Search Results

Search found 5915 results on 237 pages for 'practices'.

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 86/237 | < Previous Page | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >

  • Synchronising scripts / db / files from dev system to web server

    - by Spoonface
    I work as a freelance web dev, and up until now have been ftping my scripts / databases / static files to my web server manually, but I'm finding that is too error prone. So I'm looking for an app to automate uploading new and updated scripts / files / databases / etc. I know a lot of independent devs use WinSCP or Unison, but I don't think those apps can synch databases. Does anyone have any other suggestions? It doesn't need to be anything overly feature rich as I'm not working within a team or across multiple operating systems or anything like that. I can purchase any reasonably priced license if necesary. My work is primarily for PHP / MySQL / Apache on a Windows system, and then uploaded to a Linux / Apache server. thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • Constructor versus setter injection

    - by Chris
    Hi, I'm currently designing an API where I wish to allow configuration via a variety of methods. One method is via an XML configuration schema and another method is through an API that I wish to play nicely with Spring. My XML schema parsing code was previously hidden and therefore the only concern was for it to work but now I wish to build a public API and I'm quite concerned about best-practice. It seems that many favor javabean type PoJo's with default zero parameter constructors and then setter injection. The problem I am trying to tackle is that some setter methods implementations are dependent on other setter methods being called before them in sequence. I could write anal setters that will tolerate themselves being called in many orders but that will not solve the problem of a user forgetting to set the appropriate setter and therefore the bean being in an incomplete state. The only solution I can think of is to forget about the objects being 'beans' and enforce the required parameters via constructor injection. An example of this is in the default setting of the id of a component based on the id of the parent components. My Interface public interface IMyIdentityInterface { public String getId(); /* A null value should create a unique meaningful default */ public void setId(String id); public IMyIdentityInterface getParent(); public void setParent(IMyIdentityInterface parent); } Base Implementation of interface: public abstract class MyIdentityBaseClass implements IMyIdentityInterface { private String _id; private IMyIdentityInterface _parent; public MyIdentityBaseClass () {} @Override public String getId() { return _id; } /** * If the id is null, then use the id of the parent component * appended with a lower-cased simple name of the current impl * class along with a counter suffix to enforce uniqueness */ @Override public void setId(String id) { if (id == null) { IMyIdentityInterface parent = getParent(); if (parent == null) { // this may be the top level component or it may be that // the user called setId() before setParent(..) } else { _id = Helpers.makeIdFromParent(parent,getClass()); } } else { _id = id; } } @Override public IMyIdentityInterface getParent() { return _parent; } @Override public void setParent(IMyIdentityInterface parent) { _parent = parent; } } Every component in the framework will have a parent except for the top level component. Using the setter type of injection, then the setters will have different behavior based on the order of the calling of the setters. In this case, would you agree, that a constructor taking a reference to the parent is better and dropping the parent setter method from the interface entirely? Is it considered bad practice if I wish to be able to configure these components using an IoC container? Chris

    Read the article

  • What's the best method in ASP.NET to obtain the current domain?

    - by Graphain
    Hi, I am wondering what the best way to obtain the current domain is in ASP.NET? For instance: http://www.domainname.com/subdir/ should yield http://www.domainname.com http://www.sub.domainname.com/subdir/ should yield http://sub.domainname.com As a guide, I should be able to add a url like "/Folder/Content/filename.html" (say as generated by Url.RouteUrl() in ASP.NET MVC) straight onto the URL and it should work.

    Read the article

  • How sophisticated should be DAL?

    - by Andrew Florko
    Basically, DAL (Data Access Layer) should provide simple CRUD (Create/Read/Update/Delete) methods but I always have a temptation to create more sophisticated methods in order to minimize database access roundtrips from Business Logic Layer. What do you think about following extensions to CRUD (most of them are OK I suppose): Read: GetById, GetByName, GetPaged, GetByFilter... e.t.c. methods Create: GetOrCreate methods (model entity is returned from DB or created if not found and returned), Create(lots-of-relations) instead of Create and multiple AssignTo methods calls Update: Merge methods (entities list are updated, created and deleted in one call) Delete: Delete(bool children) - optional children delete, Cleanup methods Where do you usually implement Entity Cache capabilities? DAL or BLL? (My choice is BLL, but I have seen DAL implementations also) Where is the boundary when you decide: this operation is too specific so I should implement it in Business Logic Layer as DAL multiple calls? I often found insufficient BLL operations that were implemented in dozen database roundtrips because developer was afraid to create a bit more sophisticated DAL. Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • Turning Floats into Their Closest (UTF-8 Character) Fraction.

    - by Mark Tomlin
    I want to take any real number, and return the closest number, with the closest fraction as available in the UTF-8 character set, appropriate. 0/4 = 0.00 = # < .125 1/4 = 0.25 = ¼ # > .125 & < .375 2/4 = 0.50 = ½ # > .375 & < .625 3/4 = 0.75 = ¾ # > .625 & < .875 4/4 = 1.00 = # > .875 I made this function to do that task: function displayFraction($realNumber) { if (!is_float($realNumber)) { return $realNumber; } list($number, $decimal) = explode('.', $realNumber); $decimal = '.' . $decimal; switch($decimal) { case $decimal < 0.125: return $number; case $decimal > 0.125 && $decimal < 0.375: return $number . '¼'; # 188 ¼ &#188; case $decimal > 0.375 && $decimal < 0.625: return $number . '½'; # 189 ½ &#189; case $decimal > 0.625 && $decimal < 0.875: return $number . '¾'; # 190 ¾ &#190; case $decimal < 0.875: return ++$number; } } What are the better / diffrent way to do this? echo displayFraction(3.1) . PHP_EOL; # Outputs: 3 echo displayFraction(3.141593) . PHP_EOL; # Outputs: 3¼ echo displayFraction(3.267432) . PHP_EOL; # Outputs: 3¼ echo displayFraction(3.38) . PHP_EOL; # Outputs: 3½ Expand my mind!

    Read the article

  • Is my method for avoiding dynamic_cast<> faster than dynamic_cast<> itself ?

    - by ereOn
    Hi, I was answering a question a few minutes ago and it raised to me another one: In one of my projects, I do some network message parsing. The messages are in the form of: [1 byte message type][2 bytes payload length][x bytes payload] The format and content of the payload are determined by the message type. I have a class hierarchy, based on a common class Message. To instanciate my messages, i have a static parsing method which gives back a Message* depending on the message type byte. Something like: Message* parse(const char* frame) { // This is sample code, in real life I obviously check that the buffer // is not NULL, and the size, and so on. switch(frame[0]) { case 0x01: return new FooMessage(); case 0x02: return new BarMessage(); } // Throw an exception here because the mesage type is unknown. } I sometimes need to access the methods of the subclasses. Since my network message handling must be fast, I decived to avoid dynamic_cast<> and I added a method to the base Message class that gives back the message type. Depending on this return value, I use a static_cast<> to the right child type instead. I did this mainly because I was told once that dynamic_cast<> was slow. However, I don't know exactly what it really does and how slow it is, thus, my method might be as just as slow (or slower) but far more complicated. What do you guys think of this design ? Is it common ? Is it really faster than using dynamic_cast<> ? Any detailed explanation of what happen under the hood when one use dynamic_cast<> is welcome !

    Read the article

  • Is it good practice to generally make heavyweight classes non-copyable?

    - by Emile Cormier
    I have a Shape class containing potentially many vertices, and I was contemplating making copy-constructor/copy-assignment private to prevent accidental needless copying of my heavyweight class (for example, passing by value instead of by reference). To make a copy of Shape, one would have to deliberately call a "clone" or "duplicate" method. Is this good practice? I wonder why STL containers don't use this approach, as I rarely want to pass them by value.

    Read the article

  • index 'enabled' fields good idea?

    - by sibidiba
    Content of a website is stored in a MySQL database. 99% of the content will be enabled, but some (users, posts etc.) will be disabled. Most of the queries end as WHERE (...) AND enabled Is it a good idea to create an index on the field 'enabled'?

    Read the article

  • Where do you keep your code?

    - by skiphoppy
    Your code is of course checked into a repository somewhere, but where do you keep your working copy/copies? C:\Program Files isn't right, as it's for installed packages. My Documents somehow doesn't seem right, either—a My Code folder next to My Music and My Pictures? Dumping in C:\ is messy, but seems to be "working" for other people in my office.

    Read the article

  • PHP Database connection practice

    - by Phill Pafford
    I have a script that connects to multiple databases (Oracle, MySQL and MSSQL), each database connection might not be used each time the script runs but all could be used in a single script execution. My question is, "Is it better to connect to all the databases once in the beginning of the script even though all the connections might not be used. Or is it better to connect to them as needed, the only catch is that I would need to have the connection call in a loop (so the database connection would be new for X amount of times in the loop). Yeah Example Code #1: // Connections at the beginning of the script $dbh_oracle = connect2db(); $dbh_mysql = connect2db(); $dbh_mssql = connect2db(); for ($i=1; $i<=5; $i++) { // NOTE: might not use all the connections $rs = queryDb($query,$dbh_*); // $dbh can be any of the 3 connections } Yeah Example Code #2: // Connections in the loop for ($i=1; $i<=5; $i++) { // NOTE: Would use all the connections but connecting multiple times $dbh_oracle = connect2db(); $dbh_mysql = connect2db(); $dbh_mssql = connect2db(); $rs_oracle = queryDb($query,$dbh_oracle); $rs_mysql = queryDb($query,$dbh_mysql); $rs_mssql = queryDb($query,$dbh_mssql); } now I know you could use a persistent connection but would that be one connection open for each database in the loop as well? Like mysql_pconnect(), mssql_pconnect() and adodb for Oracle persistent connection method. I know that persistent connection can also be resource hogs and as I'm looking for best performance/practice.

    Read the article

  • How to document object-oriented MATLAB code?

    - by jjkparker
    I'm writing a sizable application using object-oriented MATLAB, and this has gotten me thinking about how to document the code. If this was C, I would use Doxygen. For Java, I'd use JavaDoc. Both have mostly agreed-upon standards for how class and method documentation should look and what it should contain. But what about MATLAB code? The most I've seen in TMW's own classes is a short sentence or two at the top of the class, and I can't find any topics devoted to documenting sizable MATLAB applications. So how do you document your MATLAB classes? Any particular style issues or additional tools?

    Read the article

  • Programming Concepts: What should be done when an exception is thrown?

    - by Dooms101
    This does not really apply to any language specifically, but if it matters I am using VB.NET in Visual Studio 2008. I can't seem to find anything really that useful using Google about this topic, but I was wondering what is common practice when an exception is thrown and caught but since it has been thrown the application cannot continue operating. For example I have exceptions that are thrown by my FileLoader class when a file cannot be found or when a file is deemed corrupt. The exception is only thrown within the class and is not handled really. If the error is detected, then the exception is thrown and whatever function is was thrown is basically quits. So in the code trying to create that object or call one of its members I use a Try...Catch statement. However, I was wondering, what should even do when this exception is caught? My application needs these files to be intact, and if they are not, the application is almost useless. So far I just pop up a message box telling the user their is an error and to reinstall. What else can I do, or better, what's common practice in these situations?

    Read the article

  • Best way to handle input from a keyboard "wedge"

    - by Mykroft
    I'm writing a C# POS (point of sale) system that takes input from a keyboard wedge magcard reader. This means that any data it reads off of a mag stripe is entered as if it were typed on the keyboard very quickly. Currently I'm handling this by attaching to the KeyPress event and looking for a series of very fast key presses that contain the card swipe sentinel characters. Is there a better way to deal with this sort of input? Edit: The device does simply present the data as keystrokes and doesn't interface through some other driver. Also We use a wide range of these types of devices so ideally a method should work independent of the specific model of wedge being used. However if there is no other option I'll have to make do.

    Read the article

  • Use continue or Checked Exceptions when checking and processing objects

    - by Johan Pelgrim
    I'm processing, let's say a list of "Document" objects. Before I record the processing of the document successful I first want to check a couple of things. Let's say, the file referring to the document should be present and something in the document should be present. Just two simple checks for the example but think about 8 more checks before I have successfully processed my document. What would have your preference? for (Document document : List<Document> documents) { if (!fileIsPresent(document)) { doSomethingWithThisResult("File is not present"); continue; } if (!isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(document)) { doSomethingWithThisResult("Something is not in the document"); continue; } doSomethingWithTheSucces(); } Or for (Document document : List<Document> documents) { try { fileIsPresent(document); isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(document); doSomethingWithTheSucces(); } catch (ProcessingException e) { doSomethingWithTheExceptionalCase(e.getMessage()); } } public boolean fileIsPresent(Document document) throws ProcessingException { ... throw new ProcessingException("File is not present"); } public boolean isSomethingInTheDocumentPresent(Document document) throws ProcessingException { ... throw new ProcessingException("Something is not in the document"); } What is more readable. What is best? Is there even a better approach of doing this (maybe using a design pattern of some sort)? As far as readability goes my preference currently is the Exception variant... What is yours?

    Read the article

  • If terminating a hung thread is a good idea, how do I do it safely?

    - by Steve
    My Delphi program relies heavily on Outlook automation. Outlook versions prior to 2007-SP2 tend to get stuck in memory due to badly written addins and badly written Outlook code. If Outlook is stuck, calling CreateOleObject('Outlook.Application') or GetActiveObject ... doesn't return and keeps my application hanging till Outlook.exe is closed in the task manager. I've thought of a solution, but I'm unsure whether it's good practice or not. I'd start Outlook with CreateOleObject in a separate thread, wait 10 seconds in my main thread and if Outlook hangs (CreateOleObject doesn't return), offer the user to kill the Outlook.exe process from my program. But since I don't want to force the user to kill the Outlook.exe process, as an alternative I also need a way to kill the new thread in my program which keeps hanging now. Is this good practice? How can I terminate a hanging thread in Delphi without leaking memory?

    Read the article

  • Extension methods for encapsulation and reusability

    - by tzaman
    In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself?

    Read the article

  • IEnumerable and IEnumerator in the same class, bad idea?

    - by David Rutten
    Is this a bad idea? Private Class GH_DataStructureEnumerator(Of Q As Types.IGH_Goo) Implements IEnumerable(Of Q) Implements IEnumerator(Of Q) .... .... 'Current, MoveNext, Reset etc.' .... .... Public Function GetEnumerator_Generic() As IEnumerator(Of Q) _ Implements IEnumerable(Of Q).GetEnumerator Return Me End Function End Class This class is only visible as an IEnumerable(Of T) readonly property, and it saves me an additional class that wraps IEnumerator(Of T). But somehow it just seems wrong. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Avoid writing SQL queries altogether in SSIS

    - by Jonn
    Working on a Data Warehouse project, the guy that gave us the tutorial advised that we stick to using SQL queries over defining a lot of data flow transformations, citing points like it'll consume a lot of memory on the ETL box so we'd rather leave the processing to the DB box. Is this really advisable? Where's the balance between relying on GUI tools over executing a bunch of SQL scripts on your Integration package? And honestly, I'd like to avoid writing SQL queries as much as I can.

    Read the article

  • php : echo"", print(), printf()

    - by marc-andre menard
    Is there a better way to output data to html page with PHP ? if i like to make a div with some var in php i will write something like that print ('<div>'.$var.'</div>); or echo "'<div>'.$var.'</div>'"; what is the PROPER way to do that ? or a better way, fill a $tempvar and print it once? like that: $tempvar = '<div>'.$var.'</div>' print ($tempvar); in fact, in real life, the var will be fill with much more !

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice for adding persistence to an MVC model?

    - by etheros
    I'm in the process of implementing an ultra-light MVC framework in PHP. It seems to be a common opinion that the loading of data from a database, file etc. should be independent of the Model, and I agree. What I'm unsure of is the best way to link this "data layer" into MVC. Datastore interacts with Model //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $data = $this->loadDataStore('foo', $model); $data->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates Model $model->setBar('bar'); $data->save(); //reads data from Model and saves } Controller mediates between Model and Datastore Seems a bit verbose and requires the model to know that a datastore exists. //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $data = $this->loadDataStore('foo'); $model->setDataStore($data); $model->getDataStore->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates Model $model->setBar('bar'); $model->getDataStore->save(); //reads data from Model and saves } Datastore extends Model What happens if we want to save a Model extending a database datastore to a flatfile datastore? //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadHybrid('foo'); //get_class == Datastore_Database $model->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates $model->setBar('bar'); $model->save(); //saves } Model extends datastore This allows for Model portability, but it seems wrong to extend like this. Further, the datastore cannot make use of any of the Model's methods. //controller extends model public function update() { $model = $this->loadHybrid('foo'); //get_class == Model $model->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates $model->setBar('bar'); $model->save(); //saves } EDIT: Model communicates with DAO //model public function __construct($dao) { $this->dao = $dao; } //model public function setBar($bar) { //a bunch of business logic goes here $this->dao->setBar($bar); } //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $model->setBar('baz'); $model->save(); } Any input on the "best" option - or alternative - is most appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What is the advantage of the 'src/main/java'' convention?

    - by Chris
    I've noticed that a lot of projects have the following structure: Project-A bin lib src main java RootLevelPackageClass.java I currently use the following convention (as my projects are 100% java): Project-A bin lib src RootLevelPackageClass.java I'm not currently using Maven but am wondering if this is a Maven convention or not or if there is another reason. Can someone explain why the first version is so popular these days and if I should adopt this new convention or not? Chris

    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 | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >