Search Results

Search found 13331 results on 534 pages for 'fluent interface'.

Page 14/534 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Factories, or Dependency Injection for object instantiation in WCF, when coding against an interface

    - by Saajid Ismail
    Hi I am writing a client/server application, where the client is a Windows Forms app, and the server is a WCF service hosted in a Windows Service. Note that I control both sides of the application. I am trying to implement the practice of coding against an interface: i.e. I have a Shared assembly which is referenced by the client application. This project contains my WCF ServiceContracts and interfaces which will be exposed to clients. I am trying to only expose interfaces to the clients, so that they are only dependant on a contract, not any specific implementation. One of the reasons for doing this is so that I can have my service implementation, and domain change at any time without having to recompile and redeploy the clients. The interfaces/contracts will in this case not change. I only need to recompile and redeploy my WCF service. The design issue I am facing now, is: on the client, how do I create new instances of objects, e.g. ICustomer, if the client doesn't know about the Customer concrete implementation? I need to create a new customer to be saved to the DB. Do I use dependency injection, or a Factory class to instantiate new objects, or should I just allow the client to create new instances of concrete implementations? I am not doing TDD, and I will typically only have one implementation of ICustomer or any other exposed interface.

    Read the article

  • Interface and partial classes

    - by Tomek Tarczynski
    According to rule SA1201 in StyleCop elements in class must appear in correct order. The order is following: Fields Constructors Finalizers (Destructors) Delegates Events Enums Interfaces Properties Indexers Methods Structs Classes Everything is ok, except of Interfaces part, because Interface can contain mehtods, events, properties etc... If we want to be strict about this rule then we won't have all members of Interface in one place which is often very useful. According to StyleCop help this problem can be solved by spliting class into partial classes. Example: /// <summary> /// Represents a customer of the system. /// </summary> public partial class Customer { // Contains the main functionality of the class. } /// <content> /// Implements the ICollection class. /// </content> public partial class Customer : ICollection { public int Count { get { return this.count; } } public bool IsSynchronized { get { return false; } } public object SyncRoot { get { return null; } } public void CopyTo(Array array, int index) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } Are there any other good solutions to this problem?

    Read the article

  • Bind WCF webservice to specific network interface / IP

    - by Markus
    On a machine with multiple network cards I need to bind a WCF webservice to a specific network interface. It seems that the default is to bind on all network interfaces. The machine has two network adapters with the IPs 192.168.0.10 and 192.168.0.11. I have an Apache running that binds on 192.168.0.10:80 and need to run the webservice on 192.168.0.11:80. (Due to external circumstances I cannot choose another port.) I tried the following: string endpoint = "http://192.168.0.11:80/SOAP"; ServiceHost = new ServiceHost(typeof(TService), new Uri(endpoint)); ServiceHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(TContract), Binding, ""); // or: ServiceHost.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(TContract), Binding, endpoint); But it doesn't work; netstat -ano -p tcp always shows the webservice listening on 0.0.0.0:80, which is all interfaces (if I got that correct). When I start Apache first, it correctly binds to the other interface, which in turn prevents the WCF service to bind to "all". Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Personalized UIView created with Interface Builder

    - by Malox
    I need to project a personalized UIView with a UIImageView and 3 UILabel. I need to allocate more of this view because I want put it into a UIScrollView. I would avoid to generate the view programatically because it's difficult and boring design it. My idea is to create a new class that extends UIView and design it with interface builder. For example my Personalized View code is like that: #import <UIKit/UIKit.h> @interface PersonalizedPreview : UIView { IBOutlet UIImageView *image; IBOutlet UILabel *first_label; IBOutlet UILabel *second_label; IBOutlet UILabel *third_label; } -(void) setImage:(UIImage *)image; @property (nonatomic, retain) IBOutlet UIImageView *image; @property (nonatomic, retain) IBOutlet UILabel *label; .... @end I would create an associated xib file for this view and initialize it simply specifing the xib file. Note that I don't want create a specific ViewController for this view and PersonalizedView is instantiate at runtime not when the app runs, moreover I don't know how many PersonalizedView I will instantiate, it depends on runtime execution. Anyone can help me? Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • Extending the method pool of a concrete class which is derived by an interface

    - by CelGene
    Hello, I had created an interface to abstract a part of the source for a later extension. But what if I want to extend the derived classes with some special methods? So I have the interface here: class virtualFoo { public: virtual ~virtualFoo() { } virtual void create() = 0; virtual void initialize() = 0; }; and one derived class with an extra method: class concreteFoo : public virtualFoo { public: concreteFoo() { } ~concreteFoo() { } virtual void create() { } virtual void initialize() { } void ownMethod() { } }; So I try to create an Instance of concreteFoo and try to call ownMethod like this: void main() { virtualFoo* ptr = new concreteFoo(); concreteFoo* ptr2 = dynamic_cast(ptr); if(NULL != ptr2) ptr2->ownMethod(); } It works but is not really the elegant way. If I would try to use ptr-ownMethod(); directly the compiler complains that this method is not part of virtualFoo. Is there a chance to do this without using dynamic_cast? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • R/XLL: Interface to call XLL method in R

    - by Neerav
    I am trying to call the methods defined in the XLL addin(for Excel) from R. Something similar to this Python code: import os from win32com.client import Dispatch Path = 'myxll.xll' xlApp = Dispatch("Excel.Application") xlApp.RegisterXLL(Path) # function call from excel # =xllfunction("param1","param2",...) result = xlApp.run('xllfunction', "param1","param2",...) Is there any library in R that does the XLL interface? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Method name collision in interface implementation - Java

    - by Bhaskar
    If I have two interfaces , both quite different in their purposes , but with same method signature , how do I make a class implement both without being forced to write a single method that serves for the both the interfaces and writing some convoluted logic in the method implementation that checks for which type of object the call is being made and invoke proper code ? In C# , this is overcome by what is called as explicit interface implementation. Is there any equivalent way in Java ?

    Read the article

  • Do fluent interfaces significantly impact runtime performance of a .NET application?

    - by stakx
    I'm currently occupying myself with implementing a fluent interface for an existing technology, which would allow code similar to the following snippet: using (var directory = Open.Directory(@"path\to\some\directory")) { using (var file = Open.File("foobar.html").In(directory)) { // ... } } In order to implement such constructs, classes are needed that accumulate arguments and pass them on to other objects. For example, to implement the Open.File(...).In(...) construct, you would need two classes: // handles 'Open.XXX': public static class OpenPhrase { // handles 'Open.File(XXX)': public static OpenFilePhrase File(string filename) { return new OpenFilePhrase(filename); } // handles 'Open.Directory(XXX)': public static DirectoryObject Directory(string path) { // ... } } // handles 'Open.File(XXX).XXX': public class OpenFilePhrase { internal OpenFilePhrase(string filename) { _filename = filename } // handles 'Open.File(XXX).In(XXX): public FileObject In(DirectoryObject directory) { // ... } private readonly string _filename; } That is, the more constituent parts statements such as the initial examples have, the more objects need to be created for passing on arguments to subsequent objects in the chain until the actual statement can finally execute. Question: I am interested in some opinions: Does a fluent interface which is implemented using the above technique significantly impact the runtime performance of an application that uses it? With runtime performance, I refer to both speed and memory usage aspects. Bear in mind that a potentially large number of temporary, argument-saving objects would have to be created for only very brief timespans, which I assume may put a certain pressure on the garbage collector. If you think there is significant performance impact, do you know of a better way to implement fluent interfaces?

    Read the article

  • Getting started on a stream interface driver

    - by Ranhiru
    I want to build a stream interface driver for testing purposes but I am completely lost. I don't know which IDE to use VS2008 or Platform Builder. Platform Builder is whopping 20GB to download :( Can anyone guide me on how i create the .dll file and include XXX_Open, XXX_Close, XXX_Write, XXX_Read in the dll file? Should i write the .dll file in C++ or can i write it in C#? Please guide me through the basics :) Thanx a lot :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >