Search Results

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

Page 92/237 | < Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >

  • Concept of WNDCLASSEX, good programming habits and WndProc for system classes

    - by luiscubal
    I understand that the Windows API uses "classes", relying to the WNDCLASS/WNDCLASSEX structures. I have successfully gone through windows API Hello World applications and understand that this class is used by our own windows, but also by Windows core controls, such as "EDIT", "BUTTON", etc. I also understand that it is somehow related to WndProc(it allows me to define a function for it) Although I can find documentation about this class, I can't find anything explaining the concept. So far, the only thing I found about it was this: A Window Class has NOTHING to do with C++ classes. Which really doesn't help(it tells me what it isn't but doesn't tellme what it is). In fact, this only confuses me more, since I'd be tempted to associate WNDCLASSEX to C++ classes and think that "WNDCLASSEX" represents a control type . So, my first question is What is it? In second place, I understand that one can define a WndProc in a class. However, a window can also get messages from the child controls(or windows, or whatever they are called in the Windows API). How can this be? Finally, when is it a good programming practise to define a new class? Per application(for the main frame), per frame, one per control I define(if I create my own progress bar class, for example)? I know Java/Swing, C#/Windows.Form, C/GTK+ and C++/wxWidgets, so I'll probably understand comparisons with these toolkits.

    Read the article

  • How should the Version field be used in Trac?

    - by Eric
    I use Trac to track bugs, and future changes in my software projects. Tickets in Trac have a "Version" field and I'm trying to figure out the best way to use this field. Say I find a series of bugs in version 1.0 of my software. I create tickets in track for each and assign them to version 1.0. Now say I fix some of the bugs, and add some of the new features and release version 1.1. But some of the old 1.0 bugs are still in 1.1. Should I change their corresponding tickets to version 1.1 because they also now exist in 1.1? Or should I leave them set to version 1.0 as a way of tracking what version the bug was found in, and just assume that any open tickets in older versions still exist in newer versions?

    Read the article

  • How to Inserting message into View that depends on session value. ASP.NET MVC. Best practice

    - by Andrew Florko
    User have to populate multistep questionnaire web-forms and step messages depend on the option chosen by user at the very beginning. Messages are stored in web.config file. I use asp.net mvc project, strong typed views and keep business logic separated from controller in static class. I don't want to make business logic dependency on web.config. Well, I have to insert message into view that depends on session value. There are at least 2 options how to implement this: View model has property that is populated in controller/businessLogic and rendered in view like <%: Model.HelpMessage1 %>. I have to pass web.config values from controller to businessLogic that makes business logic methods signature too complex. I don't want to make configuration source abstract (in order to let business logic read configuration values from its methods directly) also. Create static helper class that is called from view like <%: ViewHelper.HelpMessage1(Model.Option1) %>. But in this case logic what to show seems to be separated into two classes: business logic & viewHelper. What will you suggest? Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • How do I know if I'm being truly clever and not just "clever"?

    - by Covar
    If there's one thing I've learned from programming is that there are clever solutions to problems, and then there are "clever" solutions to problems. One is an intelligent solution to a difficult problem that results in improved efficiency and a better way to to do something and the other will wind up on The Daily WTF, and result in headaches and pain for anyone else involved. My question is how do you distinguish between one and the other? How do you figure out if you've over thought the solution? How do you stop yourself from throwing away truly clever solutions, thinking they were "clever"?

    Read the article

  • What should the Java main method be for a standalone application (for Spring JMS) ?

    - by Brandon
    I am interested in creating a Spring standalone application that will run and wait to receive messages from an ActiveMQ queue using Spring JMS. I have searched a lot of places and cannot find a consistent way of implementing the main method for such a standalone application. There appears to be few examples of Spring standalone applications. I have looked at Tomcat, JBoss, ActiveMQ and other examples from the around the web but I have not come to a conclusion so ... What is the best practice for implementing a main method for a Java application (specifically Spring with JMS) ?

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice to "look up" Java Enums?

    - by Marcus
    We have a REST API where clients can supply parameters representing values defined on the server in Java Enums. So we can provide a descriptive error, we add this lookup method to each Enum. Seems like we're just copying code (bad). Is there a better practice? public enum MyEnum { A, B, C, D; public static MyEnum lookup(String id) { try { return MyEnum.valueOf(id); } catch (IllegalArgumentException e) { throw new RuntimeException("Invalid value for my enum blah blah: " + id); } } } Update: The default error message provided by valueOf(..) would be No enum const class a.b.c.MyEnum.BadValue. I would like to provide a more descriptive error from the API.

    Read the article

  • How to test method call order with Moq

    - by Finglas
    At the moment I have: [Test] public void DrawDrawsAllScreensInTheReverseOrderOfTheStack() { // Arrange. var screenMockOne = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screenMockTwo = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screens = new List<IScreen>(); screens.Add(screenMockOne.Object); screens.Add(screenMockTwo.Object); var stackOfScreensMock = new Mock<IScreenStack>(); stackOfScreensMock.Setup(s => s.ToArray()).Returns(screens.ToArray()); var screenManager = new ScreenManager(stackOfScreensMock.Object); // Act. screenManager.Draw(new Mock<GameTime>().Object); // Assert. screenMockOne.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock one"); screenMockTwo.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock two"); } But the order in which I draw my objects in the production code does not matter. I could do one first, or two it doesn't matter. However it should matter as the draw order is important. How do you (using Moq) ensure methods are called in a certain order? Edit I got rid of that test. The draw method has been removed from my unit tests. I'll just have to manually test it works. The reversing of the order though was taken into a seperate test class where it was tested so it's not all bad. Thanks for the link about the feature they are looking into. I sure hope it gets added soon, very handy.

    Read the article

  • best practice for passing many arguments to method ?

    - by Tony
    Occasionally , we have to write methods that receive many many arguments , for example : public void doSomething(Object objA , Object objectB ,Date date1 ,Date date2 ,String str1 ,String str2 ) { } When I encounter this kind of problem , I often encapsulate arguments into a map. Map<Object,Object> params = new HashMap<Object,Object>(); params.put("objA",ObjA) ; ...... public void doSomething(Map<Object,Object> params) { // extracting params Object objA = (Object)params.get("objA"); ...... } This is not a good practice , encapsulate params into a map is totally a waste of efficiency. The good thing is , the clean signature , easy to add other params with fewest modification . what's the best practice for this kind of problem ?

    Read the article

  • Any reason not to always log stack traces?

    - by Chris Knight
    Encountered a frustrating problem in our application today which came down to an ArrayIndexOutOfBounds exception being thrown. The exception's type was just about all that was logged which is fairly useless (but, oh dear legacy app, we still love you, mostly). I've redeployed the application with a change which logs the stack trace on exception handling (and immediately found the root cause of the problem) and wondered why no one else did this before. Do you generally log the stack trace and is there any reason you wouldn't do this? Bonus points if you can explain (why, not how) the rationale behind having to jump hoops in java to get a string representation of a stack trace!

    Read the article

  • Exposing APIs - third party or homegrown?

    - by amelvin
    Parts of the project I'm currently working on (I can't give details) will be exposed as an API at some point over the next few months and I was wondering whether anyone could recommend a third party API 'provider' (possibly Mashery or SO advertiser Webservius). And I mean recommend in the 'I've used these people and they are good' sense because although I can google for an answer to this question it is more difficult to get truly unbiased opinions. As an addendum is there much mileage in creating a bespoke API solution and has anyone had any joy going down that road? Thanks in anticipation.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between a private and public funtion?

    - by Kyle
    I am a new programmer, and I started in C and am now starting to enjoy JavaScript and a tiny bit of PHP more. Lately I've heard the terms 'private' and 'public' functions a lot. Could anybody give an explanation of the both and how they are of use to a programmer? And I'm probably totally wrong here... but is a (function(){}) in javascript a private function?

    Read the article

  • When to use CreateChildControls() vs. embedding in the ASPX

    - by Kelly French
    I'm developing a webpart for SharePoint 2007 and have seen several posts that advise to do all the creation of controls in the code-behind. I'm transitioning from Java J2EE development so I don't have the platform history of .Net/ASP/etc. In other places it shows how you can do the same thing by embedding the control definition into the asp page with tags My question is this: What is the rule governing where to implement controls? Has this rule changed recently, ASP vs ASP.Net or ASP.Net MVC maybe? Is this advice limited to SharePoint development?

    Read the article

  • Combine hash values in C#

    - by Chris
    I'm creating a generic object collection class and need to implement a Hash function. I can obviously (and easily!) get the hash values for each object but was looking for the 'correct' way to combine them to avoid any issues. Does just adding, xoring or any basic operation harm the quality of the hash or am I going to have to do something like getting the objects as bytes, combining them and then hashing that? Cheers in advance

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to handle my softwares licenses?

    - by Sergio Tapia
    By best I mean more time tested, easier to implement and easier for the users to work with. I do not want my licensing crap to interfere with their work. I was thinking of launching a WCF service that check with my license DB if it's a valid license and if it is, send a True. If the returned response is False, then shut down the program after telling them to fix their license. Do you think this is a good way to handle it?

    Read the article

  • Should my internal API classes be all in one package?

    - by Chris
    I'm hard at work packaging up an API for public consumption. As such I'm trying to limit the methods that are exposed to only those that I wish to be public and supportable. Underneath this of course there are a multitude of limited access methods. The trouble is that I have a lot of internal code that needs to access these restricted methods without making those methods public. This creates two issues: I can't create interfaces to communicate between classes as this would make these my internal methods public. I can't access protected or default methods unless I put the majority of my internal classes in the same package. So, I have around 70 or 80 internal classes in cleanly segregated packages BUT with overly permissive access modifiers. Would you say that a single package is the lesser of two evils or is there a better way to be able to mask my internal methods whilst keeping more granular packages? I'd be interested to find out the best practice here. I'm already aware of This

    Read the article

  • Is there a difference between Perl's shift versus assignment from @_ for subroutine parameters?

    - by cowgod
    Let us ignore for a moment Damian Conway's best practice of no more than three positional parameters for any given subroutine. Is there any difference between the two examples below in regards to performance or functionality? Using shift: sub do_something_fantastical { my $foo = shift; my $bar = shift; my $baz = shift; my $qux = shift; my $quux = shift; my $corge = shift; } Using @_: sub do_something_fantastical { my ($foo, $bar, $baz, $qux, $quux, $corge) = @_; } Provided that both examples are the same in terms of performance and functionality, what do people think about one format over the other? Obviously the example using @_ is fewer lines of code, but isn't it more legible to use shift as shown in the other example? Opinions with good reasoning are welcome.

    Read the article

  • A better UPDATE method in LINQ to SQL

    - by Refracted Paladin
    The below is a typical, for me, Update method in L2S. I am still fairly new to a lot of this(L2S & business app development) but this just FEELs wrong. Like there MUST be a smarter way of doing this. Unfortunately, I am having trouble visualizing it and am hoping someone can provide an example or point me in the right direction. To take a stab in the dark, would I have a Person Object that has all these fields as Properties? Then what, though? Is that redundant since L2S already mapped my Person Table to a Class? Is this just 'how it goes', that you eventually end up passing 30 parameters(or MORE) to an UPDATE statement at some point? For reference, this is a business app using C#, WinForms, .Net 3.5, and L2S over SQL 2005 Standard. Here is a typical Update Call for me. This is in a file(BLLConnect.cs) with other CRUD methods. Connect is the name of the DB that holds tblPerson When a user clicks save() this is what is eventually called with all of these fields having, potentially, been updated-- public static void UpdatePerson(int personID, string userID, string titleID, string firstName, string middleName, string lastName, string suffixID, string ssn, char gender, DateTime? birthDate, DateTime? deathDate, string driversLicenseNumber, string driversLicenseStateID, string primaryRaceID, string secondaryRaceID, bool hispanicOrigin, bool citizenFlag, bool veteranFlag, short ? residencyCountyID, short? responsibilityCountyID, string emailAddress, string maritalStatusID) { using (var context = ConnectDataContext.Create()) { var personToUpdate = (from person in context.tblPersons where person.PersonID == personID select person).Single(); personToUpdate.TitleID = titleID; personToUpdate.FirstName = firstName; personToUpdate.MiddleName = middleName; personToUpdate.LastName = lastName; personToUpdate.SuffixID = suffixID; personToUpdate.SSN = ssn; personToUpdate.Gender = gender; personToUpdate.BirthDate = birthDate; personToUpdate.DeathDate = deathDate; personToUpdate.DriversLicenseNumber = driversLicenseNumber; personToUpdate.DriversLicenseStateID = driversLicenseStateID; personToUpdate.PrimaryRaceID = primaryRaceID; personToUpdate.SecondaryRaceID = secondaryRaceID; personToUpdate.HispanicOriginFlag = hispanicOrigin; personToUpdate.CitizenFlag = citizenFlag; personToUpdate.VeteranFlag = veteranFlag; personToUpdate.ResidencyCountyID = residencyCountyID; personToUpdate.ResponsibilityCountyID = responsibilityCountyID; personToUpdate.EmailAddress = emailAddress; personToUpdate.MaritalStatusID = maritalStatusID; personToUpdate.UpdateUserID = userID; personToUpdate.UpdateDateTime = DateTime.Now; context.SubmitChanges(); } }

    Read the article

  • File descriptor limits and default stack sizes

    - by Charles
    Where I work we build and distribute a library and a couple complex programs built on that library. All code is written in C and is available on most 'standard' systems like Windows, Linux, Aix, Solaris, Darwin. I started in the QA department and while running tests recently I have been reminded several times that I need to remember to set the file descriptor limits and default stack sizes higher or bad things will happen. This is particularly the case with Solaris and now Darwin. Now this is very strange to me because I am a believer in 0 required environment fiddling to make a product work. So I am wondering if there are times where this sort of requirement is a necessary evil, or if we are doing something wrong. Edit: Great comments that describe the problem and a little background. However I do not believe I worded the question well enough. Currently, we require customers, and hence, us the testers, to set these limits before running our code. We do not do this programatically. And this is not a situation where they MIGHT run out, under normal load our programs WILL run out and seg fault. So rewording the question, is requiring the customer to change these ulimit values to run our software to be expected on some platforms, ie, Solaris, Aix, or are we as a company making it to difficult for these users to get going? Bounty: I added a bounty to hopefully get a little more information on what other companies are doing to manage these limits. Can you set these pragmatically? Should we? Should our programs even be hitting these limits or could this be a sign that things might be a bit messy under the covers? That is really what I want to know, as a perfectionist a seemingly dirty program really bugs me.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >