Search Results

Search found 29753 results on 1191 pages for 'best practices'.

Page 122/1191 | < Previous Page | 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129  | Next Page >

  • Blackberry User Interface Design - Customizable UI?

    - by John Stewart
    I am trying to design a Blackberry Application and I am wondering if there are any resources on how to create custom user interface elements, skin existing ones and what other possibilities are there? I have developed a few iPhone applications with custom UI and stuff, so not sure what BB world offers in terms of UI development. Any tips, suggestions or ideas would be great.

    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

  • How to include associative table information and still retain strong typing

    - by mwright
    I am using LINQ to SQL to create strongly typed objects in my project. Let's say I have an object that is represented by a database table. This object has a "Current State" that is kept in an associative table. I would like to make a single db call where I pull back the two tables joined but am unsure how I should be populating that information into some sort of object to preserve strong typing within my model so that the view using the information can just consume the information from the objects. I looked into creating a view model for this but it doesn't seem to quite fit. Am I thinking about this in the wrong way? What information can I include to help clarify my problem? Other details that may or may not be important: It's an MVC project....

    Read the article

  • Procedures before checking in to source control?

    - by Mongus Pong
    I am starting to get a reputation at work as the "guy who breaks the builds". The problem is not that I am writing dodgy code, but when it comes to checking my fixes back into source control, it all goes wrong. I am regularly doing stupid things like : forgetting to add new files accidentally checking in code for a half fixed bug along with another bug fix forgetting to save the files in VS before checking them in I need to develop some habits / tools to stop this. What do you regularly do to ensure the code you check in is correct and is what needs to go in? Edit I forgot to mention that things can get pretty chaotic in this place. I quite often have two or three things that Im working on in the same code base at any one time. When I check in I will only really want to check in one of those things.

    Read the article

  • Good input validation loop using cin - C++

    - by Alex
    Hi there, I'm in my second OOP class, and my first class was taught in C#, so I'm new to C++ and currently I am practicing input validation using cin. So here's my question: Is this loop I constructed a pretty good way of validating input? Or is there a more common/accepted way of doing it? Thanks! Code: int taxableIncome; int error; // input validation loop do { error = 0; cout << "Please enter in your taxable income: "; cin >> taxableIncome; if (cin.fail()) { cout << "Please enter a valid integer" << endl; error = 1; cin.clear(); cin.ignore(80, '\n'); } }while(error == 1);

    Read the article

  • Legacy code - when to move on

    - by Mmarquee
    My team and support a large number of legacy applications all of which are currently functional but problematic to support and maintain. They all depend on code that the compiler manufacture has officially no support for. So the question is should we leave the code as is, and risk a new compiler breaking our code, or should we bite the bullet and update all the code?

    Read the article

  • Buddy List: Relational Database Table Design

    - by huntaub
    So, the modern concept of the buddy list: Let's say we have a table called Person. Now, that Person needs to have many buddies (of which each buddy is also in the person class). The most obvious way to construct a relationship would be through a join table. i.e. buddyID person1_id person2_id 0 1 2 1 3 6 But, when a user wants to see their buddy list, the program would have to check the column 'person1_id' and 'person2_id' to find all of their buddies. Is this the appropriate way to implement this kind of table, or would it be better to add the record twice.. i.e. buddyID person1_id person2_id 0 1 2 1 2 1 So that only one column has to be searched. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • REST doesn't work with Sever-Client-Client setup

    - by drozzy
    I am having a problem with my current RESTful api design. What I have is a REST api which is consumed by Django web-server, which renders the HTML templates. REST api > Django webserver > HTML The problem I am encountering is that I have to reconstruct all the URLS like mysite.com/main/cities/<id>/streets/ into equivalent rest api urls on my web-server layer: api.com/cities/<id>/streets/ Thus I have a lot of mapping back and forth, but as far as I know REST says that the client (in this case my web-server) should NOT need to know how to re-construct the urls. Can REST be used for such a setup and how? Or is it only viable for Server-Client architecture. Thanks

    Read the article

  • do I need to use partial?

    - by wiso
    I've a general function, for example (only a simplified example): def do_operation(operation, a, b, name): print name do_something_more(a,b,name, operation(a,b)) def operation_x(a,b): return a**2 + b def operation_y(a,b): return a**10 - b/2. and some data: data = {"first": {"name": "first summation", "a": 10, "b": 20, "operation": operation_x}, "second": {"name": "second summation", "a": 20, "b": 50, "operation": operation_y}, "third": {"name": "third summation", "a": 20, "b": 50, "operation": operation_x}, # <-- operation_x again } now I can do: what_to_do = ("first", "third") # this comes from command line for sum_id in what_to_do: do_operation(data["operation"], data["a"], data["b"], data["name"]) or maybe it's better if I use functools.partial? from functools import partial do_operation_one = do_operation(name=data["first"]["name"], operation=data["first"]["operation"], a=data["first"]["a"], b=data["first"]["b"]) do_operation_two = do_operation(name=data["second"]["name"], operation=data["second"]["operation"] a=data["second"]["a"], b=data["second"]["b"]) do_operation_three = do_operation(name=data["third"]["name"], operation=data["third"]["operation"] a=data["third"]["a"], b=data["third"]["b"]) do_dictionary = { "first": do_operation_one, "second": do_operation_two, "third": do_operation_three } for what in what_to_do: do_dictionary[what]()

    Read the article

  • Avoiding Service Locator with AutoFac 2

    - by Page Brooks
    I'm building an application which uses AutoFac 2 for DI. I've been reading that using a static IoCHelper (Service Locator) should be avoided. IoCHelper.cs public static class IoCHelper { private static AutofacDependencyResolver _resolver; public static void InitializeWith(AutofacDependencyResolver resolver) { _resolver = resolver; } public static T Resolve<T>() { return _resolver.Resolve<T>(); } } From answers to a previous question, I found a way to help reduce the need for using my IoCHelper in my UnitOfWork through the use of Auto-generated Factories. Continuing down this path, I'm curious if I can completely eliminate my IoCHelper. Here is the scenario: I have a static Settings class that serves as a wrapper around my configuration implementation. Since the Settings class is a dependency to a majority of my other classes, the wrapper keeps me from having to inject the settings class all over my application. Settings.cs public static class Settings { public static IAppSettings AppSettings { get { return IoCHelper.Resolve<IAppSettings>(); } } } public interface IAppSettings { string Setting1 { get; } string Setting2 { get; } } public class AppSettings : IAppSettings { public string Setting1 { get { return GetSettings().AppSettings["setting1"]; } } public string Setting2 { get { return GetSettings().AppSettings["setting2"]; } } protected static IConfigurationSettings GetSettings() { return IoCHelper.Resolve<IConfigurationSettings>(); } } Is there a way to handle this without using a service locator and without having to resort to injecting AppSettings into each and every class? Listed below are the 3 areas in which I keep leaning on ServiceLocator instead of constructor injection: AppSettings Logging Caching

    Read the article

  • MVC Localization of Default Model Binder

    - by Dai Bok
    Hi, I am currently trying to figure out how to localize the error messages generated by MVC. Let me use the default model binder as an example, so I can explain the problem. Assuming I have a form, where a user enters thier age. The user then enters "ten" in to the form, but instead of getting the expected error of "Age must be beween 18 and 25." the message "The value 'ten' is not valid for Age." is displayed. The entity's age property is defined below: [Range(18, 25, ErrorMessageResourceType = typeof (Errors), ErrorMessageResourceName = "Age", ErrorMessage = "Range_ErrorMessage")] public int Age { get; set; } After some digging, I notice that this error text comes from the System.Web.Mvc.Resources.DefaultModelBinder_ValueInvalid in the MvcResources.resx file. Now, how can create localized versions of this file? As A solution, for example, should I download MVC source and add MvcResources.en_GB.resx, MvcResources.fr_FR.resx, MvcResources.es_ES.resx and MvcResources.de_DE.resx, and then compile my own version of MVC.dll? But I don't like this idea. Any one else know a better way?

    Read the article

  • Java: Is clone() really ever used? What about defensive copying in getters/setters?

    - by GreenieMeanie
    Do people practically ever use defensive getters/setters? To me, 99% of the time you intend for the object you set in another object to be a copy of the same object reference, and you intend for changes you make to it to also be made in the object it was set in. If you setDate(Date dt) and modify dt later, who cares? Unless I want some basic immutable data bean that just has primitives and maybe something simple like a Date, I never use it. As far as clone, there are issues as to how deep or shallow the copy is, so it seems kind of "dangerous" to know what is going to come out when you clone an Object. I think I have only used clone() once or twice, and that was to copy the current state of the object because another thread (ie another HTTP request accessing the same object in Session) could be modifying it. Edit - A comment I made below is more the question: But then again, you DID change the Date, so it's kind of your own fault, hence whole discussion of term "defensive". If it is all application code under your own control among a small to medium group of developers, will just documenting your classes suffice as an alternative to making object copies? Or is this not necessary, since you should always assume something ISN'T copied when calling a setter/getter?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC PartialView generic ModelView

    - by Greg Ogle
    I have an ASP.NET MVC application which I want to dynamically pick the partial view and what data gets passed to it, while maintaining strong types. So, in the main form, I want a class that has a view model that contains a generically typed property which should contain the data for the partial view's view model. public class MainViewModel<T> { public T PartialViewsViewModel { get; set; } } In the User Control, I would like something like: Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<MainViewModel<ParticularViewModel>>" %> Though in my parent form, I must put Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<MainViewModel<ParticularViewModel>>" %> for it to work. Is there a way to work around this? The use case is to make the user control pluggable. I understand that I could inherit a base class, but that would put me back to having something like a dictionary instead of a typed view model.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to avoid debugger?

    - by Gabriel Šcerbák
    I don't like debugging in a debugger, because I think it is often below the abstraction layer of the programming language and it is often not reproducible. I favor usign unit tests when possible and I think they are a good way, but it is not always that easy to implement them. Do you know about any other alternative approaches to avoid the use of debugger?

    Read the article

  • How to get rid of the GUI access from shared library.

    - by Inso Reiges
    Hello, In my project i have a shared library with cross-platform code that provides a very convenient abstraction for a number of its clients. To be more specific, this library provides data access to encrypted files generated by main application on a number of platforms. There is a great deal of complicated code there that implements cryptographic protocols and as such is very error-prone and should be shared as much as possible across clients and platforms. However parsing all this encrypted stuff requires asking user for a number of different secrets ones in a while. The secret can be either a password, a number of shared passwords or a public key file and this list is a hot target for extension in the future. I can't really ask the user for any of those secrets beforehand from main application, because i really don't know what i need to ask for until i start working with the encrypted data directly in the library code. So i will have to create dialogs and call them from the library code. However i really see this as a bad idea, because (among other things) there is a possibility of a windows service using it and services can't have GUI access. The question is, are there any known ways or patterns to get rid of the GUI calls that are suitable for my case? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Which is the best jQuery-powered site?

    - by Reigel
    This "Top 10 JavaScript (jQuery) Powered Sites", posted about 2 years ago, was the one that invites me(after seeing the list) to use jQuery. All the sites in that list made me realize how cool it is to build sites powered by jQuery. And now more and more sites are being powered by jQuery. More and more developers are learning jQuery. Two years have past now but I still do a search to google for best sites and still got me to that link and which the link is not updated from the first time I have looked at it. Here at stackoverflow, there are lots of jQuery user. I was thinking if we can here show some of the sites that you know that is powered by jQuery which you think is best. If you can, please make it one site one answer, so that we can make a vote if it's really best jQuery powered site. We will take a look if it is really well implemented ( the way the codes are written, fast speed site, etc...) and deserves to be the best. Lot's of viewers will benefit from it. Like, we can view and have an idea of how we will make our next project cooler, faster, and powerful.

    Read the article

  • When should you use intermediate variables for expressions?

    - by froadie
    There are times that one writes code such as this: callSomeMethod(someClass.someClassMethod()); And other times when one would write the same code like this: int result = someClass.someClassMethod(); callSomeMethod(result); This is just a basic example to illustrate the point. My question isn't if you should use an intermediate variable or not, as that depends on the code and can sometimes be a good design decision and sometimes a terrible one. The question is - when would you choose one method over the other? What factors would you consider when deciding whether to use an intermediate step? (I'd assume length and understandability of the fully inlined code would have something to do with it...)

    Read the article

  • Email as a view.

    - by Hal
    I've been in some discussion recently about where email (notifications, etc...) should be sent in an ASP.NET MVC application. My nemesis grin argues that it only makes sense that the email should be sent from the controller. I argue that an email is simply an alternate or augmented view through a different channel. Much like I would download a file as the payload of an ActionResult, the email is simply delivered through a different protocol. I've worked an extension method that allows me to do the following: <% Html.RenderEmail(model.FromAddress, model.ToAddress, model.Subject); %> which I actually include within my the view that is displayed on the screen. The beauty is that, based on convention, if I call RenderEmail from a parent view named MyView.ascx, I attempt to render the contents of a view named MyViewEmail.ascx, unless it is not found, in which case I simply email a copy of parent view. It certainly does make it testable (I still have an ISMTPService injected for testing), I wondered if anyone had any thoughts on whether or not this breaks from good practice. In use it has been extremely handy when we needed to easily send an email or modify the contents of the emailed results vs the browser rendered results. Thanks, Hal

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129  | Next Page >