Search Results

Search found 16333 results on 654 pages for 'exception safe'.

Page 112/654 | < Previous Page | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >

  • Exception while hosting a WCF Service in a DependencyInjection Module ?

    - by Maciek
    Hello, I've written a small just-for-fun console project using Ninject, I'm pasting some of the code below just so that you get the idea : Program.cs using System; using Ninject; using Ninjectionn.Modules; // My namespace for my modules namespace Ninjections { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { IKernel kernel = new StandardKernel(); kernel.Load<ServicesHostModule>(); Console.ReadKey(); } } } ServicesHostModule.cs using System; using System.ServiceModel; using Ninject; using Ninject.Modules; namespace Ninjections.Modules { public class ServicesHostModule : INinjectModule { #region INinjectModule Members public string Name { get { return "ServicesHost"; }} public void OnLoad(IKernel kernel) { if(m_host != null) m_host.Close(); else m_host = new ServiceHost(typeof(WCFTestService)); m_host.Open(); // (!) EXCEPTION HERE } public void OnUnLoad(IKernel kernel) { m_host.Close(); } #endregion } } ITestWCFService.cs using System.ServiceModel; namespace Ninjections.Modules { [ServiceContract] public interface ITestWCFService { [OperationContract] string GetString1(); [OperationContract] string GetString2(); } } An auto-generated App.config is in the ServicesHostModule project. I've "added" an existing item (the app config) as link in the main project. Q: at the m_host.Open(); line, an InvalidOperationException occurs. The message says : "Service "Ninjections.Modules.TestWCFService" has zero application endopints. What's wrong?

    Read the article

  • Messages not forwarded to error queue when exception is thrown in handler (it works on my machine)

    - by darthjit
    e are using NServicebus 4.0.5 with sql server(sql server 2012) as transport. When the handler throws an exception, NSB does not retry or move the message to the error queue. Successful messages make it to the audit queue but the failed/errored ones don't! . Interestingly, all this works on our local machines(windows 7 ,sql server localdb) but not on windows server 2012 (sql server 2012). Here is the config info on the subscriber: <add name="NServiceBus/Transport" connectionString="Data Source=xxx;Initial Catalog=NServiceBus;Integrated Security=SSPI;Enlist=false;" /> <add name="NServiceBus/Persistence" connectionString="Data Source=xxx;Initial Catalog=NServiceBus;Integrated Security=SSPI;Enlist=false;" /> <MessageForwardingInCaseOfFaultConfig ErrorQueue="error" /> <UnicastBusConfig ForwardReceivedMessagesTo="audit"> <MessageEndpointMappings> <add Assembly="Services.Section.Messages" Endpoint= "Services.ACL.Worker" /> </MessageEndpointMappings> </UnicastBusConfig> And in code it is configured as follows: public class EndpointConfig : IConfigureThisEndpoint, AsA_Server, IWantCustomInitialization { public void Init() { IContainer container = ContainerInstanceProvider. GetContainerInstance(); Configure .Transactions.Enable(); Configure.With() .AutofacBuilder(container) .UseTransport<SqlServer>() .Log4Net() //.Serialization.Json() .UseNHibernateSubscriptionPersister() .UseNHibernateTimeoutPersister() .MessageForwardingInCaseOfFault() .RijndaelEncryptionService() .DefiningCommandsAs(type => type.Namespace != null &&type .Namespace.EndsWith("Commands")) .DefiningEventsAs(type => type.Namespace != null &&type .Namespace.EndsWith("Events")) .UnicastBus(); } } Any ideas on how to fix this? here is the log info (there is a lot there, search for error to see the relevant parts) https://gist.github.com/ranji/7378249

    Read the article

  • Adding cancel ability and exception handling to async code.

    - by Rob
    I have this sample code for async operations (copied from the interwebs) public class LongRunningTask { public LongRunningTask() { //do nowt } public int FetchInt() { Thread.Sleep(2000); return 5; } } public delegate TOutput SomeMethod<TOutput>(); public class GoodPerformance { public void BeginFetchInt() { LongRunningTask lr = new LongRunningTask(); SomeMethod<int> method = new SomeMethod<int>(lr.FetchInt); // method is state object used to transfer result //of long running operation method.BeginInvoke(EndFetchInt, method); } public void EndFetchInt(IAsyncResult result) { SomeMethod<int> method = result.AsyncState as SomeMethod<int>; Value = method.EndInvoke(result); } public int Value { get; set; } } Other async approaches I tried required the aysnc page attribute, they also seemed to cancel if other page elements where actioned on (a button clicked), this approach just seemed to work. I’d like to add a cancel ability and exception handling for the longRunningTask class, but don’t erm, really know how.

    Read the article

  • Understanding C# async / await (1) Compilation

    - by Dixin
    Now the async / await keywords are in C#. Just like the async and ! in F#, this new C# feature provides great convenience. There are many nice documents talking about how to use async / await in specific scenarios, like using async methods in ASP.NET 4.5 and in ASP.NET MVC 4, etc. In this article we will look at the real code working behind the syntax sugar. According to MSDN: The async modifier indicates that the method, lambda expression, or anonymous method that it modifies is asynchronous. Since lambda expression / anonymous method will be compiled to normal method, we will focus on normal async method. Preparation First of all, Some helper methods need to make up. internal class HelperMethods { internal static int Method(int arg0, int arg1) { // Do some IO. WebClient client = new WebClient(); Enumerable.Repeat("http://weblogs.asp.net/dixin", 10) .Select(client.DownloadString).ToArray(); int result = arg0 + arg1; return result; } internal static Task<int> MethodTask(int arg0, int arg1) { Task<int> task = new Task<int>(() => Method(arg0, arg1)); task.Start(); // Hot task (started task) should always be returned. return task; } internal static void Before() { } internal static void Continuation1(int arg) { } internal static void Continuation2(int arg) { } } Here Method() is a long running method doing some IO. Then MethodTask() wraps it into a Task and return that Task. Nothing special here. Await something in async method Since MethodTask() returns Task, let’s try to await it: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1); return result; } } Because we used await in the method, async must be put on the method. Now we get the first async method. According to the naming convenience, it is called MethodAsync. Of course a async method can be awaited. So we have a CallMethodAsync() to call MethodAsync(): internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); return result; } } After compilation, MethodAsync() and CallMethodAsync() becomes the same logic. This is the code of MethodAsyc(): internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { MethodAsyncStateMachine methodAsyncStateMachine = new MethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref methodAsyncStateMachine); return methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It just creates and starts a state machine MethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Result; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaitor; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { if (this.State != 0) { this.awaitor = HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaitor.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaitor, ref this); return; } } else { this.State = -1; } this.Result = this.awaitor.GetResult(); } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); return; } this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.Result); } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine param0) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(param0); } } The generated code has been cleaned up so it is readable and can be compiled. Several things can be observed here: The async modifier is gone, which shows, unlike other modifiers (e.g. static), there is no such IL/CLR level “async” stuff. It becomes a AsyncStateMachineAttribute. This is similar to the compilation of extension method. The generated state machine is very similar to the state machine of C# yield syntax sugar. The local variables (arg0, arg1, result) are compiled to fields of the state machine. The real code (await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1)) is compiled into MoveNext(): HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(). CallMethodAsync() will create and start its own state machine CallMethodAsyncStateMachine: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(CallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { CallMethodAsyncStateMachine callMethodAsyncStateMachine = new CallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref callMethodAsyncStateMachine); return callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } CallMethodAsyncStateMachine has the same logic as MethodAsyncStateMachine above. The detail of the state machine will be discussed soon. Now it is clear that: async /await is a C# level syntax sugar. There is no difference to await a async method or a normal method. A method returning Task will be awaitable. State machine and continuation To demonstrate more details in the state machine, a more complex method is created: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; } } In this method: There are multiple awaits. There are code before the awaits, and continuation code after each await After compilation, this multi-await method becomes the same as above single-await methods: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine); return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It creates and starts one single state machine, MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Arg2; public int Arg3; public int ResultOfAwait1; public int ResultOfAwait2; public int ResultToReturn; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaiter; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { case -1: HelperMethods.Before(); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 0: this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 1; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 1: this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); this.ResultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.ResultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); } } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(stateMachine); } } The above code is already cleaned up, but there are still a lot of things. More clean up can be done, and the state machine can be very simple: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { // State: // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End public int State; public TaskCompletionSource<int> ResultToReturn; // int resultToReturn ... public int Arg0; // int Arg0 public int Arg1; // int arg1 public int Arg2; // int arg2 public int Arg3; // int arg3 public int ResultOfAwait1; // int resultOfAwait1 ... public int ResultOfAwait2; // int resultOfAwait2 ... private Task<int> currentTaskToAwait; /// <summary> /// Moves the state machine to its next state. /// </summary> void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { // Orginal code is splitted by "case"s: // case -1: // HelperMethods.Before(); // MethodAsync(Arg0, arg1); // case 0: // int resultOfAwait1 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); // MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); // case 1: // int resultOfAwait2 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); // int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // return resultToReturn; case -1: // -1 is begin. HelperMethods.Before(); // Code before 1st await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1); // 1st task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 0. this.State = 0; IAsyncStateMachine this1 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => this1.MoveNext()); // Callback break; case 0: // Now 1st await is done. this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 1st await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); // Code after 1st await and before 2nd await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3); // 2nd task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 1. this.State = 1; IAsyncStateMachine this2 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => this2.MoveNext()); // Callback break; case 1: // Now 2nd await is done. this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 2nd await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); // Code after 2nd await. int resultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; // Code after 2nd await. // End with resultToReturn. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetResult(resultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { // End with exception. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetException(exception); } } /// <summary> /// Configures the state machine with a heap-allocated replica. /// </summary> /// <param name="stateMachine">The heap-allocated replica.</param> [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { // No core logic. } } Only Task and TaskCompletionSource are involved in this version. And MultiCallMethodAsync() can be simplified to: [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync_(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, ResultToReturn = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(), // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End State = -1 }; (multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine as IAsyncStateMachine).MoveNext(); // Original code are in this method. return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.ResultToReturn.Task; } Now the whole state machine becomes very clear - it is about callback: Original code are split into pieces by “await”s, and each piece is put into each “case” in the state machine. Here the 2 awaits split the code into 3 pieces, so there are 3 “case”s. The “piece”s are chained by callback, that is done by Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(callback), or currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(callback) in the simplified code. A previous “piece” will end with a Task (which is to be awaited), when the task is done, it will callback the next “piece”. The state machine’s state works with the “case”s to ensure the code “piece”s executes one after another. Callback Since it is about callback, the simplification  can go even further – the entire state machine can be completely purged. Now MultiCallMethodAsync() becomes: internal static Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { TaskCompletionSource<int> taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(); try { // Oringinal code begins. HelperMethods.Before(); MethodAsync(arg0, arg1).ContinueWith(await1 => { int resultOfAwait1 = await1.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); MethodAsync(arg2, arg3).ContinueWith(await2 => { int resultOfAwait2 = await2.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // Oringinal code ends. taskCompletionSource.SetResult(resultToReturn); }); }); } catch (Exception exception) { taskCompletionSource.SetException(exception); } return taskCompletionSource.Task; } Please compare with the original async / await code: HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; Yeah that is the magic of C# async / await: Await is literally pretending to wait. In a await expression, a Task object will be return immediately so that caller is not blocked. The continuation code is compiled as that Task’s callback code. When that task is done, continuation code will execute. Please notice that many details inside the state machine are omitted for simplicity, like context caring, etc. If you want to have a detailed picture, please do check out the source code of AsyncTaskMethodBuilder and TaskAwaiter.

    Read the article

  • Understanding C# async / await (1) Compilation

    - by Dixin
    Now the async / await keywords are in C#. Just like the async and ! in F#, this new C# feature provides great convenience. There are many nice documents talking about how to use async / await in specific scenarios, like using async methods in ASP.NET 4.5 and in ASP.NET MVC 4, etc. In this article we will look at the real code working behind the syntax sugar. According to MSDN: The async modifier indicates that the method, lambda expression, or anonymous method that it modifies is asynchronous. Since lambda expression / anonymous method will be compiled to normal method, we will focus on normal async method. Preparation First of all, Some helper methods need to make up. internal class HelperMethods { internal static int Method(int arg0, int arg1) { // Do some IO. WebClient client = new WebClient(); Enumerable.Repeat("http://weblogs.asp.net/dixin", 10) .Select(client.DownloadString).ToArray(); int result = arg0 + arg1; return result; } internal static Task<int> MethodTask(int arg0, int arg1) { Task<int> task = new Task<int>(() => Method(arg0, arg1)); task.Start(); // Hot task (started task) should always be returned. return task; } internal static void Before() { } internal static void Continuation1(int arg) { } internal static void Continuation2(int arg) { } } Here Method() is a long running method doing some IO. Then MethodTask() wraps it into a Task and return that Task. Nothing special here. Await something in async method Since MethodTask() returns Task, let’s try to await it: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1); return result; } } Because we used await in the method, async must be put on the method. Now we get the first async method. According to the naming convenience, it is named MethodAsync. Of course a async method can be awaited. So we have a CallMethodAsync() to call MethodAsync(): internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); return result; } } After compilation, MethodAsync() and CallMethodAsync() becomes the same logic. This is the code of MethodAsyc(): internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { MethodAsyncStateMachine methodAsyncStateMachine = new MethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref methodAsyncStateMachine); return methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It just creates and starts a state machine, MethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Result; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaitor; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { if (this.State != 0) { this.awaitor = HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaitor.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaitor, ref this); return; } } else { this.State = -1; } this.Result = this.awaitor.GetResult(); } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); return; } this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.Result); } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine param0) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(param0); } } The generated code has been refactored, so it is readable and can be compiled. Several things can be observed here: The async modifier is gone, which shows, unlike other modifiers (e.g. static), there is no such IL/CLR level “async” stuff. It becomes a AsyncStateMachineAttribute. This is similar to the compilation of extension method. The generated state machine is very similar to the state machine of C# yield syntax sugar. The local variables (arg0, arg1, result) are compiled to fields of the state machine. The real code (await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1)) is compiled into MoveNext(): HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(). CallMethodAsync() will create and start its own state machine CallMethodAsyncStateMachine: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(CallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { CallMethodAsyncStateMachine callMethodAsyncStateMachine = new CallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref callMethodAsyncStateMachine); return callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } CallMethodAsyncStateMachine has the same logic as MethodAsyncStateMachine above. The detail of the state machine will be discussed soon. Now it is clear that: async /await is a C# language level syntax sugar. There is no difference to await a async method or a normal method. As long as a method returns Task, it is awaitable. State machine and continuation To demonstrate more details in the state machine, a more complex method is created: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; } } In this method: There are multiple awaits. There are code before the awaits, and continuation code after each await After compilation, this multi-await method becomes the same as above single-await methods: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine); return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It creates and starts one single state machine, MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Arg2; public int Arg3; public int ResultOfAwait1; public int ResultOfAwait2; public int ResultToReturn; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaiter; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { case -1: HelperMethods.Before(); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 0: this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 1; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 1: this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); this.ResultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.ResultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); } } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(stateMachine); } } Once again, the above state machine code is already refactored, but it still has a lot of things. More clean up can be done if we only keep the core logic, and the state machine can become very simple: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { // State: // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End public int State; public TaskCompletionSource<int> ResultToReturn; // int resultToReturn ... public int Arg0; // int Arg0 public int Arg1; // int arg1 public int Arg2; // int arg2 public int Arg3; // int arg3 public int ResultOfAwait1; // int resultOfAwait1 ... public int ResultOfAwait2; // int resultOfAwait2 ... private Task<int> currentTaskToAwait; /// <summary> /// Moves the state machine to its next state. /// </summary> public void MoveNext() // IAsyncStateMachine member. { try { switch (this.State) { // Original code is split by "await"s into "case"s: // case -1: // HelperMethods.Before(); // MethodAsync(Arg0, arg1); // case 0: // int resultOfAwait1 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); // MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); // case 1: // int resultOfAwait2 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); // int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // return resultToReturn; case -1: // -1 is begin. HelperMethods.Before(); // Code before 1st await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1); // 1st task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 0. this.State = 0; MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine that1 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => that1.MoveNext()); break; case 0: // Now 1st await is done. this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 1st await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); // Code after 1st await and before 2nd await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3); // 2nd task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 1. this.State = 1; MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine that2 = this; this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => that2.MoveNext()); break; case 1: // Now 2nd await is done. this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 2nd await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); // Code after 2nd await. int resultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; // Code after 2nd await. // End with resultToReturn. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetResult(resultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { // End with exception. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetException(exception); } } /// <summary> /// Configures the state machine with a heap-allocated replica. /// </summary> /// <param name="stateMachine">The heap-allocated replica.</param> [DebuggerHidden] public void SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) // IAsyncStateMachine member. { // No core logic. } } Only Task and TaskCompletionSource are involved in this version. And MultiCallMethodAsync() can be simplified to: [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, ResultToReturn = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(), // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext(); // Original code are moved into this method. return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.ResultToReturn.Task; } Now the whole state machine becomes very clean - it is about callback: Original code are split into pieces by “await”s, and each piece is put into each “case” in the state machine. Here the 2 awaits split the code into 3 pieces, so there are 3 “case”s. The “piece”s are chained by callback, that is done by Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(callback), or currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(callback) in the simplified code. A previous “piece” will end with a Task (which is to be awaited), when the task is done, it will callback the next “piece”. The state machine’s state works with the “case”s to ensure the code “piece”s executes one after another. Callback If we focus on the point of callback, the simplification  can go even further – the entire state machine can be completely purged, and we can just keep the code inside MoveNext(). Now MultiCallMethodAsync() becomes: internal static Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { TaskCompletionSource<int> taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(); try { // Oringinal code begins. HelperMethods.Before(); MethodAsync(arg0, arg1).ContinueWith(await1 => { int resultOfAwait1 = await1.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); MethodAsync(arg2, arg3).ContinueWith(await2 => { int resultOfAwait2 = await2.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // Oringinal code ends. taskCompletionSource.SetResult(resultToReturn); }); }); } catch (Exception exception) { taskCompletionSource.SetException(exception); } return taskCompletionSource.Task; } Please compare with the original async / await code: HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; Yeah that is the magic of C# async / await: Await is not to wait. In a await expression, a Task object will be return immediately so that execution is not blocked. The continuation code is compiled as that Task’s callback code. When that task is done, continuation code will execute. Please notice that many details inside the state machine are omitted for simplicity, like context caring, etc. If you want to have a detailed picture, please do check out the source code of AsyncTaskMethodBuilder and TaskAwaiter.

    Read the article

  • Safe non-tamperable URL component in Perl using symmetric encryption?

    - by Randal Schwartz
    OK, I'm probably just having a bad Monday, but I have the following need and I'm seeing lots of partial solutions but I'm sure I'm not the first person to need this, so I'm wondering if I'm missing the obvious. $client has 50 to 500 bytes worth of binary data that must be inserted into the middle of a URL and roundtrip to their customer's browser. Since it's part of the URL, we're up against the 1K "theoretical" limit of a GET URL. Also, $client doesn't want their customer decoding the data, or tampering with it without detection. $client would also prefer not to store anything server-side, so this must be completely standalone. Must be Perl code, and fast, in both encoding and decoding. I think the last step can be base64. But what are the steps for encryption and hashing that make the most sense?

    Read the article

  • What is a good dumbed-down, safe template system for PHP?

    - by Wilhelm
    (Summary: My users need to be able to edit the structure of their dynamically generated web pages without being able to do any damage.) Greetings, ladies and gentlemen. I am currently working on a service where customers from a specific demographic can create a specific type of web site and fill it with their own content. The system is written in PHP. Many of the users of this system wish to edit how their particular web site looks, or, more commonly, have a designer do it for them. Editing the CSS is fine and dandy, but sometimes that's not enough. Sometimes they want to shuffle the entire page structure around by editing the raw HTML of the dynamically created web pages. The templating system used by WordPress is, as far as I can see, perfect for my use. Except for one thing which is critically important. In addition to being able to edit how comments are displayed or where the menu goes, someone editing a template can have that template execute arbitrary PHP code. As the same codebase runs all these different sites, with all content in the same databse, allowing my users to run arbitrary code is clearly out of the question. So what I need, is a dumbed-down, idiot-proof templating system where my users can edit most of the page structure on their own, pulling in the dynamic sections wherever, without being able to even echo 1+1;. Observe the following psuedocode: <!DOCTYPE html> <title><!-- $title --></title> <!-- header() --> <!-- menu() --> <div>Some random custom crap added by the user.</div> <!-- page_content() --> That's the degree of power I'd like to grant my users. They don't need to do their own loops or calculations or anything. Just include my variables and functions and leave the rest to me. I'm sure I'm not the only person on the planet that needs something like this. Do you know of any ready-made templating systems I could use? Thanks in advance for your reply.

    Read the article

  • C# - Which is more efficient and thread safe? static or instant classes?

    - by Soni Ali
    Consider the following two scenarios: //Data Contract public class MyValue { } Scenario 1: Using a static helper class. public class Broker { private string[] _userRoles; public Broker(string[] userRoles) { this._userRoles = userRoles; } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return BrokerHelper.GetValues(this._userRoles); } } static class BrokerHelper { static Dictionary<string, MyValue> _values = new Dictionary<string, MyValue>(); public static MyValue[] GetValues(string[] rolesAllowed) { return FilterForRoles(_values, rolesAllowed); } } Scenario 2: Using an instance class. public class Broker { private BrokerService _service; public Broker(params string[] userRoles) { this._service = new BrokerService(userRoles); } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return _service.GetValues(); } } class BrokerService { private Dictionary<string, MyValue> _values; private string[] _userRoles; public BrokerService(string[] userRoles) { this._userRoles = userRoles; this._values = new Dictionary<string, MyValue>(); } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return FilterForRoles(_values, _userRoles); } } Which of the [Broker] scenarios will scale best if used in a web environment with about 100 different roles and over a thousand users. NOTE: Feel free to sugest any alternative approach.

    Read the article

  • Best open source alternative for MS Visual Source Safe?

    - by afsharm
    We are leaving VSS for TFS or any other alternatives. I'm the one who persists to go for an open source alternative like SVN. Now I'm searching for a good open source Version Control regarding following aspects: We are in love with open source movement and cross-platform. Could it be possible to use it with Mono, SharpDevelop and Express editions of VS instead of Visual Studio itself? What about backup? Is it integrated with VS without serious problems? Any API or command prompt access? Please notice I've read following previous texts about it but still need more help: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/690766/vss-or-svn-for-a-net-project http://stackoverflow.com/questions/61959/tfs-vs-open-source-alternatives http://stackoverflow.com/questions/44588/how-to-convince-a-company-to-switch-their-source-control

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to lock a static variable in a non-static class?

    - by Dario Solera
    I've got a class that manages a shared resource. Now, since access to the resource depends on many parameters, this class is instantiated and disposed several times during the normal execution of the program. The shared resource does not support concurrency, so some kind of locking is needed. The first thing that came into my mind is having a static instance in the class, and acquire locks on it, like this: // This thing is static! static readonly object MyLock = new object(); // This thing is NOT static! MyResource _resource = ...; public DoSomeWork() { lock(MyLock) { _resource.Access(); } } Does that make sense, or would you use another approach?

    Read the article

  • 1 oracle schema support large reques per day , is this safe ?

    - by Hlex
    I 'm java system designer. As we have large project to do tightly, Those projects are java api without webpage. I design to create general flow engine to support all project. This idea use 1 oracle schema , having general transaction table . And others control routing table. They all nearly complete. But DBA Team concern that he is suffered to maintain very large request to 1 schema. 1 reason is if there are problem is some table. He must offline tablespace to fix. This is problem because all project will be affected. I try to convince by split data of each table to partition by project_code & "month number to delete" . Eaxmple partition: PROJ1_05 PROJ1_06 PROJ1_07 PROJ2_05 PROJ2_06 PROJ2_07 and all transaction table will store on its partition. So, If there are problem on any part of tablespace then he should offline some partition and another project with use same table should able to service Transaction per day should around 10Meg Record per day. Is this a good idea? If I must use 1 schema, what is strategy to do? Do you have any comment?

    Read the article

  • Garbage Collector not doing its job. Memory Consumption = 1.5GB & OutOFMemory Exception.

    - by imageWorker
    I'm working with images (each of size = 5MB). The following code extract some information from each image that is present in the given directory. I'm getting out of memory exception. The size of the process is around (1.5GB). I don't know why garbage collector is not freeing memory. I even tried adding GC.Collect() as last line of foreach loop. Still I'm getting 'OutOFMemory' using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Threading; using System.IO; using System.Drawing; using System.Drawing.Imaging; namespace TrainSVM { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { FileStream fs = new FileStream("dg.train",FileMode.OpenOrCreate,FileAccess.Write); StreamWriter sw = new StreamWriter(fs); String[] filePathArr = Directory.GetFiles("E:\\images\\"); foreach (string filePath in filePathArr) { if (filePath.Contains("lmn")) { sw.Write("1 "); Console.Write("1 "); } else { sw.Write("1 "); Console.Write("1 "); } Bitmap originalBMP = new Bitmap(filePath); /***********************/ Bitmap imageBody; ImageBody.ImageBody im = new ImageBody.ImageBody(originalBMP); imageBody = im.GetImageBody(-1); /* white coat */ Bitmap whiteCoatBitmap = Rgb2Hsi.Rgb2Hsi.GetHuePlane(imageBody); float WhiteCoatPixelPercentage = Rgb2Hsi.Rgb2Hsi.GetWhiteCoatPixelPercentage(whiteCoatBitmap); //Console.Write("whiteDone\t"); sw.Write("1:" + WhiteCoatPixelPercentage + " "); Console.Write("1:" + WhiteCoatPixelPercentage + " "); /******************/ Quaternion.Quaternion qtr = new Quaternion.Quaternion(-15); Bitmap yellowCoatBMP = qtr.processImage(imageBody); //yellowCoatBMP.Save("yellowCoat.bmp"); float yellowCoatPixelPercentage = qtr.GetYellowCoatPixelPercentage(yellowCoatBMP); //Console.Write("yellowCoatDone\t"); sw.Write("2:" + yellowCoatPixelPercentage + " "); Console.Write("2:" + yellowCoatPixelPercentage + " "); /**********************/ Bitmap balckPatchBitmap = BlackPatchDetection.BlackPatchDetector.MarkBlackPatches(imageBody); float BlackPatchPixelPercentage = BlackPatchDetection.BlackPatchDetector.BlackPatchPercentage; //Console.Write("balckPatchDone\n"); sw.Write("3:" + BlackPatchPixelPercentage + "\n"); Console.Write("3:" + BlackPatchPixelPercentage + "\n"); balckPatchBitmap.Dispose(); yellowCoatBMP.Dispose(); whiteCoatBitmap.Dispose(); originalBMP.Dispose(); sw.Flush(); } sw.Dispose(); fs.Dispose(); } } }

    Read the article

  • How to make safe cast using generics in C#?

    - by TN
    I want to implement a generic method on a generic class which would allow to cast safely, see example: public class Foo<T> : IEnumerable<T> { ... public IEnumerable<R> SafeCast<R>() where T : R { return this.Select(item => (R)item); } } However, the compiler tells me that Foo<T>.SafeCast<R>() does not define parameter 'T'. I understand this message that I cannot specify a constraint on T in the method since it is not defined in the method. But how can I specify an inverse constraint?

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to catch an access violation in this scenario?

    - by Eloff
    I've read a lot, including here on SO that suggests this is a very bad idea in general and that the only thing you can do safely is exit the program. I'm not sure that this is true. This is for a pooling memory allocator that hands off large allocations to malloc. During pool_free() a pointer needs to be checked it it belongs to a pool or was allocated with malloc. By rounding the address down to the nearest 1MB boundary, I get a pointer to the beginning of a block of memory in the pool, or undefined if malloc was used. In the first case I can easily verify that the block of memory belongs to the pool, but, if it does not I will either fail this verification, or I will get an access violation (note that this is a read-only process). Could I not catch this with SEH (Windows) or handle the signal (POSIX) and simply treat it as a failed verification? (i.e. this is only possible if malloc was used, so pass the ptr to free())

    Read the article

  • How to make safe frequent DataSource switches for AbstractRoutingDataSource?

    - by serg555
    I implemented Dynamic DataSource Routing for Spring+Hibernate according to this article. I have several databases with same structure and I need to select which db will run each specific query. Everything works fine on localhost, but I am worrying about how this will hold up in real web site environment. They are using some static context holder to determine which datasource to use: public class CustomerContextHolder { private static final ThreadLocal<CustomerType> contextHolder = new ThreadLocal<CustomerType>(); public static void setCustomerType(CustomerType customerType) { Assert.notNull(customerType, "customerType cannot be null"); contextHolder.set(customerType); } public static CustomerType getCustomerType() { return (CustomerType) contextHolder.get(); } public static void clearCustomerType() { contextHolder.remove(); } } It is wrapped inside some ThreadLocal container, but what exactly does that mean? What will happen when two web requests call this piece of code in parallel: CustomerContextHolder.setCustomerType(CustomerType.GOLD); //<another user will switch customer type here to CustomerType.SILVER in another request> List<Item> goldItems = catalog.getItems(); Is every web request wrapped into its own thread in Spring MVC? Will CustomerContextHolder.setCustomerType() changes be visible to other web users? My controllers have synchronizeOnSession=true. How to make sure that nobody else will switch datasource until I run required query for current user? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Javascript form validation on client side without server side - is it safe?

    - by Vitali Ponomar
    Supose I have some form with javascript client side validation and no server side validation. If user disable javascript in his browser there will no be submit button so he can not send me any data without js enabled. But I do not know is there any way to change my validation instructions from client browser so he could send me untrusted data and make some damage to my database. Thanks in advance and sorry for my (possibly) obvious question!!!

    Read the article

  • How to keep multiple connectionString passwords safe, separate, and easy to deploy?

    - by Funka
    I know there are plenty of questions here already about this topic (I've read through as many as I could find), but I haven't yet been able to figure out how best to satisfy my particular criteria. Here are the goals: The ASP.NET application will run on a few different web servers, including localhost workstations for development. This means encrypting web.config using a machine key is out. The application will decide which connection string to use based on the server name (using a switch statement). For example, "localhost" and "dev.example.com" will use the DevDatabaseConnectionString, "test.example.com" will use the TestDatabaseConnectionString, and "www.example.com" will use the ProdDatabaseConnectionString, for example. Ideally, the exact same executables and web.config should be able to run on any of these environments, without needing to tailor or configure each environment separately every time that we deploy (something that seems like it would be easy to forget/mess up one day during a deployment, which is why we moved away from having just one connectionstring that has to be changed on each target). Deployment is currently accomplished via FTP. We will not have command-line access to the production web server. This means using aspnet_regiis.exe is out. (I could run on localhost, however, if this would still work.) We would prefer to not have to recompile the application whenever a password changes, so using web.config (or db.config or whatever) seems to make the most sense. A developer should not be able to decrypt the production database password. If a developer checks the source code out onto their localhost laptop (which would determine that it should be using the DevDatabaseConnectionString, remember?) and the laptop gets lost or stolen, it should not be possible to get at the other connection strings. Thus, having a single RSA private key to un-encrypt all three passwords cannot be considered. (Contrary to #3 above, it does seem like we'd need to have three separate key files if we went this route; these could be installed once per machine, and should the wrong key file get deployed to the wrong server, the worst that should happen is that the app can't decrypt anything---and not allow the wrong host to access the wrong database!) I know this is probably a subjective question (asking for a "best" way to do something), but given the criteria I've mentioned, I'm hoping that a single best answer will indeed arise. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Safe executing shell scripts; escaping vars before execution.

    - by Kirzilla
    Hello, Let's imagine that we have a simple php script that should get ssh_host, ssh_username, ssh_port from $_GET array and try to connect using this parameters to SSH. $port = escapeshellcmd($_GET['ssh_port']); $host = escapeshellcmd($_GET['ssh_host']); $username = escapeshellcmd($_GET['ssh_username']); $answer = shell_exec("ssh -p " . $port . " " . $user . "@" . $host); Is escapeshellcmd() enough or I need something more tricky? Or maybe I should use escapeshellarg() in this example? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • MySQL ALTER TABLE on very large table - is it safe to run it?

    - by Timothy Mifsud
    I have a MySQL database with one particular MyISAM table of above 4 million rows. I update this table about once a week with about 2000 new rows. After updating, I then perform the following statement: ALTER TABLE x ORDER BY PK DESC i.e. I order the table in question by the primary key field in descending order. This has not given me any problems on my development machine (Windows with 3GB memory), but, even though 3 times I have tried it successfully on the production Linux server (with 512MB RAM - and achieving the resulted sorted table in about 6 minutes each time), the last time I tried it I had to stop the query after about 30 minutes and rebuild the database from a backup. I have started to wonder whether a 512MB server can cope with that statement (on such a large table) as I have read that a temporary table is created to perform the ALTER TABLE command?! And, if it can be safely run, what should be the expected time for the alteration of the table? Thanks in advance, Tim

    Read the article

  • In a class with no virtual methods or superclass, is it safe to assume (address of first member vari

    - by Jeremy Friesner
    Hi all, I made a private API that assumes that the address of the first member-object in the class will be the same as the class's this-pointer... that way the member-object can trivially derive a pointer to the object that it is a member of, without having to store a pointer explicitly. Given that I am willing to make sure that the container class won't inherit from any superclass, won't have any virtual methods, and that the member-object that does this trick will be the first member object declared, will that assumption hold valid for any C++ compiler, or do I need to use the offsetof() operator (or similar) to guarantee correctness? To put it another way, the code below does what I expect under g++, but will it work everywhere? class MyContainer { public: MyContainer() {} ~MyContainer() {} // non-virtual dtor private: class MyContained { public: MyContained() {} ~MyContained() {} // Given that the only place Contained objects are declared is m_contained // (below), will this work as expected on any C++ compiler? MyContainer * GetPointerToMyContainer() { return reinterpret_cast<MyContainer *>(this); } }; MyContained m_contained; // MUST BE FIRST MEMBER ITEM DECLARED IN MyContainer int m_foo; // other member items may be declared after m_contained float m_bar; };

    Read the article

  • A problem with assertRaises function in Python

    - by anton.k.
    Hello,guys! I am trying to run the following test self.assertRaises(Exception,lambda: unit_test.testBasic()) where test.testBasic() is class IsPrimeTest(unittest.TestCase): def assertRaises(self,exception,callable,*args,**kwargs): print('dfdf') temp = callable super().assertRaises(exception,temp,*args,**kwargs) def testBasic_helper(self): self.failIf(is_prime(2)) self.assertTrue(is_prime(1)) where prime is a function,and but in self.assertRaises(Exception,lambda: unit_test.testBasic()) the lambda function doesnt throws an exception after the test def testBasic_helper(self): self.failIf(is_prime(2)) self.assertTrue(is_prime(1)) fails Can somebody offers a solution to the problem?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >