Search Results

Search found 4593 results on 184 pages for 'constructor injection'.

Page 12/184 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• SQL injection attempt on my server

  - by Jan Kuboschek

  I know a little about SQL injections and URL decode, but can someone who's more of an expert than me on this matter take a look at the following string and tell me what exactly it's trying to do? Some kid from Beijing a couple weeks ago tried a number of injections like the one below. %27%20and%20char(124)%2Buser%2Bchar(124)=0%20and%20%27%27=%27

  Read the article

• Tied up with injection implemented with setter functions

  - by puudeli

  Hi, I'm trying to use Scala as part of an existing Java application and now I run into an issue with dependencies injected with a setter method (no DI frameworks in this part of code). How is this handled in a Scala way? In Scala both val and var require to be initialized when declared but I can't do that, since the Java setters inject objects that implement a certain interface and interfaces are abstract and can not be instantiated. class ScalaLogic { var service // How to initialize? def setService (srv: OutputService) = { service = srv } Is there a way to initialize the var service so that I can later assign a dependency into it? It should be lexically scoped to be visible in the whole class.

  Read the article

• Java: initialization problem with private-final-int-value and empty constructor

  - by HH

  $ javac InitInt.java InitInt.java:7: variable right might not have been initialized InitInt(){} ^ 1 error $ cat InitInt.java import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class InitInt { private final int right; InitInt(){} public static void main(String[] args) { // I don't want to assign any value. // just initialize it, how? InitInt test = new InitInt(); System.out.println(test.getRight()); // later assiging a value } public int getRight(){return right;} } Initialization problem with Constructor InitInt{ // Still the error, "may not be initialized" // How to initialise it? if(snippetBuilder.length()>(charwisePos+25)){ right=charwisePos+25; }else{ right=snippetBuilder.length()-1; } }

  Read the article

• Why is the base() constructor not necessary?

  - by Earlz

  Hello, I have a class structure like abstract class Animal { public Animal(){ //init stuff.. } } class Cat : Animal { public Cat(bool is_keyboard) : base() //NOTE here { //other init stuff } } Now then, look at the noted line. If you remove : base() then it will compile without an error. Why is this? Is there a way to disable this behavior? I have had multiple bugs now from forgetting the base() which I would have thought to be required on such a special thing as a constructor.

  Read the article

• Returning in a static class constructor

  - by Martijn Courteaux

  Hello, This isn't valid code: public class MyClass { private static boolean yesNo = false; static { if (yesNo) { System.out.println("Yes"); return; // The return statement is the problem } System.exit(0); } } This is a stupid example, but in a static class constructor we can't return;. Why? Are there good reasons for this? Does someone know something more about this? So the reason why I should do return is to end constructing there. Thanks

  Read the article

• Better to use constructor or method factory pattern?

  - by devoured elysium

  I have a wrapper class for the Bitmap .NET class called BitmapZone. Assuming we have a WIDTH x HEIGHT bitmap picture, this wrapper class should serve the purpose of allowing me to send to other methods/classes itself instead of the original bitmap. I can then better control what the user is or not allowed to do with the picture (and I don't have to copy the bitmap lots of times to send for each method/class). My question is: knowing that all BitmapZone's are created from a Bitmap, what do you find preferrable? Constructor syntax: something like BitmapZone bitmapZone = new BitmapZone(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.From(originalBitmap, x , y, width, height); Factory Method Pattern: BitmapZone bitmapZone = BitmapZone.FromBitmap(originalBitmap, x, y, width, height); Other? Why? Thanks

  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

• C++ Singleton Constructor and Destructor

  - by Aaron

  Does it matter if the constructor/destructor implementation is provided in the header file or the source file? For example, which way is preferred and why? Way 1: class Singleton { public: ~Singleton() { } private: Singleton() { } }; Way 2: class Singleton { public: ~Singleton(); private: Singleton(); }; In the source .cc file: Singleton::Singleton() { } Singleton::~Singleton() { } Initially, I have the implementation in a source file, but I was asked to remove it. Does anyone know why?

  Read the article

• Is dependency injection only for service type objects and singletons? (and NOT for gui?)

  - by sensui

  I'm currently experimenting with the Google's guice inversion of control container. I previously had singletons for just about any service (database, active directory) my application used. Now I refactored the code: all the dependencies are given as parameters to constructors. So far, so good. Now the hardest part is with the graphical user interface. I face this problem: I have a table (JTable) of products wrapped in an ProductFrame. I give the dependencies as parameters (EditProductDialog). @Inject public ProductFrame(EditProductDialog editProductDialog) { // ... } // ... @Inject public EditProductDialog(DBProductController productController, Product product) { // ... } The problem is that guice can't know what Product I have selected in the table, so it can't know what to inject in the EditProductDialog. Dependency Injection is pretty viral (if I modify one class to use dependency injection I also need to modify all the other classes it interacts with) so my question is should I directly instantiate EditProductDialog? But then I would have to pass manually the DBProductController to the EditProductDialog and I will also need to pass it to the ProductFrame and all this boils down to not using dependency injection at all. Or is my design flawed and because of that I can't really adapt the project to dependecy injection? Give me some examples of how you used dependency injection with the graphical user interface. All the examples found on the Internet are really simple examples where you use some services (mostly databases) with dependency injection.

  Read the article

• Handling Exceptions that happen in a asp.net MVC Controller Constructor

  - by Jason

  What's the best way to handle exceptions that happen from within a controller's constructor? All I can think of to do is use Application_OnError() or put a try/catch in my ControllerFactory. Neither of these solutions seem ideal. Application_OnError is to broad - I have some non-mvc content in the site that has its own error handling. Using a try/catch block seems kinda hacky. If I'm serving different content type -html/text/json/rss.... I would like to be able to handle the exception from within the action method instead of having to write all kinds of conditions to determine what kind of error message to serve. Am I missing something here, or has anyone else dealt with this?

  Read the article

• Template class implicit copy constructor issues

  - by Nate

  Stepping through my program in gdb, line 108 returns right back to the calling function, and doesn't call the copy constructor in class A, like (I thought) it should: template <class S> class A{ //etc... A( const A & old ){ //do stuff... } //etc... }; template <class T> class B{ //etc... A<T> ReturnsAnA(){ A<T> result; // do some stuff with result return result; //line 108 } //etc... }; Any hints? I've banged my head against the wall about this for 4 hours now, and can't seem to come up with what's happening here.

  Read the article

• C++ Constructor Initializer List - using member functions of initialized members

  - by Andy

  I've run into the following a few times with initializer lists and I've never been able to explain it well. Can anyone explain why exactly the following fails (I don't have a compiler to catch typos, so bear with me): class Foo { public: Foo( int i ) : m_i( i ) {} //works with no problem int getInt() {return m_i;} ~Foo {} private: int m_i; }; class Bar { public: Bar() : m_foo( 5 ), //this is ok m_myInt( m_foo.getInt() ) //runtime error, seg 11 {} ~Bar() {} private: Foo m_foo; int m_myInt; }; When trying to call member functions of members initialized higher up the initializer list, I get seg faults. I seem to recall this is a known problem (or perhaps somehow by design) but I've never seen it well described. The attached example is contrived with plain old data types, but substitute the Bar::m_myInt with another object lacking a default (empty) constructor and the issue is more real. Can anyone enlighten me? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Error Instantiating an Inner Class in Parent's Constructor...

  - by stormin986

  In my application's main class (subclass of Application), I have a public inner class that simply contains 3 public string objects. In the parent class I declare an object of that inner class. public class MainApplication extends Application { public class Data { public String x; public String y; public String z; } private Data data; MainApplication() { data = new Data() data.x = "String"; } } After I instantiate the object in the constructor, I get a runtime error when I try to assign any of the inner class object's variables. Any idea what's up here??

  Read the article

• Constructor with non-instance variable assistant?

  - by Robert Fischer

  I have a number of classes that look like this: class Foo(val:BasicData) extends Bar(val) { val helper = new Helper(val) val derived1 = helper.getDerived1Value() val derived2 = helper.getDerived2Value() } ...except that I don't want to hold onto an instance of "helper" beyond the end of the constructor. In Java, I'd do something like this: public class Foo { final Derived derived1, derived2; public Foo(BasicData val) { Helper helper = new Helper(val); derived1 = helper.getDerived1Value(); derived2 = helper.getDerived2Value(); } } So how do I do something like that in Scala? I'm aware of creating a helper object of the same name of the class with an apply method: I was hoping for something slightly more succinct.

  Read the article

• C++ catch constructor exception

  - by aaa

  hi. I do not seem to understand how to catch constructor exception. Here is relevant code: struct Thread { rysq::cuda::Fock fock_; template<class iterator> Thread(const rysq::cuda::Centers &centers, const iterator (&blocks)[4]) : fock_() { if (!fock_) throw; } }; Thread *ct; try { ct = new Thread(centers_, blocks); } catch(...) { return false; } // catch never happens, So catch statement do not execute and I get unhandled exception. What did I do wrong? this is straight C++ using g++.

  Read the article

• Disallow private constructor invocation in friend function

  - by user2907032

  Is there any way to not allow private construction in friend function, In case we do have private constructor with friend function in our class. Only Static method should be responsible for object creation and other than this compiler should flash error message #include <iostream> #include <memory> using namespace std; class a { public: void see () { cout<<"Motimaa"; } static a& getinstance() { static a instance; return instance; } private: a() {}; friend void access(); }; void access () { a obj; obj.see();//still friend function can access } int main() { a::getinstance().see(); access(); return 1; }

  Read the article

• C# Closing a form during a constructor

  - by pm_2

  Is it possible to close a form while the constructor is executing (or simply to stop it showing at this stage)? I have the following code: public partial class MyForm : Form { public MyForm() { if (MyFunc()) { this.Close(); } } } Which errors in Main(), here: static void Main() { ... // Following line errors Application.Run(new MyForm()); } I’ve tried checking the result of MyForm like this: static void Main() { ... MyForm frm = new MyForm(); if (frm != null) { // Following line errors Application.Run(frm); } } But that doesn’t seem to help. Can anyone tell me a way around this, please? Maybe a way to check the form to see if it still exists?

  Read the article

• How do I get the default constructor value in a function

  - by lax

  public class AppXmlLogWritter { public int randomNumber; public string LogDateTime = ""; public AppXmlLogWritter() { Random random = new Random(); randomNumber = random.Next(9999); LogDateTime = DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyyMMdd HHmmss"); } public AppXmlLogWritter(int intLogIDPrefix, string strLogApplication, string strLogFilePath) { LogIDPrefix = intLogIDPrefix; LogApplication = strLogApplication; LogFilePath = strLogFilePath; } public void WriteXmlLog(string LogFlag) { string value=LogDateTime + randomNumber;**//Here i m getting 0 no date time and random number generated** } } AppXmlLogWritter objParameterized = new AppXmlLogWritter(1234, "LogApplication", "LogFilepath"); AppXmlLogWritter objParmeterlessConstr = new AppXmlLogWritter(); objParameterized.WriteXmlLog("0", "LogFlag"); How do I get the default constructor value in this function?

  Read the article

• C# Constructor Problem When Using Generics

  - by Jimbo

  Please see an example of my code below: public class ScrollableCheckboxList { public List<ScrollableCheckboxItem> listitems; public void ScrollableCheckboxList<TModel>(IEnumerable<TModel> items, string valueField, string textField, string titleField) where TModel : class { listitems = new List<ScrollableCheckboxItem>(); foreach (TModel item in items) { Type t = typeof(TModel); PropertyInfo[] props = new [] { t.GetProperty(textField), t.GetProperty(valueField), t.GetProperty(titleField) }; listitems.Add(new ScrollableCheckboxItem { text = props[0].GetValue(item, null).ToString(), value = props[1].GetValue(item, null).ToString(), title = props[2].GetValue(item, null).ToString() }); } } } The code produces the following error: 'ScrollableCheckboxList': member names cannot be the same as their enclosing type This clearly means that there is a method in the class that has the same name as the class, but usually insinuates that the method is trying to return something (which is not allowed) In my case, all I have done is declare a constructor - why would this be a problem?

  Read the article

• Copy Constructor in C++

  - by user265260

  i have this code #include <iostream> using namespace std; class Test{ public: int a; Test(int i=0):a(i){} ~Test(){ cout << a << endl; } Test(const Test &){ cout << "copy" << endl; } void operator=(const Test &){ cout << "=" << endl; } Test operator+(Test& p){ Test res(a+p.a); return res; } }; int main (int argc, char const *argv[]){ Test t1(10), t2(20); Test t3=t1+t2; return 0; } Output: 30 20 10 Why isnt the copy constructor called here?

  Read the article

• Constructor Definition

  - by mctl87

  Ok so i have a class Vector: #include <cstdlib> class Vec { private: size_t size; int * ptab; public: Vec(size_t n); ~Vec() {delete [] ptab;} size_t size() const {return size;} int & operator[](int n) {return ptab[n];} int operator[](int n) const {return ptab[n];} void operator=(Vec const& v); }; inline Vec::Vec(size_t n) : size(n), ptab(new int[n]) { } and the problem is that in one of my homework exercises i have to extend constructor def, so all elements will be initialized with zeros. I thought i know the basics but cant get through this dynamic array -.- ps. sry for gramma and other mistakes ;)

  Read the article

• NHibernate does not update entity when repository is passed by constructor

  - by Alex

  Hi everybody, I am developing with NHibernate for the first time in conjunction with ASP.NET MVC and StructureMap. The CodeCampServer serves as a great example for me. I really like the different concepts which were implemented there and I can learn a lot from it. In my controllers I use Constructur Dependency Injection to get an instance of the specific repository needed. My problem is: If I change an attribute of the customer the customer's data is not updated in the database, although Commit() is called on the transaction object (by a HttpModule). public class AccountsController : Controller { private readonly ICustomerRepository repository; public AccountsController(ICustomerRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult Save(Customer customer) { Customer customerToUpdate = repository .GetById(customer.Id); customerToUpdate.GivenName = "test"; //<-- customer does not get updated in database return View(); } } On the other hand this is working: public class AccountsController : Controller { [LoadCurrentCustomer] public ActionResult Save(Customer customer) { customer.GivenName = "test"; //<-- Customer gets updated return View(); } } public class LoadCurrentCustomer : ActionFilterAttribute { public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { const string parameterName = "Customer"; if (filterContext.ActionParameters.ContainsKey(parameterName)) { if (filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { Customer CurrentCustomer = DependencyResolverFactory .GetDefault() .Resolve<IUserSession>() .GetCurrentUser(); filterContext.ActionParameters[parameterName] = CurrentCustomer; } } base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); } } public class UserSession : IUserSession { private readonly ICustomerRepository repository; public UserSession(ICustomerRepository customerRepository) { repository = customerRepository; } public Customer GetCurrentUser() { var identity = HttpContext.Current.User.Identity; if (!identity.IsAuthenticated) { return null; } Customer customer = repository.GetByEmailAddress(identity.Name); return customer; } } I also tried to call update on the repository like the following code shows. But this leads to an NHibernateException which says "Illegal attempt to associate a collection with two open sessions". Actually there is only one. public ActionResult Save(Customer customer) { Customer customerToUpdate = repository .GetById(customer.Id); customer.GivenName = "test"; repository.Update(customerToUpdate); return View(); } Does somebody have an idea why the customer is not updated in the first example but is updated in the second example? Why does NHibernate say that there are two open sessions?

  Read the article

• CA2000 passing object reference to base constructor in C#

  - by Timothy

  I receive a warning when I run some code through Visual Studio's Code Analysis utility which I'm not sure how to resolve. Perhaps someone here has come across a similar issue, resolved it, and is willing to share their insight. I'm programming a custom-painted cell used in a DataGridView control. The code resembles: public class DataGridViewMyCustomColumn : DataGridViewColumn { public DataGridViewMyCustomColumn() : base(new DataGridViewMyCustomCell()) { } It generates the following warning: CA2000 : Microsoft.Reliability : In method 'DataGridViewMyCustomColumn.DataGridViewMyCustomColumn()' call System.IDisposable.Dispose on object 'new DataGridViewMyCustomCell()' before all references to it are out of scope. I understand it is warning me DataGridViewMyCustomCell (or a class that it inherits from) implements the IDisposable interface and the Dispose() method should be called to clean up any resources claimed by DataGridViewMyCustomCell when it is no longer. The examples I've seen on the internet suggest a using block to scope the lifetime of the object and have the system automatically dispose it, but base isn't recognized when moved into the body of the constructor so I can't write a using block around it... which I'm not sure I'd want to do anyway, since wouldn't that instruct the run time to free the object which could still be used later inside the base class? My question then, is the code okay as is? Or, how could it be refactored to resolve the warning? I don't want to suppress the warning unless it is truly appropriate to do so.

  Read the article

• Temporary non-const istream reference in constructor (C++)

  - by Christopher Bruns

  It seems that a constructor that takes a non-const reference to an istream cannot be constructed with a temporary value in C++. #include <iostream> #include <sstream> using namespace std; class Bar { public: explicit Bar(std::istream& is) {} }; int main() { istringstream stream1("bar1"); Bar bar1(stream1); // OK on all platforms // compile error on linux, Mac gcc; OK on Windows MSVC Bar bar2(istringstream("bar2")); return 0; } This compiles fine with MSVC, but not with gcc. Using gcc I get a compile error: g++ test.cpp -o test test.cpp: In function ‘int main()’: test.cpp:18: error: no matching function for call to ‘Bar::Bar(std::istringstream)’ test.cpp:9: note: candidates are: Bar::Bar(std::istream&) test.cpp:7: note: Bar::Bar(const Bar&) Is there something philosophically wrong with the second way (bar2) of constructing a Bar object? It looks nicer to me, and does not require that stream1 variable that is only needed for a moment.

  Read the article

• Enums, Constructor overloads with similar conversions.

  - by David Thornley

  Why does VisualC++ (2008) get confused 'C2666: 2 overloads have similar conversions' when I specify an enum as the second parameter, but not when I define a bool type? Shouldn't type matching already rule out the second constructor because it is of a 'basic_string' type? #include <string> using namespace std; enum EMyEnum { mbOne, mbTwo }; class test { public: #if 1 // 0 = COMPILE_OK, 1 = COMPILE_FAIL test(basic_string<char> myString, EMyEnum myBool2) { } test(bool myBool, bool myBool2) { } #else test(basic_string<char> myString, bool myBool2) { } test(bool myBool, bool myBool2) { } #endif }; void testme() { test("test", mbOne); } I can work around this by specifying a reference 'ie. basic_string &myString' but not if it is 'const basic_string &myString'. Also calling explicitly via "test((basic_string)"test", mbOne);" also works. I suspect this has something to do with every expression/type being resolved to a bool via an inherent '!=0'. Curious for comments all the same :)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >