Search Results

Search found 29753 results on 1191 pages for 'best 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 153/1191 | < Previous Page | 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160  | Next Page >

  • Can JavaScript be overused?

    - by ledhed2222
    Hello stackoverflow, I'm a "long time reader first time poster", glad to start participating in this forum. My experience is with Java, Python, and several audio programming languages; I'm quite new to the big bad web technologies: HTML/CSS/JavaScript. I'm making two personal sites right now and am wondering if I'm relying on JavaScript too much. I'm making a site where all pages have a bit of markup in common--stuff like the nav bar and some sliced background images--so I thought I'd make a pageInit() function to insert the majority of the HTML for me. This way if I make a change later, I just change the script rather than all the pages. I figure if users are paranoid enough to have JavaScript turned off, I'll give them an alert or something. Is this bad practice? Can JavaScript be overused? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to initialize a variable to a dummy value?

    - by froadie
    This question is a result of the answers to this question that I just asked. It was claimed that this code is "ugly" because it initializes a variable to a value that will never be read: String tempName = null; try{ tempName = buildFileName(); } catch(Exception e){ ... System.exit(1); } FILE_NAME = tempName; Is this indeed bad practice? Should one avoid initializing variables to dummy values that will never actually be used? (EDIT - And what about initializing a String variable to "" before a loop that will concatenate values to the String...? Or is this in a separate category? e.g. String whatever = ""; for(String str : someCollection){ whatever += str; } )

    Read the article

  • Should I create a new extension for an xml file?

    - by macleojw
    I'm working with a data model stored in XML files. I want to create some metadata for the model and store it alongside, but would like to be able to distinguish between the two. The data model is imported into some software from time to time and we don't want it to try to import the meta data files. To get round this, I've been thinking of creating a new extension for the metadata xml files (say .mdml). Is this good practice?

    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

  • can I put the break on the same line

    - by brett
    I have a switch statement that has over 300 case statements. case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break; Why is it that the break is always on a separate line? Is this required? Is there anything syntactically incorrect about me doing this: case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break;

    Read the article

  • CSS: Base styles on body or html?

    - by Svish
    When I declare some base styles for my site I have used to do that on the body tag. Like for example body { font-size: medium; line-height: 1.3em; } But I have also seen people do things like that on the html tag. And on both. Where should it be done? Should some be at one and some at the other? Should all be on one of them? Or does it simply not matter at all? Or?

    Read the article

  • Using try vs if in python

    - by artdanil
    Is there a rationale to decide which one of try or if constructs to use, when testing variable to have a value? For example, there is a function that returns either a list or doesn't return a value. I want to check result before processing it. Which of the following would be more preferable and why? result = function(); if (result): for r in result: #process items or result = function(); try: for r in result: #process items except TypeError: pass; Related discussion: Checking for member existence in Python

    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

  • Defining implicit and explicit casts for C# interfaces

    - by ehdv
    Is there a way to write interface-based code (i.e. using interfaces rather than classes as the types accepted and passed around) in C# without giving up the use of things like implicit casts? Here's some sample code - there's been a lot removed, but these are the relevant portions. public class Game { public class VariantInfo { public string Language { get; set; } public string Variant { get; set; } } } And in ScrDictionary.cs, we have... public class ScrDictionary: IScrDictionary { public string Language { get; set; } public string Variant { get; set; } public static implicit operator Game.VariantInfo(ScrDictionary s) { return new Game.VariantInfo{Language=sd.Language, Variant=sd.Variant}; } } And the interface... public interface IScrDictionary { string Language { get; set; } string Variant { get; set; } } I want to be able to use IScrDictionary instead of ScrDictionary, but still be able to implicitly convert a ScrDictionary to a Game.VariantInfo. Also, while there may be an easy way to make this work by giving IScrDictionary a property of type Game.VariantInfo my question is more generally: Is there a way to define casts or operator overloading on interfaces? (If not, what is the proper C# way to maintain this functionality without giving up interface-oriented design?)

    Read the article

  • where to place browser event (resize/scroll) detection call

    - by karl
    I'm trying to alert a message when the browser is resized or scrolled. I'm detecting the 2 events in the body <body onResize="doDisp();" onScroll="doDisp();" > where doDisp is this inside the <script> tag <script type="text/javascript"> function doDisp(){ alert("browser changing state"); } </script> but isn't it bad practice to have javascript in the body tag? Is there a cross-browser way to keep all the javascript inside the <script> tags?

    Read the article

  • Abstract away a compound identity value for use in business logic?

    - by John K
    While separating business logic and data access logic into two different assemblies, I want to abstract away the concept of identity so that the business logic deals with one consistent identity without having to understand its actual representation in the data source. I've been calling this a compound identity abstraction. Data sources in this project are swappable and various and the business logic shouldn't care which data source is currently in use. The identity is the toughest part because its implementation can change per kind of data source, whereas other fields like name, address, etc are consistently scalar values. What I'm searching for is a good way to abstract the concept of identity, whether it be an existing library, a software pattern or just a solid good idea of some kind is provided. The proposed compound identity value would have to be comparable and usable in the business logic and passed back to the data source to specify records, entities and/or documents to affect, so the data source must be able to parse back out the details of its own compound ids. Data Source Examples: This serves to provide an idea of what I mean by various data sources having different identity implementations. A relational data source might express a piece of content with an integer identifier plus a language specific code. For example. content_id language Other Columns expressing details of content 1 en_us 1 fr_ca The identity of the first record in the above example is: 1 + en_us However when a NoSQL data source is substituted, it might somehow represent each piece of content with a GUID string 936DA01F-9ABD-4d9d-80C7-02AF85C822A8 plus language code of a different standardization, And a third kind of data source might use just a simple scalar value. So on and so forth, you get the idea.

    Read the article

  • detect a string contained by another discontinuously

    - by SpawnCxy
    Recently I'm working on bad content(such as advertise post) filter of a BBS.And I write a function to detect a string is in another string not continuously.Code as below: $str = 'helloguys'; $substr1 = 'hlu'; $substr2 = 'elf'; function detect($a,$b) //function that detect a in b { $c = ''; for($i=0;$i<=strlen($a);$i++) { for($j=0;$j<=strlen($b);$j++) { if($a[$i] == $b[$j]) { $b=substr($b,$j+1); $c .=$a[$i]; break; } } } if($c == $a) return true; else return false; } var_dump(detect($substr1,$str)); //true var_dump(detect($substr2,$str)); //false Since the filter works before the users do their posts so I think the efficiency here is important.And I wonder if there's any better solution? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Tests that are 2-3 times bigger than the testable code

    - by HeavyWave
    Is it normal to have tests that are way bigger than the actual code being tested? For every line of code I am testing I usually have 2-3 lines in the unit test. Which ultimately leads to tons of time being spent just typing the tests in (mock, mock and mock more). Where are the time savings? Do you ever avoid tests for code that is along the lines of being trivial? Most of my methods are less than 10 lines long and testing each one of them takes a lot of time, to the point where, as you see, I start questioning writing most of the tests in the first place. I am not advocating not unit testing, I like it. Just want to see what factors people consider before writing tests. They come at a cost (in terms of time, hence money), so this cost must be evaluated somehow. How do you estimate the savings created by your unit tests, if ever?

    Read the article

  • Avoiding repetition with libraries that use a setup + execute model

    - by lijie
    Some libraries offer the ability to separate setup and execution, esp if the setup portion has undesirable characteristics such as unbounded latency. If the program needs to have this reflected in its structure, then it is natural to have: void setupXXX(...); // which calls the setup stuff void doXXX(...); // which calls the execute stuff The problem with this is that the structure of setupXXX and doXXX is going to be quite similar (at least textually -- control flow will prob be more complex in doXXX). Wondering if there are any ways to avoid this. Example: Let's say we're doing signal processing: filtering with a known kernel in the frequency domain. so, setupXXX and doXXX would probably be something like... void doFilter(FilterStuff *c) { for (int i = 0; i < c->N; ++i) { doFFT(c->x[i], c->fft_forward_setup, c->tmp); doMultiplyVector(c->tmp, c->filter); doFFT(c->tmp, c->fft_inverse_setup, c->x[i]); } } void setupFilter(FilterStuff *c) { setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_forward_setup)); // assign the kernel to c->filter ... setupFFT(..., &(c->fft_inverse_setup)); }

    Read the article

  • STLifying C++ classes

    - by shambulator
    I'm trying to write a class which contains several std::vectors as data members, and provides a subset of vector's interface to access them: class Mesh { public: private: std::vector<Vector3> positions; std::vector<Vector3> normals; // Several other members along the same lines }; The main thing you can do with a mesh is add positions, normals and other stuff to it. In order to allow an STL-like way of accessing a Mesh (add from arrays, other containers, etc.), I'm toying with the idea of adding methods like this: public: template<class InIter> void AddNormals(InIter first, InIter last); Problem is, from what I understand of templates, these methods will have to be defined in the header file (seems to make sense; without a concrete iterator type, the compiler doesn't know how to generate object code for the obvious implementation of this method). Is this actually a problem? My gut reaction is not to go around sticking huge chunks of code in header files, but my C++ is a little rusty with not much STL experience outside toy examples, and I'm not sure what "acceptable" C++ coding practice is on this. Is there a better way to expose this functionality while retaining an STL-like generic programming flavour? One way would be something like this: (end list) class RestrictedVector<T> { public: RestrictedVector(std::vector<T> wrapped) : wrapped(wrapped) {} template <class InIter> void Add(InIter first, InIter last) { std::copy(first, last, std::back_insert_iterator(wrapped)); } private: std::vector<T> wrapped; }; and then expose instances of these on Mesh instead, but that's starting to reek a little of overengineering :P Any advice is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad programming practise to have "Public" members inside an "Internal" class?

    - by Amby
    I mean, won;t it be more specific and appropriate if i "only" keep "protected","internal" and "private" members (field,method,property,event) in a class which is declared as "internal" ? I have seen this practice ( having "public" members in an "internal" class) in various code so just wanted to know is it a bad practice or does it has some benefit or advantage. [Only concerned about C#] Thanks for your interest.

    Read the article

  • Imposing email limits on web page

    - by Martin
    To avoid spammers, what's a good strategy for imposing limits on users when sending email from our site? A count limit per day on individual IPs? Sender emails? Domains? In general terms, but recommended figures will also be helpful. Our users can send emails through our web page. They can register and log in but are also allowed to do this without logging in, but with a captcha and with a field for the senders email. Certainly, there is a header, "The user has sent you the following message.", limiting the use for spammers, so perhaps it's not a big problem. Any comments on what I'm doing will be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Handling missing data

    - by soppotare
    Say I have a simple helpdesk application which logs calls made by users. I would typically have such fields in a table relating to the call e.g. CallID, Description, CustomerID etc. I Would also have a table of customers including CustomerID, Username, Password, FullName etc. Now when a user is deleted from the customers table then the inner join between the calls table and the users table to find out historically which user logged a call would produce no results. How do people usually deal with this? Have seperate customer and useraccount tables Just disable the accounts so the data is still available Record the customers name in the calls table as a seperate field. or any other methods / suggestions?

    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 | 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160  | Next Page >