Search Results

Search found 28593 results on 1144 pages for 'best pratices'.

Page 135/1144 | < Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >

• Securing input of private / protected methods?

  - by ts

  Hello, normally, all sane developers are trying to secure input of all public methods (casting to proper types, validating, sanitizing etc.) My question is: are you in your code validating also parameters passed to protected / private methods? In my opinion it is not necessary, if you securize properly parameters of public methods and return values from outside (other classes, db, user input etc...). But I am constantly facing frameworks and apps (ie. prestashop to name one) where validation is often repeated in method call, in method body and once again for securize returned value - which, I think, is creating performace overhead and is also a sign of bad design.

  Read the article

• Why is short project lifetime and other situation-specific reasons used to excuse crappy code? [clos

  - by sharptooth

  Every now and then (including on SO) people say things implying that "if the project is short lived you can leave obvious defects there" or "that memory leak only accounts for 100 bytes per whole program lifetime and could be left". Now in my practice I always reuse company-owned code to the greatest extent I can. Like if I need something and I can find it in the company codebase I take it from there and reuse or adapt. This means that any crappy code will be reused as well and I might notice or not notice defects therein. So the defect in some "test we only need for a month" can slip into a proram we ship to customers. And a leak that "only accounted for 100 bytes per lifetime" now could account for 100 bytes 10 times per second in a server application intended to run for months. That's why I don't understand why excuses like that are offered. Is our compamy the only one having a source control? Or are we the only company that requires writing human-readable code? Could anyone shed a light on why people seriously offer such excuses?

  Read the article

• Is it a good idea to define a variable in a local block for a case of a switch statement?

  - by Paperflyer

  I have a rather long switch-case statement. Some of the cases are really short and trivial. A few are longer and need some variables that are never used anywhere else, like this: switch (action) { case kSimpleAction: // Do something simple break; case kComplexAction: { int specialVariable = 5; // Do something complex with specialVariable } break; } The alternative would be to declare that variable before going into the switch like this: int specialVariable = 5; switch (action) { case kSimpleAction: // Do something simple break; case kComplexAction: // Do something complex with specialVariable break; } This can get rather confusing since it is not clear to which case the variable belongs and it uses some unnecessary memory. However, I have never seen this usage anywhere else. Do you think it is a good idea to declare variables locally in a block for a single case?

  Read the article

• Python-based password tracker (or dictionary)

  - by Arrieta

  Hello: Where we work we need to remember about 10 long passwords which need to change every so often. I would like to create a utility which can potentially save these passwords in an encrypted file so that we can keep track of them. I can think of some sort of dictionary passwd = {'host1':'pass1', 'host2':'pass2'}, etc, but I don't know what to do about encryption (absolutely zero experience in the topic). So, my question is really two questions: Is there a Linux-based utility which lets you do that? If you were to program it in Python, how would you go about it? A perk of approach two, would be for the software to update the ssh public keys after the password has been changed (you know the pain of updating ~15 tokens once you change your password). As it can be expected, I have zero control over the actual network configuration and the management of scp keys. I can only hope to provide a simple utility to me an my very few coworkers so that, if we need to, we can retrieve a password on demand. Cheers.

  Read the article

• Best UML Application for MAC OSX / Cross Platform

  - by BigMadKev

  What is the best mac based or even better cross platform UML Application available both costed and opensource / freeware?

  Read the article

• SELECT product from subclass: How many queries do I need?

  - by Stefano

  I am building a database similar to the one described here where I have products of different type, each type with its own attributes. I report a short version for convenience product_type ============ product_type_id INT product_type_name VARCHAR product ======= product_id INT product_name VARCHAR product_type_id INT -> Foreign key to product_type.product_type_id ... (common attributes to all product) magazine ======== magazine_id INT title VARCHAR product_id INT -> Foreign key to product.product_id ... (magazine-specific attributes) web_site ======== web_site_id INT name VARCHAR product_id INT -> Foreign key to product.product_id ... (web-site specific attributes) This way I do not need to make a huge table with a column for each attribute of different product types (most of which will then be NULL) How do I SELECT a product by product.product_id and see all its attributes? Do I have to make a query first to know what type of product I am dealing with and then, through some logic, make another query to JOIN the right tables? Or is there a way to join everything together? (if, when I retrieve the information about a product_id there are a lot of NULL, it would be fine at this point). Thank you

  Read the article

• Is it ok to throw NotImplemented exception in virtual methods?

  - by Axarydax

  I have a base class for some plugin-style stuff, and there are some methods that are absolutely required to be implemented. I currently declare those in the base class as virtual, for example public virtual void Save { throw new NotImplementedException(); } and in the descendand I have a public override void Save() { //do stuff } Is it a good practice to throw a NotImplementedException there? The descendand classes could for example be the modules for handling different file formats. Thanks

  Read the article

• Java: Inputting text from a file using split

  - by 00PS

  I am inputting an adjacency list for a graph. There are three columns of data (vertex, destination, edge) separated by a single space. Here is my implementation so far: FileStream in = new FileStream("input1.txt"); Scanner s = new Scanner(in); String buffer; String [] line = null; while (s.hasNext()) { buffer = s.nextLine(); line = buffer.split("\\s+"); g.add(line[0]); System.out.println("Added vertex " + line[0] + "."); g.addEdge(line[0], line[1], Integer.parseInt(line[2])); System.out.println("Added edge from " + line[0] + " to " + line[1] + " with a weight of " + Integer.parseInt(line[2]) + "."); } System.out.println("Size of graph = " + g.size()); Here is the output: Added vertex a. Added edge from a to b with a weight of 9. Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException at structure5.GraphListDirected.addEdge(GraphListDirected.java:93) at Driver.main(Driver.java:28) I was under the impression that line = buffer.split("\\s+"); would return a 2 dimensional array of Strings to the variable line. It seemed to work the first time but not the second. Any thoughts? I would also like some feedback on my implementation of this problem. Is there a better way? Anything to help out a novice! :)

  Read the article

• Should I use block identifiers ("end;") in my code?

  - by JosephStyons

  Code Complete says it is good practice to always use block identifiers, both for clarity and as a defensive measure. Since reading that book, I've been doing that religiously. Sometimes it seems excessive though, as in the case below. Is Steve McConnell right to insist on always using block identifiers? Which of these would you use? //naughty and brief with myGrid do for currRow := FixedRows to RowCount - 1 do if RowChanged(currRow) then if not(RecordExists(currRow)) then InsertNewRecord(currRow) else UpdateExistingRecord(currRow); //well behaved and verbose with myGrid do begin for currRow := FixedRows to RowCount - 1 do begin if RowChanged(currRow) then begin if not(RecordExists(currRow)) then begin InsertNewRecord(currRow); end //if it didn't exist, so insert it else begin UpdateExistingRecord(currRow); end; //else it existed, so update it end; //if any change end; //for each row in the grid end; //with myGrid

  Read the article

• Request/Response pattern in SOA implementation

  - by UserControl

  In some enterprise-like project (.NET, WCF) i saw that all service contracts accept a single Request parameter and always return Response: [DataContract] public class CustomerRequest : RequestBase { [DataMember] public long Id { get; set; } } [DataContract] public class CustomerResponse : ResponseBase { [DataMember] public CustomerInfo Customer { get; set; } } where RequestBase/ResponseBase contain common stuff like ErrorCode, Context, etc. Bodies of both service methods and proxies are wrapped in try/catch, so the only way to check for errors is looking at ResponseBase.ErrorCode (which is enumeration). I want to know how this technique is called and why it's better compared to passing what's needed as method parameters and using standard WCF context passing/faults mechanisms?

  Read the article

• One class per file rule in .NET?

  - by Joan Venge

  I follow this rule but some of my colleagues disagree with it and argue that if a class is smaller it can be left in the same file with other class(es). Another argument I hear all the time is "Even Microsoft don't do this, so why should we?" What's the general consensus on this? Are there cases where this should be avoided?

  Read the article

• #Define Compiler Directive in C#

  - by pm_2

  In C, I could declare a compiler directive as follows: #define MY_NUMBER 10 However, in C#, I only appear to be able to do this: #define MY_NUMBER Which is obviously useless in this case. Is this correct, or am I doing something wrong? If not, can anyone suggest a way of doing this, either at namespace or solution level? I thought of maybe creating a static class, but that seems to be overkill for one value.

  Read the article

• Lock thread using somthing other than a object

  - by Scott Chamberlain

  when using a lock does the thing you are locking on have to be a object. For example is this legal static DateTime NextCleanup = DateTime.Now; const TimeSpan CleanupInterval = new TimeSpan(1, 0, 0); private static void DoCleanup() { lock ((object)NextCleanup) { if (NextCleanup < DateTime.Now) { NextCleanup = DateTime.Now.Add(CleanupInterval); System.Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(new System.Threading.WaitCallback(cleanupThread)); } } return; } EDIT-- From reading SLaks' responce I know the above code would be not valid but would this be? static MyClass myClass = new MyClass(); private static void DoCleanup() { lock (myClass) { // } return; }

  Read the article

• Should every class have its own namespace?

  - by thehouse

  Something that has been troubling me for a while: The current wisdom is that types should be kept in a namespace that only contains functions which are part of the type's non-member interface (see C++ Coding Standards Sutter and Alexandrescu or here) to prevent ADL pulling in unrelated definitions. Does this imply that all classes must have a namespace of their own? If we assume that a class may be augmented in the future by the addition of non-member functions, then it can never be safe to put two types in the same namespace as either one of them may introduce non-member functions that could interfere with the other. The reason I ask is that namespaces are becoming cumbersome for me. I'm writing a header-only library and I find myself using classes names such as project::component::class_name::class_name. Their implementations call helper functions but as these can't be in the same namespace they also have to be fully qualified!

  Read the article

• Books on Debugging Techniques?

  - by zooropa

  Are there any books on debugging techniques? A friend of mine is learning to code and he asked me this question. I told him I don't know of any. Is it that you just have to go through the School of Hard Knocks to learn?

  Read the article

• How to provide global functionality in multi-user database app

  - by Mike B

  I have been building a multi-user database application (in C#/WPF 4.0) that manages tasks for all employees of a company. I now need to add some functionality such as sending an email reminder to someone when a critical task is due. How should this be done? Obviously I don’t want every instance of the program to be performing this function (Heh each user would get 10+ emails). Should I add the capability to the application as a "Mode" and then run a copy on the database server in this mode or would it be better to create a new app altogether to perform "Global" type tasks? Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• Finding relative libraries when using symlinks to ruby executables

  - by dgtized

  Imagine you have an executable foo.rb, with libraries bar.rb layed out in the following manner: <root>/bin/foo.rb <root>/lib/bar.rb In the header of foo.rb you place the following require to bring in functionality in bar.rb: require File.dirname(__FILE__)+"../lib/bar.rb" This works fine so long as all calls to foo.rb are direct. If you put as say $HOME/project, and symlink foo.rb into $HOME/usr/bin, then __FILE__ resolves to $HOME/usr/bin/foo.rb, and is thus unable to locate bar.rb in relation to the dirname for foo.rb. I realize that packaging systems such as rubygems fix this by creating a namespace to search for the library, and that it is also possible to adjust the load_path using $: to include $HOME/project/lib, but it seems as if a more simple solution should exist. Has anyone had experience with this problem and found a useful solution or recipe?

  Read the article

• C++ include header conventions

  - by user231536

  Suppose I have a file X.h which defines a class X, whose methods are implemented in X.cc. The file X.h includes a file Y.h because it needs Y to define class X. In X.cc, we can refer to Y because X.h has already included Y.h. Should I still include Y.h in X.cc ? I understand that I don't need to and I can depend on header guards to prevent multiple inclusions. But on the one hand, including Y.h makes X.cc a little more independent of X.h (can't be completely independent of course). What is the accepted practice? Another example: including <iostream> in both .h and .cc files. I see some people do this and some don't.

  Read the article

• Building a life-critical System using Agile

  - by Ben Breen

  Looking at the general trend of comments in my question about Building an Aircraft using Agile, the biggest problem other than cost appears to be safety. Do people feel that it is not possible to build a safe system (or prove it is safe) using agile? Doesn’t all the iterative testing mitigate this? Is it likely that a piece of software developed using agile will never be as reliable as counterparts such as waterfall?

  Read the article

• Should you always write code for else cases that "can never happen"?

  - by johnswamps

  Take some code like if (person.IsMale()) { doGuyStuff(); } else { doGirlOtherStuff(); } (Yes, I realize this is bad OO code, it's an example) Should this be written so that to explicitly check if person.isFemale(), and then add a new else that throws an exception? Or maybe you're checking values in an enum, or something like that. You think that no one will add new elements to the enum, but who knows? "Can never happen" sounds like famous last words.

  Read the article

• Are upper bounds of indexed ranges always assumed to be exclusive?

  - by polygenelubricants

  So in Java, whenever an indexed range is given, the upper bound is almost always exclusive. From java.lang.String: substring(int beginIndex, int endIndex) Returns a new string that is a substring of this string. The substring begins at the specified beginIndex and extends to the character at index endIndex - 1 From java.util.Arrays: copyOfRange(T[] original, int from, int to) from - the initial index of the range to be copied, inclusive to - the final index of the range to be copied, exclusive. From java.util.BitSet: set(int fromIndex, int toIndex) fromIndex - index of the first bit to be set. toIndex - index after the last bit to be set. As you can see, it does look like Java tries to make it a consistent convention that upper bounds are exclusive. My questions are: Is this the official authoritative recommendation? Are there notable violations that we should be wary of? Is there a name for this system? (ala "0-based" vs "1-based")

  Read the article

• Number of characters recommended for a statement

  - by liaK

  Hi, I have been using Qt 4.5 and so do C++. I have been told that it's a standard practice to maintain the length of each statement in the application to 80 characters. Even in Qt creator we can make a right border visible so that we can know whether we are crossing the 80 characters limit. But my question is, Is it really a standard being followed? Because in my application, I use indenting and all, so it's quite common that I cross the boundary. Other cases include, there might be a error statement which will be a bit explanatory one and which is in an inner block of code, so it too will cross the boundary. Usually my variable names look bit lengthier so as to make the names meaningful. When I call the functions of the variable names, again I will cross. Function names will not be in fewer characters either. I agree a horizontal scroll bar shows up and it's quite annoying to move back and forth. So, for function calls including multiple arguments, when the boundary is reached I will make the forth coming arguments in the new line. But besides that, for a single statement (for e.g a very long error message which is in double quotes " " or like longfun1()->longfun2()->...) if I use an \ and split into multiple lines, the readability becomes very poor. So is it a good practice to have those statement length restrictions? If this restriction in statement has to be followed? I don't think it depends on a specific language anyway. I added C++ and Qt tags since if it might. Any pointers regarding this are welcome.

  Read the article

• Is it good practice to initialize array in C/C++?

  - by sand

  I recently encountered a case where I need to compare two files (golden and expected) for verification of test results and even though the data written to both the files were same, the files does not match. On further investigation, I found that there is a structure which contains some integers and a char array of 64 bytes, and not all the bytes of char array were getting used in most of the cases and unused fields from the array contain random data and that was causing the mismatch. This brought me ask the question whether it is good practice to initialize the array in C/C++ as well, as it is done in Java?

  Read the article

• Why cast null before checking if object is equal to null?

  - by jacerhea

  I was looking through the "Domain Oriented N-Layered .NET 4.0 Sample App" project and ran across some code that I do not understand. In this project they often use syntax like the following to check arguments for null: public GenericRepository(IQueryableContext context,ITraceManager traceManager) { if (context == (IQueryableContext)null) throw new ArgumentNullException("context", Resources.Messages.exception_ContainerCannotBeNull); Why would you cast null to the type of the object you are checking for null?

  Read the article

• Is there a case for parameterising using Abstract classes rather than Interfaces?

  - by Chris

  I'm currently developing a component based API that is heavily stateful. The top level components implement around a dozen interfaces each. The stock top-level components therefore sit ontop of a stack of Abstract implementations which in turn contain multiple mixin implementations and implement multiple mixin interfaces. So far, so good (I hope). The problem is that the base functionality is extremely complex to implement (1,000s of lines in 5 layers of base classes) and therefore I do not wish for component writers to implement the interfaces themselves but rather to extend my base classes (where all the boiler plate code is already written). If the API therefore accepts interfaces rather than references to the Abstract implementation that I wish for component writers to extends, then I have a risk that the implementer will not perform the validation that is both required and assumed by other areas of code. Therefore, my question is, is it sometimes valid to paramerise API methods using an abstract implementation reference rather than a reference to the interface(s) that it implements? Do you have an example of a well-designed API that uses this technique or am I trying to talk myself into bad-practice?

  Read the article

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