Search Results

Search found 24043 results on 962 pages for 'private methods'.

Page 4/962 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • functional test for rails controller private method

    - by mohit
    I have a private method in my controller. which is used for some database update. this method i am calling from another controller method. and it works fine. But when i am trying to write a test case for that method then It is tripping on accessing (session variable and params) in my functional all other methods are working fine the problem is only with private method? In my setup method in functional test, I am setting session also.?

    Read the article

  • final and private static

    - by xdevel2000
    I read that doing: public final void foo() {} is equals to: private static void foo() {} both meaning that the method is not overridable! But I don't see the equivalence if a method is private it's automatically not accessible...

    Read the article

  • Are private members inherited in C#?

    - by Petr
    Just seen one tutorial saying that: Class Dog { private string Name; } Class SuperDog:Dog { private string Mood; } Then there was an UML displaying that SuperDog will inherit Name as well. I have tried but to me it seems that only public members are inherited. At least I could not access Name unless it was declared as public.

    Read the article

  • C# - are private members inherited?

    - by Petr
    Hi, Just seen one tutorial saying that: Class Dog { private string Name; } Class SuperDog:Dog { private string Mood; } Then there was an UML displaying that SuperDog will inherit Name as well. I have tried but to me it seems that only public members are inherited. At least I could not access Name unless it was declared as public. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why do we need private variables?

    - by rak
    Why do we need private variables in classes in the context of programming? Every book on programming I've read says this is a private variable, this is how you define it but stops there. The wording of these explanations always seemed to me like we really have a crisis of trust in our profession. The explanations always sounded like other programmers are out to mess up our code. Yet, there are many programming languages that do not have private variables. What do private variables help prevent? How do you decide if a particular of properties should be private or not? If by default every field SHOULD be private then why are there public data members in a class? Under what circumstances should a variable be made public?

    Read the article

  • Action -methods vs public methods in PHP frameworks

    - by Tower
    There are plenty of PHP frameworks out there as many of you know, and I am interested in your thoughts on this: Zend Framework has so-called action controllers that must contain at least one action method, a method whose name ends in "Action". For example: public function indexAction() {} The word "Action" is important, without it you can't access the method directly via the URI. However, in some other frameworks like Kohana you have public and private methods, where public methods are accessible and private are not. So my question is which do you think is a better approach? From a secure point of view I would vote Zend's approach, but I am interested in knowing what others think.

    Read the article

  • Collect all extension methods to generic class in another generic class

    - by Hun1Ahpu
    I'd like to create a lot of extension methods for some generic class, e.g. for public class SimpleLinkedList<T> where T:IComparable And I've started creating methods like this: public static class LinkedListExtensions { public static T[] ToArray<T>(this SimpleLinkedList<T> simpleLinkedList) where T:IComparable { //// code } } But when I tried to make LinkedListExtensions class generic like this: public static class LinkedListExtensions<T> where T:IComparable { public static T[] ToArray(this SimpleLinkedList<T> simpleLinkedList) { ////code } } I get "Extension methods can only be declared in non-generic, non-nested static class". And I'm trying to guess where this restriction came from and have no ideas.

    Read the article

  • To static or not to static

    - by Idsa
    I really like to use static methods (especially for helpers classes). But as static methods are not stubbable, eventually they are a bad practice, aren't they? So I have to choose between static methods usage convenience and testability. Is there any compromise?

    Read the article

  • Parsing C#, finding methods and putting try/catch to all methods

    - by erdogany
    I know it sounds weird but I am required to put a wrapping try catch block to every method to catch all exceptions. We have thousands of methods and I need to do it in an automated way. What do you suggest? I am planning to parse all cs files and detect methods and insert a try catch block with an application. Can you suggest me any parser that I can easily use? or anything that will help me... every method has its unique number like 5006 public static LogEntry Authenticate(....) { LogEntry logEntry = null; try { .... return logEntry; } catch (CompanyException) { throw; } catch (Exception ex) { logEntry = new LogEntry( "5006", RC.GetString("5006"), EventLogEntryType.Error, LogEntryCategory.Foo); throw new CompanyException(logEntry, ex); } } I created this for this; http://thinkoutofthenet.com/index.php/2009/01/12/batch-code-method-manipulation/

    Read the article

  • Refering to javascript instance methods with a pound/hash sign

    - by Josh
    This question is similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/736120/why-are-methods-in-ruby-documentation-preceded-by-a-pound-sign I understand why in Ruby instance methods are proceeded with a pound sign, helping to differentiate talking about SomeClass#someMethod from SomeObject.someMethod and allowing rdoc to work. And I understand that the authors of PrototypeJS admire Ruby (with good reason) and so they use the hash mark convention in their documentation. My question is: is this a standard practice amongst JavaScript developers or is it just Prototype developers who do this? Asked another way, is it proepr for me to refer to instance methods in comments/documentation as SomeClass#someMethod? Or should my documentation refer to `SomeClass.someMethod?

    Read the article

  • Tuple struct constructor complains about private fields

    - by Grubermensch
    I am working on a basic shell interpreter to familiarize myself with Rust. While working on the table for storing suspended jobs in the shell, I have gotten stuck at the following compiler error message: tsh.rs:8:18: 8:31 error: cannot invoke tuple struct constructor with private fields tsh.rs:8 let mut jobs = job::JobsList(vec![]); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ It's unclear to me what is being seen as private here. As you can see below, both of the structs are tagged with pub in my module file. So, what's the secret sauce? tsh.rs use std::io; mod job; fn main() { // Initialize jobs list let mut jobs = job::JobsList(vec![]); loop { /*** Shell runtime loop ***/ } } job.rs use std::fmt; pub struct Job { jid: int, pid: int, cmd: String } impl fmt::Show for Job { /*** Formatter ***/ } pub struct JobsList(Vec<Job>); impl fmt::Show for JobsList { /*** Formatter ***/ }

    Read the article

  • J2ME private folder(only accessible to my midlet)

    - by Shankar
    I have two midlets, one will download some files form server everyday and the other uses these files. If i download the files to a normal folder the mobile user may delete the folder or files manually. So i need a private folder which is hidden and only accessible for my midlets. I heard about private folders which symbian platform provides for each application which are not accessible to users. I need such a folder for my j2me app. How to create such folder?? Shankar

    Read the article

  • How to Access a Private Variable?

    - by SoulBeaver
    This question isn't meant to sound as blatantly insulting as it probably is right now. This is a homework assignment, and the spec sheet is scarce and poorly designed to say the least. We have a function: double refuel( int liter, GasStation *gs ) { // TODO: Access private variable MaxFuel of gs and decrement. } Sound simple enough? It should be, but the class GasStation comes with no function that accesses the private variable MaxFuel. So how can I access it anyway using the function refuel? I'm not considering creating a function setFuel( int liter ) because the teacher always complains rather energetically if I change his specification. So... I guess I have to do some sort of hack around it, but I'm not sure how to go about this without explicitely changing the only function in GasStation and giving it a parameter so that I can call it here. Any hints perhaps?

    Read the article

  • A pragmatic view on private vs public

    - by Denis Gorbachev
    Hello everybody! I've always wondered on the topic of public, protected and private properties. My memory can easily recall times when I had to hack somebody's code, and having the hacked-upon class variables declared as private was always upsetting. Also, there were (more) times I've written a class myself, and had never recognized any potential gain of privatizing the property. I should note here that using public vars is not in my habit: I adhere to the principles of OOP by utilizing getters and setters. So, what's the whole point in these restrictions?

    Read the article

  • Code optimization - Unused methods

    - by Yochai Timmer
    How can I tell if a method will never be used ? I know that for dll files and libraries you can't really know if someone else (another project) will ever use the code. In general I assume that anything public might be used somewhere else. But what about private methods ? Is it safe to assume that if I don't see an explicit call to that method, it won't be used ? I assume that for private methods it's easier to decide. But is it safe to decide it ONLY for private methods ?

    Read the article

  • delegating into private parts

    - by FredOverflow
    Sometimes, C++'s notion of privacy just baffles me :-) class Foo { struct Bar; Bar* p; public: Bar* operator->() const { return p; } }; struct Foo::Bar { void baz() { std::cout << "inside baz\n"; } }; int main() { Foo::Bar b; // error: 'struct Foo::Bar' is private within this context Foo f; f->baz(); // fine } Since Foo::Bar is private, I cannot declare b in main. Yet I can call methods from Foo::Bar just fine. Why the hell is this allowed? Was that an accident or by design?

    Read the article

  • Implementing a "state-machine" logic for methods required by an object in C++

    - by user827992
    What I have: 1 hypothetical object/class + other classes and related methods that gives me functionality. What I want: linking this object to 0 to N methods in realtime on request when an event is triggered Each event is related to a single method or a class, so a single event does not necessarily mean "connect this 1 method only" but can also mean "connect all the methods from that class or a group of methods" Avoiding linked lists because I have to browse the entire list to know what methods are linked, because this does not ensure me that the linked methods are kept in a particular order (let's say an alphabetic order by their names or classes), and also because this involve a massive amount of pointers usage. Example: I have an object Employee Jon, Jon acquires knowledge and forgets things pretty easily, so his skills may vary during a period of time, I'm responsible for what Jon can add or remove from his CV, how can I implement this logic?

    Read the article

  • .NET Properties - Use Private Set or ReadOnly Property?

    - by tgxiii
    In what situation should I use a Private Set on a property versus making it a ReadOnly property? Take into consideration the two very simplistic examples below. First example: Public Class Person Private _name As String Public Property Name As String Get Return _name End Get Private Set(ByVal value As String) _name = value End Set End Property Public Sub WorkOnName() Dim txtInfo As TextInfo = _ Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture.TextInfo Me.Name = txtInfo.ToTitleCase(Me.Name) End Sub End Class // ---------- public class Person { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } private set { _name = value; } } public void WorkOnName() { TextInfo txtInfo = System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture.TextInfo; this.Name = txtInfo.ToTitleCase(this.Name); } } Second example: Public Class AnotherPerson Private _name As String Public ReadOnly Property Name As String Get Return _name End Get End Property Public Sub WorkOnName() Dim txtInfo As TextInfo = _ Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture.TextInfo _name = txtInfo.ToTitleCase(_name) End Sub End Class // --------------- public class AnotherPerson { private string _name; public string Name { get { return _name; } } public void WorkOnName() { TextInfo txtInfo = System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture.TextInfo; _name = txtInfo.ToTitleCase(_name); } } They both yield the same results. Is this a situation where there's no right and wrong, and it's just a matter of preference?

    Read the article

  • uitableview delegate methods are not called

    - by Sean
    hi all i got the problem that the tableview methods are not called the first time the tableview is shown. if switch back to the previous view and then click the button to show the tableview again, the methods are called this time. i've to say that i show an actionsheet while the tableview is loading. the actionsheet i call in the ViewWillAppear method. thanks in advance sean

    Read the article

  • Java: when to use static methods

    - by KP65
    Hello, I am wondering when to use static methods? Say If i have a class with a few getters and setters, a method or two, and i want those methods only to be invokable on an instance object of the class. Does this mean i should use a static method? e.g Obj x = new Obj(); x.someMethod or Obj.someMethod (is this the static way?) I'm rather confused!

    Read the article

  • Methods in Ruby: objects or not?

    - by Mladen Jablanovic
    Inspired by this discussion, after some googling I wasn't able to find an answer to a pretty simple question regarding methods in Ruby: are they objects or not? There are different opinions here and there, and I would really like to hear, let's say, an in-depth explanation. I'm aware of Object#method method, which takes a method name and returns a Method instance, but, on the other hand, there's a similar thing you can do with blocks to make them into Proc instances, and blocks aren't objects, so what makes methods any different?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >