session. ... also, can I assume it's bad practice in general? Since tests can usually be run separately. So the result of Create may never be cleaned up by Delete.

    Read the article

  • Mutiple FK columns all pointing to the same parent table - a good idea?

    - by Randy Minder
    For those of you who live and breath database design, have you ever found compelling reasons to have multiple FK's in a table that all point to the same parent table? We recently had to deal with a situation where we had a table that contained six columns which were all FK columns to the same parent table. We're debating whether this indicates a poor design on our part or whether this is more common than we think. Thanks very much.

    Read the article

  • Bad idea to force creation of Mercurial remote heads (ie. branches)?

    - by Chad Johnson
    I am developing a centralized web application, and I have a centralized Mercurial repository. Locally I created a branch in my repository hg branch my_branch I then made some changes and committed. Then when I try to push, I get abort: push creates new remote branch 'my_branch'! (did you forget to merge? use push -f to force) I've just been using push -f. Is this bad? I WANT multiple branches in my central, remote repository, as I want to 1) back up my work and 2) allow other developers to develop with me on that branch. Is it bad or something to have branches in my remote repository or something? Should I not be doing push -f (and if not, what should I do?)? Why does Joel say this in his tutorial: Occasionally I've made a change in a branch, pushed, switched to another branch, and changes I had made in that branch I switch to were mysteriously reverted to a previous version from several commits ago. Maybe this is a symptom of forcing a push?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >