Search Results

Search found 17278 results on 692 pages for 'directory conventions'.

Page 28/692 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

• RewriteRules targeting a directory result in a gratuitous redirect

  - by MapDot

  I have a standard CMS-like RewriteRule set up in my .htaccess: RewriteRule ^(.+)$ index.php?slug=$1 Let's say I have a directory called "foo" in the root directory. For some reason, if you hit the page it causes a redirect: http://www.mysite.com/foo -- http://www.mysite.com/foo?slug=foo Removing the directory fixes the problem, but unfortunately, it's not an option. Does anyone know of a workaround?

  Read the article

• JMS : Specifying Message Paging Directory on Weblogic server.

  - by adejuanc

  Two ways to configure or modify Paging directory, here the examples : 1.- Via config.xml file. <paging-directory>C:\temp</paging-directory> <jms-server> <name>JMSServerMS1</name> <target>MS1</target> <persistent-store xsi:nil="true"></persistent-store> <hosting-temporary-destinations>true</hosting-temporary-destinations> <temporary-template-resource xsi:nil="true"></temporary-template-resource> <temporary-template-name xsi:nil="true"></temporary-template-name> <message-buffer-size>-1</message-buffer-size> <paging-directory>C:\temp</paging-directory> <paging-file-locking-enabled>true</paging-file-locking-enabled> <expiration-scan-interval>30</expiration-scan-interval> </jms-server> ------------------------------------------------------- 2 .- Via WLST (Weblogic scripting tool) startEdit() cd('/Deployments/JMSServerMS1') cmo.setPagingDirectory('C:\\temp') activate()

  Read the article

• Sun2Oracle: Upgrading from DSEE to the next generation Oracle Unified Directory - webcast follow up

  - by Darin Pendergraft

  Thanks to all of the guest speakers on our Sun2Oracle webcast: Steve from Hub City Media, Albert from UCLA and our own Scott Bonell. During the webcast, we tried to answer as many questions as we could, but there were a few that we needed a bit more time to answer.  Albert from UCLA sent me the following information: Alternate Directory EvaluationWe were happy with Sun DSEE. OUD, based on the research we had done, was a logical continuation of DSEE.  If we moved away, it was to to go open source. UCLA evaluated OpenLDAP, OpenDS, Red Hat's 389 Directory. We also briefly entertained Active Directory. Ultimately, we decided to stay with OUD for the Enterprise Directory, and adopt OpenLDAP for the non-critical edge directories.HardwareFor Enterprise Directory, UCLA runs 3 Dell PowerEdge R710 servers. Each server has 12GB RAM and 2 2.4GHz Intel Xeon E5 645 processors. We run 2 of those servers at UCLA's Data Center in a semi active-passive configuration. The 3rd server is located at UCLA Berkeley. All three are multi master replicated. At run time, the bulk of LDAP query requests go to 1 server. Essentially, all of our authn/authz traffic is being handled by 1 server, with the other 2 acting as redundant back ups.

  Read the article

• "My stuff" vs. "Your stuff" in UI texts

  - by John Isaacks

  When refering to a users stuff should you use My or Your, for example: My Cart | My Account | My Wishlist Or Your Cart | Your Account | Your Wishlist I found this article that argues for the use of your. It says flikr does this. It also says MySpace and MyYahoo are wrong. I also noticed today that Amazon uses the term Your. However, I have heard they are the masters at testing variations and finding the best one, so what you see on their site might be the best variation, or simply something they are currently testing. I personally like the way my looks better, but thats just my opinion. What do you think? What will hever the better impact on customers? Does it really even matter?

  Read the article

• Best way to prevent Google from indexing a directory [duplicate]

  - by Gkhan14

  This question already has an answer here: Stopping Google index some web pages I have 5 answers I've researched many methods on how to prevent Google/other search engines from crawling a specific directory. The two most popular ones I've seen are: Adding it into the robots.txt file: Disallow: /directory/ Adding a meta tag: <meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow"> Which method would work the best? I want this directory to remain "invisible" from search engines so it does not affect any of my site's ranking. In other words, I want this directory to be neutral/invisible and "just there." I don't want it to affect any ranking. Which method would be the best to achieve this?

  Read the article

• Naming a class that decides to retrieve things from cache or a service + architecture evaluation

  - by Thomas Stock

  Hi, I'm a junior developer and I'm working on a pet project that I want to learn as much as possible from. I have the following scenario: There's a WCF service that I use to retrieve and update data, lets say Cars. So it's called CarWCFService and has a GetCars(), SaveCar(), ... . It implements interface ICarService. This isn't the Actual WCF service but more like a wrapper around it. Upon retrieving data from the service, I want to store them in local memory, as cache. I have made a class for this called CarCacheService which also implements interface ICarService. (I will explain later why it implements ICarService) I don't want client code to be calling these implementations. Instead, I want to create a third implementation for ICarService that tries to read from the CarCacheService before calling the WCFCarService, stores retrieved data in the CarCacheService, etc. 3 questions: How do I name this third class? I was thinking about something as simple as CarService. This does not really says what the service does exactly, tho. Is the naming for the other classes good? Would this naming and architecture be obvious for future programmers? This is my biggest concern. Does this architecture make sense? The reason that I implement ICarService on the CarCacheService is mainly because it allows me to fake the WCFService while debugging. I can store dummy data in a CarCacheService instance and pass it to the CarService, together with an(other) empty CarCacheService. If I made CacheCarService and WCFService public I could let client code decide if they want to drop the caching and just work directly on the WCFService.

  Read the article

• Scientific evidence that supports using long variable names instead of abbreviations?

  - by Sebastian Dietz

  Is there any scientific evidence that the human brain can read and understand fully written variable names better/faster than abbreviated ones? Like PersistenceManager persistenceManager; in contrast to PersistenceManager pm; I have the impression that I get a better grasp of code that does not use abbreviations, even if the abbreviations would have been commonly used throughout the codebase. Can this individual feeling be backed up by any studies?

  Read the article

• [YYYY].[MM].[DD].[hh][mm] vs. [major].[minor].[revision] [closed]

  - by ef2011

  Possible Duplicate: What “version naming convention” do you use? I am currently debating between the traditional versioning convention [major].[minor].[revision] and my own, almost whimsical, [YYYY].[MM].[DD].[hh][mm] for a new project I am starting. I understand that [major].[minor].[revision] is probably the most popular versioning method on the planet and it is indeed pretty straightforward and reasonable, except that determining which changes merit the label "major", "minor" or even "revision" could be... subjective. A versioning system based on a timestamp is purely non-subjective and guarantees uniqueness. Which one would you choose for your project and why?

  Read the article

• Installing e text editor

  - by kristian nissen

  I am trying to get e-text editor to run. I read http://www.e-texteditor.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=14953#14953 and Compile e-text editor on Linux as well. But on my 10.04 Lucid it fails at the following step: ./build_externals_linux.sh debug with the following error messages: Building debug binaries Building 32-bit binaries Going to place output in /opt/etexteditor/external/out.debug ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 41: pushd: bakefile: No such file or directory ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 42: ./configure: No such file or directory Cannot compile bakefile ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 46: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 49: pushd: metakit: No such file or directory ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 50: cd: builds: No such file or directory Cannot compile MetaKit ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 56: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 59: pushd: pcre: No such file or directory ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 60: ./configure: No such file or directory Cannot compile pcre ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 66: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 69: pushd: tinyxml: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. cannot compile TinyXML ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 77: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 80: pushd: libtommath: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. Cannot compile LTM ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 85: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 88: pushd: libtomcrypt: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. Cannot compile LTC ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 93: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 96: pushd: wxwidgets: No such file or directory ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 97: ./configure: No such file or directory Cannot compile wxWidgets ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 104: popd: directory stack empty ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 107: pushd: webkit: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 109: ./WebKitTools/Scripts/build-webkit: No such file or directory Cannot compile WebKit ./build_externals_linux.sh: line 113: popd: directory stack empty what am I missing?

  Read the article

• Should I use title case in URLs?

  - by Amadiere

  We are currently deciding on a consistent naming convention across a site with multiple web applications. Historically, I've been an advocate of the 'lowercase all the letters!' when creating URLs: http://example.com/mysystem/account/view/1551 However, within the last year or two, specifically since I began using ASP.NET MVC & had more dealings with REST based URLs, I've become a fan of capitalizing the first letter of each section/word within the URL as it makes it easier to read (imho). http://example.com/MySystem/Account/View/1551 We're not in a situation where people need to read or be able to understand the URLs, so that's not a driver per se. The main thing we are after is a consistent approach that is rational and makes sense. Are there any standards that declare it good to do one way or another, or issues that we may run into on (at least realistically modern) setups that would choose a preference over another? What is the general consensus for this debate currently?

  Read the article

• Are very short or abbreviated method/function names that don't use full words bad practice or a matter of style.

  - by Alb

  Is there nowadays any case for brevity over clarity with method names? Tonight I came across the Python method repr() which seems like a bad name for a method to me. It's not an English word. It apparently is an abbreviation of 'representation' and even if you can deduce that, it still doesn't tell you what the method does. A good method name is subjective to a certain degree, but I had assumed that modern best practices agreed that names should be at least full words and descriptive enough to reveal enough about the method that you would easily find one when looking for it. Method names made from words help let your code read like English. repr() seems to have no advantages as a name other than being short and IDE auto-complete makes this a non-issue. An additional reason given in an answer is that python names are brief so that you can do many things on one line. Surely the better way is to just extract the many things to their own function, and repeat until lines are not too long. Are these just a hangover from the unix way of doing things? Commands with names like ls, rm, ps and du (if you could call those names) were hard to find and hard to remember. I know that the everyday usage of commands such as these is different than methods in code so the matter of whether those are bad names is a different matter.

  Read the article

• What is the advantage to using a factor of 1024 instead of 1000 for disk size units?

  - by Joe Z.

  When considering the disk space of a storage medium, normally the computer or operating system will represent it in terms of powers of 1024 - a kilobyte is 1,024 bytes, a megabyte is 1,048,576 bytes, a gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, and so on. But I don't see any practical reason why this convention was adopted. Usually when disk size is represented in kilo-, mega-, or giga-bytes, it has to be converted into decimal first. In places where a power-of-two byte count actually matters (like the block size on a file system), the size is given in bytes anyway (e.g. 4096 bytes). Was it just a little aesthetic novelty that computer makers decided to adopt, but storage medium vendors decided to disregard? Whenever you buy a hard drive, there's always a disclaimer nowadays that says "One gigabyte means one billion bytes". It would feel like using the binary definition of "gigabyte" would artificially inflate the byte count of a device, making drive-makers have to pack 1.1 terabytes into a drive in order to have it show up as "1 TB", or to simply pack 1 terabyte in and have it show up as "931 GB" (and most of them do the latter). Some people have decided to use units like "KiB" or "MiB" in favour of "KB" and "MB" in order to distinguish the two. But is there any merit to the binary prefixes in the first place? There's probably a bit of old history I'm not aware of on this topic, and if there is, I'm looking for somebody to explain it. (Apologies if this is in the wrong place. I felt that a question on best practice might belong here, but I have faith that it will be migrated to the right place if it's incorrect.)

  Read the article

• How to Submit to A Deep Link Directory

  Deep link directory is a directory which allows you to submit internal pages of a website. Submitting to a deep link directory is a great way to increase the backlinks to your site.

  Read the article

• Simple Active Directory Authentication Using LDAP and ASP.NET

  Quick and easy Active Directory authentication using LDAP and ASP.NET

  Read the article

• How do I make the directories in a zip file relative to the target directory instead of my working directory

  - by Nathan

  I'm calling the zip command from a script where I cannot change directory. I need to make a zip file of the stuff in data/kit123/ from the directory which data resides in, but I want the contents of the zip to only be the contents of kit123, with paths relative to kit123. This is the directory structure myworkingdir data kit123 kitpart1 file.xcf anotherfile.xcf kitpart2 ... kit124 ... My script runs in myworkingdir and cannot change directories. If I call zip -r kit123.zip data/kit123 then the structure in the zip file will be data kit123 kitpart1 file.xcf anotherfile.xcf kitpart2 but I want it to be kit123 kitpart1 file.xcf anotherfile.xcf kitpart2 Is there a zip option I can use to accomplish this? It seems odd that it should depend on my working directory I know it's not -j. that one destroys the structure within kit123

  Read the article

• What do you do when your naming convention clashes with your language?

  - by Jon Purdy

  Okay, this is one of those little things that always bugged me. I typically don't abbreviate identifiers, and the only time I use a short identifier (e.g., i) is for a tight loop. So it irritates me when I'm working in C++ and I have a variable that needs to be named operator or class and I have to work around it or use an abbreviation, because it ends up sticking out. Caveat: this may happen to me disproportionately often because I work a lot in programming language design, where domain objects may mirror concepts in the host language and inadvertently cause clashes. How would you deal with this? Abbreviate? (op) Misspell? (klass) Something else? (operator_)

  Read the article

• Test descriptions/name, say what the test is? or what it means when it fails?

  - by xenoterracide

  The API docs for Test::More::ok is ok($got eq $expected, $test_name); right now in one of my apps I have $test_name print what the test is testing. So for example in one of my tests I have set this to 'filename exists'. What I realized after I got a bug report recently, and realized that the only time I ever see this message is when the test is failing, if the test is failing that means the file doesn't exist. In your opinion, do you think these $test_name's should say what the test means if successful? what it means if it failed? or do you think it should say something else? please explain why?

  Read the article

• Should I limit my type name suffix vocabulary when using OOP?

  - by Den

  My co-workers tend to think that it is better to limit non-domain type suffixes to a small fixed set of OOP-pattern inspired words, e.g.: *Service *Repository *Factory *Manager *Provider I believe there is no reason to not extend that set with more names, e.g. (some "translation" to the previous vocabulary is given in brackets): *Distributor (= *DistributionManager or *SendingService) *Generator *Browser (= *ReadonlyRepositoryService) *Processor *Manipulator (= *StateMachineManager) *Enricher (= *EnrichmentService) (*) denotes some domain word, e.g. "Order", "Student", "Item" etc. The domain is probably not complex enough to use specialized approaches such as DDD which could drive the naming.

  Read the article

• "A", "an", and "the" in method and function names: What's your take?

  - by Mike Spross

  I'm sure many of us have seen method names like this at one point or another: UploadTheFileToTheServerPlease CreateATemporaryFile WriteTheRecordToTheDatabase ResetTheSystemClock That is, method names that are also grammatically-correct English sentences, and include extra words purely to make them read like prose. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of such "literal" method names, and prefer to be succint, while still being as clear as possible. To me, words like "a", "an", and "the" just look plain awkward in method names, and it makes method names needlessly long without really adding anything useful. I would prefer the following method names for the previous examples: UploadFileToServer CreateTemporaryFile WriteOutRecord ResetSystemClock In my experience, this is far more common than the other approach of writing out the lengthier names, but I have seen both styles and was curious to see what other people's thoughts were on these two approaches. So, are you in the "method names that read like prose" camp or the "method names that say what I mean but read out loud like a bad foreign-language-to-English translation" camp?

  Read the article

• How to Submit to A Deep Link Directory

  Deep link directory is a directory which allows you to submit internal pages of a website. Submitting to a deep link directory is a great way to increase the backlinks to your site.

  Read the article

• Python lower_case_with_underscores style convention: underscores not popular?

  - by squirrel

  PEP8 recommends using lowercase, with words separated by underscores as necessary to improve readability for variable and function names. I've seen this interpreted as lower_case_with_underscores by most people, although in practice and in Python's native methods it seems like lowercasewithoutunderscores is more popular. It seems like following PEP8 strictly would be awkward since it seems to suggest mixing both lower_case_with_underscores and lowercasewithoutunderscores, which would be inconsistent. What is your interpretation of PEP8's variable names, and what do you actually use in practice? (Personally, I like lowerCamelCase as a compromise between readability and ease of typing.)

  Read the article

• Strategy to use two different measurement systems in software

  - by Dennis

  I have an application that needs to accept and output values in both US Custom Units and Metric system. Right now the conversion and input and output is a mess. You can only enter in US system, but you can choose the output to be US or Metric, and the code to do the conversions is everywhere. So I want to organize this and put together some simple rules. So I came up with this: Rules user can enter values in either US or Metric, and User Interface will take care of marking this properly All units internally will be stored as US, since the majority of the system already has most of the data stored like that and depends on this. It shouldn't matter I suppose as long as you don't mix unit. All output will be in US or Metric, depending on user selection/choice/preference. In theory this sounds great and seems like a solution. However, one little problem I came across is this: There is some data stored in code or in the database that already returns data like this: 4 x 13/16" screws, which means "four times screws". I need the to be in either US or Metric. Where exactly do I put the conversion code for doing the conversion for this unit? The above already mixing presentation and data, but the data for the field I need to populate is that whole string. I can certainly split it up into the number 4, the 13/16", and the " x " and the " screws", but the question remains... where do I put the conversion code? Different Locations for Conversion Routines 1) Right now the string is in a class where it's produced. I can put conversion code right into that class and it may be a good solution. Except then, I want to be consistent so I will be putting conversion procedures everywhere in the code at-data-source, or right after reading it from the database. The problem though is I think that my code will have to deal with two systems, all throughout the codebase after this, should I do this. 2) According to the rules, my idea was to put it in the view script, aka last change to modify it before it is shown to the user. And it may be the right thing to do, but then it strikes me it may not always be the best solution. (First, it complicates the view script a tad, second, I need to do more work on the data side to split things up more, or do extra parsing, such as in my case above). 3) Another solution is to do this somewhere in the data prep step before the view, aka somewhere in the middle, before the view, but after the data-source. This strikes me as messy and that could be the reason why my codebase is in such a mess right now. It seems that there is no best solution. What do I do?

  Read the article

• Are short abbreviated method/function names that don't use full words bad practice or a matter of style?

  - by Alb

  Is there nowadays any case for brevity over clarity with method names? Tonight I came across the Python method repr() which seems like a bad name for a method to me. It's not an English word. It apparently is an abbreviation of 'representation' and even if you can deduce that, it still doesn't tell you what the method does. A good method name is subjective to a certain degree, but I had assumed that modern best practices agreed that names should be at least full words and descriptive enough to reveal enough about the method that you would easily find one when looking for it. Method names made from words help let your code read like English. repr() seems to have no advantages as a name other than being short and IDE auto-complete makes this a non-issue. An additional reason given in an answer is that python names are brief so that you can do many things on one line. Surely the better way is to just extract the many things to their own function, and repeat until lines are not too long. Are these just a hangover from the unix way of doing things? Commands with names like ls, rm, ps and du (if you could call those names) were hard to find and hard to remember. I know that the everyday usage of commands such as these is different than methods in code so the matter of whether those are bad names is a different matter.

  Read the article

• Check whether user exists in Active Directory

  Handle Active Directory users in SharePoint.

  Read the article

• Should I care about Junit redundancy when using setUp() with @Before annotation?

  - by c_maker

  Even though developers have switched from junit 3.x to 4.x I still see the following 99% of the time: @Before public void setUp(){/*some setup code*/} @After public void tearDown(){/*some clean up code*/} Just to clarify my point... in Junit 4.x, when the runners are set up correctly, the framework will pick up the @Before and @After annotations no matter the method name. So why do developers keep using the same conventional junit 3.x names? Is there any harm keeping the old names while also using the annotations (other than it makes me feel like devs do not know how this really works and just in case, use the same name AND annotate as well)? Is there any harm in changing the names to something maybe more meaningful, like eachTestMethod() (which looks great with @Before since it reads 'before each test method') or initializeEachTestMethod()? What do you do and why? I know this is a tiny thing (and may probably be even unimportant to some), but it is always in the back of my mind when I write a test and see this. I want to either follow this pattern or not but I want to know why I am doing it and not just because 99% of my fellow developers do it as well.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >