Search Results

Search found 30896 results on 1236 pages for 'best buy'.

Page 144/1236 | < Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >

  • Best Design Pattern to Implement while Mapping Actions in MVC

    - by FidEliO
    What could be the best practices of writing the following case: We have a controller which based on what paths users take, take different actions. For example: if user chooses the path /path1/hello it will say hello. If a user chooses /path1/bye?name="Philipp" it will invoke sayGoodBye() and etc. I have written a switch statement inside the controller which is simple, however IMO not efficient. What are the best way to implement this, considering that paths are generally String. private void takeAction() { switch (path[1]) { case "hello": //sayHello(); break; case "bye": //sayBye(); break; case "case3": //Blah(); break; ... } }

    Read the article

  • where should I do the calculating stuff,PHP or Mysql?

    - by SpawnCxy
    I've been doing a lot of calculating stuff nowadays.Usually I prefer to do this job in PHP rather than Mysql though I know PHP is not good at this cuz I thought mysql may be worse.But I found some performance problem :some pages were loaded so slowly that 30 seconds' timelimit is not enough for them!So I wonder which is the better practice to do the calculations,and any princles for that?Suggestions would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to deal with multiple screensizes + dynamic controls in Android?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I am learning how to program on Android phone. However I am unsure how to make my application work for the different screen sizes and resolutions. I read the tutorial on the android site and still unsure how to do it. First I know there are different files so could make a layout for each of the sizes but my problem is most of the screen needs to be dynamically created so there would not be much to put in these files. So I am not sure how to android to re size dynamic controls based on the screen size. I have also read it is bad practice to make controls in anything but the xml file as it separates view logic and programming logic. However they never talk about if you need to make these controls dynamically what you should do. So is there some other way to do it that is considered good practice?

    Read the article

  • What is the correct way to open and close window/dialog?

    - by mree
    I'm trying to develop a new program. The work flow looks like this: Login --> Dashboard (Window with menus) --> Module 1 --> Module 2 --> Module 3 --> Module XXX So, to open Dashboard from Login (a Dialog), I use Dashboard *d = new Dashboard(); d->show(); close(); In Dashboard, I use these codes to reopen the Login if the user closes the Window (by clicking the 'X') closeEvent(QCloseEvent *) { Login *login = new Login(); login->show(); } With a Task Manager opened, I ran the program and monitor the memory usage. After clicking open Dashboard from Login and closing Dashboard to return to Login, I noticed that the memory keeps increasing about 500 KB. It can goes up to 20 MB from 12 MB of memory usage by just opening and closing the window/dialog. So, what did I do wrong here ? I need to know it before I continue developing those modules which will definitely eat more memory with my programming. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • When to use basic types (Integer, String), and when to write a new class?

    - by belgarat
    Stackoverflow users: A lot of things can be represented in programs by using the basic types, or we can create a new class for it. Example: A social security number can be a number, string or its own object. (Other common examples: Phone numbers, names, zip codes, user id, order id and other id's.) My question is: When should the basic types be used, and when should we write ourselves a new class? I see that when you need to add behavior, you'll want to create a class (example, social security number parsing, validation, formatting, etc). But is this the only criteria? I have come across cases where many of these things are represented as java Integers and/or Strings. We loose the benefit of type-checking, and I have often seen bugs caused by parameters being mixed in calls to function(Intever, Integer, Integer, Integer). On the other hand, some programmers are opposed to over-designing by creating classes for "eveything". Obviously, the answer is "it depends". But, what do you think, and what do you normally do?

    Read the article

  • Actionscript 3.0 cross-project folder/package structure best practise

    - by dr_tchock
    I'm currently looking at structuring my teams projects into a consistent manner that properly utilises packages and is easily version-controlled (via SVN). I'm interested in any 'best practise' with regards to project structuring and how to use consistent packaging without lumping everything into a gigantic com.domainname.projects folder structure whilst maintaining that package structure. I'm also keen to use the src/bin/lib folder structure within each project. I guess I'm asking 'how do you do it?' and 'why?'. Sorry if this is a bit abstract for Stack Overflow but you guys give the best answers I've found.

    Read the article

  • Why is 'using namespace std;' considered a bad practice in C++?

    - by Mana
    Okay, sorry for the simplistic question, but this has been bugging me ever since I finished high school C++ last year. I've been told by others on numerous occasions that my teacher was wrong in saying that we should have "using namespace std;" in our programs, and that std::cout and std::cin are more proper. However, they would always be vague as to why this is a bad practice. So, I'm asking now: Why is "using namespace std;" considered bad? Is it really that inefficient, or risk declaring ambiguous vars(variables that share the same name as a function in std namespace) that much? Or does this impact program performance noticeably as you get into writing larger applications? I'm sorry if this is something I should have googled to solve; I figured it would be nice to have this question on here regardless in case anyone else was wondering.

    Read the article

  • Correct way to protect a private API key when versioning a python application on a public git repo

    - by systempuntoout
    I would like to open-source a python project on Github but it contains an API key that should not be distributed. I guess there's something better than removing the key each time a "push" is committed to the repo. Imagine a simplified foomodule.py : import urllib2 API_KEY = 'XXXXXXXXX' urllib2.urlopen("http://example.com/foo?id=123%s" % API_KEY ).read() What i'm thinking is: Move the API_KEY in a second key.py module importing it on foomodule.py; i would then add key.py on .gitignore file. Same as 1 but using ConfigParser Do you know a good programmatic way to handle this scenario?

    Read the article

  • Tool to maintain a Data Mapping between two systems

    - by ktaylorjohn
    We have XML interfaces between multiple systems. An Enterprise Domain Model is missing in the overall architecture, hence the terms Product/Customer/User means different things to different systems. We currently use excel sheets to map the elements in incoming XML to what the actual Field means within our system. Additionally, it contains the values of Mandatory/Optional and length of each field. We call this the Data Dictionary. Any changes to the XML go through rounds of deliberation and updates to Word and Excel documents. Is there a better way to do this? Any tool/GUI based approach which all systems and owners can view?

    Read the article

  • Mandatory method documentation

    - by Sjoerd
    On my previous job, providing all methods with javadoc was mandatory, which resulted in things like this: /** * Sets the Frobber. * * @param frobber The frobber */ public setFrobber(Frobber frobber) { ... } As you can see, the documentation adds little to the code, but takes up space and work. Should documenting all methods be mandatory or optional? Is there a rule for which methods to document? What are pros and cons of requiring every method to be documented?

    Read the article

  • Code casing question for private class fields

    - by user200295
    Take the following example public class Class1{ public string Prop1{ get {return m_Prop1;} set {m_Prop1 = value; } } private string m_Prop1; // this is standard private property variable name // how do we cap this variable name? While the compiler can figure out same casing // it makes it hard to read private Class2 Class2; // we camel case the parameter public Class1(Class2 class2){ this.Class2 = class2; } } Here are my stock rules The class name is capitalized (Class1) The public properties are capitalized (Prop1) The private field tied to a public property has m_ to indicate this. My coworker prefers _ There is some debate if using m_ or _ should be used at all, as it is like Hungarian notation. Private class fields are capitalized. The part I am trying to figure out is what do I do if when the Class name of a private field matches the private field name. For example, private Class2 Class2; This is confusing. If the private field name is not the same class, for example private string Name; , there isn't much issue. Or am I thinking about the issue wrong. Should my classes and private fields be named in such a way that they don't collide?

    Read the article

  • Do I need to perform a commit after a rebase?

    - by Benjol
    I've just rebased a feature branch onto another feature branch (in preparation for rebasing everything to the head of my master), and it involved quite a few tricky merge resolutions. Is the rebase automatically saved as a commit somewhere? Just where do those modifications live? I can't see anything in gitk, or git log --oneline. (Same question for when I merge back my branch after rebasing.)

    Read the article

  • slowing down a loop in a recursive function

    - by eco_bach
    I have a difficult problem with a recursive function. Essentially I need to 'slow down' a for loop within a function that repeatedly calls itself(the function); Is this possible, or do I need to somehow extract the recursive nature of the function? function callRecursiveFuncAgain(ob:Object):void{ //do recursive stuff; for (var i:int = 0; i < 4; i++) { _nextObj=foo callRecursiveFuncAgain(_nextObj); } }

    Read the article

  • Application wide messaging... without singletons?

    - by StormianRootSolver
    So, I want to go for a more Singleton - less design in the future. However, there seem to be a lot of tasks in an application that can't be done in meaningful way without singletons. I call them "application wide services", but they also fall into the same category as the cross cutting concerns, which I usually fix via AOP. Lets take an example: I want an application wide message queue that dispatches messages to components, every component can subscribe and publish there, it's a very nice multicast thing. The message queue and dispatching system are usually a (rather short) singleton class, which is very easy to implement in, say, C#. You can even use double dispatching and utilize message type metadata and the like, it's all so easy to do, it's almost trivial. However, having singletons is not really "object oriented design" (it introduces global variables) and it makes testing harder. Do you have any ideas? I'm asking this question because I'm willing to learn more about this topic, a LOT more. :-)

    Read the article

  • Hide Adsense on localhost

    - by collimarco
    I have a site built in Ruby On Rails which has many ads in different templates and views. It is hard to actualy remove each ad between tests and deployments. I don't know whether Google approves many impressions (even if without clicks) on localhost. How do you deal with this issue? Maybe it is a good solution to set a variable/constant available everywere to enable/disable ads easily. Do you think it is a good solution? If so, how do I declare a global variable for views?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to violate the principle that collection properties should be readonly for performance?

    - by uriDium
    I used FxCop to analyze some code I had written. I had exposed a collection via a setter. I understand why this is not good. Changing the backing store when I don't expect it is a very bad idea. Here is my problem though. I retrieve a list of business objects from a Data Access Object. I then need to add that collection to another business class and I was doing it with the setter method. The reason I did this was that it is going to be faster to make an assignment than to insert hundreds of thousands of objects one at a time to the collection again via another addElement method. Is it okay to have a getter for a collection in some scenarios? I though of rather having a constructor which takes a collection? I thought maybe I could pass the object in to the Dao and let the Dao populate it directly? Are there any other better ideas?

    Read the article

  • Need help in sorting the programming buzz-words

    - by cwap
    How do you sort out the good buzz from the bad buzz? - I really need your help here :) I see a lot of buzz-words nowadays, both here on SO and in school. For example, we had a teacher who everyone respected, who said "be careful about gold-plating and death-by-interfacing". Now, everyone and their mama cries whenever I'm creating an interface.. Another example would be here on SO where lately "premature optimization is the root of all evil", so everytime someone asks a perfomance question, he'll get that sentence thrown in his face. A few months ago I remember it was all about NHibernate in here, etc., etc... These things comes and goes, but only the good buzz stays. Now, how do you seperate the good from the bad? By reading blogs from respected persons? By trying to come to a conclusion on your own, and then try to convince others that you're right? By simply ignoring it?

    Read the article

  • Global State and Singletons Dependency injection

    - by Manu
    this is a problem i face lot of times when i am designing a new app i'll use a sample problem to explain this think i am writing simple game.so i want to hold a list of players. i have few options.. 1.use a static field in some class private static ArrayList<Player> players = new ArrayList<Integer>(); public Player getPlayer(int i){ return players.get(i); } but this a global state 2.or i can use a singleton class PlayerList{ private PlayerList instance; private PlayerList(){...} public PlayerList getInstance() { if(instance==null){ ... } return instance; } } but this is bad because it's a singleton 3.Dependency injection class Game { private PlayerList playerList; public Game(PlayerList list) { this.list = list; } public PlayerList getPlayerList() { return playerList; } } this seems good but it's not, if any object outside Game need to look at PlayerList (which is the usual case) i have to use one of the above methods to make the Game class available globally. so I just add another layer to the problem. didn't actually solve anything. what is the optimum solution ? (currently i use Singleton approach)

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to use Reflection in Unit testing?

    - by Sebi
    During the last years I always thought that in Java, Reflection is widely used during Unit testing. Since some of the variables/methods which have to be checked are private, it is somehow necessary to read the values of them. I always thought that the Reflection API is also used for this purpose. Last week i had to test some packages and therefore write some JUnit tests. As always i used Reflection to access private fields and methods. But my supervisor who checked the code wasn't really happy with that and told me that the Reflection API wasn't meant to use for such "hacking". Instead he suggested to modifiy the visibility in the production code. Is it really bad practice to use Reflection? I can't really believe that

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >