Search Results

Search found 10115 results on 405 pages for 'coding 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 148/405 | < Previous Page | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >

  • What's the reason for leaving an extra blank line at the end of a code file?

    - by Lord Torgamus
    Eclipse and MyEclipse create new Java files with an extra blank line after the last closing brace by default. I think CodeWarrior did the same thing a few years back, and that some people leave such blank lines in their code either by intention or laziness. So, this seems to be at least a moderately widespread behavior. As a former human language editor -- copy editing newspapers, mostly -- I find that those lines look like sloppiness or accidents, and I can't think of a reason to leave them in source files. I know they don't affect compilation in C-style languages, including Java. Are there benefits to having those lines, and if so, what are they?

    Read the article

  • Straw Poll - K&R vs BSD

    - by Gordon Mackie JoanMiro
    No holy wars please - (ultimately a standardised and consistently-observed house-style on a project always wins out whatever is chosen), but I am genuinely interested in the preferences of people for K&R style formatting: public bool CompareObjects(object first, object second) { if (first == second) { return true; } else { return false; } } over BSD style: public bool CompareObjects(object first, object second) { if (first == second) { return true; } else { return false; } } K&R seems to be making a bit of a comeback recently (I'm an old programmer, so I've seen these things fluctuate); do people think K&R looks more professional, more cool, more readable, is compactness when viewing more important than extending the structure down the screen? Please use the 2 community wiki answers below to vote for K&R vs. BSD. Polls shouldn't earn rep for the first person that manages to type "BSD FTW!" My God! This question is nearly 2 years old and people are still down-voting it; ENOUGH!

    Read the article

  • Java: repetition, overuse -- ?

    - by HH
    I try to be as minimalist as possible. Repetition is a problem. I hate it. When is it really a problem? what is static-overuse? what is field-method overuse? what is class-overuse? are there more types of overuse? Problem A: when it is too much to use of static? private static class Data { private static String fileContent; private static SizeSequence lineMap; private static File fileThing; private static char type; private static boolean binary; private static String name; private static String path; } private static class Print { //<1st LINE, LEFT_SIDE, 2nd LINE, RIGHT_SIDE> private Integer[] printPositions=new Integer[4]; private static String fingerPrint; private static String formatPrint; } Problem B: when it is too much to get field data with private methods? public Stack<Integer> getPositions(){return positions;} public Integer[] getPrintPositions(){return printPositions;} private Stack<String> getPrintViews(){return printViews;} private Stack<String> getPrintViewsPerFile(){return printViewsPerFile;} public String getPrintView(){return printView;} public String getFingerPrint(){return fingerPrint;} public String getFormatPrint(){return formatPrint;} public String getFileContent(){return fileContent;} public SizeSequence getLineMap(){return lineMap;} public File getFile(){return fileThing;} public boolean getBinary(){return binary;} public char getType(){return type;} public String getPath(){return path;} public FileObject getData(){return fObj;} public String getSearchTerm(){return searchTerm;} Related interface overuse

    Read the article

  • Why use infinite loops?

    - by Moishe
    Another poster asked about preferred syntax for infinite loops. A follow-up question: Why do you use infinite loops in your code? I typically see a construct like this: for (;;) { int scoped_variable = getSomeValue(); if (scoped_variable == some_value) { break; } } Which lets you get around not being able to see the value of scoped_variable in the for or while clause. What are some other uses for "infinite" loops?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to embed Cockburn style textual UML Use Case content in the code base to improve code

    - by fooledbyprimes
    experimenting with Cockburn use cases in code I was writing some complicated UI code. I decided to employ Cockburn use cases with fish,kite,and sea levels (discussed by Martin Fowler in his book 'UML Distilled'). I wrapped Cockburn use cases in static C# objects so that I could test logical conditions against static constants which represented steps in a UI workflow. The idea was that you could read the code and know what it was doing because the wrapped objects and their public contants gave you ENGLISH use cases via namespaces. Also, I was going to use reflection to pump out error messages that included the described use cases. The idea is that the stack trace could include some UI use case steps IN ENGLISH.... It turned out to be a fun way to achieve a mini,psuedo light-weight Domain Language but without having to write a DSL compiler. So my question is whether or not this is a good way to do this? Has anyone out there ever done something similar? c# example snippets follow Assume we have some aspx page which has 3 user controls (with lots of clickable stuff). User must click on stuff in one particular user control (possibly making some kind of selection) and then the UI must visually cue the user that the selection was successful. Now, while that item is selected, the user must browse through a gridview to find an item within one of the other user controls and then select something. This sounds like an easy thing to manage but the code can get ugly. In my case, the user controls all sent event messages which were captured by the main page. This way, the page acted like a central processor of UI events and could keep track of what happens when the user is clicking around. So, in the main aspx page, we capture the first user control's event. using MyCompany.MyApp.Web.UseCases; protected void MyFirstUserControl_SomeUIWorkflowRequestCommingIn(object sender, EventArgs e) { // some code here to respond and make "state" changes or whatever // // blah blah blah // finally we have this (how did we know to call fish level method?? because we knew when we wrote the code to send the event in the user control) UpdateUserInterfaceOnFishLevelUseCaseGoalSuccess(FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow.SelectedItemForPurchase) } protected void UpdateUserInterfaceOnFishLevelGoalSuccess(FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow goal) { switch (goal) { case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow.NewMasterItemSelected: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkFlow.DrillDownOnDetails: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; case FishLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkFlow.CancelMultiSelect: //call some UI related methods here including methods for the other user controls if necessary.... break; // more cases... } } } //also we have protected void UpdateUserInterfaceOnSeaLevelGoalSuccess(SeaLevel.SomeNamedUIWorkflow goal) { switch (goal) { case SeaLevel.CheckOutWorkflow.ChangedCreditCard: // do stuff // more cases... } } } So, in the MyCompany.MyApp.Web.UseCases namespace we might have code like this: class SeaLevel... class FishLevel... class KiteLevel... The workflow use cases embedded in the classes could be inner classes or static methods or enumerations or whatever gives you the cleanest namespace. I can't remember what I did originally but you get the picture.

    Read the article

  • "Verbose Dictionary" in C#, 'override new' this[] or implement IDictionary

    - by Benjol
    All I want is a dictionary which tells me which key it couldn't find, rather than just saying The given key was not present in the dictionary. I briefly considered doing a subclass with override new this[TKey key], but felt it was a bit hacky, so I've gone with implementing the IDictionary interface, and passing everything through directly to an inner Dictionary, with the only additional logic being in the indexer: public TValue this[TKey key] { get { ThrowIfKeyNotFound(key); return _dic[key]; } set { ThrowIfKeyNotFound(key); _dic[key] = value; } } private void ThrowIfKeyNotFound(TKey key) { if(!_dic.ContainsKey(key)) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("Can't find key [" + key + "] in dictionary"); } Is this the right/only way to go? Would newing over the this[] really be that bad?

    Read the article

  • [PHP] Invalid argument supplied for foreach()

    - by Roberto Aloi
    It often happens to me to handle data that can be either an array or a null variable and to feed some foreach with these data. $values = get_values(); foreach ($values as $value){ ... } When you feed a foreach with data that are not an array, you get a warning: Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in [...] Assuming it's not possible to refactor the get_values() function to always return an array (backward compatibility, not available source code, whatever other reason), I'm wondering which is the cleanest and most efficient way to avoid these warnings: Casting $values to array Initializing $values to array Wrapping the foreach with an if Other (please suggest)

    Read the article

  • What do you need to implement to provide a Content Set for an NSArrayController?

    - by whuuh
    Heys, I am writing something in Xcode. I use Core Data for persistency and link the view and the model together with Cocoa Bindings; pretty much your ordinary Core Data application. I have an array controller (NSArrayController) in my Xib. This has its managedObjectContext bound to the AppDelegate, as is convention, and tracks an entity. So far so good. Now, the "Content Set" biding of this NSArrayController limits its content set (as you'd expect), by a keyPath from the selection in another NSArrayController (otherAc.selection.detailsOfMaster). This is the usual way to implement a Master-Detail relationship. I want to variably change the key path at runtime, using other controls. This way, I sould return a content set that includes several other content sets, which is all advanced and beyond Interface Builder. To achieve this, I think I should bind the Content Set to my AppDelegate instead. I have tried to do this, but don't know what methods to implement. If I just create the KVC methods (objectSet, setObjectSet), then I can provide a Content Set for the Array Controller in the contentSet method. However, I don't think I'm binding this properly, because it doesn't "refresh". I'm new to binding; what do I need to implement to properly update the Content Set when other things, like the selection in the master NSArrayController, changes?

    Read the article

  • debugging scaffolding contingent upon degbugging boolean (java)

    - by David
    Recently i've found myself writing a lot of methods with what i can only think to call debugging scaffolding. Here's an example: public static void printArray (String[] array, boolean bug) { for (int i = 0; i<array.lenght; i++) { if (bug) System.out.print (i) ; //this line is what i'm calling the debugging scaffolding i guess. System.out.println(array[i]) ; } } in this method if i set bug to true, wherever its being called from maybe by some kind of user imput, then i get the special debugging text to let me know what index the string being printed as at just in case i needed to know for the sake of my debugging (pretend a state of affairs exists where its helpful). All of my questions more or less boil down to the question: is this a good idea? but with a tad bit more objectivity: Is this an effective way to test my methods and debug them? i mean effective in terms of efficiency and not messing up my code. Is it acceptable to leave the if (bug) stuff ; code in place after i've got my method up and working? (if a definition of "acceptability" is needed to make this question objective then use "is not a matter of programing controversy such as ommiting brackets in an if(boolean) with only one line after it, though if you've got something better go ahead and use your definition i won't mind) Is there a more effective way to accomplish the gole of making debugging easier than what i'm doing? Anything you know i mean to ask but that i have forgotten too (as much information as makes sense is appreciated).

    Read the article

  • Python alignment of assignments (style)

    - by ikaros45
    I really like following style standards, as those specified in PEP 8. I have a linter that checks it automatically, and definitely my code is much better because of that. There is just one point in PEP 8, the E251 & E221 don't feel very good. Coming from a JavaScript background, I used to align the variable assignments as following: var var1 = 1234; var2 = 54; longer_name = 'hi'; var lol = { 'that' : 65, 'those' : 87, 'other_thing' : true }; And in my humble opinion, this improves readability dramatically. Problem is, this is dis-recommended by PEP 8. With dictionaries, is not that bad because spaces are allowed after the colon: dictionary = { 'something': 98, 'some_other_thing': False } I can "live" with variable assignments without alignment, but what I don't like at all is not to be able to pass named arguments in a function call, like this: some_func(length= 40, weight= 900, lol= 'troll', useless_var= True, intelligence=None) So, what I end up doing is using a dictionary, as following: specs = { 'length': 40, 'weight': 900, 'lol': 'troll', 'useless_var': True, 'intelligence': None } some_func(**specs) or just simply some_func(**{'length': 40, 'weight': 900, 'lol': 'troll', 'useless_var': True, 'intelligence': None}) But I have the feeling this work around is just worse than ignoring the PEP 8 E251 / E221. What is the best practice?

    Read the article

  • Good programming style when handling multiple objects

    - by Glitch
    I've been programming a software version of a board game. Thus far I have written the classes which will correspond to physical objects on the game board. I'm well into writing the program logic, however I've found that many of the logic classes require access to the same objects. At first I was passing the appropriate objects to methods as they were called, but this was getting very tedious, particularly when the methods required many objects to perform their tasks. To solve this, I created a class which initialises and stores all the objects I need. This allows me to access an object from any class by calling Assets.dice(), for example. But now that I've thought about it, this doesn't seem right. This is why I'm here, I fear that I've created some sort of god class. Is this fear unfounded, or have I created a recipe for disaster?

    Read the article

  • Checkstyle for Python

    - by oneself
    Is there an application similar to Java's Checkstyle for Python? By which I mean, I tool that analyzes Python code, and can be run as part of continuous integration (e.g. CruiseControl or Hudson). After analyzing it should produce an online accessible report which outlines any problems found in the code. Thank you,

    Read the article

  • How do you assign a variable with the result of a if..else block?

    - by Pierre Olivier Martel
    I had an argument with a colleague about the best way to assign a variable in an if..else block. His orignal code was : @products = if params[:category] Category.find(params[:category]).products else Product.all end I rewrote it this way : if params[:category] @products = Category.find(params[:category]).products else @products = Product.all end This could also be rewritten with a one-liner using a ternery operator (? :) but let's pretend that product assignment was longer than a 100 character and couldn't fit in one line. Which of the two is clearer to you? The first solution takes a little less space but I thought that declaring a variable and assigning it three lines after can be more error prone. I also like to see my if and else aligned, makes it easier for my brain to parse it!

    Read the article

  • special debugging lines (java)

    - by David
    Recently i've found myself writing a lot of methods with what i can only think to call debugging scaffolding. Here's an example: public static void printArray (String[] array, boolean bug) { for (int i = 0; i<array.lenght; i++) { if (bug) System.out.print (i) ; //this line is what i'm calling the debugging scaffolding i guess. System.out.println(array[i]) ; } } in this method if i set bug to true, wherever its being called from maybe by some kind of user imput, then i get the special debugging text to let me know what index the string being printed as at just in case i needed to know for the sake of my debugging (pretend a state of affairs exists where its helpful). All of my questions more or less boil down to the question: is this a good idea? but with a tad bit more objectivity: Is this an effective way to test my methods and debug them? i mean effective in terms of efficiency and not messing up my code. Is it acceptable to leave the if (bug) stuff ; code in place after i've got my method up and working? (if a definition of "acceptability" is needed to make this question objective then use "is not a matter of programing controversy such as ommiting brackets in an if(boolean) with only one line after it, though if you've got something better go ahead and use your definition i won't mind) Is there a more effective way to accomplish the gole of making debugging easier than what i'm doing? Anything you know i mean to ask but that i have forgotten too (as much information as makes sense is appreciated).

    Read the article

  • Safest way to change variable names in a project

    - by kamziro
    So I've been working on a relatively large project by myself, and I've come to realise that some of the variable names earlier on were.. less than ideal. But how does one change variable names in a project easily? Is there such a tool that can go through a project directory, parse all the files, and then replace the variable names to the desired one? It has to be smart enough to understand the language I imagine. I was thinking of using regexp (sed/awk on linux?) tools to just replace the variable name, but there were many times where my particular variable is also included as a part of strings. There's also the issue about changing stuff on a c++ namespace, because there is actually two classes in my project that share the same name, but are in different namespaces. I remember visual stuio being able to do this, but what's the safest and most elegant way to do this on linux?

    Read the article

  • What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    - by gargantaun
    Since I can't find a chuffing job, I've been reading up on ReST and creating web services. The way I've interpreted it, the future is all about creating a web service for all your data before you build the web app. Which seems like a good idea. However, there seems to be a lot of contradictory thoughts on what the best scheme is for ReSTful URLs. Some people advocate simple pretty urls http://api.myapp.com/resource/1 In addition, some people like to add the API version to the url like so http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1 And to make things even more confusing, some people advocate adding the content-type to get requests http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.xml http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.json http://api.myapp.com/v1/resource/1.txt Whereas others think the content-type should be sent in the HTTP header. Soooooooo.... That's a lot of variation, which has left me unsure of what the best URL scheme is. I personally see the merits of the most comprehensive URL that includes a version number, resource locator and content-type, but I'm new to this so I could be wrong. On the other hand, you could argue that you should do "whatever works best for you". But that doesn't really fit with the ReST mentality as far as I can tell since the aim is to have a standard. And since a lot of you people will have more experience than me with ReST, I thought I'd ask for some guidance. So, with all that in mind... What should the standard be for ReSTful URLS?

    Read the article

  • Way to get VS 2008 to stop forcing indentation on namespaces?

    - by Earlz
    I've never really been a big fan of the way most editors handle namespaces. They always force you to add an extra pointless level of indentation. For instance, I have a lot of code in a page that I would much rather prefer formatted as namespace mycode{ class myclass{ void function(){ foo(); } void foo(){ bar(); } void bar(){ //code.. } } } and not something like namespace mycode{ class myclass{ void function(){ foo(); } void foo(){ bar(); } void bar(){ //code.. } } } Honestly, I don't really even like the class thing being indented most of the time because I usually only have 1 class per file. And it doesn't look as bad here, but when you get a ton of code and lot of scopes, you can easily have indentation that forces you off the screen, and plus here I just used 2-space tabs and not 4-space as is used by us. Anyway, is there some way to get Visual Studio to stop trying to indent namespaces for me like that?

    Read the article

  • Return enum instead of bool from function for clarity ?

    - by Moe Sisko
    This is similar to : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2908876/net-bool-vs-enum-as-a-method-parameter but concerns returning a bool from a function in some situations. e.g. Function which returns bool : public bool Poll() { bool isFinished = false; // do something, then determine if finished or not. return isFinished; } Used like this : while (!Poll()) { // do stuff during wait. } Its not obvious from the calling context what the bool returned from Poll() means. It might be clearer in some ways if the "Poll" function was renamed "IsFinished()", but the method does a bit of work, and (IMO) would not really reflect what the function actually does. Names like "IsFinished" also seem more appropriate for properties. Another option might be to rename it to something like : "PollAndReturnIsFinished" but this doesn't feel right either. So an option might be to return an enum. e.g : public enum Status { Running, Finished } public Status Poll() { Status status = Status.Running; // do something, then determine if finished or not. return status; } Called like this : while (Poll() == Status.Running) { // do stuff during wait. } But this feels like overkill. Any ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Does anyone change the Visual Studio default bracing style in C# - Is there a standard?

    - by El Ronnoco
    I find the default bracing style a bit wasteful on line count eg... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } would, if I was writing in JavaScript for example be written like... function foo() { if (...) { ... } else { ... } } ...which I understand may also not be to peoples' tastes. But the question(s) is/are do you turn off the VS formatting style and use your own rules? What is the opinion of this in the industry when many people are working on the same code-base? Is it better just to stick to the default just for simplicity/uniformity?

    Read the article

  • Which syntax is better for return value?

    - by Omar Kooheji
    I've been doing a massive code review and one pattern I notice all over the place is this: public bool MethodName() { bool returnValue = false; if (expression) { // do something returnValue = MethodCall(); } else { // do something else returnValue = Expression; } return returnValue; } This is not how I would have done this I would have just returned the value when I knew what it was. which of these two patterns is more correct? I stress that the logic always seems to be structured such that the return value is assigned in one plave only and no code is executed after it's assigned.

    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 | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >