Search Results

Search found 2668 results on 107 pages for 'implements'.

Page 15/107 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to order by a composite key with JPA and CriteriaBuilder

    - by Kjir
    I would like to create a query using the JPA CriteriaBuilder and I would like to add an ORDER BY clause. This is my entity: @Entity @Table(name = "brands") public class Brand implements Serializable { public enum OwnModeType { OWNER, LICENCED } @EmbeddedId private IdBrand id; private String code; //bunch of other properties } Embedded class is: @Embeddable public class IdBrand implements Serializable { @ManyToOne private Edition edition; private String name; } And the way I am building my query is like this: CriteriaBuilder cb = em.getCriteriaBuilder(); CriteriaQuery<Brand> q = cb.createQuery(Brand.class).distinct(true); Root<Brand> root = q.from(Brand.class); if (f != null) { f.addCriteria(cb, q, root); f.addOrder(cb, q, root, sortCol, ascending); } return em.createQuery(q).getResultList(); And here are the functions called: public void addCriteria(CriteriaBuilder cb, CriteriaQuery<?> q, Root<Brand> r) { } public void addOrder(CriteriaBuilder cb, CriteriaQuery<?> q, Root<Brand> r, String sortCol, boolean ascending) { if (ascending) { q.orderBy(cb.asc(r.get(sortCol))); } else { q.orderBy(cb.desc(r.get(sortCol))); } } If I try to set sortCol to something like "id.edition.number" I get the following error: javax.ejb.EJBException: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unable to resolve attribute [id.name] against path Any idea how I could accomplish that? I tried searching online, but I couldn't find a hint about this... Also would be great if I could do a similar ORDER BY when I have a @ManyToOne relationship (for instance, "id.edition.number")

    Read the article

  • EJB and JPA and @OneToMany - Transaction too long?

    - by marioErr
    Hello. I'm using EJB and JPA, and when I try to access PhoneNumber objects in phoneNumbers attribute of Contact contact, it sometimes take several minutes for it to actually return data. It just returns no phoneNumbers, not even null, and then, after some time, when i call it again, it magically appears. This is how I access data: for (Contact c : contactFacade.findAll()) { System.out.print(c.getName()+" "+c.getSurname()+" : "); for (PhoneNumber pn : c.getPhoneNumbers()) { System.out.print(pn.getNumber()+" ("+pn.getDescription()+"); "); } } I'm using facade session ejb generated by netbeans (basic CRUD methods). It always prints correct name and surname, phonenumbers and description are only printed after some time (it varies) from creating it via facade. I'm guessing it has something to do with transactions. How to solve this? These are my JPA entities: contact @Entity public class Contact implements Serializable { private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private Long id; private String name; private String surname; @OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, mappedBy = "contact") private Collection<PhoneNumber> phoneNumbers = new ArrayList<PhoneNumber>(); phonenumber @Entity public class PhoneNumber implements Serializable { private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private Long id; private String number; private String description; @ManyToOne() @JoinColumn(name="CONTACT_ID") private Contact contact;

    Read the article

  • dynamical binding or switch/case?

    - by kingkai
    A scene like this: I've different of objects do the similar operation as respective func() implements. There're 2 kinds of solution for func_manager() to call func() according to different objects Solution 1: Use virtual function character specified in c++. func_manager works differently accroding to different object point pass in. class Object{ virtual void func() = 0; } class Object_A : public Object{ void func() {}; } class Object_B : public Object{ void func() {}; } void func_manager(Object* a) { a->func(); } Solution 2: Use plain switch/case. func_manager works differently accroding to different type pass in typedef _type_t { TYPE_A, TYPE_B }type_t; void func_by_a() { // do as func() in Object_A } void func_by_b() { // do as func() in Object_A } void func_manager(type_t type) { switch(type){ case TYPE_A: func_by_a(); break; case TYPE_B: func_by_b(); default: break; } } My Question are 2: 1. at the view point of DESIGN PATTERN, which one is better? 2. at the view point of RUNTIME EFFCIENCE, which one is better? Especailly as the kinds of Object increases, may be up to 10-15 total, which one's overhead oversteps the other? I don't know how switch/case implements innerly, just a bunch of if/else? Thanks very much!

    Read the article

  • Java Generics Class Parameter Type Inference

    - by Pindatjuh
    Given the interface: public interface BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> { public T getOther(); public void staticStatisfied(final U list); } The BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> looks very ugly in my use-cases. It is because the T type parameter is already defined in the BasedList<T> part, so the "uglyness" comes from that T needs to be typed twice. Problem: is it possible to let the Java compiler infer the generic T type from BasedList<T> in a generic class/interface definition? Ultimately, I'd like to use the interface like: class X implements BasedOnOther<BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } } // Does not compile, due to invalid parameter count. Instead: class X implements BasedOnOther<SomeType, BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } }

    Read the article

  • JPA 2.0 Provider Hibernate

    - by Rooh
    I have very strange problem we are using jpa 2.0 with hibernate annotations based Database generated through JPA DDL is true and MySQL as Database; i will provide some reference classes and then my porblem. @MappedSuperclass public abstract class Common implements serializable{ @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) @Column(name = "id", updatable = false) private Long id; @ManyToOne @JoinColumn private Address address; //with all getter and setters //as well equal and hashCode } @Entity public class Parent extends Common{ private String name; @OneToMany(cascade = {CascadeType.MERGE,CascadeType.PERSIST}, mappedBy = "parent") private List<Child> child; //setters and rest of class } @Entity public class Child extends Common{ //some properties with getter/setters } @Entity public class Address implements Serializable{ @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) @Column(name = "id", updatable = false) private Long id; private String street; //rest of class with get/setter } as in code you can see that parents and child classes extends Common class so both have address property and id , the problem occurs when change the address refference in parent class it reflect same change in all child objects in list and if change address refference in child class then on merge it will change address refference of parent as well i am not able to figure out is it is problem of jpa or hibernate

    Read the article

  • Static Property losing its value intermittently ?

    - by joedotnot
    Is there something fundamentally wrong with the following design, or can anyone see why would the static properties sometimes loose their values ? I have a class library project containing a class AppConfig; this class is consumed by a Webforms project. The skeleton of AppConfig class is as follows: Public Class AppConfig Implements IConfigurationSectionHandler Private Const C_KEY1 As String = "WebConfig.Key.1" Private Const C_KEY2 As String = "WebConfig.Key.2" Private Const C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE as string = "Key1defaultVal" Private Const C_KEY2_DEFAULT_VALUE as string = "Key2defaultVal" Private Shared m_field1 As String Private Shared m_field2 As String Public Shared ReadOnly Property ConfigValue1() As String Get ConfigValue1= m_field1 End Get End Property Public Shared ReadOnly Property ConfigValue2() As String Get ConfigValue2 = m_field2 End Get End Property Public Shared Sub OnApplicationStart() m_field1 = ReadSetting(C_KEY1, C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE) m_field2 = ReadSetting(C_KEY2, C_KEY1_DEFAULT_VALUE) End Sub Public Overloads Shared Function ReadSetting(ByVal key As String, ByVal defaultValue As String) As String Try Dim setting As String = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings(key) If setting Is Nothing Then ReadSetting = defaultValue Else ReadSetting = setting End If Catch ReadSetting = defaultValue End Try End Function Public Function Create(ByVal parent As Object, ByVal configContext As Object, ByVal section As System.Xml.XmlNode) As Object Implements System.Configuration.IConfigurationSectionHandler.Create Dim objSettings As NameValueCollection Dim objHandler As NameValueSectionHandler objHandler = New NameValueSectionHandler objSettings = CType(objHandler.Create(parent, configContext, section), NameValueCollection) Return 1 End Function End Class The Static Properties get set once on application start, from the Application_Start event of the Global.asax Sub Application_Start(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As EventArgs) //Fires when the application is started AppConfig.OnApplicationStart() End Sub Thereafter, whenever we want to access a value in the Web.Config from anywhere, e.g. aspx page code-behind or another class or referenced class, we simply call the static property. For example, AppConfig.ConfigValue1() AppConfig.ConfigValue2() This is turn returns the value stored in the static backing fields m_field1, m_field2 Problem is sometimes these values are empty string, when clearly the Web.Config entry has values. Is there something fundamentally wrong with the above design, or is it reasonable to expect the static properties would keep their value for the life of the Application session?

    Read the article

  • Java: autofiltering list?

    - by Jason S
    I have a series of items arriving which are used in one of my data structures, and I need a way to keep track of those items that are retained. interface Item {} class Foo implements Item { ... } class Baz implements Item { ... } class StateManager { List<Foo> fooList; Map<Integer, Baz> bazMap; public List<Item> getItems(); } What I want is that if I do the following: for (int i = 0; i < SOME_LARGE_NUMBER; ++i) { /* randomly do one of the following: * 1) put a new Foo somewhere in the fooList * 2) delete one or more members from the fooList * 3) put a new Baz somewhere in the bazMap * 4) delete one or more members from the bazMap */ } then if I make a call to StateManager.getItems(), I want to return a list of those Foo and Baz items, which are found in the fooList and the bazMap, in the order they were added. Items that were deleted or displaced from fooList and bazMap should not be in the returned list. How could I implement this? SOME_LARGE_NUMBER is large enough that I don't have the memory available to retain all the Foo and Baz items, and then filter them.

    Read the article

  • How do I establish table association in JPA / Hibernate with existing database?

    - by Paperino
    Currently I have two tables in my database Encounters and Referrals: There is a one to many relationship between these two tables. Currently they are linked together with foreign keys. Right now I have public class Encounter extends JPASupport implements java.io.Serializable { @Column(name="referralid", unique=false, nullable=true, insertable=true, updatable=true) public Integer referralid; } But what I really want is public class Encounter extends JPASupport implements java.io.Serializable { .......... @OneToMany(cascade=CascadeType.PERSIST) public Set<Referrals> referral; ............ } So that I can eventually do a query like this: List<Encounter> cases = Encounter.find( "select distinct p from Encounter p join p.referrals as t where t.caseid =103" ).fetch(); How do I tell JPA that even though I have non-standard column names for my foreign keys and primary keys that its the object models that I want linked, not simply the integer value for the keys? Does this make sense? I hope so. Thanks in advanced!

    Read the article

  • Remove then Query fails in JPA (deleted entity passed to persist)

    - by nag
    I have two entitys MobeeCustomer and CustomerRegion i want to remove the object from CustomerRegion first Im put join Coloumn in CustomerRegion is null then Remove the Object from the entityManager but Iam getting Exception MobeeCustomer: public class MobeeCustomer implements Serialization{ private Long id; private String custName; private String Address; private String phoneNo; private Set<CustomerRegion> customerRegion = new HashSet<CustomerRegion>(0); @OneToMany(cascade = { CascadeType.PERSIST, CascadeType.REMOVE }, fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "mobeeCustomer") public Set<CustomerRegion> getCustomerRegion() { return CustomerRegion; } public void setCustomerRegion(Set<CustomerRegion> customerRegion) { CustomerRegion = customerRegion; } } CustomerRegion public class CustomerRegion implements Serializable{ private Long id; private String custName; private String description; private String createdBy; private Date createdOn; private String updatedBy; private Date updatedOn; private MobeeCustomer mobeeCustomer; @ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @JoinColumn(name = "MOBEE_CUSTOMER") public MobeeCustomer getMobeeCustomer() { return mobeeCustomer; } public void setMobeeCustomer(MobeeCustomer mobeeCustomer) { this.mobeeCustomer = mobeeCustomer; } } sample code: for (CustomerRegion region : deletedRegionList) { region.setMobeeCustomer(null); getEntityManager().remove(region); } StackTrace: please suggest me how to remove the CustomerRegion Object I am getting Exception javax.persistence.EntityNotFoundException: deleted entity passed to persist: [com.manam.mobee.persist.entity.CustomerRegion#<null>] 15:46:34,614 ERROR [STDERR] at org.hibernate.ejb.AbstractEntityManagerImpl.throwPersistenceException(AbstractEntityManagerImpl.java:613) 15:46:34,614 ERROR [STDERR] at org.hibernate.ejb.AbstractEntityManagerImpl.flush(AbstractEntityManagerImpl.java:299) 15:46:34,614 ERROR [STDERR] at org.jboss.seam.persistence.EntityManagerProxy.flush(EntityManagerProxy.java:92) 15:46:34,614 ERROR [STDERR] at org.jboss.seam.framework.EntityHome.update(EntityHome.java:64)

    Read the article

  • Data encapsulation in Swift

    - by zpasternack
    I've read the entire Swift book, and watched all the WWDC videos (all of which I heartily recommend). One thing I'm worried about is data encapsulation. Consider the following (entirely contrived) example: class Stack<T> { var items : T[] = [] func push( newItem: T ) { items.insert( newItem, atIndex: 0 ) } func pop() -> T? { if items.count == 0 { return nil; } return items.removeAtIndex( 0 ); } } This class implements a stack, and implements it using an Array. Problem is, items (like all properties in Swift) is public, so nothing is preventing anyone from directly accessing (or even mutating) it separate from the public API. As a curmudgeonly old C++ guy, this makes me very grumpy. I see people bemoaning the lack of access modifiers, and while I agree they would directly address the issue (and I hear rumors that they might be implemented Soon (TM) ), I wonder what some strategies for data hiding would be in their absence. Have I missed something, or is this simply an omission in the language?

    Read the article

  • OnClickListener error: Source not found

    - by fordays
    Hi, I'm brand new to Android development and right now I am building a simple calculator for healthcare workers. My program implements the OnClickListener class, but every time I click on the button to initiate the calculation, I get an error saying the "Source is not Found". Here is the code: public class KidneyeGFR extends Activity implements OnClickListener { /** Called when the activity is first created. */ @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.main); Calculate = (Button)this.findViewById(R.id.Calculate); Calculate.setOnClickListener(this); } public void onClick(View v) { if (Female.isChecked()) { gender = 0.742; } else { gender = 1.0; } if (African.isChecked()) { race = 1.212; } else { race = 1.0; } calculateBone(); } protected void calculateBone() { int age = Integer.parseInt(EditAge.getText().toString()); double serum = Double.parseDouble(EditSerum.getText().toString()); finalgfr = BONECONST * Math.pow(serum, -1.154) * Math.pow(age, -0.203) * gender * race; BONEtext.setText(Double.toString(finalbone)); }

    Read the article

  • Comparing two Objects which implement the same interface for equality / equivalence - Design help

    - by gav
    Hi All, I have an interface and two objects implementing that interface, massively simplied; public interface MyInterface { public int getId(); public int getName(); ... } public class A implements MyInterface { ... } public class B implements MyInterface { ... } We are migrating from using one implementation to the other but I need to check that the objects of type B that are generated are equivalent to those of type A. Specifically I mean that for all of the interface methods an object of Type A and Type B will return the same value (I'm just checking my code for generating this objects is correct). How would you go about this? Map<String, MyInterface> oldGeneratedObjects = getOldGeneratedObjects(); Map<String, MyInterface> newGeneratedObjects = getNewGeneratedObjects(); // TODO: Establish that for each Key the Values in the two maps return equivalent values. I'm looking for good coding practices and style here. I appreciate that I could just iterate through one key set pulling out both objects which should be equivalent and then just call all the methods and compare, I'm just thinking there may be a cleaner, more extensible way and I'm interested to learn what options there might be. Would it be appropriate / possible / advised to override equals or implement Comparable? Thanks in advance, Gavin

    Read the article

  • Regarding the ViewModel

    - by mizipzor
    Im struggling to understand the ViewModel part of the MVVM pattern. My current approach is to have a class, with no logic whatsoever (important), except that it implements INotifyPropertyChanged. The class is just a collection of properties, a struct if you like, describing an as small part of the data as possible. I consider this my Model. Most of the WPF code I write are settings dialogs that configure said Model. The code-behind of the dialog exposes a property which returns an instance of the Model. In the XAML code I bind to subproperties of that property, thereby binding directly to the Model's properties. Which works quite well since it implements the INotifyPropertyChanged. I consider this settings dialog the View. However, I havent really been able to figure out what in all this is the ViewModel. The articles Ive read suggests that the ViewModel should tie the View and the Model together, providing the logic the Model lacks but is still to complex to go directly into the View. Is this correct? Would, in my example, the code-behind of the settings dialog be considered the ViewModel? I just feel a bit lost and would like my peers to debunk some of my assumptions. Am I completely off track here?

    Read the article

  • How to Implement an Interface that Requires Duplicate Member Names?

    - by Will Marcouiller
    I often have to implement some interfaces such as IEnumerable<T> in my code. Each time, when implementing automatically, I encounter the following: public IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator() { // Code here... } public IEnumerator GetEnumerator1() { // Code here... } Though I have to implement both GetEnumerator() methods, they impossibly can have the same name, even if we understand that they do the same, somehow. The compiler can't treat them as one being the overload of the other, because only the return type differs. When doing so, I manage to set the GetEnumerator1() accessor to private. This way, the compiler doesn't complaint about not implementing the interface member, and I simply throw a NotImplementedException within the method's body. However, I wonder whether it is a good practice, or if I shall proceed differently, as perhaps a method alias or something like so. What is the best approach while implementing an interface such as IEnumerable<T> that requires the implementation of two different methods with the same name? EDIT #1 Does VB.NET reacts differently from C# while implementing interfaces, since in VB.NET it is explicitly implemented, thus forcing the GetEnumerator1(). Here's the code: Public Function GetEnumerator() As System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerator(Of T) Implements System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable(Of T).GetEnumerator // Code here... End Function Public Function GetEnumerator1() As System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerator Implements System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator // Code here... End Function Both GetEnumerator() methods are explicitly implemented, and the compile will refuse them to have the same name. Why?

    Read the article

  • Invoking a method overloaded where all arguments implement the same interface

    - by double07
    Hello, My starting point is the following: - I have a method, transform, which I overloaded to behave differently depending on the type of arguments that are passed in (see transform(A a1, A a2) and transform(A a1, B b) in my example below) - All these arguments implement the same interface, X I would like to apply that transform method on various objects all implementing the X interface. What I came up with was to implement transform(X x1, X x2), which checks for the instance of each object before applying the relevant variant of my transform. Though it works, the code seems ugly and I am also concerned of the performance overhead for evaluating these various instanceof and casting. Is that transform the best I can do in Java or is there a more elegant and/or efficient way of achieving the same behavior? Below is a trivial, working example printing out BA. I am looking for examples on how to improve that code. In my real code, I have naturally more implementations of 'transform' and none are trivial like below. public class A implements X { } public class B implements X { } interface X { } public A transform(A a1, A a2) { System.out.print("A"); return a2; } public A transform(A a1, B b) { System.out.print("B"); return a1; } // Isn't there something better than the code below??? public X transform(X x1, X x2) { if ((x1 instanceof A) && (x2 instanceof A)) { return transform((A) x1, (A) x2); } else if ((x1 instanceof A) && (x2 instanceof B)) { return transform((A) x1, (B) x2); } else { throw new RuntimeException("Transform not implemented for " + x1.getClass() + "," + x2.getClass()); } } @Test public void trivial() { X x1 = new A(); X x2 = new B(); X result = transform(x1, x2); transform(x1, result); }

    Read the article

  • Java/Hibernate using interfaces over the entities.

    - by Dennetik
    I am using annoted Hibernate, and I'm wondering whether the following is possible. I have to set up a series of interfaces representing the objects that can be persisted, and an interface for the main database class containing several operations for persisting these objects (... an API for the database). Below that, I have to implement these interfaces, and persist them with Hibernate. So I'll have, for example: public interface Data { public String getSomeString(); public void setSomeString(String someString); } @Entity public class HbnData implements Data, Serializable { @Column(name = "some_string") private String someString; public String getSomeString() { return this.someString; } public void setSomeString(String someString) { this.someString = someString; } } Now, this works fine, sort of. The trouble comes when I want nested entities. The interface of what I'd want is easy enough: public interface HasData { public Data getSomeData(); public void setSomeData(Data someData); } But when I implement the class, I can follow the interface, as below, and get an error from Hibernate saying it doesn't know the class "Data". @Entity public class HbnHasData implements HasData, Serializable { @OneToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL) private Data someData; public Data getSomeData() { return this.someData; } public void setSomeData(Data someData) { this.someData = someData; } } The simple change would be to change the type from "Data" to "HbnData", but that would obviously break the interface implementation, and thus make the abstraction impossible. Can anyone explain to me how to implement this in a way that it will work with Hibernate?

    Read the article

  • Loading child entities with JPA on Google App Engine

    - by Phil H
    I am not able to get child entities to load once they are persisted on Google App Engine. I am certain that they are saving because I can see them in the datastore. For example if I have the following two entities. public class Parent implements Serializable{ @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) @Extension(vendorName="datanucleus", key="gae.encoded-pk", value="true") private String key; @OneToMany(cascade=CascadeType.ALL) private List<Child> children = new ArrayList<Child>(); //getters and setters } public class Child implements Serializable{ @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) @Extension(vendorName="datanucleus", key="gae.encoded-pk", value="true") private String key; private String name; @ManyToOne private Parent parent; //getters and setters } I can save the parent and a child just fine using the following: Parent parent = new Parent(); Child child = new Child(); child.setName("Child Object"); parent.getChildren().add(child); em.persist(parent); However when I try to load the parent and then try to access the children (I know GAE lazy loads) I do not get the child records. //parent already successfully loaded parent.getChildren.size(); // this returns 0 I've looked at tutorial after tutorial and nothing has worked so far. I'm using version 1.3.3.1 of the SDK. I've seen the problem mentioned on various blogs and even the App Engine forums but the answer is always JDO related. Am I doing something wrong or has anyone else had this problem and solved it for JPA?

    Read the article

  • ActionListener isn't Implementing

    - by Nick Gibson
    JFrameWithPanel is not abstract and does not override abstract method actionPerformed(java.awt.event.ActionEvent) in java.awt.event.ActionListener public class JFrameWithPanel extends JFrame implements ActionListener I Don't get this code. Book and Java site tells me this is the syntax for the method, but again this error shows up constantly. import javax.swing.*; import javax.swing.JOptionPane; import java.awt.*; import java.awt.event.*; import java.lang.Math.*; import java.lang.Integer.*; import java.util.*; import java.util.Random; import java.io.*; import java.text.*; import java.text.DecimalFormat.*; public class JFrameWithPanel extends JFrame implements ActionListener { JButton button = new JButton("Exit"); public JFrameWithPanel() { super("JFrame with Panel"); JComboBox packageChoice = new JComboBox(); packageChoice.addItem("A+ Certification"); packageChoice.addItem("Network+ Certification "); packageChoice.addItem("Security+ Certifictation"); packageChoice.addItem("CIT Full Test Package"); packageChoice.addActionListener(this); setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); JPanel pane = new JPanel(); pane.add(button); pane.add(packageChoice); setContentPane(pane); setSize(200,100); setVisible(true); } } then later public class CreateJFrameWithPanel { public static void main(String[] args) { JFrameWithPanel panel = new JFrameWithPanel(); } }

    Read the article

  • PHP 5.3 and interface \ArrayAccess

    - by Jakub Lédl
    I'm now working on a project and I have one class that implements the ArrayAccess interface. Howewer, I'm getting an error that says that my implementation: must be compatible with that of ArrayAccess::offsetSet(). My implementation looks like this: public function offsetSet($offset, $value) { if (!is_string($offset)) { throw new \LogicException("..."); } $this->params[$offset] = $value; } So, to me it looks like my implementation is correct. Any idea what is wrong? Thanks very much! The class look like this: class HttpRequest implements \ArrayAccess { // tons of private variables, methods for working // with current http request etc. Really nothing that // could interfere with that interface. // ArrayAccess implementation public function offsetExists($offset) { return isset ($this->params[$offset]); } public function offsetGet($offset) { return isset ($this->params[$offset]) ? $this->params[$offset] : NULL; } public function offsetSet($offset, $value) { if (!is_string($offset)) { throw new \LogicException("You can only assing to params using specified key."); } $this->params[$offset] = $value; } public function offsetUnset($offset) { unset ($this->params[$offset]); } }

    Read the article

  • Spring Data Neo4J @Indexed(unique = true) not working

    - by Markus Lamm
    I'm new to Neo4J and I have, probably an easy question. There're NodeEntitys in my application, a property (name) is annotated with @Indexed(unique = true) to achieve the uniqueness like I do in JPA with @Column(unique = true). My problem is, that when I persist an entity with a name that already exists in my graph, it works fine anyway. But I expected some kind of exception here...?! Here' s an overview over basic my code: @NodeEntity public abstract class BaseEntity implements Identifiable { @GraphId private Long entityId; ... } public class Role extends BaseEntity { @Indexed(unique = true) private String name; ... } public interface RoleRepository extends GraphRepository<Role> { Role findByName(String name); } @Service public class RoleServiceImpl extends BaseEntityServiceImpl<Role> implements { private RoleRepository repository; @Override @Transactional public T save(final T entity) { return getRepository().save(entity); } } And this is my test: @Test public void testNameUniqueIndex() { final List<Role> roles = Lists.newLinkedList(service.findAll()); final String existingName = roles.get(0).getName(); Role newRole = new Role.Builder(existingName).build(); newRole = service.save(newRole); } That's the point where I expect something to go wrong! How can I ensure the uniqueness of a property, without checking it for myself?? THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR ANY IDEAS!! P.S.: I'm using neo4j 1.8.M07, spring-data-neo4j 2.1.0.BUILD-SNAPSHOT and Spring 3.1.2.RELEASE.

    Read the article

  • How to Bind a Command in WPF

    - by MegaMind
    Sometimes we used complex ways so many times, we forgot the simplest ways to do the task. I know how to do command binding, but i always use same approach. Create a class that implements ICommand interface and from the view model i create new instance of that class and binding works like a charm. This is the code that i used for command binding public partial class MainWindow : Window { public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); DataContext = this; testCommand = new MeCommand(processor); } ICommand testCommand; public ICommand test { get { return testCommand; } } public void processor() { MessageBox.Show("hello world"); } } public class MeCommand : ICommand { public delegate void ExecuteMethod(); private ExecuteMethod meth; public MeCommand(ExecuteMethod exec) { meth = exec; } public bool CanExecute(object parameter) { return false; } public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged; public void Execute(object parameter) { meth(); } } But i want to know the basic way to do this, no third party dll no new class creation. Do this simple command binding using a single class. Actual class implements from ICommand interface and do the work.

    Read the article

  • JPA - Can an @JoinColumn be an @Id as well? SerializationException occurs.

    - by Shivago
    Hi everyone, I am trying to use an @JoinColumn as an @Id using JPA and I am getting SerializationExceptions, "Could not serialize." UserRole.java: @Entity @Table(name = "authorities") public class UserRole implements Serializable { @Column(name = "authority") private String role; @Id @ManyToOne @JoinColumn(name = "username") private User owner; ... } User.java: @Entity @Table(name = "users") public class User implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue protected Long id; @Column(name = "username") protected String email; @OneToMany(mappedBy = "owner", fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = CascadeType.ALL) protected Set<UserRole> roles = new HashSet<UserRole>(); .... } "username" is set up as a unique index in my Users table but not as the primary key. Is there any way to make "username" act as the ID for UserRole? I don't want to introduce a numeric key in UserRole. Have I totally lost the plot here? I am using MySQL and Hibernate under the hood.

    Read the article

  • Trouble accessing fields of a serialized object in Java

    - by typoknig
    I have instantized a class that implements Serializable and I am trying to stream that object like this: try{ Socket socket = new Socket("localhost", 8000); ObjectOutputStream toServer = new ObjectOutputStream(socket.getOutputStream()); toServer.writeObject(myObject); } catch (IOException ex) { System.err.println(ex); } All good so far right? Then I am trying to read the fields of that object like this: //This is an inner class class HandleClient implements Runnable{ private ObjectInputStream fromClient; private Socket socket; // This socket was established earlier try { fromClient = new ObjectInputStream(socket.getInputStream()); GetField inputObjectFields = fromClient.readFields(); double myFristVariable = inputObjectFields.get("myFirstVariable", 0); int mySecondVariable = inputObjectFields.get("mySecondVariable", 0); //do stuff } catch (IOException ex) { System.err.println(ex); } catch (ClassNotFoundException ex) { System.err.println(ex); } finally { try { fromClient.close(); } catch (Exception ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } } But I always get the error: java.io.NotActiveException: not in call to readObject This is my first time streaming objects instead of primitive data types, what am I doing wrong? BONUS When I do get this working correctly, is the ENTIRE CLASS passed with the serialized object (i.e. will I have access to the methods of the object's class)? My reading suggests that the entire class is passed with the object, but I have been unable to use the objects methods thus far. How exactly do I call on the object's methods? In addition to my code above I also experimented with the readObject method, but I was probably using it wrong too because I couldn't get it to work. Please enlighten me.

    Read the article

  • are there requirements for Struts setters beyond variable name matching?

    - by slk
    I have a model-driven Struts Web action: public class ModelDrivenAction<T extends Object> implements ModelDriven<T>, Preparable { protected Long id; protected T model; @Override public void prepare() {} public void setId(Long id) { this.id = id; } @Override public T getModel() { return model; } public void setModel(T model) { this.model = model; } } I have another action which is not currently model-driven: public class OtherAction implements Preparable { private ModelObj modelObj; private Long modelId; @Override public void prepare() { modelObj = repoService.retrieveModelById(modelId); } public void setModelId(Long modelId) { this.modelId = modelId; } } I wish to make it so, and would like to avoid having to track down all the instances in JavaScript where the action is passed a "modelId" parameter instead of "id" if at all possible. I thought this might work, so either modelId or id could be passed in: public class OtherAction extends ModelDrivenAction<ModelObj> { @Override public void prepare() { model = repoService.retrieveModelById(id); } public void setModelId(Long modelId) { this.id = modelId; } } However, server/path/to/other!method?modelId=123 is failing to set id. I thought so long as a setter matched a parameter name the Struts interceptor would call it on action invocation. Am I missing something here?

    Read the article

  • C# casting question: from IEnumerable to custom type

    - by Sarah Vessels
    I have a custom class called Rows that implements IEnumerable<Row>. I often use LINQ queries on Rows instances: Rows rows = new Rows { row1, row2, row3 }; IEnumerable<Row> particularRows = rows.Where<Row>(row => condition); What I would like is to be able to do the following: Rows rows = new Rows { row1, row2, row3 }; Rows particularRows = (Rows)rows.Where<Row>(row => condition); However, I get a "System.InvalidCastException: Unable to cast object of type 'WhereEnumerableIterator1[NS.Row]' to type 'NS.Rows'". I do have a Rows constructor taking IEnumerable<Row>, so I could do: Rows rows = new Rows { row1, row2, row3 }; Rows particularRows = new Rows(rows.Where<Row>(row => condition)); This seems bulky, however, and I would love to be able to cast an IEnumerable<Row> to be a Rows since Rows implements IEnumerable<Row>. Any ideas?

    Read the article

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