Search Results

Search found 5223 results on 209 pages for 'van coding'.

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 30/209 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    - by gargantaun
    Since I can't find a chuffing job, I've been reading up on ReST and creating web services. The way I've interpreted it, the future is all about creating a web service for all your data before you build the web app. Which seems like a good idea. However, there seems to be a lot of contradictory thoughts on what the best scheme is for ReSTful URLs. Some people advocate simple pretty urls http://api.myapp.com/resource/1 In addition, some people like to add the API version to the url like so http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1 And to make things even more confusing, some people advocate adding the content-type to get requests http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.xml http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.json http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.txt Whereas others think the content-type should be sent in the HTTP header. Soooooooo.... That's a lot of variation, which has left me unsure of what the best URL scheme is. I personally see the merits of the most comprehensive URL that includes a version number, resource locator and content-type, but I'm new to this so I could be wrong. On the other hand, you could argue that you should do "whatever works best for you". But that doesn't really fit with the ReST mentality as far as I can tell since the aim is to have a standard. And since a lot of you people will have more experience than me with ReST, I thought I'd ask for some guidance. So, with all that in mind... What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    Read the article

  • Does anyone change the Visual Studio default bracing style in C# - Is there a standard?

    - by El Ronnoco
    I find the default bracing style a bit wasteful on line count eg... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } would, if I was writing in JavaScript for example be written like... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } ...which I understand may also not be to peoples' tastes. But the question(s) is/are do you turn off the VS formatting style and use your own rules? What is the opinion of this in the industry when many people are working on the same code-base? Is it better just to stick to the default just for simplicity/uniformity?

    Read the article

  • How do people handle working with Code Names for their projects?

    - by Mark
    Hi All, Recently we started using some code names for several different types of prototype applications all following a theme. This made things a little more fun and was a great idea. The problem is that Im not too sure how people deal with migrating a codebase from "codename" state into version 1.0 state which may have a proper name... not something that a client really shouldnt see :) We are using Visual Studio at the moment, and I can see that you can change the assembly name, but there are references to the namespaces, etc... that would really be a large change to make. Do people both changing things like namespaces before the v1.0 release?

    Read the article

  • Vim 80 column layout concerns

    - by cdleary
    I feel like the way I do 80-column indication in Vim is incorrect: set columns=80. At times I also set textwidth but I like to be able to see and anticipate line overflow with the set columns alternative. This has some unfortunate side effects -- I can't set number for fear of splitting between files that have different orders of line numbers; i.e. < 100 line files and = 100 line files will require two different set columns values because of the extra column used for the additional digit display. I also start new (g)Vim sessions instead of splitting windows vertically, which forces me to use the window manager's clipboard -- vsplits force me to do set columns every time I open or close a pane, so starting a new session is less hassle. How do you handle the 80-character indication when you want to set numbers, vertically split, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Consistency vs Design Guidelines

    - by Adrian Faciu
    Lets say that you get involved in the development of a large project that is already in development for a long period ( more than one year ). The projects follows some of the current design guidelines, but also has a few different, that are currently discouraged ( mostly at naming guidelines ). Supposing that you can't/aren't allowed to change the whole project: What should be more important, consistency, follow the existing ones and defy current guidelines or the usage of the guidelines, creating differences between modules of the same project ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Good practice to create extension methods that apply to System.Object?

    - by Christian
    Hello, I'm wondering whether I should create extension methods that apply on the object level or whether they should be located at a lower point in the class hierarchy. What I mean is something along the lines of: public static string SafeToString(this Object o) { if (o == null || o is System.DBNull) return ""; else { if (o is string) return (string)o; else return ""; } } public static int SafeToInt(this Object o) { if (o == null || o is System.DBNull) return 0; else { if (o.IsNumeric()) return Convert.ToInt32(o); else return 0; } } //same for double.. etc I wrote those methods since I have to deal a lot with database data (From the OleDbDataReader) that can be null (shouldn't, though) since the underlying database is unfortunately very liberal with columns that may be null. And to make my life a little easier, I came up with those extension methods. What I'd like to know is whether this is good style, acceptable style or bad style. I kinda have my worries about it since it kinda "pollutes" the Object-class. Thank you in advance & Best Regards :) Christian P.S. I didn't tag it as "subjective" intentionally.

    Read the article

  • C#: Get a list of every value for a given key in a set of dictionaries?

    - by Rosarch
    How can I write this code more cleanly/concisely? /// <summary> /// Creates a set of valid URIs. /// </summary> /// <param name="levelVariantURIDicts">A collection of dictionaries of the form: /// dict["filePath"] == theFilePath </param> /// <returns></returns> private ICollection<string> URIsOfDicts(ICollection<IDictionary<string, string>> levelVariantURIDicts) { ICollection<string> result = new HashSet<string>(); foreach (IDictionary<string, string> dict in levelVariantURIDicts) { result.Add(dict["filePath"]); } return result; }

    Read the article

  • best practice on precedence of variable declaration and error handling in C

    - by guest
    is there an advantage in one of the following two approaches over the other? here it is first tested, whether fopen succeeds at all and then all the variable declarations take place, to ensure they are not carried out, since they mustn't have had to void func(void) { FILE *fd; if ((fd = fopen("blafoo", "+r")) == NULL ) { fprintf(stderr, "fopen() failed\n"); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } int a, b, c; float d, e, f; /* variable declarations */ /* remaining code */ } this is just the opposite. all variable declarations take place, even if fopen fails void func(void) { FILE *fd; int a, b, c; float d, e, f; /* variable declarations */ if ((fd = fopen("blafoo", "+r")) == NULL ) { fprintf(stderr, "fopen() failed\n"); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } /* remaining code */ } does the second approach produce any additional cost, when fopen fails? would love to hear your thoughts!

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to use whitespace while programming?

    - by Emmanuel Smith
    I'm fairly new to programming and from learning I have seen different ways of formatting code, comments, etc; and have been recommended on different techniques. I mostly program in C#, C++, and Java so I want to know what is the the best way to layout code so that if other people where to go through it, they would be impressed by how simple and easy to understand it is. I would like to know the same thing for commenting as well.

    Read the article

  • Should a connect method return a value?

    - by Matt S
    I was looking at some code I've inherited and I couldn't decided if I like a bit of code. Basically, there is a method that looks like the following: bool Connect(connection parameters){...} It returns true if it connects successfully, false otherwise. I've written code like that in the past, but now, when I see this method I don't like it for a number of reasons. Its easy to write code that just ignores the returned value, or not realize it returns a value. There is no way to return an error message. Checking the return of the method doesn't really look nice: if (!Connect(...)){....} I could rewrite code to throw an exception when it doesn't successfully connect, but I don't consider that an exceptional situation. Instead I'm thinking of refactoring the code as follows: void Connect(Connection Parameters, out bool successful, out string errorMessage){...} I like that other developers have to provide the success and error strings so they know the method has error conditions and I can know return a message Anyone have any thoughts on the matter? Thanks -Matt

    Read the article

  • How to properly document programming languages?

    - by roydukkey
    Where can I find information on how to properly document a programming language? What I mean is that there seems to be a standard way to document code. php.net and api.jquery.com seem to document there code the a similar way. For example, the trim() description on php.net. string trim ( string $str [, string $charlist ] ) And likewise on jquery.com .animate( properties, [ duration ], [ easing ], [ callback ] ) Does anyone even know what this syntax is called?

    Read the article

  • What is the preferred way in C++ for converting a builtin type (int) to bool?

    - by Martin
    When programming with Visual C++, I think every developer is used to see the warning warning C4800: 'BOOL' : forcing value to bool 'true' or 'false' from time to time. The reason obviously is that BOOL is defined as int and directly assigning any of the built-in numerical types to bool is considered a bad idea. So my question is now, given any built-in numerical type (int, short, ...) that is to be interpreted as a boolean value, what is the/your preferred way of actually storing that value into a variable of type bool? Note: While mixing BOOL and bool is probably a bad idea, I think the problem will inevitably pop up whether on Windows or somewhere else, so I think this question is neither Visual-C++ nor Windows specific. Given int nBoolean; I prefer this style: bool b = nBoolean?true:false; The following might be alternatives: bool b = !!nBoolean; bool b = (nBoolean != 0); Is there a generally preferred way? Rationale? I should add: Since I only work with Visual-C++ I cannot really say if this is a VC++ specific question or if the same problem pops up with other compilers. So it would be interesting to specifically hear from g++ or users how they handle the int-bool case. Regarding Standard C++: As David Thornley notes in a comment, the C++ Standard does not require this behavior. In fact it seems to explicitly allow this, so one might consider this a VC++ weirdness. To quote the N3029 draft (which is what I have around atm.): 4.12 Boolean conversions [conv.bool] A prvalue of arithmetic, unscoped enumeration, pointer, or pointer to member type can be converted to a prvalue of type bool. A zero value, null pointer value, or null member pointer value is converted to false; any other value is converted to true. (...)

    Read the article

  • Are there any reasons to make all fields and variables final?

    - by Roman
    In my current project I noticed that all class fields and variable inside methods are declared with final modifier whenever it's possible. Just like here: private final XMLStreamWriter _xmlStreamWriter; private final Marshaller _marshaller; private final OutputStream _documentStream; private final OutputStream _stylesStream; private final XMLStreamWriter _stylesStreamWriter; private final StyleMerger _styleMerger; public DocumentWriter(PhysicalPackage physicalPackage) throws IOException { final Package pkg = new Package(physicalPackage); final Part wordDocumentPart = pkg.createPart( "/word/document.xml", "application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document.main+xml", "http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships/officeDocument"); // styles.xml final Pair<Part, String> wordStylesPart = wordDocumentPart.createRelatedPart(...); ... } Are there any reasons to do so? p.s. As I know project is not supposed to be multithreaded (at least I've heard nothing about it).

    Read the article

  • Are "proxy properties" good style?

    - by erlando
    I have a class with a string property that's actually several strings joined with a separator. I'm wondering if it is good form to have a proxy property like this: public string ActualProperty { get { return actualProperty; } set { actualProperty = value; } } public string[] IndividualStrings { get { return ActualProperty.Split(.....); } set { // join strings from array in propval .... ; ActualProperty = propval; } } Is there any risks I have overlooked?

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on try-catch blocks

    - by John Boker
    What are your thoughts on code that looks like this: public void doSomething() { try { // actual code goes here } catch (Exception ex) { throw; } } The problem I see is the actual error is not handled, just throwing the exception in a different place. I find it more difficult to debug because i don't get a line number where the actual problem is. So my question is why would this be good? ---- EDIT ---- From the answers it looks like most people are saying it's pointless to do this with no custom or specific exceptions being caught. That's what i wanted comments on, when no specific exception is being caught. I can see the point of actually doing something with a caught exception, just not the way this code is.

    Read the article

  • Should I catch exceptions thrown when closing java.sql.Connection

    - by jb
    Connection.close() may throw SqlException, but I have always assumed that it is safe to ignore any such exceptions (and I have never seen code that does not ignore them). Normally I would write: try{ connection.close(); }catch(Exception e) {} Or try{ connection.close(); }catch(Exception e) { logger.log(e.getMessage(), e); } The question is: Is it bad practice (and has anyone had problems when ignoring such exeptions). When Connection.close() does throw any exception. If it is bad how should I handle the exception. Comment: I know that discarding exceptions is evil, but I'm reffering only to exceptions thrown when closing a connection (and as I've seen this is fairly common in this case). Does anyone know when Connection.close() may throw anything?

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Inline function vs predefined functions

    - by glaz666
    Can any body throw me some arguments for using inline functions against passing predefined function name to some handler. I.e. which is better: (function(){ setTimeout(function(){ /*some code here*/ }, 5); })(); versus (function(){ function invokeMe() { /*code*/ } setTimeout(invokeMe, 5); })(); Strange question, but we are almost fighting in the team about this

    Read the article

  • Condition check inside a function or before its call?

    - by Ashwin
    Which of these 2 programming styles do you prefer? Why? Are there particular advantages to one over the other? // Style 1 if (doBorder) doTheBorder(); if (doFrame) doTheFrame(); if (doDraw) doTheDraw(); void doTheBorder() { // ... } void doTheFrame() { // ... } void doTheDraw() { // ... } // Style 2 doTheBorder(); doTheFrame(); doTheDraw(); void doTheBorder() { if (!doBorder) return; // ... } void doTheFrame() { if (!doFrame) return; // ... } void doTheDraw() { if (!doDraw) return; // ... }

    Read the article

  • Placement of service methods

    - by mhp
    Let's assume I have two service classes with the following methods: GroupService createGroup() deleteGroup() updateGroup() findGroup() UserService createUser() deleteUser() updateUser() findUser() Now, I am thinking about the aesthetics of theses classes. Imagine we want to implement a method which search for all user of a specific group. Which service class is responsible for such a method? I mean, the return value is a user (or maybe a collection of users) but the parameter (which means the name of the group) is a group. So which service class is the better place to put this method in?

    Read the article

  • Do you use ASCII art to decorate your code?

    - by CiNN
    Do you use ASCII art to decorate your code? .-"""-. ' \ |,. ,-. | |()L( ()| | license goes here |,' `".| | |.___.',| ` .j `--"' ` `. / ' ' \ / / ` `. / / ` . / / l | . , | | ,"`. .| | _.' ``. o | `..-'l | `.`, | `. | `. __.j ) |__ |--""___| ,-' `"--...,+"""" `._,.-' mh www /n n\ /\ |/^\| / \ warning notes | , | ^||^ \_/ || _U_ || /` `''-----'P3 / |. .|''-----"|| \'| | || \| | || E | || /#####\ || /#####\ || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| gem || molom Ll /~~~\/~~\/~~~\/~~~\/~~\/~~~\ /~~~\/~~\/~~~\/~~~\/~~\/~~~\ | /\/ /\/ /\ || /\/ /\/ /\ | | /\ \/\ \/\ || /\ \/\ \/\ | \ \/ /\/ /\/ /\ \/ /\/ /\/ / function name \ \/\ \/\ \/ /\ \/\ \/\ \/ / \ \/\ \/\ \/ \ \/\ \/\ \/ \/ /\/ /\/ / \/ /\/ /\/ / ,_/\ \/\ \/\ \__/\ \/\ \/\ \______________________/ /\/ /\/ /\__/ /\/ /\/ /\_, (__/\__/\__/\____/\__/\__/\________________________/\__/\__/\____/\__/\__/\__)

    Read the article

  • Catching specific vs. generic exceptions in c#

    - by Scott Vercuski
    This question comes from a code analysis run against an object I've created. The analysis says that I should catch a more specific exception type than just the basic Exception. Do you find yourself using just catching the generic Exception or attempting to catch a specific Exception and defaulting to a generic Exception using multiple catch blocks? One of the code chunks in question is below: internal static bool ClearFlags(string connectionString, Guid ID) { bool returnValue = false; SqlConnection dbEngine = new SqlConnection(connectionString); SqlCommand dbCmd = new SqlCommand("ClearFlags", dbEngine); SqlDataAdapter dataAdapter = new SqlDataAdapter(dbCmd); dbCmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure; try { dbCmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@ID", ID.ToString()); dbEngine.Open(); dbCmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); dbEngine.Close(); returnValue = true; } catch (Exception ex) { ErrorHandler(ex); } return returnValue; } Thank you for your advice EDIT: Here is the warning from the code analysis Warning 351 CA1031 : Microsoft.Design : Modify 'ClearFlags(string, Guid)' to catch a more specific exception than 'Exception' or rethrow the exception

    Read the article

  • Naming member functions/methods with a single underscore, good style or bad?

    - by Extrakun
    In some languages where you cannot override the () operator, I have seen methods with a single underscore, usually for 'helper' classes. Something likes this: class D10 { public function _() { return rand(1,10); } } Is it better to have the function called Roll()? Is a underscore fine? After all, there is only one function, and it removes the need to look up the name of the class. Any thoughts?

    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 | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >