Search Results

Search found 1275 results on 51 pages for 'derived'.

Page 15/51 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • How to prevent inheritance for some methods?!

    - by Dr TJ
    Hi How can I prevent inheritance of some methods or properties in derived classes?! public class BaseClass : Collection { //Some operations... //Should not let derived classes inherit 'Add' method. } public class DerivedClass : BaseClass { public void DoSomething(int Item) { this.Add(Item); // Error: No such method should exist... } }

    Read the article

  • protected internal

    - by adfs
    The C# Language Reference on MSDN defines that protected internal as "Access is limited to the current assembly or types derived from the containing class". But from the semantic point of protected internal" sounds to me like both protected and internal which means the member will accessible only to those derived classes with in the same assembly. Is there any access modified that has a meaning to the same effect?

    Read the article

  • Override generic methods in c#

    - by Pascal
    I thought I can not override generic methods of a derived class. http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/programming/csharp/9780071741163/generics/ch18lev1sec13 The code in this link runs fine. The overriden method is called although the instance type of the base class is used and not the instance of the derived type. Now I am confused because a former question of mine Type parameter declaration must be identifier not a type is about calling the overriding generic method with the instance of base type which did NOT work!

    Read the article

  • SQL – Business Intelligence: Derive Data or Information?

    - by Pinal Dave
    We all know the value of information in our lives. Whether it’s a personal decision or a business initiated one, people need it. But the question is: who is to make the distinction between data and information? We all come across a whole lot of data daily, that may be significant or not. We filter what’s required and forget about the rest. Information is filtered and distilled data. Filtering and distillation can also alter its actual meaning and natural state. Therefore, in this blog we discover some ways to ensure that we’re using business intelligence derived from the right information for making critical management decisions. Four key questions managers must ask themselves before making a decision: 1. Am I working with data or information? 2. What is it’s context? 3. How recent is it? 4. How was it derived or what is the source? The first question is probably the most important. You must know what you’re dealing with here. If you see use of adjectives and conclusions drawn, it’s information. Not raw data. You very next concern must be whether this is guised to present a particular viewpoint or perspective. It makes a lot of difference if you take a decision based on someone’s propaganda to distort real facts. Therefore, the context and the intentions of the distillation process must be clear to you. The next consideration is whether data is recent enough to hold any value. Since it has a very short shelf life, you must ensure that its context and value is not lost out of time. The last and the most important consideration is how was it derived in the first place. The observer effect is what calls the shots here. The source can change the context to a great extent if the collection methodology  and purpose is not clear. Gathering intelligence for decision making requires users to be keen observers and not take the information provided on its face value alone. These probing questions will allow you to make sure that you’re working with clean and accurate data devoid of any influence or manipulations. Only then can you be sure of deriving true business intelligence for your organization. BI technology is also a great way to ensure accuracy of reports. SQL BI Platform  provides advanced tools and techniques for all your BI needs and concerns. Koenig Solutions offers this course along with a host of other Business Intelligence and IT courses on all latest technologies available in the market today. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • C++ property system interface for game editors (reflection system)

    - by Cristopher Ismael Sosa Abarca
    I have designed an reusable game engine for an project, and their functionality is like this: Is a completely scripted game engine instead of the usual scripting languages as Lua or Python, this uses Runtime-Compiled C++, and an modified version of Cistron (an component-based programming framework).to be compatible with Runtime-Compiled C++ and so on. Using the typical GameObject and Component classes of the Component-based design pattern, is serializable via JSON, BSON or Binary useful for selecting which objects will be loaded the next time. The main problem: We want to use our custom GameObjects and their components properties in our level editor, before used hardcoded functions to access GameObject base class virtual functions from the derived ones, if do you want to modify an property specifically from that class you need inside into the code, this situation happens too with the derived classes of Component class, in little projects there's no problem but for larger projects becomes tedious, lengthy and error-prone. I've researched a lot to find a solution without luck, i tried with the Ogitor's property system (since our engine is Ogre-based) but we find it inappropiate for the component-based design and it's limited only for the Ogre classes and can lead to performance overhead, and we tried some code we find in the Internet we tested it and worked a little but we considered the macro and lambda abuse too horrible take a look (some code omitted): IWE_IMPLEMENT_PROP_BEGIN(CBaseEntity) IWE_PROP_LEVEL_BEGIN("Editor"); IWE_PROP_INT_S("Id", "Internal id", m_nEntID, [](int n) {}, true); IWE_PROP_LEVEL_END(); IWE_PROP_LEVEL_BEGIN("Entity"); IWE_PROP_STRING_S("Mesh", "Mesh used for this entity", m_pModelName, [pInst](const std::string& sModelName) { pInst->m_stackMemUndoType.push(ENT_MEM_MESH); pInst->m_stackMemUndoStr.push(pInst->getModelName()); pInst->setModel(sModelName, false); pInst->saveState(); }, false); IWE_PROP_VECTOR3_S("Position", m_vecPosition, [pInst](float fX, float fY, float fZ) { pInst->m_stackMemUndoType.push(ENT_MEM_POSITION); pInst->m_stackMemUndoVec3.push(pInst->getPosition()); pInst->saveState(); pInst->m_vecPosition.Get()[0] = fX; pInst->m_vecPosition.Get()[1] = fY; pInst->m_vecPosition.Get()[2] = fZ; pInst->setPosition(pInst->m_vecPosition); }, false); IWE_PROP_QUATERNION_S("Orientation (Quat)", m_quatOrientation, [pInst](float fW, float fX, float fY, float fZ) { pInst->m_stackMemUndoType.push(ENT_MEM_ROTATE); pInst->m_stackMemUndoQuat.push(pInst->getOrientation()); pInst->saveState(); pInst->m_quatOrientation.Get()[0] = fW; pInst->m_quatOrientation.Get()[1] = fX; pInst->m_quatOrientation.Get()[2] = fY; pInst->m_quatOrientation.Get()[3] = fZ; pInst->setOrientation(pInst->m_quatOrientation); }, false); IWE_PROP_LEVEL_END(); IWE_IMPLEMENT_PROP_END() We are finding an simplified way to this, without leading confusing the programmers, (will be released to the public) i find ways to achieve this but they are only available for the common scripting as Lua or editors using C#. also too portable, we can write "wrappers" for different GUI toolkits as Qt or GTK, also i'm thinking to using Boost.Wave to get additional macro functionality without creating my own compiler. The properties designed to use in the editor they are removed in the game since the save file contains their data and loads it using an simple 'load' function to reduce unnecessary code bloat may will be useful if some GameObject property wants to be hidden instead. In summary, there's a way to implement an reflection(property) system for a level editor based in properties from derived classes? Also we can use C++11 and Boost (restricted only to Wave and PropertyTree)

    Read the article

  • Entity System with C++ templates

    - by tommaisey
    I've been getting interested in the Entity/Component style of game programming, and I've come up with a design in C++ which I'd like a critique of. I decided to go with a fairly pure Entity system, where entities are simply an ID number. Components are stored in a series of vectors - one for each Component type. However, I didn't want to have to add boilerplate code for every new Component type I added to the game. Nor did I want to use macros to do this, which frankly scare me. So I've come up with a system based on templates and type hinting. But there are some potential issues I'd like to check before I spend ages writing this (I'm a slow coder!) All Components derive from a Component base class. This base class has a protected constructor, that takes a string parameter. When you write a new derived Component class, you must initialise the base with the name of your new class in a string. When you first instantiate a new DerivedComponent, it adds the string to a static hashmap inside Component mapped to a unique integer id. When you subsequently instantiate more Components of the same type, no action is taken. The result (I think) should be a static hashmap with the name of each class derived from Component that you instantiate at least once, mapped to a unique id, which can by obtained with the static method Component::getTypeId ("DerivedComponent"). Phew. The next important part is TypedComponentList<typename PropertyType>. This is basically just a wrapper to an std::vector<typename PropertyType> with some useful methods. It also contains a hashmap of entity ID numbers to slots in the array so we can find Components by their entity owner. Crucially TypedComponentList<> is derived from the non-template class ComponentList. This allows me to maintain a list of pointers to ComponentList in my main ComponentManager, which actually point to TypedComponentLists with different template parameters (sneaky). The Component manager has template functions such as: template <typename ComponentType> void addProperty (ComponentType& component, int componentTypeId, int entityId) and: template <typename ComponentType> TypedComponentList<ComponentType>* getComponentList (int componentTypeId) which deal with casting from ComponentList to the correct TypedComponentList for you. So to get a list of a particular type of Component you call: TypedComponentList<MyComponent>* list = componentManager.getComponentList<MyComponent> (Component::getTypeId("MyComponent")); Which I'll admit looks pretty ugly. Bad points of the design: If a user of the code writes a new Component class but supplies the wrong string to the base constructor, the whole system will fail. Each time a new Component is instantiated, we must check a hashed string to see if that component type has bee instantiated before. Will probably generate a lot of assembly because of the extensive use of templates. I don't know how well the compiler will be able to minimise this. You could consider the whole system a bit complex - perhaps premature optimisation? But I want to use this code again and again, so I want it to be performant. Good points of the design: Components are stored in typed vectors but they can also be found by using their entity owner id as a hash. This means we can iterate them fast, and minimise cache misses, but also skip straight to the component we need if necessary. We can freely add Components of different types to the system without having to add and manage new Component vectors by hand. What do you think? Do the good points outweigh the bad?

    Read the article

  • Requiring library consumers reference additional assembly when using certain types

    - by Thomas G. Mayfield
    I have library code that uses ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib under the hood to make it easy to use ZIP files as data sources when running integration tests. As it stands, if I reference my library from another project, the other project will compile just fine, but when it accesses the code that uses SharpZipLib, I get an exception for it not finding the zip library: failed: System.IO.FileNotFoundException : Could not load file or assembly 'ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib, Version=0.85.5.452, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=1b03e6acf1164f73' or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified. If the types in my library derived from a class in SharpZipLib, it'd generate a compile error CS0012. What other ways are there for triggering a CS0012, so that using code that requires SharpZipLib (but doesn't clearly indicate it) would cause consumer code to fail compilation? I've had similar problems in the past when I've used libraries like DeftTech.DuckTyping under the hood. I'd add my library code to a new project, start working, compile, run, and then suddenly hit an edge case that I'd used duck typing to get around and get a runtime error. What I'd most like is to have the same behavior as if I'd derived from a type in the 3rd-party library, so that a reference to my derived type generates a CS0012: The type 'type' is defined in an assembly that is not referenced. You must add a reference to assembly 'assembly'.

    Read the article

  • How does initializing inherited members inside base class constructor reduce the calls to…?

    - by flockofcode
    I’ve read that instead of initializing inherited members ( _c1 in our example ) inside derived constructor: class A { public int _c; } class B:A { public B(int c) { _c = c; } } we should initialize them inside base class constructor, since that way we reduce the calls to inherited members ( _c ): class A { public A(int c) { _c = c; } public int _c; } class B:A { public B(int c) : base(c) { } } If _c field is initialized inside base constructor, the order of initialization is the following: 1) First the field initializers of derived class B are called 2) Then field initializers of base class A are called (at this point _c is set to value 0) 3) B’s constructor is called, which in turn calls A’s custom constructor 4) _c field gets set to value of a parameter c ( inside A’s custom constructor ) 5) Once A’s custom constructor returns, B’s constructor executes its code. If _c field is initialized inside B's constructor, the order of initialization is the following: 1) First the field initializers of a derived class B are called 2) Then field initializers of a base class A are called(at this point _c is set to value 0) 3) B’s constructor is called, which in turn calls A’s default constructor 4) Once A’s custom constructor returns, B’s constructor sets _c field to a value of parameter c As far as I can tell, in both cases was _c called two times, so how exactly did we reduce calls to inherited member _c? thanx

    Read the article

  • C# visually subclass datagridview control VS2005

    - by DRapp
    Maybe its something stupid, but I'm having a problem with a subclass of a DataGridView Control in VS2005 C#. I know I can subclass from almost anything by doing public class MyDataGridView : DataGridView {} no problem, and I put in some things / elements I want applicable globally. Now, I take this gridview and put into a custom user control that will contain other controls too. So I have something like created by the visual designer. I grab some buttons, label, and my derived "MyDataGridView" on it. public partial class MyCompoundDGVPlus : UserControl So, now, I can visually draw, move, change all sorts of settings as needed, no problem. Now, I want this "MyCompoundDGVPlus" class as the basis for other classes, of which I will manipulate settings specific, but want all to have the same look / feel, and otherwise similar flow, hence the derivations. I've even set the "modifiers" setting to public, so I SHOULD be able to modify any of the properties of the controls at any derived level. So, now, I create a new subclass of "MyFirstDetailedDGVPlus" derived from "MyCompoundDGVPlus". Ok visually, all the label, button, datagridview appear. However, now I want to specifically define the columns of the datagridview here in this class visually, but its locked. However, the LABEL on the form, I CAN get all the property settings.... What am I missing.

    Read the article

  • Emulating Dynamic Dispatch in C++ based on Template Parameters

    - by Jon Purdy
    This is heavily simplified for the sake of the question. Say I have a hierarchy: struct Base { virtual int precision() const = 0; }; template<int Precision> struct Derived : public Base { typedef Traits<Precision>::Type Type; Derived(Type data) : value(data) {} virtual int precision() const { return Precision; } Type value; }; I want a function like: Base* function(const Base& a, const Base& b); Where the specific type of the result of the function is the same type as whichever of first and second has the greater Precision; something like the following pseudocode: template<class T> T* operation(const T& a, const T& b) { return new T(a.value + b.value); } Base* function(const Base& a, const Base& b) { if (a.precision() > b.precision()) return operation((A&)a, A(b.value)); else if (a.precision() < b.precision()) return operation(B(a.value), (B&)b); else return operation((A&)a, (A&)b); } Where A and B are the specific types of a and b, respectively. I want f to operate independently of how many instantiations of Derived there are. I'd like to avoid a massive table of typeid() comparisons, though RTTI is fine in answers. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How `is_base_of` works?

    - by Alexey Malistov
    Why the following code works? typedef char (&yes)[1]; typedef char (&no)[2]; template <typename B, typename D> struct Host { operator B*() const; operator D*(); }; template <typename B, typename D> struct is_base_of { template <typename T> static yes check(D*, T); static no check(B*, int); static const bool value = sizeof(check(Host<B,D>(), int())) == sizeof(yes); }; //Test sample class Base {}; class Derived : private Base {}; //Exspression is true. int test[is_base_of<Base,Derived>::value && !is_base_of<Derived,Base>::value]; Note that B is private base. Note that operator B*() is const. How does this work? Why this works? Why static yes check(D*, T); is better than static yes check(B*, int); ?

    Read the article

  • Implementation/interface inheritance design question.

    - by Neil G
    I would like to get the stackoverflow community's opinion on the following three design patterns. The first is implementation inheritance; the second is interface inheritance; the third is a middle ground. My specific question is: Which is best? implementation inheritance: class Base { X x() const = 0; void UpdateX(A a) { y_ = g(a); } Y y_; } class Derived: Base { X x() const { return f(y_); } } interface inheritance: class Base { X x() const = 0; void UpdateX(A a) = 0; } class Derived: Base { X x() const { return x_; } void UpdateX(A a) { x_ = f(g(a)); } X x_; } middle ground: class Base { X x() const { return x_; } void UpdateX(A a) = 0; X x_; } class Derived: Base { void UpdateX(A a) { x_ = f(g(a)); } } I know that many people prefer interface inheritance to implementation inheritance. However, the advantage of the latter is that with a pointer to Base, x() can be inlined and the address of x_ can be statically calculated.

    Read the article

  • WCF data services (OData), query with inheritance limitation?

    - by Mathieu Hétu
    Project: WCF Data service using internally EF4 CTP5 Code-First approach. I configured entities with inheritance (TPH). See previous question on this topic: Previous question about multiple entities- same table The mapping works well, and unit test over EF4 confirms that queries runs smoothly. My entities looks like this: ContactBase (abstract) Customer (inherits from ContactBase), this entity has also several Navigation properties toward other entities Resource (inherits from ContactBase) I have configured a discriminator, so both Customer and Resource map to the same table. Again, everythings works fine on the Ef4 point of view (unit tests all greens!) However, when exposing this DBContext over WCF Data services, I get: - CustomerBases sets exposed (Customers and Resources sets seems hidden, is it by design?) - When I query over Odata on Customers, I get this error: Navigation Properties are not supported on derived entity types. Entity Set 'ContactBases' has a instance of type 'CodeFirstNamespace.Customer', which is an derived entity type and has navigation properties. Please remove all the navigation properties from type 'CodeFirstNamespace.Customer'. Stacktrace: at System.Data.Services.Serializers.SyndicationSerializer.WriteObjectProperties(IExpandedResult expanded, Object customObject, ResourceType resourceType, Uri absoluteUri, String relativeUri, SyndicationItem item, DictionaryContent content, EpmSourcePathSegment currentSourceRoot) at System.Data.Services.Serializers.SyndicationSerializer.WriteEntryElement(IExpandedResult expanded, Object element, ResourceType expectedType, Uri absoluteUri, String relativeUri, SyndicationItem target) at System.Data.Services.Serializers.SyndicationSerializer.<DeferredFeedItems>d__b.MoveNext() at System.ServiceModel.Syndication.Atom10FeedFormatter.WriteItems(XmlWriter writer, IEnumerable`1 items, Uri feedBaseUri) at System.ServiceModel.Syndication.Atom10FeedFormatter.WriteFeedTo(XmlWriter writer, SyndicationFeed feed, Boolean isSourceFeed) at System.ServiceModel.Syndication.Atom10FeedFormatter.WriteFeed(XmlWriter writer) at System.ServiceModel.Syndication.Atom10FeedFormatter.WriteTo(XmlWriter writer) at System.Data.Services.Serializers.SyndicationSerializer.WriteTopLevelElements(IExpandedResult expanded, IEnumerator elements, Boolean hasMoved) at System.Data.Services.Serializers.Serializer.WriteRequest(IEnumerator queryResults, Boolean hasMoved) at System.Data.Services.ResponseBodyWriter.Write(Stream stream) Seems like a limitation of WCF Data services... is it? Not much documentation can be found on the web about WCF Data services (OData) and inheritance specifications. How can I overpass this exception? I need these navigation properties on derived entities, and inheritance seems the only way to provide mapping of 2 entites on the same table with Ef4 CTP5... Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Currently using View, Should I use a hard table instead?

    - by 1001010101
    I am currently debating whether my table, mapping_uGroups_uProducts, which is a view formed by the following table: CREATE ALGORITHM=UNDEFINED DEFINER=`root`@`localhost` SQL SECURITY DEFINER VIEW `db`.`mapping_uGroups_uProducts` AS select distinct `X`.`upID` AS `upID`,`Z`.`ugID` AS `ugID` from ((`db`.`mapping_uProducts_Products` `X` join `db`.`productsInfo` `Y` on((`X`.`pID` = `Y`.`pID`))) join `db`.`mapping_uGroups_Groups` `Z` on((`Y`.`gID` = `Z`.`gID`))); My current query is: SELECT upID FROM uProductsInfo \ JOIN fs_uProducts USING (upID) column \ JOIN mapping_uGroups_uProducts USING (upID) -- could be faster if we use hard table and index \ JOIN mapping_fs_key USING (fsKeyID) \ WHERE fsName="OVERALL" \ AND ugID=1 \ ORDER BY score DESC \ LIMIT 0,30; which is pretty slow. (for 30 results, it requires about 10 secondes). I think the reason for my query being so slow is definitely due to the fact that that particular query relies on a VIEW which has no index to speed things up. +----+-------------+----------------+--------+----------------+---------+---------+---------------------------------------+-------+---------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+----------------+--------+----------------+---------+---------+---------------------------------------+-------+---------------------------------+ | 1 | PRIMARY | mapping_fs_key | const | PRIMARY,fsName | fsName | 386 | const | 1 | Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | PRIMARY | <derived2> | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 19706 | Using where | | 1 | PRIMARY | uProductsInfo | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | mapping_uGroups_uProducts.upID | 1 | Using index | | 1 | PRIMARY | fs_uProducts | ref | upID | upID | 4 | db.uProductsInfo.upID | 221 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | X | ALL | PRIMARY | NULL | NULL | NULL | 40772 | Using temporary | | 2 | DERIVED | Y | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | db.X.pID | 1 | Distinct | | 2 | DERIVED | Z | ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | db.Y.gID | 2 | Using index; Distinct | +----+-------------+----------------+--------+----------------+---------+---------+---------------------------------------+-------+---------------------------------+ 7 rows in set (0.48 sec) The explain here looks pretty cryptic, and I don't know whether I should drop view and write a script to just insert everything in the view to a hard table. ( obviously, it will lose the flexibility of the view since the mapping changes quite frequently). Does anyone have any idea to how I can optimize my schema better?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to find out whether a class is a direct base of another class?

    - by user176168
    Hi I'm wondering whether there is a way to find out whether a class is a direct base of another class i.e. in boost type trait terms a is_direct_base_of function. As far as I can see boost doesn't see to support this kind of functionality which leads me to think that its impossible with the current C++ standard. The reason I want it is to do some validation checking on two macro's that are used for a reflection system to specify that one class is derived from another e.g. header.h: #define BASE A #define DERIVED B class A {}; class B : public A { #include <rtti.h> }; rtti.h: // I want to check that the two macro's are correct with a compile time assert Rtti<BASE, DERIVED> m_rtti; Although the macro's seem unnecessary in this simple example in my real world scenario rtti.h is a lot more complex. One possible avenue would be to compare the size of the this pointer with the size of a this pointer cast to the base type and some how trying to figure out whether its the size of the base class itself away or something (yeah your right I don't know how that would work either! lol)

    Read the article

  • Will this cause a problem with different runtimes with DLL?

    - by Milo
    My gui application supports polymorphic timed events so that means that the user calls new, and the gui calls delete. This can create a problem if the runtimes are incompatible. So I was told a proposed solution would be this: class base; class Deallocator { void operator()(base* ptr) { delete ptr; } } class base { public: base(Deallocator dealloc) { m_deleteFunc = dealloc; } ~base() { m_deleteFunc(this); } private: Deallocator m_deleteFunc; } int main { Deallocator deletefunc; base baseObj(deletefunc); } While this is a good solution, it does demand that the user create a Deallocator object which I do not want. I was however wondering if I provided a Deallocator to each derived class: eg class derived : public base { Deallocator dealloc; public: Derived() : base(dealloc); { } }; I think this still does not work though. The constraint is that: The addTimedEvent() function is part of the Widget class which is also in the dll, but it is instanced by the user. The other constraint is that some classes which derive from Widget call this function with their own timed event classes. Given that "he who called new must call delete" what could work given these constraints? Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++ Virtual Methods for Class-Specific Attributes or External Structure

    - by acanaday
    I have a set of classes which are all derived from a common base class. I want to use these classes polymorphically. The interface defines a set of getter methods whose return values are constant across a given derived class, but vary from one derived class to another. e.g.: enum AVal { A_VAL_ONE, A_VAL_TWO, A_VAL_THREE }; enum BVal { B_VAL_ONE, B_VAL_TWO, B_VAL_THREE }; class Base { //... virtual AVal getAVal() const = 0; virtual BVal getBVal() const = 0; //... }; class One : public Base { //... AVal getAVal() const { return A_VAL_ONE }; BVal getBVal() const { return B_VAL_ONE }; //... }; class Two : public Base { //... AVal getAVal() const { return A_VAL_TWO }; BVal getBVal() const { return B_VAL_TWO }; //... }; etc. Is this a common way of doing things? If performance is an important consideration, would I be better off pulling the attributes out into an external structure, e.g.: struct Vals { AVal a_val; VBal b_val; }; storing a Vals* in each instance, and rewriting Base as follows? class Base { //... public: AVal getAVal() const { return _vals->a_val; }; BVal getBVal() const { return _vals->b_val; }; //... private: Vals* _vals; }; Is the extra dereference essentially the same as the vtable lookup? What is the established idiom for this type of situation? Are both of these solutions dumb? Any insights are greatly appreciated

    Read the article

  • WCF publish/subscribe service, and ASP.NET MVC client

    - by d3j4vu
    I managed to develop a custom WCF service, using the publish / subscribe model, and hosted inside a managed windows service. Everything's working. I developed an interface as the service contract implementing a method definition marked as a non-one way operation contract (OperationContract(IsOneWay = false)]. This, to make possible returns an instance of a custom class derived from System.Web.Mvc.ActionResult. In the MVC app, event fires ok. It wraps inside an action method, (just the one defined in the interface), but, and this is my current problem, i believe that something relative to the execution context of the windows service (and the hosted wcf counterpart) blocks the execution of the action method in the MVC app. This is what i have until now (some pieces ripped off just to be more clear): /// Method definition for the contract's service. Maps to a MVC ActionMethod. [OperationContract(IsOneWay = false)] ActionResult Imagen(string data, CustomActionResult result); The class to hold an ActionResult derived class instance: public class ServiceEventArgsMvc : ServiceEventArgs { /// <summary> /// /// </summary> public CustomActionResult Result { get; set; } } And the code in the MVC client app: /// <summary> /// Just a simple class to hold an abstract ActionResult derived class instance. /// </summary> public ActionResult Image(string data, CustomActionResult result) { ViewData["data"] = data; return View(); } Ok. ActionMethod sucessfully executes...but when it's done (and usually expected obtain a reditection to a View named Image, like the action method), the WCF service throws a Timeout exception, making clear that he's still waiting for a response from the MVC client. The response never arrives, so the MVC app never finish his work (redirect to the "Image" view as expected). Any ideas?. Guess i'm missing something very simple, but i don't know what it could be. This is drivin' me nuts.

    Read the article

  • Generic Func<> as parameter to base method

    - by WestDiscGolf
    I might be losing the plot, but I hope someone can point me in the right direction. What am I trying to do? I'm trying to write some base methods which take Func< and Action so that these methods handle all of the exception handling etc. so its not repeated all over the place but allow the derived classes to specify what actions it wants to execute. So far this is the base class. public abstract class ServiceBase<T> { protected T Settings { get; set; } protected ServiceBase(T setting) { Settings = setting; } public void ExecAction(Action action) { try { action(); } catch (Exception exception) { throw new Exception(exception.Message); } } public TResult ExecFunc<T1, T2, T3, TResult>(Func<T1, T2, T3, TResult> function) { try { /* what goes here?! */ } catch (Exception exception) { throw new Exception(exception.Message); } } } I want to execute an Action in the following way in the derived class (this seems to work): public void Delete(string application, string key) { ExecAction(() => Settings.Delete(application, key)); } And I want to execute a Func in a similar way in the derived class but for the life of me I can't seem to workout what to put in the base class. I want to be able to call it in the following way (if possible): public object Get(string application, string key, int? expiration) { return ExecFunc(() => Settings.Get(application, key, expiration)); } Am I thinking too crazy or is this possible? Thanks in advance for all the help.

    Read the article

  • How Can I Accept a Generic Class and Use Its Properties / Methods

    - by Blake Blackwell
    I want to create a class that could hold any of a number of same type of classes. For example lets says I have a base class like follows: public class BaseClass { public string MyBaseString { get; set; } } And then I have a few derived classes like this: public class DerivedClass : BaseClass { public MyDerivedClassString { get; set; } } public class DerivedClass2 : BaseClass { public MyDerivedClass2String { get; set; } } Now I would like a class that accepts one of these implementations and does stuff with it. Here is the only thing I can think of, but there must be a better way: public class ClassA { public object MyClass { get; set; } public ClassA (object myClass) { MyClass = myClass; if (object is BaseClass) { //do something } else if (object is DerivedClass) { //do something specific to derived class } else if (object is DerivedClass2) { //do something specific to derived class 2 } } } I'm not sure really what I'm looking for here. Any ideas would be great!

    Read the article

  • mysql-connector-c++ - ‘get_driver_instance’ is not a member of ‘sql::mysql’

    - by rizzo0917
    I am a beginner at c++ and figured the only way I am going to learn is to get dirty with some code. I am trying to build a program that connects to a mysql database. I am using g++, on linux. With no ide. I run "make" and this is my error: hello.cpp:38: error: ‘get_driver_instance’ is not a member of ‘sql::mysql’ make: *** [hello.o] Error 1 Here is my code including makefile. Any Help would be great! Thanks in advance ###BEGIN hello.cpp### #include <stdlib.h> #include <iostream> #include <sstream> #include <stdexcept> #include "mysql_connection.h" #include <cppconn/driver.h> #include <cppconn/exception.h> #include <cppconn/resultset.h> #include <cppconn/statement.h> #include <cppconn/prepared_statement.h> #define EXAMPLE_HOST "localhost" #define EXAMPLE_USER "root" #define EXAMPLE_PASS "" #define EXAMPLE_DB "world" using namespace std; using namespace sql::mysql; int main(int argc, const char **argv) { string url(argc >= 2 ? argv[1] : EXAMPLE_HOST); const string user(argc >= 3 ? argv[2] : EXAMPLE_USER); const string pass(argc >= 4 ? argv[3] : EXAMPLE_PASS); const string database(argc >= 5 ? argv[4] : EXAMPLE_DB); cout << "Connector/C++ tutorial framework..." << endl; cout << endl; try { sql::Driver *driver; sql::Connection *con; sql::Statement *stmt; driver = sql::mysql::get_driver_instance(); con = driver->connect("tcp://127.0.0.1:3306", "user", "password"); stmt = con->createStatement(); stmt->execute("USE " EXAMPLE_DB); stmt->execute("DROP TABLE IF EXISTS test"); stmt->execute("CREATE TABLE test(id INT, label CHAR(1))"); stmt->execute("INSERT INTO test(id, label) VALUES (1, 'a')"); delete stmt; delete con; } catch (sql::SQLException &e) { /* The MySQL Connector/C++ throws three different exceptions: - sql::MethodNotImplementedException (derived from sql::SQLException) - sql::InvalidArgumentException (derived from sql::SQLException) - sql::SQLException (derived from std::runtime_error) */ cout << "# ERR: SQLException in " << __FILE__; cout << "(" << __FUNCTION__ << ") on line " << __LINE__ << endl; /* Use what() (derived from std::runtime_error) to fetch the error message */ cout << "# ERR: " << e.what(); cout << " (MySQL error code: " << e.getErrorCode(); cout << ", SQLState: " << e.getSQLState() << " )" << endl; return EXIT_FAILURE; } cout << "Done." << endl; return EXIT_SUCCESS; } ###END hello.cpp### ###BEGIN Make File### SRCS := hello.cpp OBJS := $(SRCS:.cpp=.o) CXXFLAGS := -Wall -pedantic INCPATHS := -I/home/user/mysql-connector/include/ LIBPATHS := -L/home/user/mysql-connector/lib/ -L/home/user/mysql-connector-c/lib/ LIBS := -static -lmysqlclient -mysqlcppconn-static EXE := MyExecutable $(EXE): $(OBJS) $(CXX) $(OBJS) $(LIBPATHS) $(LIBS) -o $@ .cpp.o: $(CXX) $(CXXFLAGS) $(INCPATHS) -c $< -o $@ ###End Makefile###

    Read the article

  • C++ templated factory constructor/de-serialization

    - by KRao
    Hi, I was looking at the boost serialization library, and the intrusive way to provide support for serialization is to define a member function with signature (simplifying): class ToBeSerialized { public: //Define this to support serialization //Notice not virtual function! template<class Archive> void serialize(Archive & ar) {.....} }; Moreover, one way to support serilization of derived class trough base pointers is to use a macro of the type: //No mention to the base class(es) from which Derived_class inherits BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT_GUID(Derived_class, "derived_class") where Derived_class is some class which is inheriting from a base class, say Base_class. Thanks to this macro, it is possible to serialize classes of type Derived_class through pointers to Base_class correctly. The question is: I am used in C++ to write abstract factories implemented through a map from std::string to (pointer to) functions which return objects of the desired type (and eveything is fine thanks to covariant types). Hover I fail to see how I could use the above non-virtual serialize template member function to properly de-serialize (i.e. construct) an object without knowing its type (but assuming that the type information has been stored by the serializer, say in a string). What I would like to do (keeping the same nomenclature as above) is something like the following: XmlArchive xmlArchive; //A type or archive xmlArchive.open("C:/ser.txt"); //Contains type information for the serialized class Base_class* basePtr = Factory<Base_class>::create("derived_class",xmlArchive); with the function on the righ-hand side creating an object on the heap of type Derived_class (via default constructor, this is the part I know how to solve) and calling the serialize function of xmlArchive (here I am stuck!), i.e. do something like: Base_class* Factory<Base_class>::create("derived_class",xmlArchive) { Base_class* basePtr = new Base_class; //OK, doable, usual map string to pointer to function static_cast<Derived_class*>( basePtr )->serialize( xmlArchive ); //De-serialization, how????? return basePtr; } I am sure this can be done (boost serialize does it but its code is impenetrable! :P), but I fail to figure out how. The key problem is that the serialize function is a template function. So I cannot have a pointer to a generic templated function. As the point in writing the templated serialize function is to make the code generic (i.e. not having to re-write the serialize function for different Archivers), it does not make sense then to have to register all the derived classes for all possible archive types, like: MY_CLASS_REGISTER(Derived_class, XmlArchive); MY_CLASS_REGISTER(Derived_class, TxtArchive); ... In fact in my code I relies on overloading to get the correct behaviour: void serialize( XmlArchive& archive, Derived_class& derived ); void serialize( TxtArchive& archive, Derived_class& derived ); ... The key point to keep in mind is that the archive type is always known, i.e. I am never using runtime polymorphism for the archive class...(again I am using overloading on the archive type). Any suggestion to help me out? Thank you very much in advance! Cheers

    Read the article

  • Abstract exception super type

    - by marcof
    If throwing System.Exception is considered so bad, why wasn't Exception made abstract in the first place? That way, it would not be possible to call: throw new Exception("Error occurred."); This would enforce using derived exceptions to provide more details about the error that occurred. For example, when I want to provide a custom exception hierarchy for a library, I usually declare an abstract base class for my exceptions: public abstract class CustomExceptionBase : Exception { /* some stuff here */ } And then some derived exception with a more specific purpose: public class DerivedCustomException : CustomExceptionBase { /* some more specific stuff here */ } Then when calling any library method, one could have this generic try/catch block to directly catch any error coming from the library: try { /* library calls here */ } catch (CustomExceptionBase ex) { /* exception handling */ } Is this a good practice? Would it be good if Exception was made abstract? EDIT : My point here is that even if an exception class is abstract, you can still catch it in a catch-all block. Making it abstract is only a way to forbid programmers to throw a "super-wide" exception. Usually, when you voluntarily throw an exception, you should know what type it is and why it happened. Thus enforcing to throw a more specific exception type.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >