Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'oop criticism'.

Page 16/64 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • Best way to represent Gender in a class library used in multilingual applications

    - by Hauge
    I'm creating class library with some commonly used classes like persons, addresses etc. This library will be used in an multilingual application, and I am looking for the most convenient way to represent a persons gender. Ideally I would like to be able to code like this: Person person = new Person { Gender = Genders.Male, FirstName = "Nice", LastName = "Dude" } if (person.Gender == Genders.Male) Console.WriteLine("person is Male"); Console.WriteLine(person.Gender); //Should output: Male Console.WriteLine(person.Gender.ToString("da-DK")); //Should output the name of the gender in the language provided List<Gender> genders = Genders.GetAll(); foreach(Gender gender in genders) { Console.WriteLine(gender.ToString()); Console.WriteLine(gender.ToString("da-DK")); } What would you do? An enumeration and a specialized Gender class, but what about the localization then? Regards Jesper Hauge

    Read the article

  • Inconsistent get_class_methods vs method_exists when using UTF8 characters in PHP code

    - by coma
    I have this class in a UTF-8 encoded file called EnUTF8.Class.php: class EnUTF8 { public function ñññ() { return 'ñññ()'; } } and in another UTF-8 encoded file: require_once('EnUTF8.Class.php'); require_once('OneBuggy.Class.php'); $utf8 = new EnUTF8(); //$buggy = new OneBuggy(); echo (method_exists($utf8, 'ñññ')) ? 'ñññ() exists!' : 'ñññ() does not exist...'; echo "\n\n----------------------------------\n\n" print_r(get_class_methods($utf8)); echo "\n----------------------------------\n\n" echo $utf8->ñññ(); that produces the expected result: ñññ() exists! ---------------------------------- Array ( [0] => ñññ ) ---------------------------------- ñññ() but if... require_once('EnUTF8.Class.php'); require_once('OneBuggy.Class.php'); $utf8 = new EnUTF8(); $buggy = new OneBuggy(); echo (method_exists($utf8, 'ñññ')) ? 'ñññ() exists!' : 'ñññ() does not exist...'; echo "\n\n----------------------------------\n\n" print_r(get_class_methods($utf8)); echo "\n----------------------------------\n\n" echo $utf8->ñññ(); then the weirdness appears!!!: ñññ() does not exist! ---------------------------------- Array ( [0] => ñññ ) ---------------------------------- Fatal error: Call to undefined method EnUTF8::ñññ() in /var/www/test.php on line 16 Well, the thing is that OneBuggy.Class.php is UTF-8 encoded too and shares absolutly nothing with EnUTF8.Class.php so... where is the bug? UPDATED: Well, after a long debugging time I found this in OneBuggy.Class.php constructor: setlocale (LC_ALL, "es_ES@euro", "es_ES", "esp"); so I did... //setlocale (LC_ALL, "es_ES@euro", "es_ES", "esp"); and now it works but why?.

    Read the article

  • To subclass or not to subclass

    - by poulenc
    I have three objects; Action, Issue and Risk. These all contain a nunber of common variables/attributes (for example: Description, title, Due date, Raised by etc.) and some specific fields (risk has probability). The question is: Should I create 3 separate classes Action, Risk and Issue each containing the repeat fields. Create a parent class "Abstract_Item" containing these fields and operations on them and then have Action, Risk and Issue subclass Abstract_Item. This would adhere to DRY principal.

    Read the article

  • How to get the path of a derived class from an inherited method?

    - by Jacco
    How to get the path of the current class, from an inherited method? I have the following: <?php // file: /parentDir/class.php class Parent { protected function getDir() { return dirname(__FILE__); } } ?> and <?php // file: /childDir/class.php class Child extends Parent { public function __construct() { echo $this->getDir(); } } $tmp = new Child(); // output: '/parentDir' ?> The __FILE__ constant always points to the source-file of the file it is in, regardless of inheritance. I would like to get the name of the path for the derived class. Is there any elegant way of doing this? I could do something along the lines of $this->getDir(__FILE__); but that would mean that I have to repeat myself quite often. I'm looking for a method that puts all the logic in the parent class, if possible. Update: Accepted solution (by Palantir): <?php // file: /parentDir/class.php class Parent { protected function getDir() { $reflector = new ReflectionClass(get_class($this)); return dirname($reflector->getFileName()); } } ?>

    Read the article

  • How can i call method from class but this method implamented from any interface?

    - by Phsika
    i try to call base.Alan(); in HacimBul. But base. dont give intellisense alan method public double HacimBul() { throw new Exception(); //return base..... -- how can i see base.Alan(); } namespace interfaceClass { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { } } interface Ikenar { double kenar { get; set; } } interface Iyukseklik { double yuksekli {get; set;} } interface IAlan { double Alan(); } interface IHacim { double Hacim(); } class Alan : Ikenar, IAlan { public double kenar { get; set; } double IAlan.Alan() { return kenar * kenar; } } class Hacim : Alan, Iyukseklik { public double kenar { get; set; } public double yuksekli { get; set; } public double HacimBul() { throw new Exception(); //return base..... -- how can i see base.Alan(); } } }

    Read the article

  • How can i call method from class but this method implemented from any interface?

    - by Phsika
    i try to call base.Alan(); in HacimBul. But base. dont give intellisense alan method public double HacimBul() { throw new Exception(); //return base..... -- how can i see base.Alan(); } namespace interfaceClass { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { } } interface Ikenar { double kenar { get; set; } } interface Iyukseklik { double yuksekli {get; set;} } interface IAlan { double Alan(); } interface IHacim { double Hacim(); } class Alan : Ikenar, IAlan { public double kenar { get; set; } double IAlan.Alan() { return kenar * kenar; } } class Hacim : Alan, Iyukseklik { public double kenar { get; set; } public double yuksekli { get; set; } public double HacimBul() { throw new Exception(); //return base..... -- how can i see base.Alan(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Help me with a solution for what could be solutioned by virtual static fields... in FPC

    - by Gregory Smith
    Hi I'm doing an event manager in Freepascal Each event is an object type TEvent (=object), each kind of event must derive from this class. Events are differentiated by an integer identificator, assigned dynamically. The problem is that i want to retrieve the event id of an instance, and i can't do it well. All instances of a class(object) have a unique id = so it should be static field. All classes have a diferent id = so it should be virtual. Event ids are assignated in run time, and can change = so it can't be a simple method In sum, I can't put all this together. I'm looking for an elegant solution, i don't want to write a hardcoded table, actualizing it in every constructor... etc, i'd prefer something taking advantage of the polymorphism Can anyone help me with another technical or design solution? I remark I don't want to use class instead of object construct.(property doesn't work on objects? :(

    Read the article

  • Keyword 'this'(Me) is not available calling the base constructor

    - by serhio
    In the inherited class I use the base constructor, but can't use class's members calling this base constructor. In this example I have a PicturedLabel that knows it's own color and has a image. A TypedLabel : PictureLabel knows it's type but uses the base color. The (base)image that uses TypedLabel should be colored with the (base)color, however, I can't obtain this color: Error: Keyword 'this' is not available in the current context A workaround? /// base class public class PicturedLabel : Label { PictureBox pb = new PictureBox(); public Color LabelColor; public PicturedLabel() { // initialised here in a specific way LabelColor = Color.Red; } public PicturedLabel(Image img) : base() { pb.Image = img; this.Controls.Add(pb); } } public enum LabelType { A, B } /// derived class public class TypedLabel : PicturedLabel { public TypedLabel(LabelType type) : base(GetImageFromType(type, this.LabelColor)) //Error: Keyword 'this' is not available in the current context { } public static Image GetImageFromType(LabelType type, Color c) { Image result = new Bitmap(10, 10); Rectangle rec = new Rectangle(0, 0, 10, 10); Pen pen = new Pen(c); Graphics g = Graphics.FromImage(result); switch (type) { case LabelType.A: g.DrawRectangle(pen, rec); break; case LabelType.B: g.DrawEllipse(pen, rec); break; } return result; } }

    Read the article

  • Extending DOMDocument and DOMNode: problem with return object

    - by Glauber Rocha
    I'm trying to extend the DOMDocument class so as to make XPath selections easier. I wrote this piece of code: class myDOMDocument extends DOMDocument { function selectNodes($xpath){ $oxpath = new DOMXPath($this); return $oxpath->query($xpath); } function selectSingleNode($xpath){ return $this->selectNodes($xpath)->item(0); } } These methods return a DOMNodeList and a DOMNode object, respectively. What I'd like to do now is to implement similar methods to the DOMNode objects. But obviously if I write a class (myDOMNode) that extends DOMNode, I won't be able to use these two extra methods on the nodes returned by myDOMDocument because they're DOMNode (and not myDOMNode) objects. I'm rather a beginner in object programming, I've tried various ideas but they all lead to a dead-end. Any hints? Thanks a lot in advance.

    Read the article

  • Socket server with multiple clients, sending messages to many clients without hurting liveliness

    - by Karl Johanson
    I have a small socket server, and I need to distribute various messages from client-to-client depending on different conditionals. However I think I have a small problem with livelyness in my current code, and is there anything wrong in my approach: public class CuClient extends Thread { Socket socket = null; ObjectOutputStream out; ObjectInputStream in; CuGroup group; public CuClient(Socket s, CuGroup g) { this.socket = s; this.group = g; out = new ObjectOutputStream(this.socket.getOutputStream()); out.flush(); in = new ObjectInputStream(this.socket.getInputStream()); } @Override public void run() { String cmd = ""; try { while (!cmd.equals("client shutdown")) { cmd = (String) in.readObject(); this.group.broadcastToGroup(this, cmd); } out.close(); in.close(); socket.close(); } catch (Exception e) { System.out.println(this.getName()); e.printStackTrace(); } } public void sendToClient(String msg) { try { this.out.writeObject(msg); this.out.flush(); } catch (IOException ex) { } } And my CuGroup: public class CuGroup { private Vector<CuClient> clients = new Vector<CuClient>(); public void addClient(CuClient c) { this.clients.add(c); } void broadcastToGroup(CuClient clientName, String cmd) { Iterator it = this.clients.iterator(); while (it.hasNext()) { CuClient cu = (CuClient)it.next(); cu.sendToClient(cmd); } } } And my main-class: public class SmallServer { public static final Vector<CuClient> clients = new Vector<CuClient>(10); public static boolean serverRunning = true; private ServerSocket serverSocket; private CuGroup group = new CuGroup(); public void body() { try { this.serverSocket = new ServerSocket(1337, 20); System.out.println("Waiting for clients\n"); do { Socket s = this.serverSocket.accept(); CuClient t = new CuClient(s,group); System.out.println("SERVER: " + s.getInetAddress() + " is connected!\n"); t.start(); } while (this.serverRunning); } catch (IOException ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println("Server"); SmallServer server = new SmallServer(); server.body(); } } Consider the example with many more groups, maybe a Collection of groups. If they all synchronize on a single Object, I don't think my server will be very fast. I there a pattern or something that can help my liveliness?

    Read the article

  • What is a good standard exercise to learn the OO features of a language?

    - by FarmBoy
    When I'm learning a new language, I often program some mathematical functions to get used to the control flow syntax. After that, I like to implement some sorting algorithms to get used to the array/list constructs. But I don't have a standard exercise for exploring the languages OO features. Does anyone have a stock exercise for this? A good answer would naturally lend to inheritance, polymorphism, etc., for a programmer already comfortable with these concepts. An ideal answer would be one that could be communicated in a few words, without ambiguity, in the way that "implement mergesort" is completely unambiguous. (As an example, answering "design a game" is so vague as to be useless.) Any ideas? EDIT: I have to remark that the results here are somewhat ironic. 10 upvotes and (originally) 5 favorites suggest that this is a question others are interested in. Yet the most upvoted answer is one that says there is no good answer. Oh well. I think I'll look at the textbook below, I've found games useful in the past for OO.

    Read the article

  • Multi-level inheritance with Implements on properties in VB.NET vs C#

    - by Ben McCormack
    Let's say I have 2 interfaces defined like so: public interface ISkuItem { public string SKU { get; set; } } public interface ICartItem : ISkuItem { public int Quantity { get; set; } public bool IsDiscountable { get; set; } } When I go to implement the interface in C#, VS produces the following templated code: public class CartItem : ICartItem { #region ICartItem Members public int Quantity { get {...} set {...} } public bool IsDiscountable { get {...} set {...} } #endregion #region ISkuItem Members public string SKU { get {...} set {...} } #endregion } In VB.NET, the same class is built out like so: Public Class CartItem Implements ICartItem Public Property IsDiscountable As Boolean Implements ICartItem.IsDiscountable 'GET SET' End Property Public Property Quantity As Integer Implements ICartItem.Quantity 'GET SET' End Property Public Property SKU As String Implements ISkuItem.SKU 'GET SET' End Property End Class VB.NET explicitly requires you to add Implements IInterfaceName.PropertyName after each property that gets implemented whereas C# simply uses regions to indicate which properties and methods belong to the interface. Interestingly in VB.NET, on the SKU property, I can specify either Implements ISkuItem.SKU or Implements ICartItem.SKU. Although the template built by VS defaults to ISkuItem, I can also specify ICartItem if I want. Oddly, because C# only uses regions to block out inherited properties, it seems that I can't explicitly specify the implementing interface of SKU in C# like I can in VB.NET. My question is: Is there any importance behind being able to specify one interface or another to implement properites in VB.NET, and if so, is there a way to mimic this functionality in C#?

    Read the article

  • C#: Inheritence, Overriding, and Hiding

    - by Rosarch
    I'm having difficulty with an architectural decision for my C# XNA game. The basic entity in the world, such as a tree, zombie, or the player, is represented as a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of at least a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. These three are enough for simple entities, like inanimate trees or rocks. However, as I try to keep the functionality as factored out as possible, the inheritance begins to feel unwieldy. Syntactically, I'm not even sure how best to accomplish my goals. Here is the GameObjectController: public class GameObjectController { protected GameObjectModel model; protected GameObjectView view; public GameObjectController(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager) { this.gameObjectManager = gameObjectManager; model = new GameObjectModel(this); view = new GameObjectView(this); } public GameObjectManager GameObjectManager { get { return gameObjectManager; } } public virtual GameObjectView View { get { return view; } } public virtual GameObjectModel Model { get { return model; } } public virtual void Update(long tick) { } } I want to specify that each subclass of GameObjectController will have accessible at least a GameObjectView and GameObjectModel. If subclasses are fine using those classes, but perhaps are overriding for a more sophisticated Update() method, I don't want them to have to duplicate the code to produce those dependencies. So, the GameObjectController constructor sets those objects up. However, some objects do want to override the model and view. This is where the trouble comes in. Some objects need to fight, so they are CombatantGameObjects: public class CombatantGameObject : GameObjectController { protected new readonly CombatantGameModel model; public new virtual CombatantGameModel Model { get { return model; } } protected readonly CombatEngine combatEngine; public CombatantGameObject(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager, CombatEngine combatEngine) : base(gameObjectManager) { model = new CombatantGameModel(this); this.combatEngine = combatEngine; } public override void Update(long tick) { if (model.Health <= 0) { gameObjectManager.RemoveFromWorld(this); } base.Update(tick); } } Still pretty simple. Is my use of new to hide instance variables correct? Note that I'm assigning CombatantObjectController.model here, even though GameObjectController.Model was already set. And, combatants don't need any special view functionality, so they leave GameObjectController.View alone. Then I get down to the PlayerController, at which a bug is found. public class PlayerController : CombatantGameObject { private readonly IInputReader inputReader; private new readonly PlayerModel model; public new PlayerModel Model { get { return model; } } private float lastInventoryIndexAt; private float lastThrowAt; public PlayerController(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager, IInputReader inputReader, CombatEngine combatEngine) : base(gameObjectManager, combatEngine) { this.inputReader = inputReader; model = new PlayerModel(this); Model.Health = Constants.PLAYER_HEALTH; } public override void Update(long tick) { if (Model.Health <= 0) { gameObjectManager.RemoveFromWorld(this); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { Debug.WriteLine("YOU DEAD SON!!!"); } return; } UpdateFromInput(tick); // .... } } The first time that this line is executed, I get a null reference exception: model.Body.ApplyImpulse(movementImpulse, model.Position); model.Position looks at model.Body, which is null. This is a function that initializes GameObjects before they are deployed into the world: public void Initialize(GameObjectController controller, IDictionary<string, string> data, WorldState worldState) { controller.View.read(data); controller.View.createSpriteAnimations(data, _assets); controller.Model.read(data); SetUpPhysics(controller, worldState, controller.Model.BoundingCircleRadius, Single.Parse(data["x"]), Single.Parse(data["y"]), bool.Parse(data["isBullet"])); } Every object is passed as a GameObjectController. Does that mean that if the object is really a PlayerController, controller.Model will refer to the base's GameObjectModel and not the PlayerController's overriden PlayerObjectModel?

    Read the article

  • Possible mem leak?

    - by LCD Fire
    I'm new to the concept so don't be hard on me. why doesn't this code produce a destructor call ? The names of the classes are self-explanatory. The SString will print a message in ~SString(). It only prints one destructor message. int main(int argc, TCHAR* argv[]) { smart_ptr<SString> smt(new SString("not lost")); new smart_ptr<SString>(new SString("but lost")); return 0; } Is this a memory leak? The impl. for smart_ptr is from here edited: //copy ctor smart_ptr(const smart_ptr<T>& ptrCopy) { m_AutoPtr = new T(ptrCopy.get()); } //overloading = operator smart_ptr<T>& operator=(smart_ptr<T>& ptrCopy) { if(m_AutoPtr) delete m_AutoPtr; m_AutoPtr = new T(*ptrCopy.get()); return *this; }

    Read the article

  • Polymorphic call

    - by harigm
    I am new to java, I have seen in the code at many places where my seniors have declared as List myList = new ArrayList(); (option1) Instead of ArrayList myList = new ArrayList(); (option2) Can you please tell me why people use Option1, is there any advantages? If we use option2, do we miss out any advantages or features?

    Read the article

  • class composition instead of object composition?

    - by fayer
    I want a class property to be reference to another class, not its object and then use this property to call the class's static methods. class Database { private static $log; public static function addLog($LogClass) { self::$log = $LogClass; } public static function log() { self::$log::write(); // seems not possible to write it like this } } any suggestions how i can accomplish this? cause i have no reason making them objects, i want to use the classes for it.

    Read the article

  • why assign null value or another default value firstly?

    - by Phsika
    i try to generate some codes. i face to face delegates. Everythings is ok.(Look below) But appearing a warning: you shold assing value why? but second code below is ok. namespace Delegates { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { HesapMak hesapla = new HesapMak(); hesapla.Calculator = new HesapMak.Hesap(hesapla.Sum); double sonuc = hesapla.Calculator(34, 2); Console.WriteLine("Toplama Sonucu:{0}",sonuc.ToString()); Console.ReadKey(); } } class HesapMak { public double Sum(double s1, double s2) { return s1 + s2; } public double Cikarma(double s1, double s2) { return s1 - s2; } public double Multiply(double s1, double s2) { return s1 * s2; } public double Divide(double s1, double s2) { return s1 / s2; } public delegate double Hesap(double s1, double s2); public Hesap Calculator; ----&#60; they want me assingn value } } namespace Delegates { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { HesapMak hesapla = new HesapMak(); hesapla.Calculator = new HesapMak.Hesap(hesapla.Sum); double sonuc = hesapla.Calculator(34, 2); Console.WriteLine("Toplama Sonucu:{0}",sonuc.ToString()); Console.ReadKey(); } } class HesapMak { public double Sum(double s1, double s2) { return s1 + s2; } public double Cikarma(double s1, double s2) { return s1 - s2; } public double Multiply(double s1, double s2) { return s1 * s2; } public double Divide(double s1, double s2) { return s1 / s2; } public delegate double Hesap(double s1, double s2); public Hesap Calculator=null; } }

    Read the article

  • Dependency between multiple classes

    - by CliffC
    I am confuse between the best way to organize dependency between multiple classes assume i have the following classes Employee, Salary, DataAccess Should i go for: Option1 Employee emp = new Employee(); Salary sal = new Salary(); DataAccess data = new DataAccess(); sal.Calculate(emp); data.Save(emp); or Option2 Employee emp = new Employee(); Salary sal = new Salary(); sal.Calculate(emp); //once salary has been calculated salary object will initialize data access class to do the actual saving. or Option 3 Employee emp = new Employee(); emp.Calculate(); // employee object will encapsulate both the salary and data access object

    Read the article

  • Adding scope variable to an constructor

    - by Lupus
    I'm trying to create a class like architecture on javascript but stuck on a point. Here is the code: var make = function(args) { var priv = args.priv, cons = args.cons, pub = args.pub; return function(consParams) { var priv = priv, cons = args.cons; cons.prototype.constructor = cons; cons.prototype = $.extend({}, pub); if (!$.isFunction(cons)) { throw new Hata(100001); } return new cons(consParams); } }; I'm trying to add the priv variable on the returned function objects's scope and object scope of the cons.prototype but I could not make it; Here is the usage of the make object: var myClass = make({ cons: function() { alert(this.acik); }, pub: { acik: 'acik' }, priv: { gizli: 'gizli' } }) myObj = myClass(); PS: Please forgive my english...

    Read the article

  • adding one time options to items

    - by rap-uvic
    Hello, I'm building an Event Registration site. For any given event, we'll have a handful of items to choose from. I have a table for these items. For each event we might have special options for users. For example, for one of the events new users get to buy an item which is not available to other users. This may not apply to all the events. For other events we might have some other restriction on items. I will obviously be checking this programmatically on application side. I would like to though, set up a column containing flag in the items table. But I don't find it feasible because this condition may only apply to one particular event. I don't want all the future items to have this column. What is a good approach to take in such a situation? Should I create a special "restrictions" table and just do a join? How would I handle this on the application side?

    Read the article

  • Create a Python User() class that both creates new users and modifies existing users

    - by ensnare
    I'm trying to figure out the best way to create a class that can modify and create new users all in one. This is what I'm thinking: class User(object): def __init__(self,user_id): if user_id == -1 self.new_user = True else: self.new_user = False #fetch all records from db about user_id self._populateUser() def commit(self): if self.new_user: #Do INSERTs else: #Do UPDATEs def delete(self): if self.new_user == False: return False #Delete user code here def _populate(self): #Query self.user_id from database and #set all instance variables, e.g. #self.name = row['name'] def getFullName(self): return self.name #Create a new user >>u = User() >>u.name = 'Jason Martinez' >>u.password = 'linebreak' >>u.commit() >>print u.getFullName() >>Jason Martinez #Update existing user >>u = User(43) >>u.name = 'New Name Here' >>u.commit() >>print u.getFullName() >>New Name Here Is this a logical and clean way to do this? Is there a better way? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MVC pattern and State Machine

    - by topright
    I think of a game as a state machine. Game States separate I/O processing, game logic and rendering into different classes: while (game_loop) { game->state->io_events(this); game->state->logic(this); game->state->rendering(); } You can easily change a game state in this approach. MVC separation works in more complex way: while (game_loop) { game->cotroller->io_events(this); game->model->logic(this); game->view->rendering(); } So changing Game States becomes error prone task (switch 3 MVC objects, not 1). What are practical ways of combining these 2 concepts?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >