Search Results

Search found 53463 results on 2139 pages for 'net 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 400/2139 | < Previous Page | 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407  | Next Page >

  • Binding an Ilist to datagridview containing another object in a field

    - by JaSk
    I have pretty much the same problem as this question http://stackoverflow.com/questions/970741 but in windows forms, can anyone help me solve it? this is my code, so you don't have to check the other question: public class Material { public virtual int id { get; private set; } public virtual string nombre { get; set; } public virtual string unidad { get; set; } public virtual Categorias Categoria { get; set; } public virtual IList Materiales { get; set; } public Material() { Materiales = new List<Materiales>(); } public virtual void AddMateriales(Materiales materiales) { materiales.Material = this; this.Materiales.Add(materiales); } } as you can see I have an object within the IList so when I use the List as the data source for a datagridview I get a object.categoria where I want to get the Categoria.Name property, can anyone help me?. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Dynamically create textbox

    - by comii
    I need to dynamically create textbox. This is my code, but with this I create only one textbox: Public Sub CreateTextBox() Dim I As Integer Dim niz As Array For I = 1 To 5 Dim myTextBox = New TextBox myTextBox.Text = "Control Number:" & I Me.Controls.Add(myTextBox) Next End Sub So how i can dynamically create textbox? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Create Generic Class Instance from Static Method in a Derived Class

    - by user343547
    I have a class in C# with a template and static method similar to class BClass<T> { public static BClass<T> Create() { return new BClass<T>(); } } From this I derive a class and specify a template parameter to the base class class DClass : BClass<int> { } A problem occurs when I try to use the static method to create an instance of D class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { DClass d = DClass.Create(); } } Gives a compiler error "Cannot implicitly convert type 'Test.BClass<int ' to 'Test.DClass'." Adding the below cast leads to a runtime casting exception. DClass d = (DClass)DClass.Create(); Is there any succint way to allow the static method to create instances of the derived class? Ideally I would like the equivalent of a c++ typedef and I don't want the below syntax (which does work). BClass<int> d = DClass.Create();

    Read the article

  • Can someone please clarify my understanding of a mock's Verify concept?

    - by Pure.Krome
    Hi folks, I'm playing around with some unit tests and mocking. I'm trying to verify that some code, in my method, has been called. I don't think I understand the Verify part of mocking right, because I can only ever Verify main method .. which is silly because that is what I Act upon anyways. I'm trying to test that my logic is working - so I thought I use Verify to see that certain steps in the method have been reached and enacted upon. Lets use this example to highlight what I am doing wrong. public interface IAuthenticationService { bool Authenticate(string username, string password); SignOut(); } public class FormsAuthenticationService : IAuthenticationService { public bool Authenticate(string username, string password) { var user = _userService.FindSingle(x => x.UserName == username); if (user == null) return false; // Hash their password. var hashedPassword = EncodePassword(password, user.PasswordSalt); if (!hashedPassword.Equals(password, StringComparison.InvariantCulture)) return false; FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(userName, true); return true; } } So now, I wish to verify that EncodePassword was called. FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(..) was called. Now, I don't care about the implimentations of both of those. And more importantly, I do not want to test those methods. That has to be handled elsewhere. What I though I should do is Verify that those methods were called and .. if possible ... an expected result was returned. Is this the correct understanding of what 'Verify' means with mocking? If so, can someone show me how I can do this. Preferable with moq but i'm happy with anything. Cheers :)

    Read the article

  • Could not load file or assembly error even when reference has been removed

    - by twal
    Could not load file or assembly 'Payflow_dotNET_2.0' or one of its dependencies. The located assembly's manifest definition does not match the assembly reference. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80131040) I tried to reference the payflow SDK and got this error.But I am no longer trying to reference it. I have removed all references to this dll. and Now I am just trying to get the project to start in VS but I still get this error. I am not trying to add the dll anymore.If i have removed the reference to this, why am I still getting this error? How can I remove anything else that may still be causing my program to look for this file? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using reflection to find all linq2sql tables and ensure they match the database

    - by Jake Stevenson
    I'm trying to use reflection to automatically test that all my linq2sql entities match the test database. I thought I'd do this by getting all the classes that inherit from DataContext from my assembly: var contexttypes = Assembly.GetAssembly(typeof (BaseRepository<,>)).GetTypes().Where( t => t.IsSubclassOf(typeof(DataContext))); foreach (var contexttype in contexttypes) { var context = Activator.CreateInstance(contexttype); var tableProperties = type.GetProperties().Where(t=> t.PropertyType.Name == typeof(ITable<>).Name); foreach (var propertyInfo in tableProperties) { var table = (propertyInfo.GetValue(context, null)); } } So far so good, this loops through each ITable< in each datacontext in the project. If I debug the code, "table" is properly instantiated, and if I expand the results view in the debugger I can see actual data. BUT, I can't figure out how to get my code to actually query that table. I'd really like to just be able to do table.FirstOrDefault() to get the top row out of each table and make sure the SQL fetch doesn't fail. But I cant cast that table to be anything I can query. Any suggestions on how I can make this queryable? Just the ability to call .Count() would be enough for me to ensure the entities don't have anything that doesn't match the table columns.

    Read the article

  • Hiding a LinkButton in DataList

    - by sanfra1983
    Hi someone can tell me how to hide a LinkButton inside a DataList? I've tried to do this but I do not work: protected void Page_PreRender(object sender, EventArgs e) { foreach (var item in listanews) { DataList container = dlgestionenews; if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(item.IdNews)) { DataListItem itemdatalist = null; foreach (DataListItem itemdl in container.Items) { foreach (Control control in itemdatalist.Controls) { if (control.GetType().FullName == "LinkButton") { ((LinkButton)control).Visible = false; } } } } } } Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to get at specific HTML elements of a document using C# and Hide them/Show them etc.

    - by LaserBeak
    Basically I want to load a HTML document and using controls such as multiple check boxes which will be programmed to hide, delete or show HTML elements with certain ID's. So I am thinking I would have to set an inline CSS property for visibility to: false on the ones I want to hide or delete them altogether when necessary. I need this so I don't have to edit my Ebay HTML templates in dreamweaver all the time, where I usually have to scroll around messy code and manually delete or add tags and their respective content. Whereas I just want to create one master template in dreamweaver which has all the variations that my products have, since they are all of the same genre with slight changes here and there and I just need to enable and disable the visibility of these variants as required and copy + paste the final html. I haven's used Windows Forms before, but tried doing this in WebForms which I do know a bit. I am able to get the result that I want by wrapping any HTML elements in a <asp:PlaceHolder></asp:PlaceHolder> and just setting that place holders visibility to false after the associated checkbox is checked and a postback occurs, finally I add a checkbox/button control that removes all the checkboxes, including itself etc for final html. But this method seems just like too much pain in the ass as I have to add the placeholder tags around everything that I need control over as ordinary html elements do not run at server, also webforms injects a bunch of Javascript and ViewState data so I don't have clean HTML which I can just copy after viewing the page source. Any tips/code that you can suggest to achieve the desired effect with the least changes required to existing HTML documents? Ideally I would want to load the HTML document in, have a live design preview of it and underneath have a bunch of well labelled checkboxes programmed to hide, delete or show elements with certain ID's. Thanks...

    Read the article

  • How to run an "empty" Windows Application that only has a NotifyIcon?

    - by devoured elysium
    I want to make an Application that only has a NotifyIcon. It doesn't need to have at all a "Main" Form. When I want to achieve something like this, I just create an invisible form and run it, but would there be a more "elegant" way of doing this, I'd like to know it. How do you generally do this? This application can't be a Windows Service, as having the NotifyIcon and its Context Menus is important (each one of them will run a different command). Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why would an error get thrown inside my try-catch?

    - by George Johnston
    Why would my try-catch block still be throwing an error when it's handled? Exception Details: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. Try Here >> : _MemoryStream.Seek(6 * StartOffset, 0) _MemoryStream.Read(_Buffer, 0, 6) Catch ex As IOException // Handle Error End Try Edit: Cleaned the question up to remove the extraneous information.

    Read the article

  • Architecting a generic search result web control

    - by Bartek Tatkowski
    In a project I'm currently working for we've stumbled upon the need for several kinds of search results presentation controls. The search result are similar, but not identical. For example, in the "office search" result we might want to present the office name and location, while in the "document search" could contain document name, author and publishing date. These fields should be sortable. My current strategy is to employ the Factory pattern and do something like this: ISearchResult officeResults = SearchResultFactory.CreateOfficeSearchResults(data); ISearchResult documentResults = SearchResultFactory.CreateDocumentSearchResults(data); The problem is: I don't know how to implement the markup code. Should I just do Controls.Add(officeResults); in the containing page? Or is there some ASPX trickery to create generic web controls? Or maybe I'm overthinking this and just should create five classes? ;)

    Read the article

  • How to write a contains statement to match a member of a class?

    - by afuzzyllama
    If I have the following structure: Public Class UserData Public ID As String Public Name As String End Class How can I select it in a conditional like this? Dim myUsers As New List(Of UserData) If myUsers.Contains(.ID = "1") = True Then ... I know that myUsers.Contains(.ID = "1") is totally wrong, but I am curious how to do something like that? Is it possible? Is this a job for LINQ?

    Read the article

  • Dynamically find the parameter to be passed as <T> to a generic method

    - by Codex
    A generic method is defined as follows: private static T GetComparisonObject<T>(ComparisonAttribute attribute, object objectToParse) { // Perform a some action return (T)resultObject; } The method is invoked as follows: var srcObjectToCompare = GetComparisonObject<DynamicType>(attributeToCompare, srcObject); The type for which the method needs to be invoked is configured in the config file as: <add attributename ="Count" attributetype ="MemberInformation" attributeparam ="Count" type="System.Int32" comparertype="ditCreditEMGTestAutomationDifferenceEngine.Comparers.TypeComparer, ditCreditEMGTestAutomationDifferenceEngine.dll" /> The token that is passed in < for the generic methods has to be the type for which the method is being invoked. From the type key configuration in the XML, an instance of Type represnting the type can be created{i.e. Type.GetType("System.Int32")}, but how can the Type Definition be generated which can then be passed to the the Generic method? Hope am not missing something elementary here!! :-O Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • MasterPage Page_Load hits before Grid_ItemCommand

    - by Raheel Khan
    I am using the session object to store success/error messages based on user actions. On each postback, the message is set on ItemCommend and retrieved on the Page_Load of the master page. Once retrieved, the message is deleted from the session. The problem is that the master page's Page_Load gets called before the ItemCommand gets called so the message does not show up until the next refresh or postback. How is this situation normally handled? Is there some other event we can code against?

    Read the article

  • Best way to test if a generic type is a string? (c#)

    - by Rex M
    I have a generic class that should allow any type, primitive or otherwise. The only problem with this is using default(T). When you call default on a value type or a string, it initializes it to a reasonable value (such as empty string). When you call default(T) on an object, it returns null. For various reasons we need to ensure that if it is not a primitive type, then we will have a default instance of the type, not null. Here is attempt 1: T createDefault() { if(typeof(T).IsValueType) { return default(T); } else { return Activator.CreateInstance<T>(); } } Problem - string is not a value type, but it does not have a parameterless constructor. So, the current solution is: T createDefault() { if(typeof(T).IsValueType || typeof(T).FullName == "System.String") { return default(T); } else { return Activator.CreateInstance<T>(); } } But this feels like a kludge. Is there a nicer way to handle the string case?

    Read the article

  • Override An Existing Property as a Child form of its return type

    - by Jason
    I apologize if that title is confusing. This question may be a result of lack of coffee and/or sleep, but my mind is not working correctly right now. Anyways, I have an inheritance tree like such (I know the architecture isn't ideal): BaseClass GeneralForm : Inherits BaseClass SpecificForm : Inherits GeneralForm And an object like so: MyItem MySpecificItem : Inherits MyItem I have Items As List (Of MyItem) as a property in BaseClass. I would like for SpecificForm to somehow override Items to return type List (Of MySpecificItem). I feel like this is easy to do, but again, my head is spinning and I can't think straight at the moment. Thank you so much in advance.

    Read the article

  • how to make accessor for Dictionary in a way that returned Dictionary cannot be changed C# / 2.0

    - by matti
    I thought of solution below because the collection is very very small. But what if it was big? private Dictionary<string, OfTable> _folderData = new Dictionary<string, OfTable>(); public Dictionary<string, OfTable> FolderData { get { return new Dictionary<string,OfTable>(_folderData); } } With List you can make: public class MyClass { private List<int> _items = new List<int>(); public IList<int> Items { get { return _items.AsReadOnly(); } } } That would be nice! Thanks in advance, Cheers & BR - Matti NOW WHEN I THINK THE OBJECTS IN COLLECTION ARE IN HEAP. SO MY SOLUTION DOES NOT PREVENT THE CALLER TO MODIFY THEM!!! CAUSE BOTH Dictionary s CONTAIN REFERENCES TO SAME OBJECT. DOES THIS APPLY TO List EXAMPLE ABOVE? class OfTable { private string _wTableName; private int _table; private List<int> _classes; private string _label; public OfTable() { _classes = new List<int>(); } public int Table { get { return _table; } set { _table = value; } } public List<int> Classes { get { return _classes; } set { _classes = value; } } public string Label { get { return _label; } set { _label = value; } } } so how to make this immutable??

    Read the article

  • Error after passing variable from jquery to code in c#

    - by Moraru Viorel
    I try to pass variable from jquery to code c# but something is wrong. I have in js this code: <script type="text/javascript"> var mySerial = '12345'; var fooUrl = '@Url.Action("Foo", "Home")'; window.location.href = fooUrl + '?mySerial' + encodeURIComponent(mySerial); </script> in controller : [HttpPost] public ActionResult Foo(string mySerial) { return View(); } After execution I keep this url: http://localhost:2214/@Url.Action("Foo",%20"Home")?mySerial12345 and I don't understand where's the problem, can someone help me?

    Read the article

  • MVC Html.ActionLink with post funtionality?

    - by Levitikon
    I'm checking to see if anyone has written an MVC extension for Html.ActionLink that you can pass in Post parameters like such: <% Html.ActionLink("Click me", "Index", "Home", new { MyRouteValue = "123" }, null, new { postParam1 = "a", postParam2 = "b" }); %> That would render the link like normal but having an onClick event that submits an also rendered form with an Action url for the Action, Controller, and Route Values with additional hidden inputs from the Post Parameters like such: <a href="#" onClick="$('#theform').submit(); return false;">Click me</a> <form id="theform" action="/Home/Index/123" method="post"> <input type="hidden" name="postParam1" value="a"> <input type="hidden" name="postParam2" value="b"> </form> I'm looking to redirect users to various pages with potentially a lot of data. Not only from page to page, but from email to page also. This would be highly reusable and I think would clean up a lot of code, and would save a bunch of time writing this if its already floating around out there. I hate recreating the wheel when I don't have to. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What's the best way of using a pair (triple, etc) of values as one value in C#?

    - by Yacoder
    That is, I'd like to have a tuple of values. The use case on my mind: Dictionary<Pair<string, int>, object> or Dictionary<Triple<string, int, int>, object> Are there built-in types like Pair or Triple? Or what's the best way of implementing it? Update There are some general-purpose tuples implementations described in the answers, but for tuples used as keys in dictionaries you should additionaly verify correct calculation of the hash code. Some more info on that in another question. Update 2 I guess it is also worth reminding, that when you use some value as a key in dictionary, it should be immutable.

    Read the article

  • what is the best way to have a Generic Comparer

    - by oo
    I have a lot of comparer classes where the class being compared is simply checking the name property of the object and doing a string compare. For example: public class ExerciseSorter : IComparer<Exercise> { public int Compare(Exercise x, Exercise y) { return String.Compare(x.Name, y.Name); } } public class CarSorter : IComparer<Car> { public int Compare(Car x, Car y) { return String.Compare(x.Name, y.Name); } } what is the best way to have this code generic so i dont need to write redundant code over and over again.

    Read the article

  • Cannot inherit from generic base class and specific interface using same type with generic constrain

    - by simendsjo
    Sorry about the strange title. I really have no idea how to express it any better... I get an error on the following snippet. I use the class Dummy everywhere. Doesn't the compiler understand the constraint I've added on DummyImplBase? Is this a compiler bug as it works if I use Dummy directly instead of setting it as a constraint? Error 1 'ConsoleApplication53.DummyImplBase' does not implement interface member 'ConsoleApplication53.IRequired.RequiredMethod()'. 'ConsoleApplication53.RequiredBase.RequiredMethod()' cannot implement 'ConsoleApplication53.IRequired.RequiredMethod()' because it does not have the matching return type of 'ConsoleApplication53.Dummy'. C:\Documents and Settings\simen\My Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\ConsoleApplication53\ConsoleApplication53\Program.cs 37 27 ConsoleApplication53 public class Dummy { } public interface IRequired<T> { T RequiredMethod(); } public interface IDummyRequired : IRequired<Dummy> { void OtherMethod(); } public class RequiredBase<T> : IRequired<T> { public T RequiredMethod() { return default(T); } } public abstract class DummyImplBase<T> : RequiredBase<T>, IDummyRequired where T: Dummy { public void OtherMethod() { } }

    Read the article

  • how VAR is determined against many options?

    - by Royi Namir
    i have this code : IEnumerable<string> q = customers /*EF entity*/ .Select (c => c.Name.ToUpper()) .OrderBy (n => n) To select entity, ObjectContext actually create ObjectQuery, which implement IQueryable. The object return from ObjectQuery, is not normal object, but EntityObject but what if i write : ( notice the var) var q = customers /*EF entity*/ .Select (c => c.Name.ToUpper()) .OrderBy (n => n) it can be determined both to ienumerable or iqueryable : because ObjectQuery Also implements IEnumerable... i dont know if there's any specific info which tell the compiler "use A and not B. A is more specific..." ( there must be...i just cant find it) any help ? how will it know to use A || B ?

    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 | 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407  | Next Page >