Search Results

Search found 13692 results on 548 pages for 'bad 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 135/548 | < Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >

  • Use multiple css files or a single file organised by comments

    - by David
    Hi, what is regarded as the best approach to organising css. At the moment I am using a single link in the head of my xhtml documents as follows: <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style/imports.css" /> In this file im importing several different css files i.e. reset.css, structure.css, skin.css I know there is an overhead in doing this as each requires an extra trip to the server but it makes things much more logical and organised in my opinion. Does anyone have an opinion on how best to organise their css. - Would it be better to put all these seperate css funcions into one single file? Also, is it best practice to minify css.

    Read the article

  • Is Area what I am looking for?

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi I'm new to MVC2 or MVC in general. I'm gone do basic app with a backend. Now I been thinking about how I should do with the folders, views, controllers & routes for the AdminFolder. Now I just saw something called Areas. Is that a way to go for me?

    Read the article

  • how to tackle a new project

    - by stevo
    Hi, I have a question about best practice on how to tackle a new project, any project. When starting a new project how do you go about tackling the project, do you split it into sections, start writing code, draw up flow diagrams. I'm asking this question because I'm looking for advice on how I can start new projects so I can get going on them quicker. I can have it planned, designed and starting coding with everything worked out. Any advice? Thanks Stephen

    Read the article

  • Why do I need to give my options a value attribute in my dropdown? JQuery.

    - by Alex
    So far in my web developing experiences, I've noticed that almost all web developers/designers choose to give their options in a select a value like so: <select name="foo"> <option value="bar">BarCheese</option> // etc. // etc. </select> Is this because it is best practice to do so? I ask this because I have done a lot of work with jQuery and dropdown's lately, and sometimes I get really annoyed when I have to check something like: $('select[name=foo]').val() == "bar"); To me, many times that seems less clear than just being able to check the val() against BarCheese. So why is it that most web developers/designers specify a value paramater instead of just letting the options actual value be its value?

    Read the article

  • Pattern for database-wrapper in java

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I am currently writing a java-class that wraps an SQLite database. This class has two ways to be instantiated: Open an existing database. Create a new database. This is what I cam up with: public class SQLiteDatabaseWrapper { public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper openExisting(File PathToDB) { return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper createNew(File PathToDB) { CreateAndInitializeNewDatabase(PathToDB); return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } private SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(File PathToDB) { // Open connection and setup wrapper } } Is this the way to go in Java, or is there any other best practice for this situation?

    Read the article

  • Best practice for using Wcf service by silverlight?

    - by bonefisher
    How would you structure the code for calling a wcf service in silverlight application? Using only-once instanciated wcf service-proxy (aka singleton) and using it across the whole SL app? If so, how did you solve the unsubscribing controls from ws-call-completed event? or creating the wcf service-proxy for each ws-call? Where do you close the proxy then?

    Read the article

  • Haskell function composition (.) and function application ($) idioms: correct use.

    - by Robert Massaioli
    I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Generic Abstract Singleton with Custom Constructor in C#

    - by Heka
    I want to write a generic singleton with an external constructor. In other words the constructor can be modified. I have 2 designs in my mind but I don't know whether they are practical or not. First one is to enforce derived class' constructor to be non-public but I do not know if there is a way of it? Second one is to use a delegate and call it inside the constructor? It isn't necessarily to be a constructor. The reason I chose custom constructor is doing some custom initializations. Any suggestions would be appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • In which controller do you put the CRUD for the child part of a relationship?

    - by uriDium
    I am using ASP.Net MVC but this probably applies to all MVC patterns in general. My problem, for example I have companies and in each company I have a list of contacts. When I have selected a company I can see its details and a list of the contacts for that company. When I want to add a new contact for that company, should the implementation of that action go into the company controller as an "AddContact" action or should it go into the contact controller into a "New" action and we pass the Company ID in the URL? What is the usual way of dealing with this sort of thing in ASP.Net MVC? Is there a better stategy?

    Read the article

  • Using a message class static method taking in an action to wrap Try/Catch

    - by Chris Marisic
    I have a Result object that lets me pass around a List of event messages and I can check whether an action was successful or not. I've realized I've written this code in alot of places Result result; try { //Do Something ... //New result is automatically a success for not having any errors in it result = new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { //Extension method that returns a Result from the exception result = exception.ToResult(); } if(result.Success) .... What I'm considering is replacing this usage with public static Result CatchException(Action action) { try { action(); return new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { return exception.ToResult(); } } And then use it like var result = Result.CatchException(() => _model.Save(something)); Does anyone feel there's anything wrong with this or that I'm trading reusability for obscurity?

    Read the article

  • Is this bad style of programming(C#) ?

    - by m0s
    Hi, so in my program I have parts where I use try catch blocks like this try { DirectoryInfo dirInfo = new DirectoryInfo(someString); //I don't know if that directory exists //I don't know if that string is valid path string... it could be anything //Some operations here } catch(Exception iDontCareWhyItFailed) { //Didn't work? great... we will say: somethings wrong, try again/next one } Of course I probably could do checks to see if the string is valid path (regex), then I would check if directory exists, then I could catch various exceptions to see why my routine failed and give more info... But in my program it's not really necessary. Now I just really need to know if this is acceptable, and what would a pro say/think about that. Thanks a lot for attention.

    Read the article

  • How work with common utils project.

    - by ais
    For example, I have some project Common.Utils.csproj and use it in all other projects. I can store its (Utils) sourses in one repository and modify it only there, register dll in gac and use it as dll in other projects, or I can clone sourse anywhere I need, include project in solution, use it as source and push modifications. So, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • Getting up to speed on modern architecture

    - by Matt Thrower
    Hi, I don't have any formal qualifications in computer science, rather I taught myself classic ASP back in the days of the dotcom boom and managed to get myself a job and my career developed from there. I was a confident and, I think, pretty good programmer in ASP 3 but as others have observed one of the problems with classic ASP was that it did a very good job of hiding the nitty-gritty of http so you could become quite competent as a programmer on the basis of relatively poor understanding of the technology you were working with. When I changed on to .NET at first I treated it like classic ASP, developing stand-alone applications as individual websites simply because I didn't know any better at the time. I moved jobs at this point and spent the next several years working on a single site whose architecture relied heavily on custom objects: in other words I gained a lot of experience working with .NET as a middle-tier development tool using a quite old-fashioned approach to OO design along the lines of the classic "car" class example that's so often used to teach OO. Breaking down programs into blocks of functionality and basing your classes and methods around that. Although we worked under an Agile approach to manage the work the whole setup was classic client/server stuff. That suited me and I gradually got to grips with .NET and started using it far more in the manner that it should be, and I began to see the power inherent in the technology and precisely why it was so much better than good old ASP 3. In my latest job I have found myself suddenly dropped in at the deep end with two quite young, skilled and very cutting-edge programmers. They've built a site architecture which is modelling along a lot of stuff which is new to me and which, in truth I'm having a lot of trouble understanding. The application is built on a cloud computing model with multi-tenancy and the architecture is all loosely coupled using a lot of interfaces, factories and the like. They use nHibernate a lot too. Shortly after I joined, both these guys left and I'm now supposedly the senior developer on a system whose technology and architecture I don't really understand and I have no-one to ask questions of. Except you, the internet. Frankly I feel like I've been pitched in at the deep end and I'm sinking. I'm not sure if this is because I lack the educational background to understand this stuff, if I'm simply not mathematically minded enough for modern computing (my maths was never great - my approach to design is often to simply debug until it works, then refactor until it looks neat), or whether I've simply been presented with too much of too radical a nature at once. But the only way to find out which it is is to try and learn it. So can anyone suggest some good places to start? Good books, tutorials or blogs? I've found a lot of internet material simply presupposes a level of understanding that I just don't have. Your advice is much appreciated. Help a middle-aged, stuck in the mud developer get enthusastic again! Please!

    Read the article

  • Nested Array with one foreach Loop?

    - by streetparade
    I need to have access to a array which looks like this. Array ( [0] => Array ( [54] => Array ( [test] => 54 [tester] => result ) ) ) foreach($array as $key=>$value) { echo $key;// prints 0 echo $value;// prints Array /* now i can iterate through $value but i dont want it solve that way example: foreach($value as $k=>$v) { echo $k;//prints test echo $v; //prints 54 } */ } How can iterate just once ? to get the values of test and tester? I hope i could explain my problem clear

    Read the article

  • Use the serialVersionUID or suppress warnings?

    - by Okami
    Dear all, first thing to note is the serialVersionUID of a class implementing Interface Serializable is not in question. What if we create a class that for example extends HttpServlet? It also should have a serialVersionUID. If someone knows that this object will never be serialized should he define it or add an annotation to suppress those warnings? What would you do and why? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Okami

    Read the article

  • Is it better to adopt the same technologies used at work to be effective on your home projects ?

    - by systempuntoout
    Is it better to start developing an home project using the same technologies used at work to be more productive and effective? I'm not talking about a simple hello world web page but an home project with all bells and whistles that one day, maybe, you could sell on internet. This dilemma is often subject of flames between me and a friend. He thinks that if you want to make a great home-made project you need to use the same technologies used daily at work staying in the same scope too; for example, a c++ computer game programmer should develope an home-made c++ game. I'm pretty sure that developing using the same technologies used at work can be more productive at beginning, but surely less exciting and stimulating of working with other languages\ides\libraries out of your daily job. What's your opinion about that?

    Read the article

  • Interface with inner implementation - good or bad

    - by dermoritz
    I am working on a project with many someInterface - someInterfaceImpl-pairs. Some days ago I got the idea (probably inspired by reading some objective c code) to include the default implementations as an inner class. Now some colleagues (all with much more java experience than me) saw this idea - feedback was between shocked and surprised ("this is working?"). I googled around a bit but didn't find much evidence of usefulness of this "pattern" (personal i like it): pdf-paper and a faq about code style What do you think - especially in those cases where an "default" implementation is tightly coupled to an interface. Update i just found this: Java Interface-Implementation Pair (see accepted answer)

    Read the article

  • Use of properties vs backing-field inside owner class

    - by whatispunk
    I love auto-implemented properties in C# but lately there's been this elephant standing in my cubicle and I don't know what to do with him. If I use auto-implemented properties (hereafter "aip") then I no longer have a private backing field to use internally. This is fine because the aip has no side-effects. But what if later on I need to add some extra processing in the get or set? Now I need to create a backing-field so I can expand my getters and setters. This is fine for external code using the class, because they won't notice the difference. But now all of the internal references to the aip are going to invoke these side-effects when they access the property. Now all internal access to the once aip must be refactored to use the backing-field. So my question is, what do most of you do? Do you use auto-implemented properties or do you prefer to always use a backing-field? What do you think about properties with side-effects?

    Read the article

  • Best practice for debug Asserts during Unit testing

    - by Steve Steiner
    Does heavy use of unit tests discourage the use of debug asserts? It seems like a debug assert firing in the code under test implies the unit test shouldn't exist or the debug assert shouldn't exist. "There can be only one" seems like a reasonable principle. Is this the common practice? Or do you disable your debug asserts when unit testing, so they can be around for integration testing? Edit: I updated 'Assert' to debug assert to distinguish an assert in the code under test from the lines in the unit test that check state after the test has run. Also here is an example that I believe shows the dilema: A unit test passes invalid inputs for a protected function that asserts it's inputs are valid. Should the unit test not exist? It's not a public function. Perhaps checking the inputs would kill perf? Or should the assert not exist? The function is protected not private so it should be checking it's inputs for safety.

    Read the article

  • Haskel dot (.) and dollar ($) composition: correct use.

    - by Robert Massaioli
    I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • package private static member class vs. package private class

    - by Helper Method
    I was writing two implementations of a linked list for an assignment, a doubly linked list and a circular doubly linked list. Now as the class representing a Link within the linked list is the same in both implementations, I want to use it in both. Now I wonder which approach would be better: Implement the Link class as a package private static member class in the first implementation and then use this class in the second implementation or make the Link class a package private class.

    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 | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >