Search Results

Search found 7420 results on 297 pages for 'generic collections'.

Page 111/297 | < Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >

• Design Pattern for error handling in ASP.NET 3.5 site

  - by Kevin

  I am relatively new to ASP.NET programming, and web programming in general. We have a site we recently ported from .NET 1.1 to 3.5. Currently we have two methods of error handling: either catching the error during data load on a page and displaying the formatted error in a label on the page, or redirecting to a generic error page. Both of these are somewhat annoying, as right now I'm trying to redesign how our errors are displayed. We are soon moving to Master pages, and I'm wondering if there is a way to "build in" an error handling control. What I mean by this is using a ASP.NET user control I've designed that simply gets passed the error string returned from the server. If an error occurs, the page would not display the content, and instead display the error control. This provides us with the ability to retain the current banner/navigation during an error (which we don't get with the generic error page), as well as keeping me from having to add the control to every aspx page we have (which I have to do with using the label-per-page system). Does something like this make sense? Ultimately I just want to have the error control added to a single page, and all other pages have access to it directly. Is this something Master pages help with? Thanks!

  Read the article

• ASP.net file operations delay

  - by mtranda

  Ok, so here's the problem: I'm reading the stream from a FileUpload control, reading in chunks of n bytes and writing the array in a loop until I reach the stream's end. Now the reason I do this is because I need to check several things while the upload is still going on (rather than doing a Save(); which does the whole thing in one go). Here's the problem: when doing this from the local machine, I can see the file just fine as it's uploading and its size increases (had to add a Sleep(); clause in the loop to actually get to see the file being written). However, when I upload the file from a remote machine, I don't get to see it until the the file has completed uploading. Also, I've added another call to write the progress to a text file as the progress is going on, and I get the same thing. Local: the file updates as the upload goes on, remote: the token file only appears after the upload's done (which is somewhat useless since I need it while the upload's still happening). Is there some sort of security setting in (or ASP.net) that maybe saves files in a temporary location for remote machines as opposed to the local machine and then moves them to the specified destination? I would liken this with ASP.net displaying error messages when browsing from the local machine (even on the public hostname) as opposed to the generic compilation error page/generic exception page that is shown when browsing from a remote machine (and customErrors are not off) Any clues on this? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Thread-local storage segfaults on NetBSD only?

  - by bortzmeyer

  Trying to run a C++ program, I get segmentation faults which appear to be specific to NetBSD. Bert Hubert wrote the simple test program (at the end of this message) and, indeed, it crashes only on NetBSD. % uname -a NetBSD golgoth 5.0.1 NetBSD 5.0.1 (GENERIC) #0: Thu Oct 1 15:46:16 CEST 2009 +stephane@golgoth:/usr/obj/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC i386 % g++ --version g++ (GCC) 4.1.3 20080704 prerelease (NetBSD nb2 20081120) Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. % gdb thread-local-storage-powerdns GNU gdb 6.5 Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions. Type "show copying" to see the conditions. There is absolutely no warranty for GDB. Type "show warranty" for details. This GDB was configured as "i386--netbsdelf"... (gdb) run Starting program: /home/stephane/Programmation/C++/essais/thread-local-storage-powerdns Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0804881b in main () at thread-local-storage-powerdns.cc:20 20 t_a = new Bogo('a'); (gdb) On other Unix, it works fine. Is there a known issue in NetBSD with C++ thread-local storage? #include <stdio.h> class Bogo { public: explicit Bogo(char a) { d_a = a; } char d_a; }; __thread Bogo* t_a; int main() { t_a = new Bogo('a'); Bogo* b = t_a; printf("%c\n", b->d_a); }

  Read the article

• C# reflection instantiation

  - by NickLarsen

  I am currently trying to create a generic instance factory for which takes an interface as the generic parameter (enforced in the constructor) and then lets you get instantiated objects which implement that interface from all types in all loaded assemblies. The current implementation is as follows:     public class InstantiationFactory     {         protected Type Type { get; set; }         public InstantiationFactory()         {             this.Type = typeof(T);             if (!this.Type.IsInterface)             {                 // is there a more descriptive exception to throw?                 throw new ArgumentException(/* Crafty message */);             }         }         public IEnumerable GetLoadedTypes()         {             // this line of code found in other stack overflow questions             var types = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()                 .SelectMany(a = a.GetTypes())                 .Where(/* lambda to identify instantiable types which implement this interface */);             return types;         }         public IEnumerable GetImplementations(IEnumerable types)         {             var implementations = types.Where(/* lambda to identify instantiable types which implement this interface */                 .Select(x = CreateInstance(x));             return implementations;         }         public IEnumerable GetLoadedImplementations()         {             var loadedTypes = GetLoadedTypes();             var implementations = GetImplementations(loadedTypes);             return implementations;         }         private T CreateInstance(Type type)         {             T instance = default(T);             var constructor = type.GetConstructor(Type.EmptyTypes);             if (/* valid to instantiate test */)             {                 object constructed = constructor.Invoke(null);                 instance = (T)constructed;             }             return instance;         }     } It seems useful to me to have my CreateInstance(Type) function implemented as an extension method so I can reuse it later and simplify the code of my factory, but I can't figure out how to return a strongly typed value from that extension method. I realize I could just return an object:     public static class TypeExtensions     {         public object CreateInstance(this Type type)         {             var constructor = type.GetConstructor(Type.EmptyTypes);             return /* valid to instantiate test */ ? constructor.Invoke(null) : null;         }     } Is it possible to have an extension method create a signature per instance of the type it extends? My perfect code would be this, which avoids having to cast the result of the call to CreateInstance():     Type type = typeof(MyParameterlessConstructorImplementingType);     MyParameterlessConstructorImplementingType usable = type.CreateInstance();

  Read the article

• List<object>.RemoveAll - How to create an appropriate Predicate

  - by CJM

  This is a bit of noob question - I'm still fairly new to C# and generics and completely new to predicates, delegates and lamda expressions... I have a class 'Enquiries' which contains a generic list of another class called 'Vehicles'. I'm building up the code to add/edit/delete Vehicles from the parent Enquiry. And at the moment, I'm specifically looking at deletions. From what I've read so far, it appears that I can use Vehicles.RemoveAll() to delete an item with a particular VehicleID or all items with a particular EnquiryID. My problem is understanding how to feed .RemoveAll the right predicate - the examples I have seen are too simplistic (or perhaps I am too simplistic given my lack of knowledge of predicates, delegates and lambda expressions). So if I had a List<Of Vehicle> Vehicles where each Vehicle had an EnquiryID, how would I use Vehicles.RemoveAll() to remove all vehicles for a given EnquiryID? I understand there are several approaches to this so I'd be keen to hear the differences between approaches - as much as I need to get something working, this is also a learning exercise. As an supplementary question, is a Generic list the best repository for these objects? My first inclination was towards a Collection, but it appears I am out of date. Certainly Generics seem to be preferred, but I'm curious as to other alternatives. Thanks

  Read the article

• Android getting XML values

  - by Nils

  Hello, I have the following XML code, which I got by a UPnP device and like to get the res value - the RTSP URL. In this case rtsp://10.42.0.103:554/live.sdp How can I do this? I heard that Android has some built-in support for reading XML. Is that true? <DIDL-Lite xmlns="urn:schemas-upnp-org:metadata-1-0/DIDL-Lite/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:upnp="urn:schemas-upnp-org:metadata-1-0/upnp/"> <item id="11" parentID="1" restricted="1"> <dc:title>Network Camera Stream 1</dc:title> <upnp:class>object.item.videoItem</upnp:class> <res protocolInfo="rtsp-rtp-udp:*:video/mpeg4-generic:*" resolution="640x480">rtsp://10.42.0.103:554/live.sdp</res> </item> <item id="12" parentID="1" restricted="1"> <dc:title>Network Camera Stream 2</dc:title> <upnp:class>object.item.videoItem</upnp:class> <res protocolInfo="rtsp-rtp-udp:*:video/mpeg4-generic:*" resolution="176x144">rtsp://10.42.0.103:554/live2.sdp</res> </item> </DIDL-Lite>

  Read the article

• Create a strongly typed view which inherites a class which is concrete

  - by Ashwani K

  Hello All: I am having one class called BaseClass which contains some logic applicable to whole web site. In order to create a strongly typed view we need to inherit the page from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage generic class. But In our case I have to Inherit the BaseClass from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage to apply some common settings, but the BaseClass should be inherited from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage< generic version. But I cannot inherit the BaseClass from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage< as it will change other class also. So I created one more class of type BaseClass< inheriting it from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage< and copied the whole code of BaseClass in BaseClass<. But the code in BaseClass is controlled by other team so it will be changed frequently so my BaseClass< should be in sync with BaseClass. Please help me in eliminating the code duplication or any other approach to make strongly typed View. Thanks Ashwani

  Read the article

• C++ Returning Multiple Items

  - by Travis Parks

  I am designing a class in C++ that extracts URLs from an HTML page. I am using Boost's Regex library to do the heavy lifting for me. I started designing a class and realized that I didn't want to tie down how the URLs are stored. One option would be to accept a std::vector<Url> by reference and just call push_back on it. I'd like to avoid forcing consumers of my class to use std::vector. So, I created a member template that took a destination iterator. It looks like this: template <typename TForwardIterator, typename TOutputIterator> TOutputIterator UrlExtractor::get_urls( TForwardIterator begin, TForwardIterator end, TOutputIterator dest); I feel like I am overcomplicating things. I like to write fairly generic code in C++, and I struggle to lock down my interfaces. But then I get into these predicaments where I am trying to templatize everything. At this point, someone reading the code doesn't realize that TForwardIterator is iterating over a std::string. In my particular situation, I am wondering if being this generic is a good thing. At what point do you start making code more explicit? Is there a standard approach to getting values out of a function generically?

  Read the article

• Boost lambda: Invoke method on object

  - by ckarras

  I'm looking at boost::lambda as a way to to make a generic algorithm that can work with any "getter" method of any class. The algorithm is used to detect duplicate values of a property, and I would like for it to work for any property of any class. In C#, I would do something like this: class Dummy { public String GetId() ... public String GetName() ... } IEnumerable<String> FindNonUniqueValues<ClassT> (Func<ClassT,String> propertyGetter) { ... } Example use of the method: var duplicateIds = FindNonUniqueValues<Dummy>(d => d.GetId()); var duplicateNames = FindNonUniqueValues<Dummy>(d => d.GetName()); I can get the for "any class" part to work, using either interfaces or template methods, but have not found yet how to make the "for any method" part work. Is there a way to do something similar to the "d = d.GetId()" lambda in C++ (either with or without Boost)? Alternative, more C++ian solutions to make the algorithm generic are welcome too. I'm using C++/CLI with VS2008, so I can't use C++0x lambdas.

  Read the article

• Add additional content to the middle of string from within a method

  - by Sammy T

  I am working with a log file and I have a method which is creating a generic entry in to the log. The generic log entry looks like this: public StringBuilder GetLogMessage(LogEventType logType, object message) { StringBuilder logEntry = new StringBuilder(); logEntry.AppendFormat("DATE={0} ", DateTime.Now.ToString("dd-MMM-yyyy", new CultureInfo(CommonConfig.EnglishCultureCode))); logEntry.AppendFormat("TIME={0} ", DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss", new CultureInfo(CommonConfig.EnglishCultureCode))); logEntry.AppendFormat("ERRORNO={0} ", base.RemoteIPAddress.ToString().Replace(".", string.Empty)); logEntry.AppendFormat("IP={0}", base.RemoteIPAddress.ToString()); logEntry.AppendFormat("LANG={0} ", base.Culture.TwoLetterISOLanguageName); logEntry.AppendFormat("PNR={0} ", this.RecordLocator); logEntry.AppendFormat("AGENT={0} ", base.UserAgent); logEntry.AppendFormat("REF={0} ", base.Referrer); logEntry.AppendFormat("SID={0} ", base.CurrentContext.Session.SessionID); logEntry.AppendFormat("LOGTYPE={0} ", logType.ToString() ); logEntry.AppendFormat("MESSAGE={0} ", message); return logEntry; } What would be the best approach for adding additional parameters before "MESSAGE="? For example if I wanted to add "MODULE=" from a derived class when the GetLogMessage is being run. Would a delegate be what I am looking for or marking the method as virtual and overriding it or do I need something entirely different? Any help would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• .net runtime type casting when using reflection

  - by Mike

  I have need to cast a generic list of a concrete type to a generic list of an interface that the concrete types implement. This interface list is a property on an object and I am assigning the value using reflection. I only know the value at runtime. Below is a simple code example of what I am trying to accomplish: public void EmployeeTest() { IList<Employee> initialStaff = new List<Employee> { new Employee("John Smith"), new Employee("Jane Doe") }; Company testCompany = new Company("Acme Inc"); //testCompany.Staff = initialStaff; PropertyInfo staffProperty = testCompany.GetType().GetProperty("Staff"); staffProperty.SetValue(testCompany, (staffProperty.PropertyType)initialStaff, null); } Classes are defined like so: public class Company { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } set { _name = value; } } private IList<IEmployee> _staff; public IList<IEmployee> Staff { get { return _staff; } set { _staff = value; } } public Company(string name) { _name = name; } } public class Employee : IEmployee { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } set { _name = value; } } public Employee(string name) { _name = name; } } public interface IEmployee { string Name { get; set; } } Any thoughts? I am using .NET 4.0. Would the new covariant or contravariant features help? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Javascript Callback when variable is set to X

  - by Erik

  Hey everyone, Have an issue I can't seem to wrap my head around. I'm wanting to write a generic javascript function that will accept a variable and a callback, and continue to execute until that variable is something other than false. For example, the variable SpeedFeed.user.sid is false until something else happens in the code, but I don't want to execute a particular callback until it has been set. The call: SpeedFeed.helper_ready(SpeedFeed.user.sid, function(){ alert(SpeedFeed.user.sid); // Run function that requires sid to be set. }); The function: helper_ready: function(vtrue, callback){ if(vtrue != false){ callback(); } else { setTimeout(function(){ SpeedFeed.helper_ready(vtrue, callback); }, SpeedFeed.apiCheckTime); } } The issue I've narrowed it down to appears to be that because in the setTimeout I call vtrue instead of the actual SpeedFeed.user.sid, it's going to be set to false always. I realize I could write a specific function for each time that just evaluates the SpeedFeed.user.sid, but I'd like to have a generic method that I could use throughout the application. Thanks for any insight :)

  Read the article

• How can I properly handle 404s in ASP.NET MVC?

  - by Brian

  I am just getting started on ASP.NET MVC so bear with me. I've searched around this site and various others and have seen a few implementations of this. EDIT: I forgot to mention I am using RC2 Using URL Routing: routes.MapRoute( "Error", "{*url}", new { controller = "Errors", action = "NotFound" } //404s ); The above seems to take care of requests like this (assuming default route tables setup by initial MVC project): "/blah/blah/blah/blah" Overriding HandleUnknownAction() in the controller itself: //404s - handle here (bad action requested protected override void HandleUnknownAction(string actionName) { ViewData["actionName"] = actionName; View("NotFound").ExecuteResult(this.ControllerContext); } However the previous strategies do not handle a request to a Bad/Unknown controller. For example, I do not have a "/IDoNotExist", if I request this I get the generic 404 page from the web server and not my 404 if I use routing + override. So finally, my question is: Is there any way to catch this type of request using a route or something else in the MVC framework itself? OR should I just default to using Web.Config customErrors as my 404 handler and forget all this? I assume if I go with customErrors I'll have to store the generic 404 page outside of /Views due to the Web.Config restrictions on direct access. Anyway any best practices or guidance is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Are there pitfalls to using static class/event as an application message bus

  - by Doug Clutter

  I have a static generic class that helps me move events around with very little overhead: public static class MessageBus<T> where T : EventArgs { public static event EventHandler<T> MessageReceived; public static void SendMessage(object sender, T message) { if (MessageReceived != null) MessageReceived(sender, message); } } To create a system-wide message bus, I simply need to define an EventArgs class to pass around any arbitrary bits of information: class MyEventArgs : EventArgs { public string Message { get; set; } } Anywhere I'm interested in this event, I just wire up a handler: MessageBus<MyEventArgs>.MessageReceived += (s,e) => DoSomething(); Likewise, triggering the event is just as easy: MessageBus<MyEventArgs>.SendMessage(this, new MyEventArgs() {Message="hi mom"}); Using MessageBus and a custom EventArgs class lets me have an application wide message sink for a specific type of message. This comes in handy when you have several forms that, for example, display customer information and maybe a couple forms that update that information. None of the forms know about each other and none of them need to be wired to a static "super class". I have a couple questions: fxCop complains about using static methods with generics, but this is exactly what I'm after here. I want there to be exactly one MessageBus for each type of message handled. Using a static with a generic saves me from writing all the code that would maintain the list of MessageBus objects. Are the listening objects being kept "alive" via the MessageReceived event? For instance, perhaps I have this code in a Form.Load event: MessageBus<CustomerChangedEventArgs>.MessageReceived += (s,e) => DoReload(); When the Form is Closed, is the Form being retained in memory because MessageReceived has a reference to its DoReload method? Should I be removing the reference when the form closes: MessageBus<CustomerChangedEventArgs>.MessageReceived -= (s,e) => DoReload();

  Read the article

• How to update GUI thread/class from worker thread/class?

  - by user315182

  First question here so hello everyone. The requirement I'm working on is a small test application that communicates with an external device over a serial port. The communication can take a long time, and the device can return all sorts of errors. The device is nicely abstracted in its own class that the GUI thread starts to run in its own thread and has the usual open/close/read data/write data basic functions. The GUI is also pretty simple - choose COM port, open, close, show data read or errors from device, allow modification and write back etc. The question is simply how to update the GUI from the device class? There are several distinct types of data the device deals with so I need a relatively generic bridge between the GUI form/thread class and the working device class/thread. In the GUI to device direction everything works fine with [Begin]Invoke calls for open/close/read/write etc. on various GUI generated events. I've read the thread here (How to update GUI from another thread in C#?) where the assumption is made that the GUI and worker thread are in the same class. Google searches throw up how to create a delegate or how to create the classic background worker but that's not at all what I need, although they may be part of the solution. So, is there a simple but generic structure that can be used? My level of C# is moderate and I've been programming all my working life, given a clue I'll figure it out (and post back)... Thanks in advance for any help.

  Read the article

• Fluent NHibernate Repository with subclasses

  - by reallyJim

  Having some difficulty understanding the best way to implement subclasses with a generic repository using Fluent NHibernate. I have a base class and two subclasses, say: public abstract class Person { public virtual int PersonId { get; set; } public virtual string FirstName { get; set; } public virtual string LastName { get; set; } } public class Student : Person { public virtual decimal GPA { get; set; } } public class Teacher : Person { public virtual decimal Salary { get; set; } } My Mappings are as follows: public class PersonMap : ClassMap { public PersonMap() { Table("Persons"); Id(x => x.PersonId).GeneratedBy.Identity(); Map(x => x.FirstName); Map(x => x.LastName); } } public class StudentMap : SubclassMap<Student> { public StudentMap() { Table("Students"); KeyColumn("PersonId"); Map(x => x.GPA); } } public class TeacherMap : SubclassMap<Teacher> { public TeacherMap() { Table("Teachers"); KeyColumn("PersonId"); Map(x => x.Salary); } } I use a generic repository to save/retreive/update the entities, and it works great--provided I'm working with Repository--where I already know that I'm working with students or working with teachers. The problem I run into is this: What happens when I have an ID, and need to determine the TYPE of person? If a user comes to my site as PersonId = 23, how do I go about figuring out which type of person it is?

  Read the article

• Java Generics Class Parameter Type Inference

  - by Pindatjuh

  Given the interface: public interface BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> { public T getOther(); public void staticStatisfied(final U list); } The BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> looks very ugly in my use-cases. It is because the T type parameter is already defined in the BasedList<T> part, so the "uglyness" comes from that T needs to be typed twice. Problem: is it possible to let the Java compiler infer the generic T type from BasedList<T> in a generic class/interface definition? Ultimately, I'd like to use the interface like: class X implements BasedOnOther<BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } } // Does not compile, due to invalid parameter count. Instead: class X implements BasedOnOther<SomeType, BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } }

  Read the article

• using STI and ActiveRecordBase<> with full FindAll

  - by oillio

  Is it possible to use generic support with single table inheritance, and still be able to FindAll of the base class? As a bonus question, will I be able to use ActiveRecordLinqBase< as well? I do love those queries. More detail: Say I have the following classes defined: public interface ICompany { int ID { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord("companies", DiscriminatorColumn="type", DiscriminatorType="String", DiscriminatorValue="NA")] public abstract class Company<T> : ActiveRecordBase<T>, ICompany { [PrimaryKey] private int Id { get; set; } [Property] public String Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="firm")] public class Firm : Company<Firm> { [Property] public string Description { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="client")] public class Client : Company<Client> { [Property] public int ChargeRate { get; set; } } This works fine for most cases. I can do things like: var x = Client.FindAll(); But sometimes I want all of the companies. If I was not using generics I could do: var x = (Company[]) FindAll(Company); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Firm b = (Firm)x[1]; Is there a way to write a FindAll that returns an array of ICompany's that can then be typecast into their respective types? Something like: var x = (ICompany[]) FindAll(Company<ICompany>); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Or maybe I am going about implementing the generic support all wrong?

  Read the article

• Dealing with multiple generics in a method call

  - by thaBadDawg

  I've been dealing a lot lately with abstract classes that use generics. This is all good and fine because I get a lot of utility out of these classes but now it's making for some rather ugly code down the line. For example: abstract class ClassBase<T> { T Property { get; set; } } class MyClass : ClassBase<string> { OtherClass PropertyDetail { get; set; } } This implementation isn't all that crazy, except when I want to reference the abstract class from a helper class and then I have to make a list of generics just to make reference to the implemented class, like this below. class Helper { void HelpMe<C, T>(object Value) where C : ClassBase<T>, new() { DoWork(); } } This is just a tame example, because I have some method calls where the list of where clauses end up being 5 or 6 lines long to handle all of the generic data. What I'd really like to do is class Helper { void HelpMe<C>(object Value) where C : ClassBase, new() { DoWork(); } } but it obviously won't compile. I want to reference ClassBase without having to pass it a whole array of generic classes to get the function to work, but I don't want to reference the higher level classes because there are a dozen of those. Am I the victim of my own cleverness or is there an avenue that I haven't considered yet?

  Read the article

• Java Generics Class Type Parameter Inference

  - by Pindatjuh

  Given the interface: public interface BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> { public T getOther(); public void staticStatisfied(final U list); } The BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> looks very ugly in my use-cases. It is because the T type parameter is already defined in the BasedList<T> part, so the "uglyness" comes from that T needs to be typed twice. Problem: is it possible to let the Java compiler infer the generic T type from BasedList<T> in a generic class/interface definition? Ultimately, I'd like to use the interface like: class X extends BasedOnOther<BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } } Instead: class X extends BasedOnOther<SomeType, BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } }

  Read the article

• jQuery ajax form submit - how to ensure dynamically loaded form's action is used

  - by kenny99

  Hi, i'm having a problem with dynamically loaded forms - instead of using the action attribute of the newly loaded form, my jquery code is still using the action attribute of the first form loaded. I have the following code: //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); But when the next form is loaded, the above code does not pick up the new action attribute. I have tried adding the above code to my callback on successful ajax load (shown below), but this doesn't make any difference. Can anyone help? Many thanks function ajaxFormStage(url) { var $data = $('#main_body #content'); $.validationEngine.closePrompt('body'); //close any validation messages $data.fadeOut('fast', function(){ $data.load(url, function(){ $data.animate({ opacity: 'show' }, 'fast'); '); //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); }); });

  Read the article

• How to specify allowed exceptions in WCF's configuration file?

  - by tucaz

  Hello! I´m building a set of WCF services for internal use through all our applications. For exception handling I created a default fault class so I can return treated message to the caller if its the case or a generic one when I have no clue what happened. Fault contract: [DataContract(Name = "DefaultFault", Namespace = "http://fnac.com.br/api/2010/03")] public class DefaultFault { public DefaultFault(DefaultFaultItem[] items) { if (items == null || items.Length== 0) { throw new ArgumentNullException("items"); } StringBuilder sbItems = new StringBuilder(); for (int i = 0; i Specifying that my method can throw this exception so the consuming client will be aware of it: [OperationContract(Name = "PlaceOrder")] [FaultContract(typeof(DefaultFault))] [WebInvoke(UriTemplate = "/orders", BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.Bare, ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, Method = "POST")] string PlaceOrder(Order newOrder); Most of time we will use just .NET to .NET communication with usual binds and everything works fine since we are talking the same language. However, as you can see in the service contract declaration I have a WebInvoke attribute (and a webHttp binding) in order to be able to also talk JSON since one of our apps will be built for iPhone and this guy will talk JSON. My problem is that whenever I throw a FaultException and have includeExceptionDetails="false" in the config file the calling client will get a generic HTTP error instead of my custom message. I understand that this is the correct behavior when includeExceptionDetails is turned off, but I think I saw some configuration a long time ago to allow some exceptions/faults to pass through the service boundaries. Is there such thing like this? If not, what do u suggest for my case? Thanks a LOT!

  Read the article

• django join-like expansion of queryset

  - by jimbob

  I have a list of Persons each which have multiple fields that I usually filter what's upon, using the object_list generic view. Each person can have multiple Comments attached to them, each with a datetime and a text string. What I ultimately want to do is have the option to filter comments based on dates. class Person(models.Model): name = models.CharField("Name", max_length=30) ## has ~30 other fields, usually filtered on as well class Comment(models.Model): date = models.DateTimeField() person = models.ForeignKey(Person) comment = models.TextField("Comment Text", max_length=1023) What I want to do is get a queryset like Person.objects.filter(comment__date__gt=date(2011,1,1)).order_by('comment__date') send that queryset to object_list and be able to only see the comments ordered by date with only so many objects on a page. E.g., if "Person A" has comments 12/3/11, 1/2/11, 1/5/11, "Person B" has no comments, and person C has a comment on 1/3, I would see: "Person A", 1/2 - comment "Person C", 1/3 - comment "Person A", 1/5 - comment I would strongly prefer not to have to switch to filtering based on Comments.objects.filter(), as that would make me have to largely repeat large sections of code in the both the view and template. Right now if I tried executing the following command, I will get a queryset returning (PersonA, PersonC, PersonA), but if I try rendering that in a template each persons comment_set will contain all their comments even if they aren't in the date range. Ideally they're would be some sort of functionality where I could expand out a Person queryset's comment_set into a larger queryset that can be sorted and ordered based on the comment and put into a object_list generic view. This normally is fairly simple to do in SQL with a JOIN, but I don't want to abandon the ORM, which I use everywhere else.

  Read the article

• MSMQ - Message Queue Abstraction and Pattern

  - by Maxim Gershkovich

  Hi All, Let me define the problem first and why a messagequeue has been chosen. I have a datalayer that will be transactional and EXTREMELY insert heavy and rather then attempt to deal with these issues when they occur I am hoping to implement my application from the ground up with this in mind. I have decided to tackle this problem by using the Microsoft Message Queue and perform inserts as time permits asynchronously. However I quickly ran into a problem. Certain inserts that I perform may need to be recalled (ie: retrieved) immediately (imagine this is for POS system and what happens if you need to recall the last transaction - one that still hasn’t been inserted). The way I decided to tackle this problem is by abstracting the MessageQueue and combining it in my data access layer thereby creating the illusion of a single set of data being returned to the user of the datalayer (I have considered the other issues that occur in such a scenario (ie: essentially dirty reads and such) and have concluded for my purposes I can control these issues). However this is where things get a little nasty... I’ve worked out how to get the messages back and such (trivial enough problem) but where I am stuck is; how do I create a generic (or at least somewhat generic) way of querying my message queue? One where I can minimize the duplication between the SQL queries and MessageQueue queries. I have considered using LINQ (but have very limited understanding of the technology) and have also attempted an implementation with Predicates which so far is pretty smelly. Are there any patterns for such a problem that I can utilize? Am I going about this the wrong way? Does anyone have an of their own ideas about how I can tackle this problem? Does anyone even understand what I am talking about? :-) Any and ALL input would be highly appreciated and seriously considered… Thanks again.

  Read the article

• Using child visitor in C#

  - by Thomas Matthews

  I am setting up a testing component and trying to keep it generic. I want to use a generic Visitor class, but not sure about using descendant classes. Example: public interface Interface_Test_Case { void execute(); void accept(Interface_Test_Visitor v); } public interface Interface_Test_Visitor { void visit(Interface_Test_Case tc); } public interface Interface_Read_Test_Case : Interface_Test_Case { uint read_value(); } public class USB_Read_Test : Interface_Read_Test_Case { void execute() { Console.WriteLine("Executing USB Read Test Case."); } void accept(Interface_Test_Visitor v) { Console.WriteLine("Accepting visitor."); } uint read_value() { Console.WriteLine("Reading value from USB"); return 0; } } public class USB_Read_Visitor : Interface_Test_Visitor { void visit(Interface_Test_Case tc) { Console.WriteLine("Not supported Test Case."); } void visit(Interface_Read_Test_Case rtc) { Console.WriteLine("Not supported Read Test Case."); } void visit(USB_Read_Test urt) { Console.WriteLine("Yay, visiting USB Read Test case."); } } // Code fragment USB_Read_Test test_case; USB_Read_Visitor visitor; test_case.accept(visitor); What are the rules the C# compiler uses to determine which of the methods in USB_Read_Visitor will be executed by the code fragment? I'm trying to factor out dependencies of my testing component. Unfortunately, my current Visitor class contains visit methods for classes not related to the testing component. Am I trying to achieve the impossible?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >