Search Results

Search found 13788 results on 552 pages for 'instance'.

Page 156/552 | < Previous Page | 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163  | Next Page >

• How can I handle arbitrary text as "nouns" in Inform 7?

  - by Beska

  In Inform, I'd like to be able to create a new action, and have it be able to work on aribitrary text. I can easily create a new action that will work on existing things. Finding is an action with past participle found, applying to one thing. Understand "Find [something]" as finding. Carry out finding: say "You find [the noun]." But this only works on items that exist within the game world. If I try to "find fdsljk", for instance, it will fail because I haven't created a "fdsljk". I'd like to be able to "find fdsljk" and then be able to grab that extra text and respond with it...something like "You find the fdsljk." I was thinking that something like A foo is a kind of value. Finding is an action with past participle found, applying to one foo. Understand "Find [something]" as finding. Carry out finding: say "You find [the foo]." might be close...but it doesn't work. I get an error that reads: You wrote 'say "You find [the foo]."' , and in particular 'the foo': but this asked to say something of a kind which can't be said, or rather, printed. Although this problem can arise when you use complicated text substitutions which come in variant forms depending on the kinds of value used, far more often what this means is just that you tried to use a substituted value (e.g., in 'say "The dial reads [V]."') of a kind which could not be printed out. For instance, if V is a number or a piece of text, there is no problem: but if V is a parsing topic, say an entry in a 'topic' column of a table, then this problem will arise. The italics are mine, and highlight the key...I think this should be doable, but I'm taking the wrong path. Clues?

  Read the article

• Easy ways to investigate unknown Python APIs

  - by jedi_coder

  When studying a snippet of unknown Python code, I occasionally bump into the varName.methodName() pattern. To figure out what's this, I shall study the code more, find where varName was instantiated, find its type. So if varName proves to be an instance of ClassName class, I would knew that methodName() is a method of ClassName. Sometimes varName == self and methodName() is a method of this class, or a method inherited from some other class, if the current class is subclassing some other classes. Are there quick ways / tools that could take 'methodName' as input, scan over all installed Python modules and show which classes have methodName()? The closest thing related to this I know of is ipython. If I type a class name, then dot ('.') then TAB, it can show the class members. Instead of a class I could use a name of an object (which is an instance of a certain class) and it would work too. As soon as I choose a method name from the provided options, I can type '?' or '??' and get some help if there's a docstring. I wonder if ipython can do some intelligent scanning based only on 'methodName' string. If you know alternatives to ipython that could possibly help with this, please do suggest them.

  Read the article

• Magic Method __set() on a Instantiated Object

  - by streetparade

  Ok i have a problem, sorry if i cant explaint it clear but the code speaks for its self. i have a class which generates objects from a given class name; Say we say the class is Modules: public function name($name) { $this->includeModule($name); try { $module = new ReflectionClass($name); $instance = $module->isInstantiable() ? $module->newInstance() : "Err"; $this->addDelegate($instance); } catch(Exception $e) { Modules::Name("Logger")->log($e->getMessage()); } return $this; } The AddDelegate Method: protected function addDelegate($delegate) { $this->aDelegates[] = $delegate; } The __call Method public function __call($methodName, $parameters) { $delegated = false; foreach ($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if(class_exists(get_class($delegate))) { if(method_exists($delegate,$methodName)) { $method = new ReflectionMethod(get_class($delegate), $methodName); $function = array($delegate, $methodName); return call_user_func_array($function, $parameters); } } } The __get Method public function __get($property) { foreach($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if ($delegate->$property !== false) { return $delegate->$property; } } } All this works fine expect the function __set public function __set($property,$value) { //print_r($this->aDelegates); foreach($this->aDelegates as $k=>$delegate) { //print_r($k); //print_r($delegate); if (property_exists($delegate, $property)) { $delegate->$property = $value; } } //$this->addDelegate($delegate); print_r($this->aDelegates); } class tester { public function __set($name,$value) { self::$module->name(self::$name)->__set($name,$value); } } Module::test("logger")->log("test"); // this logs, it works echo Module::test("logger")->path; //prints /home/bla/test/ this is also correct But i cant set any value to class log like this Module::tester("logger")->path ="/home/bla/test/log/"; The path property of class logger is public so its not a problem of protected or private property access. How can i solve this issue? I hope i could explain my problem clear.

  Read the article

• Calling a WPF Appliaction and modify exposed properties?

  - by Justin

  I have a WPF Keyboard Application, it is developed in such a way that an application could call it and modify its properties to adapt the Keyboard to do what it needs to. Right now I have a file *.Keys.Set which tells the appliaction (on open) to style itself according to that new style. I know this file could be passed as a command line argument into the appliaction. That would not be a problem. My concern is, is thier a way via a managed environment to change the properties of the executable as long as they are exposed properly, an example: 'Creates a new instance of the Keyboard Appliaction Dim e_key as new WpfAppliaction("C:\egt\components\keyboard.exe") 'Sets the style path e_key.SetStylePath("c:\users\joe\apps\me\default.keys.set") e_key.Refresh() 'Applies the style e_key.HideMenu() 'Hides the menu e_key.ShowDeck("PIN") 'Shows the custom "deck" of keyboard keys the developer 'Created in the style appliaction. ''work with events and resposne 'Clear the instance from memory e_key.close e_key.dispose e_key = nothing This would allow my application to become easily accessible to other Touch Screen Application Developers, allowing them to use my key_board and keep the functionality they need. It seems like it might be possible because (name of executable).application shows all the exposed functions, properties, and values. I just have never done this before. Any help would be appreciated, thank you in advance.

  Read the article

• django multiprocess problem

  - by iKiR

  I have django application, running under lighttpd via fastcgi. FCGI running script looks like: python manage.py runfcgi socket=<path>/main.socket method=prefork \ pidfile=<path>/server.pid \ minspare=5 maxspare=10 maxchildren=10 maxrequests=500 \ I use SQLite. So I have 10 proccess, which all work with the same DB. Next I have 2 views: def view1(request) ... obj = MyModel.objects.get_or_create(id=1) obj.param1 = <some value> obj.save () def view2(request) ... obj = MyModel.objects.get_or_create(id=1) obj.param2 = <some value> obj.save () And If this views are executed in two different threads sometimes I get MyModel instance in DB with id=1 and updated either param1 or param2 (BUT not both) - it depends on which process was the first. (of course in real life id changes, but sometimes 2 processes execute these two views with same id) The question is: What should I do to get instance with updated param1 and param2? I need something for merging changes in different processes. One decision is create interprocess lock object but in this case I will get sequence executing views and they will not be able to be executed simultaneously, so I ask help

  Read the article

• How do I avoid a race condition in my Rails app?

  - by Cathal

  Hi, I have a really simple Rails application that allows users to register their attendance on a set of courses. The ActiveRecord models are as follows: class Course < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :scheduled_runs ... end class ScheduledRun < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :course has_many :attendances has_many :attendees, :through => :attendances ... end class Attendance < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user belongs_to :scheduled_run, :counter_cache => true ... end class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :attendances has_many :registered_courses, :through => :attendances, :source => :scheduled_run end A ScheduledRun instance has a finite number of places available, and once the limit is reached, no more attendances can be accepted. def full? attendances_count == capacity end attendances_count is a counter cache column holding the number of attendance associations created for a particular ScheduledRun record. My problem is that I don't fully know the correct way to ensure that a race condition doesn't occur when 1 or more people attempt to register for the last available place on a course at the same time. My Attendance controller looks like this: class AttendancesController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_scheduled_run before_filter :load_user, :only => :create def new @user = User.new end def create unless @user.valid? render :action => 'new' end @attendance = @user.attendances.build(:scheduled_run_id => params[:scheduled_run_id]) if @attendance.save flash[:notice] = "Successfully created attendance." redirect_to root_url else render :action => 'new' end end protected def load_scheduled_run @run = ScheduledRun.find(params[:scheduled_run_id]) end def load_user @user = User.create_new_or_load_existing(params[:user]) end end As you can see, it doesn't take into account where the ScheduledRun instance has already reached capacity. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• "Abstract static" method - how?

  - by polyglot

  There are already several SO questions on why there is not abstract static method/field as such, but I'm wondering about how one would go about implementing the following psuedo-code: class Animal { abstract static int getNumberOfLegs(); // not possible } class Chicken inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 2; } class Dog inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 4; } Here is the problem: Assuming that I want make sure that every class that inherits Animal to contain getNumberOfLegs() method (i.e. almost like an interface, except I do want the abstract class to implement several methods that are common to all child classes, hence pure interface does not work here). getNumberOfLegs() obviously should be a static method (assuming that in a perfect world we dont' have crippled chicken and dogs so getNumberOfLegs is not instance-dependent). Without an "abstract static" method/field, one can either leave the method out from Animal class, then there is the risk that some child class do not have that method. Or one can make getNumberOfLegs an instance method, but then one would have to instantiate a class to find out how many legs that animal has - even though it is not necessary. How do one usually go about implementing this situation?

  Read the article

• How do I differentiate between different descendents with the same name?

  - by zotty

  I've got some XML I'm trying to import with c#, which looks something like this: <run> <name = "bob"/> <date = "1958"/> </run> <run> <name = "alice"/> <date = "1969"/> </run> I load my xml using XElement xDoc=XElement.Load(filename); What I want to do is have a class for "run", under which I can store names and dates: public class RunDetails { public RunDetails(XElement xDoc, XNamespace xmlns) { var query = from c in xDoc.Descendants(xmlns + "run").Descendants(xmlns + "name") select c; int i=0; foreach (XElement a in query) { this.name= new NameStr(a, xmlns); // a class for names Name.Add(this.name); //Name is a List<NameStr> i++; } // Here, i=2, but what I want is a new instance of the RunDetails class for each <run> } } How can I set up my code to create a new instance of the RunDetails class for every < run, and to only select the < name and < date inside a given < run?

  Read the article

• dynamic inheritance without touching classes

  - by Jasper

  I feel like the answer to this question is really simple, but I really am having trouble finding it. So here goes: Suppose you have the following classes: class Base; class Child : public Base; class Displayer { public: Displayer(Base* element); Displayer(Child* element); } Additionally, I have a Base* object which might point to either an instance of the class Base or an instance of the class Child. Now I want to create a Displayer based on the element pointed to by object, however, I want to pick the right version of the constructor. As I currently have it, this would accomplish just that (I am being a bit fuzzy with my C++ here, but I think this the clearest way) object->createDisplayer(); virtual void Base::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } virtual void Child::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } This works, however, there is a problem with this: Base and Child are part of the application system, while Displayer is part of the GUI system. I want to build the GUI system independently of the Application system, so that it is easy to replace the GUI. This means that Base and Child should not know about Displayer. However, I do not know how I can achieve this without letting the Application classes know about the GUI. Am I missing something very obvious or am I trying something that is not possible?

  Read the article

• CodeModel help needed for right-hand singleton.getinstance() assignment.

  - by antarti

  I've been able to generate 99% of what I need with the CodeModel API, but I am stumped here... Using the various "directXX" methods does not add import statements to the generated code, and I can work without the "directXXX" type of methods except for one place in a generated class. Suppose I desire a generated method like: /** * Copies data from this Value-Obj instance, to the returned PERSON instance. * * @return PERSON * */ public PERSON mapVOToPERSON() throws MappingException { Mapper mapper = (com.blah.util.MapperSingleton.getMapperInstance()); return mapper.map(this, PERSON.class); } You can see the right hand of the Mapper assignment in parens. Emitting the entire package+class was the only way I could find to just declare "SomeSingleton.someMethod()" on the right hand side and have the generated code compile. Without the MapperSingleton being added to the object model, there is no import generated... Questions: 1) Is there a way to force an import to be generated? 2) How to declare an expression that gives me the right side of the Mapper assignment within the object model (so that an import of MapperSingleton gets generated. Any help appreciated...

  Read the article

• Comparing objects and inheritance

  - by ereOn

  Hi, In my program I have the following class hierarchy: class Base // Base is an abstract class { }; class A : public Base { }; class B : public Base { }; I would like to do the following: foo(const Base& one, const Base& two) { if (one == two) { // Do something } else { // Do something else } } I have issues regarding the operator==() here. Of course comparing an instance A and an instance of B makes no sense but comparing two instances of Base should be possible. (You can't compare a Dog and a Cat however you can compare two Animals) I would like the following results: A == B = false A == A = true or false, depending on the effective value of the two instances B == B = true or false, depending on the effective value of the two instances My question is: is this a good design/idea ? Is this even possible ? What functions should I write/overload ? My apologies if the question is obviously stupid or easy, I have some serious fever right now and my thinking abilities are somewhat limited :/ Thank you.

  Read the article

• Handling very large lists of objects without paging?

  - by user246114

  Hi, I have a class which can contain many small elements in a list. Looks like: public class Farm { private ArrayList<Horse> mHorses; } just wondering what will happen if the mHorses array grew to something crazy like 15,000 elements. I'm assuming that trying to write and read this from the datastore would be crazy, because I'd get killed on the serialization process. It's important that I can get the entire array in one shot without paging, and each Horse element may only have two string properties in it, so they are pretty lightweight: public class Horse { private String mId; private String mName; } I don't need these horses indexed at all. Does it sound reasonable to just store the mHorse array as a raw Text field, and force my clients to do the deserialization? Something like: public class Farm { private Text mHorsesSerialized; } then whenever the client receives a Farm instance, it has to take the raw string of horses, and split it in order to reinstantiate the list, something like: // GWT client perhaps Farm farm = rpcCall.getMyFarm(); String horsesSerialized = farm.getHorses(); String[] horseBlocks = horsesSerialized.split(","); for (int i = 0; i < horseBlocks.length; i++) { // .. continue deserializing the individual objects ... } yeah... so hopefully it would be quick to read a Farm instance from the datastore, and the serialization penalty is paid by the client, Thanks

  Read the article

• Why would one want to use the public constructors on Boolean and similar immutable classes?

  - by Robert J. Walker

  (For the purposes of this question, let us assume that one is intentionally not using auto(un)boxing, either because one is writing pre-Java 1.5 code, or because one feels that autounboxing makes it too easy to create NullPointerExceptions.) Take Boolean, for example. The documentation for the Boolean(boolean) constructor says: Note: It is rarely appropriate to use this constructor. Unless a new instance is required, the static factory valueOf(boolean) is generally a better choice. It is likely to yield significantly better space and time performance. My question is, why would you ever want to get a new instance in the first place? It seems like things would be simpler if constructors like that were private. For example, if they were, you could write this with no danger (even if myBoolean were null): if (myBoolean == Boolean.TRUE) It'd be safe because all true Booleans would be references to Boolean.TRUE and all false Booleans would be references to Boolean.FALSE. But because the constructors are public, someone may have used them, which means that you have to write this instead: if (Boolean.TRUE.equals(myBoolean)) But where it really gets bad is when you want to check two Booleans for equality. Something like this: if (myBooleanA == myBooleanB) ...becomes this: if ( (myBooleanA == null && myBooleanB == null) || (myBooleanA == null && myBooleanA.equals(myBooleanB)) ) I can't think of any reason to have separate instances of these objects which is more compelling than not having to do the nonsense above. What say you?

  Read the article

• lists searches in SYB or uniplate haskell

  - by Chris

  I have been using uniplate and SYB and I am trying to transform a list For instance type Tree = [DataA] data DataA = DataA1 [DataB] | DataA2 String | DataA3 String [DataA] deriving Show data DataB = DataB1 [DataA] | DataB2 String | DataB3 String [DataB] deriving Show For instance, I would like to traverse my tree and append a value to all [DataB] So my first thought was to do this: changeDataB:: Tree -> Tree changeDataB = everywhere(mkT changeDataB') chanegDataB'::[DataB] -> [DataB] changeDataB' <add changes here> or if I was using uniplate changeDataB:: Tree -> Tree changeDataB = transformBi changeDataB' chanegDataB'::[DataB] -> [DataB] changeDataB' <add changes here> The problem is that I only want to search on the full list. Doing either of these searches will cause a search on the full list and all of the sub-lists (including the empty list) The other problem is that a value in [DataB] may generate a [DataB], so I don't know if this is the same kind of solution as not searching chars in a string. I could pattern match on DataA1 and DataB3, but in my real application there are a bunch of [DataB]. Pattern matching on the parents would be extensive. The other thought that I had was to create a data DataBs = [DataB] and use that to transform on. That seems kind of lame, there must be a better solution.

  Read the article

• open a text file only if not opened alread (open in NotePad)

  - by Mr_Green

  In my project, I am trying to open a text file. Well the below code works but when the user click the button again and again, many files are being opened. (which I dont want) System.Diagnostics.Process.Start(filePath); I also tried Link , File.Open and File.OpenText which are not opening the text file and also not showing any error (tried with try catch block) File.Open(filePath); (or) File.OpenText(filePath); (or) FileStream fileStream = new FileStream(filePath, FileMode.Open); I also tried this: (ERROR : Cannot be accessed with instance reference qualify with a type name instead) System.Diagnostics.Process proc = new System.Diagnostics.Process(); proc.Start(filePath); /*red scribbles here*/ proc.WaitForExit(); How to show only one instance of the Text file(.txt). am I doing something wrong in my attempts? please suggest. EDIT: I want to open other text files afterwards but not the same and also the application should be accessible after opening a text file(or many). I have only one form.

  Read the article

• Do the 'up to date' guarantees provided by final field in Java's memory model extend to indirect ref

  - by mattbh

  The Java language spec defines semantics of final fields in section 17.5: The usage model for final fields is a simple one. Set the final fields for an object in that object's constructor. Do not write a reference to the object being constructed in a place where another thread can see it before the object's constructor is finished. If this is followed, then when the object is seen by another thread, that thread will always see the correctly constructed version of that object's final fields. It will also see versions of any object or array referenced by those final fields that are at least as up-to-date as the final fields are. My question is - does the 'up-to-date' guarantee extend to the contents of nested arrays, and nested objects? An example scenario: Thread A constructs a HashMap of ArrayLists, then assigns the HashMap to final field 'myFinal' in an instance of class 'MyClass' Thread B sees a (non-synchronized) reference to the MyClass instance and reads 'myFinal', and accesses and reads the contents of one of the ArrayLists In this scenario, are the members of the ArrayList as seen by Thread B guaranteed to be at least as up to date as they were when MyClass's constructor completed?

  Read the article

• pass a pointer of a class

  - by small_potato

  Say I have Class1 and Class2 and I want a shallow copy constructor for Class1. Class1 has a member variable, which is a pointer pointing to a Class2 instance. Also I have to be able to change the Class2 ptr is pointing at. in header file: class Class1 { Class2* ptr; ... } in source file: Class1::Class1() { ptr = new Class2(); } ...... Class2* Class1::Exchange(Class2* newClass2) { Class2* temp; ptr = newClass2; return temp; } ...... Now say Class1 original; Class1 shallowCopy(original); Class2* newClass2 = new Class2(); Class2* oldClass2; oldClass2 = orignal.Exchange(newClass2); delete oldClass2; now I want is associate original.ptr with shallowCopy.ptr, when I implement the shallow copy constructor, how do I make sure these two pointer always point at the same Class2? I mean in the class above, the oldClass2 is deleted, so ptr of shallowCopy is pointing at nothing. If I don't delete oldClass2, ptrs of original and shallowCopy are pointing at different Class2 instance.

  Read the article

• Changing pointer of self

  - by rob5408

  I have an object that I alloc/init like normal just to get a instance. Later in my application I want to load state from disk for that object. I figure I could unarchive my class (which conforms to NSCoding) and just swap where my instance points to. To this end I use this code... NSString* pathForDataFile = [self pathForDataFile]; if([[NSFileManager defaultManager] fileExistsAtPath:pathForDataFile] == YES) { NSLog(@"Save file exists"); NSData *data = [[NSMutableData alloc] initWithContentsOfFile:pathForDataFile]; NSKeyedUnarchiver *unarchiver = [[NSKeyedUnarchiver alloc] initForReadingWithData:data]; [data release]; Person *tempPerson = [unarchiver decodeObjectForKey:@"Person"]; [unarchiver finishDecoding]; [unarchiver release]; if (tempPerson) { [self release]; self = [tempPerson retain]; } } Now when I sprinkled some NSLogs throughout my application I noticed self.person: <Person: 0x3d01a10> (After I create the object with alloc/init) self: <Person: 0x3d01a10> (At the start of this method) tempPerson: <Person: 0x3b1b880> (When I create the tempPerson) self: <Person: 0x3b1b880> (after i point self to the location of the tempPerson) self.person: <Person: 0x3d01a10> (After the method back in the main program) What am I missing?

  Read the article

• How do you update a secondary view?

  - by Troy Sartain

  Perhaps there's a better way to set this up so I'm open to suggestions. But here's what I'm doing. I have a main UIView. On top of that I have a UIImageView and another UIView. When the UIImageView changes, I want to change the second UIView. So I have a class for it and the IB object's type is set to the class. In the .m of that class is a drawRect method that draws some rectangles. Also in the .m is a NSMutableArray property that is synthesized. I created an instance of that class in the controller of the main view. The problem: despite the fact that the drawRect works fine when the app starts (as traced in the debugger,) when the UIImageView changes I call a "setNeedsDisplay" on the instance variable of the second view after updating the @synthesize'd array but the drawRect does not get called. I think it has to do with instances. I wouldn't think threading would be an issue here. I just want to draw in a separate area of the screen based on an image also displayed.

  Read the article

• iphone: memory problems after refactor

  - by agilpwc

  I had a NIB with several view controllers in it. I modified the code and used Interface Builder decomose interface to get all the view controllers in their own Nib. But now with empty core data database, I'm getting "message sent to deallocated instance" errors. Here is the code flow: From the RootViewController this is called: if (self.dogController == nil) { DogViewController *controller = [[DogViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"DogViewController" bundle:nil]; self.dogController = controller; [controller release]; } self.dogController.managedObjectContext = self.managedObjectContext; [self.navigationController pushViewController:self.dogController animated:YES]; Then in a dogController a button is pressed to insert a new object and the following code is excuted and the error hits on the save, according to the trace NSManagedObjectContext *context = [self.fetchedResultsController managedObjectContext]; NSEntityDescription *entity = [[self.fetchedResultsController fetchRequest] entity]; NSManagedObject *newManagedObject = [NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:[entity name] inManagedObjectContext:context]; // If appropriate, configure the new managed object. [newManagedObject setValue:[NSDate date] forKey:@"birthDate"]; [newManagedObject setValue:@"-" forKey:@"callName"]; // Save the context. NSError *error = nil; if (![context save:&error]) { Then the error produced in the console is * -[JudgeViewController numberOfSectionsInTableView:]: message sent to deallocated instance 0x598e580 I'm racking my brain for hours and I can't figure out where my minor changes made something messed up. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Purpose of singletons in programming

  - by thecoshman

  This is admittedly a rather loose question. My current understanding of singletons is that they are a class that you set up in such a way that only one instance is ever created. This sounds a lot like a static class to me. The main differnce being that with a static class you don't / can't instance it, you just use it such as Math.pi(). With a singletong class, you would still need to do something like singleton mySingleton = new singleton(); mysingleton.set_name("foo"); singleton otherSingleton = new singleton(); // correct me if i am wrong, but mysingleton == othersingleton right now, yes? // this the following should happen? otherSingleston.set_name("bar"); mysingleton.report_name(); // will output "bar" won't it? Please note, I am asking this language independently, more about the concept. So I am not so worried about actually how to coed such a class, but more why you would wan't to and what thing you would need to consider.

  Read the article

• Rapid Opening and Closing System.IO.StreamWriter in C#

  - by ccomet

  Suppose you have a file that you are programmatically logging information into with regards to a process. Kinda like your typical debug Console.WriteLine, but due to the nature of the code you're testing, you don't have a console to write onto so you have to write it somewhere like a file. My current program uses System.IO.StreamWriter for this task. My question is about the approach to using the StreamWriter. Is it better to open just one StreamWriter instance, do all of the writes, and close it when the entire process is done? Or is it a better idea to open a new StreamWriter instance to write a line into the file, then immediately close it, and do this for every time something needs to be written in? In the latter approach, this would probably be facilitated by a method that would do just that for a given message, rather than bloating the main process code with excessive amounts of lines. But having a method to aid in that implementation doesn't necessarily make it the better choice. Are there significant advantages to picking one approach or the other? Or are they functionally equivalent, leaving the choice on the shoulders of the programmer?

  Read the article

• Does NSClassFromString affect performance?

  - by Tomen

  I want to create a controller that depends on the class of a given instance of a model -(BaseController *)getControllerForModel:(Model *)model { BaseController *controller = nil; Class controllerClass = [BaseController class]; //the default value //find the right controller if ([model isMemberOfClass:[ModelClass1 class]]) controllerClass = [ConcreteController1 class]; else if ([model isMemberOfClass:[ModelClass2 class]]) controllerClass = [ConcreteController2 class]; else if ([model isMemberOfClass:[ModelClass3 class]]) controllerClass = [ConcreteController3 class]; ... else if ([model isMemberOfClass:[ModelClassX class]]) controllerClass = [ConcreteControllerX class]; else Trace(TRACELEVEL_WARNING, @"Unrecognized model type: %@", NSStringFromClass([model class])); //Now instantiate it with the model controller = [[[controllerClass alloc] initWithModel:model] autorelease]; return slotController; } I want to find a more flexible solution to this and thought of having a dictionary, which maps Model-Classes to Controller-Classes and then NSClassFromString could give me the right instance. My question is this: Is NSClassFromString using much of my applications performance if i use it several times (say, 100 times at once)? Or would it be about as fast as the above approach?

  Read the article

• Working with Java using methods and arrays [closed]

  - by jordan

  Hi i'm a newb at java and for one of my labs I have to create a instant messenger client with these requirements: add buddyList instance variable add IMClient constructor to create ArrayList addBuddy method removeBuddy method findBuddy method printBuddyList method what's the best way to go about this? so far I have this: public class IMClient { private String userId; // User id private String password; // Password private int status; // Status code for user: 1 - Online, 2 - Off-line, 3 - Away public IMClient(String userId, String password, int status) { super(); this.userId = userId; this.password = password; this.status = status; } // Returns true if password as a parameter matches password instance variable. public boolean checkPassword(String password) { return this.password.equals(password); } public String toString() { StringBuffer buf = new StringBuffer(100); buf.append(" User id: "); buf.append(userId); buf.append(" Password: "); buf.append(password); buf.append(" Status: "); buf.append(status); return buf.toString(); } public String getUserId() { return userId; } public void setUserId(String userId) { this.userId = userId; } public String getPassword() { return password; } public void setPassword(String password) { this.password = password; } public int getStatus() { return status; } public void setStatus(int status) { this.status = status; } public static void main(String[] args) { } }

  Read the article

• calling a function from a set of overloads depending on the dynamic type of an object

  - by Jasper

  I feel like the answer to this question is really simple, but I really am having trouble finding it. So here goes: Suppose you have the following classes: class Base; class Child : public Base; class Displayer { public: Displayer(Base* element); Displayer(Child* element); } Additionally, I have a Base* object which might point to either an instance of the class Base or an instance of the class Child. Now I want to create a Displayer based on the element pointed to by object, however, I want to pick the right version of the constructor. As I currently have it, this would accomplish just that (I am being a bit fuzzy with my C++ here, but I think this the clearest way) object->createDisplayer(); virtual void Base::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } virtual void Child::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } This works, however, there is a problem with this: Base and Child are part of the application system, while Displayer is part of the GUI system. I want to build the GUI system independently of the Application system, so that it is easy to replace the GUI. This means that Base and Child should not know about Displayer. However, I do not know how I can achieve this without letting the Application classes know about the GUI. Am I missing something very obvious or am I trying something that is not possible?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163  | Next Page >