Search Results

Search found 15045 results on 602 pages for 'life style'.

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 70/602 | < Previous Page | 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77  | Next Page >

  • Are regexes really maintainable?

    - by Rich Bradshaw
    Any code I've seen that uses Regexes tends to use them as a black box: Put in string Magic Regex Get out string This doesn't seem a particularly good idea to use in production code, as even a small change can often result in a completely different regex. Apart from cases where the standard is permanent and unchanging, are regexes the way to do things, or is it better to try different methods?

    Read the article

  • How to get all n sets of three consecutives elements in an array or arraylist with a for statement ?

    - by newba
    Hi, I'm trying to do a convex hull approach and the little problem is that I need to get all sets of three consecutive vertices, like this: private void isConvexHull(Ponto[] points) { Arrays.sort(points); for (int i = 0; i <points.length; i++) { isClockWise(points[i],points[i+1],points[i+2]); } //... } I always do something that I don't consider clean code. Could please help me find one or more ways to this? I want it to be circular, i.e., if my fisrt point of the a set is the last element in the array, the 2nd element will be the 3rd in the list and the 3rd in that set will be the the 2nd element in the list, and so on. They must be consecutive, that's all.

    Read the article

  • Use of 'super' keyword when accessing non-overridden superclass methods

    - by jonny
    I'm trying to get the hang of inheritance in Java and have learnt that when overriding methods (and hiding fields) in sub classes, they can still be accessed from the super class by using the 'super' keyword. What I want to know is, should the 'super' keyword be used for non-overridden methods? Is there any difference (for non-overridden methods / non-hidden fields)? I've put together an example below. public class Vehicle { public int tyreCost; public Vehicle(int tyreCost) { this.tyreCost = tyreCost; } public int getTyreCost() { return tyreCost; } } and public class Car extends Vehicle { public int wheelCount; public Vehicle(int tyreCost, int wheelCount) { super(tyreCost); this.wheelCount = wheelCount; } public int getTotalTyreReplacementCost() { return getTyreCost() * wheelCount; } } Specifically, given that getTyreCost() hasn't been overridden, should getTotalTyreReplacementCost() use getTyreCost(), or super.getTyreCost() ? I'm wondering whether super should be used in all instances where fields or methods of the superclass are accessed (to show in the code that you are accessing the superclass), or only in the overridden/hidden ones (so they stand out).

    Read the article

  • C++ class initialisation containing class variable initialization

    - by Phil Hannent
    I noticed some code of a colleague today that initialized class variables in the initialization. However it was causing a warning, he says because of the order they are in. My question is why is it better to do variable initialization where it currently is and not within the curly brackets? DiagramScene::DiagramScene( int slideNo, QRectF screenRect, MainWindow* parent ) : QGraphicsScene( screenRect, parent ), myParent( parent ), slideUndoImageCurrentIndex(-1), nextGroupID(0), m_undoInProgress(false), m_deleteItemOnNextUndo(0) line(0), path(0) { /* Setup default brush for background */ scDetail->bgBrush.setStyle(Qt::SolidPattern); scDetail->bgBrush.setColor(Qt::white); setBackgroundBrush(scDetail->bgBrush); }

    Read the article

  • Most readable way to write simple conditional check

    - by JRL
    What would be the most readable/best way to write a multiple conditional check such as shown below? Two possibilities that I could think of (this is Java but the language really doesn't matter here): Option 1: boolean c1 = passwordField.getPassword().length > 0; boolean c2 = !stationIDTextField.getText().trim().isEmpty(); boolean c3 = !userNameTextField.getText().trim().isEmpty(); if (c1 && c2 && c3) { okButton.setEnabled(true); } Option 2: if (passwordField.getPassword().length > 0 && !stationIDTextField.getText().trim().isEmpty() && !userNameTextField.getText().trim().isEmpty() { okButton.setEnabled(true); } What I don't like about option 2 is that the line wraps and then indentation becomes a pain. What I don't like about option 1 is that it creates variables for nothing and requires looking at two places. So what do you think? Any other options?

    Read the article

  • Print styles: How to ensure image doesn't span a page break

    - by notJim
    This is a problem I've had a few times, and I'm not sure how to deal with it. When writing a print stylesheet, is there a way to ensure that an image is always only on a single page. An example of the behavior I'm seeing is below: Page 1 | | | (text text text) | | (text text text) | | ________________ | | | Top of image | | |____________________| ------page break------ ____________________ Page 2 | | Rest of image | | | |________________| | | … | What I'd like Page 1 | | | (text text text) | | (text text text) | | | | | |____________________| ------page break------ ____________________ | ________________ | | | Full image | | | | | | | |________________| | | … | All those times I bitching about floats in LaTeX, and here I am asking for the same functionality... Can this be done? I'm not necessarily concerned about it working in all browsers, since this is often just a one-off document I'm writing to be turned into a PDF.

    Read the article

  • Is there a downside to adding an anonymous empty delegate on event declaration?

    - by serg10
    I have seen a few mentions of this idiom (including on SO): // Deliberately empty subscriber public event EventHandler AskQuestion = delegate {}; The upside is clear - it avoids the need to check for null before raising the event. However, I am keen to understand if there are any downsides. For example, is it something that is in widespread use and is transparent enough that it won't cause a maintenance headache? Is there any appreciable performance hit of the empty event subscriber call?

    Read the article

  • Adding the sum of numbers using a loop statement

    - by Deonna
    I need serious help dividing the positive numbers and the negative numbers. I am to accumulate the total of the negative values and separately accumulate the total of the positive values. After the loop, you are then to display the sum of the negative values and the sum of the positive values. The data is suppose to look like this: -2.3 -1.9 -1.5 -1.1 -0.7 -0.3 0.1 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.9 Sum of negative values: -7.8 Sum of positive values: 12 So far I have this: int main () { int num, num2, num3, num4, num5, sum, count, sum1; int tempVariable = 0; int numCount = 100; int newlineCount = 0, newlineCount1 = 0; float numCount1 = -2.3; while (numCount <= 150) { cout << numCount << " "; numCount += 2; newlineCount ++; if(newlineCount == 6) { cout<< " " << endl; newlineCount = 0; } } **cout << "" << endl; while (numCount1 <=2.9 ) { cout << numCount1 << " "; numCount1 += 0.4; newlineCount1 ++; } while ( newlineCount1 <= 0 && newlineCount >= -2.3 ); cout << "The sum is " << newlineCount1 << endl;** return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Using typedefs (or #defines) on built in types - any sensible reason?

    - by jb
    Well I'm doing some Java - C integration, and throught C library werid type mappings are used (theres more of them;)): #define CHAR char /* 8 bit signed int */ #define SHORT short /* 16 bit signed int */ #define INT int /* "natural" length signed int */ #define LONG long /* 32 bit signed int */ typedef unsigned char BYTE; /* 8 bit unsigned int */ typedef unsigned char UCHAR; /* 8 bit unsigned int */ typedef unsigned short USHORT; /* 16 bit unsigned int */ typedef unsigned int UINT; /* "natural" length unsigned int*/ Is there any legitimate reason not to use them? It's not like char is going to be redefined anytime soon. I can think of: Writing platform/compiler portable code (size of type is underspecified in C/C++) Saving space and time on embedded systems - if you loop over array shorter than 255 on 8bit microprocessor writing: for(uint8_t ii = 0; ii < len; ii++) will give meaureable speedup.

    Read the article

  • how to tackle a new project

    - by stevo
    Hi, I have a question about best practice on how to tackle a new project, any project. When starting a new project how do you go about tackling the project, do you split it into sections, start writing code, draw up flow diagrams. I'm asking this question because I'm looking for advice on how I can start new projects so I can get going on them quicker. I can have it planned, designed and starting coding with everything worked out. Any advice? Thanks Stephen

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • 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

  • Resharper: how to force introducing new private fields at the bottom of the class?

    - by Igor Brejc
    Resharper offers a very useful introduce and initialize field xxx action when you specify a new parameter in a constructor like: Constructor (int parameter) The only (minor) nuisance is that it puts the new field at the beginning of the class - and I'm a fan of putting private parts as far away as possible from the prying eyes of strangers ;). If, however, you already have some private fields in the class, Resharper will put the new field "correctly" (note the quotes, I don't want to start a flame war over this issue) next to those, even if they are at the end of the class. Is there a way to force Resharper to always put new fields at the end of the class? UPDATE: OK, I forgot to mention I know about the "Type Members Layout in Options" feature, but some concrete help on how to modify the template to achieve fields placement would be nice.

    Read the article

  • Logical value of an assignment in C

    - by Andy Shulman
    while (curr_data[1] != (unsigned int)NULL && ((curr_ptr = (void*)curr_data[1]) || 1)) Two part question. What will (curr_ptr = (void*)curr_data[1]) evaluate to, logically. TRUE? Also, I know its rather hack-ish, but is the while statement legal C? I would have to go through great contortions to put the assignment elsewhere in the code, so I'd be really nice if I could leave it there, but if it's so egregious that it makes everyone's eyeballs burst into flames, I'll change it.

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to avoid try...catch...finally... in my unit tests?

    - by Bruce Li
    I'm writing many unit tests in VS 2010 with Microsoft Test. In each test class I have many test methods similar to below: [TestMethod] public void This_is_a_Test() { try { // do some test here // assert } catch (Exception ex) { // test failed, log error message in my log file and make the test fail } finally { // do some cleanup with different parameters } } When each test method looks like this I fell it's kind of ugly. But so far I haven't found a good solution to make my test code more clean, especially the cleanup code in the finally block. Could someone here give me some advices on this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • High level programming logic, design, pattern

    - by Muhammad Shahzad
    I have been doing programming from last 7 years, getting better and better, but still i think that am lacking something. I have been doing work in JOOMLA, MAGENTO, WP, Custom PHP, Opencart, laravel, codeignitor. Sometimes i need to design logic for a huge database application, in the applications we need nesting loops and queries, although i follow OOPS standards, ORM etc, still i feel i need more robust coding designs. I need to know how can i improve these things, so that code remain neat, efficient and faster. Also how big webapps like facebook twitter tests there code speed? How high level programmers choose design patterns. If you can help me find something useful with examples?

    Read the article

  • Is concatenating with an empty string to do a string conversion really that bad?

    - by polygenelubricants
    Let's say I have two char variables, and later on I want to concatenate them into a string. This is how I would do it: char c1, c2; // ... String s = "" + c1 + c2; I've seen people who say that the "" + "trick" is "ugly", etc, and that you should use String.valueOf or Character.toString instead. I prefer this construct because: I prefer using language feature instead of API call if possible In general, isn't the language usually more stable than the API? If language feature only hides API call, then even stronger reason to prefer it! More abstract! Hiding is good! I like that the c1 and c2 are visually on the same level String.valueOf(c1) + c2 suggests something is special about c1 It's shorter. Is there really a good argument why String.valueOf or Character.toString is preferrable to "" +? Trivia: in java.lang.AssertionError, the following line appears 7 times, each with a different type: this("" + detailMessage);

    Read the article

  • is there any programming language that can bring together edit and compile / run ???

    - by Aff
    When I code, I always write little pieces of unit, and compile it often. This helps me to make sure that everything run correctly, but it's very time consumed. is there any programming language that can support us to do coding and running at the same time side by side ? i mean as soon as a key press leads to valid code, the effect of the edit is incorporated into the executing program.

    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 | 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77  | Next Page >