Search Results

Search found 30896 results on 1236 pages for 'best buy'.

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 145/1236 | < Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • Is it bad practice to use Reflection in Unit testing?

    - by Sebi
    During the last years I always thought that in Java, Reflection is widely used during Unit testing. Since some of the variables/methods which have to be checked are private, it is somehow necessary to read the values of them. I always thought that the Reflection API is also used for this purpose. Last week i had to test some packages and therefore write some JUnit tests. As always i used Reflection to access private fields and methods. But my supervisor who checked the code wasn't really happy with that and told me that the Reflection API wasn't meant to use for such "hacking". Instead he suggested to modifiy the visibility in the production code. Is it really bad practice to use Reflection? I can't really believe that

    Read the article

  • Should programmers use boolean variables to "document" their code?

    - by froadie
    I'm reading McConell's Code Complete, and he discusses using boolean variables to document your code. For example, instead of: if((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex) || (elementIndex == lastElementIndex)){ ... } He suggests: finished = ((elementIndex < 0) || (MAX_ELEMENTS < elementIndex)); repeatedEntry = (elementIndex == lastElementIndex); if(finished || repeatedEntry){ ... } This strikes me as logical, good practice, and very self-documenting. However, I'm hesitant to start using this technique regularly as I've almost never come across it; and perhaps it would be confusing just by virtue of being rare. However, my experience is not very vast yet, so I'm interested in hearing programmers' opinion of this technique, and I'd be curious to know if anyone uses this technique regularly or has seen it often when reading code. Is this a worthwhile convention/style/technique to adopt? Will other programmers understand and appreciate it, or consider it strange?

    Read the article

  • How to handle request/response propagation up and down a widget hierarchy in a GUI app?

    - by fig-gnuton
    Given a GUI application where widgets can be composed of other widgets: If the user triggers an event resulting in a lower level widget needing data from a model, what's the cleanest way to be able to send that request to a controller (or the datastore itself)? And subsequently get the response back to that widget? Presumably one wouldn't want the controller or datastore to be a singleton directly available to all levels of widgets, or is this an acceptable use of singleton? Or should a top level controller be injected as a dependency through a widget hierarchy, as far down as the lowest level widget that might need that controller? Or a different approach entirely?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Generating new tasks in a foreach loop

    - 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? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; currentTask.Start(); foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { task.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; } } or do i need to do this? Task currentTask = myFirstTask; foreach (Task task in _TaskList) { Task localTask = task; currentTask.ContinueWith((antecendent) => { if(antecendent.IsCompleated) { localTask.Start(); } else //do error handling; }); currentTask = task; }

    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

  • SQL - when should you use "with (nolock)"

    - by Andy White
    Can someone explain the implications of using "with (nolock)" on queries, when you should/shouldn't use it? For example, if you have a banking application with high transaction rates and a lot of data in certain tables, in what types of queries would nolock be okay? Are there cases when you should always use it/never use it?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • How to restrict user from modifying data in mysql data base?

    - by Paul
    We need to deploy application(developed by Java) WAR file in client place which make use of MySql 5.0. But we would like to restrict the user from modifying any data in the database. Is there any way to protect data. The client can make use of the application but they should not be able to change any value in database. How to do that?

    Read the article

  • Need help in sorting the programming buzz-words

    - by cwap
    How do you sort out the good buzz from the bad buzz? - I really need your help here :) I see a lot of buzz-words nowadays, both here on SO and in school. For example, we had a teacher who everyone respected, who said "be careful about gold-plating and death-by-interfacing". Now, everyone and their mama cries whenever I'm creating an interface.. Another example would be here on SO where lately "premature optimization is the root of all evil", so everytime someone asks a perfomance question, he'll get that sentence thrown in his face. A few months ago I remember it was all about NHibernate in here, etc., etc... These things comes and goes, but only the good buzz stays. Now, how do you seperate the good from the bad? By reading blogs from respected persons? By trying to come to a conclusion on your own, and then try to convince others that you're right? By simply ignoring it?

    Read the article

  • Efficiently store last X items in an MySQL Database

    - by Saif Bechan
    I want to store the last 3 items in an MySQL database in an efficient way. So when the 4th item is stored the first should be deleted. The way I do this not is first run a query getting the items. Than check what I should do then insert/delete. There has to be a better way to do this. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • 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

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 | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >