Search Results

Search found 30780 results on 1232 pages for 'object oriented modeling'.

Page 14/1232 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Is it poor design to create objects that only execute code during the constructor?

    - by Curtix
    In my design I am using objects that evaluate a data record. The constructor is called with the data record and type of evaluation as parameters and then the constructor calls all of the object's code necessary to evaluate the record. This includes using the type of evaluation to find additional parameter-like data in a text file. There are in the neighborhood of 250 unique evaluation types that use the same or similar code and unique parameters coming from the text file. Some of these evaluations use different code so I benefit a lot from this model because I can use inheritance and polymorphism. Once the object is created there isn't any need to execute additional code on the object (at least for now) and it is used more like a struct; its kept on a list and 3 properties are used later. I think this design is the easiest to understand, code, and read. A logical alternative I guess would be using functions that return score structs, but you can't inherit from methods so it would make it kind of sloppy imo. I am using vb.net and these classes will be used in an asp.net web app as well as in a distributed app. thanks for your input

    Read the article

  • Protected object this object on the rompager server is protected

    - by Sami-L
    I have a windows home server, when I connect to any web site in it I get an authentication window with the next message: "http://mydomain.com site requires user name and password, the site says: "SmartAX". Then when I close the window I get an error page saying: Protected object this object on the rompager server is protected Could you please have an idea on this, have it relation with ADSL router ?

    Read the article

  • C# Reflection - Casting private Object field

    - by alhazen
    I have the following classes: public class MyEventArgs : EventArgs { public object State; public MyEventArgs (object state) { this.State = state; } } public class MyClass { // ... public List<string> ErrorMessages { get { return errorMessages; } } } When I raise my event, I set 'State' of the MyEventArgs object to an object of type MyClass. I'm trying to retrieve ErrorMessages by reflection in my event handler: public static void OnEventEnded(object sender, EventArgs args) { Type type = args.GetType(); FieldInfo stateInfo = type.GetField("State"); PropertyInfo errorMessagesInfo = stateInfo.FieldType.GetProperty("ErrorMessages"); object errorMessages = errorMessagesInfo.GetValue(null, null); } But this returns errorMessagesInfo as null (even though stateInfo is not null). Is it possible to retrieve ErrorMessages ? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Specification, modeling and programming are principially the same, right?

    - by Gabriel Šcerbák
    In formal specifications based on abstract algebraic types and equational theory you use formulas of equational theory to specify theory. System which will satisfy those constraints is called in formal logic a model. Modeling is process of creating a model, which abstracts of some aspects, which are unnecessary details for a specific case. So concrete system has to adhere to created model in observed aspects. Programming is a process of creating a program which will have specific behaviour - will perform specific algorithms - and programming languages through different paradigms enable us to think in a certain specific way, which abstracts of some details, usually machine specific ones. So could we be doing all those things at the same time, because they are principially the same? Is declarative programming the nearest attempt to do that? Could we use some sort f programming languages which will be good for programming as well as for modeling and specification?

    Read the article

  • How to reference a specific object in an array of objects using jTemplates

    - by Travis
    I am using the excellent jTemplates plugin to generate content. Given a data object like this... var data = { name: 'datatable', table: [ {id: 1, name: 'Anne'}, {id: 2, name: 'Amelie'}, {id: 3, name: 'Polly'}, {id: 4, name: 'Alice'}, {id: 5, name: 'Martha'} ] }; ..I'm wondering if it is possible to directly specify an object in an array of objects using $T. (I'm hoping there is something like $T.table:3 available) Currently the only way I can think of to access a specific object in an array is to do something like this... {#foreach $T.table as record} {#if $T.record$iteration == 3} This is record 3! Name: {$T.record.name} {#/if} {#/for} However that seems clumsy... Any suggestions? Thanks

    Read the article

  • object representation and value representation

    - by FredOverflow
    3.9 §4 says: The object representation of an object of type T is the sequence of N unsigned char objects taken up by the object of type T, where N equals sizeof(T). The value representation of an object is the set of bits that hold the value of type T. For trivially copyable types, the value representation is a set of bits in the object representation that determines a value, which is one discrete element of an implementation-defined set of values. Does "The value representation of an object" imply that values are always stored in objects? What is the value representation of non-trivially copyable types?

    Read the article

  • Document-oriented database - What if the document definitions change?

    - by Sebastian Hoitz
    As I understand it, you can enter any non-structured information into a document-oriented database. Let's imagine a document like this: { name: 'John Blank', yearOfBirth: 1960 } Later, in a new version, this structure is refactored to { firstname: 'John', lastname: 'Blank', yearOfBirth: 1960 } How do you do this with Document-Oriented databases? Do you have to prepare merge-scripts, that alter all your entries in the database? Or are there better ways you can handle changes in the structure?

    Read the article

  • Designing object oriented programming

    - by Pota Onasys
    Basically, I want to make api calls using an SDK I am writing. I have the following classes: Car CarData (stores input values needed to create a car like model, make, etc) Basically to create a car I do the following: [Car carWithData: cardata onSuccess: successHandler onError: errorHandler] that basically is a factory method that creates instance of Car after making an API call request and populating the new Car class with the response and passes that instance to the successHandler. So "Car" has the above static method to create that car, but also has non-static methods to edit, delete cars (which would make edit, delete API calls to the server) So when the Car create static method passes a new car to the successHandler by doing the following: successHandler([[Car alloc] initWithDictionary: dictionary) The success handler can go ahead and use that new car to do the following: [car update: cardata] [car delete] considering the new car object now has an ID for each car that it can pass to the update and delete API calls. My questions: Do I need a cardata object to store user inputs or can I store them in the car object that would also later store the response from all of the api calls? How can I improve this model? With regards to CarData, note that there might be different inputs for the different API calls. So create function might need to know model, make, etc, but find function might need to know the number of items to find, the limit, the start id, etc.

    Read the article

  • Using Stub Objects

    - by user9154181
    Having told the long and winding tale of where stub objects came from and how we use them to build Solaris, I'd like to focus now on the the nuts and bolts of building and using them. The following new features were added to the Solaris link-editor (ld) to support the production and use of stub objects: -z stub This new command line option informs ld that it is to build a stub object rather than a normal object. In this mode, it accepts the same command line arguments as usual, but will quietly ignore any objects and sharable object dependencies. STUB_OBJECT Mapfile Directive In order to build a stub version of an object, its mapfile must specify the STUB_OBJECT directive. When producing a non-stub object, the presence of STUB_OBJECT causes the link-editor to perform extra validation to ensure that the stub and non-stub objects will be compatible. ASSERT Mapfile Directive All data symbols exported from the object must have an ASSERT symbol directive in the mapfile that declares them as data and supplies the size, binding, bss attributes, and symbol aliasing details. When building the stub objects, the information in these ASSERT directives is used to create the data symbols. When building the real object, these ASSERT directives will ensure that the real object matches the linking interface presented by the stub. Although ASSERT was added to the link-editor in order to support stub objects, they are a general purpose feature that can be used independently of stub objects. For instance you might choose to use an ASSERT directive if you have a symbol that must have a specific address in order for the object to operate properly and you want to automatically ensure that this will always be the case. The material presented here is derived from a document I originally wrote during the development effort, which had the dual goals of providing supplemental materials for the stub object PSARC case, and as a set of edits that were eventually applied to the Oracle Solaris Linker and Libraries Manual (LLM). The Solaris 11 LLM contains this information in a more polished form. Stub Objects A stub object is a shared object, built entirely from mapfiles, that supplies the same linking interface as the real object, while containing no code or data. Stub objects cannot be used at runtime. However, an application can be built against a stub object, where the stub object provides the real object name to be used at runtime, and then use the real object at runtime. When building a stub object, the link-editor ignores any object or library files specified on the command line, and these files need not exist in order to build a stub. Since the compilation step can be omitted, and because the link-editor has relatively little work to do, stub objects can be built very quickly. Stub objects can be used to solve a variety of build problems: Speed Modern machines, using a version of make with the ability to parallelize operations, are capable of compiling and linking many objects simultaneously, and doing so offers significant speedups. However, it is typical that a given object will depend on other objects, and that there will be a core set of objects that nearly everything else depends on. It is necessary to impose an ordering that builds each object before any other object that requires it. This ordering creates bottlenecks that reduce the amount of parallelization that is possible and limits the overall speed at which the code can be built. Complexity/Correctness In a large body of code, there can be a large number of dependencies between the various objects. The makefiles or other build descriptions for these objects can become very complex and difficult to understand or maintain. The dependencies can change as the system evolves. This can cause a given set of makefiles to become slightly incorrect over time, leading to race conditions and mysterious rare build failures. Dependency Cycles It might be desirable to organize code as cooperating shared objects, each of which draw on the resources provided by the other. Such cycles cannot be supported in an environment where objects must be built before the objects that use them, even though the runtime linker is fully capable of loading and using such objects if they could be built. Stub shared objects offer an alternative method for building code that sidesteps the above issues. Stub objects can be quickly built for all the shared objects produced by the build. Then, all the real shared objects and executables can be built in parallel, in any order, using the stub objects to stand in for the real objects at link-time. Afterwards, the executables and real shared objects are kept, and the stub shared objects are discarded. Stub objects are built from a mapfile, which must satisfy the following requirements. The mapfile must specify the STUB_OBJECT directive. This directive informs the link-editor that the object can be built as a stub object, and as such causes the link-editor to perform validation and sanity checking intended to guarantee that an object and its stub will always provide identical linking interfaces. All function and data symbols that make up the external interface to the object must be explicitly listed in the mapfile. The mapfile must use symbol scope reduction ('*'), to remove any symbols not explicitly listed from the external interface. All global data exported from the object must have an ASSERT symbol attribute in the mapfile to specify the symbol type, size, and bss attributes. In the case where there are multiple symbols that reference the same data, the ASSERT for one of these symbols must specify the TYPE and SIZE attributes, while the others must use the ALIAS attribute to reference this primary symbol. Given such a mapfile, the stub and real versions of the shared object can be built using the same command line for each, adding the '-z stub' option to the link for the stub object, and omiting the option from the link for the real object. To demonstrate these ideas, the following code implements a shared object named idx5, which exports data from a 5 element array of integers, with each element initialized to contain its zero-based array index. This data is available as a global array, via an alternative alias data symbol with weak binding, and via a functional interface. % cat idx5.c int _idx5[5] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 }; #pragma weak idx5 = _idx5 int idx5_func(int index) { if ((index 4)) return (-1); return (_idx5[index]); } A mapfile is required to describe the interface provided by this shared object. % cat mapfile $mapfile_version 2 STUB_OBJECT; SYMBOL_SCOPE { _idx5 { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=4[5] }; }; idx5 { ASSERT { BINDING=weak; ALIAS=_idx5 }; }; idx5_func; local: *; }; The following main program is used to print all the index values available from the idx5 shared object. % cat main.c #include <stdio.h> extern int _idx5[5], idx5[5], idx5_func(int); int main(int argc, char **argv) { int i; for (i = 0; i The following commands create a stub version of this shared object in a subdirectory named stublib. elfdump is used to verify that the resulting object is a stub. The command used to build the stub differs from that of the real object only in the addition of the -z stub option, and the use of a different output file name. This demonstrates the ease with which stub generation can be added to an existing makefile. % cc -Kpic -G -M mapfile -h libidx5.so.1 idx5.c -o stublib/libidx5.so.1 -zstub % ln -s libidx5.so.1 stublib/libidx5.so % elfdump -d stublib/libidx5.so | grep STUB [11] FLAGS_1 0x4000000 [ STUB ] The main program can now be built, using the stub object to stand in for the real shared object, and setting a runpath that will find the real object at runtime. However, as we have not yet built the real object, this program cannot yet be run. Attempts to cause the system to load the stub object are rejected, as the runtime linker knows that stub objects lack the actual code and data found in the real object, and cannot execute. % cc main.c -L stublib -R '$ORIGIN/lib' -lidx5 -lc % ./a.out ld.so.1: a.out: fatal: libidx5.so.1: open failed: No such file or directory Killed % LD_PRELOAD=stublib/libidx5.so.1 ./a.out ld.so.1: a.out: fatal: stublib/libidx5.so.1: stub shared object cannot be used at runtime Killed We build the real object using the same command as we used to build the stub, omitting the -z stub option, and writing the results to a different file. % cc -Kpic -G -M mapfile -h libidx5.so.1 idx5.c -o lib/libidx5.so.1 Once the real object has been built in the lib subdirectory, the program can be run. % ./a.out [0] 0 0 0 [1] 1 1 1 [2] 2 2 2 [3] 3 3 3 [4] 4 4 4 Mapfile Changes The version 2 mapfile syntax was extended in a number of places to accommodate stub objects. Conditional Input The version 2 mapfile syntax has the ability conditionalize mapfile input using the $if control directive. As you might imagine, these directives are used frequently with ASSERT directives for data, because a given data symbol will frequently have a different size in 32 or 64-bit code, or on differing hardware such as x86 versus sparc. The link-editor maintains an internal table of names that can be used in the logical expressions evaluated by $if and $elif. At startup, this table is initialized with items that describe the class of object (_ELF32 or _ELF64) and the type of the target machine (_sparc or _x86). We found that there were a small number of cases in the Solaris code base in which we needed to know what kind of object we were producing, so we added the following new predefined items in order to address that need: NameMeaning ...... _ET_DYNshared object _ET_EXECexecutable object _ET_RELrelocatable object ...... STUB_OBJECT Directive The new STUB_OBJECT directive informs the link-editor that the object described by the mapfile can be built as a stub object. STUB_OBJECT; A stub shared object is built entirely from the information in the mapfiles supplied on the command line. When the -z stub option is specified to build a stub object, the presence of the STUB_OBJECT directive in a mapfile is required, and the link-editor uses the information in symbol ASSERT attributes to create global symbols that match those of the real object. When the real object is built, the presence of STUB_OBJECT causes the link-editor to verify that the mapfiles accurately describe the real object interface, and that a stub object built from them will provide the same linking interface as the real object it represents. All function and data symbols that make up the external interface to the object must be explicitly listed in the mapfile. The mapfile must use symbol scope reduction ('*'), to remove any symbols not explicitly listed from the external interface. All global data in the object is required to have an ASSERT attribute that specifies the symbol type and size. If the ASSERT BIND attribute is not present, the link-editor provides a default assertion that the symbol must be GLOBAL. If the ASSERT SH_ATTR attribute is not present, or does not specify that the section is one of BITS or NOBITS, the link-editor provides a default assertion that the associated section is BITS. All data symbols that describe the same address and size are required to have ASSERT ALIAS attributes specified in the mapfile. If aliased symbols are discovered that do not have an ASSERT ALIAS specified, the link fails and no object is produced. These rules ensure that the mapfiles contain a description of the real shared object's linking interface that is sufficient to produce a stub object with a completely compatible linking interface. SYMBOL_SCOPE/SYMBOL_VERSION ASSERT Attribute The SYMBOL_SCOPE and SYMBOL_VERSION mapfile directives were extended with a symbol attribute named ASSERT. The syntax for the ASSERT attribute is as follows: ASSERT { ALIAS = symbol_name; BINDING = symbol_binding; TYPE = symbol_type; SH_ATTR = section_attributes; SIZE = size_value; SIZE = size_value[count]; }; The ASSERT attribute is used to specify the expected characteristics of the symbol. The link-editor compares the symbol characteristics that result from the link to those given by ASSERT attributes. If the real and asserted attributes do not agree, a fatal error is issued and the output object is not created. In normal use, the link editor evaluates the ASSERT attribute when present, but does not require them, or provide default values for them. The presence of the STUB_OBJECT directive in a mapfile alters the interpretation of ASSERT to require them under some circumstances, and to supply default assertions if explicit ones are not present. See the definition of the STUB_OBJECT Directive for the details. When the -z stub command line option is specified to build a stub object, the information provided by ASSERT attributes is used to define the attributes of the global symbols provided by the object. ASSERT accepts the following: ALIAS Name of a previously defined symbol that this symbol is an alias for. An alias symbol has the same type, value, and size as the main symbol. The ALIAS attribute is mutually exclusive to the TYPE, SIZE, and SH_ATTR attributes, and cannot be used with them. When ALIAS is specified, the type, size, and section attributes are obtained from the alias symbol. BIND Specifies an ELF symbol binding, which can be any of the STB_ constants defined in <sys/elf.h>, with the STB_ prefix removed (e.g. GLOBAL, WEAK). TYPE Specifies an ELF symbol type, which can be any of the STT_ constants defined in <sys/elf.h>, with the STT_ prefix removed (e.g. OBJECT, COMMON, FUNC). In addition, for compatibility with other mapfile usage, FUNCTION and DATA can be specified, for STT_FUNC and STT_OBJECT, respectively. TYPE is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. SH_ATTR Specifies attributes of the section associated with the symbol. The section_attributes that can be specified are given in the following table: Section AttributeMeaning BITSSection is not of type SHT_NOBITS NOBITSSection is of type SHT_NOBITS SH_ATTR is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. SIZE Specifies the expected symbol size. SIZE is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. The syntax for the size_value argument is as described in the discussion of the SIZE attribute below. SIZE The SIZE symbol attribute existed before support for stub objects was introduced. It is used to set the size attribute of a given symbol. This attribute results in the creation of a symbol definition. Prior to the introduction of the ASSERT SIZE attribute, the value of a SIZE attribute was always numeric. While attempting to apply ASSERT SIZE to the objects in the Solaris ON consolidation, I found that many data symbols have a size based on the natural machine wordsize for the class of object being produced. Variables declared as long, or as a pointer, will be 4 bytes in size in a 32-bit object, and 8 bytes in a 64-bit object. Initially, I employed the conditional $if directive to handle these cases as follows: $if _ELF32 foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=4 } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=20 } }; $elif _ELF64 foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=8 } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=40 } }; $else $error UNKNOWN ELFCLASS $endif I found that the situation occurs frequently enough that this is cumbersome. To simplify this case, I introduced the idea of the addrsize symbolic name, and of a repeat count, which together make it simple to specify machine word scalar or array symbols. Both the SIZE, and ASSERT SIZE attributes support this syntax: The size_value argument can be a numeric value, or it can be the symbolic name addrsize. addrsize represents the size of a machine word capable of holding a memory address. The link-editor substitutes the value 4 for addrsize when building 32-bit objects, and the value 8 when building 64-bit objects. addrsize is useful for representing the size of pointer variables and C variables of type long, as it automatically adjusts for 32 and 64-bit objects without requiring the use of conditional input. The size_value argument can be optionally suffixed with a count value, enclosed in square brackets. If count is present, size_value and count are multiplied together to obtain the final size value. Using this feature, the example above can be written more naturally as: foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=addrsize } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=addrsize[5] } }; Exported Global Data Is Still A Bad Idea As you can see, the additional plumbing added to the Solaris link-editor to support stub objects is minimal. Furthermore, about 90% of that plumbing is dedicated to handling global data. We have long advised against global data exported from shared objects. There are many ways in which global data does not fit well with dynamic linking. Stub objects simply provide one more reason to avoid this practice. It is always better to export all data via a functional interface. You should always hide your data, and make it available to your users via a function that they can call to acquire the address of the data item. However, If you do have to support global data for a stub, perhaps because you are working with an already existing object, it is still easilily done, as shown above. Oracle does not like us to discuss hypothetical new features that don't exist in shipping product, so I'll end this section with a speculation. It might be possible to do more in this area to ease the difficulty of dealing with objects that have global data that the users of the library don't need. Perhaps someday... Conclusions It is easy to create stub objects for most objects. If your library only exports function symbols, all you have to do to build a faithful stub object is to add STUB_OBJECT; and then to use the same link command you're currently using, with the addition of the -z stub option. Happy Stubbing!

    Read the article

  • Web Development Trends: Mobile First, Data-Oriented Development, and Single Page Applications

    - by dwahlin
    I recently had the opportunity to give a keynote talk at an Intel conference about key trends in the world of Web development that I feel teams should be taking into account with projects. It was a lot of fun and I had the opportunity to talk with a lot of different people about projects they’re working on. There are a million things that could be covered for this type of talk (HTML5 anyone?) but I only had 60 minutes and couldn’t possibly cover them all so I decided to focus on 3 key areas: mobile, data-oriented development, and SPAs. The talk was geared toward introducing people (many who weren’t Web developers) to topics such as mobile first development (demos showed a few tools to help here), responsive design techniques, data binding techniques that can simplify code, and Single Page Application (SPA) benefits. Links to code demos shown during the presentation can be found at the end of the slide deck. Web Development Trends - What's New in the World of Web Development by Dan Wahlin

    Read the article

  • Is OpenGL after C++ job oriented?

    - by Ani
    First, my regards to all programmers out there who have put their endless efforts in learning and becoming expert, wise, efficient and best. Let me describe my situation. I have just graduated from Electronics and Communication Stream. Though I have more interest in software development and hence I have opted to become a software developer rather than Electronics engg. I have learned C++ and wish to wish to go more deep. I have started to learn OpenGL. Guide me in the following: Is OpenGL good to learn and is it job oriented? Should I learn some other language rather then OpenGL after C++?

    Read the article

  • Non-object-oriented game tutorials

    - by Arcadian
    I've been tasked with writing an essay extolling the virtues of object oriented programming and creating an accompanying game to demonstrate them. My initial idea is to find a tutorial for a simple game written in a programming language which does not follow the OOP paradigm (or written in an OOP language but not in an OOP way) and recreate it in an OOP way using either C# or Java (haven't yet decided). This would then allow me to make concrete comparisons between the two. The game doesn't have to be anything complex; Tetris, Pong, etc. that sort of thing. The problem I've had so far is finding a suitable tutorial, any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • PHP string to object name.

    - by Smickie
    Ok I have a string... $a_string = "Product"; and I want to use this string in a call to a object like this: $this->$a_string->some_function(); How the dickens do I dynamically call that object? (don't think Im on php 5 mind)

    Read the article

  • java: assigning object reference IDs for custom serialization

    - by Jason S
    For various reasons I have a custom serialization where I am dumping some fairly simple objects to a data file. There are maybe 5-10 classes, and the object graphs that result are acyclic and pretty simple (each serialized object has 1 or 2 references to another that are serialized). For example: class Foo { final private long id; public Foo(long id, /* other stuff */) { ... } } class Bar { final private long id; final private Foo foo; public Bar(long id, Foo foo, /* other stuff */) { ... } } class Baz { final private long id; final private List<Bar> barList; public Baz(long id, List<Bar> barList, /* other stuff */) { ... } } The id field is just for the serialization, so that when I am serializing to a file, I can write objects by keeping a record of which IDs have been serialized so far, then for each object checking whether its child objects have been serialized and writing the ones that haven't, finally writing the object itself by writing its data fields and the IDs corresponding to its child objects. What's puzzling me is how to assign id's. I thought about it, and it seems like there are three cases for assigning an ID: dynamically-created objects -- id is assigned from a counter that increments reading objects from disk -- id is assigned from the number stored in the disk file singleton objects -- object is created prior to any dynamically-created object, to represent a singleton object that is always present. How can I handle these properly? I feel like I'm reinventing the wheel and there must be a well-established technique for handling all the cases.

    Read the article

  • Deriving an HTMLElement Object from jQuery Object

    - by Jasconius
    I'm doing a fairly exhaustive series of DOM manipulations where a few elements (specifically form elements) have some events. I am dynamically creating (actually cloning from a source element) several boxes and assigning a change() event to them. The change event executes, and within the context of the event, "this" is the HTML Element Object. What I need to do at this point however is determine a contact for this HTML Element Object. I have these objects stored already as jQuery entities in assorted arrays, but obviously [HTMLElement Object] != [Object Object] And the trick is that I cannot cast $(this) and make a valid comparison since that would create a new object and the pointer would be different. So... I've been banging my head against this for a while. In the past I've been able to circumvent this problem by doing an innerHTML comparison, but in this case the objects I am comparing are 100% identical, just there's lots of them. Therefore I need a solid comparison. This would be easy if I could somehow derive the HTMLElement object from my originating jQuery object. Thoughts, other ideas? Help. :(

    Read the article

  • Convert JSON flattened for forms back to an object

    - by George Jempty
    I am required (please therefore no nit-picking the requirement, I've already nit-picked it, and this is the req) to convert certain form fields that have "object nesting" embedded in the field names, back to the object(s) themselves. Below are some typical form field names: phones_0_patientPhoneTypeId phones_0_phone phones_1_patientPhoneTypeId phones_1_phone The form fields above were derived from an object such as the one toward the bottom (see "Data"), and that is the format of the object I need to reassemble. It can be assumed that any form field with a name that contains the underscore _ character needs to undergo this conversion. Also that the segment of the form field between underscores, if numeric, signifies a Javascript array, otherwise an object. I found it easy to devise a (somewhat naive) implementation for the "flattening" of the original object for use by the form, but am struggling going in the other direction; below the object/data below I'm pasting my current attempt. One problem (perhaps the only one?) with it is that it does not currently properly account for array indexes, but this might be tricky because the object will subsequently be encoded as JSON, which will not account for sparse arrays. So if "phones_1" exists, but "phones_0" does not, I would nevertheless like to ensure that a slot exists for phones[0] even if that value is null. Implementations that tweak what I have begun, or are entirely different, encouraged. If interested let me know if you'd like to see my code for the "flattening" part that is working. Thanks in advance Data: var obj = { phones: [{ "patientPhoneTypeId": 4, "phone": "8005551212" }, { "patientPhoneTypeId": 2, "phone": "8885551212" }]}; Code to date: var unflattened = {}; for (var prop in values) { if (prop.indexOf('_') > -1) { var lastUnderbarPos = prop.lastIndexOf('_'); var nestedProp = prop.substr(lastUnderbarPos + 1); var nesting = prop.substr(0, lastUnderbarPos).split("_"); var nestedRef, isArray, isObject; for (var i=0, n=nesting.length; i<n; i++) { if (i===0) { nestedRef = unflattened; } if (i < (n-1)) { // not last if (/^\d+$/.test(nesting[i+1])) { isArray = true; isObject = false; } else { isArray = true; isObject = false; } var currProp = nesting[i]; if (!nestedRef[currProp]) { if (isArray) { nestedRef[currProp] = []; } else if (isObject) { nestedRef[currProp] = {}; } } nestedRef = nestedRef[currProp]; } else { nestedRef[nestedProp] = values[prop]; } } }

    Read the article

  • Using an object in an if statement... (Android)

    - by James Rattray
    I have an object variable Object test = Spinner.getSelectedItem(); -It gets the selected item from the Spinner (called spinner) and names the item 'test' I want to do an if statement related to that object e.g: 'if (test = "hello") { //do something }' But it appears not to work.... Can someone give me some help? -Do I have to use a different if? or convert the object to string etc.? Thanks alot... James

    Read the article

  • Scala passing type parameters to object

    - by Shahzad Mian
    In Scala v 2.7.7 I have a file with class Something[T] extends Other { } object Something extends OtherConstructor[Something] { } This throws the error: class Something takes type parameters object Something extends OtherConstructor[Something] { However, I can't do this object Something[T] extends OtherConstructor[Something[T]] { } It throws an error: error: ';' expected but '[' found. Is it possible to send type parameters to object? Or should I change and simply use Otherconstructor

    Read the article

  • Code Contracts Vs. Object Initializers (.net 4.0)

    - by Mystagogue
    At face value, it would seem that object initializers present a problem for .net 4.0 "code contracts", where normally the invariant should be established by the time the object constructor is finished. Presumably, however, object-initializers require properties to be set after construction is complete. My question is if the invariants of "code contracts" are able to handle object initializers, "as if" the properties were set before the constructor completes? That would be very nice indeed!!

    Read the article

  • Check if an object is defined in html

    - by Manikanta
    In HTML, I have an object tag as follows: <OBJECT ID="objectid" CLASSID="some-class-id" CODEBASE="some-codebase"> I have written a function in JavaScript to access this object. I checked the null value as follows: if(objectid==null){-----} i want to check if the object is undefined or is empty. Do we have any functions to check so?

    Read the article

  • How to create PHP method linking?

    - by Kerry
    I've seen other objects that do this: $obj->method1()->method2(); How do I do that? Is each function just modifying the pointer of an object or returning a pointer? I don't know the proper term for this style -- if anyone could help me with that, it would be great.

    Read the article

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