Search Results

Search found 13302 results on 533 pages for 'common practice'.

Page 47/533 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • Why is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • Is sticking to one language on a particular project a good practice?

    - by Ans
    I'm developing a pipeline for processing text that will go into production. The question I keep asking myself is: should I stick to one language for the project when I'm looking for a tool to do a particular task (e.g. NLTK, PDFMiner, CLD, CRFsuite, etc.)? Or is it OK to mix and match languages on the project? So I pick the best tool regardless of what language it's written in (e.g. OpenNLP, ParsCit, poppler, CFR++, etc.) and warp (wrap) my code around it? Note, I am not asking about should a developer stick to just one language for their career.

    Read the article

  • is it a bad practice to call a View from another View in MVC?

    - by marcos.borunda
    I have some plain Views, they don't have any logic behind them (there is no action or controller behind them), their only propouse is to alert the user about something like "We have sent you an email to confirm your account", "You have no access to this resource", etc... These views are really simple, and calling them through a Controller/Action seems to be too much overhead, but somehow I feel like it is not quite correct. What do you think? How do you handle this kind of situations?? I guess this question will apply to any MVC Framework, but in my case I'm using the ASP.NET MVC 3 framework.

    Read the article

  • Will Google treat this JavaScript code as a bad practice?

    - by Mathew Foscarini
    I have a website that provides a custom UX experience implemented via JavaScript. When JavaScript is disabled in the browser the website falls back to CSS for the layout. To make this possible I've added a noJS class to the <body> and quickly remove it via JavaScript. <body class="noJS layout-wide"> <script type="text/javascript">var b=document.getElementById("body");b.className=b.className.replace("noJS","");</script> This caused a problem when the page loads and JavaScript is enabled. The body immediately has it's noJS class removed, and this causes the layout to appear messed up until the JavaScript code for layout is executed (at bottom of the page). To solve this I hide each article via JavaScript by adding a CSS class fix which is display:none as each article is loaded. <article id="q-3217">....</article> <script type="text/javascript">var b=document.getElementById("q-3217");b.className=b.className+" fix";</script> After the page is ready I show all the articles in the correct layout. I've read many times in Google's documentation not to hide content. So I'm worried that the Google will penalize my website for doing this.

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice for linking to/from guest posts on other blogs?

    - by sam
    When writing a guest blog for a site, I include a link back to my site - an inbound link. If I were to write a post on my blog publicising my guest post, that would mean there were reciprocal links, thus cancelling each other out, correct? If I made the link (on my blog) back to the guest post nofollow, would that cancel the effect, meaning I still get link juice from the guest post? Further down the line if the site I posted on as a guest wanted to write a post for my site, what is the best way for me to prevent re-introducing the reciprocal link problem?

    Read the article

  • Is inline SQL still classed as bad practice now that we have Micro ORMs?

    - by Grofit
    This is a bit of an open ended question but I wanted some opinions, as I grew up in a world where inline SQL scripts were the norm, then we were all made very aware of SQL injection based issues, and how fragile the sql was when doing string manipulations all over the place. Then came the dawn of the ORM where you were explaining the query to the ORM and letting it generate its own SQL, which in a lot of cases was not optimal but was safe and easy. Another good thing about ORMs or database abstraction layers were that the SQL was generated with its database engine in mind, so I could use Hibernate/Nhibernate with MSSQL, MYSQL and my code never changed it was just a configuration detail. Now fast forward to current day, where Micro ORMs seem to be winning over more developers I was wondering why we have seemingly taken a U-Turn on the whole in-line sql subject. I must admit I do like the idea of no ORM config files and being able to write my query in a more optimal manner but it feels like I am opening myself back up to the old vulnerabilities such as SQL injection and I am also tying myself to one database engine so if I want my software to support multiple database engines I would need to do some more string hackery which seems to then start to make code unreadable and more fragile. (Just before someone mentions it I know you can use parameter based arguments with most micro orms which offers protection in most cases from sql injection) So what are peoples opinions on this sort of thing? I am using Dapper as my Micro ORM in this instance and NHibernate as my regular ORM in this scenario, however most in each field are quite similar. What I term as inline sql is SQL strings within source code. There used to be design debates over SQL strings in source code detracting from the fundamental intent of the logic, which is why statically typed linq style queries became so popular its still just 1 language, but with lets say C# and Sql in one page you have 2 languages intermingled in your raw source code now. Just to clarify, the SQL injection is just one of the known issues with using sql strings, I already mention you can stop this from happening with parameter based queries, however I highlight other issues with having SQL queries ingrained in your source code, such as the lack of DB Vendor abstraction as well as losing any level of compile time error capturing on string based queries, these are all issues which we managed to side step with the dawn of ORMs with their higher level querying functionality, such as HQL or LINQ etc (not all of the issues but most of them). So I am less focused on the individual highlighted issues and more the bigger picture of is it now becoming more acceptable to have SQL strings directly in your source code again, as most Micro ORMs use this mechanism. Here is a similar question which has a few different view points, although is more about the inline sql without the micro orm context: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5303746/is-inline-sql-hard-coding

    Read the article

  • What are the basic features of an email module in a common web application?

    - by Coral Doe
    When developing an email module, what are the features to have in mind, besides actual email sending? I am talking about an email module that notifies users of events and periodically sends reports. The only other feature I have in mind is maintaining grey/black lists for users that do illegal operations in the system or any other things that may lead to email/domain/IP banning. Is there an etiquette for developing email modules? Are there some references of requirements for such modules?

    Read the article

  • Is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice for async APIs that return futures on Scala?

    - by Maurício Linhares
    I have started a project to write an async PostgreSQL driver on Scala and to be async, I need to accept callbacks and use futures, but then accepting a callback and a future makes the code cumbersome because you always have to send a callback even if it is useless. Here's a test: "insert a row in the database" in { withHandler { (handler, future) => future.get(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS) handler.sendQuery( this.create ){ query => }.get( 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS ) handler.sendQuery( this.insert ){ query => }.get( 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS ).rowsAffected === 1 } } Sending the empty callback is horrible but I couldn't find a way to make it optional or anything like that, so right now I don't have a lot of ideas on how this external API should look like. It could be something like: handler.sendQuery( this.create ).addListener { query => println(query) } But then again, I'm not sure how people are organizing API's in this regard. Providing examples in other projects would also be great.

    Read the article

  • Is sexist humor more common in the Ruby community than other language communities? [closed]

    - by Andrew Grimm
    I've heard of more cases of sexist humor in the Ruby community, such as the sqoot's "women as perk" and toplessness in advertising, than in all the other programming language communities combined. Is this merely because I'm in the Ruby community, and therefore are more likely to hear about incidents in the Ruby community, or is it because there's a higher rate of sexist humor in the Ruby community compared to, say, the C community?

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad practice to store large files (10 MB) in a database?

    - by B Seven
    I am currently creating a web application that allows users to store and share files, 1 MB - 10 MB in size. It seems to me that storing the files in a database will significantly slow down database access. Is this a valid concern? Is it better to store the files in the file system and save the file name and path in the database? Are there any best practices related to storing files when working with a database? I am working in PHP and MySQL for this project, but is the issue the same for most environments (Ruby on Rails, PHP, .NET) and databases (MySQL, PostgreSQL).

    Read the article

  • Is there an established or defined best practice for source control branching between development and production builds?

    - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt
    Thanks for looking. I struggled in how to phrase my question, so let me give an example in hopes of making more clear what I am after: I currently work on a dev team responsible for maintaining and adding features to a web application. We have a development server and we use source control (TFS). Each day everyone checks in their code and when the code (running on the dev server) passes our QA/QC program, it goes to production. Recently, however, we had a bug in production which required an immediate production fix. The problem was that several of us developers had code checked in that was not ready for production so we had to either quickly complete and QA the code, or roll back everything, undo pending changes, etc. In other words, it was a mess. This made me wonder: Is there an established design pattern that prevents this type of scenario. It seems like there must be some "textbook" answer to this, but I am unsure what that would be. Perhaps a development branch of the code and a "release-ready" or production branch of the code?

    Read the article

  • How common is prototyping as the first stage of development?

    - by EpsilonVector
    I've been taking some software design courses in the past few semesters, and while I see the benefit in a lot of the formalism, I feel like it doesn't tell me anything about the program itself: You can't tell how the program is going to operate from the Use Case spec, even though it discusses what the program can do. You can't tell anything about the user experience from the requirements document, even though it can include quality requirements. Sequence diagrams are a good description of how the software works as the call stack, but are very limited, and give a highly partial view of the overall system. Class diagrams are great for describing how the system is built, but are utterly useless in helping you figure out what the software needs to be. Where in all this formalism is the bottom line: how the program looks, operates, and what experience it gives? Doesn't it make more sense to design off of that? Isn't it better to figure out how the program should work via a prototype and strive to implement it for real? I know that I'm probably suffering from being taught engineering by theoreticians, but I need to ask, do they do this in the industry? How do people figure out what the program actually is, not what it should conform to? Do people prototype a lot, or do they mostly use the formal tools like UML and I just didn't get the hang of using them yet?

    Read the article

  • Are very short or abbreviated method/function names that don't use full words bad practice or a matter of style.

    - by Alb
    Is there nowadays any case for brevity over clarity with method names? Tonight I came across the Python method repr() which seems like a bad name for a method to me. It's not an English word. It apparently is an abbreviation of 'representation' and even if you can deduce that, it still doesn't tell you what the method does. A good method name is subjective to a certain degree, but I had assumed that modern best practices agreed that names should be at least full words and descriptive enough to reveal enough about the method that you would easily find one when looking for it. Method names made from words help let your code read like English. repr() seems to have no advantages as a name other than being short and IDE auto-complete makes this a non-issue. An additional reason given in an answer is that python names are brief so that you can do many things on one line. Surely the better way is to just extract the many things to their own function, and repeat until lines are not too long. Are these just a hangover from the unix way of doing things? Commands with names like ls, rm, ps and du (if you could call those names) were hard to find and hard to remember. I know that the everyday usage of commands such as these is different than methods in code so the matter of whether those are bad names is a different matter.

    Read the article

  • Best practice for marking a bug as resolved in Bugzilla ?

    - by Vincent B.
    I am wondering what is the best way to handle the situation of marking a bug as resolved and providing a version of component/product in which this fix can be found. Context For a project I am working on, we are using Bugzilla for issue tracking, and we have the following: A product "A" with a version number like vA.B.C.D, This product "A" have the following components: Component "C1" with a version number like vA.B.C.D, Component "C2" with a version number like vA.B.C.D, Component "C3" with a version number like vA.B.C.D. Internally we keep track of which component versions have been used to generate the product A version vA.B.C.D. Example: Product "A" version v1.0.0.0 has been produced from component "C1" v1.0.0.3, component "C2" v1.3.0.0 and component "C3" v2.1.3.5. And Product "A" version v1.0.1.0 has been produced from component "C1" v1.0.0.4, component "C2" v1.3.0.0 and component "C3" v2.1.3.5. Each component is a SVN repository. The person in charge of generating the product "A" have only access to the different components tags folder in SVN, and not the trunk of each component repository. Problem Now the problem is the following, when a bug is found in the product "A", and that the bug is related to Component "C1", the version of product "A" is chosen (e.g. v1.0.0.0), and this version allow the developer to know which version of component "C1" has the bug (here it will be v1.0.0.3). A bug report is created. Now let's say that the developer responsible for component "C1" corrects the bug, then when the bug seems to be fixed and after some test and validation, the developer generates a new tag for component "C1", with the version v1.0.0.4. At this time, the developer of component "C1" needs to update the bug report, but what is the best to do: Mark the bug as resolved/fixed and add a comment saying "This bug has been fixed in the tags v1.0.0.4 of C1 component" ? Keep the bug as assigned, add a comment saying "This bug has been fixed in the tags v1.0.0.4 of C1 component, update this bug status to resolved for the next version of the product that will be generated with the newest version (v1.0.0.4 of C1)" ? Another possible way to deal with this problem. Right now the problem is that when a product component CX is fixed, it is not sure in which future version of the product A it will be included, so it is for me not possible to say in which version of the product it will be solved, but it is possible to say in which version of the Component CX it has been solved. So when do we need to mark a bug as solved, when the product A version include the fixed version of CX, or only when CX component has been fixed ? Thanks for your personal feedback and ideas about this !

    Read the article

  • How common is prototyping as the first stage of development?

    - by EpsilonVector
    I've been taking some software design courses in the past few semesters, and while I see the benefit in a lot of the formalism, I still feel like it doesn't tell me anything about the program itself. You can't tell how the program is going to operate from the Use Case spec, even though it discusses what the program can do, and you can't tell anything about the user experience from the requirements document, even though it can include QA requirements. ...sequence diagrams are as good a description of how the software works as the call stack, in other words- very limited, highly partial view of the overall system, and a class diagram is great for describing how the system is built, but is utterly useless in helping you figure out what the software needs to be. Where in all this formalism is the bottom line- how the program looks, operates, and what experience it gives? Doesn't it make more sense to design off of that? Isn't it better to figure out how the program should work via a prototype and strive to implement it for real? I know that I'm probably suffering from being taught engineering by theoreticians, but I got to ask, do they do this in the industry? How do people figure out what the program actually is, not what it should conform to? Do people prototype a lot? ...or do they mostly use the formal tools like UML and I just didn't get the hang of using them yet?

    Read the article

  • Best practice in setting return value (use else or?)

    - by Deckard
    Whenever you want to return a value from a method, but whatever you return depends on some other value, you typically use branching: int calculateSomething() { if (a == b) { return x; } else { return y; } } Another way to write this is: int calculateSomething() { if (a == b) { return x; } return y; } Is there any reason to avoid one or the other? Both allow adding "else if"-clauses without problems. Both typically generate compiler errors if you add anything at the bottom. Note: I couldn't find any duplicates, although multiple questions exist about whether the accompanying curly braces should be on their own line. So let's not get into that.

    Read the article

  • Is there an easy way to type in common math symbols?

    - by srcspider
    Disclaimer: I'm sure someone is going to moan about easy-of-use, for the purpose of this question consider readability to be the only factor that matters So I found this site that converts to easting northing, it's not really important what that even means but here's how the piece of javascript looks. /** * Convert Ordnance Survey grid reference easting/northing coordinate to (OSGB36) latitude/longitude * * @param {OsGridRef} gridref - easting/northing to be converted to latitude/longitude * @returns {LatLonE} latitude/longitude (in OSGB36) of supplied grid reference */ OsGridRef.osGridToLatLong = function(gridref) { var E = gridref.easting; var N = gridref.northing; var a = 6377563.396, b = 6356256.909; // Airy 1830 major & minor semi-axes var F0 = 0.9996012717; // NatGrid scale factor on central meridian var f0 = 49*Math.PI/180, ?0 = -2*Math.PI/180; // NatGrid true origin var N0 = -100000, E0 = 400000; // northing & easting of true origin, metres var e2 = 1 - (b*b)/(a*a); // eccentricity squared var n = (a-b)/(a+b), n2 = n*n, n3 = n*n*n; // n, n², n³ var f=f0, M=0; do { f = (N-N0-M)/(a*F0) + f; var Ma = (1 + n + (5/4)*n2 + (5/4)*n3) * (f-f0); var Mb = (3*n + 3*n*n + (21/8)*n3) * Math.sin(f-f0) * Math.cos(f+f0); var Mc = ((15/8)*n2 + (15/8)*n3) * Math.sin(2*(f-f0)) * Math.cos(2*(f+f0)); var Md = (35/24)*n3 * Math.sin(3*(f-f0)) * Math.cos(3*(f+f0)); M = b * F0 * (Ma - Mb + Mc - Md); // meridional arc } while (N-N0-M >= 0.00001); // ie until < 0.01mm var cosf = Math.cos(f), sinf = Math.sin(f); var ? = a*F0/Math.sqrt(1-e2*sinf*sinf); // nu = transverse radius of curvature var ? = a*F0*(1-e2)/Math.pow(1-e2*sinf*sinf, 1.5); // rho = meridional radius of curvature var ?2 = ?/?-1; // eta = ? var tanf = Math.tan(f); var tan2f = tanf*tanf, tan4f = tan2f*tan2f, tan6f = tan4f*tan2f; var secf = 1/cosf; var ?3 = ?*?*?, ?5 = ?3*?*?, ?7 = ?5*?*?; var VII = tanf/(2*?*?); var VIII = tanf/(24*?*?3)*(5+3*tan2f+?2-9*tan2f*?2); var IX = tanf/(720*?*?5)*(61+90*tan2f+45*tan4f); var X = secf/?; var XI = secf/(6*?3)*(?/?+2*tan2f); var XII = secf/(120*?5)*(5+28*tan2f+24*tan4f); var XIIA = secf/(5040*?7)*(61+662*tan2f+1320*tan4f+720*tan6f); var dE = (E-E0), dE2 = dE*dE, dE3 = dE2*dE, dE4 = dE2*dE2, dE5 = dE3*dE2, dE6 = dE4*dE2, dE7 = dE5*dE2; f = f - VII*dE2 + VIII*dE4 - IX*dE6; var ? = ?0 + X*dE - XI*dE3 + XII*dE5 - XIIA*dE7; return new LatLonE(f.toDegrees(), ?.toDegrees(), GeoParams.datum.OSGB36); } I found that to be a really nice way of writing an algorythm, at least as far as redability is concerned. Is there any way to easily write the special symbols. And by easily write I mean NOT copy/paste them.

    Read the article

  • Is it common for a development position to be extremely mundane and not challenging at all? [closed]

    - by Kim Jong Woo
    Hi guys so I am working at this company as a web developer but after 1 week of working here, I realize the stuff I am doing seem to be very easy stuff compared to what my peers who have been around for longer are doing. I am way ahead of my schedule and finish my projects early but it's because the work is not at all hard or problem solving involved. So I am puzzled why I would be thanked over doing such menial tasks. Is this normal? This is driving me nuts, I ask to be given more work and I do get it and still finish it quickly and accurately. Now I am having this paranoia that they are just conspiring to use me for a short period of time and terminate me. Am I going too far with this? I keep losing sleep over this. On days when I have a full load of work to complete, this uneasiness goes away but so far I feel like I am not being allowed to pursue what I thought I would do like solving and designing solutions. A lot of it doesn't require any thinking, just cleaning up other people's code and closing bug tickets.

    Read the article

  • Is it good practice to use functions just to centralize common code?

    - by EpsilonVector
    I run across this problem a lot. For example, I currently write a read function and a write function, and they both check if buf is a NULL pointer and that the mode variable is within certain boundaries. This is code duplication. This can be solved by moving it into its own function. But should I? This will be a pretty anemic function (doesn't do much), rather localized (so not general purpose), and doesn't stand well on its own (can't figure out what you need it for unless you see where it is used). Another option is to use a macro, but I want to talk about functions in this post. So, should you use a function for something like this? What are the pros and cons?

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad practice to register sntsh.com if my name is Santosh?

    - by Santosh
    My name is Santosh but I can't register a santosh.com because it is already taken. Most extensions for Santosh are already taken. I was trying to register a domain with .sh extension but santo.sh would cost me very high and I can't afford ~$100 for just a personal domain and that's only for one year only. Now I am thinking that I should register a sntsh.com. But there is a problem, will sntsh.com over my name Santosh don't create a SEO problem? One more thing, that totally different from above topic. If I register a santosh.name domain which is not registered, won't it create copyright and any legal problems with other santosh domains?

    Read the article

  • Is it common to prototype in a higher level language?

    - by Mark Canlas
    I'm currently toying with the idea of embarking on a project that far exceeds my current programming ability in a language I have very little real world experience in (C). Would it be valuable to prototype in a higher level language that I'm more familiar with (like Perl/Python/Ruby/C#) just so I can get the overall design going? Ultimately, the final product is performance sensitive, hence the choice of C, but I'm afraid not knowing C well will make me lose the forest for the trees. While searching for similar questions, I noticed one fellow mention that programmers used to prototype in Prolog, then crank it out in assembler.

    Read the article

  • git in non-distributed, independent, lone programming ...best practice(s) ?

    - by explorest
    I am currently studying the git documentation to get a hang of distributed version control workflow and use of git command line. I want to first start using git with small, personal, pet projects so to gain experience before doing it on large scale (i.e., bigger projects, team dev). What areas of the git system should I, as a lone player, devote most of my study time to... what parts should I leave for the larger scale work later on. In other words what features of the git system will fully be grasped in team work only, and therefore should not be too involved with at an individual level?

    Read the article

  • What are the common mistakes in 'tailored Scrum approaches'?

    - by Clark Gable
    I have seen this before. Management wants to be agile and be scrummified, but does not want to step out of the status quo. My latest observation is no different; here, the Scrum is 'tailored' to the organization; specifically into a weird many-people-process. The diagram showing the different participants. I am putting together a document listing why this will not work. Here are the obvious ones: 1. There are product owner agents (an obvious WTF), who report to the product owner: causing dilution of decision making capability 2. There is a role that looks similar to a manager in the traditional approach - development manager: an obvious attempt at command-and-control model 3. The ScrumMaster's role includes collecting timesheets, which are used to track progress instead of burndown charts: detrimental to agile's efforts to build teams with motivated individuals Leaving the question "how would you convince the management?", my question is more at, "what else do you see as failures in this/similar 'tailored Scrum approaches'? EDIT: The diagram might use a few more details 1. The development manager is not part of the development team, with not very clearly defined responsibilities, except: developer performance assessemnt, recruitment, etc., 2. There are more than two teams (with ScrumMaster+development manager+dev team) with the same product owner for all teams!

    Read the article

  • What are the most common stumbling blocks when it comes to learning programming, in order of difficulty?

    - by blueberryfields
    I seem to remember that linked lists, recursion, pointers, and memory management are all good examples of stumbling blocks - places where the aspiring programmer typically ends up spending significant time trying to understand a concept before moving on and improving, and many end up giving up and not improving. I'm looking for a complete/comprehensive list of these types of stumbling blocks, in rough estimated order of difficulty to learn, with the goal of making sure that an educational program for programmers is structured to properly guide students through them Is this information available somewhere? Ideally, the difficulty to learn will be measured in some sort of objective manner (ie, % of students which consistently fail to learn the concept) What sources are most appropriate for obtaining this information?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >