Search Results

Search found 28590 results on 1144 pages for 'best pactice'.

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 136/1144 | < Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >

  • Rapid Opening and Closing System.IO.StreamWriter in C#

    - by ccomet
    Suppose you have a file that you are programmatically logging information into with regards to a process. Kinda like your typical debug Console.WriteLine, but due to the nature of the code you're testing, you don't have a console to write onto so you have to write it somewhere like a file. My current program uses System.IO.StreamWriter for this task. My question is about the approach to using the StreamWriter. Is it better to open just one StreamWriter instance, do all of the writes, and close it when the entire process is done? Or is it a better idea to open a new StreamWriter instance to write a line into the file, then immediately close it, and do this for every time something needs to be written in? In the latter approach, this would probably be facilitated by a method that would do just that for a given message, rather than bloating the main process code with excessive amounts of lines. But having a method to aid in that implementation doesn't necessarily make it the better choice. Are there significant advantages to picking one approach or the other? Or are they functionally equivalent, leaving the choice on the shoulders of the programmer?

    Read the article

  • Arguments against Create or Update

    - by Nix
    Recently someone stated that they thought all Creates should be CreateOrUpdates. Instinctively i thought bad, but now I am trying to find out if I have any grounds. Situation interface IService{ void Create(Object a); void Update(Object a); } or interface IService{ void CreateOrUpdate(Object a); } My first thought is if you implemented everything CreateOrUpdate then you have no control if someone accidentally sends you wrong data, or concurrency issues where someone changes a "primary" field right before you call update.... But if you remove those cases, are there any other cons?

    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

  • What the reasons for/against returning 0 from main in ISO C++?

    - by Maulrus
    I know that the C++ standard says that return 0 is inserted at the end of main() if no return statement is given; however, I often see recently-written, standard-conforming C++ code that explicitly returns 0 at the end of main(). For what reasons would somebody want to explicitly return 0 if it's automatically done by the compiler?

    Read the article

  • What's a unit test? [closed]

    - by Tyler
    Possible Duplicates: What is unit testing and how do you do it? What is unit testing? I recognize that to 95% of you, this is a very WTF question. So. What's a unit test? I understand that essentially you're attempting to isolate atomic functionality but how do you test for that? When is it necessary? When is it ridiculous? Can you give an example? (Preferably in C? I mostly hear about it from Java devs on this site so maybe this is specific to Object Oriented languages? I really don't know.) I know many programmers swear by unit testing religiously. What's it all about? EDIT: Also, what's the ratio of time you typically spend writing unit tests to time spent writing new code?

    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

  • 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

  • Should I *always* import my file references into the database in drupal?

    - by sprugman
    I have a cck type with an image field, and a unique_id text field. The file name of the image is based on the unique_id. All of the content, including the image itself is being generated automatically via another process, and I'm parsing what that generates into nodes. Rather than creating separate fields for the id and the image, and doing an official import of the image into the files table, I'm tempted to only create the id field and create the file reference in the theme layer. I can think of pros and cons: 1) Theme Layer Approach Pros: makes the import process much less complex don't have to worry about syncing the db with the file system as things change more flexible -- I can move my images around more easily if I want Cons: maybe not as much The Drupal Way™ not as pure -- I'll wind up with more logic on the theme side. 2) Import Approach Pros: import method is required if we ever wanted to make the files private (we won't.) safer? Maybe I'll know if there's a problem with the image at import time, rather than view time. Since I'll be bulk importing, that might make a difference. if I delete a node through the admin interface, drupal might be able to delete the file for me, as well. Con: more complex import and maintenance All else being equal, simpler is always better, so I'm leaning toward #1. Are there any other issues I'm missing? (Since this is an open ended question, I guess I'll make it a community wiki, whatever that means.)

    Read the article

  • what if i keep my class members are public?

    - by anish
    In c++ instance variables are private by default,in Python variables are public by default i have two questions regarding the same:- 1: why Python have all the members are public by default? 2: People say you should your member data should be private what if i make my data to be public? what are the disadvantages of this approch? why it is a bad design?

    Read the article

  • Does MVC replace traditional manually created BLL?

    - by used2could
    I'm used to creating the UI, BLL, DAL by hand (some times I've used LINQ-to-SQL or SubSonic for the DAL). I've done several small projects using MVC since its release. On these projects I've still continued to write a BLL and DAL by hand and then incorporate those into the MVC's models/controllers. I'm looking to optimize my time on projects this seems like overkill and a potential waste of time. Question Would it be acceptable to roll a DAL such as SubSonic and directly use it in the Models/Controllers of my MVC web app? Now the models & controllers would act as the BLL. I just see this as a major timesaver to not have to worry about another tier. UPDATE: I just wanted to add that my concern isn't really with the DAL (I frequently use SubSonic and NH) but rather focus on the BLL. Sorry for the confusion.

    Read the article

  • MemoryStream instance timing help

    - by rod
    Hi All, Is it ok to instance a MemoryStream at the top of my method, do a bunch of stuff to it, and then use it? For instance: public static byte[] TestCode() { MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream(); ... ... whole bunch of stuff in between ... ... //finally using(m) { return m.ToArray(); } } Updated code public static byte[] GetSamplePDF() { using (MemoryStream m = new MemoryStream()) { Document document = new Document(); PdfWriter.GetInstance(document, m); document.Open(); PopulateTheDocument(document); document.Close(); return m.ToArray(); } } private static void PopulateTheDocument(Document document) { Table aTable = new Table(2, 2); aTable.AddCell("0.0"); aTable.AddCell("0.1"); aTable.AddCell("1.0"); aTable.AddCell("1.1"); document.Add(aTable); for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) { document.Add(new Phrase("Hello World, Hello Sun, Hello Moon, Hello Stars, Hello Sea, Hello Land, Hello People. ")); } } My point was to try to reuse building the byte code. In other words, build up any kind of document and then send it to TestCode() method.

    Read the article

  • Validation - Data Integrity

    - by Thomas
    A table can only store 10 records in a particular state, 10 users over 30 years for example, the others must be less than 30 years. It is a business rule and as such should be respected. How to ensure that state? Think: multiple users accessing this table.

    Read the article

  • Using a message class static method taking in an action to wrap Try/Catch

    - by Chris Marisic
    I have a Result object that lets me pass around a List of event messages and I can check whether an action was successful or not. I've realized I've written this code in alot of places Result result; try { //Do Something ... //New result is automatically a success for not having any errors in it result = new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { //Extension method that returns a Result from the exception result = exception.ToResult(); } if(result.Success) .... What I'm considering is replacing this usage with public static Result CatchException(Action action) { try { action(); return new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { return exception.ToResult(); } } And then use it like var result = Result.CatchException(() => _model.Save(something)); Does anyone feel there's anything wrong with this or that I'm trading reusability for obscurity?

    Read the article

  • Is this SQL select code following good practice?

    - by acidzombie24
    I am using sqlite and will port to mysql (5) later. I wanted to know if I am doing something I shouldnt be doing. I tried purposely to design so I'll compare to 0 instead of 1 (I changed hasApproved to NotApproved to do this, not a big deal and I haven't written any code). I was told I never need to write a subquery but I do here. My Votes table is just id, ip, postid (I don't think I can write that subquery as a join instead?) and that's pretty much all that is on my mind. Naming conventions I don't really care about since the tables are created via reflection and is all over the place. select id, name, body, upvotes, downvotes, (select 1 from UpVotes where IPAddr=? AND post=Post.id) as myup, (select 1 from DownVotes where IPAddr=@0 AND post=Post.id) as mydown from Post where flag = '0' limit ?, ?"

    Read the article

  • What do you do in your source control repository when you start a rewrite of a program?

    - by Max Schmeling
    I wrote an application a while back and have been maintaining it for a while now, but it's gotten to the point where there's several major new features to be added, a ton of changes that need made, and I know quite a few things I could do better, so I'm starting a rewrite of the entire program (using bits and pieces from original). My question is, what do you do with SVN at this point? Should I put the new version somewhere else, or should I delete the files I no longer need, add the new files, and just treat it like normal development in SVN? How have you handled this in the past?

    Read the article

  • Can I use an abstract class instead of a private __construct() when creating a singleton in PHP?

    - by Pheter
    When creating a Singleton in PHP, I ensure that it cannot be instantiated by doing the following: class Singleton { private function __construct() {} private function __clone() {} public static function getInstance() {} } However, I realised that defining a class as 'abstract' means that it cannot be instantiated. So is there anything wrong with doing the following instead: abstract class Singleton { public static function getInstance() {} } The second scenario allows me to write fewer lines of code which would be nice. (Not that it actually makes much of a difference.)

    Read the article

  • Should I start with Trac 0.12 ?

    - by mree
    I'm going to start using Trac for the first time. From what I've gathered, the latest 0.12 is capable of supporting multiple project easily (which is something I will need since I got about 5 projects). However, it seems 0.12 is still in the development (0.12-dev). So, my question is, is it good enough for a newbie in Trac like me to use it? Does anyone has any experience using it ? It will be installed on a Linux server. BTW, I'll only be using the basic functions such as svn browser, wiki, tickets and others.

    Read the article

  • jquery: How to deal with 'this' in ajax callbacks

    - by Svish
    I currently have code similar to this for a form: $('#some-form') .submit(function() { // Make sure we are not already busy if($(this).data('busy')) return false; $(this).data('busy', true); // Do post $.post("some/url", $(this).serialize(), function(data) { if(data.success) // Success is a boolean I set in the result on the server { // Deal with data } else { // Display error } $('#some-form') .removeData('busy'); }); return false; }); My issue is that I would like to somehow remove the need for knowing the form id in the post callback. In the end where I remove the busy data from the form, I'd like to somehow not have that hard coded. Is there any way I can do this? Is there a way I can hand whatever is in this to the post callback function? Since I know the id right now, I can get around it by doing what I have done, but I'd like to know how to not be dependant on knowing the id, since often I don't have an id. (For example if I have a link in each row in a table and all the rows have the same click handler.

    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 | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >