Search Results

Search found 13604 results on 545 pages for 'programming agnostic'.

Page 39/545 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • The worst anti-patterns you have came across.

    - by ?????????
    What are the worst anti-patterns you have came across in your career as a programmer? I'm mostly involved in java, although it is probably language-independent. I think the worst of it is what I call the main anti-pattern. It means program consisting of single, extremely big class (sometimes accompanied with a pair of little classes) which contains all logic. Typically with a big loop in which all business logic is contained, sometimes having tens of thousands of lines of code.

    Read the article

  • Should my program "be lenient" in what it accepts and "discard faulty input silently"?

    - by romkyns
    I was under the impression that by now everyone agrees this maxim was a mistake. But I recently saw this answer which has a "be lenient" comment upvoted 137 times (as of today). In my opinion, the leniency in what browsers accept was the direct cause of the utter mess that HTML and some other web standards were a few years ago, and have only recently begun to properly crystallize out of that mess. The way I see it, being lenient in what you accept will lead to this. The second part of the maxim is "discard faulty input silently, without returning an error message unless this is required by the specification", and this feels borderline offensive. Any programmer who has banged their head on the wall when something fails silently will know what I mean. So, am I completely wrong about this? Should my program be lenient in what it accepts and swallow errors silently? Or am I mis-interpreting what this is supposed to mean? Taken to the extreme, if Excel followed this maxim and I gave it an exe file to open, it would just show a blank spreadsheet without even mentioning that anything went wrong. Is this really a good principle to follow?

    Read the article

  • What should be allowed inside getters and setters?

    - by Botond Balázs
    I got into an interesting internet argument about getter and setter methods and encapsulation. Someone said that all they should do is an assignment (setters) or a variable access (getters) to keep them "pure" and ensure encapsulation. Am I right that this would completely defeat the purpose of having getters and setters in the first place and validation and other logic (without strange side-effects of course) should be allowed? When should validation happen? When setting the value, inside the setter (to protect the object from ever entering an invalid state - my opinion) Before setting the value, outside the setter Inside the object, before each time the value is used Is a setter allowed to change the value (maybe convert a valid value to some canonical internal representation)?

    Read the article

  • Finding an A* heuristic for a directed graph

    - by Janis Peisenieks
    In a previous question, I asked about finding a route (or path if you will) in a city. That is all dandy. The solution I chose was with the A* algorithm, which really seems to suit my needs. What I find puzzling is heuristic. How do I find one in an environment without constant distance between 2 nodes? Meaning, not every 2 nodes have the same distance between them. What I have is nodes (junctures), streets with weight (which may also be one-way), a start/finish node (since the start and end is always in the same place) and a goal node. In an ordinary case, I would just use the same way I got to goal to go back, but since one of the streets could have been a one-way, that may not be possible. The main question How do I find a heuristic in a directed graph?

    Read the article

  • Benchmarking CPU processing power

    - by Federico Zancan
    Provided that many tools for computers benchmarking are available already, I'd like to write my own, starting with processing power measurement. I'd like to write it in C under Linux, but other language alternatives are welcome. I thought starting from floating point operations per second, but it is just a hint. I also thought it'd be correct to keep track of CPU number of cores, RAM amount and the like, to more consistently associate results with CPU architecture. How would you proceed to the task of measuring CPU computing power? And on top of that: I would worry about a properly minimum workload induced by concurrently running services; is it correct to run benchmarking as a standalone (and possibly avulsed from the OS environment) process?

    Read the article

  • Does a prose to code compiler exist?

    - by Raynos
    I have seen some horrible code in my time including people virtually duplicating the code in comments // add 4 to x x+=4; // for each i in 0 to 9 for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { // multiply x by i x *= i; } Taking this concept further, I'm curious whether prose to code compilers exist. Is there a valid use case for English prose to code? Do compilers exist that do this? The distinction between this and auto generated code, is that auto generated code is generally always a subset of a project. Can we have complete projects auto generated from english prose? I realise that this might overlap with the concept of declarative languages.

    Read the article

  • How does one handle an incorrect resource file?

    - by AedonEtLIRA
    I'm starting the parser that will handle one of the key features of my app and realizing exactly who easy it would be for me to screw up a resource file that is provided to the application. For example, a simple resource that I provide to my app is a JSON file that contains an entity layout (name, fascia, location etc...). It would be easy for me to leave out the name of the entity or misspell the JSON key. Obviously catastrophic failures during parsing are to be handled in a try/catch, but how would subtle failures (such as a dyslexic spelling of name) be handled?

    Read the article

  • Techniques for getting off the ground in any language

    - by AndyBursh
    When I start learning a new language, I have a couple of simple implementations that I like to complete to familiarise myself with the language. Currently, I write: Fibonacci and/or factorial to get the hang of writing and calling methods, and basic recursion Djikstras shortest path (with a node type) to get to grips with making classes (or whatever the language equivalent is) with methods and properties, and also using them in slightly more complex code. I was wondering: does anybody else have any techniques or tools they like to use when getting off the ground in a new language? I'm always looking for new things to add to my "start-up routine".

    Read the article

  • Why Use !boolean_variable Over boolean_variable == false

    - by ell
    A comment on this question: Calling A Method that returns a boolean value inside a conditional statement says that you should use !boolean instead of boolean == false when testing conditions. Why? To me boolean == false is much more natural in English and is more explicit. I apologise if this is just a matter of style, but I was wondering if there was some other reason for this preference of !boolean?

    Read the article

  • Library to fake intermittent failures according to tester-defined policy?

    - by crosstalk
    I'm looking for a library that I can use to help mock a program component that works only intermittently - usually, it works fine, but sometimes it fails. For example, suppose I need to read data from a file, and my program has to avoid crashing or hanging when a read fails due to a disk head crash. I'd like to model that by having a mock data reader function that returns mock data 90% of the time, but hangs or returns garbage otherwise. Or, if I'm stress-testing my full program, I could turn on debugging code in my real data reader module to make it return real data 90% of the time and hang otherwise. Now, obviously, in this particular example I could just code up my mock manually to test against a random() routine. However, I was looking for a system that allows implementing any failure policy I want, including: Fail randomly 10% of the time Succeed 10 times, fail 4 times, repeat Fail semi-randomly, such that one failure tends to be followed by a burst of more failures Any policy the tester wants to define Furthermore, I'd like to be able to change the failure policy at runtime, using either code internal to the program under test, or external knobs or switches (though the latter can be implemented with the former). In pig-Java, I'd envision a FailureFaker interface like so: interface FailureFaker { /** Return true if and only if the mocked operation succeeded. Implementors should override this method with versions consistent with their failure policy. */ public boolean attempt(); } And each failure policy would be a class implementing FailureFaker; for example there would be a PatternFailureFaker that would succeed N times, then fail M times, then repeat, and a AlwaysFailFailureFaker that I'd use temporarily when I need to simulate, say, someone removing the external hard drive my data was on. The policy could then be used (and changed) in my mock object code like so: class MyMockComponent { FailureFaker faker; public void doSomething() { if (faker.attempt()) { // ... } else { throw new RuntimeException(); } } void setFailurePolicy (FailureFaker policy) { this.faker = policy; } } Now, this seems like something that would be part of a mocking library, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's been done before. (In fact, I got the idea from Steve Maguire's Writing Solid Code, where he discusses this exact idea on pages 228-231, saying that such facilities were common in Microsoft code of that early-90's era.) However, I'm only familiar with EasyMock and jMockit for Java, and neither AFAIK have this function, or something similar with different syntax. Hence, the question: Do such libraries as I've described above exist? If they do, where have you found them useful? If you haven't found them useful, why not?

    Read the article

  • Open source framework quality [closed]

    - by Jonas Byström
    It's not hard to find snippets, components or tools/toolkits in the open source world which holds the quality bar really high. Myself I use git, python, linux, gcc, bash and a whole range of others on a daily basis, and I love them. But when it comes to bigger frameworks, which are intended for facilitating larger tasks of an application without much interference, I'm not as enthusiastic. I've tried a few commercial frameworks (game engines), which were okay, but all big open source frameworks which I've used myself, or which I have seen used in applications were decidedly worse than the commercial equivalent. But I'm not sure if my experience was typical. Where have bigger open source frameworks for facilitating larger tasks of an application been able to equal or exceed commercial frameworks, and how were they better?

    Read the article

  • String patterns that can be used to filter and group files

    - by Louis Rhys
    One of our application filters files in certain directory, extract some data from it and export a document from the extracted data. The algorithm for extracting the data depends on the file, and so far we use regex to select the algorithm to be used, for example .*\.txt will be processed by algorithm A, foo[0-5]\.xml will be processed by algo B, etc. However now we need some files to be processed together. For example, in one case we need two files, foo.*\.xml and bar.*\.xml. Part of the information to be extracted exist in the foo file, and the other part in the bar file. Moreover, we need to make sure the wild card is compatible. For example, if there are 6 files foo1.xml foo23.xml bar1.xml bar9.xml bar23.xml foo4.xml I would expect foo1 and bar1 to be identified as a group, and foo23 and bar23 as another group. bar9 and foo4 has no pair, so they will not be treated. Now, since the filter is configured by user, we need to have a pattern that can express the above requirement. I don't think you can express meaning like above in standard regex. (foo|bar).*\.xml will match all 6 file above and we can't identify which file is paired for a particular file. Is there any standard pattern that can express it? Or any idea how to modify regex to support this, that can be implemented easily?

    Read the article

  • What are the arguments against parsing the Cthulhu way?

    - by smarmy53
    I have been assigned the task of implementing a Domain Specific Language for a tool that may become quite important for the company. The language is simple but not trivial, it already allows nested loops, string concatenation, etc. and it is practically sure that other constructs will be added as the project advances. I know by experience that writing a lexer/parser by hand -unless the grammar is trivial- is a time consuming and error prone process. So I was left with two options: a parser generator à la yacc or a combinator library like Parsec. The former was good as well but I picked the latter for various reasons, and implemented the solution in a functional language. The result is pretty spectacular to my eyes, the code is very concise, elegant and readable/fluent. I concede it may look a bit weird if you never programmed in anything other than java/c#, but then this would be true of anything not written in java/c#. At some point however, I've been literally attacked by a co-worker. After a quick glance at my screen he declared that the code is uncomprehensible and that I should not reinvent parsing but just use a stack and String.Split like everybody does. He made a lot of noise, and I could not convince him, partially because I've been taken by surprise and had no clear explanation, partially because his opinion was immutable (no pun intended). I even offered to explain him the language, but to no avail. I'm positive the discussion is going to re-surface in front of management, so I'm preparing some solid arguments. These are the first few reasons that come to my mind to avoid a String.Split-based solution: you need lot of ifs to handle special cases and things quickly spiral out of control lots of hardcoded array indexes makes maintenance painful extremely difficult to handle things like a function call as a method argument (ex. add( (add a, b), c) very difficult to provide meaningful error messages in case of syntax errors (very likely to happen) I'm all for simplicity, clarity and avoiding unnecessary smart-cryptic stuff, but I also believe it's a mistake to dumb down every part of the codebase so that even a burger flipper can understand it. It's the same argument I hear for not using interfaces, not adopting separation of concerns, copying-pasting code around, etc. A minimum of technical competence and willingness to learn is required to work on a software project after all. (I won't use this argument as it will probably sound offensive, and starting a war is not going to help anybody) What are your favorite arguments against parsing the Cthulhu way?* *of course if you can convince me he's right I'll be perfectly happy as well

    Read the article

  • How do we keep dependent data structures up to date?

    - by Geo
    Suppose you have a parse tree, an abstract syntax tree, and a control flow graph, each one logically derived from the one before. In principle it is easy to construct each graph given the parse tree, but how can we manage the complexity of updating the graphs when the parse tree is modified? We know exactly how the tree has been modified, but how can the change be propagated to the other trees in a way that doesn't become difficult to manage? Naturally the dependent graph can be updated by simply reconstructing it from scratch every time the first graph changes, but then there would be no way of knowing the details of the changes in the dependent graph. I currently have four ways to attempt to solve this problem, but each one has difficulties. Nodes of the dependent tree each observe the relevant nodes of the original tree, updating themselves and the observer lists of original tree nodes as necessary. The conceptual complexity of this can become daunting. Each node of the original tree has a list of the dependent tree nodes that specifically depend upon it, and when the node changes it sets a flag on the dependent nodes to mark them as dirty, including the parents of the dependent nodes all the way down to the root. After each change we run an algorithm that is much like the algorithm for constructing the dependent graph from scratch, but it skips over any clean node and reconstructs each dirty node, keeping track of whether the reconstructed node is actually different from the dirty node. This can also get tricky. We can represent the logical connection between the original graph and the dependent graph as a data structure, like a list of constraints, perhaps designed using a declarative language. When the original graph changes we need only scan the list to discover which constraints are violated and how the dependent tree needs to change to correct the violation, all encoded as data. We can reconstruct the dependent graph from scratch as though there were no existing dependent graph, and then compare the existing graph and the new graph to discover how it has changed. I'm sure this is the easiest way because I know there are algorithms available for detecting differences, but they are all quite computationally expensive and in principle it seems unnecessary so I'm deliberately avoiding this option. What is the right way to deal with these sorts of problems? Surely there must be a design pattern that makes this whole thing almost easy. It would be nice to have a good solution for every problem of this general description. Does this class of problem have a name?

    Read the article

  • Data migration - dangerous or essential?

    - by MRalwasser
    The software development department of my company is facing with the problem that data migrations are considered as potentially dangerous, especially for my managers. The background is that our customers are using a large amount of data with poor quality. The reasons for this is only partially related to our software quality, but rather to the history of the data: Most of them have been migrated from predecessor systems, some bugs caused (mostly business) inconsistencies in the data records or misentries by accident on the customer's side (which our software allowed by error). The most important counter-arguments from my managers are that faulty data may turn into even worse data, the data troubles may awake some managers at the customer and some processes on the customer's side may not work anymore because their processes somewhat adapted to our system. Personally, I consider data migrations as an integral part of the software development and that data migration can been seen to data what refactoring is to code. I think that data migration is an essential for creating software that evolves. Without it, we would have to create painful software which somewhat works around a bad data structure. I am asking you: What are your thoughts to data migration, especially for the real life cases and not only from a developer's perspecticve? Do you have any arguments against my managers opinions? How does your company deal with data migrations and the difficulties caused by them? Any other interesting thoughts which belongs to this topics?

    Read the article

  • Pattern for a class that does only one thing

    - by Heinzi
    Let's say I have a procedure that does stuff: void doStuff(initalParams) { ... } Now I discover that "doing stuff" is quite a compex operation. The procedure becomes large, I split it up into multiple smaller procedures and soon I realize that having some kind of state would be useful while doing stuff, so that I need to pass less parameters between the small procedures. So, I factor it out into its own class: class StuffDoer { private someInternalState; public Start(initalParams) { ... } // some private helper procedures here ... } And then I call it like this: new StuffDoer().Start(initialParams); or like this: new StuffDoer(initialParams).Start(); And this is what feels wrong. When using the .NET or Java API, I always never call new SomeApiClass().Start(...);, which makes me suspect that I'm doing it wrong. Sure, I could make StuffDoer's constructor private and add a static helper method: public static DoStuff(initalParams) { new StuffDoer().Start(initialParams); } But then I'd have a class whose external interface consists of only one static method, which also feels weird. Hence my question: Is there a well-established pattern for this type of classes that have only one entry point and have no "externally recognizable" state, i.e., instance state is only required during execution of that one entry point?

    Read the article

  • Performance of concurrent software on multicore processors

    - by Giorgio
    Recently I have often read that, since the trend is to build processors with multiple cores, it will be increasingly important to have programming languages that support concurrent programming in order to better exploit the parallelism offered by these processors. In this respect, certain programming paradigms or models are considered well-suited for writing robust concurrent software: Functional programming languages, e.g. Haskell, Scala, etc. The actor model: Erlang, but also available for Scala / Java (Akka), C++ (Theron, Casablanca, ...), and other programming languages. My questions: What is the state of the art regarding the development of concurrent applications (e.g. using multi-threading) using the above languages / models? Is this area still being explored or are there well-established practices already? Will it be more complex to program applications with a higher level of concurrency, or is it just a matter of learning new paradigms and practices? How does the performance of highly concurrent software compare to the performance of more traditional software when executed on multiple core processors? For example, has anyone implemented a desktop application using C++ / Theron, or Java / Akka? Was there a boost in performance on a multiple core processor due to higher parallelism?

    Read the article

  • Strategy for backwards compatibility of persistent storage

    - by Baqueta
    In my experience, trying to ensure that new versions of an application retain compatibility with data storage from previous versions can often be a painful process. What I currently do is to save a version number for each 'unit' of data (be it a file, database row/table, or whatever) and ensure that the version number gets updated each time the data changes in some way. I also create methods to convert from v1 to v2, v2 to v3, and so on. That way, if I'm at v7 and I encounter a v3 file, I can do v3-v4-v5-v6-v7. So far this approach seems to be working out well, but I haven't had to make use of it extensively yet so there may be unforseen problems. I'm also concerned that if the objects I'm loading change significantly, I'll either have to keep around old versions of the classes or face updating all my conversion methods to handle the new class definition. Is my approach sound? Are there other/better approaches I could be using? Are there any design patterns applicable to this problem?

    Read the article

  • How to "back track"?

    - by esqew
    I find that I start projects and, due to my lack of experience, find that old database structures and huge blocks of code are inefficient and memory-costly. However, by the time I realize a re-design of the entire project is needed, the project has grown to such a size that it is simply too late to go back and modify the project in its current state and requires a completely new project file and the whole shebang. How should I prevent ruts such as this one, where it is too late to go back and modify the current project to fit specifications modified far down the road from the creation of the project? (Apologies in advance for confusing grammar, it's been a long day here... as you can probably tell.)

    Read the article

  • Projects to learn web development

    - by David McDavidson
    I'm trying to get a job as a web developer, but the great majority of jobs offers requires previous experience and a portfolio to prove you've got the required skills. Unfortunately I don't have any real experience or anything to show. The best way to learn is to try and tackle real world problems, so I'd like to know what would be some nice projects to learn stuff and that will look good in a portfolio?

    Read the article

  • Updating password hashing without forcing a new password for existing users

    - by Willem
    You maintain an existing application with an established user base. Over time it is decided that the current password hashing technique is outdated and needs to be upgraded. Furthermore, for UX reasons, you don't want existing users to be forced to update their password. The whole password hashing update needs to happen behind the screen. Assume a 'simplistic' database model for users that contains: ID Email Password How does one go around to solving such a requirement? My current thoughts are: create a new hashing method in the appropriate class update the user table in the database to hold an additional password field Once a user successfully logs in using the outdated password hash, fill the second password field with the updated hash This leaves me with the problem that I cannot reasonable differentiate between users who have and those who have not updated their password hash and thus will be forced to check both. This seems horribly flawed. Furthermore this basically means that the old hashing technique could be forced to stay indefinitely until every single user has updated their password. Only at that moment could I start removing the old hashing check and remove the superfluous database field. I'm mainly looking for some design tips here, since my current 'solution' is dirty, incomplete and what not, but if actual code is required to describe a possible solution, feel free to use any language.

    Read the article

  • Methodology for Documenting Existing Code Base

    - by George Stocker
    I work as part of a team on an existing application that has no inline documentation, nor does it have technical documentation. As I've been working on various bug reports on the application, I've written a sort of breadcrumb trail for myself - bug numbers in various places so that the next developer can refer to that bug number to see what was going on. My question is thus: What is the most effecient method for documenting this code? Should I document as I touch the area (the virus method, if you will), or should I document from each section on its own, and not follow paths that branch out into other areas of the application? Should I insert inline comments where none previously existed (with the fear that I may end up incorrectly identifying what the code does)? What method would you use to accurately and quickly document a rather large application that has no existing inline documentation, nor inline references to external documentation?

    Read the article

  • Is there an excuse for short variable names?

    - by KChaloux
    This has become a large frustration with the codebase I'm currently working in; many of our variable names are short and undescriptive. I'm the only developer left on the project, and there isn't documentation as to what most of them do, so I have to spend extra time tracking down what they represent. For example, I was reading over some code that updates the definition of an optical surface. The variables set at the start were as follows: double dR, dCV, dK, dDin, dDout, dRin, dRout dR = Convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[0].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); dCV = convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[1].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); ... and so on Maybe it's just me, but it told me essentially nothing about what they represented, which made understanding the code further down difficult. All I knew was that it was a variable parsed out specific row from a specific table, somewhere. After some searching, I found out what they meant: dR = radius dCV = curvature dK = conic constant dDin = inner aperture dDout = outer aperture dRin = inner radius dRout = outer radius I renamed them to essentially what I have up there. It lengthens some lines, but I feel like that's a fair trade off. This kind of naming scheme is used throughout a lot of the code however. I'm not sure if it's an artifact from developers who learned by working with older systems, or if there's a deeper reason behind it. Is there a good reason to name variables this way, or am I justified in updating them to more descriptive names as I come across them?

    Read the article

  • Finding most Important Node(s) in a Directed Graph

    - by Srikar Appal
    I have a large (˜ 20 million nodes) directed Graph with in-edges & out-edges. I want to figure out which parts of of the graph deserve the most attention. Often most of the graph is boring, or at least it is already well understood. The way I am defining "attention" is by the concept of "connectedness" i.e. How can i find the most connected node(s) in the graph? In what follows, One can assume that nodes by themselves have no score, the edges have no weight & they are either connected or not. This website suggest some pretty complicated procedures like n-dimensional space, Eigen Vectors, graph centrality concepts, pageRank etc. Is this problem that complex? Can I not do a simple Breadth-First Traversal of the entire graph where at each node I figure out a way to find the number of in-edges. The node with most in-edges is the most important node in the graph. Am I missing something here?

    Read the article

  • Examples of "Lost art" on software technology/development

    - by mamcx
    With the advent of a new technology, some old ideas - despite been good - are forgotten in the process. I read a lot how some "new" thing was already present in Lisp like 60 years ago, but only recently resurface with other name or on top of another language. Now look like the new old thing is build functional, non-mutable, non-locking-thread stuff... and that make me wonder what have been "lost" in the art of development of software? What ideas are almost forgotten, waiting for resurface? One of my, I remember when I code in foxpro. The idea of have a full stack to develop database apps without impedance mismatch is something I truly miss. In the current languages, I never find another environment that match how easy was develop in fox back them. What else is missing?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >