Search Results

Search found 3120 results on 125 pages for 'php5 oop'.

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 49/125 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

  • Ways to make (relatively) safe assumptions about the type of concrete subclasses?

    - by Kylotan
    I have an interface (defined as a abstract base class) that looks like this: class AbstractInterface { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const = 0; } And I have an implementation of this (constructors etc omitted): class ConcreteThing { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const { return m_ImplObject.has_relationship_to(other.m_ImplObject); } private: ImplementationObject m_ImplObject; } The AbstractInterface forms an interface in Project A, and the ConcreteThing lives in Project B as an implementation of that interface. This is so that code in Project A can access data from Project B without having a direct dependency on it - Project B just has to implement the correct interface. Obviously the line in the body of the IsRelatedTo function cannot compile - that instance of ConcreteThing has an m_ImplObject member, but it can't assume that all AbstractInterfaces do, including the other argument. In my system, I can actually assume that all implementations of AbstractInterface are instances of ConcreteThing (or subclasses thereof), but I'd prefer not to be casting the object to the concrete type in order to get at the private member, or encoding that assumption in a way that will crash without a diagnostic later if this assumption ceases to hold true. I cannot modify ImplementationObject, but I can modify AbstractInterface and ConcreteThing. I also cannot use the standard RTTI mechanism for checking a type prior to casting, or use dynamic_cast for a similar purpose. I have a feeling that I might be able to overload IsRelatedTo with a ConcreteThing argument, but I'm not sure how to call it via the base IsRelatedTo(AbstractInterface) method. It wouldn't get called automatically as it's not a strict reimplementation of that method. Is there a pattern for doing what I want here, allowing me to implement the IsRelatedTo function via ImplementationObject::has_relationship_to(ImplementationObject), without risky casts? (Also, I couldn't think of a good question title - please change it if you have a better one.)

    Read the article

  • Is it good practise to blank out inherited functionality that will not be used?

    - by Timo Kosig
    I'm wondering if I should change the software architecture of one of my projects. I'm developing software for a project where two sides (in fact a host and a device) use shared code. That helps because shared data, e.g. enums can be stored in one central place. I'm working with what we call a "channel" to transfer data between device and host. Each channel has to be implemented on device and host side. We have different kinds of channels, ordinary ones and special channels which transfer measurement data. My current solution has the shared code in an abstract base class. From there on code is split between the two sides. As it has turned out there are a few cases when we would have shared code but we can't share it, we have to implement it on each side. The principle of DRY (don't repeat yourself) says that you shouldn't have code twice. My thought was now to concatenate the functionality of e.g. the abstract measurement channel on the device side and the host side in an abstract class with shared code. That means though that once we create an actual class for either the device or the host side for that channel we have to hide the functionality that is used by the other side. Is this an acceptable thing to do: public abstract class MeasurementChannelAbstract { protected void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { } protected void MethodUsedByHostSide() { } } public class DeviceMeasurementChannel : MeasurementChannelAbstract { public new void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { base.MethodUsedByDeviceSide(); } } Now, DeviceMeasurementChannel is only using the functionality for the device side from MeasurementChannelAbstract. By declaring all methods/members of MeasurementChannelAbstract protected you have to use the new keyword to enable that functionality to be accessed from the outside. Is that acceptable or are there any pitfalls, caveats, etc. that could arise later when using the code?

    Read the article

  • How do I create a class in Javascript?

    - by William
    This is what I got so far, and it's not working at all :( <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <title>Class Test</title> <meta charset="utf-8" /> <style> body { text-align: center; background-color: #ffffff;} #box { position: absolute; left: 610px; top: 80px; height: 50px; width: 50px; background-color: #ff0000; color: #000000;} </style> <script type="text/javascript"> document.onkeydown=function(event){keyDown(event)}; document.onkeyup=function(event){keyUp(event)}; var box = 0; function Player () { var speed = 5; var x = 50; var y = 50; } function update() { box.style.left = this.x + "px"; box.style.top = this.y + "px"; box.innerHTML = "<h6 style=\"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;\">X: "+ this.x + "<br /> Y: " + this.y + "</h6>"; } var player = new Player(); var keys = new Array(256); var i = 0; for (i = 0;i <= 256; i++){ keys[i] = false; } function keyDown(event){ keys[event.keyCode] = true; } function keyUp(event){ keys[event.keyCode] = false; } function update(){ if(keys[37]) player.x -= player.speed; if(keys[39]) player.x += player.speed; player.update(); } setInterval(update, 1000/60); </script> </head> <body> <div id="box" ></div> <script type="text/javascript"> box = document.getElementById('box'); box.innerHTML = "<h6 style=\"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;\">X: "+ player.x + "<br /> Y: " + player.y + "</h6>"; </script> </body> </html>

    Read the article

  • what is the difference between static class and normal class?

    - by Phsika
    when i prefer static or normal class? Or what is the difference between them? using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace staticmethodlar { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { SinifA.method1(); } } static class SinifA { public static void method1() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme1"); } } public static class SinifB { public static void method2() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme2"); } } public class sinifC { public void method3() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme3"); } } public class sinifD : sinifC { void method4() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme4"); } sinifC sinifc = new sinifC(); // i need to use it:) } }

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of declaring class functions separately from their actual functionality?

    - by vette982
    In C++, what's the benefit of having a class with functions... say class someClass{ public: void someFunc(int arg1); }; then having the function's actual functionality declared after int main int main() { return 0; } void someClass::someFunc(int arg1) { cout<<arg1; } Furthermore, what's the benefit of declaring the class in a .h header file, then putting the functionality in a .cpp file that #includes the .h file?

    Read the article

  • Get class constant names in php?

    - by user151841
    I have a php class with some class constants that indicate the status of an instance. When I'm using the class, after I run some methods on it, I do some checks to make sure that the status is what I expect it to be. For instance, after calling some methods, I expect the status to be MEANINGFUL_STATUS_NAME. $objInstance->method1(); $objInstance->method2(); if ( $objInstance->status !== class::MEANINGFUL_STATUS_NAME ) { throw new Exception("Status is wrong, should not be " . class::MEANINGFUL_STATUS_NAME . "."); } However, this gives me the exception message "Status is wrong, should not be 2" when what I really want to see is "Status is wrong, should not be MEANINGFUL_STATUS_NAME" So I've lost the meaningfulness of the constant name. I was thinking of making an 'translation table' array, so I can take the constant values and translate them back into their name, but this seems cumbersome. How should I translate this back, so I get an error message that gives me a better idea of what went wrong?

    Read the article

  • How do I write a writer method for a class variable in Ruby?

    - by tepidsam
    I'm studying Ruby and my brain just froze. In the following code, how would I write the class writer method for 'self.total_people'? I'm trying to 'count' the number of instances of the class 'Person'. class Person attr_accessor :name, :age @@nationalities = ['French', 'American', 'Colombian', 'Japanese', 'Russian', 'Peruvian'] @@current_people = [] @@total_people = 0 def self.nationalities #reader @@nationalities end def self.nationalities=(array=[]) #writer @@nationalities = array end def self.current_people #reader @@current_people end def self.total_people #reader @@total_people end def self.total_people #writer #-----????? end def self.create_with_attributes(name, age) person = self.new(name) person.age = age person.name = name return person end def initialize(name="Bob", age=0) @name = name @age = age puts "A new person has been instantiated." @@total_people =+ 1 @@current_people << self end

    Read the article

  • c++ inheritance

    - by Meloun
    Hi, i am trouble with this.. Is there some solution or i have to keep exactly class types? //header file Class Car { public: Car(); virtual ~Car(); }; class Bmw:Car { public: Bmw(); virtual ~Bmw(); }; void Start(Car& mycar) {}; //cpp file Car::Car(){} Car::~Car() {} Bmw::Bmw() :Car::Car(){} Bmw::~Bmw() {} int main() { Car myCar; Bmw myBmw; Start(myCar); //works Start(myBmw); //!! doesnt work return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How to call object's method from constructor?

    - by Kirzilla
    Hello, var Dog = function(name) { this.name = name; this.sayName(); } Dog.prototype.sayName = function() { alert(this.name); } I'm creating new instance of Dog object, but method sayName() is undefined. Why? Or maybe I should do something like (but I can't see difference)... var Dog = function(name) { this.name = name; this.prototype.sayName = function() { alert(this.name); } } Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Show composition/aggregation/association relations between objects in Visual Paradigm UML diagrams?

    - by ajsie
    I have Netbeans installed with Visual Paradigm plugin. I have converted my php code into UML diagrams (modeling - instant reverse). I can see relations (drawn lines) between superclass and subclasses. However, i cannot see relations between objects inside objects (composition/aggregation/association)? The code looks like: class Thread { private $tag = ''; public function __construct($tagObject) { $this->tag = $tagObject; } } I know its possible using Java cause i've read about it. Im using PHP, is this still possible?

    Read the article

  • Making a PHP object behave like an array?

    - by Mark Biek
    I'd like to be able to write a PHP class that behaves like an array and uses normal array syntax for getting & setting. For example (where Foo is a PHP class of my making): $foo = new Foo(); $foo['fooKey'] = 'foo value'; echo $foo['fooKey']; I know that PHP has the _get and _set magic methods but those don't let you use array notation to access items. Python handles it by overloading __getitem__ and __setitem__. Is there a way to do this in PHP? If it makes a difference, I'm running PHP 5.2.

    Read the article

  • Inheriting and overriding interfaces in C#

    - by Daniel A. White
    Please note: I am writing this question. I have these interfaces in a library/framework I am working on: interface IRepository<TKey,TModel> { void Remove(TModel entity); } interface IRepository<T> : IRepository<int, T> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TKey,TModel> : IRepository<TKey, TModel> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TModel> : ISoftDeleteRepository<int, TModel>, IRepository<TModel> { } and these implementations class Repository : IRepository { void Remove(TModel entity) { // actually Delete } } interface IRepository<T> : IRepository<int, T> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TKey,TModel> : IRepository<TKey, TModel> { } interface ISoftDeleteRepository<TModel> : ISoftDeleteRepository<int, TModel>, IRepository<TModel> { }

    Read the article

  • How to Correct & Improve the Design of this Code?

    - by DaveDev
    HI Guys, I've been working on a little experiement to see if I could create a helper method to serialize any of my types to any type of HTML tag I specify. I'm getting a NullReferenceException when _writer = _viewContext.Writer; is called in protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) {/*...*/} I think I'm at a point where it almost works (I've gotten other implementations to work) and I was wondering if somebody could point out what I'm doing wrong? Also, I'd be interested in hearing suggestions on how I could improve the design? So basically, I have this code that will generate a Select box with a number of options: // the idea is I can use one method to create any complete tag of any type // and put whatever I want in the content area <% using (Html.GenerateTag<SelectTag>(Model, new { href = Url.Action("ActionName") })) { %> <%foreach (var fund in Model.Funds) {%> <% using (Html.GenerateTag<OptionTag>(fund)) { %> <%= fund.Name %> <% } %> <% } %> <% } %> This Html.GenerateTag helper is defined as: public static MMTag GenerateTag<T>(this HtmlHelper htmlHelper, object elementData, object attributes) where T : MMTag { return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(T), htmlHelper.ViewContext, elementData, attributes); } Depending on the type of T it'll create one of the types defined below, public class HtmlTypeBase : MMTag { public HtmlTypeBase() { } public HtmlTypeBase(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._viewContext = viewContext; base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } public class SelectTag : HtmlTypeBase { public SelectTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("select"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } public class OptionTag : HtmlTypeBase { public OptionTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("option"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, _elementData); } } public class AnchorTag : HtmlTypeBase { public AnchorTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("a"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } all of these types (anchor, select, option) inherit from HtmlTypeBase, which is intended to perform base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData);. This doesn't happen though. It works if I uncomment the MergeDataToTag methods in the derived classes, but I don't want to repeat that same code for every derived class I create. This is the definition for MMTag: public class MMTag : IDisposable { internal bool _disposed; internal ViewContext _viewContext; internal TextWriter _writer; internal TagBuilder _tag; internal object[] _elementData; public MMTag() {} public MMTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { } public void Dispose() { Dispose(true /* disposing */); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (!_disposed) { _disposed = true; _writer = _viewContext.Writer; _writer.Write(_tag.ToString(TagRenderMode.EndTag)); } } protected void MergeDataToTag(ViewContext viewContext, object[] elementData) { Type elementDataType = elementData[0].GetType(); foreach (PropertyInfo prop in elementDataType.GetProperties()) { if (prop.PropertyType.IsPrimitive || prop.PropertyType == typeof(Decimal) || prop.PropertyType == typeof(String)) { object propValue = prop.GetValue(elementData[0], null); string stringValue = propValue != null ? propValue.ToString() : String.Empty; _tag.Attributes.Add(prop.Name, stringValue); } } var dic = new Dictionary<string, object>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); var attributes = elementData[1]; if (attributes != null) { foreach (PropertyDescriptor descriptor in TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(attributes)) { object value = descriptor.GetValue(attributes); dic.Add(descriptor.Name, value); } } _tag.MergeAttributes<string, object>(dic); _viewContext = viewContext; _viewContext.Writer.Write(_tag.ToString(TagRenderMode.StartTag)); } } Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • How to Execute Base Class's Method Before Implementors's Method?

    - by DaveDev
    I have the following page public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { } where OfflineFactsheetBase is defined as public class OfflineFactsheetBase : System.Web.UI.Page { public OfflineFactsheetBase() { this.Load += new EventHandler(this.Page_Load); this.PreInit += new EventHandler(this.Page_PreInit); } protected void Page_PreInit(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (Request.QueryString["data"] != null) { this.PageData = StringCompressor.DecompressString(Request.QueryString["data"]); this.ExtractPageData(); } } } OfflineFactsheetBase has the following virtual method: public virtual void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase } which is implemented in all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase as follows: public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { public override void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to an OfflineCommentary page. } } Currently, only GenericOfflineCommentary's ExtractPageData() is firing. How can I modify this to first run OfflineFactsheetBase's ExtractPageData() and then GenericOfflineCommentary's? edit: I'm trying to avoid having to call base.ExtractPageData() in every implementor. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Is fetching data from database a get-method thing?

    - by theva
    I have a small class that I call Viewer. This class is supposed to view the proper layout of each page or something like that... I have a method called getFirstPage, when called the user of this method will get a setting value for which page is currently set as the first page. I have some code here, I think it works but I am not really shure that I have done it the right way: class Viewer { private $db; private $user; private $firstPage; function __construct($db, $user) { $this->db = $db; if(isset($user)) { $this->user = $user; } else { $this->user = 'default'; } } function getFistPage() { $std = $db->prepare("SELECT firstPage FROM settings WHERE user = ':user'"); $std->execute(array(':user' => $user)); $result = $std->fetch(); $this->firstPage = $result['firstPage']; return $this->firstPage; } } My get method is fetching the setting from databse (so far so good?). The problem is that then I have to use this get method to set the private variable firstPage. It seems like I should have a set method to do this, but I cannot really have a set method that just fetch some setting from database, right? Because the user of this object should be able to assume that there already is a setting defined in the object... How should I do that?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything wrong with a class with all static methods?

    - by MatthewMartin
    I'm doing code review and came across a class that uses all static methods. The entrance method takes several arguments and then starts calling the other static methods passing along all or some of the arguments the entrance method received. It isn't like a Math class with largely unrelated utility functions. In my own normal programming, I rarely write methods where Resharper pops and says "this could be a static method", when I do, they tend to be mindless utility methods. Is there anything wrong with this pattern? Is this just a matter of personal choice if the state of a class is held in fields and properties or passed around amongst static methods using arguments?

    Read the article

  • understanding the ORM models in MVC

    - by fayer
    i cant fully understand the ORM models in MVC. so i am using symfony with doctrine. the doctrine models are created. does this mean that i don't have to create any models? are the doctrine models the only models i need? where should i put the code that uses the doctrine models: eg. $phoneIds = array(); $phone1 = new Phonenumber(); $phone1['phonenumber'] = '555 202 7890'; $phone1->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone1['id']; $phone2 = new Phonenumber(); $phone2['phonenumber'] = '555 100 7890'; $phone2->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone2['id']; $user = new User(); $user['username'] = 'jwage'; $user['password'] = 'changeme'; $user->save(); $user->link('Phonenumbers', $phoneIds); should this code be in the controller or in another model? and where should i validate these fields (check if it exists in database, that email is email etc)? could someone please shed a light on this. thanks.

    Read the article

  • returning values from function or method multiple times by only calling the class once

    - by Sokhrat Sikar
    I have a members.php file that shows my websites members. I echo members name by using foreach method. A method of Members class returns an array, then I use foreach loop in the members.php file to echo the members. I am trying to aovid writing php code in my members.php file. Is there a way to avoid using foreach inside members.php file? For example, is it possible to return value from a method couple of times? (by only calling the object once). Just like how we normally call the functions? This question doesn't make sense, but I am just trying to see if there is a away around this issue?

    Read the article

  • Where do you put non-controller classes in codeigniter?

    - by sprugman
    I've got a class Widgets. Widgets are made up of Doohickies. I'm never going to need to access Doohickies directly via url -- they're essentially a private class, only used by Widgets. Where do you put your code to define the Doohicky class? In /app/controllers/doohicky.php? in app/controllers/widget.php? somewhere else? Obviously, the former seems cleaner, but it's not obvious to me how to make the Doohicky class available to Widget.

    Read the article

  • What is the Rule of Thumb on Exposing Encapsulated Class Methods

    - by javamonkey79
    Consider the following analogy: If we have a class: "Car" we might expect it to have an instance of "Engine" in it. As in: "The car HAS-A engine". Similarly, in the "Engine" class we would expect an instance of "Starting System" or "Cooling System" which each have their appropriate sub-components. By the nature of encapsulation, is it not true that the car "HAS-A" "radiator hose" in it as well as the engine? Therefore, is it appropriate OO to do something like this: public class Car { private Engine _engine; public Engine getEngine() { return _engine; } // is it ok to use 'convenience' methods of inner classes? // are the following 2 methods "wrong" from an OO point of view? public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return getCoolingSystem().getRadiatorHose(); } public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _engine.getCoolingSystem(); } } public class Engine { private CoolingSystem _coolingSystem; public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _coolingSystem; } } public class CoolingSystem { private RadiatorHose _radiatorHose; public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return _radiatorHose; } } public class RadiatorHose {//... }

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