Search Results

Search found 30213 results on 1209 pages for 'object serialization'.

Page 12/1209 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Object to Network serialization - with an existing protocol

    - by cpf
    I'm writing a client for a server program written in C++. As is not unusual, all the networking protocol is in a format where packets can be easily memcopied into/out of a C++ structure (1 byte packet code, then different arrangements per packet type). I could do the same thing in C#, but is there an easier way, especially considering lots of the data is fixed-length char arrays that I want to play with as strings? Or should I just suck it up and convert types as needed? I've looked at using the ISerializable interface, but it doesnt look as low level as is required.

    Read the article

  • .NET XML Serialization, possibly to use a different method name than PropertySpecified for ignoring

    - by Lasse V. Karlsen
    I have a bunch of classes that I intend to serialize in order to transport over a webservice call. These classes already have properties that return whether a given "real" property has a value or not, that is ingrained in a lot of code of our product. Is it possible, for instance through attributes, for me to specify that each "real" property should be included if a specified other property returns true, but not one that is called RealPropertyNameSpecified? ie. for instance if I have this class: [XmlType("test")] public class TestClass { [XmlIgnore] public bool NameHasGotAValue { get; set; } [XmlElement("name")] public string Name { get; set; } } Is it possible for me to use the NameHasGotAValue as the "*Specified" method for the Name property, or is my only option to either rename NameHasGotAValue, add a NameSpecified method, or implement IXmlSerializable?

    Read the article

  • Jquery Serialization not working

    - by RussP
    Have a simple form (only extract fields here) but for some reason the JQserilization is not working; looks fine in alert() but only the first form field gets posts. Suggestions please - thanks in advance Form: <form id="neweventform" method="post" action=""> <div class="grid_4 alpha">Setup date *</div> <div class="grid_7 omega"> <select name="setup_day" id="setup_day"><?php days_list(); ?></select> <select name="setup_month" id="setup_month"><?php month_list(); ?></select> <select name="setup_year" id="setup_year"><?php year_list(); ?></select> <div class="grid_11"> <input type="submit" name="createevent" value="Create" id="createevent" /> </div> </form> Jquery $j(document).ready(function(){ $j('#neweventform').live('submit',function () { var data= $j('#neweventform').serialize(); alert(data); $j.ajax({type: "POST", url: "scripts/process.php",data: "newevent=newevent&event_options=" + data, cache: false, complete: function(data){ $j('#neweventform').fadeOut(2000),loading.fadeOut('slow'),$j('#content').fadeIn(2000), $j('#content').load('scripts/events.php #eventslist'); } }); return false; }); }); And the PHP processing if(isset($_POST['newevent'])) : $insert = mysql_query("INSERT INTO events (event_options) VALUES ('".$_POST['event_options']."')"); endif; Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Network message serialization for game

    - by George R
    Exit-games make a network library product called photon, and they have and actively develop a limited mmo demo. Rather than shooting off json or XML, etc. saying "MovePlayer" (with associated params), they nut that message down to a 2 digit int, via an enum - something like Operations.MovePlayer. There's no denying that a 2 digit int is smaller than a longer string, however I really hate the idea of statically burning each and every message into an enum. Would there be an alternative way to have a MessageID property assign itself a unique 2 digit int based on a lookup table or something? Has anyone dealt with this kind of thing before?

    Read the article

  • Serialization of an object and its Contained Objects

    - by Amit
    There is a main class having 2 subClasses(each represent separate entity) and all classes needs to be serialized.. how should I proceed ? My requirement is when I serelize MainClass, I should get the xml for each sub class and main class as well. Thanks in advance... and if my approach is incorrect... correct that as well.. Ex given below... class MainClass { SubClass1 objSubclass1 = null; SubClass2 objSubclass2 = null; public MainClass() { objSubclass1 = new SubClass1(); objSubclass2 = new SubClass2(); } [XmlElement("SubClass1")] public SubClass1 SubClass1 {get {return objSubclass1;} } [XmlElement("SubClass2")] public SubClass2 SubClass2 {get {return objSubclass2;} } } Class SubClass1 { Some properties here... } Class SubClass2 { Some properties here... }

    Read the article

  • Serialization java to c#

    - by tom
    Hi, I have manged to serialize an arraylist in java using xstream, send it to my c# application via http and then write that to file (just for now). The serialized data was an arraylist in java. I want to try and re form this arraylist in c# from the xml i have. I have been looking at http://code.google.com/p/xstream-dot-net/ to do this. Does anyone know if that is the right way to go or is there a better way of reforming the serialized data in c#?

    Read the article

  • XMLEncoder in java for serialization

    - by tom
    Im just wondering how i use xmlencoder to serialize ArrayList where foo is my own made class. Do i have to do anything in particular, ie define my own xml structure first and then call toString on each value in my list and write it out? Can anyone point me to a good tutorial? http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/tsc/articles/persistence4/ Thats what i have been looking at but it doesnt seem to mention what to do with non library classes. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Desine time XAML serialization problem in VS2010 Designer

    - by Reporting Avatar
    The wired problem is, in VS 2008, everything works fine. In VS2010 while serializing, it is missing the "ReportDimensionElements" so I'm unable to get the values back from the serialized value back from the XAML. It says, "'ReportDimensionElements' is null" am I missing anything silly. Note: I have marked the ReportDimensionElements class with [DefaultValue(null)] for avoiding {x:Null} being serialized. Will it be causing this by any way? Serialized XAML .Net 3.5 <Report> <Report.CategoricalAxis> <CategoricalAxis> <CategoricalAxis.ReportDimensionElements> <ReportDimensionElements Capacity="4"> <ReportDimensionElement DimensionName="Customer" HierarchyName="Customer Geography" LevelName="Country" /> </ReportDimensionElements> </CategoricalAxis.ReportDimensionElements> </CategoricalAxis> </Report.CategoricalAxis> </Report> .Net 4.0 <Report> <Report.CategoricalAxis> <CategoricalAxis> <CategoricalAxis.ReportDimensionElements> <ReportDimensionElement DimensionName="Customer" HierarchyName="Customer Geography" LevelName="Country" /> </CategoricalAxis.ReportDimensionElements> </CategoricalAxis> </Report.CategoricalAxis> </Report> Great Thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP webservice serialization of properties

    - by badra
    I got a class like this which gets returned from an ASP webservice: class Data { public int A { get; set; } public int B { get; set; } public int Sum { get { return A + B; } } } When I try to consume the webservice on the client side using Silverlight I only get the properties A and B but I also need Sum. I know I can't return any logic from a webservice, so the expected behavior was it will return the the Sum as a fixed/precalculated property in the client which is what I need. Any ideas except for redesigning my class? Thanks ...

    Read the article

  • Why do we need serialization in web service

    - by Cloud2010
    I have one webservice: public class Product { public int ProductId { get; set; } public string ProductName { get; set; } } public class Service : System.Web.Services.WebService { public Service () { //Uncomment the following line if using designed components //InitializeComponent(); } [WebMethod] public List<Product> GetItems() { List<Product> productList = new List<Product>() { new Product{ProductId=1,ProductName="Pencil"}, new Product{ProductId=2,ProductName="Pen"} }; return productList; } and in a asp.net application I am consuming it like: localhost.Service s = new localhost.Service(); List<localhost.Product> k = new List<localhost.Product>(); k = s.GetItems().ToList(); // i am getting the values here. now my question is do I need to serialize my webmethod as i am returning custom types? when should we serialize ? is it necessary at all, if yes , then what are the conditions?

    Read the article

  • How to serialize a Linq to Sql object graph without hiding the child's "Parent" member

    - by Richard B
    Without hiding the Child object's reference to the Parent object, has anyone been able to use an XmlSerializer() object to move a Linq to SQL object to an XML document, or is the only appropriate way of handling this to create a custom serialization/deserialization class to handle moving the data to/from the xml document? I don't like the idea of hiding the child object's reference to the parent object is why I'm asking. Thx.

    Read the article

  • Javascript serialization

    - by John
    Have I any chance to serialize meta (any format, so I can store it in DB)? var obj1 = {}; var obj2 = {}; obj1.link = obj2; obj2.link = obj1; var meta = [obj1, obj2]; As I understand the problem is that JSON serialize object`s links to objects.

    Read the article

  • Loose Coupling in Object Oriented Design

    - by m3th0dman
    I am trying to learn GRASP and I found this explained (here on page 3) about Low Coupling and I was very surprised when I found this: Consider the method addTrack for an Album class, two possible methods are: addTrack( Track t ) and addTrack( int no, String title, double duration ) Which method reduces coupling? The second one does, since the class using the Album class does not have to know a Track class. In general, parameters to methods should use base types (int, char ...) and classes from the java.* packages. I tend to diasgree with this; I believe addTrack(Track t) is better than addTrack(int no, String title, double duration) due to various reasons: It is always better for a method to as fewer parameters as possible (according to Uncle Bob's Clean Code none or one preferably, 2 in some cases and 3 in special cases; more than 3 needs refactoring - these are of course recommendations not holly rules). If addTrack is a method of an interface, and the requirements need that a Track should have more information (say year or genre) then the interface needs to be changed and so that the method should supports another parameter. Encapsulation is broke; if addTrack is in an interface, then it should not know the internals of the Track. It is actually more coupled in the second way, with many parameters. Suppose the no parameter needs to be changed from int to long because there are more than MAX_INT tracks (or for whatever reason); then both the Track and the method need to be changed while if the method would be addTrack(Track track) only the Track would be changed. All the 4 arguments are actually connected with each other, and some of them are consequences from others. Which approach is better?

    Read the article

  • Circular dependency and object creation when attempting DDD

    - by Matthew
    I have a domain where an Organization has People. Organization Entity public class Organization { private readonly List<Person> _people = new List<Person>(); public Person CreatePerson(string name) { var person = new Person(organization, name); _people.Add(person); return person; } public IEnumerable<Person> People { get { return _people; } } } Person Entity public class Person { public Person(Organization organization, string name) { if (organization == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("organization"); } Organization = organization; Name = name; } public Organization { get; private set; } public Name { get; private set; } } The rule for this relationship is that a Person must belong to exactly one Organization. The invariants I want to guarantee are: A person must have an organization this is enforced via the Person's constuctor An organization must know of its people this is why the Organization has a CreatePerson method A person must belong to only one organization this is why the organization's people list is not publicly mutable (ignoring the casting to List, maybe ToEnumerable can enforce that, not too concerned about it though) What I want out of this is that if a person is created, that the organization knows about its creation. However, the problem with the model currently is that you are able to create a person without ever adding it to the organizations collection. Here's a failing unit-test to describe my problem [Test] public void AnOrganizationMustKnowOfItsPeople() { var organization = new Organization(); var person = new Person(organization, "Steve McQueen"); CollectionAssert.Contains(organization.People, person); } What is the most idiomatic way to enforce the invariants and the circular relationship?

    Read the article

  • Is functional programming a superset of object oriented?

    - by Jimmy Hoffa
    The more functional programming I do, the more I feel like it adds an extra layer of abstraction that seems like how an onion's layer is- all encompassing of the previous layers. I don't know if this is true so going off the OOP principles I've worked with for years, can anyone explain how functional does or doesn't accurately depict any of them: Encapsulation, Abstraction, Inheritance, Polymorphism I think we can all say, yes it has encapsulation via tuples, or do tuples count technically as fact of "functional programming" or are they just a utility of the language? I know Haskell can meet the "interfaces" requirement, but again not certain if it's method is a fact of functional? I'm guessing that the fact that functors have a mathematical basis you could say those are a definite built in expectation of functional, perhaps? Please, detail how you think functional does or does not fulfill the 4 principles of OOP.

    Read the article

  • Recommended reading for (Object Oriented) application design architecture?

    - by e4rthdog
    In life it doesnt matter if you do one thing for 15 years. You will end up waking one day and asking stuff that are equal to "how do i walk?" :) My specific question is that as a new entrant to C# and OOP i am stepping into many little "details" that need to be addressed. Written a lot of code in VB.NET / cobol / simple php e.t.c surely does not help much into the OOP world... So , even after reading entry level books for C# and watching some videos i recently found out about the "factory model design" for applications. I would appreciate if any of you guys recomment some reading on application design architecture for further reading...

    Read the article

  • Newton Game Dynamics: Making an object not affect another object

    - by Boreal
    I'm going to be using Newton in my networked action game with Mogre. There will be two "types" of physics object: global and local. Global objects will be kept in sync for everybody; these include the players, projectiles, and other gameplay-related objects. Local objects are purely for effect, like ragdolls, debris, and particles. Is there a way to make the global objects affect the local objects without actually getting affected themselves? I'd like debris to bounce off of a tank, but I don't want the tank to respond in any way.

    Read the article

  • Design for object with optional and modifiable attributtes?

    - by Ikuzen
    I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

    Read the article

  • Object inheritance and method parameters/return types - Please check my logic

    - by user2368481
    I'm preparing for a test and doing practice questions, this one in particular I am unsure I did correctly: We are given a very simple UML diagram to demonstrate inheritance: I hope this is clear, it shows that W inherits from V and so on: |-----Y V <|----- W<|-----| |-----X<|----Z and this code: public X method1(){....} method2(new Y()); method2(method1()); method2(method3()); The questions and my answers: Q: What types of objects could method1 actually return? A: X and Z, since the method definition includes X as the return type and since Z is a kind of X is would be OK to return either. Q: What could the parameter type of method2 be? A: Since method2 in the code accepts Y, X and Z (as the return from method1), the parameter type must be either V or W, as Y,X and Z inherit from both of these. Q: What could return type of method3 be? A: Return type of method3 must be V or W as this would be consistent with answer 2.

    Read the article

  • Tips about how to spread Object Oriented practices

    - by Augusto
    I work for a medium company that has around 250 developers. Unfortunately, lots of them are stuck in a procedural way of thinking and some teams constantly deliver big Transactional Script applications, when in fact the application contains rich logic. They also fail to manage the design dependencies, and end up with services which depend on another large number of services (a clean example of Big Ball of Mud). My question is: Can you suggest how to spread this type of knowledge? I know that the surface of the problem is that these applications have a poor architecture and design. Another issue is that there are some developers who are against writing any kind of test. A few things I'm doing to change this (but I'm either failing or the change is too small are) Running presentations about design principles (SOLID, clean code, etc). Workshops about TDD and BDD. Coaching teams (this includes using sonar, findbugs, jdepend and other tools). IDE & Refactoring talks. A few things I'm thinking to do in the future (but I'm concern that they might not be good) Form a team of OO evangelists, who disseminate an OO way of thinking in differet teams (these people would need to change teams every few months). Running design review sessions, to criticise the design and suggest improvements (even if the improvements are not done because of time constraints, I think this might be useful) . Something I found with the teams I coach, is that as soon as I leave them, they revert back to the old practices. I know I don't spend a lot of time with them, usually just one month. So whatever I'm doing, it doesn't stick. I'm sorry this question is spattered with frustration, but the alterative to write this was to hit my head on the wall until I pass out.

    Read the article

  • Object construction design

    - by James
    I recently started to use c# to interface with a database, and there was one part of the process that appeared odd to me. When creating a SqlCommand, the method I was lead to took the form: SqlCommand myCommand = new SqlCommand("Command String", myConnection); Coming from a Java background, I was expecting something more similar to SqlCommand myCommand = myConnection.createCommand("Command String"); I am asking, in terms of design, what is the difference between the two? The phrase "single responsibility" has been used to suggest that a connection should not be responsible for creating SqlCommands, but I would also say that, in my mind, the difference between the two is partly a mental one of the difference between a connection executing a command and a command acting on a connection, the latter of which seems less like what I have been lead to believe OOP should be. There is also a part of me wondering if the two should be completely separate, and should only come together in some sort of connection.execute(command) method. Can anyone help clear up these differences? Are any of these methods "more correct" than the others from an OO point of view? (P.S. the fact that c# is used is completely irrelevant. It just highlighted to me that different approaches were used)

    Read the article

  • Using visitor pattern with large object hierarchy

    - by T. Fabre
    Context I've been using with a hierarchy of objects (an expression tree) a "pseudo" visitor pattern (pseudo, as in it does not use double dispatch) : public interface MyInterface { void Accept(SomeClass operationClass); } public class MyImpl : MyInterface { public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } } This design was, however questionnable, pretty comfortable since the number of implementations of MyInterface is significant (~50 or more) and I didn't need to add extra operations. Each implementation is unique (it's a different expression or operator), and some are composites (ie, operator nodes that will contain other operator/leaf nodes). Traversal is currently performed by calling the Accept operation on the root node of the tree, which in turns calls Accept on each of its child nodes, which in turn... and so on... But the time has come where I need to add a new operation, such as pretty printing : public class MyImpl : MyInterface { // Property does not come from MyInterface public string SomeProperty { get; set; } public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } public void Accept(SomePrettyPrinter printer) { printer.PrettyPrint(this.SomeProperty); } } I basically see two options : Keep the same design, adding a new method for my operation to each derived class, at the expense of maintainibility (not an option, IMHO) Use the "true" Visitor pattern, at the expense of extensibility (not an option, as I expect to have more implementations coming along the way...), with about 50+ overloads of the Visit method, each one matching a specific implementation ? Question Would you recommand using the Visitor pattern ? Is there any other pattern that could help solve this issue ?

    Read the article

  • Object desing problem for simple school application

    - by Aragornx
    I want to create simple school application that provides grades,notes,presence,etc. for students,teachers and parents. I'm trying to design objects for this problem and I'm little bit confused - because I'm not very experienced in class designing. Some of my present objects are : class PersonalData() { private String name; private String surename; private Calendar dateOfBirth; [...] } class Person { private PersonalData personalData; } class User extends Person { private String login; private char[] password; } class Student extends Person { private ArrayList<Counselor> counselors = new ArrayList<>(); } class Counselor extends Person { private ArrayList<Student> children = new ArrayList<>(); } class Teacher extends Person { private ArrayList<ChoolClass> schoolClasses = new ArrayList<>(); private ArrayList<Subject> subjects = new ArrayList<>(); } This is of course a general idea. But I'm sure it's not the best way. For example I want that one person could be a Teacher and also a Parent(Counselor) and present approach makes me to have two Person objects. I want that user after successful logging in get all roles that it has (Student or Teacher or (Teacher & Parent) ). I think I should make and use some interfaces but I'm not sure how to do this right. Maybe like this: interface Role { } interface TeacherRole implements Role { void addGrade( Student student, Grade grade, [...] ); } class Teacher implements TeacherRole { private Person person; [...] } class User extends Person{ ArrayList<Role> roles = new ArrayList<>(); } Please if anyone could help me to make this right or maybe just point me to some literature/article that covers practical objects design.

    Read the article

  • Structuring Access Control In Hierarchical Object Graph

    - by SB2055
    I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. Thoughts I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >