Search Results

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

Page 94/237 | < Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >

  • WCF Best Practice for "Overloaded" methods

    - by Nate Bross
    What is the best practice for emulating overloaded methods over WCF? Typically I might write an interface like this interface IInterface { MyType ReadMyType(int id); IEnumerable<MyType> ReadMyType(String name); IEnumerable<MyType> ReadMyType(String name, int maxResults); } What would this interface look like after you converted it to WCF?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to identify which form has been submitted?

    - by Rupert
    Currently, when I design my forms, I like to keep the name of the submit button equal to the id of the form. Then, in my php, I just do if(isset($_POST['submitName'])) in order to check if a form has been submitted and which form has been submitted. Firstly, are there any security problems or design flaws with this method? One problem I have encountered is when I wish to overlay my forms with javascript in order to provide faster validation to the user. For example, whilst I obviously need to retain server side validation, it is more convenient for the user if an error message is displayed inline, upon blurring an input. Additionally, it would be good to provide entire form validation, upon clicking the submit button. Therefore, when the user clicks on the form's submit button, I am stopping the default action, doing my validation, and then attempting to renable the traditional submit functionality, if the validation passes. In order to do this, I am using the form.submit() method but, unfortunately, this doesn't send the submit button variable (as it should be as form.submit() can be called without any button being clicked). This means my PHP script fails to detect that the form has been submitted. What is the correct way to work around this? It seems like the standard solution is to add a hidden field into the form, upon passing validation, which has the name of form's id. Then when form.submit() is called, this is passed along in place of the submit button. However, this solution seems very ungraceful to me and so I am wondering whether I should: a) Use an alternative method to detect which form has been submitted which doesn't rely rely on passing the submit button. If so what alternative is there? Obviously, just having an extra hidden field from the start isn't any better. b) Use an alternative Javascript solution which allows me to retain my non-Javascript design. For example, is there an alternative to form.submit() which allows me to pass in extra data? c) Suck it up and just insert a hidden field using Javascript.

    Read the article

  • How to best launch C++ application from web page

    - by JB
    I guess there are two parts to this question, one technical and one best practice for security and doing things "right". I'm working on a little game using C++ / directx but I would like to be able to launch it from a web page by someone clicking on a link on that page. Ideally I would like the first time they clicked for it to launch an installer downloads and installs the game on their machine, and then the next time to launch an application which updates the game from a web site if it's old and then launches it. I have no problems with the expected security popups and questions the first time it runs. I want people to be certain what they are installing and understand what they are doing. But it would be nice if once it is installed they could run it with the minimum of fuss. My question then is what technologies I could use to do this? I'm thinking that it would need a browser plugin and an activex control so that first time you'd install that, and subsequently the control/plugin would be able to launch the game. I'm not sure that under newer browser secuity models that a plugin would have the permissions to be able to run an installer though or silently invoke applications on the client machine even if they are already installed. Is there a more sensible way to achive what I want to achieve? And I'm worried about the security aspects too. I want this to be convenient for users but I of course want to do it "right". I know this can be done as I've seen several mmorpg type games that launch in this way from the browser now but it's not entirely clear to me how they've done it.

    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

  • Should I use IDisposable for purely managed resources?

    - by John Gietzen
    Here is the scenario: I have an object called a Transaction that needs to make sure that only one entity has permission to edit it at any given time. In order to facilitate a long-lived lock, I have the class generating a token object that can be used to make the edits. You would use it like this: var transaction = new Transaction(); using (var tlock = transaction.Lock()) { transaction.Update(data, tlock); } Now, I want the TransactionLock class to implement IDisposable so that its usage can be clear. But, I don't have any unmanaged resources to dispose. however, the TransctionLock object itself is a sort of "unmanaged resource" in the sense that the CLR doesn't know how to properly finalize it. All of this would be fine and dandy, I would just use IDisposable and be done with it. However, my issue comes when I try to do this in the finalizer: ~TransactionLock() { this.Dispose(false); } I want the finalizer to release the transaction from the lock, if possible. How, in the finalizer, do I detect if the parent transaction (this.transaction) has already been finalized? Is there a better pattern I should be using? The Transaction class looks something like this: public sealed class Transaction { private readonly object lockMutex = new object(); private TransactionLock currentLock; public TransactionLock Lock() { lock (this.lockMutex) { if (this.currentLock != null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); this.currentLock = new TransactionLock(this); return this.currentLock; } } public void Update(object data, TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); // ... } } internal void ValidateLock(TransactionLock tlock) { if (this.currentLock == null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); if (this.currentLock != tlock) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); } internal void Unlock(TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); this.currentLock = null; } } }

    Read the article

  • Passing objects by reference or not in C#

    - by Piku
    Suppose I have a class like this: public class ThingManager { List<SomeClass> ItemList; public void AddToList (SomeClass Item) { ItemList.Add(Item); } public void ProcessListItems() { // go through list one item at a time, get item from list, // modify item according to class' purpose } } Assume "SomeClass" is a fairly large class containing methods and members that are quite complex (List<s and arrays, for example) and that there may be a large quantity of them, so not copying vast amounts of data around the program is important. Should the "AddToList" method have "ref" in it or not? And why? It's like trying to learn pointers in C all over again ;-) (which is probably why I am getting confused, I'm trying to relate these to pointers. In C it'd be "SomeClass *Item" and a list of "SomeClass *" variables)

    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

  • Singular method name for single object argument, plural for a list?

    - by nasufara
    I'm having a problem with naming a method for a database application. In my Database instance, I have a method that can remove an Agreement object from the database. However, I want to be able to remove multiple Agreements at once, to be able to use transactions. The problem is that I also have an overload to remove a single Agreement object. Essentially, my structure is like this: public class Database { // ... public void RemoveAgreement(Agreement a) { // ... } public void RemoveAgreement(IEnumerable<Agreement> agreements) { // ... } } But this can be confusing, as the overload with the list of Agreements has a singular name, despite being inherently plural. My question is, how should I structure this? Should I have two overloads with the name RemoveAgreement(), or RemoveAgreements()? Or should I use two separate methods, instead of overloads? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Scrum metrics for quality

    - by zachary
    What is the best way to measure QA in scrum? We have members who typically test and they are measured against how many bugs they find. If they don't find any bugs then they are considered to be doing a bad job. However, it is my understanding that the developers and quality people are considered one in the same. I would think that they should be judged against the same metrics... not different metrics then the developers who may also be doing testing work... What is the best way to handle metrics for QA and should QA people have separate metrics from developers in scrum? Any documents or links someone can point me to in regards to this?

    Read the article

  • Why is debugging better in an IDE?

    - by Bill Karwin
    I've been a software developer for over twenty years, programming in C, Perl, SQL, Java, PHP, JavaScript, and recently Python. I've never had a problem I could not debug using some careful thought, and well-placed debugging print statements. I respect that many people say that my techniques are primitive, and using a real debugger in an IDE is much better. Yet from my observation, IDE users don't appear to debug faster or more successfully than I can, using my stone knives and bear skins. I'm sincerely open to learning the right tools, I've just never been shown a compelling advantage to using visual debuggers. Moreover, I have never read a tutorial or book that showed how to debug effectively using an IDE, beyond the basics of how to set breakpoints and display the contents of variables. What am I missing? What makes IDE debugging tools so much more effective than thoughtful use of diagnostic print statements? Can you suggest resources (tutorials, books, screencasts) that show the finer techniques of IDE debugging? Sweet answers! Thanks much to everyone for taking the time. Very illuminating. I voted up many, and voted none down. Some notable points: Debuggers can help me do ad hoc inspection or alteration of variables, code, or any other aspect of the runtime environment, whereas manual debugging requires me to stop, edit, and re-execute the application (possibly requiring recompilation). Debuggers can attach to a running process or use a crash dump, whereas with manual debugging, "steps to reproduce" a defect are necessary. Debuggers can display complex data structures, multi-threaded environments, or full runtime stacks easily and in a more readable manner. Debuggers offer many ways to reduce the time and repetitive work to do almost any debugging tasks. Visual debuggers and console debuggers are both useful, and have many features in common. A visual debugger integrated into an IDE also gives you convenient access to smart editing and all the other features of the IDE, in a single integrated development environment (hence the name).

    Read the article

  • How do you deal with naming conventions for rails partials?

    - by DJTripleThreat
    For example, I might have an partial something like: <div> <%= f.label :some_field %><br/> <%= f.text_field :some_field %> </div> which works for edit AND new actions. I also will have one like: <div> <%=h some_field %> </div> for the show action. So you would think that all your partials go under one directory like shared or something. The problem that I see with this is that both of these would cause a conflict since they are essentially the same partial but for different actions so what I do is: <!-- for edit and new actions --> <%= render "shared_edit/some_partial" ... %> <!-- for show action --> <%= render "shared_show/some_partial" ... %> How do you handle this? Is a good idea or even possible to maybe combine all of these actions into one partial and render different parts by determining what the current action is?

    Read the article

  • html clickable layout area. best practice

    - by Andrew Florko
    I am bad in html layout but I have to produce it :) I want to make big button on a page that is implemented as div with children tags (maybe - a bad idea). I can handle click event on boundary-div with javascript but it requires javascript enabled. I can wrap boundary-div with "anchor" tag but is doesn't work in IE Please, suggest me the best way to implement this. <a href="..."> <table> <td> ... </td> <td> ... <table> ... </table> </td> </table> </a>

    Read the article

  • DRYing up Rails Views with Nested Resources

    - by viatropos
    What is your solution to the problem if you have a model that is both not-nested and nested, such as products: a "Product" can belong_to say an "Event", and a Product can also just be independent. This means I can have routes like this: map.resources :products # /products map.resources :events do |event| event.resources :products # /events/1/products end How do you handle that in your views properly? Note: this is for an admin panel. I want to be able to have a "Create Event" page, with a side panel for creating tickets (Product), forms, and checking who's rsvp'd. So you'd click on the "Event Tickets" side panel button, and it'd take you to /events/my-new-event/tickets. But there's also a root "Products" tab for the admin panel, which could list tickets and other random products. The 'tickets' and 'products' views look 90% the same, but the tickets will have some info about the event it belongs to. It seems like I'd have to have views like this: products/index.haml products/show.haml events/products/index.haml events/products/show.haml But that doesn't seem DRY. Or I could have conditionals checking to see if the product had an Event (@product.event.nil?), but then the views would be hard to understand. How do you deal with these situations? Thanks so much.

    Read the article

  • Is it against best practice to throw Exception on most JUnit tests?

    - by Chris Knight
    Almost all of my JUnit tests are written with the following signature: public void testSomething() throws Exception My reasoning is that I can focus on what I'm testing rather than exception handling which JUnit appears to give me for free. But am I missing anything by doing this? Is it against best practice? Would I gain anything by explicitly catching specific exceptions in my test and then fail()'ing on them?

    Read the article

  • distributing R package with optional S4 syntax sugar

    - by mariotomo
    I've written a small package for logging, I'm distributing it through r-forge, recently I received some very interesting feedback on how to make it easier to use, but this functionality is based on stuff (setRefClass) that was added to R in 2.12. I'd like to keep distributing the package also for R-2.9, so I'm looking for a way to include or exclude the S4 syntactical sugar automatically, and include it when the library is loaded on a R = 2.12 system. one other option I see, that is to write a small S4 package that needs 2.12, imports the simpler logging package and exports the syntactically sugared interface... I don't like it too much, as I'd need to choose a different name for the S4 package.

    Read the article

  • P/Invoke or C++/CLI for wrapping a C library

    - by Ian G
    Have a moderate size (40-odd function) C API that needs to be called from a C# project. The functions logically break up to form a few classes that will be API presented to the rest of the project. Are there any objective reasons to prefer P/Invoke or C++/CLI for the interoperability underneath that API, in terms of robustness, maintainability, deployment, ...? The issues I could think of that might be, but aren't problematic are: C++/CLI will require an separate assembly, the P/Invoke classes can be in the main assembly. (We've already got multiple assemblies and there'll be the C dlls anyway so not a major issue). Performance doesn't seem differ noticeable between the two methods. Issues that I'm not sure about are: My feeling is C++/CLI will be easier to debug if there's inter-op problem, is this true? Language familiarity enough people know C# and C++ but knowledge of details of C++/CLI are rarer here. Anything else?

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice in regards to building composite dtos off of an aggregate root with domain

    - by Chance
    I'm trying to figure out the best approach/practice for assembling a composite data transfer object off of an aggregate root and would love to hear people's thoughts on this. For example, lets say I have a root that has a few domain objects as children. I want to assemble a specific view dto, based on some business logic, that either has attributes or full dto's of it's objects. What I'm struggling with is trying to figure out where that assembly should happen. I can see it going on the domain object of the aggregate root as there is some business logic associated with it. The benefits of this approach from what I've deduced thus far is that it should reduce the inevitable business logic from bleeding outisde of the domain object. It also allows for private methods that take care of tasks that could become more complex from an external builder. The downsides being that the domain object becomes much more entrenched in the application's workflow and represents much more than just the domain object. It also could become very large in the scenario where you need multiple composite Dtos. Alternatively, I could also see it belonging to some form of transfer object assembler where there is a builder for each domain object. The domain objects would still be responsible for GetDto() and UpdateFromDto(dto). Outside of that, the builder would handle the construction and deconstruction of composite dtos. The downside is kind of mentioned above, where I fear this will easily lead to developers unfamiliar with DDD bleeding a ton of business logic into the assembler which is what I want to desperately avoid. Any thoughts would be greatly apperciated.

    Read the article

  • A good approach to db planing for reporting service

    - by Itay Moav
    The scenario: Big system (~200 tables). 60,000 users. Complex reports that will require me to do multiple queries for each report and even those will be complex queries with inner queries all over the place + some processing in PHP. I have seen an approach, which I am not sure about: Having one centralized, de-normalized, table that registers any activity in the system which is reportable. This table will hold mostly foreign keys, so she should be fairly compact and fast. So, for example (My system is a virtual learning management system), A user enrolls to course, the table stores the user id, date, course id, organization id, activity type (enrollment). Of course I also store this data in a normalized DB, which the actual application uses. Pros I see: easy, maintainable queries and code to process data and fast retrieval. Cons: there is a danger of the de-normalized table to be out of sync with the real DB. Is this approach worth considering, or (preferably from experience) is total $#%#%t?

    Read the article

  • Using explicitly numbered repetition instead of question mark, star and plus

    - by polygenelubricants
    I've seen regex patterns that use explicitly numbered repetition instead of ?, * and +, i.e.: Explicit Shorthand (something){0,1} (something)? (something){1} (something) (something){0,} (something)* (something){1,} (something)+ The questions are: Are these two forms identical? What if you add possessive/reluctant modifiers? If they are identical, which one is more idiomatic? More readable? Simply "better"?

    Read the article

  • How do I put an ASP.NET website project and class library projects in one .sln file on Subversion

    - by JustinP8
    My company has several class libraries we use in multiple website projects (not web application projects). Website projects don't have .sln files, but I'm sure I've read in my past research that you can make a blank solution and put your website and class library projects in it. After answers to my previous questions, this is the direction that I'm going (based slightly on [http://amadiere.com/blog/2009/06/multiple-subversion-projects-in-one-visual-studio-solution-using-svnexternals/][1]: /websites /website1 /trunk /website1 /libraries /library1 /trunk /library1 /library2 /trunk /library2 /etc... Then I planed on using svn:externals to copy /library1, /library2, and so on into the working_copy/websites/website1/ folder. I want my team members to be able to checkout the /trunk folder for website1 and get a .sln file, /library1 external, /library2 external, etc. I want that .sln file to contain the website1 website project, and all of the library external projects. Hopefully that would look something like: /working_copy /websites /website1 /trunk /website1 /library1 (svn:external of libraries/library1/trunk/library1) /library2 (svn:external of libraries/library2/trunk/library2) /etc. website1.sln So, at the end of all of this, the goal is that my teammates check out the trunk, open the solution, and everyone has the exact same solution. When we commit, everything is committed appropriately to subversion (the website code, and the libraries are committed to their appropriate place on the repo). How have others solved these issues? How can I make a .sln file that my team members and I can share in this manner? [1]: "This Article"

    Read the article

  • TDD - beginner problems and stumbling blocks

    - by Noufal Ibrahim
    While I've written unit tests for most of the code I've done, I only recently got my hands on a copy of TDD by example by Kent Beck. I have always regretted certain design decisions I made since they prevented the application from being 'testable'. I read through the book and while some of it looks alien, I felt that I could manage it and decided to try it out on my current project which is basically a client/server system where the two pieces communicate via. USB. One on the gadget and the other on the host. The application is in Python. I started off and very soon got entangled in a mess of rewrites and tiny tests which I later figured didn't really test anything. I threw away most of them and and now have a working application for which the tests have all coagulated into just 2. Based on my experiences, I have a few questions which I'd like to ask. I gained some information from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1146218/new-to-tdd-are-there-sample-applications-with-tests-to-show-how-to-do-tdd but have some specific questions which I'd like answers to/discussion on. Kent Beck uses a list which he adds to and strikes out from to guide the development process. How do you make such a list? I initially had a few items like "server should start up", "server should abort if channel is not available" etc. but they got mixed and finally now, it's just something like "client should be able to connect to server" (which subsumed server startup etc.). How do you handle rewrites? I initially selected a half duplex system based on named pipes so that I could develop the application logic on my own machine and then later add the USB communication part. It them moved to become a socket based thing and then moved from using raw sockets to using the Python SocketServer module. Each time things changed, I found that I had to rewrite considerable parts of the tests which was annoying. I'd figured that the tests would be a somewhat invariable guide during my development. They just felt like more code to handle. I needed a client and a server to communicate through the channel to test either side. I could mock one of the sides to test the other but then the whole channel wouldn't be tested and I worry that I'd miss that. This detracted from the whole red/green/refactor rhythm. Is this just lack of experience or am I doing something wrong? The "Fake it till you make it" left me with a lot of messy code that I later spent a lot of time to refactor and clean up. Is this the way things work? At the end of the session, I now have my client and server running with around 3 or 4 unit tests. It took me around a week to do it. I think I could have done it in a day if I were using the unit tests after code way. I fail to see the gain. I'm looking for comments and advice from people who have implemented large non trivial projects completely (or almost completely) using this methodology. It makes sense to me to follow the way after I have something already running and want to add a new feature but doing it from scratch seems to tiresome and not worth the effort. P.S. : Please let me know if this should be community wiki and I'll mark it like that. Update 0 : All the answers were equally helpful. I picked the one I did because it resonated with my experiences the most. Update 1: Practice Practice Practice!

    Read the article

  • Is it OK to put link to SO questions in a program comments?

    - by WizardOfOdds
    In quite some codebase you can see comments stating things like: // Workaround for defect 'xxx', (See bug 1434594 on Sun's bugparade) So I've got a few questions, but they're all related. Is it OK to put link to SO questions in a program's comments: // We're now mapping from the "sorted-on column" to original indices. // // There's apparently no easy way to do this in Java, so we're // re-inventing a wheel. // // (see why here, in SO question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/951848) Do you do it? And what are the drawbacks in doing so? (see my first comment for a terrible drawback)

    Read the article

  • JavaScript-library-based Project Organization

    - by Laith J
    Hello, I'm very new to the JavaScript library world. I have used JS by itself before to create a mini social network but this is the first time I use a JS library and I really don't know how to go about this. I'm planning to use Google Closure and I'm really not sure how I should go about organizing the code. Should I put everything in one file since it's a web app and should have one screen? Should I separate the code to many chunks and put them in different files? Or should I put different dialogs (like settings) in a separate page and thus a separate file? Like all programmers I'm a perfectionist so please help me out with this one, thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >