Search Results

Search found 41998 results on 1680 pages for 'oracle best practices'.

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 424/1680 | < Previous Page | 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431  | Next Page >

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • CSS selectors : should I minimise my use of the class attribute in the HTML or optimise the speed

    - by Laurent Bourgault-Roy
    As I was working on a small website, I decided to use the PageSpeed extension to check if their was some improvement I could do to make the site load faster. However I was quite surprise when it told me that my use of CSS selector was "inefficient". I was always told that you should keep the usage of the class attribute in the HTML to a minimum, but if I understand correctly what PageSpeed tell me, it's much more efficient for the browser to match directly against a class name. It make sense to me, but it also mean that I need to put more CSS classes in my HTML. It also make my .css file a little harder to read. I usually tend to mark my CSS like this : #mainContent p.productDescription em.priceTag { ... } Which make it easy to read : I know this will affect the main content and that it affect something in a paragraph tag (so I wont start to put all sort of layout code in it) that describe a product and its something that need emphasis. However it seem I should rewrite it as .priceTag { ... } Which remove all context information about the style. And if I want to use differently formatted price tag (for example, one in a list on the sidebar and one in a paragraph), I need to use something like that .paragraphPriceTag { ... } .listPriceTag { ... } Which really annoy me since I seem to duplicate the semantic of the HTML in my classes. And that mean I can't put common style in an unqualified .priceTag { ... } and thus I need to replicate the style in both CSS rule, making it harder to make change. (Altough for that I could use multiple class selector, but IE6 dont support them) I believe making code harder to read for the sake of speed has never been really considered a very good practice . Except where it is critical, of course. This is why people use PHP/Ruby/C# etc. instead of C/assembly to code their site. It's easier to write and debug. So I was wondering if I should stick with few CSS classes and complex selector or if I should go the optimisation route and remove my fancy CSS selectors for the sake of speed? Does PageSpeed make over the top recommandation? On most modern computer, will it even make a difference?

    Read the article

  • How does the verbosity of identifiers affect the performance of a programmer?

    - by DR
    I always wondered: Are there any hard facts which would indicate that either shorter or longer identifiers are better? Example: clrscr() opposed to ClearScreen() Short identifiers should be faster to read because there are fewer characters but longer identifiers often better resemble natural language and therefore also should be faster to read. Are there other aspects which suggest either a short or a verbose style? EDIT: Just to clarify: I didn't ask: "What would you do in this case?". I asked for reasons to prefer one over the other, i.e. this is not a poll question. Please, if you can, add some reason on why one would prefer one style over the other.

    Read the article

  • What are some good usability guidelines an average developer should follow?

    - by Allain Lalonde
    I'm not a usability specialist, and I really don't care to be one. I just want a small set of rules of thumb that I can follow while coding my User Interfaces so that my product has decent usability. At first I thought that this question would be easy to answer "Use your common sense", but if it's so common among us developers we wouldn't, as a group, have a reputation for our horrible interfaces. Any Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • jQuery: Stopping a periodic ajax call?

    - by Legend
    I am writing a small jQuery plugin to update a set of Divs with content obtained using Ajax calls. Initially, let's assume we have 4 divs. I am doing something like this: (function($) { .... .... //main function $.fn.jDIV = { init: function() { ... ... for(var i = 0; i < numDivs; i++) { this.query(i); } this.handlers(); }, query: function(divNum) { //Makes the relevant ajax call }, handlers: function() { for(var i = 0; i < numDivs; i++) { setInterval("$.fn.jDIV.query(" + i + ")", 5000); } } }; })(jQuery); I would like to be able to enable and disable a particular ajax query. I was thinking of adding a "start" and "stop" instead of the "handlers" function and subsequently storing the setInterval handler like this: start: function(divNum) { divs[divNum] = setInterval("$.fn.jDIV.query(" + i + ")", 5000); }, stop: function(divNum) { clearInterval(divs[divNum]); } I did not use jQuery to setup and destroy the event handlers. Is there a better approach (perhaps using more of jQuery) to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • True or False: Good design calls for every table to have a primary key, if nothing else, a running i

    - by Velika
    Consider a grocery store scenario (I'm making this up) where you have FACT records that represent a sale transaction, where the columns of the Fact table include SaleItemFact Table ------------------ CustomerID ProductID Price DistributorID DateOfSale Etc Etc Etc Even if there are duplicates in the table when you consider ALL the keys, I would contend that a surrogate running numeric key (i.e. identity column) should be made up, e.g., TransactionNumber of type Integer. I can see someone arguing that a Fact table might not have a unique key (though I'd invent one and waste the 4 bytes, but how about a dimension table?

    Read the article

  • What are the 'big' advantages to have Poco with ORM?

    - by bonefisher
    One advantage that comes to my mind is, if you use Poco classes for Orm mapping, you can easily switch from one ORM to another, if both support Poco. Having an ORM with no Poco support, e.g. mappings are done with attributes like the DataObjects.Net Orm, is not an issue for me, as also with Poco-supported Orms and theirs generated proxy entities, you have to be aware that entities are actually DAO objects bound to some context/session, e.g. serializing is a problem, etc..

    Read the article

  • I don't like Python functions that take two or more iterables. Is it a good idea?

    - by Xavier Ho
    This question came from looking at this question on Stackoverflow. def fringe8((px, py), (x1, y1, x2, y2)): Personally, it's been one of my pet peeves to see a function that takes two arguments with fixed-number iterables (like a tuple) or two or more dictionaries (Like in the Shotgun API). It's just hard to use, because of all the verbosity and double-bracketed enclosures. Wouldn't this be better: >>> class Point(object): ... def __init__(self, x, y): ... self.x = x ... self.y = y ... >>> class Rect(object): ... def __init__(self, x1, y1, x2, y2): ... self.x1 = x1 ... self.y1 = y1 ... self.x2 = x2 ... self.y2 = y2 ... >>> def fringe8(point, rect): ... # ... ... >>> >>> point = Point(2, 2) >>> rect = Rect(1, 1, 3, 3) >>> >>> fringe8(point, rect) Is there a situation where taking two or more iterable arguments is justified? Obviously the standard itertools Python library needs that, but I can't see it being pretty in maintainable, flexible code design.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

    - by Luki
    I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

    Read the article

  • how to minimize application downtime when updating database and application ORM

    - by yamspog
    We currently run an ecommerce solution for a leisure and travel company. Everytime we have a release, we must bring the ecommerce site down as we update database schema and the data access code. We are using a custom built ORM where each data entity is responsible for their own CRUD operations. This is accomplished by dynamically generating the SQL based on attributes in the data entity. For example, the data entity for an address would be... [tableName="address"] public class address : dataEntity { [column="address1"] public string address1; [column="city"] public string city; } So, if we add a new column to the database, we must update the schema of the database and also update the data entity. As you can expect, the business people are not too happy about this outage as it puts a crimp in their cash-flow. The operations people are not happy as they have to deal with a high-pressure time when database and applications are upgraded. The programmers are upset as they are constantly getting in trouble for the legacy system that they inherited. Do any of you smart people out there have some suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Get absolute (base) url in sinatra.

    - by berkes
    Right now, I do a get '/' do set :base_url, "#{request.env['rack.url_scheme']}://#{request.env['HTTP_HOST']}" # ... haml :index end to be able to use options.base_url in the HAML index.haml. But I am sure there is a far better, DRY, way of doing this. Yet I cannot see, nor find it. (I am new to Sinatra :)) Somehow, outside of get, I don't have request.env available, or so it seems. So putting it in an include did not work. How do you get your base url?

    Read the article

  • Opinions regarding C++ programming practice

    - by Sagar
    I have a program that I am writing, not too big. Apart from the main function, it has about 15 other functions that called for various tasks at various times. The code works just fine all in one file, and as it is right now. However, I was wondering if anyone had any advice on whether it is smarter/more efficient/better programming to put those functions in a separate file different from where main is, or whether it even matters at all. If yes, why? If no, why not? I am not new at C++, but definitely not an expert either, so if you think this question is stupid, feel free to tell me so. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • Why is hibernate open session in view considered a bad practice?

    - by HeDinges
    And what kind of alternative strategies do you use for avoiding LazyLoadExceptions? I do understand that open session in view has issues with: Layered applications running in different jvm's Transactions are committed only at the end, and most probably you would like the results before. But, if you know that your application is running on a single vm, why not ease your pain by using an open session in view strategy?

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Howto mix TDD and RAII

    - by f4
    I'm trying to make extensive tests for my new project but I have a problem. Basically I want to test MyClass. MyClass makes use of several other class which I don't need/want to do their job for the purpose of the test. So I created mocks (I use gtest and gmock for testing) But MyClass instantiate everything it needs in it's constructor and release it in the destructor. That's RAII I think. So I thought, I should create some kind of factory, which creates everything and gives it to MyClass's constructor. That factory could have it's fake for testing purposes. But's thats no longer RAII right? Then what's the good solution here?

    Read the article

  • Is using joins in select clause slow in Oracle?

    - by gniquil
    I would like to write a query like the following select username, (select state from addresses where addresses.username = users.username) email from users This works in Oracle (assuming the result from the inner query is unique). However, is there a performance penalty associated with this style of writing query?

    Read the article

  • What is a 'better' approach to query/save from server: DTO or Wcf Data Services?

    - by bonefisher
    From my perspective, the Data Services and their query approach is useful when querying simple object graphs from your server-side domain model. But when you want to query complex dependencies I couldn't create anything good out of it. The classic DTO approach is fine-grained and can handle everything, but the downside is that you have to create Dto classes for every type of server-request which is time consuming and you have to synchronize the Dto type with your domain entity/business logic.

    Read the article

  • Is it Bad Practice to use C++ only for the STL containers?

    - by gmatt
    First a little background ... In what follows, I use C,C++ and Java for coding (general) algorithms, not gui's and fancy program's with interfaces, but simple command line algorithms and libraries. I started out learning about programming in Java. I got pretty good with Java and I learned to use the Java containers a lot as they tend to reduce complexity of book keeping while guaranteeing great performance. I intermittently used C++, but I was definitely not as good with it as with Java and it felt cumbersome. I did not know C++ enough to work in it without having to look up every single function and so I quickly reverted back to sticking to Java as much as possible. I then made a sudden transition into cracking and hacking in assembly language, because I felt I was concentrated too much attention on a much too high level language and I needed more experience with how a CPU interacts with memory and whats really going on with the 1's and 0's. I have to admit this was one of the most educational and fun experiences I've had with computers to date. For obviously reasons, I could not use assembly language to code on a daily basis, it was mostly reserved for fun diversions. After learning more about the computer through this experience I then realized that C++ is so much closer to the "level of 1's and 0's" than Java was, but I still felt it to be incredibly obtuse, like a swiss army knife with far too many gizmos to do any one task with elegance. I decided to give plain vanilla C a try, and I quickly fell in love. It was a happy medium between simplicity and enough "micromanagent" to not abstract what is really going on. However, I did miss one thing about Java: the containers. In particular, a simple container (like the stl vector) that expands dynamically in size is incredibly useful, but quite a pain to have to implement in C every time. Hence my code currently looks like almost entirely C with containers from C++ thrown in, the only feature I use from C++. I'd like to know if its consider okay in practice to use just one feature of C++, and ignore the rest in favor of C type code?

    Read the article

  • Representing xml through a single class

    - by Charles
    I am trying to abstract away the difficulties of configuring an application that we use. This application takes a xml configuration file and it can be a bit bothersome to manually edit this file, especially when we are trying to setup some automatic testing scenarios. I am finding that reading xml is nice, pretty easy, you get a network of element nodes that you can just go through and build your structures quite nicely. However I am slowly finding that the reverse is not quite so nice. I want to be able to build a xml configuration file through a single easy to use interface and because xml is composed of a system of nodes I am having a lot of struggle trying to maintain the 'easy' part. Does anyone know of any examples or samples that easily and intuitively build xml files without declaring a bunch of element type classes and expect the user to build the network themselves? For example if my desired xml output is like so <cook version="1.1"> <recipe name="chocolate chip cookie"> <ingredients> <ingredient name="flour" amount="2" units="cups"/> <ingredient name="eggs" amount="2" units="" /> <ingredient name="cooking chocolate" amount="5" units="cups" /> </ingredients> <directions> <direction name="step 1">Preheat oven</direction> <direction name="step 2">Mix flour, egg, and chocolate</direction> <direction name="step 2">bake</direction> </directions> </recipe> <recipe name="hot dog"> ... How would I go about designing a class to build that network of elements and make one easy to use interface for creating recipes? Right now I have a recipe object, an ingredient object, and a direction object. The user must make each one, set the attributes in the class and attach them to the root object which assembles the xml elements and outputs the formatted xml. Its not very pretty and I just know there has to be a better way. I am using python so bonus points for pythonic solutions

    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 | 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431  | Next Page >