Search Results

Search found 5007 results on 201 pages for 'django inheritance'.

Page 131/201 | < Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >

• Can I "inherit" a delegate? Looking for ways to combine Moq and MSpec without conflicts around It...

  - by Tomas Lycken

  I have started to use MSpec for BDD, and since long ago I use Moq as my mocking framework. However, they both define It, which means I can't have using Moq and using Machine.Specifications in the same code file without having to specify the namespace explicitly each time I use It. Anyone who's used MSpec knows this isn't really an option. I googled for solutions to this problem, and this blogger mentions having forked MSpec for himself, and implemented paralell support for Given, When, Then. I'd like to do this, but I can't figure out how to declare for example Given without having to go through the entire framework looking for references to Establish, and changing code there to match that I want either to be OK. For reference, the Establish, Because and It are declared in the following way: public delegate void Establish(); public delegate void Because(); public delegate void It(); What I need is to somehow declare Given, so that everywhere the code looks for an Establish, Given is also OK.

  Read the article

• AS3 Memory management when instantiating extended classes

  - by araid

  I'm developing an AS3 application which has some memory leaks I can't find, so I'd like to ask some newbie questions about memory management. Imagine I have a class named BaseClass, and some classes that extend this one, such as ClassA, ClassB, etc. I declare a variable: myBaseClass:BaseClass = new ClassA(); After a while, I use it to instantiate a new object: myBaseClass = new ClassB(); some time after myBaseClass = new ClassC(); and the same thing keeps happening every x millis, triggered by a timer. Is there any memory problem here? Are the unused instances correctly deleted by the garbage collector? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Which design pattern is most appropriate?

  - by Anon

  Hello, I want to create a class that can use one of four algorithms (and the algorithm to use is only known at run-time). I was thinking that the Strategy design pattern sounds appropriate, but my problem is that each algorithm requires slightly different parameters. Would it be a bad design to use strategy, but pass in the relevant parameters into the constructor?. Here is an example (for simplicity, let's say there are only two possible algorithms) ... class Foo { private: // At run-time the correct algorithm is used, e.g. a = new Algorithm1(1); AlgorithmInterface* a; }; class AlgorithmInterface { public: virtual void DoSomething = 0; }; class Algorithm1 : public AlgorithmInterface { public: Algorithm1( int i ) : value(i) {} virtual void DoSomething(){ // Does something with int value }; int value; }; class Algorithm2 : public AlgorithmInterface { public: Algorithm2( bool b ) : value(b) {} virtual void DoSomething(){ // Do something with bool value }; bool value; };

  Read the article

• handling pointer to member functions within hierachy in C++

  - by anatoli

  Hi, I'm trying to code the following situation: I have a base class providing a framework for handling events. I'm trying to use an array of pointer-to-member-functions for that. It goes as following: class EH { // EventHandler virtual void something(); // just to make sure we get RTTI public: typedef void (EH::*func_t)(); protected: func_t funcs_d[10]; protected: void register_handler(int event_num, func_t f) { funcs_d[event_num] = f; } public: void handle_event(int event_num) { (this->*(funcs_d[event_num]))(); } }; Then the users are supposed to derive other classes from this one and provide handlers: class DEH : public EH { public: typedef void (DEH::*func_t)(); void handle_event_5(); DEH() { func_t f5 = &DEH::handle_event_5; register_handler(5, f5); // doesn't compile ........ } }; This code wouldn't compile, since DEH::func_t cannot be converted to EH::func_t. It makes perfect sense to me. In my case the conversion is safe since the object under this is really DEH. So I'd like to have something like that: void EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper() { DEH *p = dynamic_cast<DEH *>(this); assert(p != NULL); p->handle_event_5(); } and then instead of func_t f5 = &DEH::handle_event_5; register_handler(5, f5); // doesn't compile in DEH::DEH() put register_handler(5, &EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper); So, finally the question (took me long enough...): Is there a way to create those wrappers (like EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper) automatically? Or to do something similar? What other solutions to this situation are out there? Thanks.

  Read the article

• How can I create a list of classes in C# to iterate over in a loop

  - by Jean-Bernard Pellerin

  Suppose I have class animal and classes cat and dog extending it. I want to do something along the lines of: foreach (animal a in {cat, dog}) if (a.isValid(parameters)) doStuff(); My only alternative is a switch statement for each class, something I'd like to avoid. Thanks, J-B

  Read the article

• How to Return Variable for all tests to use Unittest

  - by chrissygormley

  Hello, I have a Python script and I am trying to set a variable so that if the first test fail's the rest of then will be set to fail. The script I have so far is: class Tests(): def function: result function.......... def errorHandle(self): return self.error def sudsPass(self): try: result = self.client.service.GetStreamUri(self.stream, self.token) except suds.WebFault, e: assert False except Exception, e: pass finally: if 'result' in locals(): self.error = True self.errorHandle() assert True else: self.error = False self.errorHandle() assert False def sudsFail(self): try: result = self.client.service.GetStreamUri(self.stream, self.token) except suds.WebFault, e: assert False except Exception, e: pass finally: if 'result' in locals() or self.error == False: assert False else: assert True class GetStreamUri(TestGetStreamUri): def runTest(self): self.sudsPass() class GetStreamUriProtocolFail(TestGetStreamUri): def runTest(self): self.stream.Transport.Protocol = "NoValue" self.errorHandle() self.sudsFail() if __name__ == '__main__': unittest.main() I am trying to get self.error to be set to False if the first test fail. I understand that it is being set in another test but I was hoping someone could help me find a solution to this problem using some other means. Thanks PS. Please ignore the strange tests. There is a problem with the error handling at the moment.

  Read the article

• C2664 when casting child class to templated parent class

  - by DC

  I have a parent class which is templated, and a child class which implements it. template< typename T1, typename T2> class ParentClass{ . . . }; class ChildClass : public ParentClass<MyT1, MyT2> { . . . }; And I want to have a pointer which I can use polymorphically: ParentClass<T1, T2>* ptr; ptr = static_cast<ParentClass<MyT1, MyT2>* >(new ChildClass() ); No matter how I cast it, I always get a C2664 which has the same expression: error C2664: cannot convert parameter 1 from 'ParentClass< T1,T2 *' to 'ParentClass< T1,T2 *' Is it not possible to cast pointer types between inherited types if the parent is templated, even if the types specified in the templates are the same?

  Read the article

• Why can't I *override* and *new* a Property (C#) at the same time?

  - by Tim Lovell-Smith

  According to this question it seems like you can do this for Methods. What I want to know is why it doesn't work when I try it with properties. public class Foo { public virtual object Value { get; set; } } public class Foo<T> : Foo { public override object Value { get { return base.Value; } set { base.Value = (T)value; //inject type-checking on sets } } public new T Value { get { return (T)base.Value; } set { base.Value = value; } } } Error message from C# 4.0 RC1 Error 1 The type 'ClassLibrary1.Foo' already contains a definition for 'Value' ClassLibrary1\Class1.cs 31 22 ClassLibrary1

  Read the article

• Maven POM: how to insist property is not overridden

  - by Joe Thomas

  I have a parent POM that uses a gmaven script to do some stuff: <plugin> <groupId>org.codehaus.gmaven</groupId> <artifactId>gmaven-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.4</version> <configuration combine.children="override"> <providerSelection>2.0</providerSelection> <scriptPath>${basedir}/build/groovy</scriptPath> </configuration> <executions> <execution> <id>groovy-properties-script</id> <phase>validate</phase> <goals> <goal>execute</goal> </goals> <configuration> <source>computeProperties.groovy</source> </configuration> </execution> <!-- ... --> All of the children are supposed to run this script as well, but they try to resolve the scriptpath based on their OWN basedir. Usually this is exactly what you want with properties, but here it doesn't work, and I can't figure out any way around it.

  Read the article

• EF 4.0 Code only assocation from abstract to derived

  - by Jeroen

  Using EF 4.0 Code only i want to make an assocation between an abstract and normal class. I have class 'Item', 'ContentBase' and 'Test'. 'ContentBase' is abstract and 'Test' derives from it. 'ContentBase' has a property 'Item' that links to an instance of 'Item'. So that 'Test.Item' or any class that derives from 'ContentBase' has an 'Item' navigation property. In my DB every record for Test has a matching record for Item. public class Item { public int Id { get; set;} } public abstract class ContentBase { public int ContentId { get; set;} public int Id { get; set;} public Item Item { get; set;} } public class Test : ContentBase { public string Name { get; set;} } now some init code public void SomeInitFunction() { var itemConfig = new EntityConfiguration<Item>(); itemConfig.HasKey(p => p.Id); itemConfig.Property(p => p.Id).IsIdentity(); this.ContextBuilder.Configurations.Add(itemConfig); var testConfig = new EntityConfiguration<Test>(); testConfig.HasKey(p => p.ContentId); testConfig.Property(p => p.ContentId).IsIdentity(); // the problem testConfig.Relationship(p => p.Item).HasConstraint((p, q) => p.Id == q.Id); this.ContextBuilder.Configurations.Add(testConfig); } This gives an error: A key is registered for the derived type 'Test'. Keys must be registered for the root type 'ContentBase'. anyway i try i get an error. What am i a doing wrong?

  Read the article

• C++ overloading virtual = operator

  - by taz

  Hello, here is the code for my question: class ICommon { public: virtual ICommon& operator=(const ICommon & p)const=0; }; class CSpecial : public ICommon { public: CSpecial& operator=(const CSpecial & cs) { //custom operations return *this; } }; CSpecial obj; Basically: I want the interface ICommon to force it's descendants to implement = operator but don't want to have any typecasts in the implementation. The compiler says "can't instantiate an abstract class. Any help/advice will be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Java method get the inheriting type

  - by DrDro

  I have several classes that extend C and I would need a method that accepts any argument of type C. But in this method I would like to know if I'm dealing with A or B. * public A extends C public B extends C public void goForIt(C c)() If I cast how can I retrieve the type in a clean way (I just read using getClass or instanceof is often not the best way). PS: Fell free to edit an explicit title. *Sorry but I can't type closing braces

  Read the article

• How to enforce users to create objects of class derived from mine with "new" only?

  - by sharptooth

  To implement reference counting we use an IUnknown-like interface and a smart pointer template class. The interface has implementation for all the reference-count methods, including Release(): void IUnknownLike::Release() { if( --refCount == 0 ) { delete this; } } The smart pointer template class has a copy constructor and an assignment operator both accepting raw pointers. So users can do the following: class Class : public IUnknownLike { }; void someFunction( CSmartPointer<Class> object ); //whatever function Class object; someFunction( &object ); and the program runs into undefined behavior - the object is created with reference count zero, the smart pointer is constructed and bumps it to one, then the function returns, smart pointer is destroyed, calls Release() which leads to delete of a stack-allocated variable. Users can as well do the following: struct COuter { //whatever else; Class inner;// IUnknownLike descendant }; COuter object; somefunction( &object.Inner ); and again an object not created with new is deleted. Undefined behavior at its best. Is there any way to change the IUnknownLike interface so that the user is forced to use new for creating all objects derived from IUnknownLike - both directly derived and indirectly derived (with classes in between the most derived and the base)?

  Read the article

• Interface(s) inheriting other interface(s) in WCF services.

  - by avance70

  In my solution there's a few WCF services, each of them implementing it's own callback interface. Let's say they are called: Subscribe1, with ISubscribe1 and ICallback1, etc. It happens there are a few methods shared among ICallbacks, so I made a following interface: interface ICallback { [OperationContract] CommonlyUsedMethod(); } and i inherited it in all: ICallback1 : ICallback, ICallback2 : ICallback, etc. And deleted the CommonlyUsedMethod() from all callback interfaces. Now, on the service-side code, everything compiles fine and services can start working as usual. But, when I updated the service references for the client, CommonlyUsedMethod() dissapeared from the reference.cs file (the ISubscribeCallback part), and could no longer be used to send data to back to the client.

  Read the article

• StructureMap - Injecting a dependency into a base class?

  - by David

  In my domain I have a handful of "processor" classes which hold the bulk of the business logic. Using StructureMap with default conventions, I inject repositories into those classes for their various IO (databases, file system, etc.). For example: public interface IHelloWorldProcessor { string HelloWorld(); } public class HelloWorldProcessor : IHelloWorldProcessor { private IDBRepository _dbRepository; public HelloWorldProcessor(IDBRepository dbRepository) { _dbRepository = dbrepository; } public string HelloWorld(){ return _dbRepository.GetHelloWorld(); } } Now, there are some repositories that I'd like to be available to all processors, so I made a base class like this: public class BaseProcessor { protected ICommonRepository _commonRepository; public BaseProcessor(ICommonRepository commonRepository) { _commonRepository = commonRepository; } } But when my other processors inherit from it, I get a compiler error on each one saying that there's no constructor for BaseProcessor which takes zero arguments. Is there a way to do what I'm trying to do here? That is, to have common dependencies injected into a base class that my other classes can use without having to write the injections into each one?

  Read the article

• Abstract base class puzzle

  - by 0x80

  In my class design I ran into the following problem: class MyData { int foo; }; class AbstraktA { public: virtual void A() = 0; }; class AbstraktB : public AbstraktA { public: virtual void B() = 0; }; template<class T> class ImplA : public AbstraktA { public: void A(){ cout << "ImplA A()"; } }; class ImplB : public ImplA<MyData>, public AbstraktB { public: void B(){ cout << "ImplB B()"; } }; void TestAbstrakt() { AbstraktB *b = (AbstraktB *) new ImplB; b->A(); b->B(); }; The problem with the code above is that the compiler will complain that AbstraktA::A() is not defined. Interface A is shared by multiple objects. But the implementation of A is dependent on the template argument. Interface B is the seen by the outside world, and needs to be abstrakt. The reason I would like this is that it would allow me to define object C like this: Define the interface C inheriting from abstrakt A. Define the implementation of C using a different datatype for template A. I hope I'm clear. Is there any way to do this, or do I need to rethink my design?

  Read the article

• Seam @Factory in abstract base class?

  - by Shadowman

  I've got a series of web actions I'm implementing in Seam to perform create, read, update, etc. operations. For my read/update/delete actions, I'd like to have individual action classes that all extend an abstract base class. I'd like to put the @Factory method in the abstract base class to retrieve the item that is to be acted upon. For example, I have this as the base class: public abstract class BaseAction { @In(required=false)@Out(required=false) private MyItem item=null; public MyItem getItem(){...} public void setItem(...){...} @Factory("item") public void initItem(){...} } My subclasses would extend BaseAction, so that I don't have to repeat the logic to load the item that is to be viewed, deleted, updated, etc. However, when I start my application, Seam throws errors saying I have declared multiple @Factory's for the same object. Is there any way around this? Is there any way to provide the @Factory in the base class without encoutnering these errors?

  Read the article

• How to override inner class methods if the inner class is defined as a property of the top class

  - by Maddy

  I have a code snippet like this class A(object): class b: def print_hello(self): print "Hello world" b = property(b) And I want to override the inner class b (please dont worry about the lowercase name) behaviour. Say, I want to add a new method or I want to change an existing method, like: class C(A): class b(A.b): def print_hello(self): print "Inner Class: Hello world" b = property(b) Now if I create C's object as c = C(), and call c.b I get TypeError: 'property' object is not callable error. How would I get pass this and call print_hello of the extended inner class? Disclaimer: I dont want to change the code for A class.

  Read the article

• C++: Create abstract class with abstract method and override the method in a subclass

  - by Martijn Courteaux

  Hi, How to create in C++ an abstract class with some abstract methods that I want to override in a subclass? How should the .h file look? Is there a .cpp, if so how should it look? In Java it would look like this: abstract class GameObject { public abstract void update(); public abstract void paint(Graphics g); } class Player extends GameObject { @Override public void update() { // ... } @Override public void paint(Graphics g) { // ... } } // In my game loop: for (int i = 0; i < objects.size(); i++) { objects.get(i).update(); } for (int i = 0; i < objects.size(); i++) { objects.get(i).paint(g); } Translating this code to C++ is enough for me.

  Read the article

• A question about entities, roles and interfaces in Entity Framework 4.

  - by mvole

  Hi, I am an experienced .NET developer but new to EF - so please bear with me. I will use an example of a college application to illustrate my problem. I have these user roles: Lecturer, Student, Administrator. In my code I envisage working with these entities as distinct classes so e.g. a Lecturer teaches a collection of Students. And work with 'is Student' 'TypeOf' etc. Each of these entities share lots of common properties/methods e.g. they can all log onto the system and do stuff related to their role. In EF designer I can create a base entity Person (or User...) and have Lecturer, Student and Administrator all inherit from that. The difficulty I have is that a Lecturer can be an Administrator - and in fact on occasion a Student can be a Lecturer. If I were to add other entities such as Employee and Warden then this gets even more of an issue. I could presumably work with Interfaces so a person could implement ILecturer and IStudent, however I do not see how this fits within EF. I would like to work within the EF designer if possible and I'm working model-first (coding in C#). So any help and advice/samples would be very welcome and much appreciated. Thanks

  Read the article

• Having a base class function depend on its child class C#

  - by Junk Junk

  I have a Base class with a method that a child class will almost always override. However, instead of replacing the base class' method entirely, I would like for whatever is derived in the child class to be added to what is already in the base class. For Example: class BaseClass public string str() { var string = "Hello my name is" ; } class ChildClass : BaseClass public override string str(){ var string = "Sam"; } The point is that if I want to access the str() method by creating an instance of the ChildClass, the string will print out as "Hello, my name is Sam". I've been looking around and all I have been finding is that this should NOT happen, as the base class shouldn't even know that it is being inherited. So, if the design is false, how would I go about doing this? Keep in mind that there will be multiple child classes inheriting from BaseClass. Thank you

  Read the article

• printing using one '\n'

  - by Alex

  I am pretty sure all of you are familiar with the concept of the Big4, and I have several stuffs to do print in each of the constructor, assignment, destructor, and copy constructor. The restriction is this: I CAN'T use more than one newline (e.g., ƒn or std::endl) in any method I can have a method called print, so I am guessing print is where I will put that precious one and only '\n', my problem is that how can the method print which prints different things on each of the element I want to print in each of the Big4? Any idea? Maybe overloading the Big4?

  Read the article

• Execute a function to affect different template class instances

  - by Samer Afach

  I have a complicated problem, and I need help. I have a base case, class ParamBase { string paramValue; //... } and a bunch of class templates with different template parameters. template <typename T> class Param : public ParamBase { T value; //... } Now, each instance of Param has different template parameter, double, int, string... etc. To make it easier, I have a vector to their base class pointers that contains all the instances that have been created: vector<ParamBase*> allParamsObjects; The question is: How can I run a single function (global or member or anything, your choice), that converts all of those different instances' strings paramValue with different templates arguments and save the conversion result to the appropriate type in Param::value. This has to be run over all objects that are saved in the vector allParamsObjects. So if the template argument of the first Param is double, paramValue has to be converted to double and saved in value; and if the second Param's argument is int, then the paramValue of the second has to be converted to int and saved in value... etc. I feel it's almost impossible... Any help would be highly appreciated :-)

  Read the article

• Rails 3 Abstract Class vs Inherited Class

  - by R. Yanchuleff

  In my rails 3 model, I have two classes: Product, Service. I want both to be of type InventoryItem because I have another model called Store and Store has_many :InventoryItems This is what I'm trying to get to, but I'm not sure how to model this in my InventoryItem model and my Product and Service models. Should InventoryItem just be a parent class that Product and Service inherit from, or should InventoryItem be modeled as a class abstract of which Product and Service extend from. Thanks in advance for the advice!

  Read the article

• Question of using static_cast on "this" pointer in a derived object to base class

  - by Johnyy

  Hi, this is an example taken from Effective C++ 3ed, it says that if the static_cast is used this way, the base part of the object is copied, and the call is invoked from that part. I wanted to understand what is happening under the hood, will anyone help? class Window { // base class public: virtual void onResize() { } // base onResize impl }; class SpecialWindow: public Window { // derived class public: virtual void onResize() { // derived onResize impl; static_cast<Window>(*this).onResize(); // cast *this to Window, // then call its onResize; // this doesn't work! // do SpecialWindow- } // specific stuff };

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >