Search Results

Search found 14011 results on 561 pages for 'interface orientation'.

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 6/561 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Detect orientation change, when only portrait is allowed on Android

    - by bicska88
    I have to solve the following: I have an Activity which's android:screenOrientation="portrait". Even though, when the device is rotated to landscape while this Activity is visible, I have to start another one, and, when the device is rotated back to portrait, I have to finish() the activity in landscape. I tried to perform this with a BroadcastReceiver, but this special activity doesn't receive any broadcasts because of the android:screenOrientation="portrait". Any help is well appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Implementation question involving implementing an interface

    - by Vivin Paliath
    I'm writing a set of collection classes for different types of Trees. I'm doing this as a learning exercise and I'm also hoping it turns out to be something useful. I really want to do this the right way and so I've been reading Effective Java and I've also been looking at the way Joshua Bloch implemented the collection classes by looking at the source. I seem to have a fair idea of what is being done, but I still have a few things to sort out. I have a Node<T> interface and an AbstractNode<T> class that implements the Node interface. I then created a GenericNode<T> (a node that can have 0 to n children, and that is part of an n-ary tree) class that extends AbstractNode<T> and implements Node<T>. This part was easy. Next, I created a Tree<T> interface and an AbstractTree<T> class that implements the Tree<T> interface. After that, I started writing a GenericTree<T> class that extends AbstractTree<T> and implements Tree<T>. This is where I started having problems. As far as the design is concerned, a GenericTree<T> can only consist of nodes of type GenericTreeNode<T>. This includes the root. In my Tree<T> interface I have: public interface Tree<T> { void setRoot(Node<T> root); Node<T> getRoot(); List<Node<T>> postOrder(); ... rest omitted ... } And, AbstractTree<T> implements this interface: public abstract class AbstractTree<T> implements Tree<T> { protected Node<T> root; protected AbstractTree() { } protected AbstractTree(Node<T> root) { this.root = root; } public void setRoot(Node<T> root) { this.root = root; } public Node<T> getRoot() { return this.root; } ... rest omitted ... } In GenericTree<T>, I can have: public GenericTree(Node<T> root) { super(root); } But what this means is that you can create a generic tree using any subtype of Node<T>. You can also set the root of a tree to any subtype of Node<T>. I want to be able to restrict the type of the node to the type of the tree that it can represent. To fix this, I can do this: public GenericTree(GenericNode<T> root) { super(root); } However, setRoot still accepts a parameter of type Node<T>. Which means a user can still create a tree with the wrong type of root node. How do I enforce this constraint? The only way I can think of doing is either: Do an instanceof which limits the check to runtime. I'm not a huge fan of this. Remove setRoot from the interface and have the base class implement this method. This means that it is not part of the contract and anyone who wants to make a new type of tree needs to remember to implement this method. Is there a better way? The second question I have concerns the return type of postOrder which is List<Node<T>>. This means that if a user is operating on a GenericTree<T> object and calls postOrder, he or she receives a list that consists of Node<T> objects. This means when iterating through (using a foreach construct) they would have perform an explicit cast to GenericNode<T> if they want to use methods that are only defined in that class. I don't like having to place this burden on the user. What are my options in this case? I can only think of removing the method from the interface and have the subclass implement this method making sure that it returns a list of appropriate subtype of Node<T>. However, this once again removes it from the contract and it's anyone who wants to create a new type of tree has to remember to implement this method. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • How to make computer interface with circuit

    - by light.hammer
    I understand that I can build a circuit that will do whatever I like (ex: a simple circuit that will turn on a motor to open the blinds or something), and I can write a program that will automate my computer/mac however I like (ex: open this program at this time, or with this input and create a new file, ect). My question is, how can I interface the two? Is there an easy DIY or cheap commercial (or not cheap but functional) USB plug that will turn on/off from computer commands? I'm basically looking for some sort of on/off switch I can script/applescript. How would you even approach this problem, would I have to write my own driver some where along the way?

    Read the article

  • In Enterprise Architect I modified an interface, how to update the realizing classes?

    - by Timo
    I've created an interface in a class model. This interface has two methods, A and B and method A takes an argument (a) and method B does not take an argument (yet). Additionally I've created a class that implements this interface, overriding both methods. After a discussing the model method B now should also take a parameter (b), so I modified the interface to reflect this change. However the class realizing this interface is not updated automatically. For one class it's possible to add the method by re-creating the link between the interface, specify the which method should be implemented and deleting this link again. Then the OLD method signature has to be removed as well. This is a lot of work if there is more then one class implementing the modified interface, not to mention error-prone. Does anybody know how to make an entire class model update this type of dependency?

    Read the article

  • Frustration with superuser.com user interface (please migrate this to "meta")

    - by Randolf Richardson
    Can someone please migrate this question to "meta" for me? I'm unable to post there while I wait for OpenID to fix my password problems. Thanks. I'm having problems with superuser.com's interface -- when I provide an answer to a question, sometimes the buttons get locked and then I find out that the question was migrated. Usually I can go back and copy-and-paste my answer at whatever site it goes to, but on occasion my answer is lost and I have to re-type it. This is very time-consuming, and makes it quite frustrating to use the system. In addition, I find that I'm wasting a lot of time dealing with having to re-register on the other sites. My suggestion is to not de-activate the "Submit answer" button but to just forward that along to the migrated site automatically, thus ensuring that answers that people put a lot of effort into don't get lost. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Pause Nagios reloading in web interface

    - by 2rec
    Is there any option how could I turn off reloading of web page in Nagios web interface? Many times I checked many services and I needed the webpage to stay static and don't reload. One solution come to my mind - turn off the whole reloading for a while. Problem is that other people are using it too and they may want it at the time I don't want it. If anybody know about any kind of workaround or solution, please don't hesitate to write an answer. ;-) EDIT (+ reaction to the first answer): Maybe there could be a better way how to do it instead of modyfying nagios core. Interesting is, that I tried to disable javascript, it refreshed. I tried to disable http refreshing, it refreshed anyway. Has anybody know how and where is the refresh implemented?

    Read the article

  • The orientation media query

    Right now Jason Grigby’s excellent summary of the orientation media query is making the round of blogs and tweets, and that’s well deserved. Media queries will become extremely important in the near future, when we have to build websites that work on any device resolution from 300px to 1280px or more.Still, there’s one tiny nitpick I’d like to make, so that you fully understand when to use orientation and when to use device-width.orientation is supported by Android 2, Bolt, MicroB, and Firefox. And...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Programmatically implementing an interface that combines some instances of the same interface in var

    - by namin
    What is the best way to implement an interface that combines some instances of the same interface in various specified ways? I need to do this for multiple interfaces and I want to minimize the boilerplate and still achieve good efficiency, because I need this for a critical production system. Here is a sketch of the problem. Abstractly, I have a generic combiner class which takes the instances and specify the various combinators: class Combiner<I> { I[] instances; <T> T combineSomeWay(InstanceMethod<I,T> method) { // ... method.call(instances[i]) ... combined in some way ... } // more combinators } Now, let's say I want to implement the following interface among many others: Interface Foo { String bar(int baz); } I want to end up with code like this: class FooCombiner implements Foo { Combiner<Foo> combiner; @Override public String bar(final int baz) { return combiner.combineSomeWay(new InstanceMethod<Foo, String> { @Override public call(Foo instance) { return instance.bar(baz); } }); } } Now, this can quickly get long and winded if the interfaces have lots of methods. I know I could use a dynamic proxy from the Java reflection API to implement such interfaces, but method access via reflection is hundred times slower. So what are the alternatives to boilerplate and reflection in this case?

    Read the article

  • UIView Subview Does not autoresize on orientation change

    - by Jason
    In my iPhone app, I have a view controller with two views (essentially, a front & back view). The front view is the main UIView, and the back view is a secondary UIView which is added as a subview using [self.view addSubview:backView] when showing the back and [backView removeFromSuperview] when hiding it. However, when the orientation changes, I have the following issue: the main UIView (frontView) rotates & all of its elements resize properly, but the secondary/subview UIView (backView) does not rotate & all of its elements do not resize properly. Does anyone have suggestions on how to make the secondary UIView autoresize properly according to the rules I have set in Interface Builder?

    Read the article

  • shouldAutorotateToInterfaceOrientation is not working in iOS 6

    - by Saif
    In iOS 6 shouldAutorotateToInterfaceOrientation is not working but it work fine in iOS 5.0 or 5.1. What should i need to change in ios 6. Here is my code - (BOOL)shouldAutorotateToInterfaceOrientation:(UIInterfaceOrientation)interfaceOrientation { if([[[SampleApplicationAppDelegate instance].callInfoDictionary valueForKey:IS_CHAT] isEqualToString:NO_RESPONSE]) { int nAngle = 0; BOOL bRet = NO; switch (interfaceOrientation) { case UIInterfaceOrientationPortrait: nAngle = 90; bRet = YES; NSLog(@".......Preview = %f %f",_previewCamera.frame.size.width,_previewCamera.frame.size.height); _previewCamera.transform = CGAffineTransformMakeRotation(M_PI*1.5); NSLog(@"Preview = %f %f",_previewCamera.frame.size.width,_previewCamera.frame.size.height); break; case UIInterfaceOrientationPortraitUpsideDown: nAngle = 270; bRet = YES; _previewCamera.transform = CGAffineTransformMakeRotation(M_PI_2); break; case UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeLeft: nAngle = 0; bRet = YES; //_previewCamera.transform = CGAffineTransformMakeRotation(M_PI*1.5); break; case UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeRight: nAngle = 180; bRet = YES; //_previewCamera.transform = CGAffineTransformMakeRotation(M_PI_2); break; default: break; } return bRet; } if(interfaceOrientation == UIInterfaceOrientationPortrait || interfaceOrientation == UIInterfaceOrientationPortraitUpsideDown) return YES; return NO; } when i search for this orientation problem i found all this 1 2 but nothing work for me :( Please help .....

    Read the article

  • How to fix error - "@interface interfaceName : someEnumeration" gives error "cannot find interface '

    - by Paul V
    How can I solve "cannot find interface declaration 'someEnumeration', superclass of 'interfaceName'" error? What steps will reproduce the problem? Compiling Wsdl2ObjC Targeting groupwise.wsdl file Fixing non-valid file names of output csource code like ".h" + ".m" and objects inside source files Moving up one of the @interface BEFORE it was used futher in code! What is the expected output? Something working What do you see instead? 33 errors. "Inherited" from only 3 similar Inheritances of a typedef enum object by a class. All errors are typical: typedef enum types_StatusTrackingOptions { types_StatusTrackingOptions_none = 0, types_StatusTrackingOptions_None, types_StatusTrackingOptions_Delivered, types_StatusTrackingOptions_DeliveredAndOpened, types_StatusTrackingOptions_All, } types_StatusTrackingOptions; types_StatusTrackingOptions types_StatusTrackingOptions_enumFromString(NSString *string); NSString * types_StatusTrackingOptions_stringFromEnum(types_StatusTrackingOptions enumValue); @interface types_StatusTracking : types_StatusTrackingOptions { ... and here I'm having error "cannot find interface declaration for 'types_StatusTrackingOptions', superclass of 'types_StatusTracking'". What version of the product are you using? On what operating system? Wsdl2ObjC - rev 168, OS - Mac OS X 10.6.2, iPhone SDK - 3.2, Simulator - v. 3.1.2 - 3.1.3, wsdl - for GroupWise v.8, NDK released 2008-12-23, wsdl and xsd files are attached. P.S. GroupWise.wsdl + .xsd files could be downloaded from http://code.google.com/p/wsdl2objc/issues/detail?id=99

    Read the article

  • Can I use metro style interface in my own web application?

    - by LukeP
    I am wondering if I would need to license the Metro style or if I can just freely use it in my own applications. I mean, is it patented or protected in any way that would prevent me from building my own implementation? I effectively would like to copy the visible part of it. I like to idea of being able to: Provide an interface which is used somewhere else (as in 1 less to learn) Use the interface that has been tested for usability (I personally like it) Have the possibility of getting free publicity because of implementing full Metro style web application while not associated with Microsoft, etc.

    Read the article

  • Spring 3 DI using generic DAO interface

    - by Peders
    I'm trying to use @Autowired annotation with my generic Dao interface like this: public interface DaoContainer<E extends DomainObject> { public int numberOfItems(); // Other methods omitted for brevity } I use this interface in my Controller in following fashion: @Configurable public class HelloWorld { @Autowired private DaoContainer<Notification> notificationContainer; @Autowired private DaoContainer<User> userContainer; // Implementation omitted for brevity } I've configured my application context with following configuration <context:spring-configured /> <context:component-scan base-package="com.organization.sample"> <context:exclude-filter expression="org.springframework.stereotype.Controller" type="annotation" /> </context:component-scan> <tx:annotation-driven /> This works only partially, since Spring creates and injects only one instance of my DaoContainer, namely DaoContainer. In other words, if I ask userContainer.numberOfItems(); I get the number of notificationContainer.numberOfItems() I've tried to use strongly typed interfaces to mark the correct implementation like this: public interface NotificationContainer extends DaoContainer<Notification> { } public interface UserContainer extends DaoContainer<User> { } And then used these interfaces like this: @Configurable public class HelloWorld { @Autowired private NotificationContainer notificationContainer; @Autowired private UserContainer userContainer; // Implementation omitted... } Sadly this fails to BeanCreationException: org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Could not autowire field: private com.organization.sample.dao.NotificationContainer com.organization.sample.HelloWorld.notificationContainer; nested exception is org.springframework.beans.factory.NoSuchBeanDefinitionException: No matching bean of type [com.organization.sample.NotificationContainer] found for dependency: expected at least 1 bean which qualifies as autowire candidate for this dependency. Dependency annotations: {@org.springframework.beans.factory.annotation.Autowired(required=true)} Now, I'm a little confused how should I proceed or is using multiple Dao's even possible. Any help would be greatly appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • Storing Interface type in ASP.NET Profile

    - by NathanD
    In my ASP.NET website all calls into the data layer return entities as interfaces and the website does not need to know what the concrete type is. This works fine, but I have run into a problem when trying to store one of those types into the user Profile. My interface implements ISerializable, like the following: public interface IInsured : IPerson, IEntity, ISerializable and the concrete type in the datalayer does implement ISerializable. My Profile property in web.config is: <add name="ActiveInsured" type="FacadeInterfaces.IInsured" serializeAs="Binary" defaultValue="[null]"/> It compiles just fine, but I get a runtime error on Profile.Save() saying that the interface cannot be serialized. I have also tried it with serializeAs="Xml". I thought that if my interface implemented ISerializable it would work. Anybody had this problem before or know of a workaround?

    Read the article

  • Java: why is declaration not sufficient in interface?

    - by HH
    Big class contains Format-interfcase and Format-class. The Format-class contains the methods and the interface has the values of the fields. I could have the fields in the class Format but the goal is with Interface. So do I just create dummy-vars to get the errors away, design issue or something ELSE? KEY: Declaration VS Initialisation Explain by the terms, why you have to init in interface. What is the logic behind it? To which kind of problems it leads the use of interface? Sample Code having the init-interface-problem import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class FormatBig { private static class Format implements Format { private static long getSize(File f){return f.length();} private static long getTime(File f){return f.lastModified();} private static boolean isFile(File f){if(f.isFile()){return true;}} private static boolean isBinary(File f){return Match.isBinary(f);} private static char getType(File f){return Match.getTypes(f);} private static String getPath(File f){return getNoErrPath(f);} //Java API: isHidden, --- SYSTEM DEPENDED: toURI, toURL Format(File f) { // PUZZLE 0: would Stack<Object> be easier? size=getSize(f); time=getTime(f); isfile=isFile(f); isBinary=isBinary(f); type=getType(f); path=getPath(f); //PUZZLE 1: how can simplify the assignment? values.push(size); values.push(time); values.push(isfile); values.push(isBinary); values.push(type); values.push(path); } } public static String getNoErrPath(File f) { try{return f.getCanonicalPath(); }catch(Exception e){e.printStackTrace();} } public static final interface Format { //ERR: IT REQUIRES "=" public long size; public long time; public boolean isFile=true; //ERROR goes away if I initialise wit DUMMY public boolean isBinary; public char type; public String path; Stack<Object> values=new Stack<Object>(); } public static void main(String[] args) { Format fm=new Format(new File(".")); for(Object o:values){System.out.println(o);} } }

    Read the article

  • Delphi interface cast using TValue

    - by conciliator
    I've recently experimented extensively with interfaces and D2010 RTTI. I don't know at runtime the actual type of the interface; although I will have access to it's qualified name using a string. Consider the following: program rtti_sb_1; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses SysUtils, Rtti, TypInfo, mynamespace in 'mynamespace.pas'; var ctx: TRttiContext; InterfaceType: TRttiType; Method: TRttiMethod; ActualParentInstance: IParent; ChildInterfaceValue: TValue; ParentInterfaceValue: TValue; begin ctx := TRttiContext.Create; // Instantiation ActualParentInstance := TChild.Create as IParent; {$define WORKAROUND} {$ifdef WORKAROUND} InterfaceType := ctx.GetType(TypeInfo(IParent)); InterfaceType := ctx.GetType(TypeInfo(IChild)); {$endif} // Fetch interface type InterfaceType := ctx.FindType('mynamespace.IParent'); // This cast is OK and ChildMethod is executed (ActualParentInstance as IChild).ChildMethod(100); // Create a TValue holding the interface TValue.Make(@ActualParentInstance, InterfaceType.Handle, ParentInterfaceValue); InterfaceType := ctx.FindType('mynamespace.IChild'); // This cast doesn't work if ParentInterfaceValue.TryCast(InterfaceType.Handle, ChildInterfaceValue) then begin Method := InterfaceType.GetMethod('ChildMethod'); if (Method <> nil) then begin Method.Invoke(ChildInterfaceValue, [100]); end; end; ReadLn; end. The contents of mynamespace.pas is as follows: {$M+} IParent = interface ['{2375F59E-D432-4D7D-8D62-768F4225FFD1}'] procedure ParentMethod(const Id: integer); end; {$M-} IChild = interface(IParent) ['{6F89487E-5BB7-42FC-A760-38DA2329E0C5}'] procedure ChildMethod(const Id: integer); end; TParent = class(TInterfacedObject, IParent) public procedure ParentMethod(const Id: integer); end; TChild = class(TParent, IChild) public procedure ChildMethod(const Id: integer); end; For completeness, the implementation goes as procedure TParent.ParentMethod(const Id: integer); begin WriteLn('ParentMethod executed. Id is ' + IntToStr(Id)); end; procedure TChild.ChildMethod(const Id: integer); begin WriteLn('ChildMethod executed. Id is ' + IntToStr(Id)); end; The reason for {$define WORKAROUND} may be found in this post. Question: is there any way for me to make the desired type cast using RTTI? In other words: is there a way for me to invoke IChild.ChildMethod from knowing 1) the qualified name of IChild as a string, and 2) a reference to the TChild instance as a IParent interface? (After all, the hard-coded cast works fine. Is this even possible?) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to add member variable to an interface in c#

    - by Nassign
    I know this may be basic but I cannot seem to add a member variable to an interface. I tried inheriting the interface to an abstract class and add member variable to the abstract class but it still does not work. Here is my code: public interface IBase { void AddData(); void DeleteData(); } public abstract class AbstractBase : IBase { string ErrorMessage; abstract AddData(); abstract DeleteData(); }

    Read the article

  • Creating Mock object of Interface with type-hint in method fails on PHPUnit

    - by Mark
    I created the following interface: <?php interface Action { public function execute(\requests\Request $request, array $params); } Then I try to make a Mock object of this interface with PHPUnit 3.4, but I get the following error: Fatal error: Declaration of Mock_Action_b389c0b1::execute() must be compatible with that of Action::execute() in D:\Xampp\xampp\php\PEAR\PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase.php(1121) : eval()'d code on line 2 I looked through the stack trace I got from PHPUnit and found that it creates a Mock object that implements the interface Action, but creates the execute method in the following way: <?php public function execute($request, array $params) As you can see, PHPUnit takes over the array type-hint, but forgets about \requests\Request. Which obviously leads to an error. Does anyone knows a workaround for this error? I also tried it without namespaces, but I still get the same error.

    Read the article

  • Interface for classes that have nothing in common

    - by Tomek Tarczynski
    Lets say I want to make few classes to determine behaviour of agents. The good practice would be to make some common interface for them, such interface (simplified) could look like this: interface IModel { void UpdateBehaviour(); } All , or at least most, of such model would have some parameters, but parameters from one model might have nothing in common with parameters of other model. I would like to have some common way of loading parameters. Question What is the best way to do that? Is it maybe just adding method void LoadParameters(object parameters) to the IModel? Or creating empty interface IParameters and add method void LoadParameters(IParameters parameters)? That are two ideas I came up with, but I don't like either of them.

    Read the article

  • Constructor in a Interface?

    - by Sebi
    I know its not possible to define a constructor in a interface. But im wondering why, because i think i could be very useful. So you could be sure that some fields in a class are defined for every implementaiton of this interface. For example consider the following message class: public class MyMessage { public MyMessage(String receiver) { this.receiver = receiver; } private String receiver; public void send() { //some implementation for sending the mssage to the receiver } } If a define a Interface for this class so that i can have more classes which implement the message interface, i can only define the send method and not the constructor. So how can i assure that every implementation of this class really has an receiver setted? If i use a method like setReceiver(String receiver) i can't be sure that this method is really called. In the constructor i could assure it.

    Read the article

  • Implementing few methods of a interface class-C#

    - by Jankhana
    Is it possible in C# to have a class that implement an interface that has 10 methods declared but implementing only 5 methods i.e defining only 5 methods of that interface??? Actually I have an interface that is implemented by 3 class and not all the methods are used by all the class so if I could exclude any method???

    Read the article

  • VS2010 Implement Generic Interface expansion doesn't use specified type

    - by TJB
    Using the release version of Visual Studio 2010 I think there's a difference in the "Implement Interface" expansion from VS2008 If I speicify an interface and implement it in a class as so: public interface IRepository<T> where T : IModel { T Get<T>(int id); void Update<T>(); int Add<T>(T item); } public class MockRepository : IRepository<MockUser> { // ... } Then use the "Implement Interface" expansion and get this: public class MockRepository : IRepository<MockUser> { public T Get<T>(int id) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public void Update<T>() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public int Add<T>(T item) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } Instead of what I expected public class MockRepository : IRepository<MockUser> { public MockUser Get<MockUser>(int id) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public void Update<MockUser>() { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public int Add<MockUser>(MockUser item) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } The IDE uses the type variable name from the generic interface definition T instead of the specified concrete type MockUser. Is this a bug? Or is something new just for VS2010 / .Net 4.0?

    Read the article

  • C# naming convention for extension methods for interface

    - by Sarah Vessels
    I typically name my C# interfaces as IThing. I'm creating an extension method class for IThing, but I don't know what to name it. On one hand, calling it ThingExtensions seems to imply it is an extension class to some Thing class instead of to the IThing interface. It also makes the extension class be sorted away from the interface it extends, when viewing files alphabetically. On the other hand, naming it IThingExtensions makes it look like it is an interface itself, instead of an extension class for an interface. What would you suggest?

    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 | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >