Search Results

Search found 33557 results on 1343 pages for 'inline method'.

Page 125/1343 | < Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >

  • How to refactor a method which breaks "The law of Demeter" principle?

    - by dreza
    I often find myself breaking this principle (not intentially, just through bad design). However recently I've seen a bit of code that I'm not sure of the best approach. I have a number of classes. For simplicity I've taken out the bulk of the classes methods etc public class Paddock { public SoilType Soil { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around paddock information } public class SoilType { public SoilDrainageType Drainage { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around soil types } public class SoilDrainageType { // a whole bunch of public properties that expose soil drainage values public double GetProportionOfDrainage(SoilType soil, double blockRatio) { // This method does a number of calculations using public properties // exposed off SoilType as well as the blockRatio value in some conditions } } In the code I have seen in a number of places calls like so paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); or within the block object itself in places it's Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.Soil, this.GetBlockRatio()); Upon reading this seems to break "The Law of Demeter" in that I'm chaining together these properties to access the method I want. So my thought in order to adjust this was to create public methods on SoilType and Paddock that contains wrappers i.e. on paddock it would be public class Paddock { public double GetProportionOfDrainage() { return Soil.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.GetBlockRatio()); } } on the SoilType it would be public class SoilType { public double GetProportionOfDrainage(double blockRatio) { return Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this, blockRatio); } } so now calls where it used would be simply // used outside of paddock class where we can access instances of Paddock paddock.GetProportionofDrainage() or this.GetProportionOfDrainage(); // if used within Paddock class This seemed like a nice alternative. However now I have a concern over how would I enforce this usage and stop anyone else from writing code such as paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); rather than just paddock.GetProportionOfDrainage(); I need the properties to remain public at this stage as they are too ingrained in usage throughout the code block. However I don't really want a mixture of accessing the method on DrainageType directly as that seems to defeat the purpose altogether. What would be the appropiate design approach in this situation? I can provide more information as required to better help in answers. Is my thoughts on refactoring this even appropiate or should is it best to leave it as is and use the property chaining to access the method as and when required?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to define a [] method in ruby's NilClass?

    - by Silasj
    Ruby by default does not include the method [] for NilClass For example, to check if foo["bar"] exists when foo may be nil, I have to do: foo = something_that_may_or_may_not_return_nil if foo && foo["bar"] # do something with foo["bar"] here end If I define this method: class NilClass def [](arg) nil end end Something like that would make this possible, even if foo is nil: if foo["bar"] # do something with foo["bar"] end Or even: if foo["bar"]["baz"] # do something with foo["bar"]["baz"] here end Question: Is this a good idea or is there some reason ruby doesn't include this functionality by default?

    Read the article

  • "Unsupported compression method 98" error when unzipping a file. What tools support it, other than W

    - by Chris W. Rea
    I'm getting an error message: "unsupported compression method 98" when unzipping a file somebody sent to me. I've tried both an older version of WinZip, and 7-Zip 4.65. I've already asked the person to avoid using a non-standard compression method and re-send the file. I know WinZip (of which they are using a newer version) has compatibility options. But, I'm wondering: What archiving utilities, other than WinZip, support this "compression method 98"? In particular, is there a free and/or open source tool that supports that method? If not, why not? Is the method strictly proprietary to WinZip?

    Read the article

  • What functionality should a (basic) mock framework have?

    - by user1175327
    If i would start on writing a simple Mock framework, then what are the things that a basic mock framework MUST have? Obviously mocking any object, but what about assertions and perhaps other things? When I think of how I would write my own mock framework then I realise how much I really know (or don't know) and what I would trip up on. So this is more for educational purposes. Of course I did research and this is what i've come up with that a minimal mocking framework should be able to do. Now my question in this whole thing is, am I missing some important details in my ideas? Mocking Mocking a class: Should be able to mock any class. The Mock should preserve the properties and their original values as they were set in the original class. All method implementations are empty. Calls to methods of Mock: The Mock framework must be able to define what a mocked method must return. IE: $MockObj->CallTo('SomeMethod')->Returns('some value'); Assertions To my understanding mocking frameworks also have a set of assertions. These are the ones I think are most important (taken from SimpleTest). expect($method, $args) Arguments must match if called expectAt($timing, $method, $args) Arguments must match when called on the $timing'th time expectCallCount($method, $count) The method must be called exactly this many times expectMaximumCallCount($method, $count) Call this method no more than $count times expectMinimumCallCount($method, $count) Must be called at least $count times expectNever($method) Must never be called expectOnce($method, $args) Must be called once and with the expected arguments if supplied expectAtLeastOnce($method, $args) Must be called at least once, and always with any expected arguments And that's basically, as far as I understand, what a mock framework should be able to do. But is this really everything? Because it currently doesn't seem like a big deal to build something like this. But that's also the reason why I have the feeling that i'm missing some important details about such a framework. So is my understanding right about a mock framework? Or am i missing alot of details?

    Read the article

  • Import and render the contents of a XAML file inline in another XAML file?

    - by spoon16
    I have a XAML file that I exported from Expression Design. I would like to render that XAML content inline in one of my user controls. Can I reference the external XAML file that I want to include as a Resource on the UserControl I want to render it in? Or is there some other markup that I can use to identify the XAML object in my project that I want rendered in the current location? I am using Silverlight 4.

    Read the article

  • .NET Reflection: How to call method of interface without creating instance?

    - by jitm
    I have situation where I have to call method of interface using reflection, like this object x = null; MethodInfo method = interfaceExists.GetMethod("ShutDown"); method.Invoke(x, new object[] { 4 }) As you can see I do not create instance of object! And, as I can supposed, I receive exception Non-static method requires a target And Question, Can I call method of interface using reflection without creating instance of interface and if YES, How I can do it ?

    Read the article

  • does passing __m128i objects by reference to inline function cause these objects to be moved to stac

    - by ~buratinas
    Hello, I'm writing transpose function for 8x16bit vectors with SSE2 intrinsics. Since there are 8 arguments for that function (a matrix of 8x8x16bit size), I can't do anything but pass them by reference. Will that be optimized by the compiler (I mean, will these __m128i objects be passed in registers instead of stack)? Code snippet: inline void transpose (__m128i &a0, __m128i &a1, __m128i &a2, __m128i &a3, __m128i &a4, __m128i &a5, __m128i &a6, __m128i &a7) { .... }

    Read the article

  • C# Reflection: How to call method of interface without creating instance?

    - by jitm
    Hello, I have situation where I have to call method of interface using reflection, like this object x = null; MethodInfo method = interfaceExists.GetMethod("ShutDown"); method.Invoke(x, new object[] { 4 }) As you can see I do not create instance of object! And, as I can supposed, I receive exception Non-static method requires a target And Question, Can I call method of interface using reflection without creating instance of interface and if YES, How I can do it ? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • C# 4.0: Named And Optional Arguments

    - by Paulo Morgado
    As part of the co-evolution effort of C# and Visual Basic, C# 4.0 introduces Named and Optional Arguments. First of all, let’s clarify what are arguments and parameters: Method definition parameters are the input variables of the method. Method call arguments are the values provided to the method parameters. In fact, the C# Language Specification states the following on §7.5: The argument list (§7.5.1) of a function member invocation provides actual values or variable references for the parameters of the function member. Given the above definitions, we can state that: Parameters have always been named and still are. Parameters have never been optional and still aren’t. Named Arguments Until now, the way the C# compiler matched method call definition arguments with method parameters was by position. The first argument provides the value for the first parameter, the second argument provides the value for the second parameter, and so on and so on, regardless of the name of the parameters. If a parameter was missing a corresponding argument to provide its value, the compiler would emit a compilation error. For this call: Greeting("Mr.", "Morgado", 42); this method: public void Greeting(string title, string name, int age) will receive as parameters: title: “Mr.” name: “Morgado” age: 42 What this new feature allows is to use the names of the parameters to identify the corresponding arguments in the form: name:value Not all arguments in the argument list must be named. However, all named arguments must be at the end of the argument list. The matching between arguments (and the evaluation of its value) and parameters will be done first by name for the named arguments and than by position for the unnamed arguments. This means that, for this method definition: public static void Method(int first, int second, int third) this call declaration: int i = 0; Method(i, third: i++, second: ++i); will have this code generated by the compiler: int i = 0; int CS$0$0000 = i++; int CS$0$0001 = ++i; Method(i, CS$0$0001, CS$0$0000); which will give the method the following parameter values: first: 2 second: 2 third: 0 Notice the variable names. Although invalid being invalid C# identifiers, they are valid .NET identifiers and thus avoiding collision between user written and compiler generated code. Besides allowing to re-order of the argument list, this feature is very useful for auto-documenting the code, for example, when the argument list is very long or not clear, from the call site, what the arguments are. Optional Arguments Parameters can now have default values: public static void Method(int first, int second = 2, int third = 3) Parameters with default values must be the last in the parameter list and its value is used as the value of the parameter if the corresponding argument is missing from the method call declaration. For this call declaration: int i = 0; Method(i, third: ++i); will have this code generated by the compiler: int i = 0; int CS$0$0000 = ++i; Method(i, 2, CS$0$0000); which will give the method the following parameter values: first: 1 second: 2 third: 1 Because, when method parameters have default values, arguments can be omitted from the call declaration, this might seem like method overloading or a good replacement for it, but it isn’t. Although methods like this: public static StreamReader OpenTextFile( string path, Encoding encoding = null, bool detectEncoding = true, int bufferSize = 1024) allow to have its calls written like this: OpenTextFile("foo.txt", Encoding.UTF8); OpenTextFile("foo.txt", Encoding.UTF8, bufferSize: 4096); OpenTextFile( bufferSize: 4096, path: "foo.txt", detectEncoding: false); The complier handles default values like constant fields taking the value and useing it instead of a reference to the value. So, like with constant fields, methods with parameters with default values are exposed publicly (and remember that internal members might be publicly accessible – InternalsVisibleToAttribute). If such methods are publicly accessible and used by another assembly, those values will be hard coded in the calling code and, if the called assembly has its default values changed, they won’t be assumed by already compiled code. At the first glance, I though that using optional arguments for “bad” written code was great, but the ability to write code like that was just pure evil. But than I realized that, since I use private constant fields, it’s OK to use default parameter values on privately accessed methods.

    Read the article

  • When is a method eligible to be inlined by the CLR?

    - by Ani
    I've observed a lot of "stack-introspective" code in applications, which often implicitly rely on their containing methods not being inlined for their correctness. Such methods commonly involve calls to: MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod Assembly.GetCallingAssembly Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly Now, I find the information surrounding these methods to be very confusing. I've heard that the run-time will not inline a method that calls GetCurrentMethod, but I can't find any documentation to that effect. I've seen posts on StackOverflow on several occasions, such as this one, indicating the CLR does not inline cross-assembly calls, but the GetCallingAssembly documentation strongly indicates otherwise. There's also the much-maligned [MethodImpl(MethodImpOptions.NoInlining)], but I am unsure if the CLR considers this to be a "request" or a "command." Note that I am asking about inlining eligibility from the standpoint of contract, not about when current implementations of the JITter decline to consider methods because of implementation difficulties, or about when the JITter finally ends up choosing to inline an eligible method after assessing the trade-offs. I have read this and this, but they seem to be more focused on the last two points (there are passing mentions of MethodImpOptions.NoInlining and "exotic IL instructions", but these seem to be presented as heuristics rather than as obligations). When is the CLR allowed to inline?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework LINQ Query using Custom C# Class Method - Once yes, once no - because executing on the client or in SQL?

    - by BrooklynDev
    I have two Entity Framework 4 Linq queries I wrote that make use of a custom class method, one works and one does not: The custom method is: public static DateTime GetLastReadToDate(string fbaUsername, Discussion discussion) { return (discussion.DiscussionUserReads.Where(dur => dur.User.aspnet_User.UserName == fbaUsername).FirstOrDefault() ?? new DiscussionUserRead { ReadToDate = DateTime.Now.AddYears(-99) }).ReadToDate; } The linq query that works calls a from after a from, the equivalent of SelectMany(): from g in oc.Users.Where(u => u.aspnet_User.UserName == fbaUsername).First().Groups from d in g.Discussions select new { UnReadPostCount = d.Posts.Where(p => p.CreatedDate > DiscussionRepository.GetLastReadToDate(fbaUsername, p.Discussion)).Count() }; The query that does not work is more like a regular select: from d in oc.Discussions where d.Group.Name == "Student" select new { UnReadPostCount = d.Posts.Where(p => p.CreatedDate > DiscussionRepository.GetLastReadToDate(fbaUsername, p.Discussion)).Count(), }; The error I get is: LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'System.DateTime GetLastReadToDate(System.String, Discussion)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression. My question is, why am I able to use my custom GetLastReadToDate() method in the first query and not the second? I suppose this has something to do with what gets executed on the db server and what gets executed on the client? These queries seem to use the GetLastReadToDate() method so similarly though, I'm wondering why would work for the first and not the second, and most importantly if there's a way to factor common query syntax like what's in the GetLastReadToDate() method into a separate location to be reused in several different places LINQ queries. Please note all these queries are sharing the same object context.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >