3,623 reputation
820
bio website
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 10 months
seen Mar 29 at 12:27

Feb
11
comment How do you check that code has been covered automatically?
I am not the down voter. I suspect the downvote was because of your first sentence. Code coverage most certainly can be checked automatically. Perhaps you should change that sentence. The issue at hand is whether the results of that automated code coverage testing should in turn be used in an automated way, for example, in a git hook.
Feb
11
answered How do you check that code has been covered automatically?
Feb
4
comment Leaving intentional bugs in code for testers to find
What happens if an intentionally introduced bug covers up another bug the testers could have found had that intentional bug not been introduced? For example, suppose a chunk of code has a fencepost problem and that the development team is unaware of this bug. A programmer decides to insert an intentional fencepost error at that spot. Now the code has a double fencepost error. Suppose the testers detect the error, but don't see that it's a double fencepost error. Congrats! The testers found an introduced bug. The original code will be restored to contain the original fencepost error. Oops!
Jan
30
awarded  Nice Answer
Jan
17
comment Is it always a best practice to write a function for anything that needs to repeat twice?
+1 just for It often makes sense to create a function for something that's only executed once. I was once asked how to design tests for a function that modeled the behavior of a rocket engine. The cyclomatic complexity of that function was in the 90s, and it wasn't a switch statement with 90 some cases (ugly, but testable). It instead was a convoluted mess written by engineers and was utterly untestable. My response was just that, that it was untestable and needed to be rewritten. They followed my advice!
Oct
30
comment Is it called index or position for a location of an item?
Re Index could be argued it should always be zero-based -- Really? Ask a Fortran or Matlab programmer, or a mathematician for than matter. They typically uses indices that are "one-based". Tomayto, tomahto, as Kilian Foth wrote.
Oct
5
reviewed Reject Why do some projects have getters and setters for public instance variables?
Oct
5
comment When writing object-oriented code, should I always be following a design pattern?
As a secular programmer, about all I can say is "OMG, this answer is fantastic!" (as are the comments). Telastyn, Cerad, and tobyink, you three came this close to owing me a new computer monitor. It's a good thing my mouth was empty of liquids when I read this answer and the comments.
Sep
30
comment Derive subset with sum between two values
Solutions to the knapsack problem inevitably use what you call "guess and check".
Sep
30
comment Derive subset with sum between two values
Re Is there an algorithm to get the desired subset without using guess and check? Let M be the number of questions whose ranking is between 0.65 and 0.75. The answer to your question is yes if M>N. Just randomly choose N of those M questions. Otherwise, the answer is no.
Sep
30
comment Derive subset with sum between two values
What does that even mean, Preston? You have not fully specified the problem.
Sep
30
comment Derive subset with sum between two values
With the given example, 200 questions of which 50 are to be chosen, finding all the subsets of 50 that meet the requirement and choosing one at random is an unachievable task. There are 200 choose 50, or about 454 quattuordecillion (454*10^45), possible subsets. Some will be acceptable, others not. Your computer doesn't have the capacity to find all the acceptable subsets. Even Google or the NSA doesn't have that much storage (it's not even close).
Sep
30
comment Derive subset with sum between two values
@PrestonS - So what? This comment of yours suggests you have some addition requirements that you have not yet told us.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
It would have helped a lot if the question had made it clear that GhostDoc automatically generates comments from uncommented code. Having that key piece of information hidden behind a link that appears as just a four letter word is not good form.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
@KyleStrand _ I stand corrected. Doxygen does not produce such nonsense. Doxygen reads but does not generate doxygen comments. Those doxygen comments need to be written by a human.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
@cdorking: As far as how to tell what was auto generated, look at this page that describes a function deep within the guts of Eigen. The calling sequence is autogenerated. Much of the text below the calling sequence is hand-written. The math is hand-written LaTeX that doxygen automatically processes. The list of parameters: The names are autogenerated, but the meaning of those parameters comes from hand-written commentary. The list of functions referenced within is autogenerated.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
@cdorking: You misread the question. Read it again. GhostDoc was not attempting to read the programmer's mind. That goofy phrase appeared precisely because a programmer explicitly wrote that phrase as a comment to be parsed by GhostDoc. GhostDoc doesn't know what that phrase means. Like doxygen or javadoc, GhostDoc reproduces key commentary hand-written by humans as-is (plus formatting). There is no mind reading going on.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
-1. Just pretend? That might work great for a one person project that will never be used again. Some level of documentation/commentary is needed even with a one person project if it's complexity is greater than that of "hello world" and if you plan on picking up that project in six months time. In a project involving dozens or even hundreds of people, failure to document/comment can kill the project.
Sep
11
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
@dcorking _ I haven't the foggiest idea what you mean by that. Doxygen can't read the programmer's mind. For a good example of what doxygen can do, see this top-level page for Eigen, a rather popular C++ scientific computing package. Poke around! You can see some documentation that's obviously written by humans, other that is purely auto generated, yet other that is a blend of human-written and auto generated. If told to, doxygen will automatically generate fan-in (who references this function) and fan-out (what does this function call).
Sep
10
comment Is there any logical reason to auto-generate code documentation?
Actually, it's both. doxygen parses the code and the doxygen comments. Class names, parent class names, data member names, function names, argument types and names, return type: Those all come from the parsed code. What those things mean come from the doxygen comments. Doxygen complains if an item specified as a \param in the doxygen comment isn't an argument, and it can be made to complain about undocumented items. Other than these minimal checks, the problem of comment vs code mismatch is still a possibility. That said, I love doxygen. It's much better than writing an API by hand.