Search Results

Search found 12058 results on 483 pages for 'abstract syntax tree'.

Page 389/483 | < Previous Page | 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396  | Next Page >

  • Rescuing a failed WCF call

    - by illdev
    Hello, I am happily using Castle's WcfFacility. From Monorail I know the handy concept of Rescues - consumer friendly results that often, but not necessarily, contain Data about what went wrong. I am creating a Silverlight application right now, doing quite a few WCF service calls. All these request return an implementation of public class ServiceResponse { private string _messageToUser = string.Empty; private ActionResult _result = ActionResult.Success; public ActionResult Result // Success, Failure, Timeout { get { return _result; } set { _result = value; } } public string MessageToUser { get { return _messageToUser; } set { _messageToUser = value; } } } public abstract class ServiceResponse<TResponseData> : ServiceResponse { public TResponseData Data { get; set; } } If the service has trouble responding the right way, I would want the thrown Exception to be intercepted and converted to the expected implementation. base on the thrown exception, I would want to pass on a nice message. here is how one of the service methods looks like: [Transaction(TransactionMode.Requires)] public virtual SaveResponse InsertOrUpdate(WarehouseDto dto) { var w = dto.Id > 0 ? _dao.GetById(dto.Id) : new Warehouse(); w.Name = dto.Name; _dao.SaveOrUpdate(w); return new SaveResponse { Data = new InsertData { Id = w.Id } }; } I need the thrown Exception for the Transaction to be rolled back, so i cannot actually catch it and return something else. Any ideas, where I could hook in?

    Read the article

  • Unreleased Resource: Streams

    - by Vibhas
    Hi freinds i am getting a warning in the fortify report for the following code: if (null != serverSocket) { OutputStream socketOutPutStream = serverSocket .getOutputStream(); if (null != socketOutPutStream) { oos = new ObjectOutputStream(socketOutPutStream); if (null != oos) { int c; log.info("i am in Step 3 ooss " + oos); while ((c = mergedIS.read()) != -1) { oos.writeByte(c); } } log.info("i am in Step 4 "); } } in the catch block i have mentioned : catch (UnknownHostException e) { //catch exception Vibhas added log.info("UnknownHostException occured"); } catch (IOException e) { //catch exception Vibhas added log.info("IOException occured"); } catch (Exception e) { //catch exception //log.info("error occured in copyFile in utils-->"+e.getMessage()+"file name is-->"+destiFileName); }finally{ if (null != oos){ oos.flush(); oos.close(); } catch (Exception e) { //catch exception } } Warning which i am getting in the fortify report is: Abstract: The function copyFile() in ODCUtil.java sometimes fails to release a system resource allocated by getOutputStream() on line 61. Sink: ODCUtil.java:64 oos = new ObjectOutputStream(socketOutPutStream)() 62 if (null != socketOutPutStream) { 63 64 oos = new ObjectOutputStream(socketOutPutStream); 65 if (null != oos) { 66 int c;

    Read the article

  • JPA entitylisteners and @embeddable

    - by seanizer
    I have a class hierarchy of JPA entities that all inherit from a BaseEntity class: @MappedSuperclass @EntityListeners( { ValidatorListener.class }) public abstract class BaseEntity implements Serializable { // other stuff } I want all entities that implement a given interface to be validated automatically on persist and/or update. Here's what I've got. My ValidatorListener: public class ValidatorListener { private enum Type { PERSIST, UPDATE } @PrePersist public void checkPersist(final Object entity) { if (entity instanceof Validateable) { this.check((Validateable) entity, Type.PERSIST); } } @PreUpdate public void checkUpdate(final Object entity) { if (entity instanceof Validateable) { this.check((Validateable) entity, Type.UPDATE); } } private void check(final Validateable entity, final Type persist) { switch (persist) { case PERSIST: if (entity instanceof Persist) { ((Persist) entity).persist(); } if (entity instanceof PersistOrUpdate) { ((PersistOrUpdate) entity).persistOrUpdate(); } break; case UPDATE: if (entity instanceof Update) { ((Update) entity).update(); } if (entity instanceof PersistOrUpdate) { ((PersistOrUpdate) entity).persistOrUpdate(); } break; default: break; } } } and here's my Validateable interface that it checks against (the outer interface is just a marker, the inner contain the methods): public interface Validateable { interface Persist extends Validateable { void persist(); } interface PersistOrUpdate extends Validateable { void persistOrUpdate(); } interface Update extends Validateable { void update(); } } All of this works, however I would like to extend this behavior to Embeddable classes. I know two solutions: call the validation method of the embeddable object manually from the entity validation method: public void persistOrUpdate(){ // validate my own properties first // then manually validate the embeddable property: myEmbeddable.persistOrUpdate(); // this works but I'd like something that I don't have to call manually } use reflection, checking all properties to see if their type is of one of their interface types. This would work, but it's not pretty. Is there a more elegant solution?

    Read the article

  • Need help with a custom Spinner/ArrayAdapter setup

    - by MisterSquonk
    I have a WeatherSpinner class which extends Spinner. The class shows region names which I originally did using an ArrayAdapter<String> but I now want to use ArrayAdapter<Locale>(Locale is an abstract 'empty' class of my own). I'm getting a ClassCastException when trying to populate my ArrayAdapter with the following... protected ArrayList<?> theList; protected ArrayAdapter<Locale> aa = null; ... protected void updateContents(ArrayList<?> list, int selectedItem) { theList = list; // Exception thrown on next line aa = new ArrayAdapter<Locale>(theContext, android.R.layout.simple_spinner_item, (Locale[]) theList.toArray()); ... } I'm passing a RegionList object into updateContents() as the 'list' parameter and RegionList extends ArrayList<Region>, and Region extends Locale. I've also overriden Region's toString() method to return a valid String. What am I not seeing here? Am I wrong about the way ArrayList<?>.toArray() works?

    Read the article

  • In perl, how can I call a method whose name I have in a string?

    - by Ryan Thompson
    I'm trying to write some abstract code for searching through a list of similar objects for the first one whose attributes match specific values. In order to do this, I need to call a bunch of accessor methods and check all their values one by one. I'd like to use an abstraction like this: sub verify_attribute { my ($object, $attribute_method, $wanted_value) = @_; if ( call_method($object, $attribute_method) ~~ $wanted_value ) { return 1; } else { return; } } Then I can loop through a hash whose keys are accessor method names and whose values are the values I'm looking for for those attributes. For example, if that hash is called %wanted, I might use code like this to find the object I want: my $found_object; FINDOBJ: foreach my $obj (@list_of_objects) { foreach my $accessor (keys %wanted) { next FINDOBJ unless verify_attribute($obj, $accessor, $wanted{$accessor}); } # All attrs verified $found_object = $obj; last FINDOBJ; } Of course, the only problem is that call_method does not exsit. Or does it? How can I call a method if I have a string containing its name? Or is there a better solution to this whole problem?

    Read the article

  • How do I organize C# classes that inherit from one another, but also have properties that inherit from one another?

    - by Chris
    I have an application that has a concept of a Venue, a place where events happen. A Venue is owned by a Company and has many VenueParts. So, it looks like this: public abstract class Venue { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public virtual Company Company { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<VenuePart> VenueParts { get; set; } } A Venue can be a GolfCourseVenue, which is a Venue that has a Slope and a specific kind of VenuePart called a HoleVenuePart: public class GolfCourseVenue { public string Slope { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<HoleVenuePart> Holes { get; set; } } In the future, there may also be other kinds of Venues that all inherit from Venue. They might add their own fields, and will always have VenueParts of their own specific type. My declarations above seem wrong, because now I have a GolfCourseVenue with two collections, when really it should just have the one. I can't override it, because the type is different, right? When I run reports, I would like to refer to the classes generically, where I just spit out Venues and VenueParts. But, when I render forms and such, I would like to be specific. I have a lot of relationships like this and am wondering what I am doing wrong. For example, I have an Order that has OrderItems, but also specific kinds of Orders that have specific kinds of OrderItems.

    Read the article

  • Invoking code both before and after WebControl.Render method

    - by Dirk
    I have a set of custom ASP.NET server controls, most of which derive from CompositeControl. I want to implement a uniform look for "required" fields across all control types by wrapping each control in a specific piece of HTML/CSS markup. For example: <div class="requiredInputContainer"> ...custom control markup... </div> I'd love to abstract this behavior in such a way as to avoid having to do something ugly like this in every custom control, present and future: public class MyServerControl : TextBox, IRequirableField { public IRequirableField.IsRequired {get;set;} protected override void Render(HtmlTextWriter writer){ RequiredFieldHelper.RenderBeginTag(this, writer) //render custom control markup RequiredFieldHelper.RenderEndTag(this, writer) } } public static class RequiredFieldHelper{ public static void RenderBeginTag(IRequirableField field, HtmlTextWriter writer){ //check field.IsRequired, render based on its values } public static void RenderEndTag(IRequirableField field, HtmlTextWriter writer){ //check field.IsRequired , render based on its values } } If I was deriving all of my custom controls from the same base class, I could conceivably use Template Method to enforce the before/after behavior;but I have several base classes and I'd rather not end up with really a convoluted class hierarchy anyway. It feels like I should be able to design something more elegant (i.e. adheres to DRY and OCP) by leveraging the functional aspects of C#, but I'm drawing a blank.

    Read the article

  • C++ design related question

    - by Kotti
    Hi! Here is the question's plot: suppose I have some abstract classes for objects, let's call it Object. It's definition would include 2D position and dimensions. Let it also have some virtual void Render(Backend& backend) const = 0 method used for rendering. Now I specialize my inheritance tree and add Rectangle and Ellipse class. Guess they won't have their own properties, but they will have their own virtual void Render method. Let's say I implemented these methods, so that Render for Rectangle actually draws some rectangle, and the same for ellipse. Now, I add some object called Plane, which is defined as class Plane : public Rectangle and has a private member of std::vector<Object*> plane_objects; Right after that I add a method to add some object to my plane. And here comes the question. If I design this method as void AddObject(Object& object) I would face trouble like I won't be able to call virtual functions, because I would have to do something like plane_objects.push_back(new Object(object)); and this should be push_back(new Rectangle(object)) for rectangles and new Circle(...) for circles. If I implement this method as void AddObject(Object* object), it looks good, but then somewhere else this means making call like plane.AddObject(new Rectangle(params)); and this is generally a mess because then it's not clear which part of my program should free the allocated memory. ["when destroying the plane? why? are we sure that calls to AddObject were only done as AddObject(new something).] I guess the problems caused by using the second approach could be solved using smart pointers, but I am sure there have to be something better. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • OOP design issue: Polymorphism

    - by Graham Phillips
    I'm trying to solve a design issue using inheritance based polymorphism and dynamic binding. I have an abstract superclass and two subclasses. The superclass contains common behaviour. SubClassA and SubClassB define some different methods: SubClassA defines a method performTransform(), but SubClassB does not. So the following example 1 var v:SuperClass; 2 var b:SubClassB = new SubClassB(); 3 v = b; 4 v.performTransform(); would cause a compile error on line 4 as performTransform() is not defined in the superclass. We can get it to compile by casting... (v as SubClassA).performTransform(); however, this will cause a runtime exception to be thrown as v is actually an instance of SubClassB, which also does not define performTransform() So we can get around that by testing the type of an object before casting it: if( typeof v == SubClassA) { (cast v to SubClassA).performTransform(); } That will ensure that we only call performTransform() on v's that are instances of SubClassA. That's a pretty inelegant solution to my eyes, but at least its safe. I have used interface based polymorphism (interface meaning a type that can't be instantiated and defines the API of classes that implement it) in the past, but that also feels clunky. For the above case, if SubClassA and SubClassB implemented ISuperClass that defined performTransform, then they would both have to implement performTransform(). If SubClassB had no real need for a performTransform() you would have to implement an empty function. There must be a design pattern out there that addresses the issue.

    Read the article

  • Is there a design pattern to cut down on code duplication when subclassing Activities in Android?

    - by Daniel Lew
    I've got a common task that I do with some Activities - downloading data then displaying it. I've got the downloading part down pat; it is, of course, a little tricky due to the possibility of the user changing the orientation or cancelling the Activity before the download is complete, but the code is there. There is enough code handling these cases such that I don't want to have to copy/paste it to each Activity I have, so I thought to create an abstract subclass Activity itself such that it handles a single background download which then launches a method which fills the page with data. This all works. The issue is that, due to single inheritance, I am forced to recreate the exact same class for any other type of Activity - for example, I use Activity, ListActivity and MapActivity. To use the same technique for all three requires three duplicate classes, except each extends a different Activity. Is there a design pattern that can cut down on the code duplication? As it stands, I have saved much duplication already, but it pains me to see the exact same code in three classes just so that they each subclass a different type of Activity.

    Read the article

  • Inheritance of TCollectionItem

    - by JamesB
    I'm planning to have collection of items stored in a TCollection. Each item will derive from TBaseItem which in turn derives from TCollectionItem, With this in mind the Collection will return TBaseItem when an item is requested. Now each TBaseItem will have a Calculate function, in the the TBaseItem this will just return an internal variable, but in each of the derivations of TBaseItem the Calculate function requires a different set of parameters. The Collection will have a Calculate All function which iterates through the collection items and calls each Calculate function, obviously it would need to pass the correct parameters to each function I can think of three ways of doing this: Create a virtual/abstract method for each calculate function in the base class and override it in the derrived class, This would mean no type casting was required when using the object but it would also mean I have to create lots of virtual methods and have a large if...else statement detecting the type and calling the correct "calculate" method, it also means that calling the calculate method is prone to error as you would have to know when writing the code which one to call for which type with the correct parameters to avoid an Error/EAbstractError. Create a record structure with all the possible parameters in and use this as the parameter for the "calculate" function. This has the added benefit of passing this to the "calculate all" function as it can contain all the parameters required and avoid a potentially very long parameter list. Just type casting the TBaseItem to access the correct calculate method. This would tidy up the TBaseItem quite alot compared to the first method. What would be the best way to handle this collection?

    Read the article

  • Unable to delete inherited entity class in EF4

    - by Coding Gorilla
    I have two entities in an EF4 model (using Model First), let's call them EntityA and EntityB. EntityA is marked as abstract, and EntityB inherits from EntityA. They are similar to the following: public class EntityA { public Guid Id; public string Name; public string Uri; } public class EntityB : EntityA { public string AnotherProperty; } The generated database tables look as I would expect them, with EntityA as on table, and then another table like: EntityA_EntityB Id (PK, FK, uniqueidentifier) AnotherProperty (varchar) There is a foreign key constraint on EntityA_EntityB that references EntityA's Id property, no cascades are configured (although I did try changing these myself). The problem is that when I attempt to do something like: Context.DeleteObject(EntityA_EntityB); EF attempts to delete the EntityA_EntityB table record before deleting the EntityA table record, which of course violates the foreign key constraint on EntityA_EntityB table. Using EFProfiler I see the following commands being sent to the database: delete [dbo].[EntityA_EntityB] where (([Id] = '5c02899f-09ea-2ed9-d44b-01aef80f6b64' /* @0 */) followed by delete [dbo].[EntityA] where ([Id] = '5c02899f-09ea-2ed9-d44b-01aef80f6b64' /* @0 */) I'm completely stumped as to how to get around this problem. I would think the EF should know that it needs to delete the base class first, before deleting the inherited class. I know I could do some triggers or other database type solutions, but I'd rather avoid doing that if I can. All my classes are POCO built using some customized T4 templates. I don't want to paste in a lot of extraneous code, but if you need more information I'll provide what I can.

    Read the article

  • Zend Framework Application: module dependencies

    - by takeshin
    How do you handle dependencies between modules in Zend Framework to create reusable, drop-in modules? E.g. I have Newsletter module, which allows users to subscribe, providing e-mail address. Next, I plan to add Blog module, which allows to subscribe to posts by e-mail (it obviously duplicates some functionality of the newsletter, but the e-mails addresses are stored in User model). Next one is the Forum module, with the same subscribe to post functionality. But I want to have ability to use these modules independent to each one, i.e. application with newsletter alone, newsletter with blog, comibnation two or three modules at once. This is pretty common, e.g. the same story with search feature. I want to have search module, with options to search in all data, blog data or forum data if available. Is there any design pattern for this? Do I have to add some moduleExists($moduleMame), or provide some interface or abstract classes, some base controller pattern, similar for each module?

    Read the article

  • initialise a var in scala

    - by user unknown
    I have a class where I like to initialize my var by reading a configfile, which produces intermediate objects/vals, which I would like to group and hide in a method. Here is the bare minimum of the problem - I call the ctor with a param i, in reality a File to parse, and the init-method generates the String s, in reality more complicated than here, with a lot of intermediate objects being created: class Foo (val i: Int) { var s : String; def init () { s = "" + i } init () } This will produce the error: class Foo needs to be abstract, since variable s is not defined. In this example it is easy to solve by setting the String to "": var s = "";, but in reality the object is more complex than String, without an apropriate Null-implementation. I know, I can use an Option, which works for more complicated things than String too: var s : Option [String] = None def init () { s = Some ("" + i) } or I can dispense with my methodcall. Using an Option will force me to write Some over and over again, without much benefit, since there is no need for a None else than to initialize it that way I thought I could. Is there another way to achieve my goal?

    Read the article

  • Exemplars of large document-centric applications with COM/XPCOM/.NET interfaces.

    - by Warren P
    I am looking for exemplars (design examples) showing the use of interfaces (aka 'protocols' for you smalltalkers) to design a document management architecture in a large Word Processor, Spreadsheet, vector graphic or publishing package, or office-productivity (non-database) application with support for as many of the following as possible: any open source project, will be ideal, and language of implementation is unimportant since I am looking for design examples, however an object oriented language with support for "interfaces" is a must. I know at least a dozen languages, and I'm willing to study any application's source. use of "interface" could loosely be applied to either XPCOM or COM interfaces, or .NET interfaces, or even the use of pure-virtual (virtual+abstract) base-classes for OOP languages that lack the ability to declare an interface distinct from a class. I am mostly looking for a robust, thorough and flexible implementation for a document, IDocument, various document views (IDocumentView), and whatever operations make sense in that case. I am particular interested in cases where the product in question is a real-world product. For example, if anybody familiar with OpenOffice can tell me if the code contains a good sample design. I am looking for design documentation that outlines the design of the interfaces for such an application. So for example, if the openoffice spreadsheet has such an interface design, then that might be the best case, because it is a widely used real-world design, with millions of users, rather than a textbook example, which is minimal, and contrived. I know that the Mozilla platform uses XPCOM, and its design is heavily "interface" oriented, but I am looking more for a "word processor" or "spreadsheet" type of document design, rather than a web-browser. I am particularly interested in the interfaces used to access to data and meta-data such as markup (attributes like bold, and italics, and font size), and the ability to search and look up named entities within a document.

    Read the article

  • OO Design: use Properties or Overloaded methods?

    - by Robert Frank
    Question about OO design. Suppose I have a base object vehicle. And two descendants: truck and automobile. Further, suppose the base object has a base method: FixFlatTire(); abstract; When the truck and automobile override the base object's, they require different information from the caller. Am I better off overloading FixFlatTire like this in the two descendant objects: Procedure Truck.FixFlatTire( OfficePhoneNumber: String; NumberOfAxles: Integer): Override; Overload; Procedure Automobile.FixFlatTire( WifesPhoneNumber: String; AAAMembershipID: String): Override; Overload; Or introducing new properties in each of the descendants and then setting them before calling FixFlatTire, like this: Truck.OfficePhoneNumber := '555-555-1212'; Truck.NumberOfAxles := 18; Truck.FixFlatTire(); Automobile.WifesPhoneNumber := '555-555-2323'; Automobile.AAAMembershipID := 'ABC'; Automobile.FixFlatTire();

    Read the article

  • Map inheritance from generic class in Linq To SQL

    - by Ksenia Mukhortova
    Hi everyone, I'm trying to map my inheritance hierarchy to DB using Linq to SQL: Inheritance is like this, classes are POCO, without any LINQ to SQL attributes: public interface IStage { ... } public abstract class SimpleStage<T> : IStage where T : Process { ... } public class ConcreteStage : SimpleStage<ConcreteProcess> { ... } Here is the mapping: <Database Name="NNN" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/linqtosql/mapping/2007"> <Table Name="dbo.Stage" Member="Stage"> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.IStage"> <Column Name="ID" Member="ID" DbType="Int NOT NULL IDENTITY" IsPrimaryKey="true" IsDbGenerated="true" AutoSync="OnInsert" /> <Column Name="StageType" Member="StageType" IsDiscriminator="true" /> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.SimpleStage" IsInheritanceDefault="true"> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.ConcreteStage" IsInheritanceDefault="true" InheritanceCode="1"/> </Type> </Type> </Table> </Database> In the runtime I get error: System.InvalidOperationException was unhandled Message="Mapping Problem: Cannot find runtime type for type mapping 'BusinessLogic.Domain.SimpleStage'." Neither specifying SimpleStage, nor SimpleStage<T> in mapping file helps - runtime keeps producing different types of errors. DC is created like this: StreamReader sr = new StreamReader(@"MappingFile.map"); XmlMappingSource mapping = XmlMappingSource.FromStream(sr.BaseStream); DataContext dc = new DataContext(@"connection string", mapping); If Linq to SQL doesn't support this, could you, please, advise some other ORM, which does. Thanks in advance, Regards! Ksenia

    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

  • Problem with inheritance and List<>

    - by Jagd
    I have an abstract class called Grouping. I have a subclass called GroupingNNA. public class GroupingNNA : Grouping { // blah blah blah } I have a List that contains items of type GroupingNNA, but is actually declared to contain items of type Grouping. List<Grouping> lstGroupings = new List<Grouping>(); lstGroupings.Add( new GroupingNNA { fName = "Joe" }); lstGroupings.Add( new GroupingNNA { fName = "Jane" }); The Problem: The following LINQ query blows up on me because of the fact that lstGroupings is declared as List< Grouping and fName is a property of GroupingNNA, not Grouping. var results = from g in lstGroupings where r.fName == "Jane" select r; Oh, and this is a compiler error, not a runtime error. Thanks in advance for any help on this one! More Info: Here is the actual method that won't compile. The OfType() fixed the LINQ query, but the compiler doesn't like the fact that I'm trying to return the anonymous type as a List< Grouping. private List<Grouping> ApplyFilterSens(List<Grouping> lstGroupings, string fSens) { // This works now! Thanks @Lasse var filtered = from r in lstGroupings.OfType<GroupingNNA>() where r.QASensitivity == fSens select r; if (filtered != null) { **// Compiler doesn't like this now** return filtered.ToList<Grouping>(); } else return new List<Grouping>(); }

    Read the article

  • C++ destructor problem with boost::scoped_ptr

    - by bb-generation
    I have a question about the following code: #include <iostream> #include <boost/scoped_ptr.hpp> class Interface { }; class A : public Interface { public: A() { std::cout << "A()" << std::endl; } virtual ~A() { std::cout << "~A()" << std::endl; } }; Interface* get_a() { A* a = new A; return a; } int main() { { std::cout << "1" << std::endl; boost::scoped_ptr<Interface> x(get_a()); std::cout << "2" << std::endl; } std::cout << "3" << std::endl; } It creates the following output: 1 A() 2 3 As you can see, it doesn't call the destructor of A. The only way I see to get the destructor of A being called, is to add a destructor for the Interface class like this: virtual ~Interface() { } But I really want to avoid any Implementation in my Interface class and virtual ~Interface() = 0; doesn't work (produces some linker errors complaining about a non existing implementation of ~Interface(). So my question is: What do I have to change in order to make the destructor being called, but (if possible) leave the Interface as an Interface (only abstract methods).

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Entity code conversion from #C to VB.Net

    - by CoderRoller
    Hello and thanks for your help in advance. I am starting on the NHibernate world and i am experimenting with the NHibernate CookBook recipes, i am trying to set a base entity class for my entities and this is the C# code for this. I would like to know whats the VB.NET version so i can implement it in my sample project. This is the C# code: public abstract class Entity<TId> { public virtual TId Id { get; protected set; } public override bool Equals(object obj) { return Equals(obj as Entity<TId>); } private static bool IsTransient(Entity<TId> obj) { return obj != null && Equals(obj.Id, default(TId)); } private Type GetUnproxiedType() { return GetType(); } public virtual bool Equals(Entity<TId> other) { if (other == null) return false; if (ReferenceEquals(this, other)) return true; if (!IsTransient(this) && !IsTransient(other) && Equals(Id, other.Id)) { var otherType = other.GetUnproxiedType(); var thisType = GetUnproxiedType(); return thisType.IsAssignableFrom(otherType) || otherType.IsAssignableFrom(thisType); } return false; } public override int GetHashCode() { if (Equals(Id, default(TId))) return base.GetHashCode(); return Id.GetHashCode(); } } I tried using an online converter but puts a Nothing reference in place of default(TId) that doesn't seem right to me that's why I request for help: Private Shared Function IsTransient(obj As Entity(Of TId)) As Boolean Return obj IsNot Nothing AndAlso Equals(obj.Id, Nothing) End Function I Would appreciate the insight you may give me on the subject.

    Read the article

  • WCF publish/subscribe service, and ASP.NET MVC client

    - by d3j4vu
    I managed to develop a custom WCF service, using the publish / subscribe model, and hosted inside a managed windows service. Everything's working. I developed an interface as the service contract implementing a method definition marked as a non-one way operation contract (OperationContract(IsOneWay = false)]. This, to make possible returns an instance of a custom class derived from System.Web.Mvc.ActionResult. In the MVC app, event fires ok. It wraps inside an action method, (just the one defined in the interface), but, and this is my current problem, i believe that something relative to the execution context of the windows service (and the hosted wcf counterpart) blocks the execution of the action method in the MVC app. This is what i have until now (some pieces ripped off just to be more clear): /// Method definition for the contract's service. Maps to a MVC ActionMethod. [OperationContract(IsOneWay = false)] ActionResult Imagen(string data, CustomActionResult result); The class to hold an ActionResult derived class instance: public class ServiceEventArgsMvc : ServiceEventArgs { /// <summary> /// /// </summary> public CustomActionResult Result { get; set; } } And the code in the MVC client app: /// <summary> /// Just a simple class to hold an abstract ActionResult derived class instance. /// </summary> public ActionResult Image(string data, CustomActionResult result) { ViewData["data"] = data; return View(); } Ok. ActionMethod sucessfully executes...but when it's done (and usually expected obtain a reditection to a View named Image, like the action method), the WCF service throws a Timeout exception, making clear that he's still waiting for a response from the MVC client. The response never arrives, so the MVC app never finish his work (redirect to the "Image" view as expected). Any ideas?. Guess i'm missing something very simple, but i don't know what it could be. This is drivin' me nuts.

    Read the article

  • multiple models in Rails with a shared interface

    - by dfondente
    I'm not sure of the best structure for a particular situation in Rails. We have several types of workshops. The administration of the workshops is the same regardless of workshop type, so the data for the workshops is in a single model. We collect feedback from participants about the workshops, and the questionnaire is different for each type of workshop. I want to access the feedback about the workshop from the workshop model, but the class of the associated model will depend on the type of workshop. If I was doing this in something other than Rails, I would set up an abstract class for WorkshopFeedback, and then have subclasses for each type of workshop: WorkshopFeedbackOne, WorkshopFeedbackTwo, WorkshopFeedbackThree. I'm unsure how to best handle this with Rails. I currently have: class Workshop < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :workshop_feedbacks end class Feedback < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :workshop has_many :feedback_ones has_many :feedback_twos has_many :feedback_threes end class FeedbackOne < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end class FeedbackTwo < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end class FeedbackThree < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end This doesn't seem like to the cleanest way to access the feedback from the workshop model, as accessing the correct feedback will require logic investigating the Workshop type and then choosing, for instance, @workshop.feedback.feedback_one. Is there a better way to handle this situation? Would it be better to use a polymorphic association for feedback? Or maybe using a Module or Mixin for the shared Feedback interface? Note: I am avoiding using Single Table Inheritance here because the FeedbackOne, FeedbackTwo, FeedbackThree models do not share much common data, so I would end up with a large sparsely populated table with STI.

    Read the article

  • How to catch this low level MySQL (?) error in PHP/Magento

    - by andnil
    When I'm executing the following statement in Magento with a really large $sku, the execution terminates without any errors thrown what so ever. There are no errors in either Magento's, Apache's or PHP's error logs. Mage::getModel('catalog/product')-loadByAttribute('sku', $sku); Question: How do I catch the error? I've tried to set custom error handlers, and for testing purposes I've also managed to trigger error situations where each of the error handler functions are invoked. But when running the previously mentioned Magento code with a large $sku, none of the error handling functions are executed. error_reporting( -1 ); set_error_handler( array( 'Error', 'captureNormal' ) ); set_exception_handler( array( 'Error', 'captureException' ) ); register_shutdown_function( array( 'Error', 'captureShutdown' ) ); For completeness, this is the $sku I'm passing to loadByAttribute(). (The sku is invalid, but that is not the issue) 1- 9685 0102046|1- 9685 1212100|1- 9685 1212092|1- 9685 1212096|1- 9685 1102100|1- 9685 1102108|1- 9685 1102112|1- 9685 1102092|1- 9685 0102048|1- 9685 0102054|1- 9685 0102056|1- 9685 0102058|1- 9685 1212104|1- 9685 1212108|1- 9685 0212058|1- 9685 0104050|1- 9685 0212050|1- 9685 0212056|1- 9685 0212044|1- 9685 0212048|1- 9685 0212052|1- 9685 0212054|1- 9685 1102104|1- 9685 1102124 Any insight into this matter is much appreciated! Update: Upon further investigation, this is the exact point in the code where execution terminates. when the foreach is executed I guess Magento goes into MySQL world and starts loading up data from the database. \Mage\Catalog\Model\Abstract.php public function loadByAttribute($attribute, $value, $additionalAttributes = '*') { $collection = $this->getResourceCollection() ->addAttributeToSelect($additionalAttributes) ->addAttributeToFilter($attribute, $value) ->setPage(1,1); foreach ($collection as $object) { // <--------------- HERE return $object; } return false; } Note, I'm ONLY interested in finding out how to properly CATCH these kinds of errors, not "fix" the logic. This is so that I can present a proper error message to the user. The example above with the malformed sku is contrived and I have no desire to make my Magento app work with those erroneous skus.

    Read the article

  • java template design

    - by Sean Nguyen
    Hi, I have this class: public class Converter { private Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(Converter.class); public String convert(String s){ if (s == null) throw new IllegalArgumentException("input can't be null"); logger.debug("Input = " + s); String r = s + "abc"; logger.debug("Output = " + s); return r; } public Integer convert(Integer s){ if (s == null) throw new IllegalArgumentException("input can't be null"); logger.debug("Input = " + s); Integer r = s + 10; logger.debug("Output = " + s); return r; } } The above 2 methods are very similar so I want to create a template to do the similar things and delegate the actual work to the approriate class. But I also want to easily extends this frame work without changing the template. So for example: public class ConverterTemplate { private Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(Converter.class); public Object convert(Object s){ if (s == null) throw new IllegalArgumentException("input can't be null"); logger.debug("Input = " + s); Object r = doConverter(); logger.debug("Output = " + s); return r; } protected abstract Object doConverter(Object arg); } public class MyConverter extends ConverterTemplate { protected String doConverter(String str) { String r = str + "abc"; return r; } protected Integer doConverter(Integer arg) { Integer r = arg + 10; return r; } } But that doesn't work. Can anybody suggest me a better way to do that? I want to achieve 2 goals: 1. A template that is extensible and does all the similar work for me. 2. I ant to minimize the number of extended class. Thanks,

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396  | Next Page >