Search Results

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

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 >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Which user account to assign as owner when attaching an SQL Server database?

    - by FreshCode
    This is a simple database security & performance question, but I've always used either a special user (eg. mydbuser), or Windows' built-in NETWORK SECURITY account as the owner when attaching databases to my SQL Server instances. When deploying my database to a production server, is there a specific user I should stick to or avoid? I would think that using an account with a set password could open the database up to a potential security issue.

    Read the article

  • Reference table values in a war against magic numbers

    - by Alex N.
    This question bugged me for years now and can't seem to find good solution still. I working in PHP and Java but it sounds like this maybe language-agnostic :) Say we have a standard status reference table that holds status ids for some kind of entity. Further let's assume the table will have just 5 values, and will remain like this for a long time, maybe edited occasionally with addition of a new status. When you fetch a row and need to see what status it is you have 2 options(as I see it at least) - put it straight ID values(magic numbers that is) or use a named constant. Latter seem much cleaner, the question though is where those named constants should leave? In a model class? In a class that uses this particular constant? Somewhere else?

    Read the article

  • 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

  • How should I best store these files?

    - by Triton Man
    I have a set of image files, they are generally very small, between 5k and 100k. They can be any size though, upwards of 50mb but this is very rare. When these images are put into the system they are not ever modified. There is about 50 TB of these images total. They are currently chunked and stored in BLOBs in Oracle, but we want to change this since it requires special software to extract them. These images are access sometimes at a rate of over 100 requests per second among about 10 servers. I'm thinking about Hadoop or Cassandra, but I really don't know which would be best or how best to index them.

    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

  • 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

  • How do you remove/clean-up code which is no longer used?

    - by clarke ching
    So, we have a project which had to be radically descoped in order to ship on time. It's got a lot of code left in it which is not actually used. I want to clean up the code, removing any dead-wood. I have the authority to do it and I can convince people that it's a commercially sensible thing to do. [I have a lot of automated unit tests, some automated acceptance tests and a team of testers who can manually regression test.] My problem: I'm a manager and I don't know technically how to go about it. Any help?

    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

  • 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

  • Identifying a class which is extending an abstract class

    - by Simon A. Eugster
    Good Evening, I'm doing a major refactoring of http://wiki2xhtml.sourceforge.net/ to finally get better overview and maintainability. (I started the project when I decided to start programming, so – you get it, right? ;)) At the moment I wonder how to solve the problem I'll describe now: Every file will be put through several parsers (like one for links, one for tables, one for images, etc.): public class WikiLinks extends WikiTask { ... } public class WikiTables extends WikiTask { ... } The files will then be parsed about this way: public void parse() { if (!parse) return; WikiTask task = new WikiLinks(); do { task.parse(this); } while ((task = task.nextTask()) != null); } Sometimes I may want to use no parser at all (for files that only need to be copied), or only a chosen one (e.g. for testing purposes). So before running task.parse() I need to check whether this certain parser is actually necessary/desired. (Perhaps via Blacklist or Whitelist.) What would you suggest for comparing? An ID for each WikiTask (how to do?)? Comparing the task Object itself against a new instance of a WikiTask (overhead)?

    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

  • What would be my best MySQL Synchronization method?

    - by Kerry
    We're moving a social media service to be on separate data centers with global load balancing, as our other hosting provider's entire data center went down. Twice. This means that both websites need to be synchronized in some sense -- I'm less worried about the code of the pages, that's easy enough to sync, but they need to have the same database data. From my research on SO, it seems MySQL Replication is a good option, but the MySQL manual, for scaling out, says that its best when there are far more reads then there are writes/updates: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/replication-solutions-scaleout.html In our case, it's about equal. We're getting around 200-300 thousand requests a day right now, and we can grow rapidly. Every request is both a read and write request. What would be the best method or tool to handle this?

    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

  • which type is best for three radiobuttons?

    - by Manog
    Maybe you consider this question trivial but im just curious what is your opinion. I have three radiobuttons. "Show blue", "Show red" and "Show all". I did it with nullable boolean. There is collumn in database where blue is 0 and red is 1 so in metode i have to translate bool to int to compare those values (i do it in c#).Of course it works, but i wonder if it is the best solution. And question is wich type is best in this case? nullable bool, int, or maybe string?

    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

  • help me to choose between two designs

    - by alex
    // stupid title, but I could not think anything smarter I have a code (see below, sorry for long code but it's very-very simple): namespace Option1 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public AuxClass1 AuxClass { get { return _auxClass; } set { _auxClass = value; } } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } namespace Option2 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public string Field1 { get { return _auxClass.Field1; } set { _auxClass.Field1 = value; } } public void Method1() { _auxClass.Method1(); } public void Method2() { _auxClass.Method2(); } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { // Option1 Option1.MainClass mainClass1 = new Option1.MainClass(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Field1 = "string1"; mainClass1.AuxClass.Method1(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Method2(); // Option2 Option2.MainClass mainClass2 = new Option2.MainClass(); mainClass2.Field1 = "string2"; mainClass2.Method1(); mainClass2.Method2(); Console.ReadKey(); } } What option (option1 or option2) do you prefer ? In which cases should I use option1 or option2 ? Is there any special name for option1 or option2 (composition, aggregation) ?

    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

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 >