Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

Page 68/348 | < Previous Page | 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75  | Next Page >

• My coworker created a 96 columns SQL table

  - by Eric

  Here we are in 2010, software engineers with 4 or 5 years or experience, still designing tables with 96 fracking columns. I told him it's gonna be a nightmare. I showed him that we have to use ordinals to interface MySQL with C#. I explained that tables with more columns than rows are a huge smell. Still, I get the "It's going to be simpler this way". What should I do? EDIT * This table contains data from sensors. We have sensor 1 with Dynamic_D1X Dynamic_D1Y [...] Dynamic_D6X Dynamic_D6Y [...]

  Read the article

• How can I make a collection of mini-games in XNA where the user can download packs of minigames and the main .exe can run them without being altered?

  - by Pyroka

  I'm currently making a PC game in XNA. It's actually a collection of mini-games (there's 3 mini-games at the moment) however I plan to make and add more, in downloadable 'packs'. My question is, what's the best way to achieve this? Currently my thoughts are: Create a 'game' interface Build games to this interface but create them as .dlls Have the main .exe file scan a directory and load in the .dlls at runtime. I've not messed around with the idea much, but I know there are applications at-least that use this plug-in approach (Notepad++ seems to), but I'm not sure of any games that do (although I'm sure they must exist). However it seems that this is a problem that has been solved previously, so I'm wondering if there's any form of established best-practice.

  Read the article

• To reorganize code, what to choose between library and service?

  - by essbeev

  I want to reorganize a large application with lot of code duplication into multiple components. Plus, some code is also duplicated over other applications. The common set of functionality that can be taken out of main application is clearly defined. Now, do I write a library or do I write a service for this functionality; so that all such applications continue to work and there is only one code-base (of common functionality) to maintain ?

  Read the article

• Create many similar classes, or just one

  - by soandos

  The goal is to create an application that has objects that can represent some operations (add, subtract, etc). All of those objects will have common functions and members, and thus will either implement an interface or inherit from an abstract class (Which would be better practice, this will be in C# if that matters?). As far as I can see, there are two different ways of organizing all of these classes. I could create an addition class, a subtraction class, etc. This has the upside of being highly modular but the difference between classes is so minimal. I could create one class, and have a member that will say what type of operation is being represented. This means lots of switch statements, and losing some modularity, in addition to being harder to maintain. Which is is better practice? Is there a better way of doing that is not listed above? If it matters, the list of functions that should be supported is long.

  Read the article

• Avoiding null in a controller

  - by Kevin Burke

  I'm trying to work through how to write this code. def get(params): """ Fetch a user's details, or 404 """ user = User.fetch_by_id(params['id']) if not user: abort(404) # Render some template for the user... What's the best way to handle the case where the lookup fails? One principle says you should avoid returning null values from functions. These lead to mistakes and AttributeErrors etc. later on in the file. Another idea is to have fetch_by_id raise a ValueError or similar if no user exists with that id. However there's a general principle that you shouldn't use exceptions for control flow, either, which doesn't help much. What could be done better in this case?

  Read the article

• How to switch off? [closed]

  - by Xophmeister

  While I've programmed software for many years, I've only recently started doing so professionally and have noticed a bit of a problematic pattern. I hope this is the best place to pose such a question, as I am interested in others' experiences and solutions... Writing software is, by its nature, a cerebral exercise. When coding for my own sake, I would do so until I was satisfied; even if that meant going all night. Now I'm coding in exchange for goods and services, on projects that are inherently uninteresting to me, I want to 'switch off' when it's time to go home. Maybe you consider that to be a 'bad attitude', but I just don't feel that whatever I'm working on is worth caring about after-hours. Besides, my employer doesn't exactly have the infrastructure required to make out-of-office changes; I can't just clone a repo and even remote login is a PITA. Anyway, the problem I'm experiencing is that, while I'm not particularly overworked or stressed, if I'm faced with a problem, my brain will work on a solution. Generally, it won't give up. Hence I can't switch off and, sometimes, the problem or the solution is significant enough that it disrupts my sleep. While, paradoxically, this doesn't seem to affect my coding ability, it can have a profound impact of the rest of my life. I get increasingly low as I get tired. So far, the best solutions I've found are writing little notes on the matter (and, say, e-mailing them back to my work address) and exercise. Neither of these can switch me off entirely and, as the week progresses, exercise especially becomes untenable due to tiredness. TL;DR How can you stop from being a coding zombie?

  Read the article

• More than one way to skin an Audit

  - by BuckWoody

  I get asked quite a bit about auditing in SQL Server. By "audit", people mean everything from tracking logins to finding out exactly who ran a particular SELECT statement. In the really early versions of SQL Server, we didn't have a great story for very granular audits, so lots of workarounds were suggested. As time progressed, more and more audit capabilities were added to the product, and in typical database platform fashion, as we added a feature we didn't often take the others away. So now, instead of not having an option to audit actions by users, you might face the opposite problem - too many ways to audit! You can read more about the options you have for tracking users here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc280526(v=SQL.100).aspx  In SQL Server 2008, we introduced SQL Server Audit, which uses Extended Events to really get a simple way to implement high-level or granular auditing. You can read more about that here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd392015.aspx  As with any feature, you should understand what your needs are first. Auditing isn't "free" in the performance sense, so you need to make sure you're only auditing what you need to. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

  Read the article

• Structuring Access Control In Hierarchical Object Graph

  - by SB2055

  I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. Thoughts I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

  Read the article

• Older PHP v/s newer PHP version [closed]

  - by Monty

  My company is building a website with database. Programmer's used PHP 5.0. My Service Provider (shared) in the meantime upgraded to PHP 5.3.0. Fixes have been on going and seem endless... Do I move to VPS and install older PHP or should we rebuild with newer PHP? When working remotely with programers what is the protocol regarding delivery of all code? Please what is the industry standard? I need an independent to review their work. How should this be approached?

  Read the article

• How to control messages to the same port from different emitters?

  - by Alex In Paris

  Scene: A company has many factories X, each emits a message to the same receive port in a Biztalk server Y; if all messages are processed without much delay, each will trigger an outgoing message to another system Z. Problem: Sometimes a factory loses its connection for a half-day or more and, when the connection is reestablished, thousands of messages get emitted. Now, the messages still get processed well by Y (Biztalk can easily handle the load) but system Z can't handle the flood and may lock up and severely delay the processing of all other messages from the other X. What is the solution? Creating multiple receive locations that permits us to pause one X or another would lose us information if the factory isn't smart enough to know whether the message was received or not. What is the basic pattern to apply in Biztalk for this problem? Would some throttling parameters help to limit the flow from any one X? Or are their techniques on the end part of Y which I should use instead ? I would prefer this last one since I can be confident that the message box will remember any failures, which could then be resumed.

  Read the article

• Diving into a computer science career [closed]

  - by Willis

  Well first I would like to say thank you for taking the time to read my question. I'll give you some background. I graduated two years ago from a local UC in my state with a degree in cognitive psychology and worked in a neuroscience lab. During this time I was exposed to some light Matlab programming and other programming tidbits, but before this I had some basic understanding of programming. My father worked IT for a company when I was younger so I picked up his books and took learned things along the way growing up. Naturally I'm an inquisitive person, constantly learning, love challenges, and have had exposure to some languages. Yet at this point I was fully pursue it as a career and always had this in the back of my head. Where do I start? I'm 25 and feel like I still have time to make a switch. I've immersed myself in the terminal/command prompt to start, but which language do I focus on? I've read the A+ book and planning to take on the exam, then the networking exam, but I want to deal with more programming, development, and troubleshooting. I understand to get involved in open source, but where? I took the next step and got a small IT assistant job, but doesn't really deal with programming, development, just troubling shooting and small network issues. Thank you!

  Read the article

• Where ORMs blur the lines between code and data, how do you decide what logic should be a stored procedure, and what should be coded?

  - by PhonicUK

  Take the following pseudocode: CreateInvoiceAndCalculate(ItemsAndQuantities, DispatchAddress, User); And say CreateInvoice does the following: Create a new entry in an Invoices table belonging to the specified User to be sent to the given DispatchAddress. Create a new entry in an InvoiceItems table for each of the items in ItemsAndQuantities, storing the Item, the Quantity, and the cost of the item as of now (by looking it up from an Items table) Calculate the total amount of the invoice (ex shipping and taxes) and store it in the new Invoice row. At a glace you wouldn't be able to tell if this was a method in my applications code, or a stored procedure in the database that is being exposed as a function by the ORM. And to some extent it doesn't really matter. Now technically none of this is business logic. You're not making any decisions - just performing a calculation and creating records. However some may argue that because you are performing a calculation that affects the business (the total amount to be invoiced) that this isn't something that should be done in a stored procedure and instead should be in code. So for this specific example - why would it be more appropriate to do one or the other? And where do you draw the line? Or does it even particular matter as long as it's sufficiently well documented?

  Read the article

• Seperation of drawing and logic in games

  - by BFree

  I'm a developer that's just now starting to mess around with game development. I'm a .Net guy, so I've messed with XNA and am now playing around with Cocos2d for the iPhone. My question really is more general though. Let's say I'm building a simple Pong game. I'd have a Ball class and a Paddle class. Coming from the business world development, my first instinct is to not have any drawing or input handling code in either of these classes. //pseudo code class Ball { Vector2D position; Vector2D velocity; Color color; void Move(){} } Nothing in the ball class handles input, or deals with drawing. I'd then have another class, my Game class, or my Scene.m (in Cocos2D) which would new up the Ball, and during the game loop, it would manipulate the ball as needed. The thing is though, in many tutorials for both XNA and Cocos2D, I see a pattern like this: //pseudo code class Ball : SomeUpdatableComponent { Vector2D position; Vector2D velocity; Color color; void Update(){} void Draw(){} void HandleInput(){} } My question is, is this right? Is this the pattern that people use in game development? It somehow goes against everything I'm used to, to have my Ball class do everything. Furthermore, in this second example, where my Ball knows how to move around, how would I handle collision detection with the Paddle? Would the Ball need to have knowledge of the Paddle? In my first example, the Game class would have references to both the Ball and the Paddle, and then ship both of those off to some CollisionDetection manager or something, but how do I deal with the complexity of various components, if each individual component does everything themselves? (I hope I'm making sense.....)

  Read the article

• Can the Abstract Factory pattern be considered as a case of polymorphism?

  - by rogcg

  I was looking for a pattern/solution that allows me call a method as a runtime exception in a group of different methods without using Reflection. I've recently become aware of the Abstract Factory Pattern. To me, it looks so much like polymorphism, and I thought it could be a case of polymorphism but without the super class WidgetFactory, as you can see in the example of the link above. Am I correct in this assumption?

  Read the article

• Should HTTP Verbs Be Used Semantically?

  - by Xophmeister

  If I'm making a web application which integrates with a server-side backend, would it be considered best practice to use HTTP methods semantically? That is, for example, if I'm fetching data (e.g., to populate a menu, etc.), I would use GET, but to update data (e.g., save a record), I would use POST. (I realise there are other methods that may be even more appropriate, but we need to consider browser support.) I can see the benefits of this in the sense that it's effectively a RESTful API, but at a slightly increased development cost. In my previous projects, I've POST'd everything: Is it worth switching to a RESTful mindset simply for the sake of best practice?

  Read the article

• Tester/Doer pattern: Assume the caller conforms to the pattern or be defensive and repeat the check?

  - by Daniel Hilgarth

  Assume a simple class that implements the Tester/Doer pattern: public class FooCommandHandler : ICommandHandler { public bool CanHandle(object command) { return command is FooCommand; } public void Handle(object command) { var fooCommand = (FooCommand)command; // Do something with fooCommand } } Now, if someone doesn't conform to the pattern and calls Handle without verifying the command via CanHandle, the code in Handle throws an exception. However, depending on the actual implementation of Handle this can be a whole range of different exceptions. The following implementation would check CanHandle again in Handle and throw a descriptive exception: public void Handle(object command) { if(!CanHandle(command)) throw new TesterDoerPatternUsageViolationException("Please call CanHandle first"); // actual implementation of handling the command. } This has the advantage that the exception is very descriptive. It has the disadvantage that CanHandle is called twice for "good" clients. Is there a consensus on which variation should be used?

  Read the article

• How Visual Studio could help to avoid duplicating code?

  - by MegaMind

  I work within a team of developers. Everyone is making their changes without carrying too much if the same thing is already implemented in the codebase. This leads to classes constantly growing and to severe duplication. I want to add line items to class definitions from which a developer could judge what this class has. Would it help? How to do it in Visual Studio? If it wouldn't help, what would be the better alternative to encourage the developers to check if something exists before implementing it?

  Read the article

• Do the benefits of Resin/Quercus outweigh the overhead?

  - by Craige

  Lately, I've been looking more and more into Resin + Quercus as a technology to develop an application of mine. The reason I started looking into it was that this application has high reporting needs, a lot of which cannot (or realistically, should not) be created in real-time. Java would offer a nice backend to queue and generate reports. Also, with Quercus I would be able to develop my data models in Hibernate, and use them "from PHP", thus effectively stretching these models across front and back-end. This same concept would also apply to any front/back-end common business logic, which could be developed in Java libraries. Now, the downside is that whichever front-end (PHP) MVC Framework I choose (my goal was Symfony 2), it is unlikely to work without some heavy modification, if it can work at all. Quercus is a pretty close implementation of PHP, and is supposed to be compatible with PHP5.3, so namespaces and closures SHOULDN'T be a problem, but when I tried to run an existing Symfony 1.4 app, I failed miserably. So, my question to you is, do you think the benefits of Resin + Quercus outweigh the overhead of using a not-so-perfect/stable implementation of PHP? If this were your application, and your goal was and end-product, rather than educational purposes, what would you decide?

  Read the article

• Is "convention over configuration" not violating basic programming principles?

  - by Geerten

  I was looking at the WPF MVVM framework Caliburn.Micro and read that a lot of standard things are based on naming conventions. For example, automatic binding of properties in the View to properties in the ViewModel. Although this seems to be convenient (removes some boilerplate code), my first instinct reaction is that it isn't completely obvious to a new programmer that will read this code. In other words, the functionality of the application is not completely explained by its own code, but also by the documentation of the framework. EDIT: So this approach is called convention over configuration. Since I could not find any questions concerning this, I altered my question: My question is: Is convention over configuration a correct way of simplifying things, or is it violating some programming principles (and if so, which ones)?

  Read the article

• What are some good debugging techniques [closed]

  - by Brad Bruce

  I frequently run into situations where I'm working with other programmers, helping out with debugging issues. Over the years, I've acquired my own techniques for logically breaking down a problem and tracing through it. I see several others who are great at writing programs, but freeze up when debugging. Are there any good resources I can point people to that describe some good debugging techniques?

  Read the article

• Flags with deferred use

  - by Trenton Maki

  Let's say I have a system. In this system I have a number of operations I can do but all of these operations have to happen as a batch at a certain time, while calls to activate and deactivate these operations can come in at any time. To implement this, I could use flags like doOperation1 and doOperation2 but this seems like it would become difficult to maintain. Is there a design pattern, or something similar, that addresses this situation?

  Read the article

• Client-server application design issue

  - by user2547823

  I have a collection of clients on server's side. And there are some objects that need to work with that collection - adding and removing clients, sending message to them, updating connection settings and so on. They should perform these actions simultaneously, so mutex or another synchronization primitive is required. I want to share one instance of collection between these objects, but all of them require access to private fields of collection. I hope that code sample makes it more clear[C++]: class Collection { std::vector< Client* > clients; Mutex mLock; ... } class ClientNotifier { void sendMessage() { mLock.lock(); // loop over clients and send message to each of them } } class ConnectionSettingsUpdater { void changeSettings( const std::string& name ) { mLock.lock(); // if client with this name is inside collection, change its settings } } As you can see, all these classes require direct access to Collection's private fields. Can you give me an advice about how to implement such behaviour correctly, i.e. keeping Collection's interface simple without it knowing about its users?

  Read the article

• Can decoupling hurt maintainability in certain situations?

  - by Ceiling Gecko

  Can the fact that the business logic is mapped to interfaces instead of implementations actually hinder the maintenance of the application in certain situations? A naive example with the Java's Hibernate framework would be, that for example (provided I don't have the whole code-base in my head, the project structure is a mess and classes are named with arbitrary names) if I wish to see what's going on in a certain DAO, to see if it actually is doing what it's supposed to do, then instead of traversing backwards up the tree from the point where the data service is invoked (where the tree will end in an interface with no implementation details whatsoever apart from the signature) I have to for example go and look for a configuration XML file to see which class is mapped to said interface as the implementation before being able to access the actual implementation details. Are there any situations where having loose coupling can actually hurt maintainability?

  Read the article

• How to become more productive in design and programming

  - by aurel

  Usually whenever I see tutorial videos (apart from the main subject) I learn a lot from their working habits, for example; they way they have set up their folders, what shotcuts they use. The best example was (long time a go) I say a jquery video, and half way through the author said something like “by the way you could have a code library” – that’s the only thing I remember from that video (but the author said it as something he assumed people know about) So I was wondering if someone knows any tip or any website which goes other how other professionals work, how they have set up their programming habits to help them not waste time in repetitive tasks.

  Read the article

• How to write efficient code despite heavy deadlines

  - by gladysbixly

  Hi all, I am working in an environment wherein we have many projects with strict deadlines on deliverables. We even talk directly to the clients so getting the jobs done and fast is a must. My issue is that i'd always write code for the first solution that comes to my mind, which of course I thought as best at that moment. It always ends up ugly though and i'd later realize that there are better ways to do it but can't afford to change due to time restrictions. Are there any tips by which I could make my code efficient yet deliver on time?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75  | Next Page >