Search Results

Search found 32297 results on 1292 pages for 'method invocation'.

Page 115/1292 | < Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >

  • How do I unit test the methods in a method object?

    - by Sancho
    I've performed the "Replace Method with Method Object" refactoring described by Beck. Now, I have a class with a "run()" method and a bunch of member functions that decompose the computation into smaller units. How do I test those member functions? My first idea is that my unit tests be basically copies of the "run()" method (with different initializations), but with assertions between each call to the member functions to check the state of the computation. (I'm using Python and the unittest module.)

    Read the article

  • How can I check if an object has a specific method?

    - by Ghommey
    I want to use a method of an object. Like $myObject->helloWorld(). However there are a couple of methods so I loop through an array of method names and call the method like this: my $methodName ="helloWorld"; $myObject->$methodNames; This works quite nice but some objects don't have all methods. How can I tell whether $myObject has a method called helloWorld or not?

    Read the article

  • Create a thread in xna Update method to find path?

    - by Dan
    I am trying to create a separate thread for my enemy's A* pathfinder which will give me a list of points to get to the player. I have placed the thread in the update method of my enemy. However this seems to cause jittering in the game every-time the thread is called. I have tried calling just the method and this works fine. Is there any way I can sort this out so that I can have the pathfinder on its own thread? Do I need to remove the thread start from the update and start it in the constructor? Is there any way this can work. Here is the code at the moment: bool running = false; bool threadstarted; System.Threading.Thread thread; public void update() { if (running == false && threadstarted == false) { thread = new System.Threading.Thread(PathThread); //thread.Priority = System.Threading.ThreadPriority.Lowest; thread.IsBackground = true; thread.Start(startandendobj); //PathThread(startandendobj); threadstarted = true; } } public void PathThread(object Startandend) { object[] Startandendarray = (object[])Startandend; Point startpoint = (Point)Startandendarray[0]; Point endpoint = (Point)Startandendarray[1]; bool runnable = true; // Path find from 255, 255 to 0,0 on the map foreach(Tile tile in Map) { if(tile.Color == Color.Red) { if (tile.Position.Contains(endpoint)) { runnable = false; } } } if(runnable == true) { running = true; Pathfinder p = new Pathfinder(Map); pathway = p.FindPath(startpoint, endpoint); running = false; threadstarted = false; } }

    Read the article

  • Should static parameters in an API be part of each method?

    - by jschoen
    I am currently creating a library that is a wrapper for an online API. The obvious end goal is to make it as easy for others to use as possible. As such I am trying to determine the best approach when it comes to common parameters for the API. In my current situation there are 3 (consumer key, consumer secret, and and authorization token). They are essentially needed in every API call. My question is should I make these 3 parameters required for each method or is there a better way. I see my current options as being: Place the parameters in each method call public ApiObject callMethod(String consumerKey, String consumerSecret, String token, ...) This one seems reasonable, but seems awfully repetitive to me. Create a singleton class that the user must initialize before calling any api methods. This seems wrong, and would essentially limit them to accessing one account at a time via the API (which may be reasonable, I dunno). Make them place them in a properties file in their project. That way I can load the properties that way and store them. This seems similar to the singleton to me, but they would not have to explicitly call something to initialize these values. Is there another option I am not seeing, or a more common practice in this situation that I should be following?

    Read the article

  • How and what should I be (unit) testing for in this method?

    - by user460667
    I am relatively new to unit testing and have a query about what/how I should be testing a certain method. For the following (psudo-c#) method I have created (not a real-life example) what would you test for? Initially, my thoughts would be to test the output with variations on the dictionary of form fields, e.g. valid, invalid, missing values. However I also wonder how you would test to make sure the object values have been changed to the correct value and that the correct email message was attempted to be sent (obviously both services could/would be mocked). I hope what I am asking makes sense, I appreciate this is a subjective question and the answers may be 'it depends' ;) public bool ProcessInput(Dictionary<string, string> formFields, ObjService objService, EmailService emailService) { try { // Get my object id int objId; if(!int.TryParse(formField["objId"], out objId) { return false; } // Update my object - would you validate the save against a DB or a mocked inmemory db? var myObj = objService.Find(objId); myObj.Name = formField["objName"]; objService.Save(myObj); // Send an email - how would you test to make sure content, recipient, etc was correct? emailService.SendEmail(formField("email"), "Hello World"); return true; } catch(Exception ex) { return false; } }

    Read the article

  • Generic Singleton Façade design pattern

    - by Paul
    Hi I try write singleton façade pattern with generics. I have one problem, how can I call method from generic variable. Something like this: T1 t1 = new T1(); //call method from t1 t1.Method(); In method SingletonFasadeMethod I have compile error: Error 1 'T1' does not contain a definition for 'Method' and no extension method 'Method' accepting a first argument of type 'T1' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) Any advace? Thank, I am beginner in C#. All code is here: namespace GenericSingletonFasade { public interface IMyInterface { string Method(); } internal class ClassA : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return " Calling MethodA "; } } internal class ClassB : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return " Calling MethodB "; } } internal class ClassC : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return "Calling MethodC"; } } internal class ClassD : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return "Calling MethodD"; } } public class SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> where T1 : class,new() where T2 : class,new() where T3 : class,new() { private static T1 t1; private static T2 t2; private static T3 t3; private SingletonFasade() { t1 = new T1(); t2 = new T2(); t3 = new T3(); } class SingletonCreator { static SingletonCreator() { } internal static readonly SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> uniqueInstace = new SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3>(); } public static SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> UniqueInstace { get { return SingletonCreator.uniqueInstace; } } public string SingletonFasadeMethod() { //Problem is here return t1.Method() + t2.Method() + t3.Method(); } } } I use this for my problem. public class SingletonFasade<T1, T2, T3> where T1 : class, IMyInterface, new() where T2 : class, IMyInterface, new() where T3 : class, IMyInterface, new() {//...} Is any solution without Interfaces ??

    Read the article

  • iPhone: should initWithNibName:bundle: method be deleted from UIViewController class if not used?

    - by Scott Pendleton
    I notice that this method is provided in UIViewController .m files, but is commented out: - (id)initWithNibName:(NSString *)nibNameOrNil bundle:(NSBundle *)nibBundleOrNil I had been leaving that method commented out, or even deleting it. But then I looked at this line inside the method: if (self = [super initWithNibName:nibNameOrNil bundle:nibBundleOrNil]) I assume that if it were truly important for self to be set equal to super, then Apple would not have the method be commented out by default. On the other hand, if I do need to do some customization in that method, why do I need to set self = super? What's the best practice, and why?

    Read the article

  • How to set the HomeScreen image without using method HomeScreen.setBackgroundImage(url)?

    - by Richa
    Hello, Can anyone help me out as I am looking for a method that helps me to set the wallpaper using the images from the Pictures folder on Blackberry Curve 8310. I found one method HomeScreen.setBackground(url), but it doen't works on Blackberry Curve. I am using Operating system 4.5 and this method is useable with operating systems 4.7 & above So, i want to know is their any method for blackberry curve to set the wallpaper or is their any operating system that supports the above method? Kindly reply Thanks a lot Best Regards, Richa Bhatia

    Read the article

  • What are the pros/cons to these 2 ways of defining parameters for a web service method

    - by Antony Scott
    I have an existing web service I need to expand, but it has not gone into production yet. So, I am free to change the contracts as I see fit. But I am not sure of the best way to define the methods. I am leaning towards Method 2 for no other reason than I cannot think of good names to give the parameters classes! Are there any major disadvantages to using Method 2 over Method 1? Method 1 [DataContract(Namespace = Constants.ServiceNamespace)] public class MyParameters { [DataMember(Order = 1, IsRequired = true)] public int CompanyID { get; set; } [DataMember(Order = 2, IsRequired = true)] public string Filter { get; set; } } [ServiceContract(Namespace = Constants.ServiceNamespace)] public interface IMyService { [OperationContract, FaultContract(MyServiceFault)] MyResult MyMethod(MyParameters params); } Method 2 public interface IMyService { [OperationContract, FaultContract(MyServiceFault)] MyResult MyMethod(int companyID, string filter); }

    Read the article

  • How do you call a method for an Objective-C object's superclass from elsewhere?

    - by executor21
    If you're implementing a subclass, you can, within your implementation, explicitly call the superclass's method, even if you've overridden that method, i.e.: [self overriddenMethod]; //calls the subclass's method [super overriddenMethod]; //calls the superclass's method What if you want to call the superclass's method from somewhere outside the subclass's implementation, i.e.: [[object super] overriddenMethod]; //crashes Is this even possible? And by extension, is it possible to go up more than one level within the implementation, i.e.: [[super super] overriddenMethod]; //will this work?

    Read the article

  • How to release a string created inside a method in iphone?

    - by Warrior
    I have declared a local string inside the method.I am releasing the string inside the same method.I found my code crashing if release that object.If i dont release the string,code runs successfully.I have called that method in viewdidappear so that method is called while pushing and poping.Nothing gets printed in the console. Here is my code -(void)appendString{ NSString *locStr = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:@""]; for (int i=0;i<[result count]; i++) { locStr=[locStr stringByAppendingFormat:@"%@",[result objectAtIndex:i]]; } [str setString:locStr]; [locStr release]; } I am calling the "appendString" method from "viewDidAppear"."str" is a NSMutable string declared in .h class.How should i release the "locStr" .Please help me out

    Read the article

  • Generic Singleton Fasade design pattern

    - by Paul
    Hi I try write singleton fasede pattern with generics. I have one problem, how can I call method from generic variable. Something like this: T1 t1 = new T1(); //call method from t1 t1.Method(); In method SingletonFasadeMethod I have compile error: Error 1 'T1' does not contain a definition for 'Method' and no extension method 'Method' accepting a first argument of type 'T1' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) Any advace? Thank, I am beginner in C#. All code is here: namespace GenericSingletonFasade { public interface IMyInterface { string Method(); } internal class ClassA : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return " Calling MethodA "; } } internal class ClassB : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return " Calling MethodB "; } } internal class ClassC : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return "Calling MethodC"; } } internal class ClassD : IMyInterface { public string Method() { return "Calling MethodD"; } } public class SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> where T1 : class,new() where T2 : class,new() where T3 : class,new() { private static T1 t1; private static T2 t2; private static T3 t3; private SingletonFasade() { t1 = new T1(); t2 = new T2(); t3 = new T3(); } class SingletonCreator { static SingletonCreator() { } internal static readonly SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> uniqueInstace = new SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3>(); } public static SingletonFasade<T1,T2,T3> UniqueInstace { get { return SingletonCreator.uniqueInstace; } } public string SingletonFasadeMethod() { //Problem is here return t1.Method() + t2.Method() + t3.Method(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Smarter println that shows the depth in the stack

    - by Hectoret
    I am using System.out.println in my code to track the execution of a program and get some useful output. This creates results like this in the console: Main function. Program starts. Method getArea. Getting values Method getSide. Side is 6 Method getArea. First value is 6 Method getSide. Side is 8 Method getArea. Second value is 8 Method getArea. Area is 48 Main function. The final area is 48 I would like to create tha method, which adds a space in front of the output every time the code goes deeper in the method call stack. For example, the same code but instead of using System.out.println, now with Misc.smartPrintln: Main function. Program starts. Method getArea. Getting values Method getSide. Side is 6 Method getArea. First value is 6 Method getSide. Side is 8 Method getArea. Second value is 8 Method getArea. Area is 48 Main function. The final area is 48 The method would have this definition: public static void smartPrintln(String string); I don't know how to implement this functionality. Any ideas how to solve this? And, could the use of a logger offer this functionality?

    Read the article

  • Where and why JVM checks that the return type of entry method main(String args[]) is void and not an

    - by akjain
    I will try to answer both, please correct me if I am wrong: Where: If a static method is being called using Classname.method() or using reflection then it doesn’t matter even if you change the return type of the calling method, the same method will still be called. So JVM probably checks this in one of the native methods of jvm.cpp methodHandle m (THREAD, init_klass-find_method(vmSymbols::object_initializer_name(), vmSymbols::void_method_signature())); if (m.is_null()) { ------ THROW_MSG_0 ……….. Why: Although it’s of useless to return a value from main, as java does not do anything with it but if we try to change the return type of main to int for example, JVM throws public static int main(String[] args) { return 1; } java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: main Exception in thread "main" So may be Java mandates the use of same signature for entry method main() to maintain a symmetry in all Java programs written.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to link a method marked with MethodImplOptions.InternalCall to its implementation?

    - by adrianbanks
    In trying to find the possible cause of an exception, I'm following a code path using Reflector. I've got deeper and deeper, but ended up at a method call that looks like: [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.InternalCall)] private extern void SomeMethod(int someParameter); This markup on the method tells the framework to call a C++ function somewhere. Is there any way to find out what method actually gets called, and in turn what else is likely to be called? NB: I don't really want to see the source code of this method, I just want to know the possible things that could throw the exception I am seeing that originates out of this method call.

    Read the article

  • Shoud a method that waits for a change of state be const?

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    In a multithreaded scenario, I have a method like this: bool WaitForChange( time_duration WaitTime ) const; This method waits either until the state of the object has changed and returns true, or until the timeout times out (how do you say that?) and returns false. My intuition is, that const is to protect against unwanted side-effects of the method itself, so this is fine. But then again, some user might think that the state of the could not have changed, since the method is declared const. Is that user stupid, or should I make the method non-const in order to avoid confusion?

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection in constructor, method or just use a static class instead?

    - by gaetanm
    What is the best between: $dispatcher = new Dispatcher($request); $dispatcher->dispatch(); and $dispatcher = new Dispatcher(); $dispatcher->dispatch($request); or even Dispatcher::dispatch($request); Knowing that only one method of this class uses the $request instance. I naturally tend to the last solution because the class have no other states, but by I feel that it may not be the best OOP solution.

    Read the article

  • Which is the best method to install/uninstall apps in Ubuntu?

    - by Mujahid
    While apps can be installed with the apt-get command, Synaptic Package Manager or Ubuntu Software Centre, can anybody throw some light on which is the best method? I recently installed kubuntu-desktop and as a result even Ubuntu Software Centre showed that it was installed. When I tried uninstalling it with Ubuntu Software Centre, the package didn't actually uninstall until I used Synaptic once again.

    Read the article

  • Do any OO languages support a mechanism to guarantee an overriden method will call the base?

    - by Aaron Anodide
    I think this might be a useful language feature and was wondering if any languages already support it. The idea is if you have: class C virtual F statement1 statement2 and class D inherits C override F statement1 statement2 C.F() There would be a keyword applied to C.F() such that removing the last line of code above would cause a compiler error because it's saying "This method can be overridden but the implementation here needs to run no matter what".

    Read the article

  • What is the most appropriate testing method in this scenario?

    - by Daniel Bruce
    I'm writing some Objective-C apps (for OS X/iOS) and I'm currently implementing a service to be shared across them. The service is intended to be fairly self-contained. For the current functionality I'm envisioning there will be only one method that clients will call to do a fairly complicated series of steps both using private methods on the class, and passing data through a bunch of "data mangling classes" to arrive at an end result. The gist of the code is to fetch a log of changes, stored in a service-internal data store, that has occurred since a particular time, simplify the log to only include the last applicable change for each object, attach the serialized values for the affected objects and return this all to the client. My question then is, how do I unit-test this entry point method? Obviously, each class would have thorough unit tests to ensure that their functionality works as expected, but the entry point seems harder to "disconnect" from the rest of the world. I would rather not send in each of these internal classes IoC-style, because they're small and are only made classes to satisfy the single-responsibility principle. I see a couple possibilities: Create a "private" interface header for the tests with methods that call the internal classes and test each of these methods separately. Then, to test the entry point, make a partial mock of the service class with these private methods mocked out and just test that the methods are called with the right arguments. Write a series of fatter tests for the entry point without mocking out anything, testing the entire functionality in one go. This looks, to me, more like "integration testing" and seems brittle, but it does satisfy the "only test via the public interface" principle. Write a factory that returns these internal services and take that in the initializer, then write a factory that returns mocked versions of them to use in tests. This has the downside of making the construction of the service annoying, and leaks internal details to the client. Write a "private" initializer that take these services as extra parameters, use that to provide mocked services, and have the public initializer back-end to this one. This would ensure that the client code still sees the easy/pretty initializer and no internals are leaked. I'm sure there's more ways to solve this problem that I haven't thought of yet, but my question is: what's the most appropriate approach according to unit testing best practices? Especially considering I would prefer to write this test-first, meaning I should preferably only create these services as the code indicates a need for them.

    Read the article

  • Should I have a separate method for Update(), Insert(), etc., or have a generic Query() that would be able to handle all of these?

    - by Prayos
    I'm currently trying to write a class library for a connection to a database. Looking over it, there are several different types of queries: Select From, Update, Insert, etc. My question is, what is the best practice for writing these queries in a C# application? Should I have a separate method for each of them(i.e. Update(), Insert()), or have a generic Query() that would be able to handle all of these? Thanks for any and all help!

    Read the article

  • quartz.net - Can I not add a callback delegate method to JobExecutionContext?

    - by Greg
    Hi, BACKGROUND - I have a synchroisation function within my MainForm class. It gets called manually when the user pushes the SYNC button. I want to also call this synchroisation function when the scheduler triggers too, so effectively want SchedulerJob:IJob.Execute() method to be able to call it. QUESTION - How do I access the MainForm.Sychronization() method from within the SchedulerJob:IJob.Execute() method? I tried creating a delegate for this method in the MainForm class and getting it added via jobDetail.JobDataMap. However when I try I'm not sure that JobDataMap has a method to pull out a Delegate type??? private void Schedule(MainForm.SyncDelegate _syncNow) { var jobDetail = new JobDetail("MainJob", null, typeof(SchedulerJob)); jobDetail.JobDataMap["CallbackMethod"] = _syncNow; // Trigger Setup var trigger = new CronTrigger("MainTrigger"); string expression = GetCronExpression(); trigger.CronExpressionString = expression; trigger.StartTimeUtc = DateTime.Now.ToUniversalTime(); // Schedule Job & Trigger _scheduler.ScheduleJob(jobDetail, trigger); } public class SchedulerJob : IJob { public SchedulerJob() { } public void Execute(JobExecutionContext context) { JobDataMap dataMap = context.JobDetail.JobDataMap; MainForm.SyncDelegate CallbackFunction = dataMap.getDelegate["CallbackMethod"]; **// THIS METHOD DOESN'T EXIST - getDelegate()** CallbackFunction(); } } thanks

    Read the article

  • What's keeping this timer in scope? The anonymous method?

    - by Andy
    Ok, So I have a method which fires when someone clicks on our Icon in a silverlight application, seen below: private void Logo_MouseLeftButtonUp(object sender, MouseButtonEventArgs e) { e.Handled = true; ShowInfo(true); DispatcherTimer autoCloseTimer = new DispatcherTimer(); autoCloseTimer.Interval = new TimeSpan(0, 0, 10); autoCloseTimer.Tick +=new EventHandler((timerSender,args) => { autoCloseTimer.Stop(); ShowInfo(false); }); autoCloseTimer.Start(); } Whats meant to happen is that the method ShowInfo() opens up a box with the company info in and the dispatch timer auto closes it after said timespan. And this all works... But what I'm not sure about is because the dispatch timer is a local var, after the Logo_MouseLeftButtonUp method finishes, what is there to keep the dispatch timer referenced and not availible for GC collection before the anonymous method is fired? Is it the reference to the ShowInfo() method in the anonymous method? Just feels like some thing I should understand deeper as I can imagine with using events etc it can be very easy to create a leak with something like this. Hope this all makes sense! Andy.

    Read the article

  • When is factory method better than simple factory and vice versa?

    - by Bruce
    Hi all Working my way through the Head First Design Patterns book. I believe I understand the simple factory and the factory method, but I'm having trouble seeing what advantages factory method brings over simple factory. If an object A uses a simple factory to create its B objects, then clients can create it like this: A a = new A(new BFactory()); whereas if an object uses a factory method, a client can create it like this: A a = new ConcreteA(); // ConcreteA contains a method for instantiating the same Bs that the BFactory above creates, with the method hardwired into the subclass of A, ConcreteA. So in the case of the simple factory, clients compose A with a B factory, whereas with the factory method, the client chooses the appropriate subclass for the types of B it wants. There really doesn't seem to be much to choose between them. Either you have to choose which BFactory you want to compose A with, or you have to choose the right subclass of A to give you the Bs. Under what circumstances is one better than the other? Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • How to differentiate between method and function in a decorator?

    - by defnull
    I want to write a decorator that acts differently depending on whether it is applied to a function or to a method. def some_decorator(func): if the_magic_happens_here(func): # <---- Point of interest print 'Yay, found a method ^_^ (unbound jet)' else: print 'Meh, just an ordinary function :/' return func class MyClass(object): @some_decorator def method(self): pass @some_decorator def function(): pass I tried inspect.ismethod(), inspect.ismethoddescriptor() and inspect.isfunction() but no luck. The problem is that a method actually is neither a bound nor an unbound method but an ordinary function as long as it is accessed from within the class body. What I really want to do is to delay the actions of the decorator to the point the class is actually instantiated because I need the methods to be callable in their instance scope. For this, I want to mark methods with an attribute and later search for these attributes when the .__new__() method of MyClass is called. The classes for which this decorator should work are required to inherit from a class that is under my control. You can use that fact for your solution. In the case of a normal function the delay is not necessary and the decorator should take action immediately. That is why I wand to differentiate these two cases.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >