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 141/1144 | < Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >

  • Will this be garbage collected in JVM?

    - by stjowa
    I am running the following code every two minutes via a Timer: object = new Object(this); Potentially, this is a lot of objects being created and a lot of objects being overwritten. Do the overwritten objects get garbage collected, even with a reference to itself being used in the newly created object? I am using JDK 1.6.0_13. Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • Assignment in conditional operator

    - by DuoSRX
    I've seen a lot this kind of code recently : if ($foo = $bar->getFoo()) { baz($foo); } Is this considered good or bad practice ? For example, Netbeans IDE give a notice if you use this kind of code : Possible accidental assignment, assignments in conditions should be avoided What do you think ?

    Read the article

  • When using out parameters in a function, is it good practice to initialize them in the function?

    - by adambox
    I have a function that uses out parameters to return multiple values to the caller. I would like to initialize them in the function, but I wasn't sure if that's a bad idea since you don't know when you call the function that it's going to change the values right away. The caller might assume that after the function returns, if whatever it was doing didn't work, the values would be whatever they were initialized to in the caller. Is it ok / good for me to initialize in the function? Example: public static void SomeFunction(int ixID, out string sSomething) { sSomething = ""; sSomething = something(ixID); if (sSomething = "") { somethingelse(); sSomething = "bar" } }

    Read the article

  • Boost shared_ptr use_count function

    - by photo_tom
    My application problem is the following - I have a large structure foo. Because these are large and for memory management reasons, we do not wish to delete them when processing on the data is complete. We are storing them in std::vector<boost::shared_ptr<foo>>. My question is related to knowing when all processing is complete. First decision is that we do not want any of the other application code to mark a complete flag in the structure because there are multiple execution paths in the program and we cannot predict which one is the last. So in our implementation, once processing is complete, we delete all copies of boost::shared_ptr<foo>> except for the one in the vector. This will drop the reference counter in the shared_ptr to 1. Is it practical to use shared_ptr.use_count() to see if it is equal to 1 to know when all other parts of my app are done with the data. One additional reason I'm asking the question is that the boost documentation on the shared pointer shared_ptr recommends not using "use_count" for production code.

    Read the article

  • Best way to support large dropdowns

    - by JustAProgrammer
    Say I have a report that can be restricted by specifying some value in a dropdown. This dropdown list references a table with 30,000 records. I don't think this would be feasible to populate a dropdown with! So, what is the best way to provide the user the ability to select a value given this situation? These values do not really have categories and even if I subdivided (by having some nesting dropdown situation) by the first letter of the value, that may still leave a few thousand entries. What's the best way to deal with this?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to violate the principle that collection properties should be readonly for performance?

    - by uriDium
    I used FxCop to analyze some code I had written. I had exposed a collection via a setter. I understand why this is not good. Changing the backing store when I don't expect it is a very bad idea. Here is my problem though. I retrieve a list of business objects from a Data Access Object. I then need to add that collection to another business class and I was doing it with the setter method. The reason I did this was that it is going to be faster to make an assignment than to insert hundreds of thousands of objects one at a time to the collection again via another addElement method. Is it okay to have a getter for a collection in some scenarios? I though of rather having a constructor which takes a collection? I thought maybe I could pass the object in to the Dao and let the Dao populate it directly? Are there any other better ideas?

    Read the article

  • Flexible array members in C - bad?

    - by Lionel
    I recently read that using flexible array members in C was poor software engineering practice. However, that statement was not backed by any argument. Is this an accepted fact? (Flexible array members are a C feature introduced in C99 whereby one can declare the last element to be an array of unspecified size. For example: ) struct header { size_t len; unsigned char data[]; };

    Read the article

  • Why is 'using namespace std;' considered a bad practice in C++?

    - by Mana
    Okay, sorry for the simplistic question, but this has been bugging me ever since I finished high school C++ last year. I've been told by others on numerous occasions that my teacher was wrong in saying that we should have "using namespace std;" in our programs, and that std::cout and std::cin are more proper. However, they would always be vague as to why this is a bad practice. So, I'm asking now: Why is "using namespace std;" considered bad? Is it really that inefficient, or risk declaring ambiguous vars(variables that share the same name as a function in std namespace) that much? Or does this impact program performance noticeably as you get into writing larger applications? I'm sorry if this is something I should have googled to solve; I figured it would be nice to have this question on here regardless in case anyone else was wondering.

    Read the article

  • Should I go back and fix work when you learn something new/better?

    - by SnOrfus
    Considering that we're all constantly learning, we've all got to come across a point where we learn something just awesome that improves our code or parts of it significantly. The question is, when you've learned some new technique, strategy or whatever, do your or should you go back to code that you know works, but could be so much better/maintainable/faster/generally improved and implement this new knowledge? I understand the concept of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but when does that become losing pride in code you've already written and what does it say for refactoring.

    Read the article

  • Any reason to clean up unused imports in Java, other than reducing clutter?

    - by Kip
    Is there any good reason to avoid unused import statements in Java? As I understand it, they are there for the compiler, so lots of unused imports won't have any impacts on the compiled code. Is it just to reduce clutter and to avoid naming conflicts down the line? (I ask because Eclipse gives a warning about unused imports, which is kind of annoying when I'm developing code because I don't want to remove the imports until I'm pretty sure I'm done designing the class.)

    Read the article

  • Call a non member function on an instance before is constructed.

    - by Tom
    Hi everyone. I'm writing a class, and this doubt came up. Is this undef. behaviour? On the other hand, I'm not sure its recommended, or if its a good practice. Is it one if I ensure no exceptions to be thrown in the init function? //c.h class C{ float vx,vy; friend void init(C& c); public: C(); }; //c.cpp C::C() { init(*this); } void init(C& c) //throws() to ensure no exceptions ? { c.vx = 0; c.vy = 0; } Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • When using Sessions is bad thing, and whats wrong with it?

    - by Amr ElGarhy
    I know that in community server which means that you can't use Sessions, and few years ago i remember i was working on a website where we were not allowed to use sessions. In my point of view sessions are a very helpful tool if we managed how to use the right way, but is using session variable in a website is something bad, when its bad and when its not?

    Read the article

  • Secrets of delivering .NET size large products?

    - by Joan Venge
    In software companies I have seen it's really hard to work on very large products where everything depends on everything else. For instance Microsoft works on C#, F#, .NET, WPF, Visual Studio where these things are interconnected. I don't know how many people are involved, but if it's in 100s, how do they keep in sync with everything, so they design and implement features without conflicting with other dependencies and future plans of other products? I am wondering that if MS is able to do this, they must have a very good system. Any guidelines or secrets for MS or non-MS very large software product delivering?

    Read the article

  • Do I need to cast the result of strtol to int?

    - by Kristo
    The following code does not give a warning with g++ 4.1.1 and -Wall. int octalStrToInt(const std::string& s) { return strtol(s.c_str(), 0, 8); } I was expecting a warning because strtol returns a long int but my function is only returning a plain int. Might other compilers emit a warning here? Should I cast the return value to int in this case as a good practice?

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to initialize a variable to a dummy value?

    - by froadie
    This question is a result of the answers to this question that I just asked. It was claimed that this code is "ugly" because it initializes a variable to a value that will never be read: String tempName = null; try{ tempName = buildFileName(); } catch(Exception e){ ... System.exit(1); } FILE_NAME = tempName; Is this indeed bad practice? Should one avoid initializing variables to dummy values that will never actually be used? (EDIT - And what about initializing a String variable to "" before a loop that will concatenate values to the String...? Or is this in a separate category? e.g. String whatever = ""; for(String str : someCollection){ whatever += str; } )

    Read the article

  • can I put the break on the same line

    - by brett
    I have a switch statement that has over 300 case statements. case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break; Why is it that the break is always on a separate line? Is this required? Is there anything syntactically incorrect about me doing this: case 'hello': { $say = 'some text'; } break; case 'hi': { $say = 'some text'; } break;

    Read the article

  • moving a website built on struts to a CMS

    - by fabiobeta
    Hi. Imagine having developed a classical website with java&struts. Now you customer is learning that redeploying the application to change an image or a text is a significant cost. And it asks to add a function to the site: cms-like handling of the contents (editing, versioning, approved publishing). How would you handle this request? Would you develop it in the webapp? Would you merge the webapp with a CMS? Would tou MOVE the webapp into a cms? Would you run away?

    Read the article

  • Global State and Singletons Dependency injection

    - by Manu
    this is a problem i face lot of times when i am designing a new app i'll use a sample problem to explain this think i am writing simple game.so i want to hold a list of players. i have few options.. 1.use a static field in some class private static ArrayList<Player> players = new ArrayList<Integer>(); public Player getPlayer(int i){ return players.get(i); } but this a global state 2.or i can use a singleton class PlayerList{ private PlayerList instance; private PlayerList(){...} public PlayerList getInstance() { if(instance==null){ ... } return instance; } } but this is bad because it's a singleton 3.Dependency injection class Game { private PlayerList playerList; public Game(PlayerList list) { this.list = list; } public PlayerList getPlayerList() { return playerList; } } this seems good but it's not, if any object outside Game need to look at PlayerList (which is the usual case) i have to use one of the above methods to make the Game class available globally. so I just add another layer to the problem. didn't actually solve anything. what is the optimum solution ? (currently i use Singleton approach)

    Read the article

  • If you could remove one feature of php ti help newbies what would it be?

    - by Chris
    If you could remove one feature from PHP so as to discourage, prevent or otherwise help stop newer programmers develop bad habits or practices, or, to stop them falling into traps that might hinder their development skills what would it be and why? Now, before the votes to close it's not as open-ended as you might think. I'm not asking purely what is the worst feature or what feature would you really like to remove purely arbitrarily. Yes, there may not be one correct answer but I suspect there will be many similar answers which will provide me with a good idea of things I might be doing wrong, even inadvertently.

    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 | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >