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 34/209 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • Python: When passing variables between methods, is it necessary to assign it a new name?

    - by Anthony
    I'm thinking that the answer is probably 'no' if the program is small and there are a lot of methods, but what about in a larger program? If I am going to be using one variable in multiple methods throughout the program, is it smarter to: Come up with a different phrasing for each method (to eliminate naming conflicts). Use the same name for each method (to eliminate confusion) Just use a global variable (to eliminate both) This is more of a stylistic question than anything else. What naming convention do YOU use when passing variables?

    Read the article

  • How can I configure Xcode to put '{' where I want it in generated files

    - by djhworld
    I know this is a fairly contentious issue amongst programmers, but when developing I like my IDE to position the opening curly bracket underneath the method/interface/control declaration, for illustrative purposes: - This is how Xcode automatically generates skeleton methods with the { at the end: - -(void) isTrue:(BOOL)input { if(input) { return YES; } else { return NO; } } This is how I like to lay out my code (which I believe is called the Allman style): - -(void) isTrue:(BOOL)input { if(input) { return YES; } else { return NO; } } I'm just wondering if there's any configuration switch in Xcode to enable this style of development? It's really annoying when typing out if/else statements as it tends to auto-complete the else clause with the { at the end of the line which just looks silly if you like developing with them underneath. Or am I being unreasonable? Is Objective-C supposed to adhere to a standard defined by Apple?

    Read the article

  • best practice when referring to a program's name in C

    - by guest
    what is considered best practice when referring to a program's name? i've seen #define PROGRAM_NAME "myprog" printf("this is %s\n", PROGRAM_NAME); as well as printf("this is %s\n", argv[0]); i know, that the second approach will give me ./myprog rather than myprog when the program is not called from $PATH and that the first approach will guarantee consistence regarding the program's name. but is there anything else, that makes one approach superior to the other?

    Read the article

  • please help me to find Bug in my Code (segmentation fault)

    - by Vikramaditya Battina
    i am tring to solve this http://www.spoj.com/problems/LEXISORT/ question it working fine in visual studio compiler and IDEone also but when i running in SPOJ compiler it is getting SEGSIGV error Here my code goes #include<stdio.h> #include<stdlib.h> #include<string.h> char *getString(); void lexisort(char **str,int num); void countsort(char **str,int i,int num); int main() { int num_test; int num_strings; char **str; int i,j; scanf("%d",&num_test); for(i=0;i<num_test;i++) { scanf("%d",&num_strings); str=(char **)malloc(sizeof(char *)*num_strings); for(j=0;j<num_strings;j++) { str[j]=(char *)malloc(sizeof(char)*11); scanf("%s",str[j]); } lexisort(str,num_strings); for(j=0;j<num_strings;j++) { printf("%s\n",str[j]); free(str[j]); } free(str); } return 0; } void lexisort(char **str,int num) { int i; for(i=9;i>=0;i--) { countsort(str,i,num); } } void countsort(char **str,int i,int num) { int buff[52]={0,0},k,x; char **temp=(char **)malloc(sizeof(char *)*num); for(k=0;k<52;k++) { buff[k]=0; } for(k=0;k<num;k++) { if(str[k][i]>='A' && str[k][i]<='Z') { buff[(str[k][i]-'A')]++; } else { buff[26+(str[k][i]-'a')]++; } } for(k=1;k<52;k++) { buff[k]=buff[k]+buff[k-1]; } for(k=num-1;k>=0;k--) { if(str[k][i]>='A' && str[k][i]<='Z') { x=buff[(str[k][i]-'A')]; temp[x-1]=str[k]; buff[(str[k][i]-'A')]--; } else { x=buff[26+(str[k][i]-'a')]; temp[x-1]=str[k]; buff[26+(str[k][i]-'a')]--; } } for(k=0;k<num;k++) { str[k]=temp[k]; } free(temp); }

    Read the article

  • How to convince a colleague that code duplication is bad?

    - by vitaut
    A colleague of mine was implementing a new feature in a project we work on together and he did it by taking a file containing the implementation of a similar feature from the same project, creating a copy of it renaming all the global declarations and slightly modifying the implementation. So we ended up with two large files that are almost identical apart from renaming. I tried to explain that it makes our project more difficult to maintain but he doesn't want to change anything saying that it is easier for him to program in such way and that there is no reason to fix the code if it "ain't broke". How can I convince him that such code duplication is a bad thing? It is related to this questions, but I am more interested in the answers targeted to a technical person (another programmer), for example a reference to an authoritative source like a book would be great. I have already tried simple arguments and haven't succeeded.

    Read the article

  • A good way to implement useable Callbacks in C++

    - by Marcel J.
    I have a custom Menu class written in C++. To seperate the code into easy-to-read functions I am using Callbacks. Since I don't want to use Singletons for the Host of the Menu I provide another parameter (target) which will be given to the callback as the first parameter (some kind of workaround for the missing "this" reference). Registration-Signature AddItem(string s, void(*callback)(void*,MenuItem*), void* target = NULL) Example of a Registration menu->AddItem(TRANSLATE, "translate", &MyApp::OnModeSelected); Example of a Handler /* static */ void MyApp::OnModeSelected(void* that, MenuItem* item) { MyApp *self = (MyApp*)that; self->activeMode = item->text; } Is there anything one could consider dirty with this approach? Are there maybe better ones?

    Read the article

  • Python Etiquette: Importing Modules

    - by F3AR3DLEGEND
    Say I have two Python modules: module1.py: import module2 def myFunct(): print "called from module1" module2.py: def myFunct(): print "called from module2" def someFunct(): print "also called from module2" If I import module1, is it better etiquette to re-import module2, or just refer to it as module1.module2? For example (someotherfile.py): import module1 module1.myFunct() # prints "called from module1" module1.module2.myFunct() # prints "called from module2" I can also do this: module2 = module1.module2. Now, I can directly call module2.myFunct(). However, I can change module1.py to: from module2 import * def myFunct(): print "called from module1" Now, in someotherfile.py, I can do this: import module1 module1.myFunct() # prints "called from module1"; overrides module2 module1.someFunct() # prints "also called from module2" Also, by importing *, help('module1') shows all of the functions from module2. On the other hand, (assuming module1.py uses import module2), I can do: someotherfile.py: import module1, module2 module1.myFunct() # prints "called from module1" module2.myFunct() # prints "called from module2" Again, which is better etiquette and practice? To import module2 again, or to just refer to module1's importation?

    Read the article

  • Enum.TryParse with Flags attribute

    - by Sunny
    I have written code to TryParse enum either by value or by its name as shown below. How can I extend this code to include parsing enums with Flags attribute? public static bool TryParse<T>(this T enum_type, object value, out T result) where T : struct { return enum_type.TryParse<T>(value, true, out result); } public static bool TryParse<T>(this T enum_type, object value, bool ignoreCase, out T result) where T : struct { result = default(T); var is_converted = false; var is_valid_value_for_conversion = new Func<T, object, bool, bool>[]{ (e, v, i) => e.GetType().IsEnum, (e, v, i) => value != null, (e, v, i) => Enum.GetNames(e.GetType()).Any(n => String.Compare(n, v.ToString(), i) == 0) || Enum.IsDefined(e.GetType(), v) }; if(is_valid_value_for_conversion.All(rule => rule(enum_type, value, ignoreCase))){ result = (T)Enum.Parse(typeof(T), value.ToString(), ignoreCase); is_converted = true; } return is_converted; } Currently this code works for the following enums: enum SomeEnum{ A, B, C } // can parse either by 'A' or 'a' enum SomeEnum1 : int { A = 1, B = 2, C = 3 } // can parse either by 'A' or 'a' or 1 or "1" Does not work for: [Flags] enum SomeEnum2 { A = 1, B = 2, C = 4 } // can parse either by 'A' or 'a' // cannot parse for A|B Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Redundant code constructs

    - by Diomidis Spinellis
    The most egregiously redundant code construct I often see involves using the code sequence if (condition) return true; else return false; instead of simply writing return (condition); I've seen this beginner error in all sorts of languages: from Pascal and C to PHP and Java. What other such constructs would you flag in a code review?

    Read the article

  • Should I use block identifiers ("end;") in my code?

    - by JosephStyons
    Code Complete says it is good practice to always use block identifiers, both for clarity and as a defensive measure. Since reading that book, I've been doing that religiously. Sometimes it seems excessive though, as in the case below. Is Steve McConnell right to insist on always using block identifiers? Which of these would you use? //naughty and brief with myGrid do for currRow := FixedRows to RowCount - 1 do if RowChanged(currRow) then if not(RecordExists(currRow)) then InsertNewRecord(currRow) else UpdateExistingRecord(currRow); //well behaved and verbose with myGrid do begin for currRow := FixedRows to RowCount - 1 do begin if RowChanged(currRow) then begin if not(RecordExists(currRow)) then begin InsertNewRecord(currRow); end //if it didn't exist, so insert it else begin UpdateExistingRecord(currRow); end; //else it existed, so update it end; //if any change end; //for each row in the grid end; //with myGrid

    Read the article

  • How to name variables which are structs

    - by evilpie
    Hello, i often work on private projects using the WinApi, and as you might know, it has thousands of named and typedefed structs like MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION. I will stick to this one in my question, what still is preferred, or better when you want to name a variable of this type. Is there some kind of style guide for this case? For example if i need that variable for the VirtualQueryEx function. Some ideas: MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION memoryBasicInformation; MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION memory_basic_information; Just use the name of the struct non capitalized and with or without the underlines. MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION basicInformation; MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION information; Short form? MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION mbi; I often see this style, using the abbreviation of the struct name. MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION buffer; VirtualQueryEx defines the third parameter lpBuffer (where you pass the pointer to the struct), so using this name might be an idea, too. Cheers

    Read the article

  • Examples of both beautiful and ugly java code?

    - by tputkonen
    I would like to demonstrate how difficult it is for a layman to identify high quality code from flawed code. I'm thinking of doing this with the help of two java methods. Both of the methods should look like they do the same, pretty simple thing. However one of them should have several kind of flaws, for example: iteration with array off by one error string concatenations causing lots of objects to be created (as opposed to StringBuffer in the "good" code, which looks more complicated) possibly null pointer exception (but it should not be trivial to spot) Those are just some examples, all kinds of other issues including bugs and performance related structures are highly appreciated. Methods should be around 10-20 lines of length, and the task they do should be something simple - preferably printing something in an iteration.

    Read the article

  • Style question about existing piece of code (C/C++)

    - by Leif Ericson
    I just hope the following doesn't seem to you like redundant jabber :) Anyway, there is that: for (p = fmt; *p; p++) { if (*p != '%') { putchar(*p); continue; } switch (*++p) { /* Some cases here */ ... } } And I wondered why the writer (Kernighan / Ritchie) used the continue in the if statement. I thought it was for the mere reason that he deemed it would be more elegant than indenting the whole switch under an else statement, what do you think?

    Read the article

  • C++ iterators & loop optimization

    - by Quantum7
    I see a lot of c++ code that looks like this: for( const_iterator it = list.begin(), const_iterator ite = list.end(); it != ite; ++it) As opposed to the more concise version: for( const_iterator it = list.begin(); it != list.end(); ++it) Will there be any difference in speed between these two conventions? Naively the first will be slightly faster since list.end() is only called once. But since the iterator is const, it seems like the compiler will pull this test out of the loop, generating equivalent assembly for both.

    Read the article

  • Purpose of IF, ELSE, FOR macros ?

    - by psihodelia
    I have a source code of a library which has a lot of strange IF, ELSE, FOR, etc. macros for all common C-keywords instead of using just usual if,else,for,while keywords. These macros are defined like this: #define IF( a) if( increment_if(), a) where increment_if() function is defined so: static __inline void increment_if( void) { // If the "IF" operator comes just after an "ELSE", its counter // must not be incremented. ... //implementation } I don't really understand, what is the purpose of such macros? This library is for a real-time application and I suppose that using such macros must slow-down an application.

    Read the article

  • Acceptable to have spaces before dot?

    - by Rudy
    What is the general opinion on the 2nd indentation method below. // Normal indentation a.Value = "foobar"; ab.Checked = false; foo.Value = "foobar"; foobar.Checked = true; // Spaces before the dot to align the properties/methods a .Value = "foobar"; ab .Checked = false; foo .Value = "foobar"; foobar.Checked = true; This should probably be a wiki, but I either don't have enough privileges or don't know how to change it.

    Read the article

  • Is there a proper and wrong way to format CSS?

    - by DavidR
    When I first started writing CSS, I was writing it in an expanded form div.class { margin: 10px 5px 3px; border: 1px solid #333; font-weight: bold; } .class .subclass { text-align:right; } but now I find myself writing css like this: (Example from code I'm actually writing now) .object1 {} .scrollButton{width:44px;height:135px;} .scrollButton img {padding:51px 0 0 23px;} .object2 {width:165px;height:94px;margin:15px 0 0 23px;padding:15px 0 0 10px;background:#fff;} .featuredObject .symbol{line-height:30px; padding-top:6px;} .featuredObject .value {width:90px;} .featuredObject .valueChange {padding:5px 0 0 0;} .featuredObject img {position:absolute;margin:32px 0 0 107px;} and I'm beginning to worry because a lot of the time I see the first form done in examples online, while I find the second form a lot easier for me to work with. It has a lower vertical height, so I can see all the classes at a glance with less scrolling, the tabulation of the hierarchy seems more apparent, and it looks more like code I'd write with javascript or html. Is this a valid way of doing code, or to keep with standards when putting it online should I use the vertical form instead?

    Read the article

  • Best ways to construct Dynamic Search Conditions for Sql

    - by CoolBeans
    I have always wondered what's the best way to achieve this task. In most web based applications you have to provide search options on many different criteria. Based on what criteria is chosen behind the scene you modify your SQL. Generally, this is how I tend to go about it:- Have a base SQL template. In the base template have conditions like this WHERE [#PRE_COND1] AND [#PRE_COND2] .. so on and so forth. So an example SQL might look something like SELECT NAME,AGE FROM PERSONS [,#TABLE2] [,#TABLE3] WHERE [#PRE_COND1] AND [#PRE_COND2] ORDER BY [#ORD_COND1] AND [#ORD_COND2] etc. During run time after figuring out the all the search criteria user has entered, I replace the [#PRE_COND1]s and [#ORD_COND1]s with the appropriate SQLs and then execute the query. I personally do not like this brute force method. However, I never came across a better approach either. How do you accomplish such tasks generally given you are either using native JDBC or Spring JDBC? It is almost like I need a C MACRO like functionality in Java to do this.

    Read the article

  • Let and construct versus let in sequence

    - by Stringer
    Consider this OCaml code: let coupe_inter i j cases = let lcases = Array.length cases in let low,_,_ = cases.(i) and _,high,_ = cases.(j) in low,high, Array.sub cases i (j-i+1), case_append (Array.sub cases 0 i) (Array.sub cases (j+1) (lcases-(j+1))) Why the expression let ... and ... in is used in place of a let ... in let ... in sequence (like F# force you to do)? This construct seems quite frequent in OCaml code. Thanks!

    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 | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >