Search Results

Search found 33012 results on 1321 pages for 'method injection'.

Page 49/1321 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

  • DAO method retrieve single entry

    - by London
    Hello, How can I write DAO method which will return as a result only first entry from the database. For instance lets say I'm looking at Users table and I want to retrieve only the first entry, I'd declare method like: public User getFirstUser(){ //method logic } EDIT: User has primary key id if that matters at all. I apologize if this question is too simple/stupid/whatever I'm beginner with Java so I'm trying new things. thank you

    Read the article

  • Structuremap Configuration with generics

    - by DarthVader
    I have IRepository interface with which i want to use NHibernateRepository. How do i configure it with structure map? protected void ConfigureDependencies() { ObjectFactory.Initialize( x => { x.For<ILogger>().Use<Logger>(); x.For<IRepository<T>>().Use<NHibernateRepository<T>>(); } ); } I m getting an error on T. Another question I have is if it s OK to make an ApplicationContext static class, configure it with structure map and provide instances with it? I have read that static classes are bad, but I dont want to initialize the ApplicationContext class that I have the injections everywhere. What s the best practice for this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Cannot call action method 'System.Web.Mvc.PartialViewResult Foo[T](T)' on controller 'Controller' be

    - by MedicineMan
    Cannot call action method 'System.Web.Mvc.PartialViewResult FooT' on controller 'Controller' because the action method is a generic method <% Html.RenderAction("Foo", model = Model}); %> Is there a workaround for this limitation on ASP MVC 2? I would really prefer to use a generic. The workaround that I have come up with is to change the model type to be an object. It works, but is not preferred: public PartialViewResult Foo<T>(T model) where T : class { // do stuff }

    Read the article

  • Best way to order menu items injected by an IoC/plugin Framework

    - by Daver
    One of the common things I've seen done in applications built on IoC/plugin frameworks is to add commands to menus or toolbars from the dynamically loaded plugins. For example, the application's default plugins supply actions like "New, Open, Save" that show up in the context menu for a certain item in the workspace. A new plugin may add "Mail, Post, Encrypt" commands, but where do those commands show up in relation to "New, Open, Save"? How can the application that is loading components through IoC impose order on the items that get injected? Does it require metadata from the plugins that give a hint on how to group or order the items? Does it use a config file of previously known menu names (or ids) to define the order (seems a little weak to me)? Or are "unknown" plugins treated as second class citizens and always get dumped into sub menus? Something I've never even imagined (which I'm hoping to see in the answers)

    Read the article

  • What's the difference between DI and factory patterns?

    - by Anthony Short
    I have a class which depends on 3 classes, all 3 of which have other classes they rely on. Currently, I'm using a container class to build up all the required classes, inject them into one another and return the application. The simplified version of the container looks something like this: class Builder { private $_options; public function __construct($options) { $this->_options = $options; } public function build() { $cache = $this->getCache(); $response = $this->getResponse(); $engine = $this->getEngine(); return new Application($cache,$response,$engine); } public function getResponse() { $encoder = $this->getResponseEncoder(); $cache = $this->getResponseCache(); return new Response($encoder,$cache); } // Methods for building each object } I'm not sure if this would be classified as FactoryMethod or a DI Container. They both seem to solve the same problem in the same way - They build objects and inject dependencies. This container has some more complicated building methods, like loading observers and attaching them to observable objects. Should factories be doing all the building (loading extensions etc) and the DI container should use these factories to inject dependencies? That way the sub-packages, like Cache, Response etc, can each have their own specialised factories.

    Read the article

  • Change certain values within method

    - by Grant Wilkinson
    I have the following code with a bool if statement inside and in another method I change the value of the bool and i know i need to recall the method [self someMethod]; but I just want to reflect the changes in the if statement and not recall everything else again, how do i do this? thanks -(void)someMethod { //start my code here if (boolvalueisTrue) { //change this part only } } -(void)changeBool { boolvalueisTrue = TRUE; [self someMethod]; //instead of calling the whole method i just want to reflect //the changes inside my if statement }

    Read the article

  • Unity: Replace registered type with another type at runtime

    - by gehho
    We have a scenario where the user can choose between different hardware at runtime. In the background we have several different hardware classes which all implement an IHardware interface. We would like to use Unity to register the currently selected hardware instance for this interface. However, when the user selects another hardware, this would require us to replace this registration at runtime. The following example might make this clearer: public interface IHardware { // some methods... } public class HardwareA : IHardware { // ... } public class HardwareB : IHardware { // ... } container.RegisterInstance<IHardware>(new HardwareA()); // user selects new hardware somewhere in the configuration... // the following is invalid code, but can it be achieved another way? container.ReplaceInstance<IHardware>(new HardwareB()); Can this behavior be achieved somehow? BTW: I am completely aware that instances which have already been resolved from the container will not be replaced with the new instances, of course. We would take care of that ourselves by forcing them to resolve the instance once again.

    Read the article

  • Need an advice for unit testing using mock object

    - by Andree
    Hi there, I just recently read about "Mocking objects" for unit testing and currently I'm having a difficulties implementing this approach in my application. Please let me explain my problem. I have a User model class, which is dependent on 2 data sources (database and facebook web service). The controller class simply use this User model as an interface to access data and it doesn't care about where the data came from. Currently I never done any unit test to this User model because it is dependent on an external web service. But just a while ago, I read about object mocking and now I know that it is a common approach to unit test a class that depends on external resources (like in my case). Now I want to create a unit test for the User model, but then I encountered a design issue: In order for the User model to use a mocked Facebook SDK, I have to inject this mocked Facebook SDK to the User object (probably using a setter). Therefore I can't construct the Facebook SDK inside the User object. I have to construct it outside the User object, and inject the SDK into the User object. The real client of my User model is the application's controller. Therefore I have to construct the Facebook SDK inside the controller and inject it to the user object. Well, this is a problem because I want my controller to be as clean as possible. I want my controller to be ignorant about the application's data source. I'm not good at explaining something systematically, so you'll probably sleeping before reading this last paragraph. But anyway, I want to ask if anyone here ever encountered the same problem as mine? How do you solve this problem? Regards, Andree

    Read the article

  • rails: running a method on create only

    - by bandhunt
    I want to run a paperclip method on create only has_attached_file :file This method doesn't seem to accept the :on = :create that some other rails methods do. I tried: before_create after_create etc, but those didn't work. I also did: if :create How can I test if the controller is using the create method from the model? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Learning to implement DIC in MVC

    - by Tom
    I am learning to apply DIC to MVC project. So, I have sketched this DDD-ish DIC-ready-ish layout to my best understanding. I have read many blogs articles wikis for the last few days. However, I am not confident about implementing it correctly. Could you please demonstrate to me how to put them into DIC the proper way? I prefer Ninject or Windsor after all the readings, but anyDIC will do as long as I can get the correct idea how to do it. Web controller... public class AccountBriefingController { //create private IAccountServices accountServices { get; set; } public AccountBriefingController(IAccountServices accsrv) accountServices = accsrv; } //do work public ActionResult AccountBriefing(string userid, int days) { //get days of transaction records for this user BriefingViewModel model = AccountServices.GetBriefing(userid, days); return View(model); } } View model ... public class BriefingViewModel { //from user repository public string UserId { get; set; } public string AccountNumber {get; set;} public string FirstName { get; set; } public string LastName { get; set; } //from account repository public string Credits { get; set; } public List<string> Transactions { get; set; } } Service layer ... public interface IAccountServices { BriefingViewModel GetBriefing(); } public class AccountServices { //create private IUserRepository userRepo {get; set;} private IAccountRepository accRepo {get; set;} public AccountServices(UserRepository ur, AccountRepository ar) { userRepo = ur; accRepo = ar; } //do work public BriefingViewModel GetBriefing(string userid, int days) { var model = new BriefingViewModel(); //<---is that okay to new a model here?? var user = userRepo.GetUser(userid); if(user != null) { model.UserId = userid; model.AccountNumber = user.AccountNumber; model.FirstName = user.FirstName; model.LastName = user.LastName; //account records model.Credits = accRepo.GetUserCredits(userid); model.Transactions = accRepo.GetUserTransactions(userid, days); } return model; } } Domain layer and data models... public interface IUserRepository { UserDataModel GetUser(userid); } public interface IAccountRepository { List<string> GetUserTransactions(userid, days); int GetUserCredits(userid); } // Entity Framework DBContext goes under here Please point out if my implementation is wrong, e.g.I can feel in AccountServices-GetBriefing - new BriefingViewModel() seems wrong to me, but I don't know how to fit the stud into DIC? Thank you very much for your help!

    Read the article

  • what's wrong in File.Exist() method?

    - by Arseny
    Reading some answers with code samples I notice that those where this method mentioned are subjected to criticism. I'm using this method in my code. So I'd like to know if someone give me detailed response whuy this method is not recomemnded and what alternative approaches are?

    Read the article

  • Inject a EJB into a JSF converter with JEE6

    - by Michael Bavin
    Hi, I have a stateless EJB that acceses my database. I need this bean in a JSF 2 converter to retreive an entity object from the String value parameter. I'm using JEE6 with Glassfish V3 @EJB annotation does not work and gets a NPE, because it's in the faces context and it has not access to the ejb context. My question is: Is it still possible to Inject this bean (With a @Resource or other annotation, a JNDI lookup,...), or do i need a workaround? Thank you Solution Do a JNDI lookup like this: try { ic = new InitialContext(); myejb= (MyEJB) ic .lookup("java:global/xxxx/MyEJB"); } catch (NamingException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }

    Read the article

  • url Query and Security

    - by jasmine
    In url query with id I use is_numeric($_GET['id']) for security issues. But in query with for example category name, is urlencode() a right way for security? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Overriding a method in statically created objects

    - by I82Much
    All, Due to a bug in a library I'm using, I need to override the dispose() method on all objects extending a certain class and make it a NO-OP. I know that if I'm making new instances of the classes directly, this is easy to do: layerManager = new LayerManagerLayer(wwd) { @Override public void dispose() {} }; The problem is that a lot of the object instances I get are not directly constructed by my client code, but instead are created via static library method calls. // Here I want to override the dispose method, but I cannot. Layer l = ShapefileLoader.makeShapefileLayer(this.getClass().getResource("polylines10.shp")); Is there a way I can inject my dispose method into that statically created object without modifying the original sourcecode?

    Read the article

  • MEF Why is ComposePart an extension method?

    - by ILovePaperTowels
    CompositionContainer.ComposePart is an extension method. why is that? Looking into the System.Componentmodel.Composition assembly, it looks like it's because it is ONLY meant to work with the attributed programming model while the .Compose() method is able to take in exports as long as it is a composablepart. ComposePart is even hosted in the 'AttributedModelServices' class which makes me think I'm correct. Am I correct on this? If not, why is it an extension method and not a method in the container class?

    Read the article

  • Is scala's cake pattern possible with parametrized components?

    - by Nicolas
    Parametrized components work well with the cake pattern as long as you are only interested in a unique component for each typed component's, example: trait AComponent[T] { val a:A[T] class A[T](implicit mf:Manifest[T]) { println(mf) } } class App extends AComponent[Int] { val a = new A[Int]() } new App Now my application requires me to inject an A[Int] and an A[String], obviously scala's type system doesn't allow me to extends AComponent twice. What is the common practice in this situation ?

    Read the article

  • Using StructureMap, when a default concrete type is defined in one registry, can it be redefined in

    - by Mark Rogers
    In the project I'm working on I have a StructureMap registry for the main web project and another registry for my integration tests. During some of the tests I wire up the web project's registry, so that I can get objects out of the container for testing. In one case I want to be able to replace a default concrete type from the web registry with one in the test registry. Is this possible? How do you do it?

    Read the article

  • Ruby/RoR: calling original method via super()?

    - by fearless_fool
    In a RoR app, I want to specialize ActiveRecord's update_attributes() method in one of my models, extracting some of the attributes for special handling and passing the rest of them to the original update_attributes() method. The details: class Premise < ActiveRecord::Base ... def update_attributes(attrs) attrs.each_pair do |key, val| unless has_attribute?(key) do_special_processing(key, val) attrs.delete(key) end end # use original update_attributes() to process non-special pairs super.update_attributes(attrs) end ... end The call to super.update_attributes(attr) raises an error: undefined method `update_attributes' for true:TrueClass ... which makes me suspect I really don't understand the super keyword in Ruby. What am I missing? Specifically, how do I call the original update_attributes() method?

    Read the article

  • Ninject: How do I inject into a class library ?

    - by DennyDotNet
    To start I'm using Ninject 1.5. I have two projects: Web project and a Class library. My DI configuration is within the Web project. Within my class library I have the following defined: public interface ICacheService<T> { string Identifier { get; } T Get(); void Set( T objectToCache, TimeSpan timeSpan ); bool Exists(); } And then a concrete class called CategoryCacheService. In my web project I bind the two: Bind( typeof( ICacheService<List<Category>> ) ).To( typeof(CategoryCacheService)).Using<SingletonBehavior>(); In my class library I have extension methods for the HtmlHelper class, for example: public static class Category { [Inject] public static ICacheService Categories { get; set; } public static string RenderCategories(this HtmlHelper htmlHelper) { var c = Categories.Get(); return string.Join(", ", c.Select(s = s.Name).ToArray()); } } I've been told that you cannot inject into static properties, instead I should use Kernel.Get<() - However... Since the code above is in a class library I don't have access to the Kernel. How can I get the Kernel from this point or is there a better way of doing this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Automatic release of objects when using Castle Windsor

    - by MotoSV
    Hi, I'm starting a new project and I'm looking into using a dependency container (Castle Windsor) to help when it comes to unit testing. One of the things that is a little frustrating is that after I've finished using an object I have to tell the container to "release" the object. I understand the reasoning behind doing this, but it's still cumbersome to have to remember to do this. So, my question is, is there a way I can make the "releasing" of an object automatic so I don't have to remember to release it? Kind Regards Michael

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >