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 102/237 | < Previous Page | 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109  | Next Page >

  • How does the verbosity of identifiers affect the performance of a programmer?

    - by DR
    I always wondered: Are there any hard facts which would indicate that either shorter or longer identifiers are better? Example: clrscr() opposed to ClearScreen() Short identifiers should be faster to read because there are fewer characters but longer identifiers often better resemble natural language and therefore also should be faster to read. Are there other aspects which suggest either a short or a verbose style? EDIT: Just to clarify: I didn't ask: "What would you do in this case?". I asked for reasons to prefer one over the other, i.e. this is not a poll question. Please, if you can, add some reason on why one would prefer one style over the other.

    Read the article

  • In .NET which loop runs faster for or foreach

    - by Binoj Antony
    In c#/VB.NET/.NET which loop runs faster for or foreach? Ever since I read that for loop works faster than foreach a long time ago I assumed it stood true for all collections, generic collection all arrays etc. I scoured google and found few articles but most of them are inconclusive (read comments on the articles) and open ended. What would be ideal is to have each scenarios listed and the best solution for the same e.g: (just example of how it should be) for iterating an array of 1000+ strings - for is better than foreach for iterating over IList (non generic) strings - foreach is better than for Few references found on the web for the same: Original grand old article by Emmanuel Schanzer CodeProject FOREACH Vs. FOR Blog - To foreach or not to foreach that is the question asp.net forum - NET 1.1 C# for vs foreach [Edit] Apart from the readability aspect of it I am really interested in facts and figures, there are applications where the last mile of performance optimization squeezed do matter.

    Read the article

  • The Java interface doesn't declare any exception. How to manage checked exception of the implementat

    - by Frór
    Let's say I have the following Java interface that I may not modify: public interface MyInterface { public void doSomething(); } And now the class implementing it is like this: class MyImplementation implements MyInterface { public void doSomething() { try { // read file } catch (IOException e) { // what to do? } } } I can't recover from not reading the file. A subclass of RuntimeException can clearly help me, but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do: the problem is that that exception would then not be documented in the class and a user of the class would possibly get that exception an know nothing about solving this. What can I do?

    Read the article

  • Multiple REPLACE function in Oracle

    - by Adnan
    I am using the REPLACE function in oracle to replace values in my string like; SELECT REPLACE('THE NEW VALUE IS #VAL1#','#VAL1#','55') from dual So this is OK to replace one value, but what about 20+, should I use 20+ REPLACE function or is there a more practical solution. All ideas are welcome.

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC Handle Drop Down Boxes that are not part of the Model

    - by Pino
    I have a small form which the user must fill in and consists of the following fields. Name (Text) Value (Text) Group (Group - Is a list of option pulled from a database table) Now the Model for this View looks like so, public string Name { get; set; } public string Value { get; set; } public int GroupID { get; set; } Now the view is Strongly Typed to the above model. What method would one use to populate the drop down list? Since the data is not contained within the Model (It could be contained in the Model) should we be using Temp/View data? A HTML Helper? What would be the ideal way to achieve this.

    Read the article

  • Delphi: How to avoid EIntOverflow underflow when subtracting?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Microsoft already says, in the documentation for GetTickCount, that you could never compare tick counts to check if an interval has passed. e.g.: Incorrect (pseudo-code): DWORD endTime = GetTickCount + 10000; //10 s from now ... if (GetTickCount > endTime) break; The above code is bad because it is suceptable to rollover of the tick counter. For example, assume that the clock is near the end of it's range: endTime = 0xfffffe00 + 10000 = 0x00002510; //9,488 decimal Then you perform your check: if (GetTickCount > endTime) Which is satisfied immediatly, since GetTickCount is larger than endTime: if (0xfffffe01 > 0x00002510) The solution Instead you should always subtract the two time intervals: DWORD startTime = GetTickCount; ... if (GetTickCount - startTime) > 10000 //if it's been 10 seconds break; Looking at the same math: if (GetTickCount - startTime) > 10000 if (0xfffffe01 - 0xfffffe00) > 10000 if (1 > 10000) Which is all well and good in C/C++, where the compiler behaves a certain way. But what about Delphi? But when i perform the same math in Delphi, with overflow checking on ({Q+}, {$OVERFLOWCHECKS ON}), the subtraction of the two tick counts generates an EIntOverflow exception when the TickCount rolls over: if (0x00000100 - 0xffffff00) > 10000 0x00000100 - 0xffffff00 = 0x00000200 What is the intended solution for this problem? Edit: i've tried to temporarily turn off OVERFLOWCHECKS: {$OVERFLOWCHECKS OFF}] delta = GetTickCount - startTime; {$OVERFLOWCHECKS ON} But the subtraction still throws an EIntOverflow exception. Is there a better solution, involving casts and larger intermediate variable types?

    Read the article

  • Does it ever make sense to make a fundamental (non-pointer) parameter const?

    - by Scott Smith
    I recently had an exchange with another C++ developer about the following use of const: void Foo(const int bar); He felt that using const in this way was good practice. I argued that it does nothing for the caller of the function (since a copy of the argument was going to be passed, there is no additional guarantee of safety with regard to overwrite). In addition, doing this prevents the implementer of Foo from modifying their private copy of the argument. So, it both mandates and advertises an implementation detail. Not the end of the world, but certainly not something to be recommended as good practice. I'm curious as to what others think on this issue. Edit: OK, I didn't realize that const-ness of the arguments didn't factor into the signature of the function. So, it is possible to mark the arguments as const in the implementation (.cpp), and not in the header (.h) - and the compiler is fine with that. That being the case, I guess the policy should be the same for making local variables const. One could make the argument that having different looking signatures in the header and source file would confuse others (as it would have confused me). While I try to follow the Principle of Least Astonishment with whatever I write, I guess it's reasonable to expect developers to recognize this as legal and useful.

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern [.net/c#]

    - by gsharp
    Hi We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-) Thanks for you help.

    Read the article

  • Make a Method of the Business Layer secure. best practice / best pattern

    - by gsharp
    We are using ASP.NET with a lot of AJAX "Page Method" calls. The WebServices defined in the Page invokes methods from our BusinessLayer. To prevent hackers to call the Page Methods, we want to implement some security in the BusinessLayer. We are struggling with two different issues. First one: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // do stuff } This Method should be called by Authorized Users with the Role "HR". Second one: public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // do sutff } This Method should only be called by the owner of the Order. I know it's easy to implement the security for each method like: public List<Employees> GetAllEmployees() { // check if the user is in Role HR } or public Order GetMyOrder(int orderId) { // check if the order.Owner = user } What I'm looking for is some pattern/best practice to implement this kind of security in a generic way (without coding the the if then else every time) I hope you get what i mean :-)

    Read the article

  • C++ Matrix class hierachy

    - by bpw1621
    Should a matrix software library have a root class (e.g., MatrixBase) from which more specialized (or more constrained) matrix classes (e.g., SparseMatrix, UpperTriangluarMatrix, etc.) derive? If so, should the derived classes be derived publicly/protectively/privately? If not, should they be composed with a implementation class encapsulating common functionality and be otherwise unrelated? Something else? I was having a conversation about this with a software developer colleague (I am not per se) who mentioned that it is a common programming design mistake to derive a more restricted class from a more general one (e.g., he used the example of how it was not a good idea to derive a Circle class from an Ellipse class as similar to the matrix design issue) even when it is true that a SparseMatrix "IS A" MatrixBase. The interface presented by both the base and derived classes should be the same for basic operations; for specialized operations, a derived class would have additional functionality that might not be possible to implement for an arbitrary MatrixBase object. For example, we can compute the cholesky decomposition only for a PositiveDefiniteMatrix class object; however, multiplication by a scalar should work the same way for both the base and derived classes. Also, even if the underlying data storage implementation differs the operator()(int,int) should work as expected for any type of matrix class. I have started looking at a few open-source matrix libraries and it appears like this is kind of a mixed bag (or maybe I'm looking at a mixed bag of libraries). I am planning on helping out with a refactoring of a math library where this has been a point of contention and I'd like to have opinions (that is unless there really is an objective right answer to this question) as to what design philosophy would be best and what are the pros and cons to any reasonable approach.

    Read the article

  • In ASP.NET MVC Should A Form Post To Itself Or Another Action?

    - by Sohnee
    Which of these two scenario's is best practice in ASP.NET MVC? 1 Post to self In the view you use using (Html.BeginForm) { ... } And in the controller you have [HttpGet] public ActionResult Edit(int id) [HttpPost] public ActionResult Edit(EditModel model) 2 Post from Edit to Save In the view you use using (Html.BeginForm("Save", "ControllerName")) { And in the controller you have [HttpGet] public ActionResult Edit(int id) [HttpPost] public ActionResult Save(EditModel model) Summary I can see the benefits of each of these, the former gives you a more restful style, with the same address being used in conjunction with the correct HTTP verb (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE and so on). The latter has a URL schema that makes each address very specific. Which is the correct way to do this?

    Read the article

  • HTTP headers: Last-Modified - how can it mimimize server load?

    - by gotts
    Imagine the following use case: I use an AJAX request for getting some info about Item and use this URL: http://domain/items/show/1 In my database all items have a field called modified_at where we store the moment when this item was previously modified. How can Last-Modified server HTTP header in response can minimize load/reduce requests/increase responsiveness if we need to process this request every time on the server side? It looks like we don't reduce the number of HTTP requests with that response and we don't reduce the load on server. Who needs this anyway?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server error handling: exceptions and the database-client contract

    - by gbn
    We’re a team of SQL Servers database developers. Our clients are a mixed bag of C#/ASP.NET, C# and Java web services, Java/Unix services and some Excel. Our client developers only use stored procedures that we provide and we expect that (where sensible, of course) they treat them like web service methods. Some our client developers don’t like SQL exceptions. They understand them in their languages but they don’t appreciate that the SQL is limited in how we can communicate issues. I don’t just mean SQL errors, such as trying to insert “bob” into a int column. I also mean exceptions such as telling them that a reference value is wrong, or that data has already changed, or they can’t do this because his aggregate is not zero. They’d don’t really have any concrete alternatives: they’ve mentioned that we should output parameters, but we assume an exception means “processing stopped/rolled back. How do folks here handle the database-client contract? Either generally or where there is separation between the DB and client code monkeys. Edits: we use SQL Server 2005 TRY/CATCH exclusively we log all errors after the rollback to an exception table already we're concerned that some of our clients won't check output paramaters and assume everything is OK. We need errors flagged up for support to look at. everything is an exception... the clients are expected to do some message parsing to separate information vs errors. To separate our exceptions from DB engine and calling errors, they should use the error number (ours are all 50,000 of course)

    Read the article

  • Removing a pattern from the beggining and end of a string in ruby

    - by seaneshbaugh
    So I found myself needing to remove <br /> tags from the beginning and end of strings in a project I'm working on. I made a quick little method that does what I need it to do but I'm not convinced it's the best way to go about doing this sort of thing. I suspect there's probably a handy regular expression I can use to do it in only a couple of lines. Here's what I got: def remove_breaks(text) if text != nil and text != "" text.strip! index = text.rindex("<br />") while index != nil and index == text.length - 6 text = text[0, text.length - 6] text.strip! index = text.rindex("<br />") end text.strip! index = text.index("<br />") while index != nil and index == 0 text = test[6, text.length] text.strip! index = text.index("<br />") end end return text end Now the "<br />" could really be anything, and it'd probably be more useful to make a general use function that takes as an argument the string that needs to be stripped from the beginning and end. I'm open to any suggestions on how to make this cleaner because this just seems like it can be improved.

    Read the article

  • Prims vs Polys: what are the pros and cons of each?

    - by Richard Inglis
    I've noticed that most 3d gaming/rendering environments represent solids as a mesh of (usually triangular) 3d polygons. However some examples, such as Second Life, or PovRay use solids built from a set of 3d primitives (cube, sphere, cone, torus etc) on which various operations can be performed to create more complex shapes. So my question is: why choose one method over the other for representing 3d data? I can see there might be benefits for complex ray-tracing operations to be able to describe a surface as a single mathematical function (like PovRay does), but SL surely isn't attempting anything so ambitious with their rendering engine. Equally, I can imagine it might be more bandwidth-efficient to serve descriptions of generalised solids instead of arbitrary meshes, but is it really worth the downside that SL suffers from (ie modelling stuff is really hard, and usually the results are ugly) - was this just a bad decision made early in SL's development that they're now stuck with? Or is it an artefact of what's easiest to implement in OpenGL?

    Read the article

  • Sharing a database connection with included classes in a Sinatra application

    - by imightbeinatree
    I'm converting a part of a rails application to its own sinatra application. It has some beefy work to do and rather than have a million helps in app.rb, I've separated some of it out into classes. Without access to rails I'm rewriting finder several methods and needing access to the database inside of my class. What's the best way to share a database connection between your application and a class? Or would you recommend pushing all database work into its own class and only having the connection established there? Here is what I have in in app.rb require 'lib/myclass' configure :production do MysqlDB = Sequel.connect('mysql://user:password@host:port/db_name') end I want to access it in lib/myclass.rb class Myclass def self.find_by_domain_and_stub(domain, stub) # want to do a query here end end I've tried several things but nothing that seems to work well enough to even include as an example.

    Read the article

  • what's wrong in File.Exist() method?

    - by Arseny
    Reading some answers with code samples I notice that those where this method mentioned are subjected to criticism. I'm using this method in my code. So I'd like to know if someone give me detailed response whuy this method is not recomemnded and what alternative approaches are?

    Read the article

  • Should old/legacy/unused code be deleted from source control repository?

    - by Checkers
    I've encountered this in multiple projects. As the code base evolves, some libraries, applications, and components get abandoned and/or deprecated. Most people prefer to keep them in. The usual argument is that the code does not really take any space, it can be left alone until needed again. So a repository slowly turns into a cesspool of legacy code, where it's hard to find anything. Some people delete old code, since it creates clutter, raises more questions for new people, and you can restore any old snapshot of the code base anyway. However you can't always find the old code if you don't know where to look, as none of the (common) VCS I know offer search over the entire repository including all historical revisions, and the only way to search the old files is to check out the revision where the deleted file exists. What would be a good approach to repository management?

    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 | 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109  | Next Page >