Search Results

Search found 1030 results on 42 pages for 'refactoring'.

Page 32/42 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

• Advice moving from Eclipse to xCode

  - by Gloin the Dark

  To xCode xPerts: I have been doing Java in Eclipse for about 9 years now and I have really gotten used to the power of the refactoring tools. There are a few operations I do all the time. I am looking for equivalents in xCode since it has better support for objective-c than eclipse. (I'm not at my Mac as I write this. So some of this is from memory. I am still very new to xCode.) 1 "rename". It seems that the xCode equivalent for variables is "edit all in scope". Does this work for files/classes/methods too? 2 "extract local variable" select an expression it creates a local var initialized to that expression. It even creates a usable name for the variable. 3 "extract method" select some code and it will create a method with that code and appropriate parameters/return value. 4 "inline" (variable or method) opposite of extract, inlines all or just the selected occurrence of the selected var or method. 5 "find next" occurrence of selected text. In eclipse I can select some text and hit ctrl-k to go to the next occurrence of that in the file. likewise shift-ctrl-k finds backwards. IIRC the xCode "find next" ignores the selection and only uses what is in the find box. 6 "change method signature" This would be very useful with ocjective-c's named parameter messaging syntax. This is great for adding parameters to a method. 7 "pull-up/push-down" for moving methods up or down the class hierarchy. 8 "move" for moving elements around to other classes etc. Those are the ones that I use all of the time. I have estimated that these tools cut my coding time in half. Are any of these supported in xCode? Thanks in advance for any advice.

  Read the article

• g++ C++0x enum class Compiler Warnings

  - by Travis G

  I've been refactoring my horrible mess of C++ type-safe psuedo-enums to the new C++0x type-safe enums because they're way more readable. Anyway, I use them in exported classes, so I explicitly mark them to be exported: enum class __attribute__((visibility("default"))) MyEnum : unsigned int { One = 1, Two = 2 }; Compiling this with g++ yields the following warning: type attributes ignored after type is already defined This seems very strange, since, as far as I know, that warning is meant to prevent actual mistakes like: class __attribute__((visibility("default"))) MyClass { }; class __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))) MyClass; Of course, I'm clearly not doing that, since I have only marked the visibility attributes at the definition of the enum class and I'm not re-defining or declaring it anywhere else (I can duplicate this error with a single file). Ultimately, I can't make this bit of code actually cause a problem, save for the fact that, if I change a value and re-compile the consumer without re-compiling the shared library, the consumer passes the new values and the shared library has no idea what to do with them (although I wouldn't expect that to work in the first place). Am I being way too pedantic? Can this be safely ignored? I suspect so, but at the same time, having this error prevents me from compiling with Werror, which makes me uncomfortable. I would really like to see this problem go away.

  Read the article

• Language Tricks to Shorten My Java Code?

  - by yar

  I am currently rediscovering Java (working with Ruby a lot recently), and I love the compilation-time checking of everything. It makes refactoring so easy. However, I miss playing fast-and-loose with types to do an each loop. This is my worst code. Is this as short as it can be? I have a collection called looperTracks, which has instances that implement Looper. I don't want to modify that collection, but I want to iterate through its members PLUS the this (which also implements Looper). List<Looper> allLoopers = new ArrayList<Looper>(looperTracks.length + 1); for (LooperTrack track : looperTracks) { allLoopers.add(track); } allLoopers.add(this); for (Looper looper : allLoopers) { // Finally! I have a looper I'm particularly concerned about any features that are new to Java from 1.5 on that I may have missed. For this question I am not asking about JRuby nor Groovy, though I know that they would work for this. Edit: Sorry (too much Ruby!)... looperTracks is of type LooperTrack[] and LooperTrack implements Looper.

  Read the article

• Use Java exceptions internally for REST API user errors?

  - by user303396

  We have a REST API that works great. We're refactoring and deciding how to internally handle errors by the users of our API. For example the user needs to specify the "movie" url parameter which should take the value of "1984", "Crash", or "Avatar". First we check to see if it has a valid value. What would be the best approach if the movie parameter is invalid? return null from one of the internal methods and check for the null in the main API call method throw an exception from the internal method and catch exceptions in the main API method I think it would make our code more readable and elegant to use exceptions. However, we're reluctant because we'd be potentially throwing many exceptions because of user API input errors, our code could be perfect. This doesn't seem to be the proper use of exceptions. If there are heavy performance penalties with exceptions, which would make sense with stack traces needing to be collected, etc., then we're unnecessarily spending resources when all we need to do is tell the user the parameter is wrong. These are REST API methods, so we're not propogating the exceptions to the users of the API, nor would we want to even if possible. So what's the best practice here? Use ugly nulls or use java's exception mechanism?

  Read the article

• Integration tests in Continuous Integration environment: Database and filesystem state

  - by dario_ramos

  I'm trying to implement automated integration tests for my application. It's a very complex monster. You could say that its database and part of the filesystem are part of its state, because it saves image files in the hard drive, and references to those in the DB. The software needs all those, in a coherent state, to work properly. Back to writing tests: To run any relevant test, I need some image files in the filesystem, and certain records filled in the database. I thought of putting all of these in a separate folder called TestEnvironmentData in the repository, and retrieving them from the Continuous Integration Server (Team City), but a colleague said the repo is quite full as it is, and that I should set up a special directory, and databases, only in the Continuous Integration server. I don't like that because the tests success depend on me manually mantaining stuff in the server, and restoring initial state before every test becomes cumbersome. What do you guys do when you need to write integration tests for an app like this? The main goal is having an automated test harness to approach a large scale refactoring. There's lots of spaghetti code and the app's current architecture is hardly unit testable, that's why I decided on integration tests first. Any alternative approach is welcome.

  Read the article

• Benchmarking a UDP server

  - by Nicolas

  I am refactoring a UDP listener from Java to C. It needs to handle between 1000 and 10000 UDP messages per second, with an average data length of around 60 bytes. There is no reply necessary. Data cannot be lost (Don't ask why UDP was decided). I fork off a process to deal with the incoming data so that I can recvfrom as quickly as possible - without filling up my kernel buffers. The child then handles the data received. In short, my algo is: Listen for data. When data is received, check for errors. Fork off a child. If I'm a child, do what I with the data and exit. If I'm a parent, reap any zombie children waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG). Repeat. Firstly, any comments about the above? I'm creating the socket with socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_UDP), binding with AF_INET and INADDR_ANY and recvfrom with no flags. Secondly, can anyone suggest something that I can use to test that this application (or at least the listener) can handle more messages than what I am expecting? Or, would I need to hack something together to do this. I'd guess the latter would be better, so that I can compare data that is generated versus data that is received. But, comments would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Database design for invoices, invoice lines & revisions

  - by FreshCode

  I'm designing the 2nd major iteration of a relational database for a franchise's CRM (with lots of refactoring) and I need help on the best database design practices for storing job invoices and invoice lines with a strong audit trail of any changes made to each invoice. Current schema Invoices Table InvoiceId (int) // Primary key JobId (int) StatusId (tinyint) // Pending, Paid or Deleted UserId (int) // auditing user Reference (nvarchar(256)) // unique natural string key with invoice number Date (datetime) Comments (nvarchar(MAX)) InvoiceLines Table LineId (int) // Primary key InvoiceId (int) // related to Invoices above Quantity (decimal(9,4)) Title (nvarchar(512)) Comment (nvarchar(512)) UnitPrice (smallmoney) Revision schema InvoiceRevisions Table RevisionId (int) // Primary key InvoiceId (int) JobId (int) StatusId (tinyint) // Pending, Paid or Deleted UserId (int) // auditing user Reference (nvarchar(256)) // unique natural string key with invoice number Date (datetime) Total (smallmoney) Schema design considerations 1. Is it sensible to store an invoice's Paid or Pending status? All payments received for an invoice are stored in a Payments table (eg. Cash, Credit Card, Cheque, Bank Deposit). Is it meaningful to store a "Paid" status in the Invoices table if all the income related to a given job's invoices can be inferred from the Payments table? 2. How to keep track of invoice line item revisions? I can track revisions to an invoice by storing status changes along with the invoice total and the auditing user in an invoice revision table (see InvoiceRevisions above), but keeping track of an invoice line revision table feels hard to maintain. Thoughts? 3. Tax How should I incorporate sales tax (or 14% VAT in SA) when storing invoice data?

  Read the article

• perl dynamic path given to 'use lib'

  - by Ed Hyer

  So, my code (Perl scripts and Perl modules) sits in a tree like this: trunk/ util/ process/ scripts/ The 'util' directory has, well, utilities, that things in the 'process/' dir need. They get access like this: use FindBin; use lib "$FindBin::Bin/../util"; use UtilityModule qw(all); That construct doesn't care where you start, as long as you're at the same level in the tree as "util/". But I decided that 'scripts/' was getting too crowded, so I created scripts/scripts1 scripts/scripts2 Now I see that this doesn't work. If I run a script 'trunk/scripts/scripts1/call_script.pl', and it calls '/trunk/process/process_script.pl', then 'process_script.pl' will fail trying to get the routines from UtilityModule(), because the path that FindBin returns is the path of the top-level calling script. The first ten ways I thought of to solve this all involved something like: use lib $path_that_came_from_elsewhere; but that seems to be something Perl doesn't like to do, except via that FindBin trick. I tried some things involving BEGIN{} blocks, but i don't really know what I'm doing there, and will likely just end up refactoring. But if someone has some clever insight into this type of problem, this would be a good chance to earn some points!

  Read the article

• .net mvc pass dictionary data from view to controller

  - by Wei Ma

  A while ago, I was trying to pass a dictionary data from my view to my controller. And I was able to do so after googling on the net(remember it was one of scott hanselman's posts). The solution I had was something like <%for(int index=0; index<Model.Count(); index++){ var property= Model.ElementAt(index);%> <input type="hidden" name="<%="properties["+index+"].Key"%>"/> <input type="hidden" name="<%="properties["+index+"].Value"%>"/> <%}%> public ActionResult Process(IDictionary<string,string> properties) { doSomething(); return View(); } The code worked for awhile and then I did some refactoring and got rid of this chunk of code. Today, I ran into a situation in which I would like to pass a dictionary again. But no matter how hard I try, the properties parameter received by the action was always null. I tried the above code and <%for(int index=0; index<Model.Count(); index++){ var property= Model.ElementAt(index);%> <input type="hidden" name="<%="properties.Keys["+index+"]"%>"/> <input type="hidden" name="<%="properties.Values["+index+"]"%>"/> <%}%> Neither code worked. I googled again but couldn't find the post that helped me before. Can someone point out what I did wrong? thanks a million.

  Read the article

• using indexer to retrieve Linq to SQL object from datastore

  - by fearofawhackplanet

  class UserDatastore : IUserDatastore { ... public IUser this[Guid userId] { get { User user = (from u in _dataContext.Users where u.Id == userId select u).FirstOrDefault(); return user; } } ... } One of the developers in our team is arguing that an indexer in the above situation is not appropriate and that a GetUser(Guid id) method should be prefered. The arguments being that: 1) We aren't indexing into an in-memory collection, the indexer is basically performing a hidden SQL query 2) Using a Guid in an indexer is bad (FxCop flagged this also) 3) Returning null from an indexer isn't normal behaviour 4) An API user generally wouldn't expect any of this behaviour I agree to an extent with (most of) these points. But I'm also inclined to argue that one of the characteristics of Linq is to abstract the database access to make it appear that you're simply working with a bunch of collections, even though the lazy evaluation paradigm means those collections aren't evaluated until you run a query over them. It doesn't seem inconsistent to me to access the datastore in the same manner as if it was a concrete in-memory collection here. Also bearing in mind this is an inherited codebase which uses this pattern extensively and consistently, is it worth the refactoring? I accept that it might have been better to use a Get method from the start, but I'm not yet convinced that it's completely incorrect to be using an indexer. I'd be interested to hear all opinions, thanks.

  Read the article

• Controlling the order of PicoContainer startup

  - by Trejkaz

  I have been tasked with doing some refactoring work on how we start up applications. Basically we have a bunch of console apps which were depending on the GUI application startup code, causing bogus dependencies which have kick-on effects for which libraries we need to ship, and which dependencies other modules need to declare. So I have written a simple startup framework where I basically just throw a bunch of Runnable objects into a list and then run them in order - and it works. But I was thinking - we already have PicoContainer in our project, so all these things that need to be run on startup could potentially be thrown into a PicoContainer, and if they implement Startable they will start... But in some cases we want to specify the ordering between them. For example, I don't want any other component writing to the log before we write a header into the log indicating that the application is starting up. I know I can introduce ordering by introducing injection dependencies, but this feels like a hack in this case - I would need to add the log header writer as a dependency for every other component which might write to the log, which isn't great at all. Nonetheless it seems like it would be nice to control the order of PicoContainer startup, so is there perhaps some other way? Alternatively I could just keep it simple and stick to my list of Runnable. It does, after all, work.

  Read the article

• Should I go vor Arrays or Objects in PHP in a CouchDB/Ajax app?

  - by karlthorwald

  I find myself converting between array and object all the time in PHP application that uses couchDB and Ajax. Of course I am also converting objects to JSON and back (for sometimes couchdb but mostly Ajax), but this is not so much disturbing my workflow. At the present I have php objects that are returned by the CouchDB modules I use and on the other hand I have the old habbit to return arrays like array("error"="not found","data"=$dataObj) from my functions. This leads to a mixed occurence of real php objects and nested arrays and I cast with (object) or (array) if necessary. The worst thing is that I know more or less by heart what a function returns, but not what type (array or object), so I often run into type errors. My plan is now to always cast arrays to objects before returning from a function. Of course this implies a lot of refactoring. Is this the right way to go? What about the conversion overhead? Other ideas or tips? Edit: Kenaniah's answer suggests I should go the other way, this would mean I'd cast everything to arrays. And for all the Ajax / JSON stuff and also for CouchDB I would use $myarray = json_decode($json_data,$assoc = false) Even more work to change all the CouchDB and Ajax functions but in the end I have better code.

  Read the article

• Why put a DAO layer over a persistence layer (like JDO or Hibernate)

  - by Todd Owen

  Data Access Objects (DAOs) are a common design pattern, and recommended by Sun. But the earliest examples of Java DAOs interacted directly with relational databases -- they were, in essence, doing object-relational mapping (ORM). Nowadays, I see DAOs on top of mature ORM frameworks like JDO and Hibernate, and I wonder if that is really a good idea. I am developing a web service using JDO as the persistence layer, and am considering whether or not to introduce DAOs. I foresee a problem when dealing with a particular class which contains a map of other objects: public class Book { // Book description in various languages, indexed by ISO language codes private Map<String,BookDescription> descriptions; } JDO is clever enough to map this to a foreign key constraint between the "BOOKS" and "BOOKDESCRIPTIONS" tables. It transparently loads the BookDescription objects (using lazy loading, I believe), and persists them when the Book object is persisted. If I was to introduce a "data access layer" and write a class like BookDao, and encapsulate all the JDO code within this, then wouldn't this JDO's transparent loading of the child objects be circumventing the data access layer? For consistency, shouldn't all the BookDescription objects be loaded and persisted via some BookDescriptionDao object (or BookDao.loadDescription method)? Yet refactoring in that way would make manipulating the model needlessly complicated. So my question is, what's wrong with calling JDO (or Hibernate, or whatever ORM you fancy) directly in the business layer? Its syntax is already quite concise, and it is datastore-agnostic. What is the advantage, if any, of encapsulating it in Data Access Objects?

  Read the article

• StructureMap problems with bidirectional/circular dependencies

  - by leozilla

  I am currently integrating StructureMap within our business layer but have problems because of bidirectional dependencies. The layer contains multiple manager where each manager can call methods on each other, there are no restrictions or rules for communication. This also includes possible circular dependencies like in the example below. I know the design itself is questionable but currently we just want StructureMap to work and will focus on further refactoring in the future. Every manager implements the IManager interface internal interface IManager { bool IsStarted { get; } void Start(); void Stop(); } And does also have his own specific interface. internal interface IManagerA : IManager { void ALogic(); } internal interface IManagerB : IManager { void BLogic(); } Here are to dummy manager implementations. internal class ManagerA : IManagerA { public IManagerB ManagerB { get; set; } public void ALogic() { } public bool IsStarted { get; private set; } public void Start() { } public void Stop() { } } internal class ManagerB : IManagerB { public IManagerA ManagerA { get; set; } public void BLogic() { } public bool IsStarted { get; private set; } public void Start() { } public void Stop() { } } Here is the StructureMap configuration i use atm. I am still not sure how i should register the managers so currently i use a manual registration. Maybee someone could help me with this too. For<IManagerA>().Singleton().Use<ManagerA>(); For<IManagerB>().Singleton().Use<ManagerB>(); SetAllProperties(convention => { // configure the property injection for all managers convention.Matching(prop => typeof(IManager).IsAssignableFrom(prop.PropertyType)); }); After all i cannot create IManagerA because StructureMap complians about the circular dependency between ManagerA and ManagerB. Is there an easy and clean solution to solve this problem but keep to current design? br David

  Read the article

• PHP: Aggregate Model Classes or Uber Model Classes?

  - by sunwukung

  In many of the discussions regarding the M in MVC, (sidestepping ORM controversies for a moment), I commonly see Model classes described as object representations of table data (be that an Active Record, Table Gateway, Row Gateway or Domain Model/Mapper). Martin Fowler warns against the development of an anemic domain model, i.e. a class that is nothing more than a wrapper for CRUD functionality. I've been working on an MVC application for a couple of months now. The DBAL in the application I'm working on started out simple (on account of my understanding - oh the benefits of hindsight), and is organised so that Controllers invoke Business Logic classes, that in turn access the database via DAO/Transaction Scripts pertinent to the task at hand. There are a few "Entity" classes that aggregate these DAO objects to provide a convenient CRUD wrapper, but also embody some of the "behaviour" of that Domain concept (for example, a user - since it's easy to isolate). Taking a look at some of the code, and thinking along refactoring some of the code into a Rich Domain Model, it occurred to me that were I to try and wrap the CRUD routines and behaviour of say, a Company into a single "Model" class, that would be a sizeable class. So, my question is this: do Models represent domain objects, business logic, service layers, all of the above combined? How do you go about defining the responsibilities for these components?

  Read the article

• a selective dual command binding converter in WPF?

  - by Jippers

  I'll start off and say I am not using the MVVM pattern for my WPF app. Please forgive me. Right now I have a data template with two buttons, each binds to a different command on the CLR object this data template represents. Both use the same command parameter. Here's an example of the buttons. <Button x:Name="Button1" Command="{Binding Path=Command1}" CommandParameter="{Binding Path=Text, ElementName=TextBox1}" /> <Button x:Name="Button2" Command="{Binding Path=Command2}" CommandParameter="{Binding Path=Text, ElementName=TextBox1}" /> I would like to refactor this into a single button that can perform either command based on a user setting like a boolean in Settings.settings. I don't have access to refactoring the CLR object itself. Also this is a Data Template there isn't codebehind for me to work with. My take is that a converter would be the best bet, but I don't know how I would put that together. The converter would need to take in the CommandParameter, as well as the DataContext so it knows which object to execute the Commands on. Can someone lend me a hand with this? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• code to ping websites works sometimes ...

  - by trustfundbaby

  I'm testing out a piece of code to ping a bunch of websites I own on a regular basis, to make sure they're up. I'm using rails and so far I have this hideous test action that I'm using to try it out (see below). The problem though, is that sometimes it works, and other times it won't ... sometimes it runs through the code just fine, other times, it seems to completely ignore the begin/rescue block ... a. I need help figuring out what the problem is b. And refactoring this to make it look respectable. Your help is much appreciated. require 'net/http' require 'uri' def ping @sites = NewsSource.all @sites.each do |site| if site.uri and !site.uri.empty? uri = URI.parse(site.uri) response = nil path = uri.path.blank? ? '/' : uri.path path = uri.query.blank? ? path : "#{path}?#{uri.query}" begin Net::HTTP.start(uri.host, uri.port) {|http| http.open_timeout = 30 http.read_timeout = 30 response = http.head(path) } if response.code.eql?('200') or response.code.eql?('301') or response.code.eql?('302') site.up = true else site.up = false end site.up_check_msg = response.message site.up_check_code = response.code rescue Errno::EBADF rescue Timeout::Error site.up = false site.up_check_msg = 'timeout' site.up_check_code = '408' end site.up_check_time = 0.seconds.ago site.save end end end

  Read the article

• Nested namespaces, correct static library design issues

  - by PeterK

  Hello all, I'm currently in the process of developing a fairly large static library which will be used by some tools when it's finished. Now since this project is somewhat larger than anything i've been involved in so far, I realized its time to think of a good structure for the project. Using namespaces is one of those logical steps. My current approach is to divide the library into parts (which are not standalone, but their purpose calls for such a separation). I have a 'core' part which now just holds some very common typedefs and constants (used by many different parts of the library). Other parts are for example some 'utils' (hash etc.), file i/o and so on. Each of these parts has its own namespace. I have nearly finished the 'utils' part and realized that my approach probably is not the best. The problem (if we want to call it so) is that in the 'utils' namespace i need something from the 'core' namespace which results in including the core header files and many using directives. So i began to think that this probably is not a good thing and should be changed somehow. My first idea is to use nested namespaces as to have something like core::utils. Since this will require some heavy refactoring i want to ask here first. What do you think? How would you handle this? Or more generally: How to correctly design a static library in terms of namespaces and code organization? If there are some guidelines or articles about it, please mentoin them too. Thanks. Note: i'm quite sure that there are more good approaches than just one. Feel free to post your ideas, suggestions etc. Since i'm designing this library i want it to be really good. The goal is to make it as clean and FAST as possible. The only problem is that i will have to integrate a LOT of existing code and refactor it, which will really be a painful process (sigh) - thats why good structure is so important)

  Read the article

• Find all compilation errors in a Delphi project

  - by awmross

  I am doing some refactoring of my Delphi project. I want to be able to make a change, then see all the places in the project that break due to that change. Similar to how Eclipse lists all the compile errors for a project (in Java). In Delphi, I can make a change, then recompile my project, but the compiler stops when it finds the first Unit that does not compile. I have to fix that Unit, compile again, which will then show me the next error, etc etc. I want to be able to see all the compile errors in the project at once. Then I can decide if the change is worth doing or not. For example, if the change will require hand fixing of 50 separate source files, it's not worth doing. But if it only breaks 2 files then that's an easy change to make. Is there any way to do this in Delphi? Can I tell the compiler to keep going even after finding a Unit that does not compile? I am using Delphi 2010

  Read the article

• Efficient Clojure workflow?

  - by Alex B

  I am developing a pet project with Clojure, but wonder if I can speed up my workflow a bit. My current workflow (with Compojure) is: Start Swank with lein swank. Go to Emacs, connect with M-x slime-connect. Load all existing source files one by one. This also starts a Jetty server and an application. Write some code in REPL. When satisfied with experiments, write a full version of a construct I had in mind. Eval (C-c C-c) it. Switch REPL to namespace where this construct resides and test it. Switch to browser and reload browser tab with the affected page. Tweak the code, eval it, check in the browser. Repeat any of the above. There are a number of annoyances with it: I have to switch between Emacs and the browser (or browsers if I am testing things like templating with multiple browsers) all the time. Is there a common idiom to automate this? I used to have a JavaScript bit that reloads the page continuously, but it's of limited utility, obviously, when I have to interact with the page for more than a few seconds. My JVM instance becomes "dirty" when I experiment and write test functions. Basically namespaces become polluted, especially if I'm refactoring and moving the functions between namespaces. This can lead to symbol collisions and I need to restart Swank. Can I undef a symbol? I load all source files one by one (C-c C-k) upon restarting Swank. I suspect I'm doing it all wrong. Switching between the REPL and the file editor can be a bit irritating, especially when I have a lot of Emacs tabs open, alongside the browser(s). I'm looking for ways to improve the above points and the entire workflow in general, so I'd appreciate if you'd share yours. P. S. I have also used Vimclojure before, so Vimclojure-based workflows are welcome too.

  Read the article

• C# - Naming a value combined "getter/setter" method (WebForms & Binding)

  - by tyndall

  Looking for some help on some names for a project I'm currently working on. I don't have a compsci degree so I don't know what to call this. I have a method called TryToGetSetValue(Direction direction, object value, object valueOnFail) Then there would be a Direction enum public enum Direction { ModelToForm, FormToModel } Background This is a legacy ASP.NET application. The models, database, and mainframe are designed poorly. I can't put in MVP or MVC patterns yet (too much work). ASP.NET code is a ridiculous mess (partial pages, single-page design, 5x the normal amount of jQuery, everything is a jQuery UI dialog). I'm just trying to put in a bridge so then I can do more refactoring over the next year. I have ~200 fields that need to be set on a GET and written back on a POST. I trying not to x2 these 200 fields and have 400 lines of code to support. What would you call my method? enum? Is there so other form of binding that would be easy to use instead? I'm not a fan of the DetailsView or FormView built-ins of ASP.NET WebForms.

  Read the article

• What would you write in a consitution (law book) for a programmers' country?

  - by Developer Art

  After we have got our great place to talk about professional matters and sozialize online - on SO, I believe the next logical step would be to found our own country! I invite you all to participate and bring together your available resources. We will buy an island, better even a group of island so that we could establish states like .NET territories, Java land, Linux republic etc. We will build a society of programmers (girls - we need you too). To the organizational side, we're going to need some constitution or a law book. I suggest we write it together. I make it a wiki as it should be a cooperative effort. I'll open the work. Section 1. Programmers' rights. Every citizen has a right to an Internet connection 24/7. Every citizen can freely choose the field of interest Section 2. Programmers' obligations. Every citizen must embrace the changing nature of the profession and constanly educate himself Section 3. Law enforcement. Code duplication when can be avoided is punished by limiting the bandwith speed to 64Kbit for a period of one week. Using ugly hacks instead of refactoring code is punished by cutting the Internet connection for a period of one month. Usage of technologies older than 5/10 years is punished by restricting the web access to the sites last updated 5/10 years ago for a period of one month. Please feel free to modify and extend the list. We'll need to have it ready before we proceed formally with the country foundation. A purchase fund will be established shortly. Everyone is invited to participate.

  Read the article

• Python: circular imports needed for type checking

  - by phild

  First of all: I do know that there are already many questions and answers to the topic of the circular imports. The answer is more or less: "Design your Module/Class structure properly and you will not need circular imports". That is true. I tried very hard to make a proper design for my current project, I in my opinion I was successful with this. But my specific problem is the following: I need a type check in a module that is already imported by the module containing the class to check against. But this throws an import error. Like so: foo.py: from bar import Bar class Foo(object): def __init__(self): self.__bar = Bar(self) bar.py: from foo import Foo class Bar(object): def __init__(self, arg_instance_of_foo): if not isinstance(arg_instance_of_foo, Foo): raise TypeError() Solution 1: If I modified it to check the type by a string comparison, it will work. But I dont really like this solution (string comparsion is rather expensive for a simple type check, and could get a problem when it comes to refactoring). bar_modified.py: from foo import Foo class Bar(object): def __init__(self, arg_instance_of_foo): if not arg_instance_of_foo.__class__.__name__ == "Foo": raise TypeError() Solution 2: I could also pack the two classes into one module. But my project has lots of different classes like the "Bar" example, and I want to seperate them into different module files. After my own 2 solutions are no option for me: Has anyone a nicer solution for this problem?

  Read the article

• Should I go for Arrays or Objects in PHP in a CouchDB/Ajax app?

  - by karlthorwald

  I find myself converting between array and object all the time in PHP application that uses couchDB and Ajax. Of course I am also converting objects to JSON and back (for sometimes couchdb but mostly Ajax), but this is not so much disturbing my workflow. At the present I have php objects that are returned by the CouchDB modules I use and on the other hand I have the old habbit to return arrays like array("error"="not found","data"=$dataObj) from my functions. This leads to a mixed occurence of real php objects and nested arrays and I cast with (object) or (array) if necessary. The worst thing is that I know more or less by heart what a function returns, but not what type (array or object), so I often run into type errors. My plan is now to always cast arrays to objects before returning from a function. Of course this implies a lot of refactoring. Is this the right way to go? What about the conversion overhead? Other ideas or tips? Edit: Kenaniah's answer suggests I should go the other way, this would mean I'd cast everything to arrays. And for all the Ajax / JSON stuff and also for CouchDB I would use $myarray = json_decode($json_data,$assoc = true); //EDIT: changed to true, whcih is what I really meant Even more work to change all the CouchDB and Ajax functions but in the end I have better code.

  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

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >