Search Results

Search found 15218 results on 609 pages for 'private ips'.

Page 158/609 | < Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >

  • Getting values from another winform and passing it to current!

    - by klm9971
    Hello: I have 2 windows forms. The 1st one who gets active during start of the program has a button in which another 2nd windows form appears which has text field in which user type their name and HIT okay. Now in the 1st form I have a variable name: nameproccessed which takes the name from the second form. But the problem is my button which is in the 1st form has more functions besides taking name, how can I stop the flow of the compiler to take first the name from the second form and then process the rest execution of the function??? Here is the snippet of my code: //1st form //Class1 public string _nameProcessed = ""; private void btnGetSomething_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { showdial(); //some more functionalities in this function!!! } private void showdial() { InputName inm = new InputName(); inm.Show(); } //2nd form //Class2 public string name; private void btnEnterName_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { name = tbxName.Text; Class1 ict = new Class1(); ict._nameProcessed = name; this.Close(); } Now I want to take the 'name' from the second form put it on the _nameprocessed in the 1st form and then execute the rest of the function. How can I do that? Any help!

    Read the article

  • Hibernate CreateSQL Query Problem

    - by Shaded
    Hello All I'm trying to use hibernates built in createsql function but it seems that it doesn't like the following query. List =hibernateSession.createSQLQuery("SELECT number, location FROM table WHERE other_number IN (SELECT f.number FROM table2 AS f JOIN table3 AS g on f.number = g.number WHERE g.other_number = " + var + ") ORDER BY number").addEntity(Table.class).list(); I have a feeling it's from the nested select statement, but I'm not sure. The inner select is used elsewhere in the code and it returns results fine. This is my mapping for the first table: <hibernate-mapping> <class name="org.efs.openreports.objects.Table" table="table"> <id name="id" column="other_number" type="java.lang.Integer"> <generator class="native"/> </id> <property name="number" column="number" not-null="true" unique="true"/> <property name="location" column="location" not-null="true" unique="true"/> </class> </hibernate-mapping> And the .java public class Table implements Serializable { private Integer id;//panel_facility private Integer number; private String location; public Table() { } public void setId(Integer id) { this.id = id; } public Integer getId() { return id; } public void setNumber(Integer number) { this.number = number; } public Integer number() { return number; } public String location() { return location; } public void setLocation(String location) { this.location = location; } } Any suggestions? Edit (Added mapping)

    Read the article

  • C++ - Distributing different headers than development

    - by Ben
    I was curious about doing this in C++: Lets say I have a small library that I distribute to my users. I give my clients both the binary and the associated header files that they need. For example, lets assume the following header is used in development: #include <string> ClassA { public: bool setString(const std::string & str); private: std::string str; }; Now for my question. For deployment, is there anything fundamentally wrong with me giving a 'reduced' header to my clients? For example, could I strip off the private section and simply give them this: #include <string> ClassA { public: bool setString(const std::string & str); }; My gut instinct says "yes, this is possible, but there are gotchas", so that is why I am asking this question here. If this is possible and also safe, it looks like a great way to hide private variables, and thus even avoid forward declaration in some cases. I am aware that the symbols will still be there in the binary itself, and that this is just a visibility thing at the source code level. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java jList add item based on combobox selection

    - by Stephan Badert
    I have a csv file that is being loaded in my programme. It contains citys and areas and some other stuff (not important here). Once the csv is selected I load the data into several comboboxes. 1 Thing is not working, I have a combobox containing all the citys and now I need to list all the areas for that country based on selection from the combobox. Here is the event: private void cboProvinciesItemStateChanged(java.awt.event.ItemEvent evt) { //System.out.println(Arrays.asList(gemeentesPerProvincie(gemeentes))); invullenListProvincie(gemeentes); } Here is the method: private void invullenListProvincie(ArrayList<Gemeentes> gemeentes) { Gemeentes gf = (Gemeentes) cboProvincies.getSelectedItem(); DefaultListModel model = new DefaultListModel(); JList list = new JList(model); for (Gemeentes gemeente : gemeentesPerProvincie(gemeentes)) { model.addElement(gemeente); } lstGemeentes.setModel(model); } and this is the method to filter all the areas that equal the selection from the combobox: private ArrayList<Gemeentes> gemeentesPerProvincie(ArrayList<Gemeentes> gemeentes) { String GemPerProv = (String) cboProvincies.getSelectedItem(); ArrayList<Gemeentes> selectie = new ArrayList<Gemeentes>(); for (Gemeentes gemeente : gemeentes) { if (gemeente.getsProvincie().equals(GemPerProv)) { selectie.add(gemeente); } } return selectie; } I am convinced the error is the way I am trying to add items to the jList gemeentesPerProvincie(), I have tried so many things already. I really hope someone can see what i am clearly missing...

    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

  • Session scoped bean as class attribute of Spring MVC Controller

    - by Sotirios Delimanolis
    I have a User class: @Component @Scope("session") public class User { private String username; } And a Controller class: @Controller public class UserManager { @Autowired private User user; @ModelAttribute("user") private User createUser() { return user; } @RequestMapping(value = "/user") public String getUser(HttpServletRequest request) { Random r = new Random(); user.setUsername(new Double(r.nextDouble()).toString()); request.getSession().invalidate(); request.getSession(true); return "user"; } } I invalidate the session so that the next time i got to /users, I get another user. I'm expecting a different user because of user's session scope, but I get the same user. I checked in debug mode and it is the same object id in memory. My bean is declared as so: <bean id="user" class="org.synchronica.domain.User"> <aop:scoped-proxy/> </bean> I'm new to spring, so I'm obviously doing something wrong. I want one instance of User for each session. How?

    Read the article

  • how to find by date from timestamp column in JPA criteria

    - by Kre Toni
    I want to find a record by date. In entity and database table datatype is timestamp. I used Oracle database. @Entity public class Request implements Serializable { @Id private String id; @Version private long version; @Temporal(TemporalType.TIMESTAMP) @Column(name = "CREATION_DATE") private Date creationDate; public Request() { } public Request(String id, Date creationDate) { setId(id); setCreationDate(creationDate); } public String getId() { return id; } public void setId(String id) { this.id = id; } public long getVersion() { return version; } public void setVersion(long version) { this.version = version; } public Date getCreationDate() { return creationDate; } public void setCreationDate(Date creationDate) { this.creationDate = creationDate; } } in mian method public static void main(String[] args) { RequestTestCase requestTestCase = new RequestTestCase(); EntityManager em = Persistence.createEntityManagerFactory("Criteria").createEntityManager(); em.getTransaction().begin(); em.persist(new Request("005",new Date())); em.getTransaction().commit(); Query q = em.createQuery("SELECT r FROM Request r WHERE r.creationDate = :creationDate",Request.class); q.setParameter("creationDate",new GregorianCalendar(2012,12,5).getTime()); Request r = (Request)q.getSingleResult(); System.out.println(r.getCreationDate()); } in oracle database record is ID CREATION_DATE VERSION 006 05-DEC-12 05.34.39.200000 PM 1 Exception is Exception in thread "main" javax.persistence.NoResultException: getSingleResult() did not retrieve any entities. at org.eclipse.persistence.internal.jpa.EJBQueryImpl.throwNoResultException(EJBQueryImpl.java:1246) at org.eclipse.persistence.internal.jpa.EJBQueryImpl.getSingleResult(EJBQueryImpl.java:750) at com.ktrsn.RequestTestCase.main(RequestTestCase.java:29)

    Read the article

  • How can this Ambient Context become null?

    - by Mark Seemann
    Can anyone help me explain how TimeProvider.Current can become null in the following class? public abstract class TimeProvider { private static TimeProvider current = DefaultTimeProvider.Instance; public static TimeProvider Current { get { return TimeProvider.current; } set { if (value == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("value"); } TimeProvider.current = value; } } public abstract DateTime UtcNow { get; } public static void ResetToDefault() { TimeProvider.current = DefaultTimeProvider.Instance; } } Observations All unit tests that directly reference TimeProvider also invokes ResetToDefault() in their Fixture Teardown. There is no multithreaded code involved. Once in a while, one of the unit tests fail because TimeProvider.Current is null (NullReferenceException is thrown). This only happens when I run the entire suite, but not when I just run a single unit test, suggesting to me that there is some subtle test interdependence going on. It happens approximately once every five or six test runs. When a failure occurs, it seems to be occuring in the first executed tests that involves TimeProvider.Current. More than one test can fail, but only one fails in a given test run. FWIW, here's the DefaultTimeProvider class as well: public class DefaultTimeProvider : TimeProvider { private readonly static DefaultTimeProvider instance = new DefaultTimeProvider(); private DefaultTimeProvider() { } public override DateTime UtcNow { get { return DateTime.UtcNow; } } public static DefaultTimeProvider Instance { get { return DefaultTimeProvider.instance; } } } I suspect that there's some subtle interplay going on with static initialization where the runtime is actually allowed to access TimeProvider.Current before all static initialization has finished, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Passing.getText() String to another class

    - by DanMc
    I'm currently working on a first year university project and I have a problem, although I doubt it's a very complicated one, but I've been searching and I just can't find a suitable answer to it. The problem concerns two classes. A gui class (class1) and another class (class2). I have a JTextField in class1 and am trying to pass through the .getText() value to class2 and store it in a String type variable. The current code I'm trying to achieve this with is the following: (Class1) private JTextField textField = new JTextField("Something"); ... public String getTextFieldString() { return textField.getText(); } (Class2) private c1 Class1 = new Class1(); private String s = new String(); ... s = c1.getTextFieldString(); I'm pretty new to coding, I've read that maybe I need to pass through an argument somewhere and I assume that's because textField is not static in itself, it changes when somebody enters a new value. (sorry for stating the obvious there.) Anyway, help is appreciated. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • Spring MVC: Where to place validation and how to validation entity references.

    - by arrages
    Let's say I have the following command bean for creating a user: public class CreateUserCommand { private String userName; private String email; private Integer occupationId; pirvate Integer countryId; } occupationId and countryId are drop down selected values on the form. They map to an entity in the database (Occupation, Country). This command object is going to be fed to a service facade like so: userServiceFacade.createUser(CreateUserCommand command); This facade will construct a user entity to be sent to the actual service. So I suppose that in the facade layer I will have to make several dao calls to map all the lookup properties of the User entity. Based on this what is the best strategy to validate that occupationId and countryId map to real entities? Where is the best place to perform this validation? There is the spring validator but I am not sure this is the best place for this, for one I am wary of this method as validation is tied to the web tier, but also that means I would need to make the dao calls in the validator for validation but I would need to call the dao's in the facade layer again when the command - entity translation occurs. Is there anything I can do better? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • DCI: How to implement Context with Dependency Injection?

    - by ciscoheat
    Most examples of a DCI Context are implemented as a Command pattern. When using Dependency Injection though, it's useful to have the dependencies injected in the constructor and send the parameters into the executing method. Compare the Command pattern class: public class SomeContext { private readonly SomeRole _someRole; private readonly IRepository<User> _userRepository; // Everything goes into the constructor for a true encapsuled command. public SomeContext(SomeRole someRole, IRepository<User> userRepository) { _someRole = someRole; _userRepository = userRepository; } public void Execute() { _someRole.DoStuff(_userRepository); } } With the Dependency injected class: public class SomeContext { private readonly IRepository<User> _userRepository; // Only what can be injected using the DI provider. public SomeContext(IRepository<User> userRepository) { _userRepository = userRepository; } // Parameters from the executing method public void Execute(SomeRole someRole) { someRole.DoStuff(_userRepository); } } The last one seems a bit nicer, but I've never seen it implemented like this so I'm curious if there are any things to consider.

    Read the article

  • Is it better for class data to be passed internally or accessed directly?

    - by AaronSzy
    Example: // access fields directly private void doThis() { return doSomeWork(this.data); } // receive data as an argument private void doThis(data) { return doSomeWork(data); } The first option is coupled to the value in this.data while the second option avoids this coupling. I feel like the second option is always better. It promotes loose coupling WITHIN the class. Accessing global class data willy-nilly throughout just seems like a bad idea. Obviously this class data needs to be accessed directly at some point. However, if accesses, to this global class data can be eliminated by parameter passing, it seems that this is always preferable. The second example has the advantage of working with any data of the proper type, whereas the first is bound to working with the just class data. Even if you don't NEED the additional flexibility, it seems nice to leave it as an option. I just don't see any advantage in accessing member data directly from private methods as in the first example. Whats the best practice here? I've referenced code complete, but was not able to find anything on this particular issue.

    Read the article

  • What is the Rule of Thumb on Exposing Encapsulated Class Methods

    - by javamonkey79
    Consider the following analogy: If we have a class: "Car" we might expect it to have an instance of "Engine" in it. As in: "The car HAS-A engine". Similarly, in the "Engine" class we would expect an instance of "Starting System" or "Cooling System" which each have their appropriate sub-components. By the nature of encapsulation, is it not true that the car "HAS-A" "radiator hose" in it as well as the engine? Therefore, is it appropriate OO to do something like this: public class Car { private Engine _engine; public Engine getEngine() { return _engine; } // is it ok to use 'convenience' methods of inner classes? // are the following 2 methods "wrong" from an OO point of view? public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return getCoolingSystem().getRadiatorHose(); } public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _engine.getCoolingSystem(); } } public class Engine { private CoolingSystem _coolingSystem; public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _coolingSystem; } } public class CoolingSystem { private RadiatorHose _radiatorHose; public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return _radiatorHose; } } public class RadiatorHose {//... }

    Read the article

  • Help me convert C# 1.1 Xml validation code to C# 2.0 please.

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    It would be fantastic if you could help me rid of these warnings below. I have not been able to find a good document. Since the warnings are concentrated in just the private void ValidateConfiguration( XmlNode section ) section, hopefully this is not terribly hard to answer, if you have encountered this before. Thanks! 'System.Configuration.ConfigurationException.ConfigurationException(string)' is obsolete: 'This class is obsolete, to create a new exception create a System.Configuration!System.Configuration.ConfigurationErrorsException' 'System.Xml.XmlValidatingReader' is obsolete: 'Use XmlReader created by XmlReader.Create() method using appropriate XmlReaderSettings instead. http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=14202' private void ValidateConfiguration( XmlNode section ) { // throw if there is no configuration node. if( null == section ) { throw new ConfigurationException("The configuration section passed within the ... class was null ... there must be a configuration file defined.", section ); } //Validate the document using a schema XmlValidatingReader vreader = new XmlValidatingReader( new XmlTextReader( new StringReader( section.OuterXml ) ) ); // open stream on Resources; the XSD is set as an "embedded resource" so Resource can open a stream on it using (Stream xsdFile = XYZ.GetStream("ABC.xsd")) using (StreamReader sr = new StreamReader(xsdFile)) { vreader.ValidationEventHandler += new ValidationEventHandler(ValidationCallBack); vreader.Schemas.Add(XmlSchema.Read(new XmlTextReader(sr), null)); vreader.ValidationType = ValidationType.Schema; // Validate the document while (vreader.Read()) { } if (!_isValidDocument) { _schemaErrors = _sb.ToString(); throw new ConfigurationException("XML Document not valid"); } } } // Does not cause warnings. private void ValidationCallBack( object sender, ValidationEventArgs args ) { // check what KIND of problem the schema validation reader has; // on FX 1.0, it gives a warning for "<xs:any...skip" sections. Don't worry about those, only set validation false // for real errors if( args.Severity == XmlSeverityType.Error ) { _isValidDocument = false; _sb.Append( args.Message + Environment.NewLine ); } }

    Read the article

  • Unique view count.

    - by alokswain
    I have a collection of links which are being displayed on the index page. Whenever a user clicks a link I want to keep a track of the number of unique views. I know it can be done by tracking the ips whenever a click happens by request.remote_ip and then the link of the page that was clicked. Is there any better approach ? Any plugins etc.

    Read the article

  • Any workarounds for non-static member array initialization?

    - by TomiJ
    In C++, it's not possible to initialize array members in the initialization list, thus member objects should have default constructors and they should be properly initialized in the constructor. Is there any (reasonable) workaround for this apart from not using arrays? [Anything that can be initialized using only the initialization list is in our application far preferable to using the constructor, as that data can be allocated and initialized by the compiler and linker, and every CPU clock cycle counts, even before main. However, it is not always possible to have a default constructor for every class, and besides, reinitializing the data again in the constructor rather defeats the purpose anyway.] E.g. I'd like to have something like this (but this one doesn't work): class OtherClass { private: int data; public: OtherClass(int i) : data(i) {}; // No default constructor! }; class Foo { private: OtherClass inst[3]; // Array size fixed and known ahead of time. public: Foo(...) : inst[0](0), inst[1](1), inst[2](2) {}; }; The only workaround I'm aware of is the non-array one: class Foo { private: OtherClass inst0; OtherClass inst1; OtherClass inst2; OtherClass *inst[3]; public: Foo(...) : inst0(0), inst1(1), inst2(2) { inst[0]=&inst0; inst[1]=&inst1; inst[2]=&inst2; }; }; Edit: It should be stressed that OtherClass has no default constructor, and that it is very desirable to have the linker be able to allocate any memory needed (one or more static instances of Foo will be created), using the heap is essentially verboten. I've updated the examples above to highlight the first point.

    Read the article

  • C# xml serializer - serialize derived objects

    - by gln
    Hi, I want to serialize the following: [Serializable] [DefaultPropertyAttribute("Name")] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfo))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoA))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoB))] public class ItemInfo { private string name; [XmlArray("Items"), XmlArrayItem(typeof(ItemInfo))] private ArrayList arr; private ItemInfo parentItemInfo; } [Serializable] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfo))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoA))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoB))] public class ItemInfoA : ItemInfo { ... } [Serializable] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfo))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoA))] [XmlInclude(typeof(ItemInfoB))] public class ItemInfoB : ItemInfo { ... } The class itemInfo describes a container which can hold other itemInfo objects in the array list, the parentItemInfo describes which is the parent container of the item info. Since ItemInfoA and ItemInfoB derive from ItemInfo they can also be a member of the array list and the parentItemInfo, therefore when trying to serialize these objects (which can hold many objects in hierarchy) it fails with exception can't generate the xml file - innerexception. My question is: What attributes do I need to add the ItemInfo class so it will be serializable? Note: the exception is only when the ItemInfo[A]/[B] are initialized with parentItemInfo or the arrayList. Help please! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to bind Assisted Injected class to interface?

    - by eric2323223
    Here is the problem I met: Class SimpleCommand implements Executable{ private final ConfigManager config; private String name; @Inject public SimpleCommand(ConfigManager config, @Assisted String name){ this.config = config; this.name = name; } } Class MyModule extends AbstractModule{ @Override protected void configure() { bind(CommandFactory.class).toProvider(FactoryProvider.newFactory(CommandFactory.class, SimpleCommand.class)); bind(Executable.class).to(SimpleCommand.class); } } When I try to get instance of SimpleCommand using: Guice.createInjector(new MyModule()).getInstance(CommandFactory.class).create("sample command"); I got this error: 1) No implementation for java.lang.String annotated with @com.google.inject.assistedinject.Assisted(value=) was bound. while locating java.lang.String annotated with @com.google.inject.assistedinject.Assisted(value=) for parameter 2 at model.Command.<init>(SimpleCommand.java:58) at module.MyModule.configure(MyModule.java:34) So my problem is how can I bind SimpleCommand to Executable when SimpleCommand has Assisted Injected parameter? Here is the CommandFactory and its implementation: public interface CommandFactory{ public Command create(String name); } public class GuiceCommandFactory implements CommandFactory{ private Provider<ConfigManager> configManager ; @Inject public GuiceCommandFactory(Provider<ConfigManager> configManager){ this.configManager = configManager; } public Command create(String cmd){ return new Command(configManager.get(), cmd); } }

    Read the article

  • how to run TimerTask off main UI thread?

    - by huskyd97
    I am having trouble with a TimerTask Interfering with In App Purchasing (Async Tasks). I am weak with Threads, so I believe it is running on the main UI thread, eating up resources. How can I run this outside the UI thread? I have searched, and tried some suggestions using handlers. but seems like I get the same result, app gets really laggy. when I don't run this task (refreshes every 500mS), the activity runs smoothly, and there are no hangs during In app purchases. Your help is appreciated, code snippet below: public class DummyButtonClickerActivity extends Activity { protected Timer timeTicker = new Timer("Ticker"); private Handler timerHandler = new Handler(); protected int timeTickDown = 20; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.mainhd); // start money earned timer handler TimerTask tick = new TimerTask() { public void run() { myTickTask(); } }; timeTicker.scheduleAtFixedRate(tick, 0, 500); // 500 ms each } // End OnCreate protected void myTickTask() { if (timeTickDown == 0) { /// run my code here //total = total + _Rate; timerHandler.post(doUpdateTimeout); } else if(timeTickDown < 0) { // do nothing } timeTickDown--; } private Runnable doUpdateTimeout = new Runnable() { public void run() { updateTimeout(); } }; private void updateTimeout() { // reset tick timeTickDown = 2; // 2* 500ms == once a second } }

    Read the article

  • Unsure how to come up with a good design

    - by Mewzer
    Hello there, I am having trouble coming up with a good design for a group of classes and was hoping that someone could give me some guidance on best practices. I have kept the classes and member functions generic to make the problem simpler. Essentially, I have three classes (lets call them A, B, and C) as follows: class A { ... int GetX( void ) const { return x; }; int GetY( void ) const { return y; }; private: B b; // NOTE: A "has-a" B int x; int y; }; class B { ... void SetZ( int value ) { z = value }; private: int z; C c; // NOTE: B "has-a" C }; class C { private: ... void DoSomething(int x, int y){ ... }; void DoSomethingElse( int z ){ ... }; }; My problem is as follows: Class A uses its member variables "x" and "y" a lot internally. Class B uses its member variable "z" a lot internally. Class B needs to call C::DoSomething(), but C::DoSomething() needs the values of X and Y in class A passed in as arguments. C::DoSomethingElse() is called from say another class (e.g. D), but it needs to invoke SetZ() in class B!. As you can see, it is a bit of a mess as all the classes need information from one another!. Are there any design patterns I can use?. Any ideas would be much appreciated ....

    Read the article

  • Passing values for method

    - by Kasun
    I beginner for programming. So can you please show me how to pass values for your compile() method. class CL { private const string clexe = @"cl.exe"; private const string exe = "Test.exe", file = "test.cpp"; private string args; public CL(String[] args) { this.args = String.Join(" ", args); this.args += (args.Length > 0 ? " " : "") + "/Fe" + exe + " " + file; } public Boolean Compile(String content, ref string errors) { //remove any old copies if (File.Exists(exe)) File.Delete(exe); if (File.Exists(file)) File.Delete(file); File.WriteAllText(file, content); Process proc = new Process(); proc.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false; proc.StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true; proc.StartInfo.RedirectStandardError = true; proc.StartInfo.FileName = clexe; proc.StartInfo.Arguments = this.args; proc.StartInfo.CreateNoWindow = true; proc.Start(); //errors += proc.StandardError.ReadToEnd(); errors += proc.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd(); proc.WaitForExit(); bool success = File.Exists(exe); return success; } }

    Read the article

  • mvc design in a card game

    - by Hong
    I'm trying to make a card game. some classes I have are: CardModel, CardView; DeckModel, DeckView. The deck model has a list of card model, According to MVC, if I want to send a card to a deck, I can add the card model to the deck model, and the card view will be added to the deck view by a event handler. So I have a addCard(CardModel m) in the DeckModel class, but if I want to send a event to add the card view of that model to the deck view, I only know let the model has a reference to view. So the question is: If the card model and deck model have to have a reference to their view classes to do it? If not, how to do it better? Update, the code: public class DeckModel { private ArrayList<CardModel> cards; private ArrayList<EventHandler> actionEventHandlerList; public void addCard(CardModel card){ cards.add(card); //processEvent(event x); //must I pass a event that contain card view here? } CardModel getCards(int index){ return cards.get(index); } public synchronized void addEventHandler(EventHandler l){ if(actionEventHandlerList == null) actionEventHandlerList = new ArrayList<EventHandler>(); if(!actionEventHandlerList.contains(l)) actionEventHandlerList.add(l); } public synchronized void removeEventHandler(EventHandler l){ if(actionEventHandlerList!= null && actionEventHandlerList.contains(l)) actionEventHandlerList.remove(l); } private void processEvent(Event e){ ArrayList list; synchronized(this){ if(actionEventHandlerList!= null) list = (ArrayList)actionEventHandlerList.clone(); else return; } for(int i=0; i<actionEventHandlerList.size(); ++i){ actionEventHandlerList.get(i).handle(e); } } }

    Read the article

  • How to avoid raising an event to a closed form?

    - by Steve Dignan
    I'm having trouble handling the scenario whereby an event is being raised to a closed form and was hoping to get some help. Scenario (see below code for reference): Form1 opens Form2 Form1 subscribes to an event on Form2 (let's call the event FormAction) Form1 is closed and Form2 remains open Form2 raises the FormAction event In Form1.form2_FormAction, why does this return a reference to Form1 but button1.Parent returns null? Shouldn't they both return the same reference? If we were to omit step 3, both this and button1.Parent return the same reference. Here's the code I'm using... Form1: public partial class Form1 : Form { public Form1 () { InitializeComponent(); } private void button1_Click ( object sender , EventArgs e ) { // Create instance of Form2 and subscribe to the FormAction event var form2 = new Form2(); form2.FormAction += form2_FormAction; form2.Show(); } private void form2_FormAction ( object o ) { // Always returns reference to Form1 var form = this; // If Form1 is open, button1.Parent is equal to form/this // If Form1 is closed, button1.Parent is null var parent = button1.Parent; } } Form2: public partial class Form2 : Form { public Form2 () { InitializeComponent(); } public delegate void FormActionHandler ( object o ); public event FormActionHandler FormAction = delegate { }; private void button1_Click ( object sender , EventArgs e ) { FormAction( "Button clicked." ); } } Ideally, I would like to avoid raising events to closed/disposed forms (which I'm not sure is possible) or find a clean way of handling this in the caller (in this case, Form1). Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why does my simple event handling example not work?

    - by njreed
    I am trying to make a simple event handler. (Note, I'm not trying to implement a full-blown publish/subscribe model; I'm just interested in why my example doesn't work as I think it should) var myObj = (function () { var private = "X"; function triggerEvent(eventName) { if (this[eventName]) { this[eventName](); } } // Setter / Getter function getProp() { return private; } function setProp(value) { private = value; triggerEvent("onPropChange"); } // Public API return { // Events "onPropChange": null, // Fires when prop value is changed // Methods "getProp": getProp, "setProp": setProp }; })(); // Now set event handler myObj.onPropChange = function () { alert("You changed the property!"); }; myObj.setProp("Z"); // --> Nothing happens. Wrong // Why doesn't my alert show? I set the onPropChange property of my object to a simpler handler function but it is not being fired. I have debugged this and it seems that in triggerEvent the variable this is referencing the global window object. I thought it should reference myObj (which is what I need). Can someone explain the error in my thinking and how I correct this? Help much appreciated. jsFiddle here

    Read the article

  • In Java, can a final field be initialized from a constructor helper?

    - by csj
    I have a final non-static member: private final HashMap<String,String> myMap; I would like to initialize it using a method called by the constructor. Since myMap is final, my "helper" method is unable to initialize it directly. Of course I have options: I could implement the myMap initialization code directly in the constructor. MyConstructor (String someThingNecessary) { myMap = new HashMap<String,String>(); myMap.put("blah","blahblah"); // etc... // other initialization stuff unrelated to myMap } I could have my helper method build the HashMap, return it to the constructor, and have the constructor then assign the object to myMap. MyConstructor (String someThingNecessary) { myMap = InitializeMyMap(someThingNecessary); // other initialization stuff unrelated to myMap } private HashMap<String,String> InitializeMyMap(String someThingNecessary) { HashMap<String,String> initializedMap = new HashMap<String,String>(); initializedMap.put("blah","blahblah"); // etc... return initializedMap; } Method #2 is fine, however, I'm wondering if there's some way I could allow the helper method to directly manipulate myMap. Perhaps a modifier that indicates it can only be called by the constructor? MyConstructor (String someThingNecessary) { InitializeMyMap(someThingNecessary); // other initialization stuff unrelated to myMap } // helper doesn't work since it can't modify a final member private void InitializeMyMap(String someThingNecessary) { myMap = new HashMap<String,String>(); myMap.put("blah","blahblah"); // etc... }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >