Search Results

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

Page 64/348 | < Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >

• Can I include a robots meta tag outside of the head in HTML snippets indeded to be SSIed?

  - by Dan

  I have a number of files in my site which are not intended for independent viewing, but rather to be AJAXed into content within the site. They obviously don't meet HTML standards (no body, head, etc.) as independent entities. I would like to prevent search engines from indexing these pages, but do not have access to /robots.txt (which would be much more ideal). My question is, could I include the following at the top of these partial HTML files and get the desired results? <meta name="robots" content="noindex, noarchive"> I guess there are two parts to this question. Will this cause any rendering issues in any browsers? Will search engines (at least Google & Bing) interpret this as intended?

  Read the article

• Is using Javascript/JQuery for layout and style bad practice?

  - by Renesis

  Many, but not all, HTML layout problems can be solved with CSS alone. For those that can't, JQuery (on document load) has become very popular.* As a result of its ease, many developers are quick to use JQuery or Javascript for layout and style — even without understanding whether or not the problem can be solved with CSS alone. This is illustrated by responses to questions like this one. Is this bad practice? What are the arguments for/against? Should someone who sees this in practice attempt to persuade those developers otherwise? If so, what are the best responses to arguments in favor of JQuery saying it's "so easy"? * Example: Layouts that wish to use vertical layout flow of some kind often run into dead ends with CSS alone — this would include layouts similar to Pinterest, though I'm not sure that's actually impossible with CSS.

  Read the article

• Building a complete program?

  - by Bob

  Reading books, watching videos, and reviewing tutorials is all very easy. Taking notes and actually learning the material may be slightly harder, but even then, anyone with a decent brain and a fair amount of interest, it's easy enough (not to mention, fun). The thing is, it doesn't really prepare you to write a full program or website. Let's say you're those teens (only in highschool, no true (college level) computer science or programming courses, and no real world experience), and you come out with Groupon. Or even Mark Zuckerburg, sure he was a genius, and he was a very capable programmer... but how? How do you recommend that people who are not necessarily new to programming, but new to programming real applications and real programmers go about developing it? What is the "development process" - especially for single programmers (or maybe 2-3 teens)? Also, as far as web development goes, what is the process? Was something like Facebook or Groupon written with a framework (like CodeIgniter or Zend for PHP)? Or do they develop their own frameworks? I'm not asking how to come up with a great idea, but how to implement great ideas in an effective way? Does anyone have advice? I've read a couple of books on both C and C++ (primarily the C Programming Language and the C++ Programming Language) and taken AP Computer Science (as well as read a few additional books on Java and OOP). I also have read a few tutorials on PHP (and CodeIgniter) and Python. But I'm still in highschool, and I'm technically not even old enough to work at an internship for a few more months.

  Read the article

• Tips or techniques to use when you don't know how to code something?

  - by janoChen

  I have a background as UI designer. And I realized that it is a bit hard for me to write a pieces of logic. Sometimes I get it right, but most of the time, I end up with something hacky (and it usually takes a lot of time). And is not that I don't like programming, in fact, I'm starting to like it as much as design. It's just that sometimes I think that I'm better at dealing with colors an shapes, rather than numbers and logic (but I want to change that). What I usually do is to search the solution on the Internet, copy the example, and insert it into my app (I know this is not a very good practice). I've heard that one tip was to write the logic in common English as comment before writing the actual code. What other tips and techniques I can use?

  Read the article

• What is the career path for a software developer/ programmer? [closed]

  - by Lo Wai Lun

  I've been working as a programmer for a few months and I often study CCNA , CISSP for future. Besides simple coding I was working on specs, designing applications, and all those around-like things. My question is, I want to be a information / system security specialist. what's the career path I should be aiming for? Is it like working on code for the rest of my life? :) Restart my career from the network engineer ? Or do programmers make a good manager-position people ? I know it's very subjective. Thing is, lately I find myself much more into the designing/working on specs part of the development project then the coding itself. How do you see it? Would you like to go from development to information security? Would you like to work on a project with a manager that used to be a coder?

  Read the article

• How should compound words be handled when coding? Is there a definitive list of compound words? [closed]

  - by Ray

  QUESTION: How should you handle compound words when programming? Are there any good lists available online for developers of generally accepted technology-related compound words? I can see how this is highly ambiguous, so should I just use common-sense? EXAMPLE: I would be inclined to do this: filename NOT FileName or login NOT LogIn However, the microsoft documentation indicates that filename is not compound. So I wonder, is there a more definitive source? See also, this english.stackexchange discussion on filename. Under the section "Capitalization Rules for Compound Words and Common Terms" located here: Microsoft .NET Capitalization Conventions only offers a limited introduction into the topic, and leaves it up to the developer to use their intuition with the rest.

  Read the article

• Can the following Domain Entity contain logic for creating/deleting other entities?

  - by user702769

  a) As far as I understand it, in most cases Domain Model DM doesn't contain code for creating/deleting domain entities, but instead it is the job of layers ( ie service layer or UI layer ) on top of DM to create/delete domain entities? b) Domain entities are modelled after real world entities. Assuming particular real world entity being abstracted does have the functionality of creating/deleting other real world entities, then I assume the domain entity abstracting this real world entity could also contain logic for creating/deleting other entities? class RobotDestroyerCreator { ... void heavyThinking() { ... if(...) unitOfWork.registerDelete(robot); ... if(...) { var robotNew = new Robot(...); unitOfWork.registerNew(robotNew); { ... } } Thank you

  Read the article

• Reflective practice in programming using keystroke playback

  - by Graham

  I'm thinking of applying Reflective Practice to improving my programming skills. To that end, I want to be able to watch myself writing code. In general, what is a good method for applying Reflective Practice to the craft of programming? In particular, if it's a good idea, is there an editor that records keystrokes then plays them back at a later time - possibly running the keys together without delays, or replaying at a 2x/4x/8x accelerated rate? Screencasting with RecordMyDesktop is an option, but has downsides of waiting for encoding and ending up with a big video file instead of a list of keystrokes.

  Read the article

• Quick Tip - Speed a Slow Restore from the Transaction Log

  - by KKline

  Here's a quick tip for you: During some restore operations on Microsoft SQL Server, the transaction log redo step might be taking an unusually long time. Depending somewhat on the version and edition of SQL Server you've installed, you may be able to increase performance by tinkering with the readahead performance for the redo operations. To do this, you should use the MAXTRANSFERSIZE parameter of the RESTORE statement. For example, if you set MAXTRANSFERSIZE=1048576, it'll use 1MB buffers. If you...(read more)

  Read the article

• Learning by doing (and programming by trial and error)

  - by AlexBottoni

  How do you learn a new platform/toolkit while producing working code and keeping your codebase clean? When I know what I can do with the underlying platform and toolkit, I usually do this: I create a new branch (with GIT, in my case) I write a few unit tests (with JUnit, for example) I write my code until it passes my tests So far, so good. The problem is that very often I do not know what I can do with the toolkit because it is brand new to me. I work as a consulant so I cannot have my preferred language/platform/toolkit. I have to cope with whatever the customer uses for the task at hand. Most often, I have to deal (often in a hurry) with a large toolkit that I know very little so I'm forced to "learn by doing" (actually, programming by "trial and error") and this makes me anxious. Please note that, at some point in the learning process, usually I already have: read one or more five-stars books followed one or more web tutorials (writing working code a line at a time) created a couple of small experimental projects with my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA, at the moment. I use Eclipse, Netbeans and others, as well.) Despite all my efforts, at this point usually I can just have a coarse understanding of the platform/toolkit I have to use. I cannot yet grasp each and every detail. This means that each and every new feature that involves some data preparation and some non-trivial algorithm is a pain to implement and requires a lot of trial-and-error. Unfortunately, working by trial-and-error is neither safe nor easy. Actually, this is the phase that makes me most anxious: experimenting with a new toolkit while producing working code and keeping my codebase clean. Usually, at this stage I cannot use the Eclipse Scrapbook because the code I have to write is already too large and complex for this small tool. In the same way, I cannot use any more an indipendent small project for my experiments because I need to try the new code in place. I can just write my code in place and rely on GIT for a safe bail-out. This makes me anxious because this kind of intertwined, half-ripe code can rapidly become incredibly hard to manage. How do you face this phase of the development process? How do you learn-by-doing without making a mess of your codebase? Any tips&tricks, best practice or something like that?

  Read the article

• What to do as a new team lead on a project with maintainability problems?

  - by Mr_E

  I have just been put in charge of a code project with maintainability problems. What things can I do to get the project on a stable footing? I find myself in a place where we are working with a very large multi-tiered .NET system that is missing a lot of the important things such as unit tests, IOC, MEF, too many static classes, pure datasets etc. I'm only 24 but I've been here for almost three years (this app has been in development for 5) and mostly due to time constraints we've been just adding in more crap to fit the other crap. After doing a number of projects in my free time I have begun to understand just how important all those concepts are. Also due to employee shifting I find myself to now be the team lead on this project and I really want to come up with some smart ways to improve this app. Ways where the value can be explained to management. I have ideas of what I would like to do but they all seem so overwhelming without much upfront gain. Any stories of how people have or would have dealt with this would be a very interesting read. Thanks.

  Read the article

• When should one use "out" parameters?

  - by qegal

  In Objective-C, there are several methods like initWithContentsOfFile:encoding:error: where one passes in a reference to an NSError object for the error: parameter. In this example, the value of the NSError object passed in can change based on what goes on at runtime when the method is being called and whether the body of the method was executed in a certain way successfully. In a way I think of this NSError object as sort of like a second return value from the method, and only differs from an object anObject in the statement return anObject; in that when this statement is called, execution leaves the method. So my question is, not only in the context of error handling in Objective-C, but in general, when should one use an "out" parameter in place of returning said value in a return statement?

  Read the article

• Develop in trunk and then branch off, or in release branch and then merge back?

  - by Torben Gundtofte-Bruun

  Say that we've decided on following a "release-based" branching strategy, so we'll have a branch for each release, and we can add maintenance updates as sub-branches from those. Does it matter whether we: develop and stabilize a new release in the trunk and then "save" that state in a new release branch; or first create that release branch and only merge into the trunk when the branch is stable? I find the former to be easier to deal with (less merging necessary), especially when we don't develop on multiple upcoming releases at the same time. Under normal circumstances we would all be working on the trunk, and only work on released branches if there are bugs to fix. What is the trunk actually used for in the latter approach? It seems to be almost obsolete, because I could create a future release branch based on the most recent released branch rather than from the trunk. Details based on comment below: Our product consists of a base platform and a number of modules on top; each is developed and even distributed separately from each other. Most team members work on several of these areas, so there's partial overlap between people. We generally work only on 1 future release and not at all on existing releases. One or two might work on a bugfix for an existing release for short periods of time. Our work isn't compiled and it's a mix of Unix shell scripts, XML configuration files, SQL packages, and more -- so there's no way to have push-button builds that can be tested. That's done manually, which is a bit laborious. A release cycle is typically half a year or more for the base platform; often 1 month for the modules.

  Read the article

• Is there really anything to gain with complex design? [duplicate]

  - by SB2055

  This question already has an answer here: What is enterprise software, exactly? 8 answers I've been working for a consulting firm for some time, with clients of various sizes, and I've seen web applications ranging in complexity from really simple: MVC Service Layer EF DB To really complex: MVC UoW DI / IoC Repository Service UI Tests Unit Tests Integration Tests But on both ends of the spectrum, the quality requirements are about the same. In simple projects, new devs / consultants can hop on, make changes, and contribute immediately, without having to wade through 6 layers of abstraction to understand what's going on, or risking misunderstanding some complex abstraction and costing down the line. In all cases, there was never a need to actually make code swappable or reusable - and the tests were never actually maintained past the first iteration because requirements changed, it was too time-consuming, deadlines, business pressure, etc etc. So if - in the end - testing and interfaces aren't used rapid development (read: cost-savings) is a priority the project's requirements will be changing a lot while in development ...would it be wrong to recommend a super-simple architecture, even to solve a complex problem, for an enterprise client? Is it complexity that defines enterprise solutions, or is it the reliability, # concurrent users, ease-of-maintenance, or all of the above? I know this is a very vague question, and any answer wouldn't apply to all cases, but I'm interested in hearing from devs / consultants that have been in the business for a while and that have worked with these varying degrees of complexity, to hear if the cool-but-expensive abstractions are worth the overall cost, at least while the project is in development.

  Read the article

• ASP.NET design not SOLID

  - by w0051977

  SOLID principles are described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID_%28object-oriented_design%29 I am developing a large ASP.NET app. The previous developer created a few very large classes each with lots of different purposes. It is very difficult to maintain and extend. The classes are deployed to the web server along with the code behind files etc. I want to share a small amount of the app with another application. I am considering moving all of the classes of the ASP.NET web app to a DLL, so the small subset of functionality can be shared. I realise it would be better to only share the classes which contain code to be shared but because of the dependencies this is proving to be very difficult e.g. class A contains code that should be shared, however class A contains references to classes B, C, D, E, F, G etc, so class A cannot be shared on its own. I am planning to refactor the code in the future. As a temporary solution I am planning to convert all the classes into a single class library. Is this a bad idea and if so, is there an alternative? as I don't have time to refactor at the moment.

  Read the article

• Is deserializing complex objects instead of creating them a good idea, in test setup?

  - by Chris Bye

  I'm writing tests for a component that takes very complex objects as input. These tests are mixes of tests against already existing components, and test-first tests for new features. Instead of re-creating my input objects (this would be a large chunk of code) or reading one from our data store, I had the thought to serialize a live instance of one of these objects, and just deserialize it into test setup. I can't decide if this is a reasonable idea that will save effort in long run, or whether it's the worst idea that I've ever had, causing those that will maintain this code will hunt me down as soon as they read it. Is deserialization of inputs a valid means of test setup in some cases? To give a sense of scale of what I'm dealing with, the size of serialization output for one of these input objects is 93KB. Obtained by, in C#: new BinaryFormatter().Serialize((Stream)fileStream, myObject);

  Read the article

• Harmful temptations in programming

  - by gaearon

  Just curious, what kinds of temptations in programming turned out to be really harmful in your projects? Like when you really feel the urge to do something and you believe it's going to benefit the project or else you just trick yourself into believing it is, and after a week you realize you haven't solved any real problems but instead created new ones or, in the best case, pleased your inner beast with no visible impact. Personally, I find it very hard to not refactor bad code. I work with a lot of bad legacy code, and it takes some deep breaths to not touch it when I have no tests to prove my refactoring doesn't not break anything. Another demon for me in user interface, I can literally spend hours changing UI layout just because I enjoy doing it. Sometimes I tell myself I'm working on usability, but the truth is just I love moving buttons around. What are your programming demons, and how do you avoid them?

  Read the article

• Is there such a thing as having too many private functions/methods?

  - by shovonr

  I understand the importance of well documented code. But I also understand the importance of self-documenting code. The easier it is to visually read a particular function, the faster we can move on during software maintenance. With that said, I like to separate big functions into other smaller ones. But I do so to a point where a class can have upwards of five of them just to serve one public method. Now multiply five private methods by five public ones, and you get around twenty-five hidden methods that are probably going to be called only once by those public ones. Sure, it's now easier to read those public methods, but I can't help but think that having too many functions is bad practice.

  Read the article

• How to determine if class meets single responsibility principle ?

  - by user1483278

  Single Responsibility Principle is based on high cohesion principle. The difference between the two is that highly cohesive classes feature a set of responsibilities that are strongly related, while classes adhering to SRP have just one responsibility. But how do we determine whether particular class features a set of responsibilities and is thus just highly cohesive, or whether it has only one responsibility and is thus adhering to SRP? Namely, isn't it more or less subjective, since some may find class very granular ( and as such will consider a class as adhering to SRP ), while others may find it not granular enough?

  Read the article

• How bad would be to focus on iOS/Android development for an indie developer?

  - by kender

  After some time developing games for others I'm thinking of moving towards my own productions. My background is 10+ years of software development, with last 2 years spent on the iOS development (Objective-C and CoronaSDK). With my current experience in Corona I can quickly develop for iOS and Android systems. And this is something that I'm probably gonna do with several of the game ideas I have, at least for the prototype part. But - I'm wondering if it's not a bad idea to focus on those 2 systems only. After all there are other mobile platforms, there are PCs, Macs and Linux boxes... All of them having gamers using them. I was wondering if it wasn't a good idea to try some other SDK, giving me more flexibility when it comes to platform-independance. There's Unity3D (I think I can develop a 2D game in it though), there's MoAI from what I checked. I see a few options, not sure which one is best as I have little experience in this field (publishing own games): Stick with CoronaSDK for the whole time, release for iOS and Android platforms, screw other mobile devices and PCs, Use Corona for prototyping, then when the idea goes more into the "production" phase rewrite it in MoAI or Unity3D for more platforms support, Start with one of those 2 SDKs right now (which means the prototype phase will be delayed a bit, but after that I can jump right into real coding). Any clues here, what to do?

  Read the article

• does class reference itself static anti pattern in prism

  - by Michael Riva

  I have an application and my desing approach look like this: class Manager { public int State; static Manager _instance = null; public static Manager Instance { get { return _instance; } set { if (_instance == value) return; _instance = value; } } public Manager() { State = 0; Instance=this; } } class Module1 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } class Module2 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } class Module3 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } Manager class already registered in Bootstrapper like : protected override void ConfigureContainer() { base.ConfigureContainer(); Container.RegisterType<Manager>(new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager()); } protected override void InitializeModules() { Manager man= Container.Resolve<Manager>(); } Question is do I need to define my manager object as static in its field to be able to reach its state? Or this is anti pattern or bad for performance?

  Read the article

• Handheld device software - Handheld tuners?

  - by NathanH

  Hey I've been looking around and really don't understand what software some of these company's use for their handheld devices. I've used a lot of Handheld Tuners (Cobb Accessport, Diablo Sport). I've gotten more and more knowledgable of programming and I'm really wanting to understand what software they use on these devices to have a graphical interface. And to hold all the files to flash over to the ecu. I'm just unsure how you would get basically all the components to work together (screen, buttons, memory) without having drivers installed. I could be totally wrong here on using the term drivers, but that's what I would like some help to get more knowledge on (only thing I've really found is making a handheld game boy from scratch,but that was using a emulator.). I've tried looking it up but can't really find a good write up or explanation anywhere I look. Just really would like to put a little device together and have a simple user interface and work from there. Thanks, Nathan

  Read the article

• Is it bad practise to call a controller action from a view that was rendered by another controller?

  - by marco-fiset

  Let's say I have an OrderController which handles orders. The user adds products to it through the view, and then the final price gets calculated through an AJAX call to a controller action. The price calculation logic is implemented in a seperate class and used in a controller action. What happens is that I have many views from different controllers that need to use that particular action. I'd like to have some kind of a PriceController that I could call an action on. But then the view would have to know about that PriceController and call an action on it. Is it bad practice for a view to call an action on a different controller from which it was rendered?

  Read the article

• A better alternative to incompatible implementations for the same interface?

  - by glenatron

  I am working on a piece of code which performs a set task in several parallel environments where the behaviour of the different components in the task are similar but quite different. This means that my implementations are quite different but they are all based on the relationships between the same interfaces, something like this: IDataReader -> ContinuousDataReader -> ChunkedDataReader IDataProcessor -> ContinuousDataProcessor -> ChunkedDataProcessor IDataWriter -> ContinuousDataWriter -> ChunkedDataWriter So that in either environment we have an IDataReader, IDataProcessor and IDataWriter and then we can use Dependency Injection to ensure that we have the correct one of each for the current environment, so if we are working with data in chunks we use the ChunkedDataReader, ChunkedDataProcessor and ChunkedDataWriter and if we have continuous data we have the continuous versions. However the behaviour of these classes is quite different internally and one could certainly not go from a ContinuousDataReader to the ChunkedDataReader even though they are both IDataProcessors. This feels to me as though it is incorrect ( possibly an LSP violation? ) and certainly not a theoretically correct way of working. It is almost as though the "real" interface here is the combination of all three classes. Unfortunately in the project I am working on with the deadlines we are working to, we're pretty much stuck with this design, but if we had a little more elbow room, what would be a better design approach in this kind of scenario?

  Read the article

• Is OOP hard because it is not natural?

  - by zvrba

  One can often hear that OOP naturally corresponds to the way people think about the world. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: We (or at least I) conceptualize the world in terms of relationships between things we encounter, but the focus of OOP is designing individual classes and their hierarchies. Note that, in everyday life, relationships and actions exist mostly between objects that would have been instances of unrelated classes in OOP. Examples of such relationships are: "my screen is on top of the table"; "I (a human being) am sitting on a chair"; "a car is on the road"; "I am typing on the keyboard"; "the coffee machine boils water", "the text is shown in the terminal window." We think in terms of bivalent (sometimes trivalent, as, for example in, "I gave you flowers") verbs where the verb is the action (relation) that operates on two objects to produce some result/action. The focus is on action, and the two (or three) [grammatical] objects have equal importance. Contrast that with OOP where you first have to find one object (noun) and tell it to perform some action on another object. The way of thinking is shifted from actions/verbs operating on nouns to nouns operating on nouns -- it is as if everything is being said in passive or reflexive voice, e.g., "the text is being shown by the terminal window". Or maybe "the text draws itself on the terminal window". Not only is the focus shifted to nouns, but one of the nouns (let's call it grammatical subject) is given higher "importance" than the other (grammatical object). Thus one must decide whether one will say terminalWindow.show(someText) or someText.show(terminalWindow). But why burden people with such trivial decisions with no operational consequences when one really means show(terminalWindow, someText)? [Consequences are operationally insignificant -- in both cases the text is shown on the terminal window -- but can be very serious in the design of class hierarchies and a "wrong" choice can lead to convoluted and hard to maintain code.] I would therefore argue that the mainstream way of doing OOP (class-based, single-dispatch) is hard because it IS UNNATURAL and does not correspond to how humans think about the world. Generic methods from CLOS are closer to my way of thinking, but, alas, this is not widespread approach. Given these problems, how/why did it happen that the currently mainstream way of doing OOP became so popular? And what, if anything, can be done to dethrone it?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >