Search Results

Search found 21809 results on 873 pages for 'display interfaces'.

Page 48/873 | < Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >

  • Break a class in twain, or impose an interface for restricted access?

    - by bedwyr
    What's the best way of partitioning a class when its functionality needs to be externally accessed in different ways by different classes? Hopefully the following example will make the question clear :) I have a Java class which accesses a single location in a directory allowing external classes to perform read/write operations to it. Read operations return usage stats on the directory (e.g. available disk space, number of writes, etc.); write operations, obviously, allow external classes to write data to the disk. These methods always work on the same location, and receive their configuration (e.g. which directory to use, min disk space, etc.) from an external source (passed to the constructor). This class looks something like this: public class DiskHandler { public DiskHandler(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int space = getAvailableSpace(); ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } There's quite a bit more going on, but this will do to suffice. This class needs to be accessed differently by two external classes. One class needs access to the read operations; the other needs access to both read and write operations. public class DiskWriter { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskWriter() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { diskHandler.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { DiskHandler diskHandler; public DiskReader() { diskHandler = new DiskHandler(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskHandler.getAvailableSpace(...); } } At this point, both classes share the same class, but the class which should only read has access to the write methods. Solution 1 I could break this class into two. One class would handle read operations, and the other would handle writes: // NEW "UTILITY" CLASSES public class WriterUtil { private ReaderUtil diskReader; public WriterUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... diskReader = new ReaderUtil(dir, minSpace); } public void writeToDisk(String contents, String filename) { int = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(); ... } } public class ReaderUtil { public ReaderUtil(String dir, int minSpace) { ... } public void getAvailableSpace() { ... } } // MODIFIED EXTERNALLY-ACCESSING CLASSES public class DiskWriter { WriterUtil diskWriter; public DiskWriter() { diskWriter = new WriterUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { diskWriter.writeToDisk(...); } } public class DiskReader { ReaderUtil diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new ReaderUtil(...); } public void doSomething() { int space = diskReader.getAvailableSpace(...); } } This solution prevents classes from having access to methods they should not, but it also breaks encapsulation. The original DiskHandler class was completely self-contained and only needed config parameters via a single constructor. By breaking apart the functionality into read/write classes, they both are concerned with the directory and both need to be instantiated with their respective values. In essence, I don't really care to duplicate the concerns. Solution 2 I could implement an interface which only provisions read operations, and use this when a class only needs access to those methods. The interface might look something like this: public interface Readable { int getAvailableSpace(); } The Reader class would instantiate the object like this: Readable diskReader; public DiskReader() { diskReader = new DiskHandler(...); } This solution seems brittle, and prone to confusion in the future. It doesn't guarantee developers will use the correct interface in the future. Any changes to the implementation of the DiskHandler could also need to update the interface as well as the accessing classes. I like it better than the previous solution, but not by much. Frankly, neither of these solutions seems perfect, but I'm not sure if one should be preferred over the other. I really don't want to break the original class up, but I also don't know if the interface buys me much in the long run. Are there other solutions I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Implementation/interface inheritance design question.

    - by Neil G
    I would like to get the stackoverflow community's opinion on the following three design patterns. The first is implementation inheritance; the second is interface inheritance; the third is a middle ground. My specific question is: Which is best? implementation inheritance: class Base { X x() const = 0; void UpdateX(A a) { y_ = g(a); } Y y_; } class Derived: Base { X x() const { return f(y_); } } interface inheritance: class Base { X x() const = 0; void UpdateX(A a) = 0; } class Derived: Base { X x() const { return x_; } void UpdateX(A a) { x_ = f(g(a)); } X x_; } middle ground: class Base { X x() const { return x_; } void UpdateX(A a) = 0; X x_; } class Derived: Base { void UpdateX(A a) { x_ = f(g(a)); } } I know that many people prefer interface inheritance to implementation inheritance. However, the advantage of the latter is that with a pointer to Base, x() can be inlined and the address of x_ can be statically calculated.

    Read the article

  • How to display information contained in XML file from another website

    - by Tristan
    Hello, I have an XML file ( XML file I produce ) which contains information about my parteners. I want them to display on their website information relative to them by picking them into the XML file. I have no idea to do that, ecxept that i need to write a 'parser' in javascript to display information. could you please provide me examples to do that ? (how to write a parser, how to display only information for one partener ?) Thank you, Regards

    Read the article

  • Custom Collection Implementing IEnumerable

    - by Burnzy
    I know that technically, an Interface is used for reading and not writting or editing however, I want to add an add and addrange function to the following class, here is what I currently have which is not working public class HrefCollection : IEnumerable<Href> { private IEnumerable<Href> hrefs; public IEnumerable<Href> Add( Href href ) { yield return href; } public IEnumerable<Href> AddRange( List<Href> hrefs ) { foreach( Href href in hrefs ) { yield return href; } } public IEnumerator<Href> GetEnumerator() { return hrefs.GetEnumerator(); } System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return hrefs.GetEnumerator(); } } I'm not quite sure how to associate the yield return with the private list. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • Editing "Time to display recovery options when needed" timeout value using a program

    - by chandra
    Hi all, I want to edit the timeout value of 'Time to display recovery options when needed' without using the UI display option. To navigate, Right click on 'Mycomputer' - Properties - Advanced tab - click on SETTINGS of 'Startup and recovery' = 2nd displayed check box. The value thought to be in c:\boot.ini file, but it has value of other timeout 'Time to display other operating systems'. After some searching, i found that 'c:\windows\bootstat.dat' file holds the timeout value for 'Time to display recovery options when needed'... but, i am not able to decode the .dat file or edit that file.. any suggestions would he helpful for me.. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • How do I remove implementing types from GWT’s Serialization Policy?

    - by Bluu
    The opposite of this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/138099/how-do-i-add-a-type-to-gwts-serialization-policy-whitelist GWT is adding undesired types to the serialization policy and bloating my JS. How do I trim my GWT whitelist by hand? Or should I at all? For example, if I put the interface List on a GWT RPC service class, GWT has to generate Javascript that handles ArrayList, LinkedList, Stack, Vector, ... even though my team knows we're only ever going to return an ArrayList. I could just make the method's return type ArrayList, but I like relying on an interface rather than a specific implementation. After all, maybe one day we will switch it up and return e.g. a LinkedList. In that case, I'd like to force the GWT serialization policy to compile for only ArrayList and LinkedList. No Stacks or Vectors. These implicit restrictions have one huge downside I can think of: a new member of the team starts returning Vectors, which will be a runtime error. So besides the question in the title, what is your experience designing around this?

    Read the article

  • Interface helpers or delegating interface parent

    - by Craig Peterson
    If I have an existing IInterface descendant implemented by a third party, and I want to add helper routines, does Delphi provide any easy way to do so without redirecting every interface method manually? That is, given an interface like so: IFoo = interface procedure Foo1; procedure Foo2; ... procedure FooN; end; Is anything similar to the following supported? IFooHelper = interface helper for IFoo procedure Bar; end; or IFooBar = interface(IFoo) procedure Bar; end; TFooBar = interface(TInterfacedObject, IFoo, IFooBar) private FFoo: IFoo; public procedure Bar; property Foo: IFoo implements IFoo; end; I'm specifically wondering about ways to that allow me to always refer to IFoo, IFooBar, or TFooBar, without switching between them, and without adding all of IFoo's methods to TFooBar.

    Read the article

  • [C#] Problems with implementing generic IEnumerator and IComparable

    - by r0h
    Hi all! I'm working on an AVL Tree. The tree itself seems to be working but I need a iterator to walk through the values of the tree. Therefore I tried to implement the IEnumerator interace. Unfortunately I get a compile time error implementing IEnumerator and IComparable. First the code and below that the error. class AvlTreePreOrderEnumerator<T> : IEnumerator<T> where T :IComparable<T> { private AvlTreeNode<T> current = default(T); private AvlTreeNode<T> tree = null; private Queue<AvlTreeNode<T>> traverseQueue = null; public AvlTreePreOrderEnumerator(AvlTreeNode<T> tree) { this.tree = tree; //Build queue traverseQueue = new Queue<AvlTreeNode<T>>(); visitNode(this.tree.Root); } private void visitNode(AvlTreeNode<T> node) { if (node == null) return; else { traverseQueue.Enqueue(node); visitNode(node.LeftChild); visitNode(node.RightChild); } } public T Current { get { return current.Value; } } object IEnumerator.Current { get { return Current; } } public void Dispose() { current = null; tree = null; } public void Reset() { current = null; } public bool MoveNext() { if (traverseQueue.Count > 0) current = traverseQueue.Dequeue(); else current = null; return (current != null); } } The error given by VS2008: Error 1 The type 'T' cannot be used as type parameter 'T' in the generic type or method 'Opdr2_AvlTreeTest_Final.AvlTreeNode'. There is no boxing conversion or type parameter conversion from 'T' to 'System.IComparable'. For now I've not included the tree and node logic. I anybody thinks is necessary to resolve this probleem, just say so! Thx!

    Read the article

  • How to display a confirmation message in Tapestry5?

    - by shane87
    I am developing a website as part of my final year project and I want to display a message which confirms that an email has been sent. I know how to display custom error messages on a form i.e. You cannot go any further until the following errors are fixed : login name not known! I want to display a message which will say: your email has been sent! after I send an email. I have been told that I should display this message through the flash. I am unsure on how to do this, any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Display different layout according to Facebook connection status in Android

    - by Rom Freiman
    I'm building an Android application where I want users to connect by their facebook details. According to my design, when the application starts first time, I want to display a layout with LOGIN facebook button. After the user will perform login for the first time, I dont want to display this layout/activity again - when the application would be relanched, I want t display another (home) screen, and not the LOGIN one. How should I implement this functionality? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Delphi: How to call a method when i click a control?

    - by Ian Boyd
    i have a method: procedure Frob(Sender: TObject); that i want to call when i click a menu item. The method comes to me though an interface: animal: IAnimal; IAnimal = interface procedure Frob(Sender: TObject); end; The question revolves around what to assign to the OnClick event handler of a menu item (i.e. control): var animal: IAnimal; ... begin ... menuItem := TMenuItem.Create(FileMenu) menuItem.Caption := 'Click me!'; menuItem.OnClick := <-------- what to do ... end; The obvious choice, my first attempt, and the wrong answer is: menuItem.OnClick := animal.Frob; So how can i call a method when user clicks a control? See also Why doesn't it work?

    Read the article

  • Recognize active objects with a capacitive touch screen display

    - by lucgian84
    I'm trying to develop an app that can recognize an active object (for example: a memory) that touch the smartphone display. Before I start to develop I've to know if there's any objects that my touch screen display can recognize? Which device can be recognizable by a smartphone display? I'm interested to know that for iPhone or for Android phone. I found this app and you can see that with a card I can interact with a mobile device, now I'm asking you if anyone know how to do this kind of app with an iPhone or with an Android phone. Does anyone knows how to do that? There's a library (iOS or Android) to recognize object that I put over the display?

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio code generated when choosing to explicitly implement interface

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    Sorry for the vague title, but I'm not sure what this is called. Say I add IDisposable to my class, Visual Studio can create the method stub for me. But it creates the stub like: void IDisposable.Dispose() I don't follow what this syntax is doing. Why do it like this instead of public void Dispose()? And with the first syntax, I couldn't work out how to call Dispose() from within my class (in my destructor).

    Read the article

  • Why should I use display:table instead of table

    - by nimo9367
    What's the benefits of structuring my site with divs and apply the display:table property ( display:tr, display:tr). Doesn't this mean that the divs will behave exactly like tr and td elements? I know I probably shouldn’t use tables or table behavior for layout at all but I'm just curious if there's a difference and a benefit?

    Read the article

  • Best way to implement some type of ITaggable interface

    - by Jack
    I've got a program I'm creating that reports on another certain programs backup xml files. I've gotten to the point where I need to implement some type of ITaggable interface - but am unsure how to go about it code wise. My idea is that each item (BackupClient, BackupVersion, and BackupFile) should implement an ITaggable interface for highlighting old, out of date, or non-existent files in their HTML or Excel report. The user will be able to specify tags in the settings. My question is this, how can a user dynamically specify a "tag" such as File Date 3 days old? - Background Color = Red. Actually I guess my question is more, how can I, the programmer, implement this dynamically? I was thinking Expression trees, but am unsure this is the way to go as I havn't studied them much. I know my ITaggable interface would have methods such as AddTag(T tag), RemoveTag(T tag), but what exactly specifies the criteria for the tag to be added? I realize this may be subjective, and can be marked as wiki if need be, but I truly am stuck. Any input would be greatly helpful!

    Read the article

  • Converting a view to Bitmap without displaying it in Android?

    - by sunil
    Hi, I will try to explain what exactly I need to do. I have 3 separate screens say A,B,C. There is another screen called say HomeScreen where all the 3 screens bitmap should be displayed in Gallery view and the user can select in which view does he wants to go. I have been able to get the Bitmaps of all the 3 screens and display it in Gallery view by placing all the code in HomeScreen Activity only. Now, this has complicated the code a lot and I will like to simplify it. So, can I call another Activity from HomeScreen and do not display it and just get the Bitmap of that screen. For example, say I just call HomeScreen and it calls Activity A,B,C and none of the Activities from A,B,C are displayed. It just gives the Bitmap of that screen by getDrawingCache(). And then we can display those bitmaps in Gallery view in HomeScreen. I hope I have explained the problem very clearly. Please let me know if this is actually possible. Regards Sunil

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >