Search Results

Search found 17407 results on 697 pages for 'static constructor'.

Page 113/697 | < Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >

  • ASP.Net Webservice - Constructors with Parameters

    - by Ben
    Hi, I'm fairly new to WebService developement and have just set up my own webservice (ASP.Net 3.5, Visual Studio 2008 .asmx file). I can not find a way of setting up my webservice to take parameters on the constructor. If i create a constructor that takes parameters, it is not then shown when i hook up to the webservice from my application (it only shows a parameterless constructor). Am i missing something blatently obvious, or is this not possible (and why not)? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How can I make TextToSpeech to speak a text with max volume and restore original volume after speak end?

    - by HelloCW
    I save the current volume both STREAM_RING and STREAM_MUSIC before sTts.get().speak(s, TextToSpeech.QUEUE_ADD, null), I hope the TextToSpeech can speak a text with max volume, but in fact I find the TextToSpeech speak the text with current volume, it seems that sTts.get().speak is asynchronous. How can I make TextToSpeech to speak a text with max volume and restore original volume after speak end? Thanks! public class SpeechTxt { private static SoftReference<TextToSpeech> sTts; public static void SpeakOut(final Context context, final String s) { final Context appContext = context.getApplicationContext(); if (sTts == null) { sTts = new SoftReference<TextToSpeech>(new TextToSpeech(appContext, new TextToSpeech.OnInitListener() { @Override public void onInit(int status) { if (status == TextToSpeech.SUCCESS) { speak(appContext, s); } else { } } })); } else { speak(appContext, s); } } private static void speak(Context context, String s) { if (sTts != null) { switch (sTts.get().setLanguage(Locale.getDefault())) { case TextToSpeech.LANG_COUNTRY_AVAILABLE: case TextToSpeech.LANG_COUNTRY_VAR_AVAILABLE: case TextToSpeech.LANG_AVAILABLE: { sTts.get().setPitch((float) 0.6); sTts.get().setSpeechRate((float) 0.8); int currentRing=PublicParFun.GetCurrentVol(context, AudioManager.STREAM_RING); int currentPlay=PublicParFun.GetCurrentVol(context, AudioManager.STREAM_MUSIC); PublicParFun.SetRingVol(context, 0); PublicParFun.SetPlayVol(context,1000000); sTts.get().speak(s, TextToSpeech.QUEUE_ADD, null); PublicParFun.SetRingVol(context, currentRing); PublicParFun.SetPlayVol(context,currentPlay); break; } case TextToSpeech.LANG_MISSING_DATA: { break; } case TextToSpeech.LANG_NOT_SUPPORTED: // not much to do here } } } public static int GetCurrentVol(Context myContext,int streamType){ AudioManager mAudioManager = (AudioManager)myContext.getSystemService(Context.AUDIO_SERVICE); int current = mAudioManager.getStreamVolume( streamType); return current; } public static void SetRingVol(Context myContext,int vol){ SetVol(myContext,AudioManager.STREAM_RING, vol); } public static void SetPlayVol(Context myContext,int vol){ SetVol(myContext,AudioManager.STREAM_MUSIC, vol); } private static void SetVol(Context myContext,int streamType,int vol){ AudioManager mAudioManager = (AudioManager)myContext.getSystemService(Context.AUDIO_SERVICE); int max = mAudioManager.getStreamMaxVolume(streamType); if (vol>max){ vol=max; } mAudioManager.setStreamVolume(streamType,vol, 0); } }

    Read the article

  • constructors and inheritance in JS

    - by nandinga
    Hi all, This is about "inheritance" in JavaScript. Supose I create a constructor Bird(), and another called Parrot() which I make to "inherit" the props of Bird by asigning an instance of it to Parrot's prototype, like the following code shows: function Bird() { this.fly = function(){}; } function Parrot() { this.talk = function(){ alert("praa!!"); }; } Parrot.prototype = new Bird(); var p = new Parrot(); p.talk(); // Alerts "praa!!" alert(p.constructor); // Alerts the Bird function!?!?! After I've created an instance of Parrot, how comes that the .constructor property of it is Bird(), and not Parrot(), which is the constructor I've used to create the object? Thanks!!

    Read the article

  • Bug in the official Android Fragments training sample?

    - by Jeff Axelrod
    It seems to me that there must be a bug in the Android Fragments demo. As background, Fragments are apparently sometimes instantiated by the Android OS and thus need a public no-arg constructor: All subclasses of Fragment must include a public empty constructor. The framework will often re-instantiate a fragment class when needed, in particular during state restore, and needs to be able to find this constructor to instantiate it. If the empty constructor is not available, a runtime exception will occur in some cases during state restore. But the NewsReader demo from the official Android training on Fragments constructs the HeadlinesFragment class and configures it with setOnHeadlineSelectedListener(this) from NewsReaderActivity.onCreate(). If the Android OS re-instantiates this fragment, the mHeadlineSelectedListener field will be null because HeadlinesFragment doesn't save or restore its state. Is this a bug or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • 32 bit dllimport generating incorrect format error (0x8007000b) on win7 x64 platform

    - by DFP
    Hello, I'm trying to install and run a 32 bit application on a Win7 x64 machine. The application is built as a Win32 app. It runs fine on 32 bit platforms. On the x64 machine it installs correctly in the Programs(x86) directory and runs fine until I make a call into a 32 bit dll. At that time I get the incorrect format error (0x8007000b) indicating it is trying to load the dll of the wrong bitness. Indeed it is trying to load the 64 bit dll from the System32 directory rather than the 32 bit version in the SystemWOW64 directory. Another 32 bit application provided by the dll vendor runs correctly and it does load the 32 bit dll from the SystemWOW64 directory. I do not have source to their application to see how they are accessing the DLL. I'm using the DllImport function as shown below to access the dll. Is there a way to decorate the DllImport calls to force it to load the 32 bit version? Any thoughts appreciated. Thanks, DP public static class Micronas { [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public static extern short UacBuildDeviceList(uint uFlags); [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public static extern short UacGetNumberOfDevices(); [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public static extern uint UacGetFirstDevice(); [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public static extern uint UacGetNextDevice(uint handle); [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public static extern uint UacSetXDFP(uint handle, short adr, uint data); [DllImport(@"UAC2.DLL")] public unsafe static extern uint UacGetXDFP(uint handle, short adr, IntPtr data); }

    Read the article

  • Why overload true and false instead of defining bool operator?

    - by Joe Enos
    I've been reading about overloading true and false in C#, and I think I understand the basic difference between this and defining a bool operator. The example I see around is something like: public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA > 0); } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA <= 0); } To me, this is the same as saying: public static implicit operator bool(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA > 0); } The difference, as far as I can tell, is that by defining true and false separately, you can have an object that is both true and false, or neither true nor false: public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return true; } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return true; } //or public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return false; } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return false; } I'm sure there's a reason this is allowed, but I just can't think of what it is. To me, if you want an object to be able to be converted to true or false, a single bool operator makes the most sense. Can anyone give me a scenario where it makes sense to do it the other way? Thanks

    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

  • Best way to get a single value from a DataTable?

    - by PiersMyers
    I have a number of static classes that contain tables like this: using System; using System.Data; using System.Globalization; public static class TableFoo { private static readonly DataTable ItemTable; static TableFoo() { ItemTable = new DataTable("TableFoo") { Locale = CultureInfo.InvariantCulture }; ItemTable.Columns.Add("Id", typeof(int)); ItemTable.Columns["Id"].Unique = true; ItemTable.Columns.Add("Description", typeof(string)); ItemTable.Columns.Add("Data1", typeof(int)); ItemTable.Columns.Add("Data2", typeof(double)); ItemTable.Rows.Add(0, "Item 1", 1, 1.0); ItemTable.Rows.Add(1, "Item 2", 1, 1.0); ItemTable.Rows.Add(2, "Item 3", 2, 0.75); ItemTable.Rows.Add(3, "Item 4", 4, 0.25); ItemTable.Rows.Add(4, "Item 5", 1, 1.0); } public static DataTable GetItemTable() { return ItemTable; } public static int Data1(int id) { DataRow[] dr = ItemTable.Select("Id = " + id); if (dr.Length == 0) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("id", "Out of range."); } return (int)dr[0]["Data1"]; } public static double Data2(int id) { DataRow[] dr = ItemTable.Select("Id = " + id); if (dr.Length == 0) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("id", "Out of range."); } return (double)dr[0]["Data2"]; } } Is there a better way of writing the Data1 or Data2 methods that return a single value from a single row that matches the given id?

    Read the article

  • Trouble with object injection in Spring.Net

    - by Abdel Olakara
    Hi all, I have a issue with my Spring.Net configuration where its not injecting an object. I have a CommService to which an object named GeneralEmail is injected to. Here is the configuration: <!-- GeneralMail Object --> <object id="GeneralMailObject" type="CommUtil.Email.GeneralEmail, CommUtil"> <constructor-arg name="host" value="xxxxx.com"/> <constructor-arg name="port" value="25"/> <constructor-arg name="user" value="[email protected]"/> <constructor-arg name="password" value="xxxxx"/> <constructor-arg name="template" value="xxxxx"/> </object> <!-- Communication Service --> <object id="CommServiceObject" type="TApp.Code.Services.CommService, TApp"> <property name="emailService" ref="GeneralMailObject" /> </object> The communication service object is again injected to many other aspx pages & service. In one scenario, I need to call the commnucation service from an static WebMethod. I try doing: CommService cso = new CommService(); But when i try to get the emailService object, its null! why didn't the spring inject the GeneralMail object into my cso object? What am I doing wrong and how do I access the object from spring container. Thanks in advance for the suggestions and solutions. Reagrds, Abdel Olakara

    Read the article

  • how to make an import library

    - by user295030
    a requirement was sent to me below: API should be in the form of static library. company xxx will link the library into a third party application to prevent any possible exposure of the code(dll) could they mean an import library? An import library is a library that automates the process of loading and using a dynamic library. On Windows, this is typically done via a small static library (.lib) of the same name as the dynamic library (.dll). The static library is linked into the program at compile time, and then the functionality of the dynamic library can effectively be used as if it were a static library. this might be what they might be eluding to.....I am not sure how to make this in vs2008 . Additional facts: I have a static lib that i use in my current application. Now, I have to convert my app that uses that static lib into an import lib so that they can use a third party prog to access the API's they providede me which in turn will use that static lib i am using. I hope I am clearly explaining this. I am just not sure how to go about it in vs2008. I am looking for specific steps to do this. I already have the coding done. Just need to convert it into the form they are asking and I have to provide the API they want. Other than that then I need to create a test prog which will act as that third party prog so I can make sure my import library works.

    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

  • When do instance variables get initialized and values assigned?

    - by AKh
    When doees the instance variable get initialized? Is it after the constructor block is done or before it? Consider this example: public abstract class Parent { public Parent(){ System.out.println("Parent Constructor"); init(); } public void init(){ System.out.println("parent Init()"); } } public class Child extends Parent { private Integer attribute1; private Integer attribute2 = null; public Child(){ super(); System.out.println("Child Constructor"); } public void init(){ System.out.println("Child init()"); super.init(); attribute1 = new Integer(100); attribute2 = new Integer(200); } public void print(){ System.out.println("attribute 1 : " +attribute1); System.out.println("attribute 2 : " +attribute2); } } public class Tester { public static void main(String[] args) { Parent c = new Child(); ((Child)c).print(); } } OUTPUT: Parent Constructor Child init() parent Init() Child Constructor attribute 1 : 100 attribute 2 : null When the memory for the atribute 1 & 2 are allocated in the heap ? Curious to know why is attribute 2 is NULL ? Are there any design flaws?

    Read the article

  • memcache is not storing data accross requests

    - by morpheous
    I am new to using memcache, so I may be doing something wrong. I have written a wrapper class around memcache. The wrapper class has only static methods, so is a quasi singleton. The class looks something like this: class myCache { private static $memcache = null; private static $initialized = false; public static function init() { if (self::$initialized) return; self::$memcache = new Memcache(); if (self::configure()) //connects to daemon { self::store('foo', 'bar'); } else throw ConnectionError('I barfed'); } public static function store($key, $data, $flag=MEMCACHE_COMPRESSED, $timeout=86400) { if (self::$memcache->get($key)!== false) return self::$memcache->replace($key, $data, $flag, $timeout); return self::$memcache->set($key, $data, $flag, $timeout); } public static function fetch($key) { return self::$memcache->get($key); } } //in my index.php file, I use the class like this require_once('myCache.php'); myCache::init(); echo 'Stored value is: '. myCache::fetch('foo'); The problem is that the myCache::init() method is being executed in full everytime a page is requested. I then remembered that static variables do not maintain state accross page requests. So I decided instead, to store the flag that indicates whether the server contains the start up data (for our purposes, the variable 'foo', with value 'bar') in memcache itself. Once the status flag is stored in memcache itself, It solves the problem of the initialisation data being loaded for every page request (which quite frankly, defeats the purpose of memcache). However, having solved that problem, when I come to fetch the data in memcache, it is empty. I dont understand whats going on. Can anyone clarify how I can store my data once and retrieve it accross page requests? BTW, (just to clarify), the get/set is working correctly, and if I allow memcache to load the initialisation data for each page request, (which is silly), then the data is available in memcache.

    Read the article

  • Why MSMQ won't send a space character?

    - by cyclotis04
    I'm exploring MSMQ services, and I wrote a simple console client-server application that sends each of the client's keystrokes to the server. Whenever hit a control character (DEL, ESC, INS, etc) the server understandably throws an error. However, whenever I type a space character, the server receives the packet but doesn't throw an error and doesn't display the space. Server: namespace QIM { class Program { const string QUEUE = @".\Private$\qim"; static MessageQueue _mq; static readonly object _mqLock = new object(); static XmlSerializer xs; static void Main(string[] args) { lock (_mqLock) { if (!MessageQueue.Exists(QUEUE)) _mq = MessageQueue.Create(QUEUE); else _mq = new MessageQueue(QUEUE); } xs = new XmlSerializer(typeof(string)); _mq.BeginReceive(new TimeSpan(0, 1, 0), new object(), OnReceive); while (Console.ReadKey().Key != ConsoleKey.Escape) { } } static void OnReceive(IAsyncResult result) { Message msg; lock (_mqLock) { try { msg = _mq.EndReceive(result); Console.Write("."); Console.Write(xs.Deserialize(msg.BodyStream)); } catch (Exception ex) { Console.Write(ex); } } _mq.BeginReceive(new TimeSpan(0, 1, 0), new object(), OnReceive); } } } Client: namespace QIM_Client { class Program { const string QUEUE = @".\Private$\qim"; static MessageQueue _mq; static void Main(string[] args) { if (!MessageQueue.Exists(QUEUE)) _mq = MessageQueue.Create(QUEUE); else _mq = new MessageQueue(QUEUE); ConsoleKeyInfo key = new ConsoleKeyInfo(); while (key.Key != ConsoleKey.Escape) { key = Console.ReadKey(); _mq.Send(key.KeyChar.ToString()); } } } } Client Input: Testing, Testing... Server Output: .T.e.s.t.i.n.g.,..T.e.s.t.i.n.g...... You'll notice that the space character sends a message, but the character isn't displayed.

    Read the article

  • Can I get rid of this read lock?

    - by Pieter
    I have the following helper class (simplified): public static class Cache { private static readonly object _syncRoot = new object(); private static Dictionary<Type, string> _lookup = new Dictionary<Type, string>(); public static void Add(Type type, string value) { lock (_syncRoot) { _lookup.Add(type, value); } } public static string Lookup(Type type) { string result; lock (_syncRoot) { _lookup.TryGetValue(type, out result); } return result; } } Add will be called roughly 10/100 times in the application and Lookup will be called by many threads, many of thousands of times. What I would like is to get rid of the read lock. How do you normally get rid of the read lock in this situation? I have the following ideas: Require that _lookup is stable before the application starts operation. The could be build up from an Attribute. This is done automatically through the static constructor the attribute is assigned to. Requiring the above would require me to go through all types that could have the attribute and calling RuntimeHelpers.RunClassConstructor which is an expensive operation; Move to COW semantics. public static void Add(Type type, string value) { lock (_syncRoot) { var lookup = new Dictionary<Type, string>(_lookup); lookup.Add(type, value); _lookup = lookup; } } (With the lock (_syncRoot) removed in the Lookup method.) The problem with this is that this uses an unnecessary amount of memory (which might not be a problem) and I would probably make _lookup volatile, but I'm not sure how this should be applied. (John Skeets' comment here gives me pause.) Using ReaderWriterLock. I believe this would make things worse since the region being locked is small. Suggestions are very welcome.

    Read the article

  • java singleton instantiation

    - by jurchiks
    I've found three ways of instantiating a Singleton, but I have doubts as to whether any of them is the best there is. I'm using them in a multi-threaded environment and prefer lazy instantiation. Sample 1: private static final ClassName INSTANCE = new ClassName(); public static ClassName getInstance() { return INSTANCE; } Sample 2: private static class SingletonHolder { public static final ClassName INSTANCE = new ClassName(); } public static ClassName getInstance() { return SingletonHolder.INSTANCE; } Sample 3: private static ClassName INSTANCE; public static synchronized ClassName getInstance() { if (INSTANCE == null) INSTANCE = new ClassName(); return INSTANCE; } The project I'm using ATM uses Sample 2 everywhere, but I kind of like Sample 3 more. There is also the Enum version, but I just don't get it. The question here is - in which cases I should/shouldn't use any of these variations? I'm not looking for lengthy explanations though (there's plenty of other topics about that, but they all eventually turn into arguing IMO), I'd like it to be understandable with few words.

    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

  • C++, function pointer to the template function pointer

    - by Ian
    I am having a pointer to the common static method class MyClass { private: static double ( *pfunction ) ( const Object *, const Object *); ... }; pointing to the static method class SomeClass { public: static double getA ( const Object *o1, const Object *o2); ... }; Initialization: double ( *MyClass::pfunction ) ( const Object *o1, const Object *o2 ) = &SomeClass::getA; I would like to convert this pointer to the static template function pointer: template <class T> static T ( *pfunction ) ( const Object <T> *, const Object <T> *); //Compile error where: class SomeClass { public: template <class T> static double getA ( const Object <T> *o1, const Object <T> *o2); ... }; But there is some error... Thanks for your help...

    Read the article

  • DBTransactions between stateless calls using GUIDs

    - by Marty Trenouth
    I'm looking to add transactional support to my DB engine and providing to Abstract Transaction Handling down to passing in Guids with the DB Action Command. The DB engine would run similar to: private static Database DB; public static Dictionary<Guid,DBTransaction> Transactions = new ...() public static void DoDBAction(string cmdstring,List<Parameter> parameters,Guid TransactionGuid) { DBCommand cmd = BuildCommand(cmdstring,parameters); if(Transactions.ContainsKey(TransactionGuid)) cmd.Transaction = Transactions[TransactionGuid]; DB.ExecuteScalar(cmd); } public static BuildCommand(string cmd, List<Parameter> parameters) { // Create DB command from EntLib Database and assign parameters } public static Guid BeginTransaction() { // creates new Transaction adding it to "Transactions" and opens a new connection } public static Guid Commit(Guid g) { // Commits Transaction and removes it from "Transactions" and closes connection } public static Guid Rollback(Guid g) { // Rolls back Transaction and removes it from "Transactions" and closes connection } The Calling system would run similar to: Guid g try { g = DBEngine.BeginTransaction() DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring1, parameters,g) // do some other stuff DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring2, parameters2,g) // sit here and wait for a response from other item DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring3, parameters3,g) DBEngine.Commit(g) } catch(Exception){ DBEngine.Rollback(g);} Does this interfere with .NET connection pooling (other than a connection be accidently left open)? Will EntLib keep the connection open until the commit or rollback?

    Read the article

  • Some questions about special operators i've never seen in C++ code.

    - by toto
    I have downloaded the Phoenix SDK June 2008 (Tools for compilers) and when I'm reading the code of the Hello sample, I really feel lost. public ref class Hello { //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- // // Description: // // Class Variables. // // Remarks: // // A normal compiler would have more flexible means for holding // on to all this information, but in our case it's simplest (if // somewhat inelegant) if we just keep references to all the // structures we'll need to access as classstatic variables. // //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- static Phx::ModuleUnit ^ module; static Phx::Targets::Runtimes::Runtime ^ runtime; static Phx::Targets::Architectures::Architecture ^ architecture; static Phx::Lifetime ^ lifetime; static Phx::Types::Table ^ typeTable; static Phx::Symbols::Table ^ symbolTable; static Phx::Phases::PhaseConfiguration ^ phaseConfiguration; 2 Questions : What's that ref keyword? What is that sign ^ ? What is it doing protected: virtual void Execute ( Phx::Unit ^ unit ) override; }; override is a C++ keyword too? It's colored as such in my Visual Studio. I really want to play with this framework, but this advanced C++ is really an obstacle right now. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Implementing a bitfield using java enums

    - by soappatrol
    Hello, I maintain a large document archive and I often use bit fields to record the status of my documents during processing or when validating them. My legacy code simply uses static int constants such as: static int DOCUMENT_STATUS_NO_STATE = 0 static int DOCUMENT_STATUS_OK = 1 static int DOCUMENT_STATUS_NO_TIF_FILE = 2 static int DOCUMENT_STATUS_NO_PDF_FILE = 4 This makes it pretty easy to indicate the state a document is in, by setting the appropriate flags. For example: status = DOCUMENT_STATUS_NO_TIF_FILE | DOCUMENT_STATUS_NO_PDF_FILE; Since the approach of using static constants is bad practice and because I would like to improve the code, I was looking to use Enums to achieve the same. There are a few requirements, one of them being the need to save the status into a database as a numeric type. So there is a need to transform the enumeration constants to a numeric value. Below is my first approach and I wonder if this is the correct way to go about this? class DocumentStatus{ public enum StatusFlag { DOCUMENT_STATUS_NOT_DEFINED(1<<0), DOCUMENT_STATUS_OK(1<<1), DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_TID_DIR(1<<2), DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_TIF_FILE(1<<3), DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_PDF_FILE(1<<4), DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_OCR_FILE(1<<5), DOCUMENT_STATUS_PAGE_COUNT_TIF(1<<6), DOCUMENT_STATUS_PAGE_COUNT_PDF(1<<7), DOCUMENT_STATUS_UNAVAILABLE(1<<8), private final long statusFlagValue; StatusFlag(long statusFlagValue) { this.statusFlagValue = statusFlagValue } public long getStatusFlagValue(){ return statusFlagValue } } /** * Translates a numeric status code into a Set of StatusFlag enums * @param numeric statusValue * @return EnumSet representing a documents status */ public EnumSet<StatusFlag> getStatusFlags(long statusValue) { EnumSet statusFlags = EnumSet.noneOf(StatusFlag.class) StatusFlag.each { statusFlag -> long flagValue = statusFlag.statusFlagValue if ( (flagValue&statusValue ) == flagValue ) { statusFlags.add(statusFlag) } } return statusFlags } /** * Translates a set of StatusFlag enums into a numeric status code * @param Set if statusFlags * @return numeric representation of the document status */ public long getStatusValue(Set<StatusFlag> flags) { long value=0 flags.each { statusFlag -> value|=statusFlag.getStatusFlagValue() } return value } public static void main(String[] args) { DocumentStatus ds = new DocumentStatus(); Set statusFlags = EnumSet.of( StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_OK, StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_UNAVAILABLE) assert ds.getStatusValue( statusFlags )==258 // 0000.0001|0000.0010 long numericStatusCode = 56 statusFlags = ds.getStatusFlags(numericStatusCode) assert !statusFlags.contains(StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_OK) assert statusFlags.contains(StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_TIF_FILE) assert statusFlags.contains(StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_PDF_FILE) assert statusFlags.contains(StatusFlag.DOCUMENT_STATUS_MISSING_OCR_FILE) } }

    Read the article

  • Not all symbols of an DLL-exported class is exported (VS9)

    - by mandrake
    I'm building a DLL from a group of static libraries and I'm having a problem where only parts of classes are exported. What I'm doing is declaring all symbols I want to export with a preprocessor definition like: #if defined(MYPROJ_BUILD_DLL) //Build as a DLL # define MY_API __declspec(dllexport) #elif defined(MYPROJ_USE_DLL) //Use as a DLL # define MY_API __declspec(dllimport) #else //Build or use as a static lib # define MY_API #endif For example: class MY_API Foo{ ... } I then build static library with MYPROJ_BUILD_DLL & MYPROJ_USE_DLL undefined causing a static library to be built. In another build I create a DLL from these static libraries. So I define MYPROJ_BUILD_DLL causing all symbols I want to export to be attributed with __declspec(dllexport) (this is done by including all static library headers in the DLL-project source file). Ok, so now to the problem. When I use this new DLL I get unresolved externals because not all symbols of a class is exported. For example in a class like this: class MY_API Foo{ public: Foo(char const* ); int bar(); private: Foo( char const*, char const* ); }; Only Foo::Foo( char const*, char const*); and int Foo::bar(); is exported. How can that be? I can understand if the entire class was missing, due to e.g. I forgot to include the header in the DLL-build. But it's only partial missing. Also, say if Foo::Foo( char const*) was not implemented; then the DLL build would have unresolved external errors. But the build is fine (I also double checked for declarations without implementation). Note: The combined size of the static libraries I'm combining is in the region of 30MB, and the resulting DLL is 1.2MB. I'm using Visual Studio 9.0 (2008) to build everything. And Depends to check for exported symbols.

    Read the article

  • C# Debug.Assert-s use the same error message. Should I promote it to a static variable?

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    I love Asserts but not code duplication, and in several places I use a Debug.Assert which checks for the same condition like so: Debug.Assert(kosherBaconList.SelectedIndex != -1, "An error message along the lines - you should not ever be able to click on edit button without selecting a kosher bacon first."); This is in response to an actual bug, although the actual list does not contain kosher bacon. Anyhow, I can think of two approaches: private static readonly mustSelectKosherBaconBeforeEditAssertMessage = "An error message along the lines - you should not ever be able to " + "click on edit button without selecting a something first."; ... Debug.Assert( kosherBaconList.SelectedIndex != -1, mustSelectKosherBaconBeforeEditAssertMessage) or: if (kosherBaconList.SelectedIndex == -1) { AssertMustSelectKosherBaconBeforeEdit(); } ... [Conditional("DEBUG")] private void AssertMustSelectKosherBaconBeforeEdit() { // Compiler will optimize away this variable. string errorMessage = "An error message along the lines - you should not ever be able to " + "click on edit button without selecting a something first."; Debug.Assert(false, errorMessage); } or is there a third way which sucks less than either one above? Please share. General helpful relevant tips are also welcome.

    Read the article

  • C#. Saving information about events and event handlers and removing handlers using this information

    - by Philipp
    I have an object which is creating several event handlers using lambda expressions, and I need to remove all handlers created in that object in one time. I'm trying to create some unified static object which will 'know' which handler relates to which object and event if event handler was created through this static object. I tried something like code below, but I don't understand how to save events and event handlers objects, to be able remove handlers in one time. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var EventSender = new EventSender(); var EventReceiver = new EventReceiver(EventSender); EventSender.Invoke(" some var "); LinkSaver.RemoveEvent(EventReceiver); // ?? Console.ReadKey(); } } public class ObjLink{ public object Event; public object Action; } public static class LinkSaver { public static void SetEvent<T>(object obj, Action<T> Event, T Action) { Event(Action); var objLink = new ObjLink{Event = Event, Action = Action}; if (!Links.ContainsKey(obj)) Links.Add(obj, new List<ObjLink>{objLink}); else Links[obj].Add(objLink); } static Dictionary<object,List<ObjLink>> Links = new Dictionary<object, List<ObjLink>>(); public static void RemoveEvent(object obj){ foreach(var objLink in Links[obj]){ // objLink.Event -= objLink.Action; ??? } } } public class EventReceiver { public EventReceiver(EventSender obj) { LinkSaver.SetEvent<EventSender.TestDelegate>(this, obj.SetEvent, str => Console.WriteLine(str + " test event!")); } } public class EventSender { public void Invoke(string var) { if (eventTest != null) eventTest(var); } public void SetEvent(TestDelegate Action) { eventTest += Action; } public delegate void TestDelegate(string var); private event TestDelegate eventTest; // by the way public void RemoveFromEvent() { foreach (var handler in eventTest.GetInvocationList()) eventTest -= (TestDelegate)handler; } }

    Read the article

  • JavaScript - Inheritance in Constructors

    - by j0ker
    For a JavaScript project we want to introduce object inheritance to decrease code duplication. However, I cannot quite get it working the way I want and need some help. We use the module pattern. Suppose there is a super element: a.namespace('a.elements.Element'); a.elements.Element = (function() { // public API -- constructor Element = function(properties) { this.id = properties.id; }; // public API -- prototype Element.prototype = { getID: function() { return this.id; } }; return Element; }()); And an element inheriting from this super element: a.namespace('a.elements.SubElement'); a.elements.SubElement = (function() { // public API -- constructor SubElement = function(properties) { // inheritance happens here // ??? this.color = properties.color; this.bogus = this.id + 1; }; // public API -- prototype SubElement.prototype = { getColor: function() { return this.color; } }; return SubElement; }()); You will notice that I'm not quite sure how to implement the inheritance itself. In the constructor I have to be able to pass the parameter to the super object constructor and create a super element that is then used to create the inherited one. I need a (comfortable) possibility to access the properties of the super object within the constructor of the new object. Ideally I could operate on the super object as if it was part of the new object. I also want to be able to create a new SubElement and call getID() on it. What I want to accomplish seems like the traditional class based inheritance. However, I'd like to do it using prototypal inheritance since that's the JavaScript way. Is that even doable? Thanks in advance! EDIT: Fixed usage of private variables as suggested in the comments. EDIT2: Another change of the code: It's important that id is accessible from the constructor of SubElement.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >