Search Results

Search found 6690 results on 268 pages for 'worst 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 69/268 | < Previous Page | 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76  | Next Page >

  • Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidlines?

    - by SiegeX
    Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Helper Casting Functions -- Is it a code smell?

    - by Earlz
    I recently began to start using functions to make casting easier on my fingers for one instance I had something like this ((Dictionary<string,string>)value).Add(foo); and converted it to a tiny little helper function so I can do this ToDictionary(value).Add(foo); Is this a code smell? Also, what about simpler examples? For example in my scripting engine I've considered making things like this ((StringVariable)arg).Value="foo"; be ToStringVar(arg).Value="foo"; I really just dislike how inorder to cast a value and instantly get a property from it you must enclose it in double parentheses. I have a feeling the last one is much worse than the first one though (also I've marked this language agnostic even though my example is C#)

    Read the article

  • Amazon SimpleDB Identity Seed equivalent

    - by Zaff
    Is there an equivalent to an identity Seed in SimpleDB? If the answer is no, how do you handle creating something like a customer number or order number that will prevent the creation duplicate numbers? My experience is mainly from SQL Server in which I would either create a primary key with an identity seed or use transactions in a stored procedure to increment the number. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • How to handle form submission ASP.NET MVC Back button?

    - by melaos
    Hi guys, i have a form which allows the user to key in the data and then submit. if everything works well on this action result, then i will redirect the user back to a thank you page. my problem right now is that when the user click on the back button, they will be able to go back to the form page and the inputs will still be there. and if the user just click on submit again, i will be getting some potential weird bugs. so in terms of asp.net mvc, what's the best way to handle users who click on the back button? thanks!

    Read the article

  • Questions on usages of sizeof

    - by Appu
    Question 1 I have a struct like, struct foo { int a; char c; }; When I say sizeof(foo), i am getting 8 on my machine. As per my understanding, 4 bytes for int, 1 byte for char and 3 bytes for padding. Is that correct? Given a struct like the above, how will I find out how many bytes will be added as padding? Question 2 I am aware that sizeof can be used to calculate the size of an array. Mostly I have seen the usage like (foos is an array of foo) sizeof(foos)/sizeof(*foos) But I found that the following will also give same result. sizeof(foos) / sizeof(foo) Is there any difference in these two? Which one is preffered? Question 3 Consider the following statement. foo foos[] = {10,20,30}; When I do sizeof(foos) / sizeof(*foos), it gives 2. But the array has 3 elements. If I change the statement to foo foos[] = {{10},{20},{30}}; it gives correct result 3. Why is this happening? Any thoughts..

    Read the article

  • Declaring data types in SQLite

    - by dan04
    I'm familiar with how type affinity works in SQLite: You can declare column types as anything you want, and all that matters is whether the type name contains "INT", "CHAR", "FLOA", etc. But is there a commonly-used convention on what type names to use? For example, if you have an integer column, is it better to distinguish between TINYINT, SMALLINT, MEDIUMINT, and BIGINT, or just declare everything as INTEGER? So far, I've been using the following: INTEGER REAL CHAR(n) -- for strings with a known fixed with VARCHAR(n) -- for strings with a known maximum width TEXT -- for all other strings BLOB BOOLEAN DATE -- string in "YYYY-MM-DD" format TIME -- string in "HH:MM:SS" format TIMESTAMP -- string in "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" format (Note that the last three are contrary to the type affinity.)

    Read the article

  • ORM market analysis

    - by bonefisher
    I would like to see your experience with popular ORM tools outhere, like NHibernate, LLBLGen, EF, S2Q, Genom-e, LightSpeed, DataObjects.NET, OpenAccess, ... From my exp: - Genom-e is quiet capable of Linq & performance, dev support - EF lacks on some key features like lazy loading, Poco support, pers.ignorance... but in 4.o it may have overcome .. - DataObjects.Net so far good, althrough I found some bugs - NHibernate steep learning curve, no 100% Linq support (like in Genom-e and DataObjects.Net), but very supportive, extensible and mature

    Read the article

  • GOTO still considered harmful?

    - by Kyle Cronin
    Everyone is aware of Dijkstra's Letters to the editor: go to statement considered harmful (also here .html transcript and here .pdf) and there has been a formidable push since that time to eschew the goto statement whenever possible. While it's possible to use goto to produce unmaintainable, sprawling code, it nevertheless remains in modern programming languages. Even the advanced continuation control structure in Scheme can be described as a sophisticated goto. What circumstances warrant the use of goto? When is it best to avoid? As a followup question: C provides a pair of functions, setjmp and longjmp, that provide the ability to goto not just within the current stack frame but within any of the calling frames. Should these be considered as dangerous as goto? More dangerous? Dijkstra himself regretted that title, of which he was not responsible for. At the end of EWD1308 (also here .pdf) he wrote: Finally a short story for the record. In 1968, the Communications of the ACM published a text of mine under the title "The goto statement considered harmful", which in later years would be most frequently referenced, regrettably, however, often by authors who had seen no more of it than its title, which became a cornerstone of my fame by becoming a template: we would see all sorts of articles under the title "X considered harmful" for almost any X, including one titled "Dijkstra considered harmful". But what had happened? I had submitted a paper under the title "A case against the goto statement", which, in order to speed up its publication, the editor had changed into a "letter to the Editor", and in the process he had given it a new title of his own invention! The editor was Niklaus Wirth. A well thought out classic paper about this topic, to be matched to that of Dijkstra, is Structured Programming with go to Statements (also here .pdf), by Donald E. Knuth. Reading both helps to reestablish context and a non-dogmatic understanding of the subject. In this paper, Dijkstra's opinion on this case is reported and is even more strong: Donald E. Knuth: I believe that by presenting such a view I am not in fact disagreeing sharply with Dijkstra's ideas, since he recently wrote the following: "Please don't fall into the trap of believing that I am terribly dogmatical about [the go to statement]. I have the uncomfortable feeling that others are making a religion out of it, as if the conceptual problems of programming could be solved by a single trick, by a simple form of coding discipline!"

    Read the article

  • Whats the point of STL?

    - by Jonathan D
    I've been programming c++ for about a year now and when i'm looking about i see lots of references to STL. Can some one please tell me what it does? and the advantages and disadvantageous of it? thanks

    Read the article

  • Fluent API Style Usage

    - by Chris Dwyer
    When programming against a fluent API, I've seen the style mostly like this: var obj = objectFactory.CreateObject() .SetObjectParameter(paramName, value) .SetObjectParameter(paramName, value) .DoSomeTransformation(); What is the reasoning behind putting the dot at the beginning of the line instead of the end of the line like this: var obj = objectFactory.CreateObject(). SetObjectParameter(paramName, value). SetObjectParameter(paramName, value). DoSomeTransformation(); Or, is it merely a style thing that a team makes a consensus on?

    Read the article

  • Prefer extension methods for encapsulation and reusability?

    - by tzaman
    edit4: wikified, since this seems to have morphed more into a discussion than a specific question. In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. (edit: Even in the current .NET library, I can see places where it would've been useful to have extensions instead of instance methods - for example, all of the utility functions of List<T> (Sort, BinarySearch, FindIndex, etc.) would be incredibly useful if they were lifted up to IList<T> - getting free bonus functionality like that adds a lot more benefit to implementing the interface.) So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself? (edit2: In response to Tomas - while C# did start out with Java's (overly, imo) OO mentality, it seems to be embracing more multi-paradigm programming with every new release; the main thrust of this question is whether using extension methods to drive a style change (towards more generic / functional C#) is useful or worthwhile..) edit3: overridable extension methods The only real problem identified so far with this approach, is that you can't specialize extension methods if you need to. I've been thinking about the issue, and I think I've come up with a solution. Suppose I have an interface MyInterface, which I want to extend - I define my extension methods in a MyExtension static class, and pair it with another interface, call it MyExtensionOverrider. MyExtension methods are defined according to this pattern: public static int MyMethod(this MyInterface obj, int arg, bool attemptCast=true) { if (attemptCast && obj is MyExtensionOverrider) { return ((MyExtensionOverrider)obj).MyMethod(arg); } // regular implementation here } The override interface mirrors all of the methods defined in MyExtension, except without the this or attemptCast parameters: public interface MyExtensionOverrider { int MyMethod(int arg); string MyOtherMethod(); } Now, any class can implement the interface and get the default extension functionality: public class MyClass : MyInterface { ... } Anyone that wants to override it with specific implementations can additionally implement the override interface: public class MySpecializedClass : MyInterface, MyExtensionOverrider { public int MyMethod(int arg) { //specialized implementation for one method } public string MyOtherMethod() { // fallback to default for others MyExtension.MyOtherMethod(this, attemptCast: false); } } And there we go: extension methods provided on an interface, with the option of complete extensibility if needed. Fully general too, the interface itself doesn't need to know about the extension / override, and multiple extension / override pairs can be implemented without interfering with each other. I can see three problems with this approach - It's a little bit fragile - the extension methods and override interface have to be kept synchronized manually. It's a little bit ugly - implementing the override interface involves boilerplate for every function you don't want to specialize. It's a little bit slow - there's an extra bool comparison and cast attempt added to the mainline of every method. Still, all those notwithstanding, I think this is the best we can get until there's language support for interface functions. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • What version numbering scheme to use?

    - by deamon
    I'm looking for a version numbering scheme that expresses the extent of change, especially compatiblity. Apache APR, for example, use the well known version numbering scheme <major>.<minor>.<patch> example: 4.5.11 Maven suggests a similar but more detailed schema: <major>.<minor>.<patch>-<qualifier>-<build number> example: 4.5.11-RC1-3732 Where is the Maven versioning scheme defined? Are there conventions for qualifier and build number? Probably it is a bad idea to use maven but not to follow the Maven version scheme ... What other version numbering schemes do you know? What scheme would you prefer and why?

    Read the article

  • PHP: Loop or no loop?

    - by Joseph Robidoux
    In this situation, is it better to use a loop or not? echo "0"; echo "1"; echo "2"; echo "3"; echo "4"; echo "5"; echo "6"; echo "7"; echo "8"; echo "9"; echo "10"; echo "11"; echo "12"; echo "13"; or $number = 0; while ($number != 13) { echo $number; $number = $number + 1; }

    Read the article

  • Can a script called by XHR reference $_COOKIE?

    - by Christian Mann
    Quick yes/no - I'm building an AJAX application and some scripts require authentication. Can I read $_COOKIE['username'] and $_COOKIE['password'] on the server if the PHP script was called via XHR, whether that be $.get() or $.post()? Side question: Can it also set cookies? Is that considered "good practice"?

    Read the article

  • C# integer primary key generation using Entity Framework with local database file (Sdf)

    - by Ronny
    Hello, I'm writing a standalone application and I thought using Entity Framework to store my data. At the moment the application is small so I can use a local database file to get started. The thing is that the local database file doesn't have the ability to auto generate integer primary keys as SQL Server does. Any suggestions how to manage primary keys for entities in a local database file that will be compatible with SQL Server in the future? Thanks, Ronny

    Read the article

  • Casting functions -- Is it a code smell?

    - by Earlz
    I recently began to start using functions to make casting easier on my fingers for one instance I had something like this ((Dictionary<string,string>)value).Add(foo); and converted it to a tiny little helper function so I can do this ToDictionary(value).Add(foo); Is this a code smell? (also I've marked this language agnostic even though my example is C#)

    Read the article

  • Managing highly repetitive code and documentation in Java

    - by polygenelubricants
    Highly repetitive code is generally a bad thing, and there are design patterns that can help minimize this. However, sometimes it's simply inevitable due to the constraints of the language itself. Take the following example from java.util.Arrays: /** * Assigns the specified long value to each element of the specified * range of the specified array of longs. The range to be filled * extends from index <tt>fromIndex</tt>, inclusive, to index * <tt>toIndex</tt>, exclusive. (If <tt>fromIndex==toIndex</tt>, the * range to be filled is empty.) * * @param a the array to be filled * @param fromIndex the index of the first element (inclusive) to be * filled with the specified value * @param toIndex the index of the last element (exclusive) to be * filled with the specified value * @param val the value to be stored in all elements of the array * @throws IllegalArgumentException if <tt>fromIndex &gt; toIndex</tt> * @throws ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException if <tt>fromIndex &lt; 0</tt> or * <tt>toIndex &gt; a.length</tt> */ public static void fill(long[] a, int fromIndex, int toIndex, long val) { rangeCheck(a.length, fromIndex, toIndex); for (int i=fromIndex; i<toIndex; i++) a[i] = val; } The above snippet appears in the source code 8 times, with very little variation in the documentation/method signature but exactly the same method body, one for each of the root array types int[], short[], char[], byte[], boolean[], double[], float[], and Object[]. I believe that unless one resorts to reflection (which is an entirely different subject in itself), this repetition is inevitable. I understand that as a utility class, such high concentration of repetitive Java code is highly atypical, but even with the best practice, repetition does happen! Refactoring doesn't always work because it's not always possible (the obvious case is when the repetition is in the documentation). Obviously maintaining this source code is a nightmare. A slight typo in the documentation, or a minor bug in the implementation, is multiplied by however many repetitions was made. In fact, the best example happens to involve this exact class: Google Research Blog - Extra, Extra - Read All About It: Nearly All Binary Searches and Mergesorts are Broken (by Joshua Bloch, Software Engineer) The bug is a surprisingly subtle one, occurring in what many thought to be just a simple and straightforward algorithm. // int mid =(low + high) / 2; // the bug int mid = (low + high) >>> 1; // the fix The above line appears 11 times in the source code! So my questions are: How are these kinds of repetitive Java code/documentation handled in practice? How are they developed, maintained, and tested? Do you start with "the original", and make it as mature as possible, and then copy and paste as necessary and hope you didn't make a mistake? And if you did make a mistake in the original, then just fix it everywhere, unless you're comfortable with deleting the copies and repeating the whole replication process? And you apply this same process for the testing code as well? Would Java benefit from some sort of limited-use source code preprocessing for this kind of thing? Perhaps Sun has their own preprocessor to help write, maintain, document and test these kind of repetitive library code? A comment requested another example, so I pulled this one from Google Collections: com.google.common.base.Predicates lines 276-310 (AndPredicate) vs lines 312-346 (OrPredicate). The source for these two classes are identical, except for: AndPredicate vs OrPredicate (each appears 5 times in its class) "And(" vs Or(" (in the respective toString() methods) #and vs #or (in the @see Javadoc comments) true vs false (in apply; ! can be rewritten out of the expression) -1 /* all bits on */ vs 0 /* all bits off */ in hashCode() &= vs |= in hashCode()

    Read the article

  • Advantages of a build server?

    - by CraigS
    I am attempting to convince my colleagues to start using a build server and automated building for our Silverlight application. I have justified it on the grounds that we will catch integration errors more quickly, and will also always have a working dev copy of the system with the latest changes. But some still don't get it. What are the most significant advantages of using a Build Server for your project?

    Read the article

  • Removing duplicates without overriding hash method

    - by Javi
    Hello, I have a List which contains a list of objects and I want to remove from this list all the elements which have the same values in two of their attributes. I had though about doing something like this: List<Class1> myList; .... Set<Class1> mySet = new HashSet<Class1>(); mySet.addAll(myList); and overriding hash method in Class1 so it returns a number which depends only in the attributes I want to consider. The problem is that I need to do a different filtering in another part of the application so I can't override hash method in this way (I would need two different hash methods). What's the most efficient way of doing this filtering without overriding hash method? Thanks

    Read the article

  • automated email downloading and treading similar messages

    - by Michael
    Okay here it is : I have built an c# console app that downloads email, save attachments , and stores the subject, from, to, body to a MS SQL Database. I use aspNetPOP3 Component to do this. I have build a front end ASP.NET application to search and view the messages. Works great. Next Steps (this is where I need help ): Now I want my users (of the asp.net app) to reply to this message send the email to the originator, and tread any additional replies back and forth on from that original message(like basecamp). This would allow my end user not to have to log-in to a system, they just continue using email (our users can as well). The question is what should I use to determine if messages are related? Subject line I think is a bad approach. I believe the best method i've seen so far is way basecamp does it, but I'm not sure how that is done, here is a real example of the reply to address from a basecamp email (I've changed the host name): [email protected] Basecamp obviously are prefixing the pre-pending a tracking id to the email address, however , when I try this with my mail service, it's rejected. Is this the best approach, is there a way I can accomplish this, is there a better approach, or even a better email component tool? Thanks, Mike

    Read the article

  • jQuery global variable best practice & options?

    - by Kris Krause
    Currently I am working on a legacy web page that uses a ton of javascript, jquery, microsoft client javascript, and other libraries. The bottom line - I cannot rewrite the entire page from scratch as the business cannot justify it. So... it is what it is. Anyway, I need to pollute (I really tried not too) the global namespace with a variable. There are the three options I was thinking - Just store/retrieve it using a normal javascript declaration - var x = 0; Utilize jQuery to store/retrieve the value in a DOM tag - $("body").data("x", 0); Utilize a hidden form field, and set/retrieve the value with jQuery - $("whatever").data("x", 0); What does everyone think? Is there a better way? I looked at the existing pile of code and I do not believe the variable can be scoped in a function.

    Read the article

  • How to: mirror a staging server from a production server

    - by Zombies
    We want to mirror our current production app server (Oracle Application Server) onto our staging server. As it stands right now, various things are out of sync, and what may work in testing/QA can easily fail in production because of settings/patch/etc inconsistencies. I was thinking what would be best is to clone the entire disk daily and push it onto the staging server... Would this be the best method...?

    Read the article

  • Objective C -std=c99 usage

    - by Andy White
    Is there any reason why you shouldn't use the "-std=c99" flag for compiling Objective-C programs on Mac? The one feature in C99 that I really like is the ability to declare variables anywhere in code, rather than just at the top of methods, but does this flag causes any problems or create incompatibilities for iPhone or Cocoa apps?

    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 | 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76  | Next Page >