Search Results

Search found 45849 results on 1834 pages for 'abstract class'.

Page 10/1834 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • "Public" nested classes or not

    - by Frederick
    Suppose I have a class 'Application'. In order to be initialised it takes certain settings in the constructor. Let's also assume that the number of settings is so many that it's compelling to place them in a class of their own. Compare the following two implementations of this scenario. Implementation 1: class Application { Application(ApplicationSettings settings) { //Do initialisation here } } class ApplicationSettings { //Settings related methods and properties here } Implementation 2: class Application { Application(Application.Settings settings) { //Do initialisation here } class Settings { //Settings related methods and properties here } } To me, the second approach is very much preferable. It is more readable because it strongly emphasises the relation between the two classes. When I write code to instantiate Application class anywhere, the second approach is going to look prettier. Now just imagine the Settings class itself in turn had some similarly "related" class and that class in turn did so too. Go only three such levels and the class naming gets out out of hand in the 'non-nested' case. If you nest, however, things still stay elegant. Despite the above, I've read people saying on StackOverflow that nested classes are justified only if they're not visible to the outside world; that is if they are used only for the internal implementation of the containing class. The commonly cited objection is bloating the size of containing class's source file, but partial classes is the perfect solution for that problem. My question is, why are we wary of the "publicly exposed" use of nested classes? Are there any other arguments against such use?

    Read the article

  • Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed"

    - by Nicolas Repiquet
    After 10+ years of java/c# programming, I find myself creating either: abstract classes: contract not meant to be instantiated as-is. final/sealed classes: implementation not meant to serve as base class to something else. I can't think of any situation where a simple "class" (i.e. neither abstract nor final/sealed) would be "wise programming". Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed" ? EDIT This great article explains my concerns far better than I can.

    Read the article

  • Is It "Wrong"/Bad Design To Put A Thread/Background Worker In A Class?

    - by Jetti
    I have a class that will read from Excel (C# and .Net 4) and in that class I have a background worker that will load the data from Excel while the UI can remain responsive. My question is as follows: Is it bad design to have a background worker in a class? Should I create my class without it and use a background worker to operate on that class? I can't see any issues really of creating my class this way but then again I am a newbie so I figured I would make sure before I continue on. I hope that this question is relevant here as I don't think it should be on stackoverflow as my code works, this just a design issue.

    Read the article

  • VB.NET class inherits a base class and implements an interface issue (works in C#)

    - by 300 baud
    I am trying to create a class in VB.NET which inherits a base abstract class and also implements an interface. The interface declares a string property called Description. The base class contains a string property called Description. The main class inherits the base class and implements the interface. The existence of the Description property in the base class fulfills the interface requirements. This works fine in C# but causes issues in VB.NET. First, here is an example of the C# code which works: public interface IFoo { string Description { get; set; } } public abstract class FooBase { public string Description { get; set; } } public class MyFoo : FooBase, IFoo { } Now here is the VB.NET version which gives a compiler error: Public Interface IFoo Property Description() As String End Interface Public MustInherit Class FooBase Private _Description As String Public Property Description() As String Get Return _Description End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _Description = value End Set End Property End Class Public Class MyFoo Inherits FooBase Implements IFoo End Class If I make the base class (FooBase) implement the interface and add the Implements IFoo.Description to the property all is good, but I do not want the base class to implement the interface. The compiler error is: Class 'MyFoo' must implement 'Property Description() As String' for interface 'IFoo'. Implementing property must have matching 'ReadOnly' or 'WriteOnly' specifiers. Can VB.NET not handle this, or do I need to change my syntax somewhere to get this to work?

    Read the article

  • Accessing parent class attribute from sub-class body

    - by warwaruk
    I have a class Klass with a class attribute my_list. I have a subclass of it SubKlass, in which i want to have a class attribute my_list which is a modified version of the same attribute from parent class: class Klass(): my_list = [1, 2, 3] class SubKlass(Klass): my_list = Klass.my_list + [4, 5] # this works, but i must specify parent class explicitly #my_list = super().my_list + [4, 5] # SystemError: super(): __class__ cell not found #my_list = my_list + [4, 5] # NameError: name 'my_list' is not defined print(Klass.my_list) print(SubKlass.my_list) So, is there a way to access parent class attribute without specifying its name?

    Read the article

  • How to determine which inheriting class is using an abstract class' methods.

    - by Kin
    In my console application have an abstract Factory class "Listener" which contains code for listening and accepting connections, and spawning client classes. This class is inherited by two more classes (WorldListener, and MasterListener) that contain more protocol specific overrides and functions. I also have a helper class (ConsoleWrapper) which encapsulates and extends System.Console, containing methods for writing to console info on what is happening to instances of the WorldListener and MasterListener. I need a way to determine in the abstract ListenerClass which Inheriting class is calling its methods. Any help with this problem would be greatly appreciated! I am stumped :X Simplified example of what I am trying to do. abstract class Listener { public void DoSomething() { if(inheriting class == WorldListener) ConsoleWrapper.WorldWrite("Did something!"); if(inheriting class == MasterListener) ConsoleWrapper.MasterWrite("Did something!"); } } public static ConsoleWrapper { public void WorldWrite(string input) { System.Console.WriteLine("[World] {0}", input); } } public class WorldListener : Listener { public void DoSomethingSpecific() { ConsoleWrapper.WorldWrite("I did something specific!"); } } public void Main() { new WorldListener(); new MasterListener(); } Expected output [World] Did something! [World] I did something specific! [Master] Did something! [World] I did something specific!

    Read the article

  • How to determine which inheriting class is using an abstract class's methods.

    - by Kin
    In my console application have an abstract Factory class "Listener" which contains code for listening and accepting connections, and spawning client classes. This class is inherited by two more classes (WorldListener, and MasterListener) that contain more protocol specific overrides and functions. I also have a helper class (ConsoleWrapper) which encapsulates and extends System.Console, containing methods for writing to console info on what is happening to instances of the WorldListener and MasterListener. I need a way to determine in the abstract ListenerClass which Inheriting class is calling its methods. Any help with this problem would be greatly appreciated! I am stumped :X Simplified example of what I am trying to do. abstract class Listener { public void DoSomething() { if(inheriting class == WorldListener) ConsoleWrapper.WorldWrite("Did something!"); if(inheriting class == MasterListener) ConsoleWrapper.MasterWrite("Did something!"); } } public static ConsoleWrapper { public void WorldWrite(string input) { System.Console.WriteLine("[World] {0}", input); } } public class WorldListener : Listener { public void DoSomethingSpecific() { ConsoleWrapper.WorldWrite("I did something specific!"); } } public void Main() { new WorldListener(); new MasterListener(); } Expected output [World] Did something! [World] I did something specific! [Master] Did something! [World] I did something specific!

    Read the article

  • Difference between Factory Method and Abstract Factory design patterns using C#.Net

    - by nijhawan.saurabh
    First of all I'll just put both these patterns in context and describe their intent as in the GOF book: Factory Method: Define an interface for creating an object, but let subclasses decide which class to instantiate. Factory Method lets a class defer instantiation to subclasses.   Abstract Factory: Provide an interface for creating families of related or dependent objects without specifying their concrete classes.   Points to note:   Abstract factory pattern adds a layer of abstraction to the factory method pattern. The type of factory is not known to the client at compile time, this information is passed to the client at runtime (How it is passed is again dependent on the system, you may store this information in configuration files and the client can read it on execution). While implementing Abstract factory pattern, the factory classes can have multiple factory methods. In Abstract factory, a factory is capable of creating more than one type of product (Simpilar products are grouped together in a factory)   Sample implementation of factory method pattern   Let's see the class diagram first:                   ProductFactory.cs // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public abstract class ProductFactory     {         /// <summary>         /// </summary>         /// <returns>         /// </returns>         public abstract Product CreateProductInstance();     } }     ProductAFactory.cs // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductAFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductAFactory:ProductFactory     {         public override Product CreateProductInstance()         {             return new ProductA();         }     } }         // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductBFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductBFactory:ProductFactory     {         public override Product CreateProductInstance()         {             return new ProductB();           }     } }     // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="Product.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public abstract class Product     {         public abstract string Name { get; set; }     } }     // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductA.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductA:Product     {         public ProductA()         {               Name = "ProductA";         }           public override string Name { get; set; }     } }       // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductB.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductB:Product     {          public ProductB()         {               Name = "ProductA";         }         public override string Name { get; set; }     } }     Program.cs using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text;   namespace FactoryMethod {     class Program     {         static void Main(string[] args)         {             ProductFactory pf = new ProductAFactory();               Product product = pf.CreateProductInstance();             Console.WriteLine(product.Name);         }     } }       Normal 0 false false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

    Read the article

  • Objective-C Class Question?

    - by tarnfeld
    Hey, My head is about to explode with this logic, can anyone help? Class A #imports Class B. Class A calls Method A in Class B. This works great Class B wants to send a response back to Class A from another method that is called from Method A. If you #import Class A from Class B, it is in effect an infinite loop and the whole thing crashes. Is there a way to do this properly, like a parent type thing? BTW, I'm developing for iPhone.

    Read the article

  • Can i override an abstract method written in a parent class, with a different name in a child class?

    - by Ranhiru
    abstract class SettingSaver { public abstract void add(string Name, string Value); public abstract void remove(string SettingName); } class XMLSettings : SettingSaver { public override void add(string Name, string Value) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override void remove(string SettingName) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } Is there anyway that I can change the name of the add function in XMLSettings class to addSetting but make sure it overrides the add function in the SettingSaver? I know it should be definitely overridden in derived classes but just want to know whether I can use a different name :) Thanx in advance :D

    Read the article

  • Prefer class members or passing arguments between internal methods?

    - by geoffjentry
    Suppose within the private portion of a class there is a value which is utilized by multiple private methods. Do people prefer having this defined as a member variable for the class or passing it as an argument to each of the methods - and why? On one hand I could see an argument to be made that reducing state (ie member variables) in a class is generally a good thing, although if the same value is being repeatedly used throughout a class' methods it seems like that would be an ideal candidate for representation as state for the class to make the code visibly cleaner if nothing else. Edit: To clarify some of the comments/questions that were raised, I'm not talking about constants and this isn't relating to any particular case rather just a hypothetical that I was talking to some other people about. Ignoring the OOP angle for a moment, the particular use case that I had in mind was the following (assume pass by reference just to make the pseudocode cleaner) int x doSomething(x) doAnotherThing(x) doYetAnotherThing(x) doSomethingElse(x) So what I mean is that there's some variable that is common between multiple functions - in the case I had in mind it was due to chaining of smaller functions. In an OOP system, if these were all methods of a class (say due to refactoring via extracting methods from a large method), that variable could be passed around them all or it could be a class member.

    Read the article

  • Desktop Fun: Abstract Icon Packs

    - by Asian Angel
    Do you prefer a more unique, artistic, or alternative look for your desktop setup? Then you will definitely want to have a look through our Abstract Icon Packs collection. Just set your imagination loose and enjoy the wonderful desktops that these icon packs can inspire for you. Note: To customize the icon setup on your Windows 7 & Vista systems see our article here. Using Windows XP? We have you covered here. Sneak Preview For this week’s preview desktop we created an Alien Desert Planet theme using the Abstract Symbol Icons pack shown below. Note: The original, unmodified version of this wallpaper can be found here. Here is a closer look at the icons we used for our new theme… The Icon Packs Match-stick-play Icons *.ico format only Download Abstract Symbol Icons *.ico format only Download Allomantic Metals *.ico format only Download Mutated Snowflake Icon Set *.ico format only Download Shades of Geometry *.ico format only Download Starry Objects Icons *.ico format only Download New Sin – Abstract Human Icons *.ico, .png, and .psd format Note: While most of the icons in this pack look similar at first glance, there are differences when viewed at a larger size. Download Mysterious Icons *.ico format only Download Alien Icons *.ico format only Download Beads Icons *.ico format only Download Magic Flowers Icons *.ico format only Download Circle Shapes Icons *.ico format only Download geometric doc icons *.png format only Download alumina *.png format only Download Citiscape dockicons *.png format only Download Wanting more great icon sets to look through? Be certain to visit our Desktop Fun section for more icon goodness! Latest Features How-To Geek ETC How to Use the Avira Rescue CD to Clean Your Infected PC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials Is Your Desktop Printer More Expensive Than Printing Services? 20 OS X Keyboard Shortcuts You Might Not Know HTG Explains: Which Linux File System Should You Choose? HTG Explains: Why Does Photo Paper Improve Print Quality? Add Falling Snow to Webpages with the Snowfall Extension for Opera [Browser Fun] Automatically Keep Up With the Latest Releases from Mozilla Labs in Firefox 4.0 A Look Back at 2010 Through Infographics Monitor the Weather with the Weather Forecast Extension for Opera Orbiting at the Edge of the Atmosphere Wallpaper Simon’s Cat Explores the Christmas Tree! [Video]

    Read the article

  • ctags doesn't work when class is defined like "class Gem::SystemExitException"

    - by dan
    You can define a class in a namespace like this class Gem class SystemExitException end end or class Gem::SystemExitException end When code uses first method of class definition, ctags indexes the class definition like this: SystemExitException test_class.rb /^ class SystemExitException$/;" c class:Gem With the second way, ctags indexes it like this: Gem rubygems/exceptions.rb /^class Gem::SystemExitException < SystemExit$/;" c The problem with the second way is that you can't put your cursor (in vim) over a reference to "Gem::SystemExitException" and have that jump straight to the class definition. Your only recourse is to page through all the (110!) class definitions that start with "Gem::" and find the one you're looking for. Does anyone know of a workaround? Maybe I should report this to the maintainer of ctags?

    Read the article

  • Class Plugins in PHP?

    - by YuriKolovsky
    i just got some more questions while learning PHP, does php implement any built in plugin system? so the plugin would be able to change the behavior of the core component. for example something like this works: include 'core.class.php'; include 'plugin1.class.php'; include 'plugin2.class.php'; new plugin2; where core.class.php contains class core { public function coremethod1(){ echo 'coremethod1'; } public function coremethod2(){ echo 'coremethod2'; } } plugin1.class.php contains class plugin1 extends core { public function coremethod1(){ echo 'plugin1method1'; } } plugin2.class.php contains class plugin2 extends plugin1 { public function coremethod2(){ echo 'plugin2method2'; } } This would be ideal, if not for the problem that now the plugins are dependable on each other, and removing one of the plugins: include 'core.class.php'; //include 'plugin1.class.php'; include 'plugin2.class.php'; new plugin2; breaks the whole thing... are there any proper methods to doing this? if there are not, them i might consider moving to a different langauge that supports this... thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • How can I implement an abstract singleton class in Java?

    - by Simon
    Here is my sample abstract singleton class: public abstract class A { protected static A instance; public static A getInstance() { return instance; } //...rest of my abstract methods... } And here is the concrete implementation: public class B extends A { private B() { } static { instance = new B(); } //...implementations of my abstract methods... } Unfortunately I can't get the static code in class B to execute, so the instance variable never gets set. I have tried this: Class c = B.class; A.getInstance() - returns null; and this ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader().loadClass("B"); A.getInstance() - return null; Running both these in the eclipse debugger the static code never gets executed. The only way I could find to get the static code executed is to change the accessibility on B's constructor to public, and to call it. I'm using sun-java6-jre on Ubuntu 32bit to run these tests.

    Read the article

  • How can I create object in abstract class without having knowledge of implementation?

    - by Greg
    Hi, Is there a way to implement the "CreateNode" method in my library abstract below? Or can this only be done in client code outside the library? I current get the error "Cannot create an instance of the abstract class or interface 'ToplogyLibrary.AbstractNode" public abstract class AbstractTopology<T> { // Properties public Dictionary<T, AbstractNode<T>> Nodes { get; private set; } public List<AbstractRelationship<T>> Relationships { get; private set; } // Constructors protected AbstractTopology() { Nodes = new Dictionary<T, AbstractNode<T>>(); } // Methods public AbstractNode<T> CreateNode() { var node = new AbstractNode<T>(); // ** Does not work ** Nodes.Add(node.Key, node); } } } public abstract class AbstractNode<T> { public T Key { get; set; } } public abstract class AbstractRelationship<T> { public AbstractNode<T> Parent { get; set; } public AbstractNode<T> Child { get; set; } }

    Read the article

  • Best method of including an abstract in a latex 'book'?

    - by olan
    Hello there. I've been looking for the answer to this question for a while now but can't seem to find it, so I'm hoping someone on here can help me. I'm writing up a thesis in Latex, and really like the \frontmatter, \mainmatter and \backmatter ability when using the "book" environment. However I need to add an abstract and the \begin{abstract} environment is undefined when creating a "book". If I change to a "report" however, I lose the functionality of the *matter terms. So what I really need to know is: is there a simple method of including an abstract in a "book" and have it formatted the same as it would be in a "report"? (i.e. centered vertically and horizontally with an 'abstract' heading) Thanks for any help! First post on stackoverflow after reading for months!

    Read the article

  • PHP Access property of a class from within a class instantiated in the original class.

    - by Iain
    I'm not certain how to explain this with the correct terms so maybe an example is the best method... $master = new MasterClass(); $master->doStuff(); class MasterClass { var $a; var $b; var $c; var $eventProccer; function MasterClass() { $this->a = 1; $this->eventProccer = new EventProcess(); } function printCurrent() { echo '<br>'.$this->a.'<br>'; } function doStuff() { $this->printCurrent(); $this->eventProccer->DoSomething(); $this->printCurrent(); } } class EventProcess { function EventProcess() {} function DoSomething() { // trying to access and change the parent class' a,b,c properties } } My problem is i'm not certain how to access the properties of the MasterClass from within the EventProcess-DoSomething() method? I would need to access, perform operations on and update the properties. The a,b,c properties will be quite large arrays and the DoSomething() method would be called many times during the execuction of the script. Any help or pointers would be much appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • DataAnnotation attributes buddy class strangeness - ASP.NET MVC

    - by JK
    Given this POCO class that was automatically generated by an EntityFramework T4 template (has not and can not be manually edited in any way): public partial class Customer { [Required] [StringLength(20, ErrorMessage = "Customer Number - Please enter no more than 20 characters.")] [DisplayName("Customer Number")] public virtual string CustomerNumber { get;set; } [Required] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "ACNumber - Please enter no more than 10 characters.")] [DisplayName("ACNumber")] public virtual string ACNumber{ get;set; } } Note that "ACNumber" is a badly named database field, so the autogenerator is unable to generate the correct display name and error message which should be "Account Number". So we manually create this buddy class to add custom attributes that could not be automatically generated: [MetadataType(typeof(CustomerAnnotations))] public partial class Customer { } public class CustomerAnnotations { [NumberCode] // This line does not work public virtual string CustomerNumber { get;set; } [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Account Number - Please enter no more than 10 characters.")] [DisplayName("Account Number")] public virtual string ACNumber { get;set; } } Where [NumberCode] is a simple regex based attribute that allows only digits and hyphens: [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property)] public class NumberCodeAttribute: RegularExpressionAttribute { private const string REGX = @"^[0-9-]+$"; public NumberCodeAttribute() : base(REGX) { } } NOW, when I load the page, the DisplayName attribute works correctly - it shows the display name from the buddy class not the generated class. The StringLength attribute does not work correctly - it shows the error message from the generated class ("ACNumber" instead of "Account Number"). BUT the [NumberCode] attribute in the buddy class does not even get applied to the AccountNumber property: foreach (ValidationAttribute attrib in prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>()) { // This collection correctly contains all the [Required], [StringLength] attributes // BUT does not contain the [NumberCode] attribute ApplyValidation(generator, attrib); } Why does the prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>() collection not contain the [NumberCode] attribute? NumberCode inherits RegularExpressionAttribute which inherits ValidationAttribute so it should be there. If I manually move the [NumberCode] attribute to the autogenerated class, then it is included in the prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>() collection. So what I don't understand is why this particular attribute does not work in when in the buddy class, when other attributes in the buddy class do work. And why this attribute works in the autogenerated class, but not in the buddy. Any ideas? Also why does DisplayName get overriden by the buddy, when StringLength does not?

    Read the article

  • Linker error: wants C++ virtual base class destructor

    - by jdmuys
    Hi, I have a link error where the linker complains that my concrete class's destructor is calling its abstract superclass destructor, the code of which is missing. This is using GCC 4.2 on Mac OS X from XCode. I saw http://stackoverflow.com/questions/307352/g-undefined-reference-to-typeinfo but it's not quite the same thing. Here is the linker error message: Undefined symbols: "ConnectionPool::~ConnectionPool()", referenced from: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool::~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool()in RKConnector.o ld: symbol(s) not found collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Here is the abstract base class declaration: class ConnectionPool { public: static ConnectionPool* newPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b); virtual ~ConnectionPool() =0; virtual int keepAlive() =0; virtual int disconnect() =0; virtual sql::Connection * getConnection(char *compression_scheme = NULL) =0; virtual void releaseConnection(sql::Connection * theConnection) =0; }; Here is the concrete class declaration: class AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool: public ConnectionPool { protected: <snip data members> public: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b); virtual ~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(); virtual int keepAlive(); // will make sure the connection doesn't time out. Call regularly virtual int disconnect(); // disconnects/destroys all connections. virtual sql::Connection * getConnection(char *compression_scheme = NULL); virtual void releaseConnection(sql::Connection * theConnection); }; Needless to say, all those members are implemented. Here is the destructor: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool::~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool() { printf("AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool destructor call"); // nothing to destruct in fact } and also maybe the factory routine: ConnectionPool* ConnectionPool::newPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b) { return new AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(h, p, u, pw, b); } I can fix this by artificially making my abstract base class concrete. But I'd rather do something better. Any idea? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why and when should I make a class 'static'? What is the purpose of 'static' keyword on classes?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    The static keyword on a member in many languages mean that you shouldn't create an instance of that class to be able to have access to that member. However, I don't see any justification to make an entire class static. Why and when should I make a class static? What benefits do I get from making a class static? I mean, after declaring a static class, one should still declare all members which he/she wants to have access to without instantiation, as static too. This means that for example, Math class could be declared normal (not static), without affecting how developers code. In other words, making a class static or normal is kind of transparent to developers.

    Read the article

  • UiElement from abstract class

    - by plotnick
    I placed a control into a grid. let's say the control is derived from public class 'ButBase' which is derived in its turn from System.Windows.Controls.Button. The code normally compiles and app works just fine. But there's something really annoying. When you try to switch to xaml-design tab it will say 'The document root element is not supported by the visual designer', which is normal and I'm totally okay with that, but the thing is, that all the xaml code is underlined and VS2010 says: 'Cannot create an instance of ButBase' although still normally compiles and able to run. I've tried the same code in VS2008, it said that needs to see a public parameterless constructor in the ButBase, and even after I put one it showed the same error. What do I miss here?

    Read the article

  • Java Design Questions - Class, Function, Access Modifiers

    - by Ron
    I am newbie to Java. I have some design questions. Say I have a crawler application, that does the following: 1. Crawls a url and gets its content 2. Parses the contents 3. Displays the contents How do you decide between implementing a function or a class? -- Should the parser be a function of the crawler class, or should it be a class in itself, so it can be used by other applications as well? -- If it should be a class, should it be protected or public class? How do you decide between implementing a public or protected class? -- If I had to create a class to generate stats from the parsed contents for eg, should that class be protected (so only the crawler class can access it) or should it be public? Thanks Ron

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >