Search Results

Search found 30894 results on 1236 pages for 'best practice'.

Page 137/1236 | < Previous Page | 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144  | Next Page >

  • File descriptor limits and default stack sizes

    - by Charles
    Where I work we build and distribute a library and a couple complex programs built on that library. All code is written in C and is available on most 'standard' systems like Windows, Linux, Aix, Solaris, Darwin. I started in the QA department and while running tests recently I have been reminded several times that I need to remember to set the file descriptor limits and default stack sizes higher or bad things will happen. This is particularly the case with Solaris and now Darwin. Now this is very strange to me because I am a believer in 0 required environment fiddling to make a product work. So I am wondering if there are times where this sort of requirement is a necessary evil, or if we are doing something wrong. Edit: Great comments that describe the problem and a little background. However I do not believe I worded the question well enough. Currently, we require customers, and hence, us the testers, to set these limits before running our code. We do not do this programatically. And this is not a situation where they MIGHT run out, under normal load our programs WILL run out and seg fault. So rewording the question, is requiring the customer to change these ulimit values to run our software to be expected on some platforms, ie, Solaris, Aix, or are we as a company making it to difficult for these users to get going? Bounty: I added a bounty to hopefully get a little more information on what other companies are doing to manage these limits. Can you set these pragmatically? Should we? Should our programs even be hitting these limits or could this be a sign that things might be a bit messy under the covers? That is really what I want to know, as a perfectionist a seemingly dirty program really bugs me.

    Read the article

  • Git-Based Source Control in the Enterprise: Suggested Tools and Practices?

    - by Bob Murphy
    I use git for personal projects and think it's great. It's fast, flexible, powerful, and works great for remote development. But now it's mandated at work and, frankly, we're having problems. Out of the box, git doesn't seem to work well for centralized development in a large (20+ developer) organization with developers of varying abilities and levels of git sophistication - especially compared with other source-control systems like Perforce or Subversion, which are aimed at that kind of environment. (Yes, I know, Linus never intended it for that.) But - for political reasons - we're stuck with git, even if it sucks for what we're trying to do with it. Here are some of the things we're seeing: The GUI tools aren't mature Using the command line tools, it's far to easy to screw up a merge and obliterate someone else's changes It doesn't offer per-user repository permissions beyond global read-only or read-write privileges If you have a permission to ANY part of a repository, you can do that same thing to EVERY part of the repository, so you can't do something like make a small-group tracking branch on the central server that other people can't mess with. Workflows other than "anything goes" or "benevolent dictator" are hard to encourage, let alone enforce It's not clear whether it's better to use a single big repository (which lets everybody mess with everything) or lots of per-component repositories (which make for headaches trying to synchronize versions). With multiple repositories, it's also not clear how to replicate all the sources someone else has by pulling from the central repository, or to do something like get everything as of 4:30 yesterday afternoon. However, I've heard that people are using git successfully in large development organizations. If you're in that situation - or if you generally have tools, tips and tricks for making it easier and more productive to use git in a large organization where some folks are not command line fans - I'd love to hear what you have to suggest. BTW, I've asked a version of this question already on LinkedIn, and got no real answers but lots of "gosh, I'd love to know that too!"

    Read the article

  • Is there a naming convention for a method that should set the properties of the passed object.

    - by Genady Sergeev
    Hello, I am writing a method that will set the properties of an object passed as a parameter. The method accepts one parameter of type interface and the return type of the method is the same interface. I was wondering if there is some kind of a naming convention for such methods. I was thinking of something like: FillInInterfaceTypeData or InitInterfaceTypeData but both sound clumsy to me. How do you think?

    Read the article

  • How to write a good PHP database insert using an associative array

    - by Tom
    In PHP, I want to insert into a database using data contained in a associative array of field/value pairs. Example: $_fields = array('field1'=>'value1','field2'=>'value2','field3'=>'value3'); The resulting SQL insert should look as follows: INSERT INTO table (field1,field2,field3) VALUES ('value1','value2','value3'); I have come up with the following PHP one-liner: mysql_query("INSERT INTO table (".implode(',',array_keys($_fields)).") VALUES (".implode(',',array_values($_fields)).")"); It separates the keys and values of the the associative array and implodes to generate a comma-separated string . The problem is that it does not escape or quote the values that were inserted into the database. To illustrate the danger, Imagine if $_fields contained the following: $_fields = array('field1'=>"naustyvalue); drop table members; --"); The following SQL would be generated: INSERT INTO table (field1) VALUES (naustyvalue); drop table members; --; Luckily, multiple queries are not supported, nevertheless quoting and escaping are essential to prevent SQL injection vulnerabilities. How do you write your PHP Mysql Inserts? Note: PDO or mysqli prepared queries aren't currently an option for me because the codebase already uses mysql extensively - a change is planned but it'd take alot of resources to convert?

    Read the article

  • Is it good to subclass a class only to separate some functional parts?

    - by prostynick
    Suppose we have abstract class A (all examples in C#) public abstract class A { private Foo foo; public A() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //a lot of other stuff... } But we are able to split it into two classes A and B: public abstract class A { public A() { } //a lot of stuff... } public abstract class B : A { private Foo foo; public B() : base() { } public void DoSomethingUsingFoo() { //stuff } public void DoSomethingElseUsingFoo() { //stuff } //nothing else or just some overrides of A stuff } That's good, but we are 99.99% sure, that no one will ever subclass A, because functionality in B is very important. Is it still good to have two separate classes only to split some code into two parts and to separate functional elements?

    Read the article

  • How to test method call order with Moq

    - by Finglas
    At the moment I have: [Test] public void DrawDrawsAllScreensInTheReverseOrderOfTheStack() { // Arrange. var screenMockOne = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screenMockTwo = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screens = new List<IScreen>(); screens.Add(screenMockOne.Object); screens.Add(screenMockTwo.Object); var stackOfScreensMock = new Mock<IScreenStack>(); stackOfScreensMock.Setup(s => s.ToArray()).Returns(screens.ToArray()); var screenManager = new ScreenManager(stackOfScreensMock.Object); // Act. screenManager.Draw(new Mock<GameTime>().Object); // Assert. screenMockOne.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock one"); screenMockTwo.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock two"); } But the order in which I draw my objects in the production code does not matter. I could do one first, or two it doesn't matter. However it should matter as the draw order is important. How do you (using Moq) ensure methods are called in a certain order? Edit I got rid of that test. The draw method has been removed from my unit tests. I'll just have to manually test it works. The reversing of the order though was taken into a seperate test class where it was tested so it's not all bad. Thanks for the link about the feature they are looking into. I sure hope it gets added soon, very handy.

    Read the article

  • Exposing a service to external systems - How should I design the contract?

    - by Larsi
    Hi! I know this question is been asked before here but still I'm not sure what to select. My service will be called from many 3 party system in the enterprise. I'm almost sure the information the service will collect (MyBigClassWithAllInfo) will change during the products lifetime. Is it still a good idea to expose objects? This is basically what my two alternatives: [ServiceContract] public interface ICollectStuffService { [OperationContract] SetDataResponseMsg SetData(SetDataRequestMsg dataRequestMsg); } // Alternative 1: Put all data inside a xml file [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public string Body { get; set; } [DataMember] public string OtherPropertiesThatMightBeHandy { get; set; } // ?? } // Alternative 2: Expose the objects [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public Header Header { get; set; } [DataMember] public MyBigClassWithAllInfo ExposedObject { get; set; } } public class SetDataResponseMsg { [DataMember] public ServiceError Error { get; set; } } The xml file would look like this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <Message>   <Header>     <InfoAboutTheSender>...</InfoAboutTheSender>   </Header>   <StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo>   <stuff1>...</stuff1> </StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo> </Message> Any thought on how this service should be implemented? Thanks Larsi

    Read the article

  • How many address fields would you use for a UK database?

    - by Draemon
    Address records are probably used in most database, but I've seen a number of slightly different sets of fields used to store them. The number of fields seems to vary from 3-7, and sometimes all fields are simple labelled address1..addressN, other times given specific meaning (town, city, etc). This is UK specific, though I'm open to comments about the rest of the world too. Here you need the first line of the address (actually just the number) and the post code to identify the address - everything else is mostly an added bonus. I'm currently favouring: Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 Town County Post Code We could add Country if we ever needed it (unlikely). What do you think? Is this too little, too much?

    Read the article

  • Why is debugging better in an IDE?

    - by Bill Karwin
    I've been a software developer for over twenty years, programming in C, Perl, SQL, Java, PHP, JavaScript, and recently Python. I've never had a problem I could not debug using some careful thought, and well-placed debugging print statements. I respect that many people say that my techniques are primitive, and using a real debugger in an IDE is much better. Yet from my observation, IDE users don't appear to debug faster or more successfully than I can, using my stone knives and bear skins. I'm sincerely open to learning the right tools, I've just never been shown a compelling advantage to using visual debuggers. Moreover, I have never read a tutorial or book that showed how to debug effectively using an IDE, beyond the basics of how to set breakpoints and display the contents of variables. What am I missing? What makes IDE debugging tools so much more effective than thoughtful use of diagnostic print statements? Can you suggest resources (tutorials, books, screencasts) that show the finer techniques of IDE debugging? Sweet answers! Thanks much to everyone for taking the time. Very illuminating. I voted up many, and voted none down. Some notable points: Debuggers can help me do ad hoc inspection or alteration of variables, code, or any other aspect of the runtime environment, whereas manual debugging requires me to stop, edit, and re-execute the application (possibly requiring recompilation). Debuggers can attach to a running process or use a crash dump, whereas with manual debugging, "steps to reproduce" a defect are necessary. Debuggers can display complex data structures, multi-threaded environments, or full runtime stacks easily and in a more readable manner. Debuggers offer many ways to reduce the time and repetitive work to do almost any debugging tasks. Visual debuggers and console debuggers are both useful, and have many features in common. A visual debugger integrated into an IDE also gives you convenient access to smart editing and all the other features of the IDE, in a single integrated development environment (hence the name).

    Read the article

  • Any reason not to always log stack traces?

    - by Chris Knight
    Encountered a frustrating problem in our application today which came down to an ArrayIndexOutOfBounds exception being thrown. The exception's type was just about all that was logged which is fairly useless (but, oh dear legacy app, we still love you, mostly). I've redeployed the application with a change which logs the stack trace on exception handling (and immediately found the root cause of the problem) and wondered why no one else did this before. Do you generally log the stack trace and is there any reason you wouldn't do this? Bonus points if you can explain (why, not how) the rationale behind having to jump hoops in java to get a string representation of a stack trace!

    Read the article

  • How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately?

    - by sharptooth
    According to Wikipedia (the table at the page bottom), the earliest known version control systems were CVS and TeamWare both known from year 1990. How can it be? Software development has been here from at most 1960's and I honestly can't imagine working with codebase without version control. How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately compared to software development?

    Read the article

  • YAGNI and database creation scripts

    - by Daniel Straight
    Right now, I have code which creates the database (just a few CREATE queries on a SQLite database) in my main database access class. This seems unnecessary as I have no intention of ever using the code. I would just need it if something went wrong and I needed to recreate the database. Should I... Leave things as they are, even though the database creation code is about a quarter of my file size. Move the database-creation code to a separate script. It's likely I'll be running it manually if I ever need to run it again anyway, and that would put it out-of-sight-out-of-mind while working on the main code. Delete the database-creation code and rely on revision control if I ever find myself needing it again.

    Read the article

  • How do you deal with naming conventions for rails partials?

    - by DJTripleThreat
    For example, I might have an partial something like: <div> <%= f.label :some_field %><br/> <%= f.text_field :some_field %> </div> which works for edit AND new actions. I also will have one like: <div> <%=h some_field %> </div> for the show action. So you would think that all your partials go under one directory like shared or something. The problem that I see with this is that both of these would cause a conflict since they are essentially the same partial but for different actions so what I do is: <!-- for edit and new actions --> <%= render "shared_edit/some_partial" ... %> <!-- for show action --> <%= render "shared_show/some_partial" ... %> How do you handle this? Is a good idea or even possible to maybe combine all of these actions into one partial and render different parts by determining what the current action is?

    Read the article

  • How do you keep track of what you have released in production?

    - by systempuntoout
    Tipically a deploy in production does not involve just a mere source code update (build) but requires a lot of other important tasks like for example: Db scripts (tables, query..) Configuration files (differents from test\production) Batch to schedule Executables to move to the correct path Etc. etc. In our company we just send an email to a "Release email address" describing the tasks in order, which changeset need to be published (TFS), which SP need to be updated, db scripts and so on. I believe there's not a magic tool that does these tasks automagically in order, rollback included; but probably there's something better than email that helps to keep track of releases in production. Do you have any tools to suggest or practices to share?

    Read the article

  • Best performance approach to history mechanism?

    - by Royi Namir
    We are going to create History Mechanism for our changes in DB (DART in pic) via Triggers. we have 600 tables. Each record that will be changed - the trigger will insert the deleted one into XXX. regarding to the XXX : option 1 : clone each table in "Dart" DB and each table now will have a "sister table" e.g. : Table1 will have Table1_History problems : we will have 1200 tables programmer can do mistakes by working on wrong tables... option 2 : make a new DB (DART_2005 in pic) and the history tables will be there option 3 : use linked server which stores the Db which will contain the history tables. question : 1) which option gives the best performance ( I guess 3 is not - but is it 1 or 2 or same ?) 2) Does option 2 is acting like "linked server" ( in queries we will need to select from both DB's...) 3) What is the best practice approach ?

    Read the article

  • Java Code Formating

    - by the qwerty
    I'm using FreeMarker to generate java code, but as most of it is dynamically generated it's difficult to control the code formation. I want to get code well formatted. Does anyone knows a lib or something like a pretty printer for java code?

    Read the article

  • Using GET instead of POST to delete data behind authenticated pages

    - by Matt Spradley
    I know you should use POST whenever data will be modified on a public website. There are several reasons including the fact that search engines will follow all the links and modify the data. My question is do you think it is OK to use GET behind authenticated pages in something like an admin interface? One example would be a list of products with a delete link on each row. Since the only way to get to the page is if you are logged in, is there any harm in just using a link with the product ID in the query string?

    Read the article

  • P/Invoke or C++/CLI for wrapping a C library

    - by Ian G
    Have a moderate size (40-odd function) C API that needs to be called from a C# project. The functions logically break up to form a few classes that will be API presented to the rest of the project. Are there any objective reasons to prefer P/Invoke or C++/CLI for the interoperability underneath that API, in terms of robustness, maintainability, deployment, ...? The issues I could think of that might be, but aren't problematic are: C++/CLI will require an separate assembly, the P/Invoke classes can be in the main assembly. (We've already got multiple assemblies and there'll be the C dlls anyway so not a major issue). Performance doesn't seem differ noticeable between the two methods. Issues that I'm not sure about are: My feeling is C++/CLI will be easier to debug if there's inter-op problem, is this true? Language familiarity enough people know C# and C++ but knowledge of details of C++/CLI are rarer here. Anything else?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144  | Next Page >