Search Results

Search found 40 results on 2 pages for 'contructor'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • Relvance of 'public' contructor in abstract class.

    - by Amby
    Is there any relevance of a 'public' constructor in an abstract class? I can not think of any possible way to use it, in that case shouldn't it be treated as error by compiler (C#, not sure if other languages allow that). Sample Code: internal abstract class Vehicle { public Vehicle() { } } The C# compiler allows this code to compile, while there is no way i can call this contructor from the outside world. It can be called from derived classes only. So shouldn't it allow 'protected' and 'private' modifiers only. Please comment.

    Read the article

  • toString method for varargs contructor

    - by owca
    I have a varargs contructor like this : public class Sentence { public String[] str; public Sentence(Object... text){ StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); for (Object o : text) { sb.append(o.toString()) .append(" "); } System.out.println(sb.toString()); } } Contructor can get various types of data (ints, strings, and Sentence objects as well). How to do a proper toString method for such class ?

    Read the article

  • Contructor parameters for dependent classes with Unity Framework

    - by Onisemus
    I just started using the Unity Application Block to try to decouple my classes and make it easier for unit testing. I ran into a problem though that I'm not sure how to get around. Looked through the documentation and did some Googling but I'm coming up dry. Here's the situation: I have a facade-type class which is a chat bot. It is a singleton class which handles all sort of secondary classes and provides a central place to launch and configure the bot. I also have a class called AccessManager which, well, manages access to bot commands and resources. Boiled down to the essence, I have the classes set up like so. public class Bot { public string Owner { get; private set; } public string WorkingDirectory { get; private set; } private IAccessManager AccessManager; private Bot() { // do some setup // LoadConfig sets the Owner & WorkingDirectory variables LoadConfig(); // init the access mmanager AccessManager = new MyAccessManager(this); } public static Bot Instance() { // singleton code } ... } And the AccessManager class: public class MyAccessManager : IAccessManager { private Bot botReference; public MyAccesManager(Bot botReference) { this.botReference = botReference; SetOwnerAccess(botReference.Owner); } private void LoadConfig() { string configPath = Path.Combine( botReference.WorkingDirectory, "access.config"); // do stuff to read from config file } ... } I would like to change this design to use the Unity Application Block. I'd like to use Unity to generate the Bot singleton and to load the AccessManager interface in some sort of bootstrapping method that runs before anything else does. public static void BootStrapSystem() { IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer(); // create new bot instance Bot newBot = Bot.Instance(); // register bot instance container.RegisterInstance<Bot>(newBot); // register access manager container.RegisterType<IAccessManager,MyAccessManager>(newBot); } And when I want to get a reference to the Access Manager inside the Bot constructor I can just do: IAcessManager accessManager = container.Resolve<IAccessManager>(); And elsewhere in the system to get a reference to the Bot singleton: // do this Bot botInstance = container.Resolve<Bot>(); // instead of this Bot botInstance = Bot.Instance(); The problem is the method BootStrapSystem() is going to blow up. When I create a bot instance it's going to try to resolve IAccessManager but won't be able to because I haven't registered the types yet (that's the next line). But I can't move the registration in front of the Bot creation because as part of the registration I need to pass the Bot as a parameter! Circular dependencies!! Gah!!! This indicates to me I have a flaw in the way I have this structured. But how do I fix it? Help!!

    Read the article

  • How to avoid using this in a contructor

    - by Paralife
    I have this situation: interface MessageListener { void onMessageReceipt(Message message); } class MessageReceiver { MessageListener listener; public MessageReceiver(MessageListener listener, other arguments...) { this.listener = listener; } loop() { Message message = nextMessage(); listener.onMessageReceipt(message); } } and I want to avoid the following pattern: (Using the this in the Client constructor) class Client implements MessageListener { MessageReceiver receiver; MessageSender sender; public Client(...) { receiver = new MessageReceiver(this, other arguments...); sender = new Sender(...); } . . . @Override public void onMessageReceipt(Message message) { if(Message.isGood()) sender.send("Congrtulations"); else sender.send("Boooooooo"); } } The reason why i need the above functionality is because i want to call the sender inside the onMessageReceipt() function, for example to send a reply. But I dont want to pass the sender into a listener, so the only way I can think of is containing the sender in a class that implements the listener, hence the above resulting Client implementation. Is there a way to achive this without the use of 'this' in the constructor? It feels bizare and i dont like it, since i am passing myself to an object(MessageReceiver) before I am fully constructed. On the other hand, the MessageReceiver is not passed from outside, it is constructed inside, but does this 'purifies' the bizarre pattern? I am seeking for an alternative or an assurance of some kind that this is safe, or situations on which it might backfire on me.

    Read the article

  • SqlParameter contructor compiler overload choice

    - by Ash
    When creating a SqlParameter (.NET3.5) or OdbcParameter I often use the SqlParameter(string parameterName, Object value) constructor overload to set the value in one statement. When I tried passing a literal 0 as the value paramter I was initially caught by the C# compiler choosing the (string, OdbcType) overload instead of (string, Object). MSDN actually warns about this gotcha in the remarks section, but the explanation confuses me. Why does the C# compiler decide that a literal 0 parameter should be converted to OdbcType rather than Object? The warning also says to use Convert.ToInt32(0) to force the Object overload to be used. It confusingly says that this converts the 0 to an "Object type". But isn't 0 already an "Object type"? The Types of Literal Values section of this page seems to say literals are always typed and so inherit from System.Object. This behavior doesn't seem very intuitive given my current understanding? Is this something to do with Contra-variance or Co-variance maybe?

    Read the article

  • C++ keeping a list of objects and calling a contructor through another function

    - by Nona Urbiz
    why isnt my object being created? When I do it like so, I am told error C2065: 'AllReferrals' : undeclared identifier as well as error C2228: left of '.push_back' must have class/struct/union. If I put the list initialization before the class I get error C2065: 'AllReferrals' : undeclared identifier. Thanks! #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <regex> #include <string> #include <list> #include <map> using namespace std; using namespace tr1; class Referral { public: string url; map<string, int> keywords; static bool submit(string url, string keyword, int occurrences) { //if(lots of things i'll later add){ Referral(url, keyword, occurrences); return true; //} //else // return false; } private: list<string> urls; Referral(string url, string keyword, int occurrences) { url = url; keywords[keyword] = occurrences; AllReferrals.push_back(this); } }; static list<Referral> AllReferrals; int main() { Referral::submit("url", "keyword", 1); cout << AllReferrals.size(); cout << "\n why does that ^^ say 0 (help me make it say one)?"; cout << "\n and how can i AllReferrals.push_back(this) from my constructor?"; cout << " When I do it like so, I am told error C2065: 'AllReferrals' : undeclared identifier"; cout << " as well as error C2228: left of '.push_back' must have class/struct/union."; cout << " If I put the list initialization before the class I get error C2065: 'AllReferrals' : undeclared identifier."; cout << "\n\n\t Thanks!"; getchar(); }

    Read the article

  • JavaScript: using constructor without operator 'new'

    - by GetFree
    Please help me to understand why the following code works: <script> var re = RegExp('\\ba\\b') ; alert(re.test('a')) ; alert(re.test('ab')) ; </script> In the first line there is no new operator. As far as I know, a contructor in JavaScript is a function that initialize objects created by the operator new and they are not meant to return anything.

    Read the article

  • variable scope when adding a value to a vector in class constructor

    - by TheFuzz
    I have a level class and a Enemy_control class that is based off an vector that takes in Enemys as values. in my level constructor I have: Enemy tmp( 1200 ); enemys.Add_enemy( tmp ); // this adds tmp to the vector in Enemy_control enemys being a variable of type Enemy_control. My program crashes after these statements complaining about some destructor problem in level and enemy_control and enemy. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How can a class's memory-allocated address be determined from within the contructor?

    - by Jim Fell
    Is it possible to get the memory-allocated address of a newly instantiated class from within that class's constructor during execution of said constructor? I am developing a linked list wherein multiple classes have multiple pointers to like classes. Each time a new class instantiates, it needs to check its parent's list to make sure it is included. If I try to do something like this: MyClass() // contructor { extern MyClass * pParent; for ( int i = 0; i < max; i++ ) { pParent->rels[i] == &MyClass; // error } } I get this error: error C2275: 'namespace::MyClass' : illegal use of this type as an expression Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Refactor throwing not null exception if using a method that has a dependency on a certain contructor

    - by N00b
    In the method below the second constructor accepts a ForumThread object which the IncrementViewCount() method uses. There is a dependency between the method and that particular constructor. Without extracting into a new private method the null check in IncrementViewCount() and LockForumThread() (plus other methods not shown) is there some simpler re-factoring I can do or the implementation of a better design practice for this method to guard against the use of the wrong constructor with these dependent methods? Thank you for any suggestions in advance. private readonly IThread _forumLogic; private readonly ForumThread _ft; public ThreadLogic(IThread forumLogic) : this(forumLogic, null) { } public ThreadLogic(IThread forumLogic, ForumThread ft) { _forumLogic = forumLogic; _ft = ft; } public void Create(ForumThread ft) { _forumLogic.SaveThread(ft); } public void IncrementViewCount() { if (_ft == null) throw new NoNullAllowedException("_ft ForumThread is null; this must be set in the constructor"); lock (_ft) { _ft.ViewCount = _ft.ViewCount + 1; _forumLogic.SaveThread(_ft); } } public void LockForumThread() { if (_ft == null) throw new NoNullAllowedException("_ft ForumThread is null; this must be set in the constructor"); _ft.ThreadLocked = true; _forumLogic.SaveThread(_ft); }

    Read the article

  • C++: Copy contructor: Use Getters or access member vars directly?

    - by cbrulak
    Have a simple container class: public Container { public: Container() {} Container(const Container& cont) //option 1 { SetMyString(cont.GetMyString()); } //OR Container(const Container& cont) //option 2 { m_str1 = cont.m_str1; } public string GetMyString() { return m_str1;} public void SetMyString(string str) { m_str1 = str;} private: string m_str1; } So, would you recommend this method or accessing the member variables directly? In the example, all code is inline, but in our real code there is no inline code. Update (29 Sept 09): Some of these answers are well written however they seem to get missing the point of this question: this is simple contrived example to discuss using getters/setters vs variables initializer lists or private validator functions are not really part of this question. I'm wondering if either design will make the code easier to maintain and expand. Some ppl are focusing on the string in this example however it is just an example, imagine it is a different object instead. I'm not concerned about performance. we're not programming on the PDP-11

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to cause a new C++ class instance to fail, if certain conditions in the contructor ar

    - by Jim Fell
    As I understand it, when a new class is instantiated in C++, a pointer to the new class is returned, or NULL, if there is insufficient memory. I am writing a class that initializes a linked list in the constructor. If there is an error while initializing the list, I would like the class instantiator to return NULL. For example: MyClass * pRags = new MyClass; If the linked list in the MyClass constructor fails to initialize properly, I would like pRags to equal NULL. I know that I can use flags and additional checks to do this, but I would like to avoid that, if possible. Does anyone know of a way to do this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Should constant contructor aguments be passed by reference or value?

    - by Mike
    When const values are passed to an object construct should they be passed by reference or value? If you pass by value and the arguments are immediately fed to initializes are two copies being made? Is this something that the compiler will automatically take care of. I have noticed that all textbook examples of constructors and intitializers pass by value but this seems inefficient to me. class Point { public: int x; int y; Point(const int _x, const int _y) : x(_x), y(_y) {} }; int main() { const int a = 1, b = 2; Point p(a,b); Point q(3,5); cout << p.x << "," << p.y << endl; cout << q.x << "," << q.y << endl; } vs. class Point { public: int x; int y; Point(const int& _x, const int& _y) : x(_x), y(_y) {} }; Both compile and do the same thing but which is correct?

    Read the article

  • Permission denied to access property 'toString'

    - by Anders
    I'm trying to find a generic way of getting the name of Constructors. My goal is to create a Convention over configuration framework for KnockoutJS My idea is to iterate over all objects in the window and when I find the contructor i'm looking for then I can use the index to get the name of the contructor The code sofar (function() { constructors = {}; window.findConstructorName = function(instance) { var constructor = instance.constructor; var name = constructors[constructor]; if(name !== undefined) { return name; } var traversed = []; var nestedFind = function(root) { if(typeof root == "function" || traversed[root]) { return } traversed[root] = true; for(var index in root) { if(root[index] == constructor) { return index; } var found = nestedFind(root[index]); if(found !== undefined) { return found; } } } name = nestedFind(window); constructors[constructor] = name; return name; } })(); var MyApp = {}; MyApp.Foo = function() { }; var instance = new MyApp.Foo(); console.log(findConstructorName(instance)); The problem is that I get a Permission denied to access property 'toString' Exception, and i cant even try catch so see which object is causing the problem Fiddle http://jsfiddle.net/4ZwaV/

    Read the article

  • Instantiating ServiceController takes sometimes too much time

    - by mrbamboo
    Hi, i am creating an instance of ServiceController using a remote/local machine name and the name of the service. When I type sth. like stackoverflow.com as machine name the contructor blocks for a long time and returns an exception. Example: string MachineName = "stackoverflow.com" ServiceController("RemoteRegistry", MachineName ); How can I set here a kind of timeout to cancel this process?

    Read the article

  • Define Default constructor Structuremap in a Generic Repository

    - by Ricky
    Hello guys, I have a generic IRepository that has 2 constructors, one have none parameters, other has the datacontext as parameter. I want to define to structuremap to aways in this case use the parameterless constructor. I want a way to create a parameterless contructor, other solutions that I have seen, they create a new Datacontext and pass it to the constructor that has parameters.

    Read the article

  • What's the best approach for readonly property

    - by Patrick Parent
    Hi, I'm using a model UserRepository-User The Repository is used to Save and Load the User. I want to be able to set the ID in the Repository, but I don't want it to be access by UI. The User and Repository are found in a Core project, and the UI in a Web. Is there a way to do this, like a modifier for the property, or should I put the ID in the User contructor ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • android game performance regarding timers

    - by iQue
    Im new to the game-dev world and I have a tendancy to over-simplify my code, and sometimes this costs me alot fo memory. Im using a custom TimerTask that looks like this: public class Task extends TimerTask { private MainGamePanel panel; public Task(MainGamePanel panel) { this.panel=panel; } /** * When the timer executes, this code is run. */ public void run() { panel.createEnemies(); } } this task calls this method from my view: public void createEnemies() { Bitmap bmp = BitmapFactory.decodeResource(getResources(), R.drawable.female); if(enemyCounter < 24){ enemies.add(new Enemy(bmp, this)); } enemyCounter++; } Since I call this in the onCreate-method instead of in my views contructor (because My enemies need to get width and height of view). Im wondering if this will work when I have multiple levels in game (start a new intent). And if this kind of timer really is the best way to add a delay between the spawning-time of my enemies performance-wise. adding code for my timer if any1 came here cus they dont understand timers: private Timer timer1 = new Timer(); private long delay1 = 5*1000; // 5 sec delay public void surfaceCreated(SurfaceHolder holder) { timer1.schedule(new Task(this), 0, delay1); //I call my timer and add the delay thread.setRunning(true); thread.start(); }

    Read the article

  • Strange PHP reference bug

    - by Roland Soós
    Hello, I have a really strange bug with my PHP code. I have a recursive code which build up a menu tree with object and one of my customers server can't make it work. Contructor: function Menu(&$menus, &$keys , &$parent, &$menu){ ... if($keys === NULL){ $keys = array_keys($menus); } ... for($x = 0; $x < count($keys); $x++) { var_dump($keys); $menu = $menus[$keys[$x]]; var_dump($keys); if($this->id == $menu->pid){ $keys[$x] = NULL; $this->submenus[] = new Menu($menus, $keys, $this, $menu); } } First var_dump give me back the array, the second give back the first element of $menus. Do you have any idea what causes this? PHP version 5.2.3

    Read the article

  • resource acquisition is initialization "RAII"

    - by hitech
    in the example below class X{ int *r; public: X(){cout<< X is created ; r new int[10]; } ~X(){cout<< X is destroyed ; delete [] r; } }; class Y { public: Y(){ X x; throw 44; } ~Y(){cout<< Y is destroyed ;} }; I got this example of RAII from one site and ave some doubts. please help. in the contructor of x we are not considering the scenation "if the memory allocation fails" . Here for the destructor of Y is safe as in y construcotr is not allocating any memory. what if we need to do some memory allocation also in y constructor?

    Read the article

  • Java - getConstructor() ?

    - by msr
    Hello, I wrote the question as a comment in the code, I think its easier to understand this way. public class Xpto{ protected AbstractClass x; public void foo(){ // AbstractClass y = new ????? Car or Person ????? /* here I need a new object of this.x's type (which could be Car or Person) I know that with x.getClass() I get the x's Class (which will be Car or Person), however Im wondering how can I get and USE it's contructor */ // ... more operations (which depend on y's type) } } public abstract class AbstractClass { } public class Car extends AbstractClass{ } public class Person extends AbstractClass{ }

    Read the article

  • [Android] accessing another Activity's preferences

    - by Raffaele
    I have a Login Activity which stores credentials in its own SharedPreferences; then I added two getters for reading them, something like public String getUsername() { return getPreferences(MODE_PRIVATE).getString("#username", null); } but this throws a NPE when I call it like this String mUser = (new Login()).getUsername(); It seems that the Activity cannot read its preferences after a simple contructor call, as if it were in some uncompleted state. I read lots of related topics, but wasn't able to find a solution. Basically, I need to share these credentials among activities in my application

    Read the article

  • Relevance of 'public' constructor in abstract class.

    - by Amby
    Is there any relevance of a 'public' constructor in an abstract class? I can not think of any possible way to use it, in that case shouldn't it be treated as error by compiler (C#, not sure if other languages allow that). Sample Code: internal abstract class Vehicle { public Vehicle() { } } The C# compiler allows this code to compile, while there is no way i can call this contructor from the outside world. It can be called from derived classes only. So shouldn't it allow 'protected' and 'private' modifiers only. Please comment.

    Read the article

  • How to make a Scala Applet whose Applet class is a singleton?

    - by Jamie
    Hi, I don't know if a solution exists but it would be highly desirable. I'm making a Scala Applet, and I want the main Applet class to be a singleton so it can be accessed elsewhere in the applet, sort of like: object App extends Applet { def init { // do init here } } Instead I have to make the App class a normal instantiatable class otherwise it complains because the contructor is private. So the ugly hack I have is to go: object A { var pp: App = null } class App extends Applet { A.pp = this def init { // do init here } } I really hate this, and is one of the reasons I don't like making applets in Scala right now. Any better solution? It would be nice...

    Read the article

  • Accessing Session and IPrinciple data in a Master View in Asp.Net MCV

    - by bplus
    I currently have a abstract controller class that I all my controllers inherit from. In my master page I want to be able to access some data that will be in Session and also the currently user (IPrinciple). I read that I could use the contructor of by abstract base controller class, that is I could do something like public BaseController() { ViewData["SomeData"] = Session["SomeData"]; ViewData["UserName"] = this.User.Identity.Name; } I could then access ViewData["UserName"] etc from my master page. My problem is that both Session and User are null at this point. Does anybody know of a different approach? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >