Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 121/348 | < Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >

  • How to perform a literal match with regex using wildcard

    - by kashif4u
    I am trying to perform literal match with regular expression using wildcard. string utterance = "Show me customer id 19"; string pattern 1 = "*tom*"; string patter 2 = "*customer id [0-9]*"; Desired results: if (Regex.IsMatch(utterance, pattern 1 )) { MATCH NOT FOUND } if (Regex.IsMatch(utterance, pattern 2 )) { MATCH FOUND } I have tried looking for literal match solution/syntax in wildcard but having difficulty. Could you also enlighten me with with an example on possible Pattern Matching Strength algorithm i.e. if code match 90 select? Note: I have table with 100000 records to perform literal matches from user utterances. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Java Date vs Calendar

    - by Marty Pitt
    Could someone please advise the current "best practice" around Date and Calendar types. When writing new code, is it best to always favour Calendar over Date, or are there circumstances where Date is the more appropriate datatype?

    Read the article

  • SVN best practice - checking out root folder

    - by Stephen Dolier
    Hi all, quick question about svn checkout best practice. Once the structure of a repository is set up, ie trunk, branches, tags, is it normal to have the root checked out to our local machines. Or should you only check out the trunk if that's what you are working on or a branch if we so choose to create one. The reason i ask is that every time someone creates a branch or tag we all get a copy when we do an update. btw, we're recently migrated from vss.

    Read the article

  • When to use "property" builtin: auxiliary functions and generators

    - by Seth Johnson
    I recently discovered Python's property built-in, which disguises class method getters and setters as a class's property. I'm now being tempted to use it in ways that I'm pretty sure are inappropriate. Using the property keyword is clearly the right thing to do if class A has a property _x whose allowable values you want to restrict; i.e., it would replace the getX() and setX() construction one might write in C++. But where else is it appropriate to make a function a property? For example, if you have class Vertex(object): def __init__(self): self.x = 0.0 self.y = 1.0 class Polygon(object): def __init__(self, list_of_vertices): self.vertices = list_of_vertices def get_vertex_positions(self): return zip( *( (v.x,v.y) for v in self.vertices ) ) is it appropriate to add vertex_positions = property( get_vertex_positions ) ? Is it ever ok to make a generator look like a property? Imagine if a change in our code meant that we no longer stored Polygon.vertices the same way. Would it then be ok to add this to Polygon? @property def vertices(self): for v in self._new_v_thing: yield v.calculate_equivalent_vertex()

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to using web.config to store settings (for complex solutions)

    - by Brian MacKay
    In our web applications, we seperate our Data Access Layers out into their own projects. This creates some problems related to settings. Because the DAL will eventually need to be consumed from perhaps more than one application, web.config does not seem like a good place to keep the connection strings and some of the other DAL-related settings. To solve this, on some of our recent projects we introduced a third project just for settings. We put the setting in a system of .Setting files... With a simple wrapper, the ability to have different settings for various enviroments (Dev, QA, Staging, Production, etc) was easy to achieve. The only problem there is that the settings project (including the .Settings class) compiles into an assembly, so you can't change it without doing a build/deployment, and some of our customers want to be able to configure their projects without Visual Studio. So, is there a best practice for this? I have that sense that I'm reinventing the wheel. Some solutions such as storing settings in a fixed directory on the server in, say, our own XML format occurred to us. But again, I would rather avoid having to re-create encryption for sensitive values and so on. And I would rather keep the solution self-contained if possible. EDIT: The original question did not contain the really penetrating reason that we can't (I think) use web.config ... That puts a few (very good) answers out of context, my bad.

    Read the article

  • Should I worry about reigning in namespace number/length/scope?

    - by Jay
    I've recently reorganized a solution-in-progress from 24 projects to 4. To keep the copious files organized in the "main" project, things are in folders in folders in folders. I think I've preserved a logical, discoverable arrangement of the solution content. As a result, of course, I end up with namespaces like AppName.DataAccess.NHibernate.Fluent.Mappings. Is there any compelling reason that I should care about flattening out the namespace hierarchy when my project has a somewhat deeply nested folder structure? (I am not concerned about resolving or managing using directives; I let ReSharper do all the heavy lifting here.)

    Read the article

  • Abstract Factory Using Generics: Is Explicitly Converting a Specified Type to Generic a Bad Practice

    - by Merritt
    The question's title says it all. I like how it fits into the rest of my code, but does it smell? public interface IFoo<T> { T Bar { get; set; } } public class StringFoo : IFoo<string> { public string Bar { get; set; } } public static class FooFactory { public static IFoo<T> CreateFoo<T>() { if (typeof(T) == typeof(string)) { return new StringFoo() as IFoo<T>; } throw new NotImplementedException(); } } UPDATE: this is sort of a duplicate of Is the StaticFactory in codecampserver a well known pattern?

    Read the article

  • How to record different authentication types (username / password vs token based) in audit log

    - by RM
    I have two types of users for my system, normal human users with a username / password, and delegation authorized accounts through OAuth (i.e. using a token identifier). The information that is stored for each is quite different, and are managed by different subsytems. They do however interact with the same tables / data within the system, so I need to maintain the audit trail regardless of whether human user, or token-based user modified the data. My solution at the moment is to have a table called something like AuditableIdentity, and then have the two types inheriting off that table (either in the single table, or as two seperate tables with 1 to 1 PK with AuditableIdentity. All operations would use the common AuditableIdentity PK for CreatedBy, ModifiedBy etc columns. There isn't any FK constraint on the audit columns, so any text can go in there, but I want an easy way to easily determine whether it was a human or system that made the change, and joining to the one AuditableIdentity table seems like a clean way to do that? Is there a best practice for this scenario? Is this an appropriate way of approaching the problem - or would you not bother with the common table and just rely on joins (to the two seperate un-related user / token tables) later to determine which user type matches which audit records?

    Read the article

  • C# - Removing event handlers - FormClosing event or Dispose() method

    - by Andy
    Suppose I have a form opened via the .ShowDialog() method. At some point I attach some event handlers to some controls on the form. e.g. // Attach radio button event handlers. this.rbLevel1.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel2.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel3.Click += new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); When the form closes, I need to remove these handlers, right? At present, I am doing this when the FormClosing event is fired. e.g. private void Foo_FormClosing(object sender, FormClosingEventArgs e) { // Detach radio button event handlers. this.rbLevel1.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel2.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); this.rbLevel3.Click -= new EventHandler(this.RadioButton_CheckedChanged); } However, I have seen some examples where handlers are removed in the Dispose() method. Is there a 'best-practice' way of doing this? (Using C#, Winforms, .NET 2.0) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad taste to include GPA in your resume?

    - by Gab Royer
    As I was typing my curriculum vitae, I was wondering if it was good idea to include my GPA. I'm currently in software engineering and have a 4.0 GPA, but don't like mentioning it too much as I fear people might see this as bragging... But at the same time, I feel like it is something that could help me land a job (or an interview, at least). What should I do?

    Read the article

  • Saving a reference to a int.

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    Here is a much simplified version of what I am trying to do static void Main(string[] args) { int test = 0; int test2 = 0; Test A = new Test(ref test); Test B = new Test(ref test); Test C = new Test(ref test2); A.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 B.write(); //Writes 1 should write 2 C.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 Console.ReadLine(); } class Test { int _a; public Test(ref int a) { _a = a; //I loose the reference here } public void write() { var b = System.Threading.Interlocked.Increment(ref _a); Console.WriteLine(b); } } In my real code I have a int that will be incremented by many threads however where the threads a called it will not be easy to pass it the parameter that points it at the int(In the real code this is happening inside a IEnumerator). So a requirement is the reference must be made in the constructor. Also not all threads will be pointing at the same single base int so I can not use a global static int either. I know I can just box the int inside a class and pass the class around but I wanted to know if that is the correct way of doing something like this? What I think could be the correct way: static void Main(string[] args) { Holder holder = new Holder(0); Holder holder2 = new Holder(0); Test A = new Test(holder); Test B = new Test(holder); Test C = new Test(holder2); A.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 B.write(); //Writes 2 should write 2 C.write(); //Writes 1 should write 1 Console.ReadLine(); } class Holder { public Holder(int i) { num = i; } public int num; } class Test { Holder _holder; public Test(Holder holder) { _holder = holder; } public void write() { var b = System.Threading.Interlocked.Increment(ref _holder.num); Console.WriteLine(b); } } Is there a better way than this?

    Read the article

  • Refering to javascript instance methods with a pound/hash sign

    - by Josh
    This question is similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/736120/why-are-methods-in-ruby-documentation-preceded-by-a-pound-sign I understand why in Ruby instance methods are proceeded with a pound sign, helping to differentiate talking about SomeClass#someMethod from SomeObject.someMethod and allowing rdoc to work. And I understand that the authors of PrototypeJS admire Ruby (with good reason) and so they use the hash mark convention in their documentation. My question is: is this a standard practice amongst JavaScript developers or is it just Prototype developers who do this? Asked another way, is it proepr for me to refer to instance methods in comments/documentation as SomeClass#someMethod? Or should my documentation refer to `SomeClass.someMethod?

    Read the article

  • Singleton class design in C#, are these two classes equivalent?

    - by Oskar
    I was reading up on singleton class design in C# on this great resource and decided to go with alternative 4: public sealed class Singleton1 { static readonly Singleton1 _instance = new Singleton1(); static Singleton1() { } Singleton1() { } public static Singleton1 Instance { get { return _instance; } } } Now I wonder if this can be rewritten using auto properties like this? public sealed class Singleton2 { static Singleton2() { Instance = new Singleton2(); } Singleton2() { } public static Singleton2 Instance { get; private set; } } If its only a matter of readability I definitely prefer the second version, but I want to get it right.

    Read the article

  • Which is better Java programming practice for looping up to an int value: a converted for-each loop

    - by Arvanem
    Hi folks, Given the need to loop up to an arbitrary int value, is it better programming practice to convert the value into an array and for-each the array, or just use a traditional for loop? FYI, I am calculating the number of 5 and 6 results ("hits") in multiple throws of 6-sided dice. My arbitrary int value is the dicePool which represents the number of multiple throws. As I understand it, there are two options: Convert the dicePool into an array and for-each the array: public int calcHits(int dicePool) { int[] dp = new int[dicePool]; for (Integer a : dp) { // call throwDice method } } Use a traditional for loop. public int calcHits(int dicePool) { for (int i = 0; i < dicePool; i++) { // call throwDice method } } I apologise for the poor presentation of the code above (for some reason the code button on the Ask Question page is not doing what it should). My view is that option 1 is clumsy code and involves unnecessary creation of an array, even though the for-each loop is more efficient than the traditional for loop in Option 2. Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid injecting dependencies into an object so that it can pass them on?

    - by Pheter
    I am interested in applying dependency injection to my current project, which makes use of the MVC pattern. My controllers will call the models and therefore will need to inject the dependencies into the models. To do this, the controller must have the dependencies (such as a database object) in the first place. The controller doesn't need to make use of some of these dependencies (such as the database object), so I feel that it shouldn't be given this dependency. However, it has to have these dependencies if it is to inject them into the model objects. How can I avoid having dependencies injected into an object just so that it can pass them on? Doing so feels wrong and can result in many dependencies being injected into an object. Edit: I am using PHP.

    Read the article

  • What are the Worst Software Project Failures Ever?

    - by Warren P
    Is there a good list of "worst software project failures ever" in the history of software development? For example in Canada a "gun registry" project spent around two billion dollars. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_registry). This is of course, insane, even if the final product "sort of worked". I have heard of an FBI Case file system which there have been several attempts to rewrite, all of them so far, failures. There is a book on the subject (Software Runaways). There doesn't seem to be be a software "boondoggle" list or "fiasco" list on Wikipedia that I can see. (Update: Therac-25 would be the 'winner' of this question, except that I was internally thinking more of Software projects that had as their deliverable, mainly software, as opposed to firmware projects like Therac-25, where the hardware and firmware together are capable of killing people. In terms of pure software monetary debacles, which was my intended question, there are several contenders.)

    Read the article

  • How to create custom javadoc tags

    - by Carlucho
    How to create custom javadoc tags such as @pre / @post... I found some links that explain it but i haven had luck with them, i dont know if that am already tired but i can figure where to put it. these are some of the links http://www.developer.com/java/other/article.php/3085991/Javadoc-Programming.html http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/tooldocs/windows/javadoc.html I'm sorry to ask to be spoon fed but am at the stage where i only see black dots on the screen :\ Thanks a bunch

    Read the article

  • Standardizing a Release/Tools group on a specific language

    - by grahzny
    I'm part of a six-member build and release team for an embedded software company. We also support a lot of developer tools, such as Atlassian's Fisheye, Jira, etc., Perforce, Bugzilla, AnthillPro, and a couple of homebrew tools (like my Django release notes generator). Most of the time, our team just writes little plugins for larger apps (ex: customize workflows in Anthill), long-term utility scripts (package up a release for QA), or things like Perforce triggers (don't let people check into a specific branch unless their change description includes a bug number; authenticate against Active Directory instead of Perforce's internal passwords). That's about the scale of our problems, although we sometimes tackle something slightly more sizable. My boss, who is reasonably technical, has asked us to standardize on one or two languages so we can more easily substitute for each other. He's advocating bash scripts and Perl, due to their universality and simplicity. I can see his point--we mostly do "glue", so why not use "glue" languages rather than saddle ourselves with something designed for much larger projects? Since some of the tools we work with are Java-based, we do need to use something that speaks JVM sometimes. (The path of least resistance for these projects is BeanShell and Groovy.) I feel a tremendous itch toward language advocacy, but I'm trying to avoid saying "We should use Python 'cause I like it and Perl is gross." Instead, I'm trying to come up with a good approach to defining our problem set: what problems do we solve with scripts? Would we benefit from a library of common functions by our team, or are most of our projects more isolated? What is it reasonable to expect my co-workers to learn? What languages give us the most ease of development and ease of modification? Can you folks suggest some useful ways to approach this problem, both for my own thinking process and to help me facilitate some brainstorming among my coworkers?

    Read the article

  • Is there a compelling reason to use quantifiers in Perl regular expressions instead of just repeatin

    - by Morinar
    I was performing a code review for a colleague and he had a regular expression that looked like this: if ($value =~ /^\d\d\d\d$/) { #do stuff } I told him he should change it to: if ($value =~ /^\d{4}$/) { #do stuff } To which he replied that he preferred the first for readability (I find the second more readable, but that's a religious debate I'll save for another day). My question: is there an actual benefit to one over the other?

    Read the article

  • Performance Related features for migration from .net 2003 Framework 1.1 to .net 2008 framework 3.5?

    - by KuldipMCA
    I am work on VB.net 2003 Framework 1.1 for last 3.5 years in windows Application. We are currently migrating to VB.net 2008 framework 3.5, but i don't know about the features which related to ADO.net and which is important to performance. I know linq to SQL but our architecture is made in .net 2003 so we should follow this. Any features which is very important to enhance the performance?

    Read the article

  • Refactoring a C# derived class with method dependancies

    - by drelihan
    Hi Folks, I want to get your opinion on this. I have a class which is derived from a base class. I don't have control over the code in the base class and it is critical to the system that I derive from it. In my class I inherite two methods that are critical to the system and are used in pretty much every function, many times. I intend to refactor this derived class and extract some classes from it - this won't be a problem. What I'm not sure about is, is it worth extracting class if I have to constantly make call backs to my main class to access the two methods (or public wrappers to the methods)??? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >