Search Results

Search found 4760 results on 191 pages for 'coding guideline'.

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 4/191 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • tips for fixing bad coding/dev habits ?

    - by dfafa
    i want to become a better coder....so i have decided to sign up for computing science program...maybe a formal education can assist me. i started working on smaller projects to learn but currently i have really bad coding/dev habits which is hindering my productivity as the codebase increases.... i have highlighted them and perhaps someone could make suggestions (or redirect to resources) or a more efficient method. most stuff that i made in the past were web apps. i usually develop with putty + nano...i just love the minimalist feel i use winscp and develop directly on my private web server...too lazy to do it on localhost and upload it later. i dont use subversion control...which one do i need ? sometimes ctrl +z doesn't work well. when i run out of ideas for naming variable, i use swear words instead. i swear a lot when i get stuck....how to deal with anger issue ? my codes look ugly with comments everywhere. would rather use procedural coding finds "thinking" in OO difficult and time consuming i "write first think later". refactors code only if i am getting paid for it. dislikes configuring linux distro, Apache, MySQL, scaling, designing graphics and layouts. does not like writing tests likes working alone. does not like sharing codes. has an econ degree dislikes reading other people's code would rather write it on my own it seems my only true desire is to translate my ideas to a working prototype as fast as possible....it seems like i am very uninterested in the other details...could it be that i am not cut out to be a coder after all ? is going back to study comp sci a bad idea ?

    Read the article

  • Should we encourage coding styles in favor of developer's autonomy, or discourage it in favor of consistency?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    A developer writes if/else blocks with one-line code statements like: if (condition) // Do this one-line code else // Do this one-line code Another uses curly braces for all of them: if (condition) { // Do this one-line code } else { // Do this one-line code } A developer first instantiates an object, then uses it: HelperClass helper = new HelperClass(); helper.DoSomething(); Another developer instantiates and uses the object in one line: new HelperClass().DoSomething(); A developer is more easy with arrays, and for loops: string[] ordinals = new string[] {'First', 'Second', 'Third'}; for (i = 0; i < ordinals.Length; i++) { // Do something } Another writes: List<string> ordinals = new List<string>() {'First', 'Second', 'Third'}; foreach (string ordinal in ordinals) { // Do something } I'm sure that you know what I'm talking about. I call it coding style (cause I don't know what it's called). But whatever we call it, is it good or bad? Does encouraging it have an effect of higher productivity of developers? Should we ask developers to try to write code the way we tell them, so to make the whole system become style-consistent?

    Read the article

  • Questions on Juval Lowy's IDesign C# Coding Standard

    - by Jan
    We are trying to use the IDesign C# Coding standard. Unfortunately, I found no comprehensive document to explain all the rules that it gives, and also his book does not always help. Here are the open questions that remain for me (from chapter 2, Coding Practices): No. 26: Avoid providing explicit values for enums unless they are integer powers of 2 No. 34: Always explicitly initialize an array of reference types using a for loop No. 50: Avoid events as interface members No. 52: Expose interfaces on class hierarchies No. 73: Do not define method-specific constraints in interfaces No. 74: Do not define constraints in delegates Here's what I think about those: I thought that providing explicit values would be especially useful when adding new enum members at a later point in time. If these members are added between other already existing members, I would provide explicit values to make sure the integer representation of existing members does not change. No idea why I would want to do this. I'd say this totally depends on the logic of my program. I see that there is alternative option of providing "Sink interfaces" (simply providing already all "OnXxxHappened" methods), but what is the reason to prefer one over the other? Unsure what he means here: Could this mean "When implementing an interface explicitly in a non-sealed class, consider providing the implementation in a protected virtual method that can be overridden"? (see Programming .NET Components 2nd Edition, end of chapter “Interfaces and Class Hierarchies”). I suppose this is about providing a "where" clause when using generics, but why is this bad on an interface? I suppose this is about providing a "where" clause when using generics, but why is this bad on a delegate?

    Read the article

  • Is there an appropriate coding style for implementing an algorithm during an interview?

    - by GlenPeterson
    I failed an interview question in C years ago about converting hex to decimal by not exploiting the ASCII table if (inputDigitByte > 9) hex = inputDigitByte - 'a'. The rise of Unicode has made this question pretty silly, but the point was that the interviewer valued raw execution speed above readability and error handling. They tell you to review algorithms textbooks to prepare for these interviews, yet these same textbooks tend to favor the implementation with the fewest lines of code, even if it has to rely on magic numbers (like "infinity") and a slower, more memory-intensive implementation (like a linked list instead of an array) to do that. I don't know what is right. Coding an algorithm within the space of an interview has at least 3 constraints: time to code, elegance/readability, and efficiency of execution. What trade-offs are appropriate for interview code? How much do you follow the textbook definition of an algorithm? Is it better to eliminate recursion, unroll loops, and use arrays for efficiency? Or is it better to use recursion and special values like "infinity" or Integer.MAX_VALUE to reduce the number of lines of code needed to write the algorithm? Interface: Make a very self-contained, bullet-proof interface, or sloppy and fast? On the one extreme, the array to be sorted might be a public static variable. On the other extreme, it might need to be passed to each method, allowing methods to be called individually from different threads for different purposes. Is it appropriate to use a linked-list data structure for items that are traversed in one direction vs. using arrays and doubling the size when the array is full? Implementing a singly-linked list during the interview is often much faster to code and easier remember for recursive algorithms like MergeSort. Thread safety - just document that it's unsafe, or say so verbally? How much should the interviewee be looking for opportunities for parallel processing? Is bit shifting appropriate? x / 2 or x >> 1 Polymorphism, type safety, and generics? Comments? Variable and method names: qs(a, p, q, r) vs: quickSort(theArray, minIdx, partIdx, maxIdx) How much should you use existing APIs? Obviously you can't use a java.util.HashMap to implement a hash-table, but what about using a java.util.List to accumulate your sorted results? Are there any guiding principals that would answer these and other questions, or is the guiding principal to ask the interviewer? Or maybe this should be the basis of a discussion while writing the code? If an interviewer can't or won't answer one of these questions, are there any tips for coaxing the information out of them?

    Read the article

  • More elegant way to avoid hard coding the format of a a CSV file?

    - by dsollen
    I know this is trivial issue, but I just feel this can be more elegant. So I need to write/read data files for my program, lets say they are CSV for now. I can implement the format as I see fit, but I may have need to change that format later. The simply thing to do is something like out.write(For.getValue()+","+bar.getMinValue()+","+fi.toString()); This is easy to write, but obviously is guilty of hard coding and the general 'magic number' issue. The format is hard-coded, requires parsing of the code to figure out the file format, and changing the format requires changing multiple methods. I could instead have my constants specifying the location that I want each variable to be saved in the CSV file to remove some of the 'magic numbers'; then save/load into the an array at the location specified by the constants: int FOO_LOCATION=0; int BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION=1; int FI_LOCATION=2 int NUM_ARGUMENTS=3; String[] outputArguments=new String[NUM_ARGUMENTS]; outputArguments[FOO_LOCATION] = foo.getValue(); outputArgumetns[BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION] = bar.getMinValue(); outptArguments[FI_LOCATOIN==fi.toString(); writeAsCSV(outputArguments); But this is...extremely verbose and still a bit ugly. It makes it easy to see the format of existing CSV and to swap the location of variables within the file easily. However, if I decide to add an extra value to the csv I need to not only add a new constant, but also modify the read and write methods to add the logic that actually saves/reads the argument from the array; I still have to hunt down every method using these variables and change them by hand! If I use Java enums I can clean this up slightly, but the real issue is still present. Short of some sort of functional programming (and java's inner classes are too ugly to be considered functional) I still have no obvious way of clearly expressing what variable is associated with each constant short of writing (and maintaining) it in the read/write methods. For instance I still need to write somewhere that the FOO_LOCATION specifies the location of foo.getValue(). It seems as if there should be a prettier, easier to maintain, manner for approaching this? Incidentally, I'm working in java at the moment, however, I am interested conceptually about the design approach regardless of language. Some library in java that does all the work for me is definitely welcome (though it may prove more hassle to get permission to add it to the codebase then to just write something by hand quickly), but what I'm really asking is more about how to write elegant code if you had to do this by hand.

    Read the article

  • iPhone/Cocoa Coding Standards

    - by greypoint
    Are there any generally-accepted coding standards (naming, casting etc) that apply specifically to iPhone/Cocoa/Objective-C? I know Microsoft has published similar standards as they relate to .Net and C# but haven't run across anything related to the iPhone world.

    Read the article

  • Is my javascript coding style following best-practice?

    - by Blankman
    What is the 'best practise' with regard to coding style. Should I use _ for private members? Should I use this._privateMember? Please re-write my code in proper style if its wrong: (function()){ var _blah = 1; someFunction = function() { alert(_blah); }; someOtherFunction = function { someFunction(); } }();

    Read the article

  • Java coding style

    - by folone
    How do you keep yourself coding to standards? There is stylecop and resharper for C#. Are there any tools/eclipse plugins for code analisys in Java? Which of them do you use?

    Read the article

  • PHP Coding styles return; in switch/case

    - by ArneRie
    Hi , we're trying to implement new coding style guidelines for our team, the php codesniffer is printing an warning on switch case statements when no "break" is found like: switch ($foo) { case 1: return 1; case 2: return 2; default: return 3; } is there any good reason to use : switch ($foo) { case 1: return 1; break; } ?? the break is never reached ?

    Read the article

  • Consolidating coding styles: Funcs, private method, single method classes

    - by jdoig
    Hi all, We currently have 3 devs with, some, conflicting styles and I'm looking for a way to bring peace to the kingdom... The Coders: Foo 1: Likes to use Func's & Action's inside public methods. He uses actions to alias off lengthy method calls and Func's to perform simple tasks that can be expressed in 1 or 2 lines and will be used frequently through out the code Pros: The main body of his code is succinct and very readable, often with only one or 2 public methods per class and rarely any private methods. Cons: The start of methods contain blocks of lambda rich code that other developers don't enjoy reading; and, on occasion, can contain higher order functions that other dev's REALLY don't like reading. Foo 2: Likes to create a private method for (almost) everything the public method will have to do . Pros: Public methods remain small and readable (to all developers). Cons: Private methods are numerous. With private methods that call into other private methods, that call into... etc, etc. Making code hard to navigate. Foo 3: Likes to create a public class with a, single, public method for every, non-trivial, task that needs performing, then dependency inject them into other objects. Pros: Easily testable, easy to understand (one object, one responsibility). Cons: project gets littered by classes, opening multiple class files to understand what code does makes navigation awkward. It would be great to take the best of all these techniques... Foo-1 Has really nice, readable (almost dsl-like) code... for the most part, except for all the Action and Func lambda shenanigans bulked together at the start of a method. Foo-3 Has highly testable and extensible code that just feels a bit "belt-&-braces" for some solutions and has some code-navigation niggles (constantly hitting F12 in VS and opening 5 other .cs files to find out what a single method does). And Foo-2... Well I'm not sure I like anything about the one-huge .cs file with 2 public methods and 12 private ones, except for the fact it's easier for juniors to dig into. I admit I grossly over-simplified the explanations of those coding styles; but if any one knows of any patterns, practices or diplomatic-manoeuvres that can help unite our three developers (without just telling any of them to just "stop it!") that would be great. From a feasibility standpoint : Foo-1's style meets with the most resistance due to some developers finding lambda and/or Func's hard to read. Foo-2's style meets with a less resistance as it's just so easy to fall into. Foo-3's style requires the most forward thinking and is difficult to enforce when time is short. Any ideas on some coding styles or conventions that can make this work?

    Read the article

  • C# coding standards for private member variables [closed]

    - by Sasha
    I saw two common approaches for coding standards for private member variables: class Foo { private int _i; private string _id; } and class Foo { private int m_i; private string m_id; } I believe the latter is coming from C++. Also, many people specify type before the member variable: double m_dVal -- to indicate that is is a nonconstant member variable of the type double? What are the conventions in C#?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: avoiding hard coding of database name in cross-database views

    - by codeulike
    So, lets say you have two SQL Server Databases on the same server that reference each others tables in their Views, Functions and Stored Procedures. You know, things like this: use database_foo create view spaghetti as select f.col1, c.col2 from fusilli f inner join database_bar.dbo.conchigli c on f.id = c.id (I know that cross-database views are not very good practice, but lets just say you're stuck with it) Are there any good techniques to avoid 'hard coding' the database names? (So that should you need to occasionally re-point to a different database - for testing perhaps - you don't need to edit loads of views, fns, sps) I'm interested in SQL 2005 or SQL 2008 solutions. Cheers.

    Read the article

  • What coding standards do you follow?

    - by Mark Szymanski
    I was just curious what coding standards people followed. I for one use the following: Brackets ALWAYS go on the next line. For instance: int main() { //Blah... } I never use code folding. (Yes my IDE's do support it (Xcode and Eclipse). Put related functions/methods single-spaced, otherwise double space. Here is an example: int foo = 0; printf("%d",foo); those are related while these are not: printf("Hello, World!"); return(0); I don't put else statements on the same line as the closing bracket for the preceding if statement. Most of the time in Java if a program needs multiple try catch statements I will just put the whole thing in one try catch.

    Read the article

  • Common coding style for Python?

    - by Oscar Carballal
    Hi, I'm pretty new to Python, and I want to develop my first serious open source project. I want to ask what is the common coding style for python projects. I'll put also what I'm doing right now. 1.- What is the most widely used column width? (the eternal question) I'm currently sticking to 80 columns (and it's a pain!) 2.- What quotes to use? (I've seen everything and PEP 8 does not mention anything clear) I'm using single quotes for everything but docstrings, which use triple double quotes. 3.- Where do I put my imports? I'm putting them at file header in this order. import sys import -rest of python modules needed- import whatever import -rest of application modules- <code here> 4.- Can I use "import whatever.function as blah"? I saw some documents that disregard doing this. 5.- Tabs or spaces for indenting? Currently using 4 spaces tabs. 6.- Variable naming style? I'm using lowercase for everything but classes, which I put in camelCase. Anything you would recommend?

    Read the article

  • What is a Coding Dojo?

    - by huwyss
    Recently i found out that there is a thing called "coding dojo". The point behind it is that software developers want to have a space to learn new stuff like processes, methods, coding details, languages, and whatnot in an environment without stress. Just for fun. No competition. No results required. No deadlines.Some days ago I joined the Zurich coding dojo. We were three programmers with different backgrounds.We gave ourselves the task to develop a method that takes an input value and returns its prime factors. We did pair programming and every few minutes we switched positions. We used test driven development. The chosen programming language was Ruby.I haven't really done TDD before. It was pretty interesting to see the algorithm develop following the testcases.We started with the first test input=1 then developed the most simple productive program that passed this very first test. Then we added the next test input=2 and implemented the productive code. We kept adding tests and made sure all tests are passed until we had the general solution.When we improved the performance of our code we saw the value of the tests we wrote before. Of course our first performance improvement broke several tests.It was a very interesting experience to see how other developers think and how they work. I will participate at the dojo again and can warmly recommend it to anyone. There are  coding dojos all over the world.Have fun!

    Read the article

  • How do you overcome your own coding biases when handed legacy code?

    - by Bryan M.
    As programmers, we often take incredible pride in our skills and hold very strong opinions about what is 'good' code and 'bad' code. At any given point in our careers, we've probably had some legacy system dropped in our laps, and thought 'My god, this code sucks!' because it didn't fit into our notion of what good code should be, despite the fact that it may have well been perfectly functional, maintainable code. How do you prepare yourself mentally when trying to get your head around another programmer's work?

    Read the article

  • How is your working time distributed between coding and thinking?

    - by mojuba
    ...in percentage. For example 60/40 or 90/10 or 100/0. My hypothesis is that the bigger the proportion of time you spend thinking the smaller your code can be as a result (and the less time will be needed to write it down). Think more, write less, in other words. Do you think it is true? As a side note, I think in typical software companies thinking is not part of the culture anyway: you are usually supposed to be sitting there at your computer typing something. You will almost definitely be noticed by your managers if you wander about with a blank look thinking over your next steps with your code. Too bad.

    Read the article

  • Unity 3D coding language, C# or JavaScript [on hold]

    - by hemantchhabra
    Hello to the gaming community. I am a budding game designer, learning to code for the first time in my life. I did learned c++ in school, 8 years back, so I sort of understand the logic when people are doing coding and I can suggest them the right route also, but to an extent I can't code. I am beginning to learn coding for Unity 3D. Which one do you suggest is more versatile and easier to work on for future, because I am a game designer not a coder, I would do coding until I don't have anyone else to code for me. It should be easy and fast to learn, functional and universal to apply, and innovative at the same time. C# or JavaScript ? Thank you for your time Ps- if you could suggest me steps to learn and tutorials to look for, that would be just awesome.

    Read the article

  • Who likes #regions in Visual Studio?

    - by Nicholas
    Personally I can't stand region tags, but clearly they have wide spread appeal for organizing code, so I want to test the temperature of the water for other MS developer's take on this idea. My personal feeling is that any sort of silly trick to simplify code only acts to encourage terrible coding behavior, like lack of cohesion, unclear intention and poor or incomplete coding standards. One programmer told me that code regions helped encourage coding standards by making it clear where another programmer should put his or her contributions. But, to be blunt, this sounds like a load of horse manure to me. If you have a standard, it is the programmer's job to understand what that standard is... you should't need to define it in every single class file. And, nothing is more annoying than having all of your code collapsed when you open a file. I know that cntrl + M, L will open everything up, but then you have the hideous "hash region definition" open and closing lines to read. They're just irritating. My most stead fast coding philosophy is that all programmer should strive to create clear, concise and cohesive code. Region tags just serve to create noise and redundant intentions. Region tags would be moot in a well thought out and intentioned class. The only place they seem to make sense to me, is in automatically generated code, because you should never have to read that outside of personal curiosity.

    Read the article

  • Which coding style is more common?

    - by Babiker
    In no way shape or form am i advertising/promoting my programming style, but as far as 'multiple variable declarations' are concerned, which case is more acceptable professionally and commonly: case 1: private $databaseURL = "localhost" ; private $databaseUName = "root" ; private $databasePWord = "" ; private $databaseName = "AirAlliance"; case 2: private $databaseURL = "localhost"; private $databaseUName = "root"; private $databasePWord = ""; private $databaseName = "AirAlliance"; The reason i like case 1 is because i can skim though it and see that all is correct way faster than case 2. Also i can visually get familiar with variable names witch makes it faster to work with them l latter on the program.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Coding Standards Feature Implementation

    - by Mike Hofer
    Okay, I have reached a sort of an impasse. In my open source project, a .NET-based Oracle database browser, I've implemented a bunch of refactoring tools. So far, so good. The one feature I was really hoping to implement was a big "Global Reformat" that would make the code (scripts, functions, procedures, packages, views, etc.) standards compliant. (I've always been saddened by the lack of decent SQL refactoring tools, and wanted to do something about it.) Unfortunatey, I am discovering, much to my chagrin, that there doesn't seem to be any one widely-used or even "generally accepted" standard for PL-SQL. That kind of puts a crimp on my implementation plans. My search has been fairly exhaustive. I've found lots of conflicting documents, threads and articles and the opinions are fairly diverse. (Comma placement, of all things, seems to generate quite a bit of debate.) So I'm faced with a couple of options: Add a feature that lets the user customize the standard and then reformat the code according to that standard. —OR— Add a feature that lets the user customize the standard and simply generate a violations list like StyleCop does, leaving the SQL untouched. In my mind, the first option saves the end-users a lot of work, but runs the risk of modifying SQL in potentially unwanted ways. The second option runs the risk of generating lots of warnings and doing no work whatsoever. (It'd just be generally annoying.) In either scenario, I still have no standard to go by. What I'd need to know from you guys is kind of poll-ish, but kind of not. If you were going to use a tool of this nature, what parts of your SQL code would you want it to warn you about or fix? Again, I'm just at a loss due to a lack of a cohesive standard. And given that there isn't anything out there that's officially published by Oracle, I think this is something the community could weigh in on. Also, given the way that voting works on SO, the votes would help to establish the popularity of a given "refactoring." P.S. The engine parses SQL into an expression tree so it can robustly analyze the SQL and reformat it. There should be quite a bit that we can do to correct the format of the SQL. But I am thinking that for the first release of the thing, layout is the primary concern. Though it is worth noting that the thing already has refactorings for converting keywords to upper case, and identifiers to lower case.

    Read the article

  • Objective PHP and key value coding

    - by Lukasz
    Hi Guys. In some part of my code I need something like this: $product_type = $product->type; $price_field = 'field_'.$product_type.'_price'; $price = $product->$$price_field; In other words I need kind of KVC - means get object field by field name produced at the runtime. I simply need to extend some existing system and keep field naming convention so do not advice me to change field names instead. I know something like this works for arrays, when you could easily do that by: $price = $product[$price_field_key]. So I can produce key for array dynamically. But how to do that for objects? Please help me as google gives me river of results for arrays, etc... Thank you

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >