Search Results

Search found 1008 results on 41 pages for 'generics'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 18/41 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

  • Finding a sequence in a List

    - by user113164
    I have a list of integers that I would like to search for a sequence. For example, if i have a master list: 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 2, 39, 482, 19283, 19, 23, 1, 29 And I want to find sequence: 1, 2, 3, 4 I would like some easy way to fill a subset list with: 1, 2, 3, 4 + the next five integers in the master list And then remove the integers in the subset list from the master list so at the end of the operation, my lists would look like this: Master list: 19, 23, 1, 29 Subset list: 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 2, 39, 482, 19283 Hope that makes sense. I'm guessing maybe linq would be good for something like this, but I've never used it before. Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • Class hierarchy problem (with generic's variance!)

    - by devoured elysium
    The problem: class StatesChain : IState, IHasStateList { private TasksChain tasks = new TasksChain(); ... public IList<IState> States { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } } IList<ITask> IHasTasksCollection.Tasks { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } <-- ERROR! You can't do this in C#! I want to return an IList<ITask> from an IList<IStates>. } } Assuming the IList returned will be read-only, I know that what I'm trying to achieve is safe (or is it not?). Is there any way I can accomplish what I'm trying? I wouldn't want to try to implement myself the TasksChain algorithm (again!), as it would be error prone and would lead to code duplication. Maybe I could just define an abstract Chain and then implement both TasksChain and StatesChain from there? Or maybe implementing a Chain<T> class? How would you approach this situation? The Details: I have defined an ITask interface: public interface ITask { bool Run(); ITask FailureTask { get; } } and a IState interface that inherits from ITask: public interface IState : ITask { IState FailureState { get; } } I have also defined an IHasTasksList interface: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> Tasks { get; } } and an IHasStatesList: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> States { get; } } Now, I have defined a TasksChain, that is a class that has some code logic that will manipulate a chain of tasks (beware that TasksChain is itself a kind of ITask!): class TasksChain : ITask, IHasTasksList { IList<ITask> tasks = new List<ITask>(); ... public List<ITask> Tasks { get { return _tasks; } } ... } I am implementing a State the following way: public class State : IState { private readonly TaskChain _taskChain = new TaskChain(); public State(Precondition precondition, Execution execution) { _taskChain.Tasks.Add(precondition); _taskChain.Tasks.Add(execution); } public bool Run() { return _taskChain.Run(); } public IState FailureState { get { return (IState)_taskChain.Tasks[0].FailureTask; } } ITask ITask.FailureTask { get { return FailureState; } } } which, as you can see, makes use of explicit interface implementations to "hide" FailureTask and instead show FailureState property. The problem comes from the fact that I also want to define a StatesChain, that inherits both from IState and IHasStateList (and that also imples ITask and IHasTaskList, implemented as explicit interfaces) and I want it to also hide IHasTaskList's Tasks and only show IHasStateList's States. (What is contained in "The problem" section should really be after this, but I thought puting it first would be way more reader friendly). (pff..long text) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why does this return zero results?

    - by Jon
    I have a List<List<string>> and when I try to search with the List<string> it returns no results. Any ideas? Thanks List<List<string>> test = new List<List<string>>(); List<string> ff = new List<string>(); ff.Add("1"); ff.Add("ABC 1"); test.Add(ff); ff = new List<string>(); ff.Add("2"); ff.Add("ABC 2"); test.Add(ff); var result = test.Where(x=>x.Contains("ABC")); //result.Count(); is 0

    Read the article

  • .net runtime type casting when using reflection

    - by Mike
    I have need to cast a generic list of a concrete type to a generic list of an interface that the concrete types implement. This interface list is a property on an object and I am assigning the value using reflection. I only know the value at runtime. Below is a simple code example of what I am trying to accomplish: public void EmployeeTest() { IList<Employee> initialStaff = new List<Employee> { new Employee("John Smith"), new Employee("Jane Doe") }; Company testCompany = new Company("Acme Inc"); //testCompany.Staff = initialStaff; PropertyInfo staffProperty = testCompany.GetType().GetProperty("Staff"); staffProperty.SetValue(testCompany, (staffProperty.PropertyType)initialStaff, null); } Classes are defined like so: public class Company { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } set { _name = value; } } private IList<IEmployee> _staff; public IList<IEmployee> Staff { get { return _staff; } set { _staff = value; } } public Company(string name) { _name = name; } } public class Employee : IEmployee { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } set { _name = value; } } public Employee(string name) { _name = name; } } public interface IEmployee { string Name { get; set; } } Any thoughts? I am using .NET 4.0. Would the new covariant or contravariant features help? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why does this work?

    - by Fizz
    Why does this work? I'm not complaining, just want to know. void Test() { int a = 1; int b = 2; What<int>(a, b); // Why does this next line work? What(a, b); } void What<T>(T a, T b) { }

    Read the article

  • Java map with values limited by key's type parameter

    - by Ashley Mercer
    Is there a way in Java to have a map where the type parameter of a value is tied to the type parameter of a key? What I want to write is something like the following: public class Foo { // This declaration won't compile - what should it be? private static Map<Class<T>, T> defaultValues; // These two methods are just fine public static <T> void setDefaultValue(Class<T> clazz, T value) { defaultValues.put(clazz, value); } public static <T> T getDefaultValue(Class<T> clazz) { return defaultValues.get(clazz); } } That is, I can store any default value against a Class object, provided the value's type matches that of the Class object. I don't see why this shouldn't be allowed since I can ensure when setting/getting values that the types are correct. EDIT: Thanks to cletus for his answer. I don't actually need the type parameters on the map itself since I can ensure consistency in the methods which get/set values, even if it means using some slightly ugly casts.

    Read the article

  • How to perform a binary search on IList<T>?

    - by Daniel Brückner
    Simple question - given an IList<T> how do you perform a binary search without writing the method yourself and without copying the data to a type with build-in binary search support. My current status is the following. List<T>.BinarySearch() is not a member of IList<T> There is no equivalent of the ArrayList.Adapter() method for List<T> IList<T> does not inherit from IList, hence using ArrayList.Adapter() is not possible I tend to believe that is not possible with build-in methods, but I cannot believe that such a basic method is missing from the BCL/FCL. If it is not possible, who can give the shortest, fastest, smartest, or most beatiful binary search implementation for IList<T>? UPDATE We all know that a list must be sorted before using binary search, hence you can assume that it is. But I assume (but did not verify) it is the same problem with sort - how do you sort IList<T>? CONCLUSION There seems to be no build-in binary search for IList<T>. One can use First() and OrderBy() LINQ methods to search and sort, but it will likly have a performance hit. Implementing it yourself (as an extension method) seems the best you can do.

    Read the article

  • Do I have to allocate and free records when using TList<T> in Delphi?

    - by afrazier
    The question more or less says it all. Given the following record structure: type TPerson = record Name: string; Age: Integer; end; PPerson = ^TPerson; TPersonList = TList<TPerson>; Is the following code valid? procedure ReadPeople(DataSet: TDataSet; PersonList: TPersonList); begin PersonList.Count := DataSet.RecordCount; if DataSet.RecordCount = 0 then Exit; DataSet.First; while not DataSet.Eof do begin PersonList[DataSet.RecNo].Name := DataSet.FieldByName('Name').AsString; PersonList[DataSet.RecNo].Age := DataSet.FieldByName('Age').AsInteger; DataSet.Next; end; end; Do I have to use GetMem/FreeMem to allocate and free records an instance of TPersonList, or am I free to directly access the TPersonList entries directly? My gut says that the code should be valid, though I'm not sure if there's any wrinkles related to record initialization or finalization.

    Read the article

  • C#: How to remove items from the collection of a IDictionary<E, ICollection<T>> with LINQ?

    - by Rosarch
    Here is what I am trying to do: private readonly IDictionary<float, ICollection<IGameObjectController>> layers; foreach (ICollection<IGameObjectController> layerSet in layers.Values) { foreach (IGameObjectController controller in layerSet) { if (controller.Model.DefinedInVariant) { layerSet.Remove(controller); } } } Of course, this doesn't work, because it will cause a concurrent modification exception. (Is there an equivalent of Java's safe removal operation on some iterators?) How can I do this correctly, or with LINQ?

    Read the article

  • Extending both T and SomeInterface<T> in Java

    - by Graeme Moss
    I want to create a class that takes two parameters. One should be typed simply as T. The other should be typed as something that extends both T and SomeInterface. When I attempt this with public class SomeClass<T, S extends SomeInterface<T> & T> then Java complains with "The type T is not an interface; it cannot be specified as a bounded parameter" and if instead I attempt to create an interface for S with public interface TandSomeInterface<T> extends SomeInterface<T>, T then Java complains with "Cannot refer to the type parameter T as a supertype" Is there any way to do this in Java? I think you can do it in C++...?

    Read the article

  • [Java] Force an unchecked call

    - by François Cassistat
    Hello, Sometimes, when using Java reflection or some special storing operation into Object, you end up with unchecked warnings. I got used to it and when I can't do anything about it, I document why one call is unchecked and why it should be considered as safe. But, for the first time, I've got an error about a unchecked call. This function : public <K,V extends SomeClass & SomeOtherClass<K>> void doSomethingWithSomeMap (Map map, V data); I thought that calling it this way : Map someMap = ...; SomeClass someData = ...; doSomethingWithSomeMap(someMap, someData); would give me an unchecked call warning. Jikes does a warning, but javac gives me an error : Error: <K,V>doSomethingWithSomeMap(java.util.Map<K,V>,V) in SomeClass cannot be applied to (java.util.Map,SomeClass) Any way to force it to compile with a warning? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Implementing IComparer<T> For IComparer<DictionaryEntry>

    - by Phil Sandler
    I am using the ObservableSortedDictionary from Dr. WPF. The constructor looks like this: public ObservableSortedDictionary(IComparer<DictionaryEntry> comparer) I am really struggling to create an implementation that satisfies the constructor and works. My current code (that won't compile) is: public class TimeCreatedComparer<T> : IComparer<T> { public int Compare(T x, T y) { var myclass1 = (IMyClass)((DictionaryEntry)x).Value; var myclass2 = (IMyClass)((DictionaryEntry)y).Value; return myclass1.TimeCreated.CompareTo(myclass2.TimeCreated); } } It says I can't cast from T to DictionaryEntry. If I cast directly to IMyClass, it compiles, but I get a runtime error saying I can't cast from DictionaryEntry to IMyClass. At runtime, x and y are instances of DictionaryEntry, which each have the correct IMyClass as their Value.

    Read the article

  • XML Serializing a class with a Dictionary<string, List<string>> object

    - by Matt
    Is it possible to implement IXmlSerializable and in my XML file capture an object of type Dictionary ? I have the following public class coolio : IXmlSerializable { private int a; private bool b; private string c; private Dictionary<string, List<string>> coco; public coolio(int _a, bool _b, string _c, Dictionary<string, List<string>> _coco) { a=_a; b=_b; c=_c; coco=_coco; } public System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchema GetSchema() { return null; } public void WriteXml(XmlWriter writer) { const string myType = "coolio"; writer.WriteStartElement(myType); writer.WriteAttributeString("a", a.ToString()); writer.WriteAttributeString("b", b.ToString()); writer.WriteAttributeString("c", c); // How do I add a subelement for Dictionary<string, List<string>> coco? writer.WriteEndElement(); } public void ReadXml(XmlReader reader) { if (reader.MoveToContent() != XmlNodeType.Element || reader.LocalName != "coolio") return; a= int.Parse(reader["a"]); b = bool.Parse(reader["b"]); c= reader["c"]; // How do I read subelement into Dictionary<string, List<string>> coco? } } But I am stumped as to how I could add the Dictionary (XML seriliazed to my XML file)

    Read the article

  • Java enums in generic type

    - by Marcin Cylke
    Hi, I'd like to create a generic enum-based mapper for IBatis. I'm doing this with the below code. This does have compile time errors, which I don't know how to fix. Maybe my solution is just plain wrong (keep in mind the use of IBatis), in such case please suggest something better. Any help appreciated. What I want to achieve is to define subsequent mappers as: public class XEnumTypeHandler extends CommonEnumTypeHandler<X> { } The current code: public class CommonEnumTypeHandler<T extends Enum> implements TypeHandlerCallback { public void setParameter(ParameterSetter ps, Object o) throws SQLException { if (o.getClass().isAssignableFrom(**T**)) { ps.setString(((**T**) o).value().toUpperCase()); } else throw new SQLException("Excpected ParameterType object than: " + o); } public Object getResult(ResultGetter rs) throws SQLException { Object o = valueOf(rs.getString()); if (o == null) throw new SQLException("Unknown parameter type: " + rs.getString()); return o; } public Object valueOf(String s) { for (T pt : T.**values()**) { if (pt.**value()**.equalsIgnoreCase(s)) return pt; } return null; } } I've added error markings to the above code, the error messages are in order: T cannot be resolved The method value() is undefined for the type T The method values() is undefined for the type T The method values() is undefined for the type T

    Read the article

  • I can't find the cause of an "unchecked or unsafe operations" warning in Java.

    - by Peter
    Hello, as per the title I am struggling to find the cause of an "unchecked or unsafe operations" warning in some code. If I have the following code, it compiles without any warnings: public void test() { Set<String> mySet = new HashSet<String>(); Set<String> myNewSet = mySet; //do stuff } Now, if I change where mySet comes from, specifically as the result of a method call, I get the "unchecked yadda yadda" warning: public void test() { Set<String> myNewSet = this.getSet(); //do stuff } public Set getSet() { Set<String> set = new HashSet<String>(); return set; } I have tried and tried to work out what the problem is and I am completely stumped. The issue is present whether I use Sets or Lists. Why would the Set returned by the getSet method be any different to the Set in the first example? Any help would be greatly appreciated as while the warning isn't the end of the world, it is bugging the hell out of me! :( Regards

    Read the article

  • Is there a standard .NET exception to throw when a class doesn't implement a required attribute?

    - by a typing monkey
    Suppose I want to throw a new exception when invoking a generic method with a type that doesn't have a required attribute. Is there a .NET exception that's appropriate for this situation, or, more likely, one that would be a suitable ancestor for a custom exception? For example: public static class ClassA { public static T DoSomething<T>(string p) { Type returnType = typeof(T); object[] typeAttributes = returnType.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(SerializableAttribute), true); if ((typeAttributes == null) || (typeAttributes.Length == 0)) { // Is there an exception type in the framework that I should use/inherit from here? throw new Exception("This class doesn't support blah blah blah"); // Maybe ArgumentException? That doesn't seem to fit right. } } } Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Type patterns and generic classes in Haskell

    - by finnsson
    I'm trying to understand type patterns and generic classes in Haskell but can't seem to get it. Could someone explain it in laymen's terms? In [1] I've read that "To apply functions generically to all data types, we view data types in a uniform manner: except for basic predefined types such as Float, IO, and ?, every Haskell data type can be viewed as a labeled sum of possibly labeled products." and then Unit, :*: and :+: are mentioned. Are all data types in Haskell automatically versions of the above mentioned and if so how do I figure out how a specific data type is represented in terms of :*:, etc? The users guide for generic classes (ch. 7.16) at haskell.org doesn't mention the predefined types but shouldn't they be handled in every function if the type patterns should be exhaustive? [1] Comparing Approaches to Generic Programming in Haskell, Ralf Hinze, Johan Jeuring, and Andres Löh

    Read the article

  • Generic overriding tells me this is the same function. Not agree.

    - by serhio
    base class: Class List(Of T) Function Contains(ByVal value As T) As Boolean derived class: Class Bar : List(Of Exception) ' Exception type as example ' Function Contains(Of U)(ByVal value As U) As Boolean compiler tells me that that two are the same, so I need to declare Overloads/new this second function. But I want use U to differentiate the type (one logic) like NullReferenceException, ArgumentNull Exception, etc. but want to leave the base function(no differentiation by type - other logic) as well.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to achieve covariance of generic types in C# 3.0?

    - by nullDev
    This has been introduced in C# 4.0, but is there a way to achieve this in c# 3.0? For e.g., consider the following code: class Base { } class Derived1 : Base { } class Derived2 : Base { } class User<T> where T : Base { } class User1 : User<Derived1> { } Now, I would like to have a list of User<T>, in which I can store User<Derived1> as well as User<Derived2>, but the following code fails to compile in C# 3.0: List<User<Base>> users = new List<User<Base>>(); users.Add(new User1()); Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Trying to put a generic MyObj<T, U> into an IList where U can be different between objects

    - by Sergio Romero
    I have the following class definition: public interface IItem{} public class FirstObject<T, U> : IItem { public U SomeProperty { get; private set; } } IList<IItem> myList = new List<IItem>(); I did it like this because U can be of different types. Now I want to iterate the list and get my items back, the problem is that I do not know how to cast them back to their original type so I can read the value of SomeProperty. Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >