Search Results

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

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 139/1144 | < Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >

  • What are the standard practices for throwing Javascript Exceptions?

    - by T.R.
    w3schools says that exceptions can be strings, integers, booleans, or objects, but the example given doesn't strike me as good practice, since exception type checking is done through string comparison. Is this the preferred method of exception handling in Javascript? Are there built-in exception types (like NullPointerException)? (if so, what are they, what kind of inheritance do they use, and are they preferred over other options?)

    Read the article

  • Application wide messaging... without singletons?

    - by StormianRootSolver
    So, I want to go for a more Singleton - less design in the future. However, there seem to be a lot of tasks in an application that can't be done in meaningful way without singletons. I call them "application wide services", but they also fall into the same category as the cross cutting concerns, which I usually fix via AOP. Lets take an example: I want an application wide message queue that dispatches messages to components, every component can subscribe and publish there, it's a very nice multicast thing. The message queue and dispatching system are usually a (rather short) singleton class, which is very easy to implement in, say, C#. You can even use double dispatching and utilize message type metadata and the like, it's all so easy to do, it's almost trivial. However, having singletons is not really "object oriented design" (it introduces global variables) and it makes testing harder. Do you have any ideas? I'm asking this question because I'm willing to learn more about this topic, a LOT more. :-)

    Read the article

  • Formating a date field in the Model (Codeigniter)

    - by Landitus
    Hi, I', trying to re-format a date from a table in Codeigniter. The Controller is for a blog. I was succesfull when the date conversion happens in the View. I was hoping to convert the date in the Model to have things in order. This is the Model: class Novedades_model extends Model { function getAll() { $this->db->order_by('date','desc'); $query = $this->db->get('novedades'); if($query->num_rows() > 0) { foreach ($query->result() as $row) { $data[] = $row; } } return $data; } } This is part of the controller $this->load->model('novedades_model'); $data['records'] = $this->novedades_model->getAll(); Here's the date conversion as it happens in the View. This is inside the posts loop: <?php foreach($records as $row) : ?> <?php $fdate = "%d <abbr>%M</abbr> %Y"; $dateConv = mdate($fdate, mysql_to_unix($row->date)); ?> <div class="article section"> <span class="date"><?php echo $dateConv ;?></span> ... Keeps going ... How can I convert the date in the Model? Can I access the date key and refactor it?

    Read the article

  • Foreach loop and tasks.

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I know from the codeing guidlines that I have read you should not do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(i)); } Console.ReadLine(); as it will write 5 5's, I understand that and I think i understand why it is happening. I know the solution is just to do for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { int localI = i; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Console.WriteLine(localI)); } Console.ReadLine(); However is something like this ok to do? foreach (MyClass myClass in myClassList) { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => myClass.DoAction()); } Console.ReadLine(); Or do I need to do the same thing I did in the for loop. foreach (MyClass myClass in myClassList) { MyClass localMyClass = myClass; Task.Factory.StartNew(() => localMyClass.DoAction()); } Console.ReadLine();

    Read the article

  • White-box testing in Javascript - how to deal with privacy?

    - by Max Shawabkeh
    I'm writing unit tests for a module in a small Javascript application. In order to keep the interface clean, some of the implementation details are closed over by an anonymous function (the usual JS pattern for privacy). However, while testing I need to access/mock/verify the private parts. Most of the tests I've written previously have been in Python, where there are no real private variables (members, identifiers, whatever you want to call them). One simply suggests privacy via a leading underscore for the users, and freely ignores it while testing the code. In statically typed OO languages I suppose one could make private members accessible to tests by converting them to be protected and subclassing the object to be tested. In Javascript, the latter doesn't apply, while the former seems like bad practice. I could always wall back to black box testing and simply check the final results. It's the simplest and cleanest approach, but unfortunately not really detailed enough for my needs. So, is there a standard way of keeping variables private while still retaining some backdoors for testing in Javascript?

    Read the article

  • int i vs int index etc. Which one is better?

    - by Earlz
    Coming from a C background I've always used int i for generic loop variables. Of course in big nested loops or other complex things I may use a descriptive name but which one had you rather see? int i; for(i=0;i<Controls.Count;i++){ DoStuff(Controls[i]); } or int index; for(index=0;index<Controls.Count;index++){ DoStuff(Controls[index]); } In the current project I am working on there are both of these styles and index being replaced by ndx. Which one is better? Is the i variable too generic? Also what about the other C style names? i, j, k Should all of these be replaced by actual descriptive variables?

    Read the article

  • How do I get mercurial to show the diff during `hg com`?

    - by Kev
    Is there a way to configure hg com so that in the commit message file that pops up in the external editor, instead of just showing which files were changed (in the HG: lines) it actually shows the full diff? I'd rather view the output and compose my commit message simultaneously from the comfort of my text editor as opposed to doing hg diff on the command line separately beforehand.

    Read the article

  • where should I do the calculating stuff,PHP or Mysql?

    - by SpawnCxy
    I've been doing a lot of calculating stuff nowadays.Usually I prefer to do this job in PHP rather than Mysql though I know PHP is not good at this cuz I thought mysql may be worse.But I found some performance problem :some pages were loaded so slowly that 30 seconds' timelimit is not enough for them!So I wonder which is the better practice to do the calculations,and any princles for that?Suggestions would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • slowing down a loop in a recursive function

    - by eco_bach
    I have a difficult problem with a recursive function. Essentially I need to 'slow down' a for loop within a function that repeatedly calls itself(the function); Is this possible, or do I need to somehow extract the recursive nature of the function? function callRecursiveFuncAgain(ob:Object):void{ //do recursive stuff; for (var i:int = 0; i < 4; i++) { _nextObj=foo callRecursiveFuncAgain(_nextObj); } }

    Read the article

  • how to organize classes in ruby if they are literal subclasses

    - by RetroNoodle
    I know that title didn't make sense, Im sorry! Its hard to word what I am trying to ask. I had trouble googling it for the same reason. So this isn't even Ruby specific, but I am working in ruby and I am new to it, so bear with me. So you have a class that is a document. Inside each document, you have sentences, and each sentence has words. Words will have properties, like "noun" or a count of how many times they are used in the document, etc. I would like each of the elements, document, sentence, word be an object. Now, if you think literally - sentences are in documents, and words are in sentences. Should this be organized literally like this as well? Like inside the document class you will define and instantiate the sentence objects, and inside the sentence class you will define and instantiate the words? Or, should everything be separate and reference each other? Like the word class would sit outside the sentence class but the sentence class would be able to instantiate and work with words? This is a basic OOP question I guess, and I suppose you could argue to do it either way. What do you guys think? Each sentence in the document could be stored in a hash of sentence objects inside the document object, and each word in the sentence could be stored in a hash of word objects inside the sentence. I dont want to code myself into a corner here, thats why I am asking, plus I have wondered this before in other situations. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • When to use basic types (Integer, String), and when to write a new class?

    - by belgarat
    Stackoverflow users: A lot of things can be represented in programs by using the basic types, or we can create a new class for it. Example: A social security number can be a number, string or its own object. (Other common examples: Phone numbers, names, zip codes, user id, order id and other id's.) My question is: When should the basic types be used, and when should we write ourselves a new class? I see that when you need to add behavior, you'll want to create a class (example, social security number parsing, validation, formatting, etc). But is this the only criteria? I have come across cases where many of these things are represented as java Integers and/or Strings. We loose the benefit of type-checking, and I have often seen bugs caused by parameters being mixed in calls to function(Intever, Integer, Integer, Integer). On the other hand, some programmers are opposed to over-designing by creating classes for "eveything". Obviously, the answer is "it depends". But, what do you think, and what do you normally do?

    Read the article

  • Factory Method Using Is/As Operator

    - by Swim
    I have factory that looks something like the following snippet. Foo is a wrapper class for Bar and in most cases (but not all), there is a 1:1 mapping. As a rule, Bar cannot know anything about Foo, yet Foo takes an instance of Bar. Is there a better/cleaner approach to doing this? public Foo Make( Bar obj ) { if( obj is Bar1 ) return new Foo1( obj as Bar1 ); if( obj is Bar2 ) return new Foo2( obj as Bar2 ); if( obj is Bar3 ) return new Foo3( obj as Bar3 ); if( obj is Bar4 ) return new Foo3( obj as Bar4 ); // same wrapper as Bar3 throw new ArgumentException(); } At first glance, this question might look like a duplicate (maybe it is), but I haven't seen one exactly like it. Here is one that is close, but not quite: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/242097/factory-based-on-typeof-or-is-a

    Read the article

  • Is there anything wrong with taking immediate actions in constructors?

    - by pestaa
    I have classes like this one: class SomeObject { public function __construct($param1, $param2) { $this->process($param1, $param2); } ... } So I can instantly "call" it as some sort of global function just like new SomeObject($arg1, $arg2); which has the benefits of staying concise, being easy to understand, but might break unwritten rules of semantics by not waiting till a method is called. Should I continue to feel bad because of a bad practice, or there's really nothing to worry about? Clarification: I do want an instance of the class. I do use internal methods of the class only. I initialize the object in the constructor, but call the "important" action-taker methods too. I am selfish in the light of these sentences.

    Read the article

  • How should nested components interact with model in a GUI application?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Broad design/architecture question. If you have nested components in a GUI, what's the most common way for those components to interact with data? For example, let's say a component receives a click on one of its buttons to save data. Should the save request be delegated up that component's ancestors, with the uppermost ancestor ultimately passing the request to a controller? Or are models/datastores in a GUI application typically singletons, so that a component at any level of a hierarchy can directly get/set data? Or is a controller injected as a dependency down the hierarchy of components, so that any given component is only one intermediary away from the datastore/model?

    Read the article

  • Table in DB for generating primary keys?

    - by Sapphire
    Do you ever use a separate table for "generating" artificial primary keys for DB (and why)? What I mean is to have a table with two columns, table name and current ID - with which you could get new "ID" for some table by simply locking the row with that table name, getting the current value of the key, increment it by one, and unlock the row. Why would you prefer this over standard integer identity column? P.S. The "idea" is from Fowlers Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, btw...

    Read the article

  • How to deal with multiple screensizes + dynamic controls in Android?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I am learning how to program on Android phone. However I am unsure how to make my application work for the different screen sizes and resolutions. I read the tutorial on the android site and still unsure how to do it. First I know there are different files so could make a layout for each of the sizes but my problem is most of the screen needs to be dynamically created so there would not be much to put in these files. So I am not sure how to android to re size dynamic controls based on the screen size. I have also read it is bad practice to make controls in anything but the xml file as it separates view logic and programming logic. However they never talk about if you need to make these controls dynamically what you should do. So is there some other way to do it that is considered good practice?

    Read the article

  • require_once at the beginning or when really needed?

    - by takeshin
    Where should I put require_once statements, and why? Always on the beginning of a file, before the class, In the actual method when the file is really needed It depends ? Most frameworks put includes at the beginning and do not care if the file is really needed. Using autoloader is the other case here.

    Read the article

  • new Integer vs valueOf

    - by LB
    Hi, I was using Sonar to make my code cleaner, and it pointed that I'm using new Integer(1) instead of Integer.valueOf(1). Because it seems that valueOf does not instantiate a new object so is more memory-friendly. How can valueOf not instantiate a new object ? How does it work ? Is this true for all integers ? thanks.

    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 | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >