I\'m trying to explain to my team why this is bad practice, and am looking for an anti-patt开发者_开发技巧ern reference to help in my explanation.This is a very large enterprise app, so here\'s a simp
Branching guidance usually describes an immortal \"Main\" branch, with features branched from Main, and merged back to Main, and Releases branched from Main, with further branches of a Release as nece
I am currently reviewing a colleagues Java code, and I see a lot of cases where every single statement that may throw an exception being encapsulated in its own try/catch. Where the catch block all pe
I have a library class which contains two methods, say, Login() and NavigateToPage(). Now, in order to navigate to a page, the session has to be logged in. Also, to log in, one needs to first navigate
So I have been charged with taking an active third party product that we own source code for, and making proprietary changes that will break compatibility with future updates of the product.This produ
I currently have a design like so. There are tables for each object class. Each table then contains rows (objects) which needs to be associated with multiple statuses.
I have two particular cases where I disagree with a coworker, whether constants should be used or not.
Consider this example function from a fictive game engine API: function Entity.SetHealth( Number health )
Consider the code below (which has been simplified). I have a service class that returns a list of specific DTO objects that each implement their own specific interface. In the actual code these are g
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this po
加载中,请稍侯......