Search Results

Search found 32346 results on 1294 pages for 'method overloading'.

Page 13/1294 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Java getMethod with subclass parameter

    - by SelectricSimian
    I'm writing a library that uses reflection to find and call methods dynamically. Given just an object, a method name, and a parameter list, I need to call the given method as though the method call were explicitly written in the code. I've been using the following approach, which works in most cases: static void callMethod(Object receiver, String methodName, Object[] params) { Class<?>[] paramTypes = new Class<?>[params.length]; for (int i = 0; i < param.length; i++) { paramTypes[i] = params[i].getClass(); } receiver.getClass().getMethod(methodName, paramTypes).invoke(receiver, params); } However, when one of the parameters is a subclass of one of the supported types for the method, the reflection API throws a NoSuchMethodException. For example, if the receiver's class has testMethod(Foo) defined, the following fails: receiver.getClass().getMethod("testMethod", FooSubclass.class).invoke(receiver, new FooSubclass()); even though this works: receiver.testMethod(new FooSubclass()); How do I resolve this? If the method call is hard-coded there's no issue - the compiler just uses the overloading algorithm to pick the best applicable method to use. It doesn't work with reflection, though, which is what I need. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • UPK and the Oracle Unified Method can be used to deploy Oracle-Based Business Solutions

    - by Emily Chorba
    Originally developed to support Oracle's acquisition strategy, the Oracle Unified Method (OUM) defines a common implementation language across all of Oracle's products and technologies. OUM is a flexible, scalable, and evolving body of knowledge that combines existing best practices and field experience with an industry standard framework that includes the latest thinking around agile implementation and cloud computing.    Strong, proven methods are essential to ensuring successful enterprise IT projects both within Oracle and for our customers and partners. OUM provides a collection of repeatable processes that are the basis for agile implementations of Oracle enterprise business solutions. OUM also provides a structure for tracking progress and managing cost and risks. OUM is applicable to any size or type of IT project. While OUM is a plan-based method—including overview material, task and artifact descriptions, and templates—the method is intended to be tailored to support the appropriate level of ceremony (or agility) required for each project. Guidance is provided for identifying the minimum subset of tasks, tailoring the approach, executing iterative and incremental planning, and applying agile techniques, including support for managing projects using Scrum. Supplemental guidance provides specific support for Oracle products, such as UPK. OUM is available to Oracle employees, partners, and customers. Internal Use at Oracle: Employees can download OUM from MyDesktop. OUM Partner Program: OUM is available free of charge to Oracle PartnerNetwork (OPN) Diamond, Platinum, and Gold partners as a benefit of membership. These partners may download OUM from the Oracle Unified Method Knowledge Zone on OPN. OUM Customer Program: The OUM Customer Program allows customers to obtain copies of the method for their internal use by contracting with Oracle for a services engagement of two weeks or longer. Customers who have a signed contract with Oracle and meet the engagement qualification criteria as published on Customer tab of the OUM Website, are permitted to download the current release of OUM for their perpetual use. They may obtain subsequent releases published during a renewable, three-year access period To learn more about OUM, visit OUM Blog OUM on LinkedIn OUM on Twitter Emily Chorba, Principle Product Manager, Oracle User Productivity Kit

    Read the article

  • No input method choice appear on iBus

    - by phanect
    I've installed iBus and ibus-mozc, and an input method engine of Japanese from the repository, and attempted to enable mozc from Preference > "Input Method" tab > "Select Input Method" combo box. However, there is no choice to select, so I couldn't enable mozc. I also tried ibus-anthy, another legacy Japanese input method, but the situation was the same and I couldn't use anthy. Same problem is also occuring in openSUSE 12.1, so I don't think this is distribution-specific problem. In addition, this trouble also happened when I installed ibus-pynin, so this is not Japanese-specific. Any idea to find the cause of this trouble?

    Read the article

  • Method flags as arguments or as member variables?

    - by Martin
    I think the title "Method flags as arguments or as member variables?" may be suboptimal, but as I'm missing any better terminology atm., here goes: I'm currently trying to get my head around the problem of whether flags for a given class (private) method should be passed as function arguments or via member variable and/or whether there is some pattern or name that covers this aspect and/or whether this hints at some other design problems. By example (language could be C++, Java, C#, doesn't really matter IMHO): class Thingamajig { private ResultType DoInternalStuff(FlagType calcSelect) { ResultType res; for (... some loop condition ...) { ... if (calcSelect == typeA) { ... } else if (calcSelect == typeX) { ... } else if ... } ... return res; } private void InteralStuffInvoker(FlagType calcSelect) { ... DoInternalStuff(calcSelect); ... } public void DoThisStuff() { ... some code ... InternalStuffInvoker(typeA); ... some more code ... } public ResultType DoThatStuff() { ... some code ... ResultType x = DoInternalStuff(typeX); ... some more code ... further process x ... return x; } } What we see above is that the method InternalStuffInvoker takes an argument that is not used inside this function at all but is only forwarded to the other private method DoInternalStuff. (Where DoInternalStuffwill be used privately at other places in this class, e.g. in the DoThatStuff (public) method.) An alternative solution would be to add a member variable that carries this information: class Thingamajig { private ResultType DoInternalStuff() { ResultType res; for (... some loop condition ...) { ... if (m_calcSelect == typeA) { ... } ... } ... return res; } private void InteralStuffInvoker() { ... DoInternalStuff(); ... } public void DoThisStuff() { ... some code ... m_calcSelect = typeA; InternalStuffInvoker(); ... some more code ... } public ResultType DoThatStuff() { ... some code ... m_calcSelect = typeX; ResultType x = DoInternalStuff(); ... some more code ... further process x ... return x; } } Especially for deep call chains where the selector-flag for the inner method is selected outside, using a member variable can make the intermediate functions cleaner, as they don't need to carry a pass-through parameter. On the other hand, this member variable isn't really representing any object state (as it's neither set nor available outside), but is really a hidden additional argument for the "inner" private method. What are the pros and cons of each approach?

    Read the article

  • Why the R# Method Group Refactoring is Evil

    - by Liam McLennan
    The refactoring I’m talking about is recommended by resharper when it sees a lambda that consists entirely of a method call that is passed the object that is the parameter to the lambda. Here is an example: public class IWishIWasAScriptingLanguage { public void SoIWouldntNeedAllThisJunk() { (new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 4}).Select(n => IsEven(n)); } private bool IsEven(int number) { return number%2 == 0; } } When resharper gets to n => IsEven(n) it underlines the lambda with a green squiggly telling me that the code can be replaced with a method group. If I apply the refactoring the code becomes: public class IWishIWasAScriptingLanguage { public void SoIWouldntNeedAllThisJunk() { (new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 4}).Select(IsEven); } private bool IsEven(int number) { return number%2 == 0; } } The method group syntax implies that the lambda’s parameter is the same as the IsEven method’s parameter. So a readable, explicit syntax has been replaced with an obfuscated, implicit syntax. That is why the method group refactoring is evil.

    Read the article

  • Java's Object.wait method with nanoseconds: Is this a joke or am I missing something

    - by Krumia
    I was checking out the Java API source code (Java 8) just out of curiosity. And I found this in java/lang/Object.java. There are three methods named wait: public final native void wait(long timeout): This is the core of all wait methods, which has a native implementation. public final void wait(): Just calls wait(0). And then there is public final void wait(long timeout, int nanos). The JavaDoc for the particular method tells me that, This method is similar to the wait method of one argument, but it allows finer control over the amount of time to wait for a notification before giving up. The amount of real time, measured in nanoseconds, is given by: 1000000*timeout+nanos But this is how the methods achieves "finer control over the amount of time to wait": if (nanos >= 500000 || (nanos != 0 && timeout == 0)) { timeout++; } wait(timeout); So this method basically does a crude rounding up of nanoseconds to milliseconds. Not to mention that anything below 500000ns/0.5ms will be ignored. Is this piece of code bad/unnecessary code, or am I missing some unseen virtue of declaring this method, and it's no argument cousin as the way they are?

    Read the article

  • How to dynamically override a method in an object

    - by Ace Takwas
    If this is possible, how can I change what a method does after I might have created an instance of that class and wish to keep the reference to that object but override a public method in it's class' definition? Here's my code: package time_applet; public class TimerGroup implements Runnable{ private Timer hour, min, sec; private Thread hourThread, minThread, secThread; public TimerGroup(){ hour = new HourTimer(); min = new MinuteTimer(); sec = new SecondTimer(); } public void run(){ hourThread.start(); minThread.start(); secThread.start(); } /*Please pay close attention to this method*/ private Timer activateHourTimer(int start_time){ hour = new HourTimer(start_time){ public void run(){ while (true){ if(min.changed)//min.getTime() == 0) changeTime(); } } }; hourThread = new Thread(hour); return hour; } private Timer activateMinuteTimer(int start_time){ min = new MinuteTimer(start_time){ public void run(){ while (true){ if(sec.changed)//sec.getTime() == 0) changeTime(); } } }; minThread = new Thread(min); return min; } private Timer activateSecondTimer(int start_time){ sec = new SecondTimer(start_time); secThread = new Thread(sec); return sec; } public Timer addTimer(Timer timer){ if (timer instanceof HourTimer){ hour = timer; return activateHourTimer(timer.getTime()); } else if (timer instanceof MinuteTimer){ min = timer; return activateMinuteTimer(timer.getTime()); } else{ sec = timer; return activateSecondTimer(timer.getTime()); } } } So for example in the method activateHourTimer(), I would like to override the run() method of the hour object without having to create a new object. How do I go about that?

    Read the article

  • Fixing a spelling mistake in a method name

    - by One Two Three
    One of the methods that I commonly use in our codebase is misspelled (and it predated me). This really irritates me not simply because it is mispelled but more importantly it makes me ALWAYS get the method name wrong the first time I type it (and then I have to remember "Oh, right, it should be mispelled to this...") I'm making a few changes around the original method. Should I take the opportunity to just rename the freaking method?

    Read the article

  • fixing spelling mistake in method name

    - by One Two Three
    One of the methods that I commonly use in our codebase is misspelled (and it predated me). This really irritates me not simply because it is mispelled but more importantly it makes me ALWAYS get the method name wrong the first time I type it (and then I have to remember "Oh, right, it should be mispelled to this...") I'm making a few changes around the original method. Should I take the opportunity to just rename the freaking method?

    Read the article

  • Pass structure as an argument in c# method

    - by MegaMind
    I want to know if it is possible to pass a Structure as a parameter in c# method and if possible, is it a good practice to do so? I have a c# method which is taking six arguments, i really hate that. I could create a carrier class for that and pass it as an argument, but i want to know if structure could do the job. I want to mention here that few arguments to that method are of ref type and few are of value type.

    Read the article

  • operator overloading of stream extraction operator in C++ help

    - by Crystal
    I'm having some trouble overloading my stream extraction operator in C++ for a hw assignment. I'm not really sure why I am getting these compile errors since I thought I was doing it right... Here is my code: Complex.h #ifndef COMPLEX_H #define COMPLEX_H class Complex { //friend ostream &operator<<(ostream &output, const Complex &complexObj) const; public: Complex(double = 0.0, double = 0.0); // constructor Complex operator+(const Complex &) const; // addition Complex operator-(const Complex &) const; // subtraction void print() const; // output private: double real; // real part double imaginary; // imaginary part }; #endif Complex.cpp #include <iostream> #include "Complex.h" using namespace std; // Constructor Complex::Complex(double realPart, double imaginaryPart) : real(realPart), imaginary(imaginaryPart) { } // addition operator Complex Complex::operator+(const Complex &operand2) const { return Complex(real + operand2.real, imaginary + operand2.imaginary); } // subtraction operator Complex Complex::operator-(const Complex &operand2) const { return Complex(real - operand2.real, imaginary - operand2.imaginary); } // Overload << operator ostream &Complex::operator<<(ostream &output, const Complex &complexObj) const { cout << '(' << complexObj.real << ", " << complexObj.imaginary << ')'; return output; // returning output allows chaining } // display a Complex object in the form: (a, b) void Complex::print() const { cout << '(' << real << ", " << imaginary << ')'; } main.cpp #include <iostream> #include "Complex.h" using namespace std; int main() { Complex x; Complex y(4.3, 8.2); Complex z(3.3, 1.1); cout << "x: "; x.print(); cout << "\ny: "; y.print(); cout << "\nz: "; z.print(); x = y + z; cout << "\n\nx = y + z: " << endl; x.print(); cout << " = "; y.print(); cout << " + "; z.print(); x = y - z; cout << "\n\nx = y - z: " << endl; x.print(); cout << " = "; y.print(); cout << " - "; z.print(); cout << endl; } Compile erros: complex.cpp(23) : error C2039: '<<' : is not a member of 'Complex' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' complex.cpp(24) : error C2270: '<<' : modifiers not allowed on nonmember functions complex.cpp(25) : error C2248: 'Complex::real' : cannot access private member declared in class 'Complex' complex.h(13) : see declaration of 'Complex::real' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' complex.cpp(25) : error C2248: 'Complex::imaginary' : cannot access private member declared in class 'Complex' complex.h(14) : see declaration of 'Complex::imaginary' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Purpose of overloading operators in C++?

    - by Geo Drawkcab
    What is the main purpose of overloading operators in C++? In the code below, << and >> are overloaded; what is the advantage to doing so? #include <iostream> #include <string> using namespace std; class book { string name,gvari; double cost; int year; public: book(){}; book(string a, string b, double c, int d) { a=name;b=gvari;c=cost;d=year; } ~book() {} double setprice(double a) { return a=cost; } friend ostream& operator <<(ostream& , book&); void printbook(){ cout<<"wignis saxeli "<<name<<endl; cout<<"wignis avtori "<<gvari<<endl; cout<<"girebuleba "<<cost<<endl; cout<<"weli "<<year<<endl; } }; ostream& operator <<(ostream& out, book& a){ out<<"wignis saxeli "<<a.name<<endl; out<<"wignis avtori "<<a.gvari<<endl; out<<"girebuleba "<<a.cost<<endl; out<<"weli "<<a.year<<endl; return out; } class library_card : public book { string nomeri; int raod; public: library_card(){}; library_card( string a, int b){a=nomeri;b=raod;} ~library_card() {}; void printcard(){ cout<<"katalogis nomeri "<<nomeri<<endl; cout<<"gacemis raodenoba "<<raod<<endl; } friend ostream& operator <<(ostream& , library_card&); }; ostream& operator <<(ostream& out, library_card& b) { out<<"katalogis nomeri "<<b.nomeri<<endl; out<<"gacemis raodenoba "<<b.raod<<endl; return out; } int main() { book A("robizon kruno","giorgi",15,1992); library_card B("910CPP",123); A.printbook(); B.printbook(); A.setprice(15); B.printbook(); system("pause"); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How to proxy calls to the instance of an object

    - by mr.b
    Edit: Changed question title from "Does C# allow method overloading, PHP style (__call)?" - figured out it doesn't have much to do with actual question. Also edited question text. What I want to accomplish is to proxy calls to a an instance of an object methods, so I could log calls to any of its methods. Right now, I have code similar to this: class ProxyClass { static logger; public AnotherClass inner { get; private set; } public ProxyClass() { inner = new AnotherClass(); } } class AnotherClass { public void A() {} public void B() {} public void C() {} // ... } // meanwhile, in happyCodeLandia... ProxyClass pc = new ProxyClass(); pc.inner.A(); // need to write log message like "method A called" pc.inner.B(); // need to write log message like "method B called" // ... So, how can I proxy calls to an object instance in extensible way? Method overloading would be most obvious solution (if it was supported in PHP way). By extensible, meaning that I don't have to modify ProxyClass whenever AnotherClass changes. In my case, AnotherClass can have any number of methods, so it wouldn't be appropriate to overload or wrap all methods to add logging. I am aware that this might not be the best approach for this kind of problem, so if anyone has idea what approach to use, shoot. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • presentModalViewController does not want to work when called from a protocol method

    - by johnbdh
    I have a subview that when double tapped a protocol method on the subview's parent view controller is called like this... - (void)touchesEnded:(NSSet *)touches withEvent:(UIEvent *)event { UITouch *theTouch = [touches anyObject]; if (theTouch.tapCount == 1) { } else if (theTouch.tapCount == 2) { if ([self.delegate respondsToSelector:@selector(editEvent:)]) { [self.delegate editEvent:dictionary]; } } } Here is the protocol method with the dictionary consuming code removed... - (void)editEvent:(NSDictionary){ EventEditViewController *eventEditViewController = [[EventEditViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"EventEditViewController" bundle:nil]; eventEditViewController.delegate = self; navigationController = [[UINavigationController alloc] initWithRootViewController:eventEditViewController]; [self presentModalViewController:navigationController animated:YES]; [eventEditViewController release]; } The protocol method is called and runs without any errors but the modal view does not present itself. I temporarily copied the protocol method's code to an IBAction method for one of the parent's view button's to isolate it from the subview. When I tap this button the modal view works fine. Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong? Why does it work when executed from a button on the parent view, and not from a protocol method called from a subview. Here is what I have tried so far to work around the problem... Restarted xCode and the simulator Ran on the device (iTouch) Presenting eventEditViewController instead of navigationController Using Push instead of presentModal. delaying the call to the protocol with performSelector directly to the protocol, to another method in the subview which calls the protocol method, from the protocol method to another method with the presentModal calls. Using a timer. I have it currently setup so that the protocol method calls a known working method that presents a different view. Before calling presentModalViewController it pops a UIAlertView which works every time, but the modal view refuses to display when called via the protocol method. I'm stumped. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that I am calling the protocol method from a UIView class instead of a UIViewController class. Maybe I need to create a UIViewController for the subView?? Thanks, John

    Read the article

  • Does adding to a method group count as using a variable?

    - by Vaccano
    I have the following code example taken from the code of a Form: protected void SomeMethod() { SomeOtherMethod(this.OnPaint); } private void SomeOtherMethod(Action<PaintEventArgs> onPaint) { onPaint += MyPaint; } protected void MyPaint(PaintEventArgs e) { // paint some stuff } The second method (SomeOtherMethod) has resharper complaining at me. It says of onPaint that "Value assigned is not used in any execution path". To my mind it was used because I added a method to the list of methods called when a paint was done. But usually when resharper tells me something like this it is because I am not understanding some part of C#. Like maybe when the param goes out of goes out of scope the item I added to the list gets removed (or something like that). I thought I would ask here to see if any one knows what resharper is trying to tell me. (Side Note: I usually just override OnPaint. But I am trying to get OnPaint to call a method in another class. I don't want to expose that method publicly so I thought I would pass in the OnPaint group and add to it.)

    Read the article

  • Use Extension method to write cleaner code

    - by Fredrik N
    This blog post will show you step by step to refactoring some code to be more readable (at least what I think). Patrik Löwnedahl gave me some of the ideas when we where talking about making code much cleaner. The following is an simple application that will have a list of movies (Normal and Transfer). The task of the application is to calculate the total sum of each movie and also display the price of each movie. class Program { enum MovieType { Normal, Transfer } static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfNormalMovie = 0; int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = 0; foreach (var movie in movies) { if (movie == MovieType.Normal) { totalPriceOfNormalMovie += 2; Console.WriteLine("$2"); } else if (movie == MovieType.Transfer) { totalPriceOfTransferMovie += 3; Console.WriteLine("$3"); } } } private static IEnumerable<MovieType> GetMovies() { return new List<MovieType>() { MovieType.Normal, MovieType.Transfer, MovieType.Normal }; } } .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; } In the code above I’m using an enum, a good way to add types (isn’t it ;)). I also use one foreach loop to calculate the price, the loop has a condition statement to check what kind of movie is added to the list of movies. I want to reuse the foreach only to increase performance and let it do two things (isn’t that smart of me?! ;)). First of all I can admit, I’m not a big fan of enum. Enum often results in ugly condition statements and can be hard to maintain (if a new type is added we need to check all the code in our app to see if we use the enum somewhere else). I don’t often care about pre-optimizations when it comes to write code (of course I have performance in mind). I rather prefer to use two foreach to let them do one things instead of two. So based on what I don’t like and Martin Fowler’s Refactoring catalog, I’m going to refactoring this code to what I will call a more elegant and cleaner code. First of all I’m going to use Split Loop to make sure the foreach will do one thing not two, it will results in two foreach (Don’t care about performance here, if the results will results in bad performance, you can refactoring later, but computers are so fast to day, so iterating through a list is not often so time consuming.) Note: The foreach actually do four things, will come to is later. var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfNormalMovie = 0; int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = 0; foreach (var movie in movies) { if (movie == MovieType.Normal) { totalPriceOfNormalMovie += 2; Console.WriteLine("$2"); } } foreach (var movie in movies) { if (movie == MovieType.Transfer) { totalPriceOfTransferMovie += 3; Console.WriteLine("$3"); } } .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; } To remove the condition statement we can use the Where extension method added to the IEnumerable<T> and is located in the System.Linq namespace: foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m == MovieType.Normal)) { totalPriceOfNormalMovie += 2; Console.WriteLine("$2"); } foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m == MovieType.Transfer)) { totalPriceOfTransferMovie += 3; Console.WriteLine("$3"); } .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 above code will still do two things, calculate the total price, and display the price of the movie. I will not take care of it at the moment, instead I will focus on the enum and try to remove them. One way to remove enum is by using the Replace Conditional with Polymorphism. So I will create two classes, one base class called Movie, and one called MovieTransfer. The Movie class will have a property called Price, the Movie will now hold the price:   public class Movie { public virtual int Price { get { return 2; } } } public class MovieTransfer : Movie { public override int Price { get { return 3; } } } .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 has no enum and will use the new Movie classes instead: class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfNormalMovie = 0; int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = 0; foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m is Movie)) { totalPriceOfNormalMovie += movie.Price; Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m is MovieTransfer)) { totalPriceOfTransferMovie += movie.Price; Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } } private static IEnumerable<Movie> GetMovies() { return new List<Movie>() { new Movie(), new MovieTransfer(), new Movie() }; } } .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; }   If you take a look at the foreach now, you can see it still actually do two things, calculate the price and display the price. We can do some more refactoring here by using the Sum extension method to calculate the total price of the movies:   static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfNormalMovie = movies.Where(m => m is Movie) .Sum(m => m.Price); int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = movies.Where(m => m is MovieTransfer) .Sum(m => m.Price); foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m is Movie)) Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); foreach (var movie in movies.Where( m => m is MovieTransfer)) Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } .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; } Now when the Movie object will hold the price, there is no need to use two separate foreach to display the price of the movies in the list, so we can use only one instead: foreach (var movie in movies) Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); .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; } If we want to increase the Maintainability index we can use the Extract Method to move the Sum of the prices into two separate methods. The name of the method will explain what we are doing: static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfMovie = TotalPriceOfMovie(movies); int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = TotalPriceOfMovieTransfer(movies); foreach (var movie in movies) Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } private static int TotalPriceOfMovieTransfer(IEnumerable<Movie> movies) { return movies.Where(m => m is MovieTransfer) .Sum(m => m.Price); } private static int TotalPriceOfMovie(IEnumerable<Movie> movies) { return movies.Where(m => m is Movie) .Sum(m => m.Price); } .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; } Now to the last thing, I love the ForEach method of the List<T>, but the IEnumerable<T> doesn’t have it, so I created my own ForEach extension, here is the code of the ForEach extension method: public static class LoopExtensions { public static void ForEach<T>(this IEnumerable<T> values, Action<T> action) { Contract.Requires(values != null); Contract.Requires(action != null); foreach (var v in values) action(v); } } .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; } I will now replace the foreach by using this ForEach method: static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfMovie = TotalPriceOfMovie(movies); int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = TotalPriceOfMovieTransfer(movies); movies.ForEach(m => Console.WriteLine(m.Price)); } .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 ForEach on the movies will now display the price of the movie, but maybe we want to display the name of the movie etc, so we can use Extract Method by moving the lamdba expression into a method instead, and let the method explains what we are displaying: movies.ForEach(DisplayMovieInfo); private static void DisplayMovieInfo(Movie movie) { Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } .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; } Now the refactoring is done! Here is the complete code:   class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var movies = GetMovies(); int totalPriceOfMovie = TotalPriceOfMovie(movies); int totalPriceOfTransferMovie = TotalPriceOfMovieTransfer(movies); movies.ForEach(DisplayMovieInfo); } private static void DisplayMovieInfo(Movie movie) { Console.WriteLine(movie.Price); } private static int TotalPriceOfMovieTransfer(IEnumerable<Movie> movies) { return movies.Where(m => m is MovieTransfer) .Sum(m => m.Price); } private static int TotalPriceOfMovie(IEnumerable<Movie> movies) { return movies.Where(m => m is Movie) .Sum(m => m.Price); } private static IEnumerable<Movie> GetMovies() { return new List<Movie>() { new Movie(), new MovieTransfer(), new Movie() }; } } public class Movie { public virtual int Price { get { return 2; } } } public class MovieTransfer : Movie { public override int Price { get { return 3; } } } pulbic static class LoopExtensions { public static void ForEach<T>(this IEnumerable<T> values, Action<T> action) { Contract.Requires(values != null); Contract.Requires(action != null); foreach (var v in values) action(v); } } .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; } I think the new code is much cleaner than the first one, and I love the ForEach extension on the IEnumerable<T>, I can use it for different kind of things, for example: movies.Where(m => m is Movie) .ForEach(DoSomething); .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; } By using the Where and ForEach extension method, some if statements can be removed and will make the code much cleaner. But the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What would you have done different, what do you think will make the first example in the blog post look much cleaner than my results, comments are welcome! If you want to know when I will publish a new blog post, you can follow me on twitter: http://www.twitter.com/fredrikn

    Read the article

  • Static and Non Static Method Intercall in Java

    - by Vishal
    I am clearing my concepts on Java. My knowledge about Java is on far begineer side, so kindly bear with me. I am trying to understand static method and non static method intercalls. I know -- Static method can call another static method simply by its name within same class. Static method can call another non staic method of same class only after creating instance of the class. Non static method can call another static method of same class simply by way of classname.methodname - No sure if this correct ? My Question is about non static method call to another non staic method of same class. In class declaration, when we declare all methods, can we call another non static method of same class from a non static class ? Please explain with example. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Problem in using C# generics with method overloading

    - by Siva Chandran
    I am trying to call an overloaded method based on the generic type. I've been doing this in C++ without any pain. But I really don't understand why am not able to do this in C# with generics. Can anybody help me how can I achieve this in C# with generics? class Test<T> { public T Val; public void Do(T val) { Val = val; MainClass.Print(Val); } } class MainClass { public static void Print(UInt16 val) { Console.WriteLine("UInt16: " + val.ToString()); } public static void Print(UInt32 val) { Console.WriteLine("UInt32: " + val.ToString()); } public static void Print(UInt64 val) { Console.WriteLine("UInt64: " + val.ToString()); } public static void Main (string[] args) { Test<UInt16> test = new Test<UInt16>(); test.Do(); } }

    Read the article

  • Overload and hide methods in Java

    - by Marco
    Hi, i have an abstract class BaseClass with a public insert() method: public abstract class BaseClass { public void insert(Object object) { // Do something } } which is extended by many other classes. For some of those classes, however, the insert() method must have additional parameters, so that they instead of overriding it I overload the method of the base class with the parameters required, for example: public class SampleClass extends BaseClass { public void insert(Object object, Long param){ // Do Something } } Now, if i instantiate the SampleClass class, i have two insert() methods: SampleClass sampleClass = new SampleClass(); sampleClass.insert(Object object); sampleClass.insert(Object object, Long param); what i'd like to do is to hide the insert() method defined in the base class, so that just the overload would be visible: SampleClass sampleClass = new SampleClass(); sampleClass.insert(Object object, Long param); Could this be done in OOP?

    Read the article

  • Which is the better way to simulate optional parameters in Java?

    - by froadie
    I have a Java method that takes 3 parameters, and I'd like it to also have a 4th "optional" parameter. I know that Java doesn't support optional parameters directly, so I coded in a 4th parameter and when I don't want to pass it I pass null. (And then the method checks for null before using it.) I know this is kind of clunky... but the other way is to overload the method which will result in quite a bit of duplication. Which is the better way to implement optional method parameters in Java: using a nullable parameter, or overloading? And why?

    Read the article

  • Combining template method with strategy

    - by Mekswoll
    An assignment in my software engineering class is to design an application which can play different forms a particular game. The game in question is Mancala, some of these games are called Wari or Kalah. These games differ in some aspects but for my question it's only important to know that the games could differ in the following: The way in which the result of a move is handled The way in which the end of the game is determined The way in which the winner is determined The first thing that came to my mind to design this was to use the strategy pattern, I have a variation in algorithms (the actual rules of the game). The design could look like this: I then thought to myself that in the game of Mancala and Wari the way the winner is determined is exactly the same and the code would be duplicated. I don't think this is by definition a violation of the 'one rule, one place' or DRY principle seeing as a change in rules for Mancala wouldn't automatically mean that rule should be changed in Wari as well. Nevertheless from the feedback I got from my professor I got the impression to find a different design. I then came up with this: Each game (Mancala, Wari, Kalah, ...) would just have attribute of the type of each rule's interface, i.e. WinnerDeterminer and if there's a Mancala 2.0 version which is the same as Mancala 1.0 except for how the winner is determined it can just use the Mancala versions. I think the implementation of these rules as a strategy pattern is certainly valid. But the real problem comes when I want to design it further. In reading about the template method pattern I immediately thought it could be applied to this problem. The actions that are done when a user makes a move are always the same, and in the same order, namely: deposit stones in holes (this is the same for all games, so would be implemented in the template method itself) determine the result of the move determine if the game has finished because of the previous move if the game has finished, determine who has won Those three last steps are all in my strategy pattern described above. I'm having a lot of trouble combining these two. One possible solution I found would be to abandon the strategy pattern and do the following: I don't really see the design difference between the strategy pattern and this? But I am certain I need to use a template method (although I was just as sure about having to use a strategy pattern). I also can't determine who would be responsible for creating the TurnTemplate object, whereas with the strategy pattern I feel I have families of objects (the three rules) which I could easily create using an abstract factory pattern. I would then have a MancalaRuleFactory, WariRuleFactory, etc. and they would create the correct instances of the rules and hand me back a RuleSet object. Let's say that I use the strategy + abstract factory pattern and I have a RuleSet object which has algorithms for the three rules in it. The only way I feel I can still use the template method pattern with this is to pass this RuleSet object to my TurnTemplate. The 'problem' that then surfaces is that I would never need my concrete implementations of the TurnTemplate, these classes would become obsolete. In my protected methods in the TurnTemplate I could just call ruleSet.determineWinner(). As a consequence, the TurnTemplate class would no longer be abstract but would have to become concrete, is it then still a template method pattern? To summarize, am I thinking in the right way or am I missing something easy? If I'm on the right track, how do I combine a strategy pattern and a template method pattern? This is part of a homework assignment but I'm not looking to be gifted the answer, I have deliberately been very verbose in my question to show that I have thought about it before coming here to ask a question

    Read the article

  • Passing Parameters to an ADF Page through the URL - Part 2.

    - by shay.shmeltzer
    I showed before how to pass a parameter on the URL when invoking a taskflow (where the taskflow starts with a method call and then a page). However in some simpler scenarios you don't actually need a full blown taskflow. Instead you can use page level parameters defined for your page in the adfc-config.xml file. So below is a demo of this technique. I'm also taking advantage of this video to show the concept of a view object level service method and how to invoke it from your page. P.S. You might wonder - why not just reference #{param.amount} as the value set for the method parameter? Why do I need to copy it into a viewScope parameter? The advantage of placing the value in the viewScope is that it is available even when the page went through several sumbits. For example if you switch the "partialSumbit" property of the "Next" button to false in the above example - the minute that you press the button to go to the next department - the param.amount value is gone. However the ViewScope is still there as long as you stay on this page.

    Read the article

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