Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns and practices'.

Page 47/348 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

• Testing loses its effectiveness if all programmers don't use them

  - by Jeff O

  Let's assume you are convinced that the extra time spent unit testing has merit and improves production. Does that still hold up when everyone working on the same code doesn't use them? This question makes me wonder if fixing tests that everyone doesn't use is a waste of time. If you correct a test so the new code will pass, you're assuming the new code is correct. The person updating the test better have a firm understanding of the reasoning behind the code change and decide if the test or the new code needs to be fixed. This much inconsistency in a team when it comes to testing is probably an indication of other problems as well. There is a certain amount of risk involved that someone else on the team will alter code that is covered by testing. Is this the point where testing becomes counter-productive?

  Read the article

• How Does AutoPatch Handle Shared E-Business Suite Products?

  - by Steven Chan

  Space... is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is.~ Douglas AdamsDouglas Adams could have been talking about the E-Business Suite.  Depending upon whom you ask (and how you count them), there are between 200 to 240 products in Oracle E-Business Suite.  The products that make up Oracle E-Business Suite are tightly integrated. Some of these products are known as shared or dependent products. Installed and registered automatically by Rapid Install, such products depend on components from other products for full functionality.For example:General Ledger (GL) depends on Application Object Library (FND) and Oracle Receivables (AR)Inventory (INV) depends on FND and GLReceivables (AR) depends on FND, INV, and GLIt can sometimes be challenging to craft a patching strategy for these types of product dependencies.  To help you with that, our Applications Database (AD) team has recently published a new document that describes the actions AutoPatch takes with shared Oracle E-Business Suite products:Patching Shared Oracle E-Business Suite Products (Note 1069099.1)

  Read the article

• Should I comment Tables or Columns in my database?

  - by jako

  I like to comment my code with various information, and I think most people nowadays do so while writing some code. But when it comes to database tables or columns, I have never seen anyone setting some comments, and, to be honest, I don't even think of looking for comments there. So I am wondering if some people are commenting their DB strcuture here, and if I should bother commenting, for instance when I create a new column to an existing table?

  Read the article

• Design for a plugin based application

  - by Varun Naik

  I am working on application, details of which I cannot discuss here. We have core framework and the rest is designed as plug in. In the core framework we have a domain object. This domain object is updated by the plugins. I have defined an interface in which I have function as DomainObject doProcessing(DomainObject object) My intention here is I pass the domain object, the plug in will update it and return it. This updated object is then passed again to different plugin to be updated. I am not sure if this is a good approach. I don't like passing the DomainObject to plugin. Is there a better way I can achieve this? Should I just request data from plugin and update the domain object myself?

  Read the article

• British Telecom Automates Cloud Management with Oracle Enterprise Manager

  - by Anand Akela

  British Telecom delivers scalable and reliable Cloud services using Oracle Enterprise Manager’s automated management capabilities. Don't miss the on Oracle Launch Webcast : Total Cloud Control for Systems on April 12th at 9 AM PST . For more information, please go to Oracle Enterprise Manager  web page or  follow us at :  Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Linkedin | Newsletter

  Read the article

• Am I copy/paste programmer ?

  - by Searock

  When ever I am stuck with a particular problem, I search for a solution in Google. And then I try to understand the code and tweak it according to my requirement. For example recently I had asked a question Reading xml document in firefox in stack overflow. Soufiane Hassou gave me a link to w3schools, where I found a example on parsing xml document, I understood how the example works, but I copied the code and tweaked it according to my requirement, since I don't like typing much. So does this make me a copy/paste programmer? How do you say if a person is a copy/paste programmer ? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Is the 'C' in MVC really necessary?

  - by Anne Nonimus

  I understand the role of the model and view in the Model-View-Controller pattern, but I have a hard time understanding why a controller is necessary. Let's assume we're creating a chess program using an MVC approach; the game state should be the model, and the GUI should be the view. What exactly is the controller in this case? Is it just a separate class that has all the functions that will be called when you, say, click on a tile? Why not just perform all the logic on the model in the view itself?

  Read the article

• Are there any memorization techniques that exist for programmers? [closed]

  - by Akromyk

  I just watched this video on Ted.com entitled: Joshua Foer: Feats of memory anyone can do and it got me thinking about memory from a programmers perspective. There are so many abstract concepts and syntactic nuances we encounter daily, and yet we still manage to remember enough information to be productive. The memory palace may help in remembering someone's name or a random story but are there any memorization techniques that can better aid programmers?

  Read the article

• Am I missing a pattern?

  - by Ryan Pedersen

  I have a class that is a singleton and off of the singleton are properties that hold the instances of all the performance counters in my application. public interface IPerformanceCounters { IPerformanceCounter AccountServiceCallRate { get; } IPerformanceCounter AccountServiceCallDuration { get; } Above is an incomplete snippet of the interface for the class "PerformanceCounters" that is the singleton. I really don't like the plural part of the name and thought about changing it to "PerformanceCounterCollection" but stopped because it really isn't a collection. I also thought about "PerformanceCounterFactory" but it is really a factory either. After failing with these two names and a couple more that aren't worth mentioning I thought that I might be missing a pattern. Is there a name that make sense or a change that I could make towards a standardized pattern that would help me put some polish on this object and get rid of the plural name? I understand that I might be splitting hairs here but that is why I thought that the "Programmers" exchange was the place for this kind of thing. If it is not... I am sorry and I will not make that mistake again. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Builder Pattern: When to fail?

  - by skiwi

  When implementing the Builder Pattern, I often find myself confused with when to let building fail and I even manage to take different stands on the matter every few days. First some explanation: With failing early I mean that building an object should fail as soon as an invalid parameter is passed in. So inside the SomeObjectBuilder. With failing late I mean that building an object only can fail on the build() call that implicitely calls a constructor of the object to be built. Then some arguments: In favor of failing late: A builder class should be no more than a class that simply holds values. Moreover, it leads to less code duplication. In favor of failing early: A general approach in software programming is that you want to detect issues as early as possible and therefore the most logical place to check would be in the builder class' constructor, 'setters' and ultimately in the build method. What is the general concensus about this?

  Read the article

• maintaining a growing, diverse codebase with continuous integration

  - by Nate

  I am in need of some help with philosophy and design of a continuous integration setup. Our current CI setup uses buildbot. When I started out designing it, I inherited (well, not strictly, as I was involved in its design a year earlier) a bespoke CI builder that was tailored to run the entire build at once, overnight. After a while, we decided that this was insufficient, and started exploring different CI frameworks, eventually choosing buildbot. One of my goals in transitioning to buildbot (besides getting to enjoy all the whiz-bang extras) was to overcome some of the inadequacies of our bespoke nightly builder. Humor me for a moment, and let me explain what I have inherited. The codebase for my company is almost 150 unique c++ Windows applications, each of which has dependencies on one or more of a dozen internal libraries (and many on 3rd party libraries as well). Some of these libraries are interdependent, and have depending applications that (while they have nothing to do with each other) have to be built with the same build of that library. Half of these applications and libraries are considered "legacy" and unportable, and must be built with several distinct configurations of the IBM compiler (for which I have written unique subclasses of Compile), and the other half are built with visual studio. The code for each compiler is stored in two separate Visual SourceSafe repositories (which I am simply handling using a bunch of ShellCommands, as there is no support for VSS). Our original nightly builder simply took down the source for everything, and built stuff in a certain order. There was no way to build only a single application, or pick a revision, or to group things. It would launched virtual machines to build a number of the applications. It wasn't very robust, it wasn't distributable. It wasn't terribly extensible. I wanted to be able to overcame all of these limitations in buildbot. The way I did this originally was to create entries for each of the applications we wanted to build (all 150ish of them), then create triggered schedulers that could build various applications as groups, and then subsume those groups under an overall nightly build scheduler. These could run on dedicated slaves (no more virtual machine chicanery), and if I wanted I could simply add new slaves. Now, if we want to do a full build out of schedule, it's one click, but we can also build just one application should we so desire. There are four weaknesses of this approach, however. One is our source tree's complex web of dependencies. In order to simplify config maintenace, all builders are generated from a large dictionary. The dependencies are retrieved and built in a not-terribly robust fashion (namely, keying off of certain things in my build-target dictionary). The second is that each build has between 15 and 21 build steps, which is hard to browse and look at in the web interface, and since there are around 150 columns, takes forever to load (think from 30 seconds to multiple minutes). Thirdly, we no longer have autodiscovery of build targets (although, as much as one of my coworkers harps on me about this, I don't see what it got us in the first place). Finally, aformentioned coworker likes to constantly bring up the fact that we can no longer perform a full build on our local machine (though I never saw what that got us, either, considering that it took three times as long as the distributed build; I think he is just paranoically phobic of ever breaking the build). Now, moving to new development, we are starting to use g++ and subversion (not porting the old repository, mind you - just for the new stuff). Also, we are starting to do more unit testing ("more" might give the wrong picture... it's more like any), and integration testing (using python). I'm having a hard time figuring out how to fit these into my existing configuration. So, where have I gone wrong philosophically here? How can I best proceed forward (with buildbot - it's the only piece of the puzzle I have license to work on) so that my configuration is actually maintainable? How do I address some of my design's weaknesses? What really works in terms of CI strategies for large, (possibly over-)complex codebases?

  Read the article

• How do you approach tutorials

  - by aurel

  Hi I get lots of interesting tutorials through feeds and sometimes I implement them step by step, other times I just read through them and note anything that I do not know. when ever I implement them I takes a long time - starting the project, typing the code (as I feel there is no point to copy and paste ), then going back and forth between browser and editing program All in all, I am interested to know how do you learn from the tutorials (I'm no where close to being an expert). Or if you don't use tutorials, is there any other way to learn? Thanks a lot

  Read the article

• Given the presentation model pattern, is the view, presentation model, or model responsible for adding child views to an existing view at runtime?

  - by Ryan Taylor

  I am building a Flex 4 based application using the presentation model design pattern. This application will have several different components to it as shown in the image below. The MainView and DashboardView will always be visible and they each have corresponding presentation models and models as necessary. These views are easily created by declaring their MXML in the application root. <s:HGroup width="100%" height="100%"> <MainView width="75% height="100%"/> <DashboardView width="25%" height="100%"/> </s:HGroup> There will also be many WidgetViewN views that can be added to the DashboardView by the user at runtime through a simple drop down list. This will need to be accomplished via ActionScript. The drop down list should always show what WidgetViewN has already been added to the DashboardView. Therefore some state about which WidgetViewN's have been created needs to be stored. Since the list of available WidgetViewN and which ones are added to the DashboardView also need to be accessible from other components in the system I think this needs to be stored in a Model object. My understanding of the presentation model design pattern is that the view is very lean. It contains as close to zero logic as is practical. The view communicates/binds to the presentation model which contains all the necessary view logic. The presentation model is effectively an abstract representation of the view which supports low coupling and eases testability. The presentation model may have one or more models injected in in order to display the necessary information. The models themselves contain no view logic whatsoever. So I have a several questions around this design. Who should be responsible for creating the WidgetViewN components and adding these to the DashboardView? Is this the responsibility of the DashboardView, DashboardPresentationModel, DashboardModel or something else entirely? It seems like the DashboardPresentationModel would be responsible for creating/adding/removing any child views from it's display but how do you do this without passing in the DashboardView to the DashboardPresentationModel? The list of available and visible WidgetViewN components needs to be accessible to a few other components as well. Is it okay for a reference to a WidgetViewN to be stored/referenced in a model? Are there any good examples of the presentation model pattern online in Flex that also include creating child views at runtime?

  Read the article

• Absolute statements in IT that are wrong

  - by Dan McGrath

  I was recently in a discussion about the absolute statement "It costs more in programming time to optimise software than it costs to throw hardware at a problem". The general thought (of which I agree with) is that as an absolute statement this is wrong. There are too many variables to ever generalise in such a way. What other statements do you hear about software/programming that simply do not work as an absolute and why?

  Read the article

• Cumulative Update packages for SQL Server 2008 are available now: CU7 for SQL2008 SP2 and CU2 for SQL2008 SP3

  - by ssqa.net

  Another instalment of Cumulative Update package for SQL Server 2008 SP3 is available now, which is CU2 and the build number is known as 10.00.5768.00. As usual this CU2 for SQL2008 SP3 contains hotfixes for issues that were fixed after the release of SQL Server 2008 Service Pack 3 (SP3). KBA2633143 list the following article numbers about more information on the fixes: VSTS bug number KB article number Description 794387 2522893 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2522893/ ) FIX: A backup operation...(read more)

  Read the article

• Programmers and tech email: Do you actually read all of them?

  - by AdityaGameProgrammer

  Email Alerts, Blog /Forum updates, discussion subscriptions general programming/technology update emails that we often subscribe to.Do you actually read them ? or go direct to the source when you find time. often we might the mail of programmers filled with loads of unread subscription mail from technology they previously were following or worked on or things they wish to follow .some or a majority of these mail just keep on piling up . i personally have few updates that i wish i read but constantly avoid and keep of for latter and finally delete them in effort keep the in box clean. few questions come to mind regarding this Do you keep such mail in separate accounts? Do you read all the mail you have subscribed to? Do you ever unsubscribe to any such email if you aren't reading them? How much do you really value these email. Lastly do you keep your in box clean ? wish to deal with this in a better way.

  Read the article

• Manager/Container class vs static class methods

  - by Ben

  Suppose I a have a Widget class that is part of a framework used independently by many applications. I create Widget instances in many situations and their lifetimes vary. In addition to Widget's instance specified methods, I would like to be able to perform the follow class wide operations: Find a single Widget instance based on a unique id Iterate over the list of all Widgets Remove a widget from the set of all widgets In order support these operations, I have been considering two approaches: Container class - Create some container or manager class, WidgetContainer, which holds a list of all Widget instances, support iteration and provides methods for Widget addition, removal and lookup. For example in C#: public class WidgetContainer : IEnumerable<Widget { public void AddWidget(Widget); public Widget GetWidget(WidgetId id); public void RemoveWidget(WidgetId id); } Static class methods - Add static class methods to Widget. For example: public class Widget { public Widget(WidgetId id); public static Widget GetWidget(WidgetId id); public static void RemoveWidget(WidgetId id); public static IEnumerable<Widget AllWidgets(); } Using a container class has the added problem of how to access the container class. Make it a singleton?..yuck! Create some World object that provides access to all such container classes? I have seen many frameworks that use the container class approach, so what is the general consensus?

  Read the article

• How to develop "Client script library" for ASP.net controls and how do these work?

  - by Niranjan Kala

  I have been working on .Net platform for 2 years and right now I am working on DevExpress controls for 6 months. All these control have client-side Events which are under some ClientScript nameSpace of particular control, Which specify ClientInstanceName, methods and properties accessible at client side. For example Button1 is ClientInstanceName and Button1.Text is a property, with methods like these: Button1.SetValue(); Button1.GetValue(); In ASP.Net Controls, buttons have the ClientClick event that fires before the Server Side Click event. I have inspected and goggled to extend client side functionality in asp.net controls. For example: create a ClientInstanceName property for controls or CheckedChanged event for CheckBox / RadioButton control. I have tried using these MSDN articles: Injecting Client-Side Script from an ASP.NET Server Control Working with Client-Side Script I got much information and ideas from these articles on how to implement/extend these. All are working in the client side. protected override void AddAttributesToRender(HtmlTextWriter writer) { base.AddAttributesToRender(writer); string script = @"return confirm(""%%POPUP_MESSAGE%%"");"; script = script.Replace("%%POPUP_MESSAGE%%", this.PopupMessage.Replace("\"", "\\\"")); writer.AddAttribute(HtmlTextWriterAttribute.Onclick, script); } Here It is just setting up attribute to the button. but all client side interaction no control from server. Here is that I want to know: How can I implement such functionality to create methods, properties etc. on client side. For example I am creating a PopControl as in the above code snippet same behavior as like Ajax ModalPopupExtender That have OK Button related properties. Ajax Controls can be directed to perform work from server side code e.g. Popup1.show(); How can I do this with such client enabled controls implemented controls as windows do? I am learning creation of Ajax Controls but I do not want to use ScriptManager or depend on another control. Just some extension to standard controls. I am expecting for ideas and implementation methods for such functionality.

  Read the article

• How to protect a peer-to-peer network from inappropriate content?

  - by Mike

  I’m developing a simple peer-to-peer app in .Net which should enable users to share specific content (text and picture files). As I've learned with my last question, inappropriate content can “relatively” easily be identified / controlled in a centralized environment. But what about a peer-to-peer network, what are the best methods to protect a decentralized system from unwanted (illegal) content? At the moment I only see the following two methods: A protocol (a set of rules) defines what kind of data (e.g. only .txt and jpg-files, not bigger than 20KB etc.) can be shared over the p2p-network and all clients (peers) must implement this protocol. If a peer doesn’t, it gets blocked by other peers. Pro: easy to implement. Con: It’s not possible to define the perfect protocol (I think eMail-Spam filters have the same problem) Some kind of rating/reputation system must be implemented (similar to stackoverflow), so “bad guys” and inappropriate content can be identified / blocked by other users. Pro: Would be very accurate. Con: Would be slow and in my view technically very hard to implement. Are there other/better solutions? Any answer or comment is highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Developing a feature which sole purpose to be taken out?

  - by adib

  What is the name of the pattern in which individual contributors (programmers/designers) developed an artifact for the sole purpose is to serve as a diversion so that management can remove that feature in the final product? This is a folklore I heard from an ex-colleague who used to work at a large game development company. At that company, it is well known that middle management is pressurized to "give inputs" and "make changes" to the product otherwise they risk being seen as not contributing to the project. This situation have delayed many projects because of these superfluous "management inputs". In one project at the above company, the artists and developers created a supernumerary animated character that appears in every cutscene and sticks out like a sore thumb. They designed it in such a way that it can be easily removed before the game is shipped (this was when games were still sold in physical media and not a downloadable product). Obviously the management then voted to remove the animation. On the positive side, management didn't introduced any unnecessary changes that would have delayed the project because they have shown that they provided constructive inputs to the product. This process pattern has a name among game programmers that work in corporates, but I forgot what was the actual name. I believe it's duck-something. Anybody can help pointing out the name and perhaps some rather credible reference to how the pattern develops?.

  Read the article

• How to avoid big and clumpsy UITableViewController on iOS?

  - by Johan Karlsson

  I have a problem when implementing the MVC-pattern on iOS. I have searched the Internet but seems not to find any nice solution to this problem. Many UITableViewController implementations seems to be rather big. Most example I have seen lets the UITableViewController implement UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. These implementations are a big reason why UITableViewControlleris getting big. One solution would be to create separate classes that implements UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. Of course these classes would have to have a reference to the UITableViewController. Are there any drawbacks using this solution? In general I think you should delegate the functionality to other "Helper" classes or similar, using the delegate pattern. Are there any well established ways of solving this problem? I do not want the model to contain to much functionality, nor the view. A believe that the logic should really be in the controller class, since this is one of the cornerstones of the MVC-pattern. But the big question is; How should you divide the controller of a MVC-implementation into smaller manageable pieces? (Applies to MVC in iOS in this case) There might be a general pattern for solving this, although I am specifically looking for a solution for iOS. Please give an example of a good pattern for solving this issue. Also an argument why this solution is awesome.

  Read the article

• Should one always know what an API is doing just by looking at the code?

  - by markmnl

  Recently I have been developing my own API and with that invested interest in API design I have been keenly interested how I can improve my API design. One aspect that has come up a couple times is (not by users of my API but in my observing discussion about the topic): one should know just by looking at the code calling the API what it is doing. For example see this discussion on GitHub for the discourse repo, it goes something like: foo.update_pinned(true, true); Just by looking at the code (without knowing the parameter names, documentation etc.) one cannot guess what it is going to do - what does the 2nd argument mean? The suggested improvement is to have something like: foo.pin() foo.unpin() foo.pin_globally() And that clears things up (the 2nd arg was whether to pin foo globally, I am guessing), and I agree in this case the later would certainly be an improvement. However I believe there can be instances where methods to set different but logically related state would be better exposed as one method call rather than separate ones, even though you would not know what it is doing just by looking at the code. (So you would have to resort to looking at the parameter names and documentation to find out - which personally I would always do no matter what if I am unfamiliar with an API). For example I expose one method SetVisibility(bool, string, bool) on a FalconPeer and I acknowledge just looking at the line: falconPeer.SetVisibility(true, "aerw3", true); You would have no idea what it is doing. It is setting 3 different values that control the "visibility" of the falconPeer in the logical sense: accept join requests, only with password and reply to discovery requests. Splitting this out into 3 method calls could lead to a user of the API to set one aspect of "visibility" forgetting to set others that I force them to think about by only exposing the one method to set all aspects of "visibility". Furthermore when the user wants to change one aspect they almost always will want to change another aspect and can now do so in one call.

  Read the article

• Style bits vs. Separate bool's

  - by peterchen

  My main platform (WinAPI) still heavily uses bits for control styles etc. (example). When introducing custom controls, I'm permanently wondering whether to follow that style or rather use individual bool's. Let's pit them against each other: enum EMyCtrlStyles { mcsUseFileIcon = 1, mcsTruncateFileName = 2, mcsUseShellContextMenu = 4, }; void SetStyle(DWORD mcsStyle); void ModifyStyle(DWORD mcsRemove, DWORD mcsAdd); DWORD GetStyle() const; ... ctrl.SetStyle(mcsUseFileIcon | mcsUseShellContextMenu); vs. CMyCtrl & SetUseFileIcon(bool enable = true); bool GetUseFileIcon() const; CMyCtrl & SetTruncteFileName(bool enable = true); bool GetTruncteFileName() const; CMyCtrl & SetUseShellContextMenu(bool enable = true); bool GetUseShellContextMenu() const; ctrl.SetUseFileIcon().SetUseShellContextMenu(); As I see it, Pro Style Bits Consistent with platform less library code (without gaining complexity), less places to modify for adding a new style less caller code (without losing notable readability) easier to use in some scenarios (e.g. remembering / transferring settings) Binary API remains stable if new style bits are introduced Now, the first and the last are minor in most cases. Pro Individual booleans Intellisense and refactoring tools reduce the "less typing" effort Single Purpose Entities more literate code (as in "flows more like a sentence") No change of paradim for non-bool properties These sound more modern, but also "soft" advantages. I must admit the "platform consistency" is much more enticing than I could justify, the less code without losing much quality is a nice bonus. 1. What do you prefer? Subjectively, for writing the library, or for writing client code? 2. Any (semi-) objective statements, studies, etc.?

  Read the article

• What is the best practice for when to check if something needs to be done?

  - by changokun

  Let's say I have a function that does x. I pass it a variable, and if the variable is not null, it does some action. And I have an array of variables and I'm going to run this function on each one. Inside the function, it seems like a good practice is to check if the argument is null before proceeding. A null argument is not an error, it just causes an early return. I could loop through the array and pass each value to the function, and the function will work great. Is there any value to checking if the var is null and only calling the function if it is not null during the loop? This doubles up on the checking for null, but: Is there any gained value? Is there any gain on not calling a function? Any readability gain on the loop in the parent code? For the sake of my question, let's assume that checking for null will always be the case. I can see how checking for some object property might change over time, which makes the first check a bad idea. Pseudo code example: for(thing in array) { x(thing) } Versus: for(thing in array) { if(thing not null) x(thing) } If there are language-specific concerns, I'm a web developer working in PHP and JavaScript.

  Read the article

• When modeling a virtual circuit board, what is the best design pattern to check for cycles?

  - by Wallace Brown

  To make it simple assume you have only AND and OR gates. Each has two inputs and one output. The output of two inputs can be used as an input for the next gate For example: A AND B - E C AND D - F E OR F - G Assuming an arbitrary number of gates, we want to check if the circuit ever connects back into itself at an earlier state? For example: E AND F - A This should be illegal since it creates an endless cycle. What design pattern would best be able to check for these cycles?

  Read the article

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