Search Results

Search found 4593 results on 184 pages for 'constructor injection'.

Page 13/184 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Unity Framework constructor parameters in MVC

    - by ubersteve
    I have an ASP.NET MVC3 site that I want to be able to use different types of email service, depending on how busy the site is. Consider the following: public interface IEmailService { void SendEmail(MailMessage mailMessage); } public class LocalEmailService : IEmailService { public LocalEmailService() { // no setup required } public void SendEmail(MailMessage mailMessage) { // send email via local smtp server, write it to a text file, whatever } } public class BetterEmailService : IEmailService { public BetterEmailService (string smtpServer, string portNumber, string username, string password) { // initialize the object with the parameters } public void SendEmail(MailMessage mailMessage) { //actually send the email } } Whilst the site is in development, all of my controllers will send emails via the LocalEmailService; when the site is in production, they will use the BetterEmailService. My question is twofold: 1) How exactly do I pass the BetterEmailService constructor parameters? Is it something like this (from ~/Bootstrapper.cs): private static IUnityContainer BuildUnityContainer() { var container = new UnityContainer(); container.RegisterType<IEmailService, BetterEmailService>("server name", "port", "username", "password"); return container; } 2) Is there a better way of doing that - i.e. putting those keys in the web.config or another configuration file so that the site would not need to be recompiled to switch which email service it was using? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • Ruby - calling constructor without arguments & removal of new line characters

    - by Raj
    I am a newbie at Ruby, I have written down a sample program. I dont understand the following: Why constructor without any arguments are not called in Ruby? How do we access the class variable outside the class' definition? Why does it always append newline characters at the end of the string? How do we strip it? Code: class Employee attr_reader :empid attr_writer :empid attr_writer :name def name return @name.upcase end attr_accessor :salary @@employeeCount = 0 def initiaze() @@employeeCount += 1 puts ("Initialize called!") end def getCount return @@employeeCount end end anEmp = Employee.new print ("Enter new employee name: ") anEmp.name = gets() print ("Enter #{anEmp.name}'s employee ID: ") anEmp.empid = gets() print ("Enter salary for #{anEmp.name}: ") anEmp.salary = gets() theEmpName = anEmp.name.split.join("\n") theEmpID = anEmp.empid.split.join("\n") theEmpSalary = anEmp.salary.split.join("\n") anEmp = Employee.new() anEmp = Employee.new() theCount = anEmp.getCount puts ("New employee #{theEmpName} with employee ID #{theEmpID} has been enrolled, welcome to hell! You have been paid as low as $ #{theEmpSalary}") puts ("Total number of employees created = #{theCount}") Output: Enter new employee name: Lionel Messi Enter LIONEL MESSI 's employee ID: 10 Enter salary for LIONEL MESSI : 10000000 New employee LIONEL MESSI with employee ID 10 has been enrolled, welcome to hell! You have been paid as low as $ 10000000 Total number of employees created = 0 Thanks

    Read the article

  • stealing inside the move constructor

    - by FredOverflow
    During the implementation of the move constructor of a toy class, I noticed a pattern: array2D(array2D&& that) { data_ = that.data_; that.data_ = 0; height_ = that.height_; that.height_ = 0; width_ = that.width_; that.width_ = 0; size_ = that.size_; that.size_ = 0; } The pattern obviously being: member = that.member; that.member = 0; So I wrote a preprocessor macro to make stealing less verbose and error-prone: #define STEAL(member) member = that.member; that.member = 0; Now the implementation looks as following: array2D(array2D&& that) { STEAL(data_); STEAL(height_); STEAL(width_); STEAL(size_); } Are there any downsides to this? Is there a cleaner solution that does not require the preprocessor?

    Read the article

  • Inheritance and choose constructor from base class

    - by myle
    My question is rather simple, but I am stuck. How can I choose the desired constructor from base class? // node.h #ifndef NODE_H #define NODE_H #include <vector> // definition of an exception-class class WrongBoundsException { }; class Node { public: ... Node(double, double, std::vector<double>&) throw (WrongBoundsException); ... }; #endif // InternalNode.h #ifndef INTERNALNODE_H #define INTERNALNODE_H #include <vector> #include "Node.h" class InternalNode : public Node { public: // the position of the leftmost child (child left) int left_child; // the position of the parent int parent; InternalNode(double, double, std::vector<double>&, int parent, int left_child) throw (WrongBoundsException); private: int abcd; }; #endif // InternalNode.cpp #include "InternalNode.h" #define UNDEFINED_CHILD -1 #define ROOT -1 // Here is the problem InternalNode::InternalNode(double a, double b, std::vector<double> &v, int par, int lc) throw (WrongBoundsException) : Node(a, b, v), parent(par), left_child(lc) { std::cout << par << std::endl; } I get: $ g++ InternalNode.cpp InternalNode.cpp:16: error: declaration of ‘InternalNode::InternalNode(double, double, std::vector &, int, int) throw (WrongBoundsException)’ throws different exceptions InternalNode.h:17: error: from previous declaration ‘InternalNode::InternalNode(double, double, std::vector &, int, int)’ UPDATE 0: Fixed missing : UPDATE 1: Fixed throw exception

    Read the article

  • Copy constructor demo (crashing...)

    - by AKN
    Here is the program... class CopyCon { public: char *name; CopyCon() { name = new char; } CopyCon(const CopyCon &objCopyCon) { name = new char; _tcscpy(name,objCopyCon.name); } ~CopyCon() { if( name != NULL ) { delete name; name = NULL; } } }; int main() { CopyCon objCopyCon1; objCopyCon1.name = "Hai"; CopyCon objCopyCon2(objCopyCon1); objCopyCon1.name = "Hello"; cout<<objCopyCon2.name<<endl; return 0; } Once the code execution completes, when the destructor called, it crashes on 'delete' saying... Debug Error! Program: ... HEAP CORRUPTION DETECTED: after Normal block (#124) at 0x00366990. CRT detected that the application wrote to memory after end of heap buffer. (Press Retry to debug the application) Don't we have to clear the heap memory in destructor. What's wrong with this program? Pls someone help! Copy constructor works perfectly as intended. But still... !?

    Read the article

  • C++ Initialize array in constructor EXC_BAD_ACCESS

    - by user890395
    I'm creating a simple constructor and initializing an array: // Construtor Cinema::Cinema(){ // Initalize reservations for(int i = 0; i < 18; i++){ for(int j = 0; j < 12; j++){ setReservation(i, j, 0); } } // Set default name setMovieName("N/A"); // Set default price setPrice(8); } The setReservation function: void Cinema::setReservation(int row, int column, int reservation){ this->reservations[row][column] = reservation; } The setMovieName function: void Cinema::setMovieName(std::string movieName){ this->movieName = movieName; } For some odd reason when I run the program, the setMovieName function gives the following error: "Program Received Signal: EXC_BAD_ACCESS" If I take out the for-loop that initializes the array of reservations, the problem goes away and the movie name is set without any problems. Any idea what I'm doing wrong? This is the Cinema.h file: #ifndef Cinema_h #define Cinema_h class Cinema{ private: int reservations[17][11]; std::string movieName; float price; public: // Construtor Cinema(); // getters/setters int getReservation(int row, int column); int getNumReservations(); std::string getMovieName(); float getPrice(); void setReservation(int row, int column, int reservation); void setMovieName(std::string movieName); void setPrice(float price); }; #endif

    Read the article

  • Should a C++ constructor do real work?

    - by Wade Williams
    I'm strugging with some advice I have in the back of my mind but for which I can't remember the reasoning. I seem to remember at some point reading some advice (can't remember the source) that C++ constructors should not do real work. Rather, they should initialize variables only. The advice when on to explain that real work should be done in some sort of init() method, to be called separately after the instance was created. The situation is I have a class that represents a hardware device. It makes logical sense to me for the constructor to call the routines that query the device in order to build up the instance variables that describe the device. In other words, once new instantiates the object, the developer receives an object which is ready to be used, no separate call to object-init() required. Is there a good reason why constructors shouldn't do real work? Obviously it could slow allocation time, but that wouldn't be any different if calling a separate method immediately after allocation. Just trying to figure out what gotchas I not currently considering that might have lead to such advice.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practise to initialise fields outside of an explicit constructor

    - by MrTortoise
    So its monday and we are arguing about coding practises. The examples here are a litttle too simple, but the real deal has several constructors. In order to initialise the simple values (eg dates to their min value) I have moved the code out of the constructors and into the field definitions. public class ConstructorExample { string _string = "John"; } public class ConstructorExample2 { string _string; public ConstructorExample2() { _string = "John"; } } How should it be done by the book. I tend to be very case by case and so am maybe a little lax abotu this kind of thing. However i feel that accams razor tells me to move the initialisation out of multiple constructors. Of course I could always move this shared initialisation into a private method. The question is essentially ... is initialising fields where they are defined as opposed to the constructor bad in any way? The argument I am facing is one of error handling, but i do not feel it is relevant as there are no possible exceptions that won't be picked up at compile time.

    Read the article

  • calling constructor of the class in the destructor of the same class

    - by dicaprio
    Experts !! I know this question is one of the lousy one , but still I dared to open my mind , hoping I would learn from all. I was trying some examples as part of my routine and did this horrible thing, I called the constructor of the class from destructor of the same class. I don't really know if this is ever required in real programming , I cant think of any real time scenarios where we really need to call functions/CTOR in our destructor. Usually , destructor is meant for cleaning up. If my understanding is correct, why the compiler doesn't complain ? Is this because it is valid for some good reasons ? If so what are they ? I tried on Sun Forte, g++ and VC++ compiler and none of them complain about it. using namespace std; class test{ public: test(){ cout<<"CTOR"<<endl; } ~test() {cout<<"DTOR"<<endl; test(); }};

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection in ASP.NET MVC NerdDinner App using Unity 2.0

    - by shiju
    In my previous post Dependency Injection in ASP.NET MVC NerdDinner App using Ninject, we did dependency injection in NerdDinner application using Ninject. In this post, I demonstrate how to apply Dependency Injection in ASP.NET MVC NerdDinner App using Microsoft Unity Application Block (Unity) v 2.0.Unity 2.0Unity 2.0 is available on Codeplex at http://unity.codeplex.com . In earlier versions of Unity, the ObjectBuilder generic dependency injection mechanism, was distributed as a separate assembly, is now integrated with Unity core assembly. So you no longer need to reference the ObjectBuilder assembly in your applications. Two additional Built-In Lifetime Managers - HierarchicalifetimeManager and PerResolveLifetimeManager have been added to Unity 2.0.Dependency Injection in NerdDinner using UnityIn my Ninject post on NerdDinner, we have discussed the interfaces and concrete types of NerdDinner application and how to inject dependencies controller constructors. The following steps will configure Unity 2.0 to apply controller injection in NerdDinner application. Step 1 – Add reference for Unity Application BlockOpen the NerdDinner solution and add  reference to Microsoft.Practices.Unity.dll and Microsoft.Practices.Unity.Configuration.dllYou can download Unity from at http://unity.codeplex.com .Step 2 – Controller Factory for Unity The controller factory is responsible for creating controller instances.We extend the built in default controller factory with our own factory for working Unity with ASP.NET MVC. public class UnityControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory {     protected override IController GetControllerInstance(RequestContext reqContext, Type controllerType)     {         IController controller;         if (controllerType == null)             throw new HttpException(                     404, String.Format(                         "The controller for path '{0}' could not be found" +         "or it does not implement IController.",                     reqContext.HttpContext.Request.Path));           if (!typeof(IController).IsAssignableFrom(controllerType))             throw new ArgumentException(                     string.Format(                         "Type requested is not a controller: {0}",                         controllerType.Name),                         "controllerType");         try         {             controller = MvcUnityContainer.Container.Resolve(controllerType)                             as IController;         }         catch (Exception ex)         {             throw new InvalidOperationException(String.Format(                                     "Error resolving controller {0}",                                     controllerType.Name), ex);         }         return controller;     }   }   public static class MvcUnityContainer {     public static IUnityContainer Container { get; set; } }  Step 3 – Register Types and Set Controller Factory private void ConfigureUnity() {     //Create UnityContainer               IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer()     .RegisterType<IFormsAuthentication, FormsAuthenticationService>()     .RegisterType<IMembershipService, AccountMembershipService>()     .RegisterInstance<MembershipProvider>(Membership.Provider)     .RegisterType<IDinnerRepository, DinnerRepository>();     //Set container for Controller Factory     MvcUnityContainer.Container = container;     //Set Controller Factory as UnityControllerFactory     ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(                         typeof(UnityControllerFactory));            } Unity 2.0 provides a fluent interface for type configuration. Now you can call all the methods in a single statement.The above Unity configuration specified in the ConfigureUnity method tells that, to inject instance of DinnerRepositiry when there is a request for IDinnerRepositiry and  inject instance of FormsAuthenticationService when there is a request for IFormsAuthentication and inject instance of AccountMembershipService when there is a request for IMembershipService. The AccountMembershipService class has a dependency with ASP.NET Membership provider. So we configure that inject the instance of Membership Provider.After the registering the types, we set UnityControllerFactory as the current controller factory. //Set container for Controller Factory MvcUnityContainer.Container = container; //Set Controller Factory as UnityControllerFactory ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(                     typeof(UnityControllerFactory)); When you register a type  by using the RegisterType method, the default behavior is for the container to use a transient lifetime manager. It creates a new instance of the registered, mapped, or requested type each time you call the Resolve or ResolveAll method or when the dependency mechanism injects instances into other classes. The following are the LifetimeManagers provided by Unity 2.0ContainerControlledLifetimeManager - Implements a singleton behavior for objects. The object is disposed of when you dispose of the container.ExternallyControlledLifetimeManager - Implements a singleton behavior but the container doesn't hold a reference to object which will be disposed of when out of scope.HierarchicalifetimeManager - Implements a singleton behavior for objects. However, child containers don't share instances with parents.PerResolveLifetimeManager - Implements a behavior similar to the transient lifetime manager except that instances are reused across build-ups of the object graph.PerThreadLifetimeManager - Implements a singleton behavior for objects but limited to the current thread.TransientLifetimeManager - Returns a new instance of the requested type for each call. (default behavior)We can also create custome lifetime manager for Unity container. The following code creating a custom lifetime manager to store container in the current HttpContext. public class HttpContextLifetimeManager<T> : LifetimeManager, IDisposable {     public override object GetValue()     {         return HttpContext.Current.Items[typeof(T).AssemblyQualifiedName];     }     public override void RemoveValue()     {         HttpContext.Current.Items.Remove(typeof(T).AssemblyQualifiedName);     }     public override void SetValue(object newValue)     {         HttpContext.Current.Items[typeof(T).AssemblyQualifiedName]             = newValue;     }     public void Dispose()     {         RemoveValue();     } }  Step 4 – Modify Global.asax.cs for configure Unity container In the Application_Start event, we call the ConfigureUnity method for configuring the Unity container and set controller factory as UnityControllerFactory void Application_Start() {     RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);       ViewEngines.Engines.Clear();     ViewEngines.Engines.Add(new MobileCapableWebFormViewEngine());     ConfigureUnity(); }Download CodeYou can download the modified NerdDinner code from http://nerddinneraddons.codeplex.com

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic proxy generator with c# – Part 3 – Creating the constructors

    - by SeanMcAlinden
    Creating a dynamic proxy generator with c# – Part 1 – Creating the Assembly builder, Module builder and caching mechanism Creating a dynamic proxy generator with c# – Part 2 – Interceptor Design For the latest code go to http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/ When building our proxy type, the first thing we need to do is build the constructors. There needs to be a corresponding constructor for each constructor on the passed in base type. We also want to create a field to store the interceptors and construct this list within each constructor. So assuming the passed in base type is a User<int, IRepository> class, were looking to generate constructor code like the following:   Default Constructor public User`2_RapidDynamicBaseProxy() {     this.interceptors = new List<IInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>>>();     DefaultInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>> item = new DefaultInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>>();     this.interceptors.Add(item); }     Parameterised Constructor public User`2_RapidDynamicBaseProxy(IRepository repository1) : base(repository1) {     this.interceptors = new List<IInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>>>();     DefaultInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>> item = new DefaultInterceptor<User<int, IRepository>>();     this.interceptors.Add(item); }   As you can see, we first populate a field on the class with a new list of the passed in base type. Construct our DefaultInterceptor class. Add the DefaultInterceptor instance to our interceptor collection. Although this seems like a relatively small task, there is a fair amount of work require to get this going. Instead of going through every line of code – please download the latest from http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/ and debug through. In this post I’m going to concentrate on explaining how it works. TypeBuilder The TypeBuilder class is the main class used to create the type. You instantiate a new TypeBuilder using the assembly module we created in part 1. /// <summary> /// Creates a type builder. /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TBase">The type of the base class to be proxied.</typeparam> public static TypeBuilder CreateTypeBuilder<TBase>() where TBase : class {     TypeBuilder typeBuilder = DynamicModuleCache.Get.DefineType         (             CreateTypeName<TBase>(),             TypeAttributes.Class | TypeAttributes.Public,             typeof(TBase),             new Type[] { typeof(IProxy) }         );       if (typeof(TBase).IsGenericType)     {         GenericsHelper.MakeGenericType(typeof(TBase), typeBuilder);     }       return typeBuilder; }   private static string CreateTypeName<TBase>() where TBase : class {     return string.Format("{0}_RapidDynamicBaseProxy", typeof(TBase).Name); } As you can see, I’ve create a new public class derived from TBase which also implements my IProxy interface, this is used later for adding interceptors. If the base type is generic, the following GenericsHelper.MakeGenericType method is called. GenericsHelper using System; using System.Reflection.Emit; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Types.Helpers {     /// <summary>     /// Helper class for generic types and methods.     /// </summary>     internal static class GenericsHelper     {         /// <summary>         /// Makes the typeBuilder a generic.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="concrete">The concrete.</param>         /// <param name="typeBuilder">The type builder.</param>         public static void MakeGenericType(Type baseType, TypeBuilder typeBuilder)         {             Type[] genericArguments = baseType.GetGenericArguments();               string[] genericArgumentNames = GetArgumentNames(genericArguments);               GenericTypeParameterBuilder[] genericTypeParameterBuilder                 = typeBuilder.DefineGenericParameters(genericArgumentNames);               typeBuilder.MakeGenericType(genericTypeParameterBuilder);         }           /// <summary>         /// Gets the argument names from an array of generic argument types.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="genericArguments">The generic arguments.</param>         public static string[] GetArgumentNames(Type[] genericArguments)         {             string[] genericArgumentNames = new string[genericArguments.Length];               for (int i = 0; i < genericArguments.Length; i++)             {                 genericArgumentNames[i] = genericArguments[i].Name;             }               return genericArgumentNames;         }     } }       As you can see, I’m getting all of the generic argument types and names, creating a GenericTypeParameterBuilder and then using the typeBuilder to make the new type generic. InterceptorsField The interceptors field will store a List<IInterceptor<TBase>>. Fields are simple made using the FieldBuilder class. The following code demonstrates how to create the interceptor field. FieldBuilder interceptorsField = typeBuilder.DefineField(     "interceptors",     typeof(System.Collections.Generic.List<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(IInterceptor<TBase>)),       FieldAttributes.Private     ); The field will now exist with the new Type although it currently has no data – we’ll deal with this in the constructor. Add method for interceptorsField To enable us to add to the interceptorsField list, we are going to utilise the Add method that already exists within the System.Collections.Generic.List class. We still however have to create the methodInfo necessary to call the add method. This can be done similar to the following: Add Interceptor Field MethodInfo addInterceptor = typeof(List<>)     .MakeGenericType(new Type[] { typeof(IInterceptor<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(TBase)) })     .GetMethod     (        "Add",        BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic,        null,        new Type[] { typeof(IInterceptor<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(TBase)) },        null     ); So we’ve create a List<IInterceptor<TBase>> type, then using the type created a method info called Add which accepts an IInterceptor<TBase>. Now in our constructor we can use this to call this.interceptors.Add(// interceptor); Building the Constructors This will be the first hard-core part of the proxy building process so I’m going to show the class and then try to explain what everything is doing. For a clear view, download the source from http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/, go to the test project and debug through the constructor building section. Anyway, here it is: DynamicConstructorBuilder using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Reflection; using System.Reflection.Emit; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Interception; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Types.Helpers; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Types.Constructors {     /// <summary>     /// Class for creating the proxy constructors.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicConstructorBuilder     {         /// <summary>         /// Builds the constructors.         /// </summary>         /// <typeparam name="TBase">The base type.</typeparam>         /// <param name="typeBuilder">The type builder.</param>         /// <param name="interceptorsField">The interceptors field.</param>         public static void BuildConstructors<TBase>             (                 TypeBuilder typeBuilder,                 FieldBuilder interceptorsField,                 MethodInfo addInterceptor             )             where TBase : class         {             ConstructorInfo interceptorsFieldConstructor = CreateInterceptorsFieldConstructor<TBase>();               ConstructorInfo defaultInterceptorConstructor = CreateDefaultInterceptorConstructor<TBase>();               ConstructorInfo[] constructors = typeof(TBase).GetConstructors();               foreach (ConstructorInfo constructorInfo in constructors)             {                 CreateConstructor<TBase>                     (                         typeBuilder,                         interceptorsField,                         interceptorsFieldConstructor,                         defaultInterceptorConstructor,                         addInterceptor,                         constructorInfo                     );             }         }           #region Private Methods           private static void CreateConstructor<TBase>             (                 TypeBuilder typeBuilder,                 FieldBuilder interceptorsField,                 ConstructorInfo interceptorsFieldConstructor,                 ConstructorInfo defaultInterceptorConstructor,                 MethodInfo AddDefaultInterceptor,                 ConstructorInfo constructorInfo             ) where TBase : class         {             Type[] parameterTypes = GetParameterTypes(constructorInfo);               ConstructorBuilder constructorBuilder = CreateConstructorBuilder(typeBuilder, parameterTypes);               ILGenerator cIL = constructorBuilder.GetILGenerator();               LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable =                 cIL.DeclareLocal(typeof(DefaultInterceptor<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(TBase)));               ConstructInterceptorsField(interceptorsField, interceptorsFieldConstructor, cIL);               ConstructDefaultInterceptor(defaultInterceptorConstructor, cIL, defaultInterceptorMethodVariable);               AddDefaultInterceptorToInterceptorsList                 (                     interceptorsField,                     AddDefaultInterceptor,                     cIL,                     defaultInterceptorMethodVariable                 );               CreateConstructor(constructorInfo, parameterTypes, cIL);         }           private static void CreateConstructor(ConstructorInfo constructorInfo, Type[] parameterTypes, ILGenerator cIL)         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);               if (parameterTypes.Length > 0)             {                 LoadParameterTypes(parameterTypes, cIL);             }               cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Call, constructorInfo);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ret);         }           private static void LoadParameterTypes(Type[] parameterTypes, ILGenerator cIL)         {             for (int i = 1; i <= parameterTypes.Length; i++)             {                 cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_S, i);             }         }           private static void AddDefaultInterceptorToInterceptorsList             (                 FieldBuilder interceptorsField,                 MethodInfo AddDefaultInterceptor,                 ILGenerator cIL,                 LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable             )         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldfld, interceptorsField);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldloc, defaultInterceptorMethodVariable);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Callvirt, AddDefaultInterceptor);         }           private static void ConstructDefaultInterceptor             (                 ConstructorInfo defaultInterceptorConstructor,                 ILGenerator cIL,                 LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable             )         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, defaultInterceptorConstructor);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Stloc, defaultInterceptorMethodVariable);         }           private static void ConstructInterceptorsField             (                 FieldBuilder interceptorsField,                 ConstructorInfo interceptorsFieldConstructor,                 ILGenerator cIL             )         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, interceptorsFieldConstructor);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Stfld, interceptorsField);         }           private static ConstructorBuilder CreateConstructorBuilder(TypeBuilder typeBuilder, Type[] parameterTypes)         {             return typeBuilder.DefineConstructor                 (                     MethodAttributes.Public | MethodAttributes.SpecialName | MethodAttributes.RTSpecialName                     | MethodAttributes.HideBySig, CallingConventions.Standard, parameterTypes                 );         }           private static Type[] GetParameterTypes(ConstructorInfo constructorInfo)         {             ParameterInfo[] parameterInfoArray = constructorInfo.GetParameters();               Type[] parameterTypes = new Type[parameterInfoArray.Length];               for (int p = 0; p < parameterInfoArray.Length; p++)             {                 parameterTypes[p] = parameterInfoArray[p].ParameterType;             }               return parameterTypes;         }           private static ConstructorInfo CreateInterceptorsFieldConstructor<TBase>() where TBase : class         {             return ConstructorHelper.CreateGenericConstructorInfo                 (                     typeof(List<>),                     new Type[] { typeof(IInterceptor<TBase>) },                     BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic                 );         }           private static ConstructorInfo CreateDefaultInterceptorConstructor<TBase>() where TBase : class         {             return ConstructorHelper.CreateGenericConstructorInfo                 (                     typeof(DefaultInterceptor<>),                     new Type[] { typeof(TBase) },                     BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic                 );         }           #endregion     } } So, the first two tasks within the class should be fairly clear, we are creating a ConstructorInfo for the interceptorField list and a ConstructorInfo for the DefaultConstructor, this is for instantiating them in each contructor. We then using Reflection get an array of all of the constructors in the base class, we then loop through the array and create a corresponding proxy contructor. Hopefully, the code is fairly easy to follow other than some new types and the dreaded Opcodes. ConstructorBuilder This class defines a new constructor on the type. ILGenerator The ILGenerator allows the use of Reflection.Emit to create the method body. LocalBuilder The local builder allows the storage of data in local variables within a method, in this case it’s the constructed DefaultInterceptor. Constructing the interceptors field The first bit of IL you’ll come across as you follow through the code is the following private method used for constructing the field list of interceptors. private static void ConstructInterceptorsField             (                 FieldBuilder interceptorsField,                 ConstructorInfo interceptorsFieldConstructor,                 ILGenerator cIL             )         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, interceptorsFieldConstructor);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Stfld, interceptorsField);         } The first thing to know about generating code using IL is that you are using a stack, if you want to use something, you need to push it up the stack etc. etc. OpCodes.ldArg_0 This opcode is a really interesting one, basically each method has a hidden first argument of the containing class instance (apart from static classes), constructors are no different. This is the reason you can use syntax like this.myField. So back to the method, as we want to instantiate the List in the interceptorsField, first we need to load the class instance onto the stack, we then load the new object (new List<TBase>) and finally we store it in the interceptorsField. Hopefully, that should follow easily enough in the method. In each constructor you would now have this.interceptors = new List<User<int, IRepository>>(); Constructing and storing the DefaultInterceptor The next bit of code we need to create is the constructed DefaultInterceptor. Firstly, we create a local builder to store the constructed type. Create a local builder LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable =     cIL.DeclareLocal(typeof(DefaultInterceptor<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(TBase))); Once our local builder is ready, we then need to construct the DefaultInterceptor<TBase> and store it in the variable. Connstruct DefaultInterceptor private static void ConstructDefaultInterceptor     (         ConstructorInfo defaultInterceptorConstructor,         ILGenerator cIL,         LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable     ) {     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, defaultInterceptorConstructor);     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Stloc, defaultInterceptorMethodVariable); } As you can see, using the ConstructorInfo named defaultInterceptorConstructor, we load the new object onto the stack. Then using the store local opcode (OpCodes.Stloc), we store the new object in the local builder named defaultInterceptorMethodVariable. Add the constructed DefaultInterceptor to the interceptors field collection Using the add method created earlier in this post, we are going to add the new DefaultInterceptor object to the interceptors field collection. Add Default Interceptor private static void AddDefaultInterceptorToInterceptorsList     (         FieldBuilder interceptorsField,         MethodInfo AddDefaultInterceptor,         ILGenerator cIL,         LocalBuilder defaultInterceptorMethodVariable     ) {     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldfld, interceptorsField);     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldloc, defaultInterceptorMethodVariable);     cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Callvirt, AddDefaultInterceptor); } So, here’s whats going on. The class instance is first loaded onto the stack using the load argument at index 0 opcode (OpCodes.Ldarg_0) (remember the first arg is the hidden class instance). The interceptorsField is then loaded onto the stack using the load field opcode (OpCodes.Ldfld). We then load the DefaultInterceptor object we stored locally using the load local opcode (OpCodes.Ldloc). Then finally we call the AddDefaultInterceptor method using the call virtual opcode (Opcodes.Callvirt). Completing the constructor The last thing we need to do is complete the constructor. Complete the constructor private static void CreateConstructor(ConstructorInfo constructorInfo, Type[] parameterTypes, ILGenerator cIL)         {             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);               if (parameterTypes.Length > 0)             {                 LoadParameterTypes(parameterTypes, cIL);             }               cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Call, constructorInfo);             cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ret);         }           private static void LoadParameterTypes(Type[] parameterTypes, ILGenerator cIL)         {             for (int i = 1; i <= parameterTypes.Length; i++)             {                 cIL.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_S, i);             }         } So, the first thing we do again is load the class instance using the load argument at index 0 opcode (OpCodes.Ldarg_0). We then load each parameter using OpCode.Ldarg_S, this opcode allows us to specify an index position for each argument. We then setup calling the base constructor using OpCodes.Call and the base constructors ConstructorInfo. Finally, all methods are required to return, even when they have a void return. As there are no values on the stack after the OpCodes.Call line, we can safely call the OpCode.Ret to give the constructor a void return. If there was a value, we would have to pop the value of the stack before calling return otherwise, the method would try and return a value. Conclusion This was a slightly hardcore post but hopefully it hasn’t been too hard to follow. The main thing is that a number of the really useful opcodes have been used and now the dynamic proxy is capable of being constructed. If you download the code and debug through the tests at http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/, you’ll be able to create proxies at this point, they cannon do anything in terms of interception but you can happily run the tests, call base methods and properties and also take a look at the created assembly in Reflector. Hope this is useful. The next post should be up soon, it will be covering creating the private methods for calling the base class methods and properties. Kind Regards, Sean.

    Read the article

  • Unity The parameter host could not be resolved when attempting to call constructor

    - by Terrance
    When I attempt to instantiate my instance of the base class I get the error: a ResolutionFailedException with roughly the following error "The parameter host could not be resolved when attempting to call constructor" I'm currently not using an Interface for the base type and my instance of the class is inheriting the base type class. I'm new to Unity and DI so I'm thinking its something I forgot possibly. ExeConfigurationFileMap map = new ExeConfigurationFileMap(); map.ExeConfigFilename = "Unity.Config"; Configuration config = ConfigurationManager.OpenMappedExeConfiguration(map, ConfigurationUserLevel.None); UnityConfigurationSection section = (UnityConfigurationSection)config.GetSection("unity"); IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer(); section.Containers.Default.Configure(container); //Throws exception here on this BaseCalculatorServer server = container.Resolve<BaseCalculatorServer>(); and the Unity.Config file <container> <types> <type name ="CalculatorServer" type="Calculator.Logic.BaseCalculatorServer, Calculator.Logic" mapTo="Calculator.Logic.CalculateApi, Calculator.Logic"/> </types> </container> </containers> The Base class using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Runtime.Serialization; using System.ServiceModel; using System.ServiceModel.Transactions; using Microsoft.Practices.Unity; using Calculator.Logic; namespace Calculator.Logic { public class BaseCalculatorServer : IDisposable { public BaseCalculatorServer(){} public CalculateDelegate Calculate { get; set; } public CalculationHistoryDelegate CalculationHistory { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Performs application-defined tasks associated with freeing, releasing, or resetting unmanaged resources. /// </summary> public void Dispose() { this.Dispose(); } } } The Implementation using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using Calculator.Logic; using System.ServiceModel; using System.ServiceModel.Configuration; using Microsoft.Practices.Unity; namespace Calculator.Logic { public class CalculateApi:BaseCalculatorServer { public CalculateApi(ServiceHost host) { host.Open(); Console.WriteLine("Press Enter To Exit"); Console.ReadLine(); host.Close(); } public CalculateDelegate Calculate { get; set; } public CalculationHistoryDelegate CalculationHistory { get; set; } } } Yes both base class and implementation are in the same Namespace and thats something design wise that will change once I get this working. Oh and a more detailed error Resolution of the dependency failed, type = "Calculator.Logic.BaseCalculatorServer", name = "". Exception message is: The current build operation (build key Build Key[Calculator.Logic.BaseCalculatorServer, null]) failed: The value for the property "Calculate" could not be resolved. (Strategy type BuildPlanStrategy, index 3)

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection in ASP.NET Web API using Autofac

    - by shiju
    In this post, I will demonstrate how to use Dependency Injection in ASP.NET Web API using Autofac in an ASP.NET MVC 4 app. The new ASP.NET Web API is a great framework for building HTTP services. The Autofac IoC container provides the better integration with ASP.NET Web API for applying dependency injection. The NuGet package Autofac.WebApi provides the  Dependency Injection support for ASP.NET Web API services. Using Autofac in ASP.NET Web API The following command in the Package Manager console will install Autofac.WebApi package into your ASP.NET Web API application. PM > Install-Package Autofac.WebApi The following code block imports the necessary namespaces for using Autofact.WebApi using Autofac; using Autofac.Integration.WebApi; .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The following code in the Bootstrapper class configures the Autofac. 1: public static class Bootstrapper 2: { 3: public static void Run() 4: { 5: SetAutofacWebAPI(); 6: } 7: private static void SetAutofacWebAPI() 8: { 9: var configuration = GlobalConfiguration.Configuration; 10: var builder = new ContainerBuilder(); 11: // Configure the container 12: builder.ConfigureWebApi(configuration); 13: // Register API controllers using assembly scanning. 14: builder.RegisterApiControllers(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly()); 15: builder.RegisterType<DefaultCommandBus>().As<ICommandBus>() 16: .InstancePerApiRequest(); 17: builder.RegisterType<UnitOfWork>().As<IUnitOfWork>() 18: .InstancePerApiRequest(); 19: builder.RegisterType<DatabaseFactory>().As<IDatabaseFactory>() 20: .InstancePerApiRequest(); 21: builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(typeof(CategoryRepository) 22: .Assembly).Where(t => t.Name.EndsWith("Repository")) 23: .AsImplementedInterfaces().InstancePerApiRequest(); 24: var services = Assembly.Load("EFMVC.Domain"); 25: builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(services) 26: .AsClosedTypesOf(typeof(ICommandHandler<>)) 27: .InstancePerApiRequest(); 28: builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(services) 29: .AsClosedTypesOf(typeof(IValidationHandler<>)) 30: .InstancePerApiRequest(); 31: var container = builder.Build(); 32: // Set the WebApi dependency resolver. 33: var resolver = new AutofacWebApiDependencyResolver(container); 34: configuration.ServiceResolver.SetResolver(resolver); 35: } 36: } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The RegisterApiControllers method will scan the given assembly and register the all ApiController classes. This method will look for types that derive from IHttpController with name convention end with “Controller”. The InstancePerApiRequest method specifies the life time of the component for once per API controller invocation. The GlobalConfiguration.Configuration provides a ServiceResolver class which can be use set dependency resolver for ASP.NET Web API. In our example, we are using AutofacWebApiDependencyResolver class provided by Autofac.WebApi to set the dependency resolver. The Run method of Bootstrapper class is calling from Application_Start method of Global.asax.cs. 1: protected void Application_Start() 2: { 3: AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); 4: RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilters.Filters); 5: RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); 6: BundleTable.Bundles.RegisterTemplateBundles(); 7: //Call Autofac DI configurations 8: Bootstrapper.Run(); 9: } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Autofac.Mvc4 The Autofac framework’s integration with ASP.NET MVC has updated for ASP.NET MVC 4. The NuGet package Autofac.Mvc4 provides the dependency injection support for ASP.NET MVC 4. There is not any syntax change between Autofac.Mvc3 and Autofac.Mvc4 Source Code I have updated my EFMVC app with Autofac.WebApi for applying dependency injection for it’s ASP.NET Web API services. EFMVC app also updated to Autofac.Mvc4 for it’s ASP.NET MVC 4 web app. The above code sample is taken from the EFMVC app. You can download the source code of EFMVC app from http://efmvc.codeplex.com/

    Read the article

  • C++: Retriving values of static const variables at a constructor of a static variable

    - by gilbertc
    I understand that the code below would result segmentation fault because at the cstr of A, B::SYMBOL was not initialized yet. But why? In reality, A is an object that serves as a map that maps the SYMBOLs of classes like B to their respective IDs. C holds this map(A) static-ly such that it can provide the mapping as a class function. The primary function of A is to serve as a map for C that initializes itself at startup. How should I be able to do that without segmentation fault, provided that I can still use B::ID and B::SYMBOL in the code (no #define pls)? Thanks! Gil. class A { public: A() { std::cout<<B::ID<<std::endl; std::cout<<B::SYMBOL<<std::endl; } }; class B { public: static const int ID; static const std::string SYMBOL; } const int B::ID = 1; const std::string B::SYMBOL = "B"; class C { public: static A s_A; }; A C::s_A; int main(int c, char** p) { }

    Read the article

  • add methods in subclasses within the super class constructor

    - by deamon
    I want to add methods (more specifically: method aliases) automatically to Python subclasses. If the subclass defines a method named 'get' I want to add a method alias 'GET' to the dictionary of the subclass. To not repeat myself I'd like to define this modifation routine in the base class. But if I check in the base class init method, there is no such method, since it is defined in the subclass. It will become more clear with some source code: class Base: def __init__(self): if hasattr(self, "get"): setattr(self, "GET", self.get) class Sub(Base): def get(): pass print(dir(Sub)) Output: ['__doc__', '__init__', '__module__', 'get'] It should also contain 'GET'. Is there a way to do it within the base class?

    Read the article

  • Copy constructor demo (crashing... case 2)

    - by AKN
    Please have a glance at this program: class CopyCon { public: char *name; CopyCon() { name = new char[20]; name = "Hai";//_tcscpy(name,"Hai"); } CopyCon(const CopyCon &objCopyCon) { name = new char[_tcslen(objCopyCon.name)+1]; _tcscpy(name,objCopyCon.name); } ~CopyCon() { if( name != NULL ) { delete[] name; name = NULL; } } }; int main() { CopyCon obj1; CopyCon obj2(obj1); cout<<obj1.name<<endl; cout<<obj2.name<<endl; } This program crashes on execution. Error: "Expression: _BLOCK_TYPE_IS_VALID(pHead-nBlockUse)" If I assign "Hai" to name using aasignment operator, its crashing. Where as when I use string func _tcscpy to assign "Hai" to name, its working perfectly. Can some one explain why so?

    Read the article

  • Assignment operator that calls a constructor is broken

    - by Delan Azabani
    I've implemented some of the changes suggested in this question, and (thanks very much) it works quite well, however... in the process I've seemed to break the post-declaration assignment operator. With the following code: #include <cstdio> #include "ucpp" main() { ustring a = "test"; ustring b = "ing"; ustring c = "- -"; ustring d = "cafe\xcc\x81"; printf("%s\n", (a + b + c[1] + d).encode()); } I get a nice "testing cafe´" message. However, if I modify the code slightly so that the const char * conversion is done separately, post-declaration: #include <cstdio> #include "ucpp" main() { ustring a = "test"; ustring b = "ing"; ustring c = "- -"; ustring d; d = "cafe\xcc\x81"; printf("%s\n", (a + b + c[1] + d).encode()); } the ustring named d becomes blank, and all that is output is "testing ". My new code has three constructors, one void (which is probably the one being incorrectly used, and is used in the operator+ function), one that takes a const ustring &, and one that takes a const char *. The following is my new library code: #include <cstdlib> #include <cstring> class ustring { int * values; long len; public: long length() { return len; } ustring() { len = 0; values = (int *) malloc(0); } ustring(const ustring &input) { len = input.len; values = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int) * len); for (long i = 0; i < len; i++) values[i] = input.values[i]; } ustring operator=(ustring input) { ustring result(input); return result; } ustring(const char * input) { values = (int *) malloc(0); long s = 0; // s = number of parsed chars int a, b, c, d, contNeed = 0, cont = 0; for (long i = 0; input[i]; i++) if (input[i] < 0x80) { // ASCII, direct copy (00-7f) values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = input[i]; } else if (input[i] < 0xc0) { // this is a continuation (80-bf) if (cont == contNeed) { // no need for continuation, use U+fffd values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = 0xfffd; } cont = cont + 1; values[s - 1] = values[s - 1] | ((input[i] & 0x3f) << ((contNeed - cont) * 6)); if (cont == contNeed) cont = contNeed = 0; } else if (input[i] < 0xc2) { // invalid byte, use U+fffd (c0-c1) values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = 0xfffd; } else if (input[i] < 0xe0) { // start of 2-byte sequence (c2-df) contNeed = 1; values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = (input[i] & 0x1f) << 6; } else if (input[i] < 0xf0) { // start of 3-byte sequence (e0-ef) contNeed = 2; values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = (input[i] & 0x0f) << 12; } else if (input[i] < 0xf5) { // start of 4-byte sequence (f0-f4) contNeed = 3; values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = (input[i] & 0x07) << 18; } else { // restricted or invalid (f5-ff) values = (int *) realloc(values, sizeof(int) * ++s); values[s - 1] = 0xfffd; } len = s; } ustring operator=(const char * input) { ustring result(input); return result; } ustring operator+(ustring input) { ustring result; result.len = len + input.len; result.values = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int) * result.len); for (long i = 0; i < len; i++) result.values[i] = values[i]; for (long i = 0; i < input.len; i++) result.values[i + len] = input.values[i]; return result; } ustring operator[](long index) { ustring result; result.len = 1; result.values = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int)); result.values[0] = values[index]; return result; } char * encode() { char * r = (char *) malloc(0); long s = 0; for (long i = 0; i < len; i++) { if (values[i] < 0x80) r = (char *) realloc(r, s + 1), r[s + 0] = char(values[i]), s += 1; else if (values[i] < 0x800) r = (char *) realloc(r, s + 2), r[s + 0] = char(values[i] >> 6 | 0x60), r[s + 1] = char(values[i] & 0x3f | 0x80), s += 2; else if (values[i] < 0x10000) r = (char *) realloc(r, s + 3), r[s + 0] = char(values[i] >> 12 | 0xe0), r[s + 1] = char(values[i] >> 6 & 0x3f | 0x80), r[s + 2] = char(values[i] & 0x3f | 0x80), s += 3; else r = (char *) realloc(r, s + 4), r[s + 0] = char(values[i] >> 18 | 0xf0), r[s + 1] = char(values[i] >> 12 & 0x3f | 0x80), r[s + 2] = char(values[i] >> 6 & 0x3f | 0x80), r[s + 3] = char(values[i] & 0x3f | 0x80), s += 4; } return r; } };

    Read the article

  • jQuery.extend() not giving deep copy of object formed by constructor

    - by two7s_clash
    I'm trying to use this to clone a complicated Object. The object in question has a property that is an array of other Objects, and each of these have properties of different types, mostly primitives, but a couple further Objects and Arrays. For example, an ellipsed version of what I am trying to clone: var asset = new Assets(); function Assets() { this.values = []; this.sectionObj = Section; this.names = getNames; this.titles = getTitles; this.properties = getProperties; ... this.add = addAsset; function AssetObj(assetValues) { this.name = ""; this.title = ""; this.interface = ""; ... this.protected = false; this.standaloneProtected = true; ... this.chaptersFree = []; this.chaptersUnavailable = []; ... this.mediaOptions = { videoWidth: "", videoHeight: "", downloadMedia: true, downloadMediaExt: "zip" ... } this.chaptersAvailable = []; if (typeof assetValues == "undefined") { return; } for (var name in assetValues) { if (typeof assetValues[name] == "undefined") { this[name] = ""; } else { this[name] = assetValues[name]; } } ... function Asset() { return new AssetObj(); } ... function getProperties() { var propertiesArray = new Array(); for (var property in this.values[0]) { propertiesArray.push(property); } return propertiesArray; } ... function addAsset(assetValues) { var newValues; newValues = new AssetObj(assetValues); this.values.push(newValues); } } When I do var copiedAssets = $.extend(true, {}, assets); copiedAssets.values == [], while assets.values == [Object { name="section_intro", more...}, Object { name="select_textbook", more...}, Object { name="quiz", more...}, 11 more...] When I do var copiedAssets = $.extend( {}, assets); all copiedAssets.values.[X].properties are just pointers to the value in assets. What I want is a true deep copy all the way down. What am I missing? Do I need to write a custom extend function? If so, any recommended patterns?

    Read the article

  • Copy constructor, objects, pointers

    - by Pauff
    Let's say I have this: SolutionSet(const SolutionSet &solutionSet) { this->capacity_ = solutionSet.capacity_; this->solutionsList_ = solutionSet.solutionsList_; // <-- } And solutionsList_ is a vector<SomeType*> vect*. What is the correct way to copy that vector (I suppose that way I'm not doing it right..)?

    Read the article

  • C++ Constructor initialization list strangeness

    - by Andy
    I have always been a good boy when writing my classes, prefixing all member variables with m_: class Test { int m_int1; int m_int2; public: Test(int int1, int int2) : m_int1(int int1), m_int2(int int2) {} }; void main() { Test t(10, 20); // Just an example } However, recently I forgot to do that and ended up writing: class Test { int int1; int int2; public: // Very questionable, but of course I meant to assign ::int1 to this->int1! Test(int int1, int int2) : int1(int1), int2(int2) {} }; Believe it or not, the code compiled with no errors/warnings and the assignments took place correctly! It was only when doing the final check before checking in my code when I realised what I had done. My question is: why did my code compile? Is something like that allowed in the C++ standard, or is it simply a case of the compiler being clever? In case you were wondering, I was using Visual Studio 2008 Thank you.

    Read the article

  • extraneous calls to copy-constructor and destructor

    - by eSKay
    [This question is a follow up to this question] class A { public: A() {cout<<"A Construction" <<endl;} A(A const& a){cout<<"A Copy Construction"<<endl;} ~A() {cout<<"A Destruction" <<endl;} }; int main() { { vector<A> t; t.push_back(A()); t.push_back(A()); // once more } } The output is: A Construction // 1 A Copy Construction // 1 A Destruction // 1 A Construction // 2 A Copy Construction // 2 A Copy Construction // WHY THIS? A Destruction // 2 A Destruction // deleting element from t A Destruction // deleting element from t A Destruction // WHY THIS?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >