Search Results

Search found 54446 results on 2178 pages for 'struct vs class'.

Page 621/2178 | < Previous Page | 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628  | Next Page >

  • Problem with foreach loop and $_GET

    - by phpExe
    I have a very simple foreach loop foreach($tv as $id => $channel) { $ID = $_GET['ID']; if($ID == $id){$class = "currentt";} echo '<a href="http://www.mysite.com/tst.php?ID='.$id.'" class="'.$class.'">'.$channel.'</a><br>'; } With url query, with every click the current class repeated. How can avoid this? Thanks alot.

    Read the article

  • Silverlight Binding - Binds when item is added but doesn't get updates.

    - by dw
    Hello, I'm sorta at a loss to why this doesn't work considering I got it from working code, just added a new level of code, but here's what I have. Basically, when I bind the ViewModel to a list, the binding picks up when Items are added to a collection. However, if an update occurs to the item that is bound, it doesn't get updated. Basically, I have an ObservableCollection that contains a custom class with a string value. When that string value gets updated I need it to update the List. Right now, when I debug, the list item does get updated correctly, but the UI doesn't reflect the change. If I set the bound item to a member variable and null it out then reset it to the right collection it will work, but not desired behavior. Here is a mockup of the code, hopefully someone can tell me where I am wrong. Also, I've tried implementing INofityPropertyChanged at every level in the code below. public class Class1 { public string ItemName; } public class Class2 { private Class2 _items; private Class2() //Singleton { _items = new ObservableCollection<Class1>(); } public ObservableCollection<Class1> Items { get { return _items; } internal set { _items = value; } } } public class Class3 { private Class2 _Class2Instnace; private Class3() { _Class2Instnace = Class2.Instance; } public ObservableCollection<Class1> Items2 { get {return _Class2Instnace.Items; } } } public class MyViewModel : INofityPropertyChanged { private Class3 _myClass3; private MyViewModel() { _myClass3 = new Class3(); } private BindingItems { get { return _myClass3.Items2; } // Binds when adding items but not when a Class1.ItemName gets updated. } }

    Read the article

  • Is this the way I should deploy a asp.net application

    - by Ryan
    I have a solution containing asp.net project class library WCF service class library WCF service application I've added a project refference from the asp.net project to the class library project and to the service class library project. I've published the asp.net application, loaded it to the webserver root. all ok. Now for the service, I've created a new folder on the root called WCF, and placed the aplication in there. Is this The way I should deploy the sollution? Are this the steps when you have more than a simple asp.net application? PS: How do I change that WCF folder to make it an application trough a control panel because I get this:http://surveillancecamera.somee.com/WCF. The reason why I get this is described here:

    Read the article

  • Catch a PHP Object Instantiation Error

    - by Rob Wilkerson
    It's really irking me that PHP considers the failure to instantiate an object a Fatal Error (which can't be caught) for the application as a whole. I have set of classes that aren't strictly necessary for my application to function--they're really a convenience. I have a factory object that attempts to instantiate the class variant that's indicated in a config file. This mechanism is being deployed for message storage and will support multiple store types: DatabaseMessageStore FileMessageStore MemcachedMessageStore etc. A MessageStoreFactory class will read the application's preference from a config file, instantiate and return an instance of the appropriate class. It might be easy enough to slap a conditional around the instantiation to ensure that class_exists(), but MemcachedMessageStore extends PHP's Memcached class. As a result, the class_exists() test will succeed--though instantiation will fail--if the memcached bindings for PHP aren't installed. Is there any other way to test whether a class can be instantiated properly? If it can't, all I need to do is tell the user which features won't be available to them, but let them continue one with the application. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Works on emulator but not on device

    - by Klaus
    Hello Community, I have an inner handler class that calls the method sendMessage. sendMessige is outside the handler class, but inside the conatining Android java class. On the emulator (AVD 2.2) it works fine, but on my Android 2.2 device the method sendMessage is not called at all. Inner handler class: private Handler handler2 = new Handler() { public void handleMessage(Message msg) { if (GeoSetting.equals("s") && (inNumber.equals(definedNumber))) **SendService.this.sendMessage(definedNumber, DisplayLoc)**; if (GeoSetting.equals("a")) **SendService.this.sendMessage(inNumber, DisplayLoc)**; stopService(new Intent(getApplicationContext(), GeoService.class)); }; The method that should be called: private void sendMessage(String sendNumber, String sendText){ Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "done!!!", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show(); SmsManager sms = SmsManager.getDefault(); try { sms.sendTextMessage(sendNumber, null, sendText, null, null); if (Message == true) {Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Sending SMS to "+sendNumber+": "+sendText, Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();} } catch (Exception exeption){ Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Something is wrong, could not send SMS!", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show(); } Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "method called!", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show(); } Does anybody have an idea why sendMessage is not called on the real device? Thank you for the help!

    Read the article

  • Access-specifiers are not foolproof?

    - by Nawaz
    If I've a class like this, class Sample { private: int X; }; Then we cannot access X from outside, so this is illegal, Sample s; s.X = 10; // error - private access But we can make it accessible without editing the class! All we need to do is this, #define private public //note this define! class Sample { private: int X; }; //outside code Sample s; s.X = 10; //no error! Working code at ideone : http://www.ideone.com/FaGpZ That means, we can change the access-specifiers by defining such macros just before the class definition, or before #include <headerfile.h>, #define public private //make public private //or #define protected private //make protected private //or #define so on Isn't it a problem with C++ (Macros/access-specifiers/whatever)? Anyway, the point of this topic is: Using macros, we can easily violate encapsulation. Access-specifiers are not foolproof! Am I right?

    Read the article

  • ruby subclass filter

    - by Nik
    Hey! Maybe I am getting the idea of a subclass wrong, but I have a Person model and it has an attrib called "age" so Person.first.age #=> '20' Now I want to have a model that's basically persons 55 or older so I know I can have a class like this: class Senior < Person end But how can I "pre-filter" the Senior class so that every object belonging to that class has age = 55? Senior.first.age #=> 56 Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Converting string to a simple type

    - by zespri
    .Net framework contains a great class named Convert that allows conversion between simple types, DateTime type and String type. Also the class support conversion of the types implementing IConvertible interface. The class has been implemented in the very first version of .Net framework. There were a few things in the first .Net framework that were not done quite right. For example .Parse methods on simple types would throw an exception if the string couldn't be parsed and there would be no way to check if exception is going to be thrown in advance. A future version of .Net Framework removed this deficiency by introducing the TryParse method that resolved this problem. The Convert class dates back to time of the old Parse method, so the ChangeType method on this class in implemented old style - if conversion can't be performed an exception is thrown. Take a look at the following code: public static T ConvertString<T>(string s, T @default) { try { return (T)Convert.ChangeType(s, typeof(T), CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); } catch (Exception) { return @default; } } This code basically does what I want. However I would pretty much like to avoid the ugly try/catch here. I'm sure, that similar to TryParse, there is a modern method of rewriting this code without the catch-all. Could you suggest one?

    Read the article

  • How can I hit my database with an AJAX call using javascript?

    - by tmedge
    I am pretty new at this stuff, so bear with me. I am using ASP.NET MVC. I have created an overlay to cover the page when someone clicks a button corresponding to a certain database entry. Because of this, ALL of my code for this functionality is in a .js file contained within my project. What I need to do is pull the info corresponding to my entry from the database itself using an AJAX call, and place that into my textboxes. Then, after the end-user has made the desired changes, I need to update that entry's values to match the input. I've been surfing the web for a while, and have failed to find an example that fits my needs effectively. Here is my code in my javascript file thus far: function editOverlay(picId) { //pull up an overlay $('body').append('<div class="overlay" />'); var $overlayClass = $('.overlay'); $overlayClass.append('<div class="dataModal" />'); var $data = $('.dataModal'); overlaySetup($overlayClass, $data); //set up form $data.append('<h1>Edit Picture</h1><br /><br />'); $data.append('Picture name: &nbsp;'); $data.append('<input class="picName" /> <br /><br /><br />'); $data.append('Relative url: &nbsp;'); $data.append('<input class="picRelURL" /> <br /><br /><br />'); $data.append('Description: &nbsp;'); $data.append('<textarea class="picDescription" /> <br /><br /><br />'); var $nameBox = $('.picName'); var $urlBox = $('.picRelURL'); var $descBox = $('.picDescription'); var pic = null; //this is where I need to pull the actual object from the db //var imgList = for (var temp in imgList) { if (temp.Id == picId) { pic= temp; } } /* $nameBox.attr('value', pic.Name); $urlBox.attr('value', pic.RelativeURL); $descBox.attr('value', pic.Description); */ //close buttons $data.append('<input type="button" value="Save Changes" class="saveButton" />'); $data.append('<input type="button" value="Cancel" class="cancelButton" />'); $('.saveButton').click(function() { /* pic.Name = $nameBox.attr('value'); pic.RelativeURL = $urlBox.attr('value'); pic.Description = $descBox.attr('value'); */ //make a call to my Save() method in my repository CloseOverlay(); }); $('.cancelButton').click(function() { CloseOverlay(); }); } The stuff I have commented out is what I need to accomplish and/or is not available until prior issues are resolved. Any and all advice is appreciated! Remember, I am VERY new to this stuff (two weeks, to be exact) and will probably need highly explicit instructions. BTW: overlaySetup() and CloseOverlay() are functions I have living someplace else. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why One-to-one relationship dosen't work?

    - by eugenn
    I'm trying to create a very simple relationship between two objects. Can anybody explain me why I can't find the Company object via findBy method? class Company { String name String desc City city static constraints = { city(unique: true) } } class City { String name static constraints = { } } class BootStrap { def init = { servletContext -> new City(name: 'Tokyo').save() new City(name: 'New York').save() new Company(name: 'company', city: City.findByName('New York')).save() def c = Company.findByName('company') // Why c=null????! } def destroy = { } }

    Read the article

  • Why would it be necessary to subclass from object in Python?

    - by rmh
    I've been using Python for quite a while now, and I'm still unsure as to why you would subclass from object. What is the difference between this: class MyClass(): pass And this: class MyClass(object): pass As far as I understand, object is the base class for all classes and the subclassing is implied. Do you get anything from explicitly subclassing from it? What is the most "Pythonic" thing to do?

    Read the article

  • How to access the map returned by IParameterValues::getParameterValues()?

    - by Hua
    I declared a command and a commandParameter for this command. I specified the "values" of this commandParameter as a class implemented by myself. The implementation of this class is below, public class ParameterValues implements IParameterValues { @Override public Map<String, Double> getParameterValues() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub Map<String, Double> values = new HashMap<String, Double>(2); values.put("testParam", 1.1239); values.put("AnotherTest", 4.1239); return values; } } The implementation of the handler of this command is blow, public class testHandler extends AbstractHandler implements IHandler { private static String PARAMETER_ID = "my.parameter1"; @Override public Object execute(ExecutionEvent event) throws ExecutionException { String value = event.getParameter(PARAMETER_ID); MessageDialog.openInformation(HandlerUtil.getActiveShell(event), "Test", "Parameter ID: " + PARAMETER_ID + "\nValue: " + value); return null; } } Now, I contribute the command to a menu, <menuContribution locationURI="menu:org.eclipse.ui.main.menu"> <menu id="my.edit" label="Edit"> <command commandId="myCommand.test" label="Test1"> <parameter name="my.parameter1" value="testParam"> </parameter> </command> Since I specified a "values" class for the commandParater, I expect when the menu is clicked, this code line "String value = event.getParameter(PARAMETER_ID);" in the handler class returns 1.1239 instead of "testParam". But, I still see that code line returns "testParam". What's the problem? How could I access the map returned by getParameterValues()? By the way, following menu declaration still works even I don't define "ppp" in the map. <menuContribution locationURI="menu:org.eclipse.ui.main.menu"> <menu id="my.edit" label="Edit"> <command commandId="myCommand.test" label="Test1"> <parameter name="my.parameter1" value="ppp"> </parameter> </command> Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Does C++ have a static polymorphism implementation of interface that does not use vtable?

    - by gilbertc
    Does C++ have a proper implementation of interface that does not use vtable? for example class BaseInterface{ public: virtual void func() const = 0; } class BaseInterfaceImpl:public BaseInterface{ public: void func(){ std::cout<<"called."<<endl; } } BaseInterface* obj = new BaseInterfaceImpl(); obj->func(); the call to func at the last line goes to vtable to find the func ptr of BaseInterfaceImpl::func, but is there any C++ way to do that directly as the BaseInterfaceImpl is not subclassed from any other class besides the pure interface class BaseInterface? Thanks. Gil.

    Read the article

  • Django admin: how do I add an unrelated model field to a model change/add page?

    - by NP
    I have the following models: class Foo(models.Model): field1 = models.IntegerField() ... class Bar(models.Model): field1 = models.IntegerField() ... class Foo_bar(models.Model): foo = models.ForeignKey(Foo) bar = models.ForeignKey(Bar) ... In the admin, I want it so that in the Foo change/add page, you can specify a Bar object, and on save I want to create a Foo_bar object to represent the relationship. How can I do this through customizing the Admin site/ModelAdmins? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Java reflection appropriateness

    - by jsn
    This may be a fairly subjective question, but maybe not. My application contains a bunch of forms that are displayed to the user at different times. Each form is a class of its own. Typically the user clicks a button, which launches a new form. I have a convenience function that builds these buttons, you call it like this: buildButton( "button text", new SelectionAdapter() { @Override public void widgetSelected( SelectionEvent e ) { showForm( new TasksForm( args... ) ); } } ); I do this dozens of times, and it's really cumbersome having to make a SelectionAdapter every time. Really all I need for the button to know is what class to instantiate when it's clicked and what arguments to give the constructor, so I built a function that I call like this instead: buildButton( "button text", TasksForm.class, args... ); Where args is an arbitrary list of objects that you could use to instantiate TasksForm normally. It uses reflection to get a constructor from the class, match the argument list, and build an instance when it needs to. Most of the time I don't have to pass any arguments to the constructor at all. The downside is obviously that if I'm passing a bad set of arguments, it can't detect that at compilation time, so if it fails, a dialog is displayed at runtime. But it won't normally fail, and it'll be easy to debug if it does. I think this is much cleaner because I come from languages where the use of function and class literals is pretty common. But if you're a normal Java programmer, would seeing this freak you out, or would you appreciate not having to scan a zillion SelectionAdapters?

    Read the article

  • Why boost::recursive_mutex is not working as expected?

    - by Kjir
    I have a custom class that uses boost mutexes and locks like this (only relevant parts): template<class T> class FFTBuf { public: FFTBuf(); [...] void lock(); void unlock(); private: T *_dst; int _siglen; int _processed_sums; int _expected_sums; int _assigned_sources; bool _written; boost::recursive_mutex _mut; boost::unique_lock<boost::recursive_mutex> _lock; }; template<class T> FFTBuf<T>::FFTBuf() : _dst(NULL), _siglen(0), _expected_sums(1), _processed_sums(0), _assigned_sources(0), _written(false), _lock(_mut, boost::defer_lock_t()) { } template<class T> void FFTBuf<T>::lock() { std::cerr << "Locking" << std::endl; _lock.lock(); std::cerr << "Locked" << std::endl; } template<class T> void FFTBuf<T>::unlock() { std::cerr << "Unlocking" << std::endl; _lock.unlock(); } If I try to lock more than once the object from the same thread, I get an exception (lock_error): #include "fft_buf.hpp" int main( void ) { FFTBuf<int> b( 256 ); b.lock(); b.lock(); b.unlock(); b.unlock(); return 0; } This is the output: sb@dex $ ./src/test Locking Locked Locking terminate called after throwing an instance of 'boost::lock_error' what(): boost::lock_error zsh: abort ./src/test Why is this happening? Am I understanding some concept incorrectly?

    Read the article

  • Toggle jQuery-UI widgets

    - by cf_PhillipSenn
    I have: <div class="ui-widget"> <div class="ui-widget-header"> <span class="ui-icon ui-icon-circle-triangle-n">My Menu</span> </div> <ul class="ui-widget-content"> <li>Menu Item 1</li> <li>Menu Item 2</li> <li>Menu Item 3</li> </ul> </div> My jQuery is: $('.ui-widget-header').click(function() { $('.ui-widget-header+ul').toggle('slow'); }); Q: How do I toggle classes between ui-icon-circle-triangle-n and ui-icon-circle-triangle-s as the user clicks on .ui-widget-header?

    Read the article

  • remember passowrd works in ff but not in ie and chrome

    - by jasperdejong
    Hi, It seems that my html login form support remember password in ff but not in ie and chrome. Can anybody tell me why? Here's the code: <form name="login_form" id="login_form" action="" method="POST"> <div class="login_line">name<input name="user_name" id="user_name_id" size="16" maxlength="16" value="" type="text"></div> <div class="login_line">password<input name="password" id="password_id" size="16" maxlength="16" type="password"></div> <div class="login_line">&nbsp;<input class="icon icon_accept" value="login" onclick="javascript:handleFunction('action_login', document.getElementById('user_name_id').value, document.getElementById('password_id').value); return false;" type="submit"></div> </form> <!-- login_form -->

    Read the article

  • PHP5: restrict access to function to certain classes

    - by Tim
    Is there a way in PHP5 to only allow a certain class or set of classes to call a particular function? For example, let's say I have three classes ("Foo", "Bar", and "Baz"), all with similarly-named methods, and I want Bar to be able to call Foo::foo() but deny Baz the ability to make that call: class Foo { static function foo() { print "foo"; } } class Bar { static function bar() { Foo::foo(); print "bar"; } // Should work } class Baz { static function baz() { Foo::foo; print "baz"; } // Should fail } Foo::foo(); // Should also fail There's not necessarily inheritance between Foo, Bar, and Baz, so the use of protected or similar modifiers won't help; however, the methods aren't necessarily static (I made them so here for the simplicity of the example).

    Read the article

  • java reflection

    - by user622222
    Hi all, System.out.println("Class name : "); BufferedReader reader= new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in)); String line = reader.readLine(); Class<?> writeoutClass = Class.forName(line); Method Writeout = null; for (Method mth : writeoutClass.getDeclaredMethods()) { if (mth.getName().startsWith("Writeout")) { Writeout = mth; break; } It's giving error like that; java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: a How can i generate that class?

    Read the article

  • Scala :: operator, how it works?

    - by Felix
    Hello Guys, in Scala, I can make a caseclass case class Foo(x:Int) and then put it in a list like so: List(Foo(42)) Now, nothing strange here. The following is strange to me. The operator :: is a function on a list, right? With any function with 1 argument in Scala, I can call it with infix notation. An example is 1 + 2 is a function (+) on the object Int. The class Foo I just defined does not have the :: operator, so how is the following possible: Foo(40) :: List(Foo(2)) ? In scala 2.8 rc1, I get the following output from the interactive prompt: scala> case class Foo(x:Int) defined class Foo scala> Foo(40) :: List(Foo(2)) res2: List[Foo] = List(Foo(40), Foo(2)) scala> I can go on and use it, but if someone can explain it I will be glad :)

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2008 having problems with namespaces when used as type in Generic coolection

    - by patrick
    I just upgraded last week from Visual Studio 2005 to 2008. I am having an issue with compiler resolving namespaces when I use a class as a type in a Generic collection. Intellisense recognizes the class and the compiler generates no errors when I use the class except when it is a type in a Generic collection declaration either as return type for a Property or as a parameter to a method. This is happening in my only project that is targeting the 3.5 framework, but changing the project containing the class to use the 3.5 framework doesn't fix the problem. Examples Compile fine MyClass myClass = new MyClass(); SortedList <DateTime,MyClass> listOfClasses = new SortedList<DateTime,MyClass> Compile error - Namespace could not be found public SortedList<DateTime,MyClass> ClassList { get; set; } private void DoSomethingToLists(SortedList<DateTime,MyClass> classList) Intellisense has no problem resolving the namespace, only the compiler. Is this a known bug or am I missing something obvious? Will SP1 fix it? I was able to create a new library containing just this class targeting 3.5 and am now able to successfully use this in both 3.5 and 2.0 projects. My guess is that even though I tried to change the target of my original library, since it was still referencing 2.0 projects there was some conflict.

    Read the article

  • JUnit for Functions with Void Return Values

    - by RobotNerd
    I've been working on a Java application where I have to use JUnit for testing. I am learning it as I go. So far I find it to be useful, especially when used in conjunction with the Eclipse JUnit plugin. After playing around a bit, I developed a consistent method for building my unit tests for functions with no return values. I wanted to share it here and ask others to comment. Do you have any suggested improvements or alternative ways to accomplish the same goal? Common Return Values First, there's an enumeration which is used to store values representing test outcomes. public enum UnitTestReturnValues { noException, unexpectedException // etc... } Generalized Test Let's say a unit test is being written for: public class SomeClass { public void targetFunction (int x, int y) { // ... } } The JUnit test class would be created: import junit.framework.TestCase; public class TestSomeClass extends TestCase { // ... } Within this class, I create a function which is used for every call to the target function being tested. It catches all exceptions and returns a message based on the outcome. For example: public class TestSomeClass extends TestCase { private UnitTestReturnValues callTargetFunction (int x, int y) { UnitTestReturnValues outcome = UnitTestReturnValues.noException; SomeClass testObj = new SomeClass (); try { testObj.targetFunction (x, y); } catch (Exception e) { UnitTestReturnValues.unexpectedException; } return outcome; } } JUnit Tests Functions called by JUnit begin with a lowercase "test" in the function name, and they fail at the first failed assertion. To run multiple tests on the targetFunction above, it would be written as: public class TestSomeClass extends TestCase { public void testTargetFunctionNegatives () { assertEquals ( callTargetFunction (-1, -1), UnitTestReturnValues.noException); } public void testTargetFunctionZeros () { assertEquals ( callTargetFunction (0, 0), UnitTestReturnValues.noException); } // and so on... } Please let me know if you have any suggestions or improvements. Keep in mind that I am in the process of learning how to use JUnit, so I'm sure there are existing tools available that might make this process easier. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Who needs singletons?

    - by sexyprout
    Imagine you access your MySQL database via PDO. You got some functions, and in these functions, you need to access the database. The first thing I thought of is global, like: $db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'root', 'pwd'); function some_function() { global $db; $db->query('...'); } But it's considered as a bad practice. So, after a little search, I ended up with the Singleton pattern, which "applies to situations in which there needs to be a single instance of a class." According to the example of the manual, we should do this: class Database { private static $instance, $db; private function __construct(){} static function singleton() { if(!isset(self::$instance)) self::$instance = new __CLASS__; return self:$instance; } function get() { if(!isset(self::$db)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd') return self::$db; } } function some_function() { $db = Database::singleton(); $db->get()->query('...'); } some_function(); But I just can't understand why you need that big class when you can do it merely with: class Database { private static $db; private function __construct(){} static function get() { if(!isset(self::$rand)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd'); return self::$db; } } function some_function() { Database::get()->query('...'); } some_function(); This last one works perfectly and I don't need to worry about $db anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting something. So, who's wrong, who's right?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628  | Next Page >