Search Results

Search found 4615 results on 185 pages for 'coding horrors'.

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 4/185 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Question about best practices and Macros from the book 'C++ Coding Standards'

    - by Victor T.
    From Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu's 'C++ Coding Standards', Item 16: Avoid Macros under Exceptions for this guideline they wrote: For conditional compilation (e.g., system-dependent parts), avoid littering your code with #ifdefs. Instead, prefer to organize code such that the use of macros drives alternative implementations of one common interface, and then use the interface throughout. I'm having trouble understanding exactly what they mean by this. How can you drive alternate implementations without the use of #ifdef conditional compile macro directives? Can someone provide an example to help illustrate what's being proposed by the above paragraph? Thanks

    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

  • Coding Conventions - Naming Enums

    - by Walter White
    Hi all, Is there a document describing how to name enumerations? My preference is that an enum is a type. So, for instance, you have an enum Fruit{Apple,Orange,Banana,Pear, ... } NetworkConnectionType{LAN,Data_3g,Data_4g, ... } I am opposed to naming it: FruitEnum NetworkConnectionTypeEnum I understand it is easy to pick off which files are enums, but then you would also have: NetworkConnectionClass FruitClass Also, is there a good document describing the same for constants, where to declare them, etc.? Walter

    Read the article

  • In Java it seems Public constructors are always a bad coding practice

    - by Adam Gent
    This maybe a controversial question and may not be suited for this forum (so I will not be insulted if you choose to close this question). It seems given the current capabilities of Java there is no reason to make constructors public ... ever. Friendly, private, protected are OK but public no. It seems that its almost always a better idea to provide a public static method for creating objects. Every Java Bean serialization technology (JAXB, Jackson, Spring etc...) can call a protected or private no-arg constructor. My questions are: I have never seen this practice decreed or written down anywhere? Maybe Bloch mentions it but I don't own is book. Is there a use case other than perhaps not being super DRY that I missed? EDIT: I explain why static methods are better. .1. For one you get better type inference. For example See Guava's http://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/wiki/CollectionUtilitiesExplained .2. As a designer of the class you can later change what is returned with a static method. .3. Dealing with constructor inheritance is painful especially if you have to pre-calculate something.

    Read the article

  • Huffman coding two characters as one

    - by Adomas
    Hi, I need huffman code(best in python or in java), which could encode text not by one character (a = 10, b = 11), but by two (ab = 11, ag = 10). Is it possible and if yes, where could i find it, maybe it's somewhere in the internet and i just can'd find it?

    Read the article

  • on coding style

    - by user12607414
    I vastly prefer coding to discussing coding style, just as I would prefer to write poetry instead of talking about how it should be written. Sometimes the topic cannot be put off, either because some individual coder is messing up a shared code base and needs to be corrected, or (worse) because some officious soul has decided, "what we really need around here are some strongly enforced style rules!" Neither is the case at the moment, and yet I will venture a post on the subject. The following are not rules, but suggested etiquette. The idea is to allow a coherent style of coding to flourish safely and sanely, as a humane, inductive, social process. Maxim M1: Observe, respect, and imitate the largest-scale precedents available. (Preserve styles of whitespace, capitalization, punctuation, abbreviation, name choice, code block size, factorization, type of comments, class organization, file naming, etc., etc., etc.) Maxim M2: Don't add weight to small-scale variations. (Realize that Maxim M1 has been broken many times, but don't take that as license to create further irregularities.) Maxim M3: Listen to and rely on your reviewers to help you perceive your own coding quirks. (When you review, help the coder do this.) Maxim M4: When you touch some code, try to leave it more readable than you found it. (When you review such changes, thank the coder for the cleanup. When you plan changes, plan for cleanups.) On the Hotspot project, which is almost 1.5 decades old, we have often practiced and benefited from such etiquette. The process is, and should be, inductive, not prescriptive. An ounce of neighborliness is better than a pound of police-work. Reality check: If you actually look at (or live in) the Hotspot code base, you will find we have accumulated many annoying irregularities in our source base. I suppose this is the normal condition of a lived-in space. Unless you want to spend all your time polishing and tidying, you can't live without some smudge and clutter, can you? Final digression: Grammars and dictionaries and other prescriptive rule books are sometimes useful, but we humans learn and maintain our language by example not grammar. The same applies to style rules. Actually, I think the process of maintaining a clean and pleasant working code base is an instance of a community maintaining its common linguistic identity. BTW, I've been reading and listening to John McWhorter lately with great pleasure. (If you end with a digression, is it a tail-digression?)

    Read the article

  • I can't program because the code I am using uses old coding styles. Is this normal to programmers? [closed]

    - by Renato Dinhani Conceição
    I'm in my first real job as programmer, but I can't solve any problems because of the coding style used. The code here: Does not have comments Does not have functions (50, 100, 200, 300 or more lines executed in sequence) Uses a lot of if statements with a lot of paths Has variables that make no sense (eg.: cf_cfop, CF_Natop, lnom, r_procod) Uses an old language (Visual FoxPro 8 from 2002), but there are new releases from 2007. I feel like I have gone back to 1970. Is it normal for a programmer familiar with OOP, clean-code, design patterns, etc. to have trouble with coding in this old-fashion way? EDIT: All the answers are very good. For my (un)hope, appears that there are a lot of this kind of code bases around the world. A point mentioned to all answers is refactor the code. Yeah, I really like to do it. In my personal project, I always do this, but... I can't refactor the code. Programmers are only allowed to change the files in the task that they are designed for. Every change in old code must be keep commented in the code (even with Subversion as version control), plus meta informations (date, programmer, task) related to that change (this became a mess, there are code with 3 used lines and 50 old lines commented). I'm thinking that is not only a code problem, but a management of software development problem.

    Read the article

  • What is the best aproach for coding in a slow compilation environment

    - by Andrew
    I used to coding in C# in a TDD style - write/or change a small chunk of code, re-compile in 10 seconds the whole solution, re-run the tests and again. Easy... That development methodology worked very well for me for a few years, until a last year when I had to go back to C++ coding and it really feels that my productivity has dramatically decreased since. The C++ as a language is not a problem - I had quite a lot fo C++ dev experience... but in the past. My productivity is still OK for a small projects, but it gets worse when with the increase of the project size and once compilation time hits 10+ minutes it gets really bad. And if I find the error I have to start compilation again, etc. That is just purely frustrating. Thus I concluded that in a small chunks (as before) is not acceptable - any recommendations how can I get myself into the old gone habit of coding for an hour or so, when reviewing the code manually (without relying on a fast C# compiler), and only recompiling/re-running unit tests once in a couple of hours. With a C# and TDD it was very easy to write a code in a evolutionary way - after a dozen of iterations whatever crap I started with was ending up in a good code, but it just does not work for me anymore (in a slow compilation environment). Would really appreciate your inputs and recos. p.s. not sure how to tag the question - anyone is welcome to re-tag the question appropriately. Cheers.

    Read the article

  • Most effective work habit for coding? [on hold]

    - by Cris
    Working on a big solo project (~15,000 LOC), I am encountering the following phenomenon: I seem to work best when I program in short bursts of 10-15 minutes. Right now I am working on a section which is a complete first time for me architecturally and if I have any architectural issues that emerge when doing the implementation, I seem to be able to best serve these by taking a total break. Then, later, sketching out the ideas on some paper. And when I feel I have sufficient clarity, then going back to code. This iterates until that architectural issue for that section is resolved. This seems quite counter intuitive: that I can progress more quickly by coding less, and taking more breaks. I am nearing the end of the sections which are "first times" for me, and about to dive into stuff which I am much more familiar and am wondering if this counter intuitive efficiency will continue. So my question is: even for regular coding of sections one is familiar with, which don't require constant re-clarification of the best architecture, is more progress to be attained by taking more breaks and coding in bursts?

    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 >