Search Results

Search found 6690 results on 268 pages for 'worst practices'.

Page 37/268 | < Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >

  • Can a candidate be judged by asking to write a complex program on "paper"?

    - by iammilind
    Sometime back in an interview, I was asked to write following program: In a keypad of a mobile phone, there is a mapping between number and characters. e.g. 0 & 1 corresponds to nothing; 2 corresponds to 'a','b','c'; 3 corresponds to 'd','e','f'; ...; 9 corresponds to 'w','x','y','z'. User should input any number (e.g. 23, 389423, 927348923747293) and I should store all the combinations of these character mapping into some data structure. For example, if user enters "23" then possible character combinations are: ad, ae, af, bd, be, bf, cd, ce, cf or if user enters, "4676972" then it can be, gmpmwpa, gmpmwpb, ..., hnroxrc, ..., iosozrc Interviewer told that people have written code for this within 20-30 mins!! Also he insisted I have to write on paper. If I am writing a code then my tendency is as of I am writing production code, even though it may not be expected from me. So, I always try to think all the aspects like, optimization, readability, maintainability, extensible and so on. Considering all these, I felt that I should be writing on PC and it needs decent 2 hours. Finally after 25 mins, I was able to come up with just the concept and some shattered pieces of code (not to mention of my rejection). My question is not the answer for the above program. I want to know that is this a right way to judge the caliber of a person ? Am I wrong / too slow in the estimates ? Am I too idealistic ?

    Read the article

  • Sucking Less Every Year ?

    - by AdityaGameProgrammer
    Sucking Less Every Year A trail of thought that had been on my mind for a while Quoting directly from the post I've often thought that sucking less every year is how humble programmers improve. You should be unhappy with code you wrote a year ago. If you aren't, that means either A) you haven't learned anything in a year, B) your code can't be improved, or C) you never revisit old code. All of these are the kiss of death for software developers. How often does this happen or not happen to you? How long before you see an actual improvement in your coding ? month, year? Do you ever revisit Your old code? How often does your old code plague you? or how often do you have to deal with your technical debt. It is definitely very painful to fix old bugs n dirty code that we may have done to quickly meet a deadline and those quick fixes ,some cases we may have to rewrite most of the application/code. No arguments about that. Some of the developers i had come across argued that they were already at the evolved stage where their coding doesn't need improvement or cant get improved anymore. Does this happen? If so how many years into coding on a particular language does one expect this to happen?

    Read the article

  • Harmful temptations in programming

    - by gaearon
    Just curious, what kinds of temptations in programming turned out to be really harmful in your projects? Like when you really feel the urge to do something and you believe it's going to benefit the project or else you just trick yourself into believing it is, and after a week you realize you haven't solved any real problems but instead created new ones or, in the best case, pleased your inner beast with no visible impact. Personally, I find it very hard to not refactor bad code. I work with a lot of bad legacy code, and it takes some deep breaths to not touch it when I have no tests to prove my refactoring doesn't not break anything. Another demon for me in user interface, I can literally spend hours changing UI layout just because I enjoy doing it. Sometimes I tell myself I'm working on usability, but the truth is just I love moving buttons around. What are your programming demons, and how do you avoid them?

    Read the article

  • Do I have to write a lot of boilerplate code if I keep working using Java?

    - by edem
    I'm working for a company writing ERP applications. My problem is that I have to write tons of boilerplate code. I came up with ideas to automatize/prevent the drudgery but only some of them were accepted. I have been told by the lead developer that my ideas tend to be go far afield and I should write code everyone can understand. I had a discussion about this lately and it seems to me that this kind of code ramp is within java's philosophy. I have to write lots of code to achiveve simple things not because it is necessary but because this is the way most of the people at the company think. Is this universally applicable to most of the companies out there using java or this is just my company's view? Do I have to get used to the drudgery if I keep working for java-based firms?

    Read the article

  • Pros and cons of creating a print friendly page to remove the use of pdfs?

    - by Phil
    the company I work for has a one page invoice that uses the library tcpdf. they wanted to do some design changes that I found are just incredibly difficult for setting up in .pdf format. Using html/css I could easily create the page and have it print very nicely, but I have a feeling that I am over looking something. What are the pros and cons of setting up a page just for printing? What are the pros and cons of putting out a .pdf? I could also use the CSS inline so that if they wanted to download it and open it they could.

    Read the article

  • Getting graduates up to speed?

    - by Simon
    This question got me thinking about how comapnies deal with newly-hired graduated. Do experienced programmers expect CS graduates to write clean code (by clean I mean code easily understandable by others — maybe that is too much to expect?) Or do significant portion of graduates at your place (if any) just end up testing and fixing small bugs on existing applications? And, even if they do bug fixes, do you end up spending double the amount of time just checking they did not end up breaking anything and creating new bugs? How do you deal with such scenarios when pair programming and code reviews are not available options (for reasons such as personal deadlines), and also what techniques did you find to get fresh graduate up to speed? Some suggestions would be great.

    Read the article

  • How to Deal with an out of touch "Project manager"

    - by Joe
    This "manager" is 70+ yrs old and a math genius. We were tasked with creating a web application. He loves SQL and stored procedures. He first created this in MS access. For the web app I had to take his DB migrate to SQL server. His first thought was to have a master stored procedure with a WAITFOR Handling requests from users. I eventually talked him out of that and use asp.net mvc. Then eventually use the asp.net membership. Now the web app is a mostly handles requests from the pages that is passed to stored procedures. It is all stored procedure driven. The business logic as well. Now we are having an one open DB connection per user logged in plus 1. I use linq to sql to check 2 tables and return the values thats it period. So 25 users is a load. He complains why my code is bad cause his test driver stored procedure simulates over 100 users with no issue. What are the best arguments for not having the business logic not all in stored procedures?? How should I deal with this?? I am giving an abbreviated story of course. He is a genius part owner of the company all the other owners trust him because he is a genius. and quoting -"He gets things done. old school".

    Read the article

  • Is committing/checking in code everyday a good practice?

    - by ArtB
    I've been reading Martin Fowler's note on Continuous Integration and he lists as a must "Everyone Commits To the Mainline Every Day". I do not like to commit code unless the section I'm working on is complete and that in practice I commit my code every three days: one day to investigate/reproduce the task and make some preliminary changes, a second day to complete the changes, and a third day to write the tests and clean it up^ for submission. I would not feel comfortable submitting the code sooner. Now, I pull changes from the repository and integrate them locally usually twice a day, but I do not commit that often unless I can carve out a smaller piece of work. Question: is committing everyday such a good practice that I should change my workflow to accomodate it, or it is not that advisable? Edit: I guess I should have clarified that I meant "commit" in the CVS meaning of it (aka "push") since that is likely what Fowler would have meant in 2006 when he wrote this. ^ The order is more arbitrary and depends on the task, my point was to illustrate the time span and activities, not the exact sequence.

    Read the article

  • Using CSS3 is a bad practice? [closed]

    - by Qmal
    Possible Duplicate: Should I use HTML5 and/or CSS3 to build my website? I just want to know if it's considered as a "bad practice" to use things like rounded corners, gradients and so on... I understand that there are bots and crawlers that do not process CSS, but they don't need to. And nowadays most people use browsers that can process CSS3 with no problem. So should I make my buttons and shadows and such look pretty with CSS3 or with images?

    Read the article

  • How to get started in coding for JBoss

    - by Mister IT Guru
    I have an idea on how to revamp our internal application, after having accessed the needs of the users, addressing thier current issues, and the like. But I am not a coder. My last application I wrote was in college, in C, (java wasn't invented-ish!) and it was a booking system, with the option to add on other modules, blah blah. I got an A, but I became a system administrator instead, more intrested in designing and maintainend networks and infrastructure, but with the advent of virtualisation, and linux management tools such as puppet I can now manage infrastructure in my sleep! Now I want to write code - to put on my infastructure, and I want to build .... a booking system! This is just to get experience, but I am at a loss as to where to start. Setting up the environment, will take me about a day. Writing the spec, even how I want it to work, I already know, but as for actually coding in a decent manner, I can only guess. If anyone can recommend a book, website, blog, twitter person to follow, or just advice on how to build a kick butt basic jboss app, then please, "I AM READY TO LEARN" :)

    Read the article

  • How bad would be to focus on iOS/Android development for an indie developer?

    - by kender
    After some time developing games for others I'm thinking of moving towards my own productions. My background is 10+ years of software development, with last 2 years spent on the iOS development (Objective-C and CoronaSDK). With my current experience in Corona I can quickly develop for iOS and Android systems. And this is something that I'm probably gonna do with several of the game ideas I have, at least for the prototype part. But - I'm wondering if it's not a bad idea to focus on those 2 systems only. After all there are other mobile platforms, there are PCs, Macs and Linux boxes... All of them having gamers using them. I was wondering if it wasn't a good idea to try some other SDK, giving me more flexibility when it comes to platform-independance. There's Unity3D (I think I can develop a 2D game in it though), there's MoAI from what I checked. I see a few options, not sure which one is best as I have little experience in this field (publishing own games): Stick with CoronaSDK for the whole time, release for iOS and Android platforms, screw other mobile devices and PCs, Use Corona for prototyping, then when the idea goes more into the "production" phase rewrite it in MoAI or Unity3D for more platforms support, Start with one of those 2 SDKs right now (which means the prototype phase will be delayed a bit, but after that I can jump right into real coding). Any clues here, what to do?

    Read the article

  • Quick Tip - Speed a Slow Restore from the Transaction Log

    - by KKline
    Here's a quick tip for you: During some restore operations on Microsoft SQL Server, the transaction log redo step might be taking an unusually long time. Depending somewhat on the version and edition of SQL Server you've installed, you may be able to increase performance by tinkering with the readahead performance for the redo operations. To do this, you should use the MAXTRANSFERSIZE parameter of the RESTORE statement. For example, if you set MAXTRANSFERSIZE=1048576, it'll use 1MB buffers. If you...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Loading another domain's content in a modal iframe - acceptable?

    - by user568458
    Is it okay to load another page in an iframe in a modal pop-up window - in terms of legal and ethical standards around displaying 3rd party content? I remember a few years ago there was controversy and a debate about whether it was okay to load another domain's page content on your domain in a full-width iframe, with your site providing a masthead with controls for favouriting, linking etc (e.g. like StumbleUpon). I seem to recall that the consensus was, that it was okay so long as you were clearly in no way claiming ownership of the 3rd party content or attempting to modify the content and so long as there was a 'go to site' button or equivalent; and that sites could ask you to exclude them, but generally speaking, it's an acceptable practice. How acceptable would it be considered to be to load another site's page within a modal (lightbox-like) popup box (following all the above principles: clear attribution and a prominent button that kills the iframe and gives them the 3rd party original)? My expectation would be that it would follow the same principles, and be acceptable so long as these conditions were met. Note that I'm asking about the likely legitimate responses of the 3rd party sites and possible legal position, not about usability or UX. I'm aware that this should never ever ever ever ever be the standard way external links are loaded, and that 99% of the time linking to external content like this would be terrible for usability. My specific use case is one of those 1% of cases where loading a separate page in this tab actually wouldn't be the expected behaviour of a link: an interactive data visualisation tool that also acts as a 'browser' of external content (science papers underlying the data it navigates). All other links within the interactive will change something while staying on the same page. If the user clicked one of these external links by mistake (as people often do, even when they are clearly, noisily labelled) and then had to back-button back, they would lose their fine-grained position in the interactive tool (jquery bbq hashchanges being not appropriate for all elements of the tool). New window/tab will simply open the target page on the 3rd party domain. Opening a new window/tab would also be an alternative option (and has its own disadvantages) - my question is, whether this is an alternative that could be considered (in terms of acceptable practice around intellectual property etc), irrespective of which option is best for UX: which is something we'll decide the proper way, based on actual UX testing.

    Read the article

  • Make a flowchart to demonstrate closure behavior

    - by thomas
    I saw below test question the other day in which the author's used a flow chart to represent the logic of loops. And I got to thinking it would be interesting to do this with some more complex logic. For example, the closure in this IIFE sort of boggles me. while (i <= qty_of_gets) { // needs an IIFE (function(i) promise = promise.then(function(){ return $.get("queries/html/" + product_id + i + ".php"); }); }(i++)); } I wonder if seeing a flowchart representation of what happens in it could be more elucidating. Could such a thing be done? Would it be helpful? Or just messy? I haven't the foggiest clue where to start, but thought maybe someone would like to take a stab. Probably all the ajax could go and it could just be a simple return within the IIFE.

    Read the article

  • Should a primary key be immutable?

    - by Vincent Malgrat
    A recent question on stackoverflow provoked a discussion about the immutability of primary keys. I had thought that it was a kind of rule that primary keys should be immutable. If there is a chance that some day a primary key would be updated, I thought you should use a surrogate key. However it is not in the SQL standard and some RDBMS' "cascade update" feature allows a primary key to change. So my question is: is it still a bad practice to have a primary key that may change ? What are the cons, if any, of having a mutable primary key ?

    Read the article

  • prism and multiple screens

    - by Avi
    OK - I am studying Prism a little because of a "free weekend" offer on Pluralsight. As this is proving too complex for me, I went to the Prism book and looked at the forward, and this is what it said: What comes after “Hello, World?” WPF and Silverlight developers are blessed with an abundance of excellent books... There’s no lack of tutorials on Model-View-ViewModel ... But they stop short of the guidance you need to deliver a non-trivial application in full. Your first screen goes well. You add a second screen and a third. Because you started your solution with the built-in “Navigation Application Template,” adding new screens feels like hanging shirts on a closet rod. You are on a roll. Until the harsh reality of real application requirements sets in. As it happens, your application has 30 screens not three. There’s no room on that closet rod for 30 screens. Some screens are modal pop-ups; you don’t navigate to a pop-up. Screens become interdependent such that user activity in one screen triggers changes that propagate throughout the UI. Some screens are optional; others are visible only to authorized users. Some screens are permanent, while other screens can be opened and closed at will. You discover that navigating back to a previously displayed screen creates a new instance. That’s not what you expected and, to your horror, the prior instance is gone along with the user’s unsaved changes. Now the issue is, I don't relate to this description. I've never been a UI programmer, but same as everyone else I'm using Windows apps such as MS-Office, and web sites such as Amazon, Facebook and StackExchange. And I look at these and I don't see many "so many screens" issues! Indeed, the only applications having many windows I can think of is Visual Studio. Maybe also Visio, a little. But take Word - You have a ribbon and a main window. Or take Facebook: You have those lists on the left (Favorites, Lists, Groups etc.), the status middle, the adds and then the Contacts sidebar. But it's only one page. Of course, I understand that in enterprise scenarios there are dashboad applications where multiple segments of the screen are updated from multiple non-related services. This I dig. But other scenarios? So - What am I missing? What is the "multiple screens" monster Pirsm is supposed to be the silver bullet solution for? Shoud I invest in studying Prism in addition to learning WPF or ASP.NET MVC?

    Read the article

  • Reflective practice in programming using keystroke playback

    - by Graham
    I'm thinking of applying Reflective Practice to improving my programming skills. To that end, I want to be able to watch myself writing code. In general, what is a good method for applying Reflective Practice to the craft of programming? In particular, if it's a good idea, is there an editor that records keystrokes then plays them back at a later time - possibly running the keys together without delays, or replaying at a 2x/4x/8x accelerated rate? Screencasting with RecordMyDesktop is an option, but has downsides of waiting for encoding and ending up with a big video file instead of a list of keystrokes.

    Read the article

  • How to stop getting too focused on a train of thought when programming?

    - by LDM91
    I often find myself getting too focused on a train of thought when programming, which results in me having what I guess could be described as "tunnel vision". As a result of this I miss important details/clues, which means I waste a fair amount of time before finally deciding the path I'm taking to solve the task is wrong. Afterwards, I take a step back which almost always results in me discovering what I've missed in a lot less time.. It's becoming really frustrating as it feels like I'm wasting a lot of time and effort, so I was wondering if anyone else had experienced similar issues, and had some suggestions to stop going down dead ends and programming "blindly" as it were!

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to call a controller action from a view that was rendered by another controller?

    - by marco-fiset
    Let's say I have an OrderController which handles orders. The user adds products to it through the view, and then the final price gets calculated through an AJAX call to a controller action. The price calculation logic is implemented in a seperate class and used in a controller action. What happens is that I have many views from different controllers that need to use that particular action. I'd like to have some kind of a PriceController that I could call an action on. But then the view would have to know about that PriceController and call an action on it. Is it bad practice for a view to call an action on a different controller from which it was rendered?

    Read the article

  • Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

    - by Bob Horn
    Disclaimer: The intent of this question isn't to discern what is better for the individual developer, but for the system as a whole. I've worked in environments where small teams managed certain areas. For example, there would be a small team for every one of these functions: UI Framework code Business/application logic Database I've also worked on teams where the developers were responsible for all of these areas and more (QA, analsyt, etc...). My current environment promotes agile development (specifically scrum) and everyone has their hands in every area mentioned above. While there are pros and cons to each approach, I'd be curious to know if there are more pros and cons than I list below, and also what the generally feeling is about which approach is better. Devs Do It All Pros 1. Developers may be more well-rounded 2. Developers know more of the system Cons 1. Everyone has their hands in all areas, increasing the probability of creating less-than-optimal results in that area 2. It can take longer to do something with which you are unfamiliar (jack of all trades, master of none) Devs Specialize Pros 1. Developers can create policies and procedures for their area of expertise and more easily enforce them 2. Developers have more of a chance to become deeply knowledgeable about their specific area and make it the best it can be 3. Other developers don't cross boundaries and degrade another area Cons 1. As one colleague put it: "Why would you want to pigeon-hole yourself like that?" (Meaning some developers won't get a chance to work in certain areas.) It's easy to say how wonderful agile is, and that we should do it all, but I'm somewhat of a fan of having areas of expertise. Without that expertise, I've seen code degrade, database schemas become difficult to manage, hack UI code, etc... Let's face it, some people make careers out of doing just UI work, or just database work. It's not that easy to just fill in and do as good of a job as an expert in that area.

    Read the article

  • Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 Released

    - by Sherry LaMonica-Oracle
    Oracle R Distribution version 3.1.1 has been released to Oracle's public yum today. R-3.1.1 (code name "Sock it to Me") is an update to R-3.1.0 that consists mainly of bug fixes. It also includes enhancements related to accessing package help files, improved accuracy when importing data with large integers, and better integration with RStudio graphics. The full list of new features and bug fixes is listed in the NEWS file.To install Oracle R Distribution using yum, follow the instructions in the Oracle R Enterprise Installation and Administration Guide.Installing using yum will resolve any operating system dependencies automatically. As such, we recommend using yum to install Oracle R Distribution. However, if yum is not available, you can install Oracle R Distribution RPMs directly using RPM commands.For Oracle Linux 5, the Oracle R Distribution RPMs are available in the Enterprise Linux Add-Ons repository:  R-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm   R-core-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  R-devel-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-devel-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-static-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm For Oracle Linux 6, the Oracle R Distribution RPMs are available in the Oracle Linux Add-Ons repository:  R-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  R-core-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  R-devel-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-devel-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-static-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpmFor example, this command installs the R 3.1.1 RPM on Oracle Linux x86-64 version 6:  rpm -i R-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm To complete the Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 installation, repeat this command for each of the 6 RPMs, resolving dependencies as required. Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 is not yet officially certified with Oracle R Enterprise. Refer to Table 1-2 in the Oracle R Enterprise Installation Guide for supported configurations of Oracle R Enterprise components, or check this blog for updates. The Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 binaries for Windows, AIX, Solaris SPARC and Solaris x86 will be available on OSS, Oracle's Open Source Software portal, in the coming weeks.

    Read the article

  • Structure vs. programming

    - by ChristopherW
    Is it bad that I often find myself spending more time on program structure than actually writing code inside methods? Is this common? I feel I spend more time laying the foundation than actually building the house (metaphorically). While I understand that without a good foundation the house will cave in, but does it legitimately need to take half of the project to finalize code structure? I understand design patterns, and I know where to go if I need help on choosing one, but often I find myself doubting my own choices.

    Read the article

  • Salting a public hash

    - by Sathvik
    Does it make any sense at all to salt a hash which might be available publicly? It doesn't really make sense to me, but does anyone actually do that? UPDATE - Some more info: An acquaintance of mine has a common salted-hash function which he uses throughout his code. So I was wondering if it made any sense at-all, to do so. Here's the function he used: hashlib.sha256(string+SALT).hexdigest() Update2: Sorry if it wasn't clear. By available publicly I meant, that it is rendered in the HTML of the project (for linking, etc) & can thus be easily read by a third party. The project is a python based web-app which involves user-created pages which are tracked using their hashes like myproject.com/hash so thus revealing the hash publicly. So my question is, whether in any circumstances would any sane programmer salt such a hash? Question: Using hashlib.sha256(string+SALT).hexdigest() vs hashlib.sha256(string).hexdigest() , when the hash isn't a secret.

    Read the article

  • Who can change the View in MVC?

    - by Luke
    I'm working on a thick client graph displaying and manipulation application. I'm trying to apply the MVC pattern to our 3D visualization component. Here is what I have for the Model, View, and Controller: Model - The graph and it's metadata. This includes vertices, edges, and the attributes of each. It does not contain position information, icons, colors, or anything display related. View - This would commonly be called a scene graph. It includes the 3D display information, texture information, color information, and anything else that is related specifically to the visualization of the model. Controller - The controller takes the view and displays it in a Window using OpenGL (but it could potentially be any 3D graphics package). The application has various "layouts" that change the position of the vertices in the display. For instance, one layout may arrange the vertices in a circle. Is it common for these layouts to access and change the view directly? Should they go through the Controller to access the View? If they go through the Controller, should they just ask for direct access to the View or should each change go through the controller? I realize this is a bit different from the standard MVC example where there a finite number of Views. In this case, the View can change in an infinite number of ways. Perhaps I'm shattering some basic principle of MVC here. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Can too much abstraction be bad?

    - by m3th0dman
    As programmers I feel that our goal is to provide good abstractions on the given domain model and business logic. But where should this abstraction stop? How to make the trade-off between abstraction and all it's benefits (flexibility, ease of changing etc.) and ease of understanding the code and all it's benefits. I believe I tend to write code overly abstracted and I don't know how good is it; I often tend to write it like it is some kind of a micro-framework, which consists of two parts: Micro-Modules which are hooked up in the micro-framework: these modules are easy to be understood, developed and maintained as single units. This code basically represents the code that actually does the functional stuff, described in requirements. Connecting code; now here I believe stands the problem. This code tends to be complicated because it is sometimes very abstracted and is hard to be understood at the beginning; this arises due to the fact that it is only pure abstraction, the base in reality and business logic being performed in the code presented 1; from this reason this code is not expected to be changed once tested. Is this a good approach at programming? That it, having changing code very fragmented in many modules and very easy to be understood and non-changing code very complex from the abstraction POV? Should all the code be uniformly complex (that is code 1 more complex and interlinked and code 2 more simple) so that anybody looking through it can understand it in a reasonable amount of time but change is expensive or the solution presented above is good, where "changing code" is very easy to be understood, debugged, changed and "linking code" is kind of difficult. Note: this is not about code readability! Both code at 1 and 2 is readable, but code at 2 comes with more complex abstractions while code 1 comes with simple abstractions.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >