Search Results

Search found 557 results on 23 pages for 'violation'.

Page 12/23 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion

    - by user2158382
    I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

    Read the article

  • Calling COM from Intel Fortran?

    - by user57460
    I'm trying to get COM working from my Fortran application. I do a "COMINITIALIZE" followed by a "COMCreateObjectByProgID". Both of these appear to be successful and return a status of zero. However, when I try to use the COM object, I get "Unhandled exception at 0x00000000 in FortranProg01.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation." I realize that this error can mean almost anything, but has anyone got some suggestions of common problems with COM that produce this problem? Here are some more details. My program code: program FortranProg01 use myolepg implicit none integer*4 comInitStatus integer:: comCreateStatus INTEGER(INT_PTR_KIND()) $OBJECT INTEGER(4) funcResult REAL(8) pkgVersion call COMINITIALIZE(comInitStatus) print *, comInitStatus call COMCreateObjectByProgID('MyOlePg.MyOlePkg', $OBJECT, comCreateStatus) print *, comCreateStatus funcResult = IMyOlePkg_GetPackageVersion($OBJECT, pkgVersion) print *, funcResult call COMUNINITIALIZE() end program FortranProg01 The wizard-generated interface code: INTERFACE !property PackageVersion INTEGER(4) FUNCTION IMyOlePkg_GetPackageVersion($OBJECT, pVal) INTEGER(INT_PTR_KIND()), INTENT(IN) :: $OBJECT ! Object Pointer !DEC$ ATTRIBUTES VALUE :: $OBJECT REAL(8), INTENT(OUT) :: pVal !DEC$ ATTRIBUTES REFERENCE :: pVal !DEC$ ATTRIBUTES STDCALL :: IMyOlePkg_GetPackageVersion END FUNCTION IMyOlePkg_GetPackageVersion END INTERFACE Any help would be much appreciated! Thanks! Brad.

    Read the article

  • The Oracle Platform

    - by Naresh Persaud
    Today’s enterprises typically create identity management infrastructures using ad-hoc, multiple point solutions. Relying on point solutions introduces complexity and high cost of ownership leading many organizations to rethink this approach. In a recent worldwide study of 160 companies conducted by Aberdeen Research, there was a discernible shift in this trend as businesses are now looking to move away from the point solution approach from multiple vendors and adopt an integrated platform approach. By deploying a comprehensive identity and access management strategy using a single platform, companies are saving as much as 48% in IT costs, while reducing audit deficiencies by nearly 35%. According to Aberdeen's research, choosing an integrated suite or “platform” of solutions for Identity Management from a single vendor can have many advantages over choosing “point solutions” from multiple vendors. The Oracle Identity Management Platform is uniquely designed to offer several compelling benefits to our customers.  Shared Services: Instead of separate solutions for - Administration, Authentication, Authorization, Audit and so on–  Oracle Identity Management offers a set of share services that allows these services to be consumed by each component in the stack and by developers of new applications  Actionable Intelligence: The most compelling benefit of the Oracle platform is ” Actionable intelligence” which means if there is a compliance violation, the same platform can fix it. And If a user is logging in from an un-trusted device or we detect an attack and act proactively on that information. Suite Interoperability: With the oracle platform the components all connect and integrated with each other. So if an organization purchase the platform for provisioning and wants to manage access, then the same platform can offer access management which leads to cost savings. Extensible and Configurable: With point solutions – you typically get limited ability to extend the tool to address custom requirements. But with the Oracle platform all of the components have a common way to extend the UI and behavior Find out more about the Oracle Platform approach in this presentation. Platform approach-series-the oracleplatform-final View more PowerPoint from OracleIDM

    Read the article

  • AdvanceTimePolicy and Point Event Streams In StreamInsight.

    There are a number of ways to issues CTIs (Current Time Increments) into your StreamInsight streams but a quite useful way is to do it declaratively on your source factory like this public AdapterAdvanceTimeSettings DeclareAdvanceTimeProperties<TPayload>(InputConfig configInfo, EventShape eventShape) {     return new AdapterAdvanceTimeSettings(         new AdvanceTimeGenerationSettings(configInfo.CtiFrequency, TimeSpan.FromTicks(-1)),         AdvanceTimePolicy.Adjust); } This will issue a CTI after every event and allows no delay (for delayed events) by stamping the CTI with the timestamp of the last event minus 1 tick. The very last statement "AdvanceTimePolicy.Adjust" tells the adapter what to do with events that violate the policy (arrive late).  From BOL "Events that violate the inserted CTI are moved in time if their lifetime overlaps with the CTI timestamp. That is, the start timestamp of the events is set to the most recent CTI timestamp, which renders those events valid. If both start and end time of an event fall before the CTI timestamp, then the event is dropped." This means that if you are using this method of inserting CTIs for a Point event stream and have specified "AdvanceTimePolicy.Adjust" for the violation policy, this setting will be ignored and instead it will use "AdvanceTimePolicy.Drop" because a Point event can never straddle a CTI.

    Read the article

  • C++ and system exceptions

    - by Abyx
    Why standard C++ doesn't respect system (foreign or hardware) exceptions? E.g. when null pointer dereference occurs, stack isn't unwound, destructors aren't called, and RAII doesn't work. The common advice is "to use system API". But on certain systems, specifically Win32, this doesn't work. To enable stack unwinding for this C++ code // class Foo; // void bar(const Foo&); bar(Foo(1, 2)); one should generate something like this C code Foo tempFoo; Foo_ctor(&tempFoo); __try { bar(&tempFoo); } __finally { Foo_dtor(&tempFoo); } Foo_dtor(&tempFoo); and it's impossible to implement this as C++ library. Upd: Standard doesn't forbid handling system exceptions. But it seems that popular compilers like g++ doesn't respect system exceptions on any platforms just because standard doesn't require this. The only thing that I want - is to use RAII to make code readable and program reliable. I don't want to put hand-crafted try\finally around every call to unknown code. For example in this reusable code, AbstractA::foo is such unknown code: void func(AbstractA* a, AbstractB* b) { TempFile file; a->foo(b, file); } Maybe one will pass to func such implementation of AbstractA, which every Friday will not check if b is NULL, so access violation will happen, application will terminate and temporary file will not be deleted. How many months uses will suffer because of this issue, until either author of func or author of AbstractA will do something with it? Related: Is `catch(...) { throw; }` a bad practice?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Pitfalls: Cascades

    - by Ricardo Peres
    This is part of a series of posts about NHibernate Pitfalls. See the entire collection here. For entities that have associations – one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one or many-to-many –, NHibernate needs to know what to do with their related entities, in three particular moments: when saving, updating or deleting. In particular, there are two possible behaviors: either ignore these related entities or cascade changes to them. NHibernate allows setting the cascade behavior for each association, and the default behavior is not to cascade (ignore). The possible cascade options are: None Ignore, this is the default Save-Update If the entity is being saved or updated, also save any related entities that are either not saved or have been modified and associate these related entities to the root entity. Generally safe Delete If the entity is being deleted, also delete the related entities. This is only useful for parent-child relations Delete-Orphan Identical to Delete, with the addition that if once related entity is removed from the association – orphaned –, also delete it. Also only for parent-child All Combination of Save-Update and Delete, usually that’s what we want (for parent-child relations, of course) All-Delete-Orphan Same as All plus delete any related entities who lose their relationship In summary, Save-Update is generally what you want in most cases. As for the Delete variations, they should only be used if the related entities depend on the root entity (parent-child), so that deleting the root entity and not their related entities would result in a constraint violation on the database.

    Read the article

  • Rails: The Law of Demeter [duplicate]

    - by user2158382
    This question already has an answer here: Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion 4 answers I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

    Read the article

  • Stylecop 4.7.36.0 is out!

    - by TATWORTH
    Stylecop 4.7.36.0 has been released at http://stylecop.codeplex.com/releases/view/79972This is an update to coincide with the latest ReSharper. The full fix list is:4.7.36.0 (508dbac00ffc)=======================Fix for 7344. Don't throw 1126 inside default expressions.Fix for 7371. Compare Namespace parts using the CurrentCulture and not InvariantCulture.Fix for 7386. Don't throw casing violations for filed names in languages that do not support case (like Chinese). Added new tests.fix for 7380. Catch Exception caused by CRM Toolkit.Update ReSharper 7.0 dependency to 7.0.1 (7.0.1098.2760)Fix for 7358. Use the RuleId in the call to MSBuild Logging.Fix for 7348. Update suggestion text for constructors.Fix for 7364. Don't throw 1126 for New Array Expressions.Fix for 7372. Throw 1126 inside catch blocks wasn't working. Add new tests.Fix for 7369. Await is allowed to be inside parenthesis. Add new tests.Fix testsCorrect styling issues.Fix for 7373. Typeparam violations were not being thrown in all cases. Added new tests.Fix for 7361. Rule 1120 was logging against the root element and so Suppressions wouldn't work. Fixed and added tests.Updating de-DE resources - from Michael Diermeier - thank you.Change for 7368. Add the violation count into the Task outputs.Fix for 7383. Fix for memory leak in plugins.Update environment to detect ReSharper 7Fix for 7378. Null reference exception from command line run in message output.Update release history.

    Read the article

  • A better alternative to incompatible implementations for the same interface?

    - by glenatron
    I am working on a piece of code which performs a set task in several parallel environments where the behaviour of the different components in the task are similar but quite different. This means that my implementations are quite different but they are all based on the relationships between the same interfaces, something like this: IDataReader -> ContinuousDataReader -> ChunkedDataReader IDataProcessor -> ContinuousDataProcessor -> ChunkedDataProcessor IDataWriter -> ContinuousDataWriter -> ChunkedDataWriter So that in either environment we have an IDataReader, IDataProcessor and IDataWriter and then we can use Dependency Injection to ensure that we have the correct one of each for the current environment, so if we are working with data in chunks we use the ChunkedDataReader, ChunkedDataProcessor and ChunkedDataWriter and if we have continuous data we have the continuous versions. However the behaviour of these classes is quite different internally and one could certainly not go from a ContinuousDataReader to the ChunkedDataReader even though they are both IDataProcessors. This feels to me as though it is incorrect ( possibly an LSP violation? ) and certainly not a theoretically correct way of working. It is almost as though the "real" interface here is the combination of all three classes. Unfortunately in the project I am working on with the deadlines we are working to, we're pretty much stuck with this design, but if we had a little more elbow room, what would be a better design approach in this kind of scenario?

    Read the article

  • How to write code that communicates with an accelerator in the real address space (real mode)?

    - by ysap
    This is a preliminary question for the issue, where I was asked to program a host-accelerator program on an embedded system we are building. The system is comprised of (among the standard peripherals) an ARM core and an accelerator processor. Both processors access the system bus via their bus interfaces, and share the same 32-bit global physical memory space. Both share access to the system's DRAM through the system bus. (The computer concept is similar to Beagleboard/raspberry Pie, but with a specialized accelerator added) The accelerator has its own internal memory (SRAM) which is exposed to the system and occupies a portion of the global address space (as opposed to how a graphics card would talk to teh CPU via a "small" aperture in the system memory space). On the ARM core (the host) we plan on running Ubuntu 12.04. The mode of operation of communicating between the processors should be that the host issues memory transactions on the system bus that are targeted at the accelerator internal memory. As far as my understanding goes, if I write a program for the host that simply writes to the physical address of the accelerator, most chances are that the program will crash due to a segmentation violation. So, I assume that I need some way of communicating with the device in real mode. What is the easiest way to achieve this mode of operation?

    Read the article

  • Logging violations of rules in limits.conf

    - by PaulDaviesC
    I am trying to log the details of the programs that where failed due to the limit cap defined in the limits.conf. My initial plan was to do it using the audit system. The idea was to track the system calls related to limits in the limits.conf that where failed. However the problem with this approach is that , it is not possible to track the violations of cpu time, since that violation do not involve failure of system calls. In the case of CPU time , one thing happens is that the program which violated the cpu time will be delivered a SIGXCPU. So my question is how should I go about logging the programs that violated CPU time? Also is there any limits.conf specific logs available?

    Read the article

  • Why do Google search results include pages disallowed in robots.txt?

    - by Ilmari Karonen
    I have some pages on my site that I want to keep search engines away from, so I disallowed them in my robots.txt file like this: User-Agent: * Disallow: /email Yet I recently noticed that Google still sometimes returns links to those pages in their search results. Why does this happen, and how can I stop it? Background: Several years ago, I made a simple web site for a club a relative of mine was involved in. They wanted to have e-mail links on their pages, so, to try and keep those e-mail addresses from ending up on too many spam lists, instead of using direct mailto: links I made those links point to a simple redirector / address harvester trap script running on my own site. This script would return either a 301 redirect to the actual mailto: URL, or, if it detected a suspicious access pattern, a page containing lots of random fake e-mail addresses and links to more such pages. To keep legitimate search bots away from the trap, I set up the robots.txt rule shown above, disallowing the entire space of both legit redirector links and trap pages. Just recently, however, one of the people in the club searched Google for their own name and was quite surprised when one of the results on the first page was a link to the redirector script, with a title consisting of their e-mail address followed by my name. Of course, they immediately e-mailed me and wanted to know how to get their address out of Google's index. I was quite surprised too, since I had no idea that Google would index such URLs at all, seemingly in violation of my robots.txt rule. I did manage to submit a removal request to Google, and it seems to have worked, but I'd like to know why and how Google is circumventing my robots.txt like that and how to make sure that none of the disallowed pages will show up in their search results. Ps. I actually found out a possible explanation and solution, which I'll post below, while preparing this question, but I thought I'd ask it anyway in case someone else might have the same problem. Please do feel free to post your own answers. I'd also be interested in knowing if other search engines do this too, and whether the same solutions work for them also.

    Read the article

  • Stylecop 4.7.39.0 has been released

    - by TATWORTH
    Stylecop  4.7.38.0 has been released at http://stylecop.codeplex.com/releases/view/79972The release notes follow:Allow case sensitivity in the deprecated words and recognised words listStyleing fixes.Fix for documentation spelling checks inside nested xml nodes.Look for CustomDictionary.xml files in the folder of the cs file.Update the TabIndex in the spelling tab.Updating default deprecated words and their alternatives.Add support for specifying dictionary folders in the settings.StyleCop file. Like :Rename StyleCopViolationError to StyleCopHighlightingError and all associated types.Fix the Bulb Item for spelling mistakes to replace matching words correctly.Fix the spelling parser for strings beginning with $$THREADING FIX: Make StyleCop execute analysis in proces and not create 2 threads. Use Countdown Event when we move to .NET 4.Use the naming service for the Culture specified for the project. Pass the actual violation through to ReSharper.Ensure Registry access code works for VS2008 addins.Rollback Registry changes to ensure VS2008 plugin loads correctly.Adding support for preferred alternative words for spelling. Adding deprecated word support into Settings.StyleCop file. Spelling is only checked if Office 2010 is installed. Allow editing of deprecated words and their alternatives in the Settings editor.Adding new resource stringsAdding BulbItem and Quick fixes for spelling errors.Moving StringExtensions to common area.Styling fixes.Report all spelling errors found on a line.Start of 4.7.39.0 dev.

    Read the article

  • Run Photoshop on VM (virtual machine) to increase calculation power, without violating the licence agreement (EULA)

    - by mecplusultra
    A question concerning the possibility to run Photoshop as VM without violating the licence agreement (EULA) : My Adobe Photoshop is bloody slow, nd sometimes I need to launch thousands of image calculations that have to use hundreds of PSD templates. I want to increase my Photoshop calculation power by creating non-persistent virtual machines on my hosted server. Each VMm would only alive for a few seconds, just enough time to deliver the calculated file. Is this a violation of the EULA? I must clarify that I'm the only one to access my non persistent VMs.

    Read the article

  • Error Handling without Exceptions

    - by James
    While searching SO for approaches to error handling related to business rule validation , all I encounter are examples of structured exception handling. MSDN and many other reputable development resources are very clear that exceptions are not to be used to handle routine error cases. They are only to be used for exceptional circumstances and unexpected errors that may occur from improper use by the programmer (but not the user.) In many cases, user errors such as fields that are left blank are common, and things which our program should expect, and therefore are not exceptional and not candidates for use of exceptions. QUOTE: Remember that the use of the term exception in programming has to do with the thinking that an exception should represent an exceptional condition. Exceptional conditions, by their very nature, do not normally occur; so your code should not throw exceptions as part of its everyday operations. Do not throw exceptions to signal commonly occurring events. Consider using alternate methods to communicate to a caller the occurrence of those events and leave the exception throwing for when something truly out of the ordinary happens. For example, proper use: private void DoSomething(string requiredParameter) { if (requiredParameter == null) throw new ArgumentExpcetion("requiredParameter cannot be null"); // Remainder of method body... } Improper use: // Renames item to a name supplied by the user. Name must begin with an "F". public void RenameItem(string newName) { // Items must have names that begin with "F" if (!newName.StartsWith("F")) throw new RenameException("New name must begin with /"F/""); // Remainder of method body... } In the above case, according to best practices, it would have been better to pass the error up to the UI without involving/requiring .NET's exception handling mechanisms. Using the same example above, suppose one were to need to enforce a set of naming rules against items. What approach would be best? Having the method return a enumerated result? RenameResult.Success, RenameResult.TooShort, RenameResult.TooLong, RenameResult.InvalidCharacters, etc. Using an event in a controller class to report to the UI class? The UI calls the controller's RenameItem method, and then handles an AfterRename event that the controller raises and that has rename status as part of the event args? The controlling class directly references and calls a method from the UI class that handles the error, e.g. ReportError(string text). Something else... ? Essentially, I want to know how to perform complex validation in classes that may not be the Form class itself, and pass the errors back to the Form class for display -- but I do not want to involve exception handling where it should not be used (even though it seems much easier!) Based on responses to the question, I feel that I'll have to state the problem in terms that are more concrete: UI = User Interface, BLL = Business Logic Layer (in this case, just a different class) User enters value within UI. UI reports value to BLL. BLL performs routine validation of the value. BLL discovers rule violation. BLL returns rule violation to UI. UI recieves return from BLL and reports error to user. Since it is routine for a user to enter invalid values, exceptions should not be used. What is the right way to do this without exceptions?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate - how to delete bidirectional many-to-many association

    - by slomir
    Problem: I have many-to-many association between two entities A and B. I set A entity as an owner of their relationship(inverse=true is on A's collection in b.hbm.xml). When i delete an A entity, corresponding records in join table are deleted. When i delete an B entity, corresponding records in join table are not deleted (integrity violation exception). -- Let's consider some very simple example: class A{ Set<B> bset=new HashSet<B>(); //... } class B{ Set<A> aset=new HashSet<A>(); //... } File a.hbm.xml [m-to-m mappings only]: <set name="bset" table="AB"> <key name="a_id"/> <many-to-many column="b_id" class="B"/> </set> File b.hbm.xml [m-to-m mappings only]: <set name="aset" table="AB" inverse="true"> <key name="b_id"/> <many-to-many column="a_id" class="A"/> </set> Database relations: A(id,...) B(id,...) AB(a_id,b_id) Suppose that we have some records in AB joint table. For example: AB = {(1,1),(1,2)} where AB= { (a_id , b_id) | ... ... } -- Situation 1 - works probably because A is owner of AB relationship: A a=aDao.read(1); //read A entity with id=1 aDao.delete(a); //delete 'a' entity and both relations with B-entities Situation 2 - doesn't work: B b=bDao.read(1); //read B entity with id=1 bDao.delete(b); //foreign key integrity violation On the one hand, this is somehow logical to me, because the A entity is responsible for his relation with B. But, on the other hand, it is not logical or at least it is not orm-like solution that I have to explicitly delete all records in join table where concrete B entity appears, and then to delete the B entity, as I show in situation 3: Situation 3 - works, but it is not 'elegant': B b=bDao.read(1); Set<A> aset=b.getA(); //get set with A entities Iterator i=aset.iterator(); //while removes 'b' from all related A entities //while breaks relationships on A-side of relation (A is owner) while(i.hasNext()){ A a=i.next(); a.bset.remove(b); //remove entity 'b' from related 'a' entity aDao.update(a); //key point!!! this line breaks relation in database } bDao.delete(b); //'b' is deleted because there is no related A-entities -- So, my question: is there any more convenient way to delete no-owner entity (B in my example) in bidirectional many-to-many association and all of his many-to-many relations from joint table?

    Read the article

  • iPhone App rejected because of Three20 private API undocumented, private UITouch instance variables:

    - by Sijo
    I got a notification mail after submitting to app store.. "During our review of your application we found it is using private APIs, which is in violation of the iPhone Developer Program License Agreement section 3.3.1; "3.3.1 Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs." While your application has not been rejected, it would be appropriate to resolve this issue in your next update. The non-public APIs that are included in your application are the following undocumented, private UITouch instance variables: firstResponder UITouch._locationInWindow UITouch._phase UITouch._previousLocationInWindow UITouch._tapCount UITouch._timestamp UITouch._touchFlags UITouch._view UITouch._window Please resolve this issue in your next update to Application " . My application contains Three20. These variables are used in "UIViewAdditions.m". Is there any way to resolve this issue ? Please help me. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Unicode problems with Delphi 2009 / 2010 and windows API calls

    - by Charles Faiga
    Hi I have been using this function in Delphi 2006, but now with D2010 it throws an error. I think it is related to the switch to Unicode. Function TWinUtils.GetTempFile(Const Extension: STRING): STRING; Var Buffer: ARRAY [0 .. MAX_PATH] OF char; Begin Repeat GetTempPath(SizeOf(Buffer) - 1, Buffer); GetTempFileName(Buffer, '~~', 0, Buffer); Result := ChangeFileExt(Buffer, Extension); Until not FileExists(Result); End; What should I do to make it work? EDIT I get an 'access violation' when the ChangeFileExt is called

    Read the article

  • Best Practices - Data Annotations vs OnChanging in Entity Framework 4

    - by jptacek
    I was wondering what the general recommendation is for Entity Framework in terms of data validation. I am relatively new to EF, but it appears there are two main approaches to data validation. The first is to create a partial class for the model, and then perform data validations and update a rule violation collection of some sort. This is outlined at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc716747.aspx The other is to use data annotations and then have the annotations perform data validation. Scott Guthrie explains this on his blog at http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/01/15/asp-net-mvc-2-model-validation.aspx. I was wondering what the benefits are of one over the other. It seems the data annotations would be the preferred mechanism, especially as you move to RIA Services, but I want to ensure I am not missing something. Of course, nothing precludes using both of them together. Thanks John

    Read the article

  • Testing an XQuery Transformation

    - by hakish
    Hi, I'm using Workshop for Weblogic and I'm testing an XQuery Transformation. Both MFL and XSD are valid. But the XQuery doesn't seem to work... it gives me this error: Error occurred while executing XQuery: loader constraint violation: when resolving method "javax.xml.stream.XMLInputFactory.createXMLStreamReader(Ljava/io/Reader;)Ljavax/xml/stream/XMLStreamReader;" the class loader (instance of org/eclipse/osgi/internal/baseadaptor/DefaultClassLoader) of the current class, weblogic/xml/query/parsers/StAXCursorAdaptor, and the class loader (instance of ) for resolved class, javax/xml/stream/XMLInputFactory, have different Class objects for the type javax/xml/stream/XMLStreamReader used in the signature Have you ever seen this before? How can I solve this please?

    Read the article

  • LIbrary issue: How do I set up QtWebKit to parse HTML?

    - by user560106
    Nick Presta showed that you can parse HTML with qt here: Library Recommendation: C++ HTML Parser However, when I attempt to build this, I get an access violation on the "QWebFrame* frame = page.mainFrame();" line. What am I doing wrong? #include <QtWebKit\QWebElement> #include <QtWebKit\QWebView> #include <QtWebKit\QWebFrame> #include <QtWebKit\QWebPage> #include <iostream> int main() { QWebPage page; QWebFrame* frame = page.mainFrame(); frame->setHtml( "<html><head></head><body></body></html>" ); QWebElement document = frame->documentElement(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Can I redistribute Phing with non-free software?

    - by Matt1776
    I am having trouble understanding the terms of the LGPL in light of a program that is not written in C or C++. They speak of libraries being linked and 'derivitive' works. If I were to package a php program and sell it, but within the program the deployment mechanism used the phing package (full up with the entire contents as is and un modified) - would I be violating the terms of the LGPL? For example, If this was a C program that was compiled by linking the phing 'library' then the answer would be easier, it is a derivitive work and therefore unless released under the GPL will not be considered free and also a violation. But this situation is different. I am not linking and not producing a derivitive, i am simply using phing as a deployment tool to move files around and set up the enviornment. Can someone shed some light? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Symfony FK Constraint Issue

    - by Daniel Hertz
    Hello! So I have a table schema that has users who can be friends. User: actAs: { Timestampable: ~ } columns: name: { type: string(255), notnull: true } email: { type: string(255), notnull: true, unique: true } nickname: { type: string(255), unique: true } password: { type: string(300), notnull: true } image: { type: string(255) } FriendsWith: actAs: { Timestampable: ~ } columns: friend1_id: { type: integer, primary: true } friend2_id: { type: integer, primary: true } relations: User: { onDelete: CASCADE, local: friend1_id, foreign: id } User: { onDelete: CASCADE, local: friend2_id, foreign: id } It builds the database correctly, but when I try to insert test data like: User: user1: name: Danny Gurt email: [email protected] nickname: danny password: test1 user2: name: Adrian Soian email: [email protected] nickname: adrian password: test1 FriendsWith: friendship1: friend1_id: user1 friend2_id: user2 I get this integrity constraint problem: SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1452 Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (`krowdd`.`friends_with`, CONSTRAINT `friends_with_ibfk_1` FOREIGN KEY (`friend1_id`) REFERENCES `user` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE) Any ideas? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Handling update errors in multiple records in the TClientDataset's ReconcileError method

    - by Fabio Gomes
    I'm trying to use the ReconcileError event to allow the user to correct the data after an update error which occurred in a specific record among others. Example: I have a dataset with one field and 3 records, this field have a unique constraint on the database, then I change one value to conflict when it reaches the database, then I call ApplyUpdates on the Dataset. This will generate an error (violation of unique constraint) in the provider and abort the applyupdates process, returning raAbort in the Action var of the ReconcileError method. In the ReconcileError method I tryied to use: Action := HandleReconcileError(aDataSet, UpdateKind, E); ** EDIT ** After debugging and dumping the DataSet records which were returned from the server, I noticed that there are 2 records in this Dataset, the first is the Old record and the second have all the changes I made to the first record. I'm a bit confused, will I always get this DataSet with 2 records? I thought that it should have only one record with the Old/New values. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Exceptions silently caught by Windows, how to handle manually?

    - by Mark Ingram
    We're having problems with Windows silently eating exceptions and allowing the application to continue running, when the exception is thrown inside the message pump. For example, we created a test MFC MDI application, and overrode OnDraw: void CTestView::OnDraw(CDC* /*pDC*/) { *(int*)0 = 0; // Crash CTestDoc* pDoc = GetDocument(); ASSERT_VALID(pDoc); if (!pDoc) return; // TODO: add draw code for native data here } You would expect a nasty error message when running the application, but you actually get nothing at all. The program appears to be running perfectly well, but if you check the output window you will see: First-chance exception at 0x13929384 in Test.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation writing location 0x00000000. First-chance exception at 0x77c6ee42 in Test.exe: 0xC0150010: The activation context being deactivated is not active for the current thread of execution. I know why I'm receiving the application context exception, but why is it being handled silently? It means our applications could be suffering serious problems when in use, but we'll never know about it, because our users will never report any problems.

    Read the article

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