Search Results

Search found 42304 results on 1693 pages for 'request object'.

Page 261/1693 | < Previous Page | 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268  | Next Page >

• How to ignore viewstate of a previous request for particular control?

  - by AaronLS

  I am dynamically generating controls, and sometimes I want to create a control and have it ignore the viewstate. For example, sometimes the user has clicked a button indicating they want a different form loaded, so the control tree I generate on postback is different from the original control tree. This is fine, except when I call Controls.Add then it tries to load the viewstate form the old controls into the new controls if the control tree structure is similar, and I want them to instead ignore that viewstate(and also ignore the postback values for input controls as well). Can I do something like set the IDs of the controls or something that would allow me to conditionally prevent them from getting the viewstate/postback data of the previous request?

  Read the article

• How to handle request/response propagation up and down a widget hierarchy in a GUI app?

  - by fig-gnuton

  Given a GUI application where widgets can be composed of other widgets: If the user triggers an event resulting in a lower level widget needing data from a model, what's the cleanest way to be able to send that request to a controller (or the datastore itself)? And subsequently get the response back to that widget? Presumably one wouldn't want the controller or datastore to be a singleton directly available to all levels of widgets, or is this an acceptable use of singleton? Or should a top level controller be injected as a dependency through a widget hierarchy, as far down as the lowest level widget that might need that controller? Or a different approach entirely?

  Read the article

• In Spring MVC, is it possible to have different return types in one request handler method?

  - by Bobo

  For example, if a request succeeds, I will return a View ,if not, return a String indicating error message and set the content-type to either xml or json. Based on what I read, seems like I should use "void" as the return type for handler methods. Check this out: "void if the method handles the response itself (by writing the response content directly, declaring an argument of type ServletResponse / HttpServletResponse for that purpose) or if the view name is supposed to be implicitly determined through a RequestToViewNameTranslator (not declaring a response argument in the handler method signature)."(Spring Framework reference). What I dont understand is what " the view name is supposed to be implicitly determined through a RequestToViewNameTranslator (not declaring a response argument in the handler method signature)" means? Any anyone give me an example?

  Read the article

• Ajax request. Which callback is executed first complete or success?

  - by Gutzofter

  I could spike this to find out, but I'm going to use SO. In my unit tests (qunit) I use the asynchShould (alias for asynchTest) test. Part of the assertion is to wait for the completion/success of the request. Like this: asyncShould('talk to customer list server', 1, function() { stop(2000); var forCustomerList = newCustomerListRequest(); forCustomerList.page = 'helpers/helper.php'; forCustomerList.data += '&action=customerListServer&DB=11001'; var originalSuccess = forCustomerList.success; forCustomerList.success = function(msg) { if (msg.flash !== undefined && msg.data !== undefined && msg.status !== undefined) { ok(true, 'json structure correct') } else { ok(false, 'json structure not correct'); } originalSuccess(msg); start(); }; testController.getServerData(forCustomerList); })

  Read the article

• How to create an XML document from a .NET object?

  - by JL

  I have the following variable that accepts a file name: var xtr = new XmlTextReader(xmlFileName) { WhitespaceHandling = WhitespaceHandling.None }; var xd = new XmlDocument(); xd.Load(xtr); I would like to change it so that I can pass in an object. I don't want to have to serialize the object to file first. Is this possible? Update: My original intentions were to take an xml document, merge some xslt (stored in a file), then output and return html... like this: public string TransformXml(string xmlFileName, string xslFileName) { var xtr = new XmlTextReader(xmlFileName) { WhitespaceHandling = WhitespaceHandling.None }; var xd = new XmlDocument(); xd.Load(xtr); var xslt = new System.Xml.Xsl.XslCompiledTransform(); xslt.Load(xslFileName); var stm = new MemoryStream(); xslt.Transform(xd, null, stm); stm.Position = 1; var sr = new StreamReader(stm); xtr.Close(); return sr.ReadToEnd(); } In the above code I am reading in the xml from a file. Now what I would like to do is just work with the object, before it was serialized to the file. So let me illustrate my problem using code public string TransformXMLFromObject(myObjType myobj , string xsltFileName) { // Notice the xslt stays the same. // Its in these next few lines that I can't figure out how to load the xml document (xd) from an object, and not from a file.... var xtr = new XmlTextReader(xmlFileName) { WhitespaceHandling = WhitespaceHandling.None }; var xd = new XmlDocument(); xd.Load(xtr); }

  Read the article

• How can I programmatically add more than just one view object to my view controller?

  - by BeachRunnerJoe

  I'm diving into iPhone OS development and I'm trying to understand how I can add multiple view objects to the "Left/Root" view of my SplitView iPad app. I've figured out how to programmatically add a TableView to that view based on the example code I found in Apple's online documentation... RootViewController.h @interface RootViewController : UITableViewController <NSFetchedResultsControllerDelegate, UITableViewDelegate, UITableViewDataSource> { DetailViewController *detailViewController; UITableView *tableView; NSFetchedResultsController *fetchedResultsController; NSManagedObjectContext *managedObjectContext; } RootViewController.m - (void)loadView { UITableView *newTableView = [[UITableView alloc] initWithFrame:[[UIScreen mainScreen] applicationFrame] style:UITableViewStylePlain]; newTableView.autoresizingMask = UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleHeight|UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleWidth; newTableView.delegate = self; newTableView.dataSource = self; [newTableView reloadData]; self.view = newTableView; [newTableView release]; } but there are a few things I don't understand about it and I was hoping you veterans could help clear up some confusion. In the statement self.view = newTableView, I assume I'm setting the entire view to a single UITableView. If that's the case, then how can I add additional view objects to that view alongside the table view? For example, if I wanted to have a DatePicker view object and the TableView object instead of just the TableView object, then how would I programmatically add that? Referencing the code above, how can I resize the table view to make room for the DatePicker view object that I'd like to add? Thanks so much in advance for your help! I'm going to continue researching these questions right now.

  Read the article

• How to design Models the correct way: Object-oriented or "Package"-oriented?

  - by ajsie

  I know that in OOP you want every object (from a class) to be a "thing", eg. user, validator etc. I know the basics about MVC, how they different parts interact with each other. However, i wonder if the models in MVC should be designed according to the traditional OOP design, that is to say, should every model be a database/table/row (solution 2)? Or is the intention more like to collect methods that are affecting the same table or a bunch of related tables (solution 1). example for an Address book module in CodeIgniter, where i want be able to "CRUD" a Contact and add/remove it to/from a CRUD-able Contact Group. Models solution 1: bunching all related methods together (not real object, rather a "package") class Contacts extends Model { function create_contact() {) function read_contact() {} function update_contact() {} function delete_contact() {} function add_contact_to_group() {} function delete_contact_from_group() {} function create_group() {} function read_group() {} function update_group() {} function delete_group() {} } Models solution 2: the OOP way (one class per file) class Contact extends Model { private $name = ''; private $id = ''; function create_contact() {) function read_contact() {} function update_contact() {} function delete_contact() {} } class ContactGroup extends Model { private $name = ''; private $id = ''; function add_contact_to_group() {} function delete_contact_from_group() {} function create_group() {} function read_group() {} function update_group() {} function delete_group() {} } i dont know how to think when i want to create the models. and the above examples are my real tasks for creating an Address book. Should i just bunch all functions together in one class. then the class contains different logic (contact and group), so it can not hold properties that are specific for either one of them. the solution 2 works according to the OOP. but i dont know why i should make such a dividing. what would the benefits be to have a Contact object for example. Its surely not a User object, so why should a Contact "live" with its own state (properties and methods). you experienced guys with OOP/MVC, please shed a light on how one should think here in this very concrete task.

  Read the article

• In WMI, can I use a join (or something similar) to acquire the IisWebServer object for a site, given

  - by Precipitous

  Given a server name and a physical path, I'd like to be able to hunt down the IISWebServer object and ApplicationPool. Website url is also an acceptable input. Our technologies are IIS 6, WMI, and access via C# or Powershell 2. I'm certain this would be easier with IIS 7 its managed API. We don't have that yet. Here's what I can do: Get a list of IIS virtual directories from IISWebVirtualDirSetting and filter (offline) for the matching physical path. $theVirtualDir = gwmi -Namespace "root/MicrosoftIISv2" ` -ComputerName $servername -authentication PacketPrivacy ` -class "IISWebVirtualDirSetting" ` | where-object {$_.Path -like $deployLocation} From the virtual directory object, I can get a name (like W3SVC/40565456/root). Given this name, I can get to other goodies, such as the IIS web server object. gwmi -Namespace "root/MicrosoftIISv2" ` -ComputerName $servername ` -authentication PacketPrivacy ` -Query "SELECT * FROM IisWebServer WHERE Name='W3SVC/40589473'" The questions, restated: 1) This is a query language. Can I join or subquery so that 1 WMI query statement gets web servers based on IISWebVirtualDir.Path? How? 2) In solving 1, you'll have to explain how to query on the Path property. Why is this an invalid query? "SELECT * FROM IISWebVirtualDirSetting WHERE Path='D:\sites\globaldominator'"

  Read the article

• Good practice to create extension methods that apply to System.Object?

  - by Christian

  Hello, I'm wondering whether I should create extension methods that apply on the object level or whether they should be located at a lower point in the class hierarchy. What I mean is something along the lines of: public static string SafeToString(this Object o) { if (o == null || o is System.DBNull) return ""; else { if (o is string) return (string)o; else return ""; } } public static int SafeToInt(this Object o) { if (o == null || o is System.DBNull) return 0; else { if (o.IsNumeric()) return Convert.ToInt32(o); else return 0; } } //same for double.. etc I wrote those methods since I have to deal a lot with database data (From the OleDbDataReader) that can be null (shouldn't, though) since the underlying database is unfortunately very liberal with columns that may be null. And to make my life a little easier, I came up with those extension methods. What I'd like to know is whether this is good style, acceptable style or bad style. I kinda have my worries about it since it kinda "pollutes" the Object-class. Thank you in advance & Best Regards :) Christian P.S. I didn't tag it as "subjective" intentionally.

  Read the article

• ColdFusion 9 ORM - Securing an object at a low level...

  Hiya: I wonder if anybody has an idea on this... I'm looking at securing a low level object in my model (a "member" object) so by default only certain information can be accessed from it. Here's a possible approach (damn sexy if it would work!): 1) Add a property called "locked" - defaulting to "true" to the object itself. It appears that the only option to do this, and not tie it to a db table column, is to use the formula attribute that takes a query. So to default locked to TRUE I've got: <cfproperty name="locked" formula="select 1" /> 2) Then, I overwrite the existing set-ers and get-ers to use this: e.g. <cffunction name="getFullname" returnType="string"> <cfscript> if (this.getLocked()) { return this.getScreenName(); } else { return this.getFullname(); } </cfscript> </cffunction> 3) When i use it like this: <p> #oMember.getFullName()# </p> shows the ScreenName (great!) but... When I do this: <cfset oMember.setLocked(false)> <p> #oMember.getFullName()# </p> Just hangs!!! It appears that attempting to set a property that's been defined using "formula" is a no-no. Any ideas? Any other way we can have properties attached to an ORM object that are gettable and settable without them being present in the db? Ideas appreciated!

  Read the article

• Can I detect whether an object has called GC.SuppressFinalize?

  - by Joe White

  Is there a way to detect whether or not an object has called GC.SuppressFinalize? I have an object that looks something like this (full-blown Dispose pattern elided for clarity): public class ResourceWrapper { private readonly bool _ownsResource; private readonly UnmanagedResource _resource; public ResourceWrapper(UnmanagedResource resource, bool ownsResource) { _resource = resource; _ownsResource = ownsResource; if (!ownsResource) GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } ~ResourceWrapper() { if (_ownsResource) // clean up the unmanaged resource } } If the ownsResource constructor parameter is false, then the finalizer will have nothing to do -- so it seems reasonable (if a bit quirky) to call GC.SuppressFinalize right from the constructor. However, because this behavior is quirky, I'm very tempted to note it in an XML doc comment... and if I'm tempted to comment it, then I ought to write a unit test for it. But while System.GC has methods to set an object's finalizability (SuppressFinalize, ReRegisterForFinalize), I don't see any methods to get an object's finalizability. Is there any way to query whether GC.SuppressFinalize has been called on a given instance, short of buying Typemock or writing my own CLR host?

  Read the article

• How can I bind Wpf DataGridColumn to an object?

  - by John

  I want to bind the columns of my WPF DataGrid to some objects in a Dictionary like this: Binding Path=Objects[i] where Objects is my Dictionary of objects, so that each cell will represent an Object element. How can I do that? I suppose that I need to create a template for my cell, which I did, but how to get the result of column binding in my template? I know that by default the content of a DataGridCell is a TextBlock and it's Text property is set through column binding result, but if that result is an object I guess that I have to create a ContentTemplate. How do I do that, as the stuff I tried is not displaying anything. Here it is what I tried: <Style x:Key="CellStyle" TargetType="{x:Type dg:DataGridCell}"> <Setter Property="Template"> ---it should realy be ContentTemplate? <Setter.Value> <ControlTemplate> <controls:DataGridCellControl CurrentObject="{Binding }"/> -- I would expect to get the object like this for this column path : Path=Objects[i] but is not working </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> </Setter> </Style> So, to make myself completly clear, i want to get in CurrentObject property of my DataGridCellControl the current object that should result if I set the column binding in my data grid like this Path=Objects[i]. Thank you for any suggestion, John.

  Read the article

• How can I pass in a params of Expression<Func<T, object>> to a method?

  - by Pure.Krome

  Hi folks, I have the following two methods :- public static IQueryable<T> IncludeAssociations<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, params string[] associations) { ... } public static IQueryable<T> IncludeAssociations<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, params Expression<Func<T, object>>[] expressions) { ... } Now, when I try and pass in a params of Expression<Func<T, object>>[], it always calls the first method (the string[]' and of course, that value isNULL`) Eg. Expression<Func<Order, object>> x1 = x => x.User; Expression<Func<Order, object>> x2 = x => x.User.Passport; var foo = _orderRepo .Find() .IncludeAssociations(new {x1, x2} ) .ToList(); Can anyone see what I've done wrong? Why is it thinking my params are a string? Can I force the type, of the 2x variables?

  Read the article

• How to sum up a fetched result's number property based on the object's category?

  - by mr_kurrupt

  I have a NSFetchRequest that is returning all my saved objects (call them Items) and storing them in an NSMutableArray. Each of these Items have a category, an amount, and some other properties. My goal is to check the category of each Item and store the sum of the amounts for objects of the same category. So if I had these Items: Red; 10.00 Blue; 20.00 Green; 5.00 Red; 5.00 Green; 15.00 then I would have an array or other type of container than has: Red; 15.00 Blue; 20.00 Green; 20.00 What would be the best way to organize the data in such a manner? I was going to create a object class (call it Totals) that just has the category and amount. As I traverse through the fetch results in a for-loop, add Items with the same category in a Totals object an store them in a NSMutableArray. The problem I ran into with that is that I'm not sure how to check if an array contains a Totals object with a specific property. Specifically, a category that already exists. So if 'Red' exists, add the amount to it, otherwise create a new Totals object with category 'Red' and a the first Item's amount. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Why won't WPF databindings show text when ToString() has a collaborating object?

  - by Jay

  In a simple form, I bind to a number of different objects -- some go in listboxes; some in textblocks. A couple of these objects have collaborating objects upon which the ToString() method calls when doing its work -- typically a formatter of some kind. When I step through the code I see that when the databinding is being set up, ToString() is called the collaborating object is not null and returns the expected result when inspected in the debugger, the objects return the expected result from ToString() BUT the text does not show up in the form. The only common thread I see is that these use a collaborating object, whereas the other bindings that show up as expected simply work from properties and methods of the containing object. If this is confusing, here is the gist in code: public class ThisThingWorks { private SomeObject some_object; public ThisThingWorks(SomeObject s) { some_object = s; } public override string ToString() { return some_object.name; } } public class ThisDoesntWork { private Formatter formatter; private SomeObject some_object; public ThisDoesntWork(SomeObject o, Formatter f) { formatter = f; some_object = o; } public override string ToString() { return formatter.Format(some_object.name); } } Again, let me reiterate -- the ToString() method works in every other context -- but when I bind to the object in WPF and expect it to display the result of ToString(), I get nothing. Update: The issue seems to be what I see as a buggy behaviour in the TextBlock binding. If I bind the Text property to a property of the DataContext that is declared as an interface type, ToString() is never called. If I change the property declaration to an implementation of the interface, it works as expected. Other controls, like Label work fine when binding the Content property to a DataContext property declared as either the implementation or the interface. Because this is so far removed from the title and content of this question, I've created a new question here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2917878/why-doesnt-textblock-databinding-call-tostring-on-a-property-whose-compile-tim

  Read the article

• chrome extension: get specific part of the current tab page in DOM object and display it in either popup.html or new html page?

  - by sandeep

  IS there any way so that i can convert any DOM object into HTML page within the script ? suppose I have dom object like this: content script.js chrome.extension.onRequest.addListener(function(request, sender, sendResponse) { if (request.method == "fromPopup") { console.log("got Request from Popup"); var myDivObj = document.getElementById("definition"); //sendResponse({data: "from Content Script to Popup"}); if ( myDivObj ) { sendResponse({data:myDivObj}); } else{ sendResponse({data:"Empty or No Tag"}); } console.log("sent Response1"); } else { sendResponse({}); // snub them. console.log("sent Response2"); } }); here is my popup.html <body> <Div>Searching..</Div> <Div id="output">Response??</Div> <script> console.log("Pop UP Clicked"); chrome.tabs.getSelected(null, function(tab) { chrome.tabs.sendRequest(tab.id, {method: "fromPopup", tabid: tab.id}, function(response) { console.log("got Response from Content Script"); document.getElementById("output").innerHTML=response.data; }); }); </script> </body> I know we can send onaly JSON type of data to the popup.html page.. am i right ? If yes is ther any way that I can creat HTML page with DOM Object( myDivObj ) which I collected.. Any alternative solution..? In short i want get only specific part of the current tab page in DOM object and display it in either popup.html or separate html page..

  Read the article

• Is locking on the requested object a bad idea?

  - by Quick Joe Smith

  Most advice on thread safety involves some variation of the following pattern: public class Thing { private static readonly object padlock = new object(); private string stuff, andNonsense; public string Stuff { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Threadsafe!"; } return this.stuff; } } public string AndNonsense { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.andNonsense == null) this.andNonsense = "Also threadsafe!"; } return this.andNonsense; } } // Rest of class... } In cases where the get operations are expensive and unrelated, a single locking object is unsuitable because a call to Stuff would block all calls to AndNonsense, degrading performance. And rather than create a lock object for each call, wouldn't it be better to acquire the lock on the member itself (assuming it is not something that implements SyncRoot or somesuch for that purpose? For example: public string Stuff { get { lock (this.stuff) { // Pretend that this is a very expensive operation. if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Still threadsafe and good?"; } return this.stuff; } } Strangely, I have never seen this approach recommended or warned against. Am I missing something obvious?

  Read the article

• assembling an object graph without an ORM -- in the service layer or data layer?

  - by Hans Gruber

  At my current gig, our persistence layer uses IBatis going against SQL Server stored procedures (puke). IMHO, this approach has many disadvantages over the use of a "true" ORM such NHibernate or EF, but the one I'm trying to address here revolves around all the boilerplate code needed to map data from a result set into an object graph. Say I have the following DTO object graph I want to return to my presentation layer: IEnumerable<CustomerDTO> |--> IEnumerable<AddressDTO> |--> LatestOrderDTO The way I've implemented this is to have a discrete method in my DAO class to return each IEnumerable<*DTO>, and then have my service class be responsible for orchestrating the calls to the DAO. It then returns the fully assembled object graph to the client: public class SomeService(){ public SomeService(IDao someDao){ this._someDao = someDao; } public IEnumerable<CustomerDTO> ListCustomersForHistory(int brokerId){ var customers = _someDao.ListCustomersForBroker(brokerId); foreach (customer in customers){ customer.Addresses = someDao.ListCustomersAddresses(brokerId); customer.LatestOrder = someDao.GetCustomerLatestOrder(brokerId); } } return customers; } My question is should this logic belong in the service layer or the should I make my DAO such that it instead returns the assembled object graph. If I was using NHibernate, I assume that this kind of relationship association between objects comes for "free"?

  Read the article

• Pass object from JSON into MVC Controller - its always null ?

  - by SteveCl

  Hi I have seen a few questions on here related to the a similar issue, I have read them, followed them, but still i have the same problem. I am basically creating an object in javascript and trying to call a method on the controller that will return a string of html. Not JSON. I've been playing around with dataType and contentType but still no joy. So apologies if the code snippets are a bit messy. Build the object in JS. function GetCardModel() { var card = {}; card.CardTitle = $("#CardTitle").val(); card.TopicTitle = $("#TopicTitle").val(); card.TopicBody = $("#TopicBody").data("tEditor").value(); card.CardClose = $("#CardClose").val(); card.CardFromName = $("#CardFromName").val(); return card; } Take a look at the object - all looks good and as it should in JSON. var model = GetCardModel(); alert(JSON.stringify(GetCardModel())); Make the call... $.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "/Postcard/Create/Preview/", dataType: "json", //contentType: "application/json", date: GetCardModel(), processData: true, success: function (data) { alert("im back"); alert(data); }, error: function (xhr, ajaxOptions, error) { alert(xhr.status); alert("Error: " + xhr.responseText); //alert(error); } }); Always when I step into the controller, the object is ALWAYS there, but with null values for all the properties.

  Read the article

• Can a PHP object respond to an undefined method?

  - by Nathan Long

  Rails relies on some of the neat aspects of Ruby. One of those is the ability to respond to an undefined method. Consider a relationship between Dog and Owner. Owner has_many :dogs and Dog belongs_to :owner. If you go into script/console, get a dog object with fido = Dog.find(1), and look at that object, you won't see a method or attribute called Owner. What you will see is an owner_id. And if you ask for fido.owner, the object will do something like this (at least, this is how it appears to me): I'm being asked for my .owner attribute. I don't have one of those! Before I throw a NoMethodError, do I have a rule about how to deal with this? Yes, I do: I should check and see if I have an owner_id. I do! OK, then I'll do a join and return that owner object. PHP's documentation is - ahem - a bit lacking sometimes, so I wonder if anyone here knows the answer to this: Can I define similar behavior for objects in PHP? If not, do you know of a workaround for flexible model joins like these?

  Read the article

• Is there a way to deserialize an object into "$this"?

  - by Andreas Bonini

  I'm writing a class to handle a memcached object. The idea was to create abstract class Cachable and all the cachable objects (such as User, Post, etc) would be subclasses of said class. The class offers some method such as Load() which calls the abstract function LoadFromDB() if the object is not cached, functions to refresh/invalidate the cache, etc. The main problem is in Load(); I wanted to do something similar: protected function Load($id) { $this->memcacheId = $id; $this->Connect(); $cached = $this->memcache->get(get_class($this) . ':' . $id); if($cached === false) { $this->SetLoaded(LoadFromDB($id)); UpdateCache(); } else { $this = $cached; $this->SetLoaded(true); } } Unfortunately I need $this to become $cached (the cached object); is there any way to do that? Was the "every cachable object derives from the cachable class" a bad design idea?

  Read the article

• XML Reader threw Object Null exception, but node exists(?!)

  - by Capt.Morgan

  I am hoping someone could enlighten me as to why I am getting the annoying - "xml object reference not set to an instance .." error. The elements (nodes?) I am looking for seem to exist and I have not misspelled it either :[ I might be doing something stupid here, but any help at all would be greatly appreciated. My Code: private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { XmlDocument reader = new XmlDocument(); reader.Load("Kotaku - powered by FeedBurner.xml"); XmlNodeList titles = reader.GetElementsByTagName("title"); XmlNodeList dates = reader.GetElementsByTagName("pubDate"); XmlNodeList descriptions = reader.GetElementsByTagName("description"); XmlNodeList links = reader.GetElementsByTagName("link"); for (int i = 0; i < titles.Count; i++) { textBox1.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + titles[i].InnerText); textBox1.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + descriptions[i].InnerText); //<<-- Throws Object Ref Null Exception textBox1.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + links[i].InnerText); textBox1.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + dates[i].InnerText); //<<-- Throws Object Ref Null Exception } } The XML I am using is a saved XML page from: http://feeds.gawker.com/kotaku/full The way I am working on it now is as follows: I have saved the page from the above link (which is an XML page) and put it next to my EXE for easier access. Then I run the code.

  Read the article

• How to know the type of an object in a list?

  - by nacho4d

  Hi, I want to know the type of object (or type) I have in my list so I wrote this: void **list; //list of references list = new void * [2]; Foo foo = Foo(); const char *not_table [] = {"tf", "ft", 0 }; list[0] = &foo; list[1] = not_table; if (dynamic_cast<LogicProcessor*>(list[0])) { //ERROR here ;( printf("Foo was found\n"); } if (dynamic_cast<char*> (list[0])) { //ERROR here ;( printf("char was found\n"); } but I get : error: cannot dynamic_cast '* list' (of type 'void*') to type 'class Foo*' (source is not a pointer to class) error: cannot dynamic_cast '* list' (of type 'void*') to type 'char*' (target is not pointer or reference to class) Why is this? what I am doing wrong here? Is dynamic_cast what I should use here? Thanks in advance EDIT: I know above code is much like plain C and surely sucks from the C++ point of view but is just I have the following situation and I was trying something before really implementing it: I have two arrays of length n but both arrays will never have an object at the same index. Hence, or I have array1[i]!=NULL or array2[i]!=NULL. This is obviously a waste of memory so I thought everything would be solved if I could have both kind of objects in a single array of length n. I am looking something like Cocoa's (Objective-C) NSArray where you don't care about the type of the object to be put in. Not knowing the type of the object is not a problem since you can use other method to get the class of a certain later. Is there something like it in c++ (preferably not third party C++ libraries) ? Thanks in advance ;)

  Read the article

• C++: What is the size of an object of an empty class?

  - by Ashwin

  I was wondering what could be the size of an object of an empty class. It surely could not be 0 bytes since it should be possible to reference and point to it like any other object. But, how big is such an object? I used this small program: #include <iostream> using namespace std; class Empty {}; int main() { Empty e; cerr << sizeof(e) << endl; return 0; } The output I got on both Visual C++ and Cygwin-g++ compilers was 1 byte! This was a little surprising to me since I was expecting it to be of the size of the machine word (32 bits or 4 bytes). Can anyone explain why the size of 1 byte? Why not 4 bytes? Is this dependent on compiler or the machine too? Also, can someone give a more cogent reason for why an empty class object will not be of size 0 bytes?

  Read the article

• How to create a datastore.Text object out of an array of dynamically created Strings?

  - by Adrogans

  I am creating a Google App Engine server for a project where I receive a large quantity of data via an HTTP POST request. The data is separated into lines, with 200 characters per line. The number of lines can go into the hundreds, so 10's of thousands of characters total. What I want to do is concatenate all of those lines into a single Text object, since Strings have a maximum length of 500 characters but the Text object can be as large as 1MB. Here is what I thought of so far: public void doPost(HttpServletRequest req, HttpServletResponse resp) { ... String[] audioSampleData = new String[numberOfLines]; for (int i = 0; i < numberOfLines; i++) { audioSampleData[i] = req.getReader().readLine(); } com.google.appengine.api.datastore.Text textAudioSampleData = new Text(audioSampleData[0] + audioSampleData[1] + ...); ... } But as you can see, I don't know how to do this without knowing the number of lines before-hand. Is there a way for me to iterate through the String indexes within the Text constructor? I can't seem to find anything on that. Of note is that the Text object can't be modified after being created, and it must have a String as parameter for the constructor. (Documentation here) Is there any way to this? I need all of the data in the String array in one Text object. Many Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268  | Next Page >