Search Results

Search found 3127 results on 126 pages for 'lexical scope'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 15/126 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Python __setattr__ and __getattr__ for global scope?

    - by KT
    Suppose I need to create my own small DSL that would use Python to describe a certain data structure. E.g. I'd like to be able to write something like f(x) = some_stuff(a,b,c) and have Python, instead of complaining about undeclared identifiers or attempting to invoke the function some_stuff, convert it to a literal expression for my further convenience. It is possible to get a reasonable approximation to this by creating a class with properly redefined __getattr__ and __setattr__ methods and use it as follows: e = Expression() e.f[e.x] = e.some_stuff(e.a, e.b, e.c) It would be cool though, if it were possible to get rid of the annoying "e." prefixes and maybe even avoid the use of []. So I was wondering, is it possible to somehow temporarily "redefine" global name lookups and assignments? On a related note, maybe there are good packages for easily achieving such "quoting" functionality for Python expressions?

    Read the article

  • How does scope in Javascript work?

    - by Jim
    I can not understand how scoping works in Javascript. E.g. <html> <head> <script>var userName = "George"; </script> </head> <body> ...... <script> document.write('Name = ' + userName); </script> </body> </html> The variable userName is declared in another "section" of a script. As I understand it the browser renders html and executes code in the order it finds it. So how does userName in the second script tag gets resolved? Does it go to a global setting? Anything I declare earlier is global? I noticed the same happens if I do something like: <html> <head> <script> do { var userName = "George"; //bla } while (someCondition); </script> </head> <body> ...... <script> document.write('Name = ' + userName); </script> </body> </html> Even when userName is declared inside {} it is still resolved in the second script. How is that possible?

    Read the article

  • Python function argument scope (Dictionaries v. Strings)

    - by Shaun Meyer
    Hello, given: foo = "foo" def bar(foo): foo = "bar" bar(foo) print foo # foo is still "foo"... foo = {'foo':"foo"} def bar(foo): foo['foo'] = "bar" bar(foo) print foo['foo'] # foo['foo'] is now "bar"? I have a function that has been inadvertently over-writing my function parameters when I pass a dictionary. Is there a clean way to declare my parameters as constant or am I stuck making a copy of the dictionary within the function? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Variable scope in javascript

    - by Rich Bradshaw
    This is a simple question, but I can't work it out. The specifics aren't important, but here's the gist. I have some code like this: var lat = 0; var lon = 0; if (navigator.geolocation) { navigator.geolocation.getCurrentPosition(function(position) { lat = position.coords.latitude; lon = position.coords.longitude; }); } What I think it's doing is: Set lat and lon to 0 If the browser has geolocation, overwrite those variables with real values However, at the end of that chunk, lat and lon are still 0. I've tried adding vars, passing lat and lon to the function etc but with no success... How do I make this work?

    Read the article

  • jquery ajax callback out of the function scope

    - by vasion
    function checkauth(){ jQuery.getJSON("/users/checkauthjson", null, function(xhr){ if(xhr.success){ return true;}else{ return false;} }); } Obviously, that does not work, but it illustrates what i want to achieve. I want checkauth to return a value which is checked against an ajax server script. How do i do this?

    Read the article

  • XPath: limit scope of result set

    - by Laramie
    Given the XML <a> <c> <b id="1" value="noob"/> </c> <b id="2" value="tube"/> <a> <c> <b id="3" value="foo"/> </c> <b id="4" value="goo"/> <b id="5" value="noob"/> <a> <b id="6" value="near"/> <b id="7" value="bar"/> </a> </a> </a> and the Xpath 1.0 query //b[@id=2]/ancestor::a[1]//b[@value="noob"] is there some way to limit the result set to the <b> elements that are ONLY the children of the immediate <a> element of the start node (//b[@id=2])? For example the Xpath above returns both node ids 1 and 5. The goal is to limit the result to just node id=1 since it is the only @value="noob" element in the same <c> group as our start node (//b[@id=2]). In English, "Starting at a node whose id is equal to 2, find all the elements whose value is "noob" that are descendants of the immediate parent c element without passing through another c element".

    Read the article

  • Linq Scope Problem + Reduce Repeated Code

    - by Tom Gullen
    If the parameter is -1, it needs to run a different query as to if an ID was specified... how do I do this? I've tried initialising var q; outside the If block but no luck! // Loads by Entry ID, or if -1, by latest entry private void LoadEntryByID(int EntryID) { IEnumerable<tblBlogEntry> q; if (EntryID == -1) { q = ( from Blog in db.tblBlogEntries orderby Blog.date descending select new { Blog.ID, Blog.title, Blog.entry, Blog.date, Blog.userID, Comments = ( from BlogComments in db.tblBlogComments where BlogComments.blogID == Blog.ID select BlogComments).Count(), Username = ( from Users in db.yaf_Users where Users.UserID == Blog.userID select new { Users.DisplayName }) }).FirstOrDefault(); } else { q = ( from Blog in db.tblBlogEntries where Blog.ID == EntryID select new { Blog.ID, Blog.title, Blog.entry, Blog.date, Blog.userID, Comments = ( from BlogComments in db.tblBlogComments where BlogComments.blogID == Blog.ID select BlogComments).Count(), Username = ( from Users in db.yaf_Users where Users.UserID == Blog.userID select new { Users.DisplayName }) }).SingleOrDefault(); } if (q == null) { this.Loaded = false; } else { this.ID = q.ID; this.Title = q.title; this.Entry = q.entry; this.Date = (DateTime)q.date; this.UserID = (int)q.userID; this.Loaded = true; this.AuthorUsername = q.Username; } } My main aim is to reduce repeating code

    Read the article

  • Javascript: variable scope & the evils of globals

    - by Nick
    I'm trying to be good, I really am, but I can't see how to do it :) Any advice on how to not use a global here would be greatly appreciated. Let's call the global G. Function A Builds G by AJAX Function B Uses G Function C Calls B Called by numerous event handlers attached to DOM elements (type 1) Function D Calls B Called by numerous event handlers attached to DOM elements (type 2) I can't see how I can get around using a global here. The DOM elements (types 1 & 2) are created in other functions (E&F) which are unconnected with A. I don't want to add G to each event handler (because it's large and there's lots of these event handlers), and doing so would require the same kind of solution as I'm seeking here (i.e., getting G to E&F). The global G, BTW, is an array that is necessary to build other elements as they, in turn, are built by AJAX. I'm not convinced that a singleton is real solution, either. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Setting precision on std::cout in entire file scope - C++ iomanip

    - by Ivan
    Hi all, I'm doing some calculations, and the results are being save in a file. I have to output very precise results, near the precision of the double variable, and I'm using the iomanip setprecision(int) for that. The problem is that I have to put the setprecision everywhere in the output, like that: func1() { cout<<setprecision(12)<<value; cout<<setprecision(10)<<value2; } func2() { cout<<setprecision(17)<<value4; cout<<setprecision(3)<<value42; } And that is very cumbersome. Is there a way to set more generally the cout fixed modifier? Thanks

    Read the article

  • binding an object to the global scope

    - by elduderino
    I have the following code: var myVar = (function (window) { myobj = {}; myobj.boo = function() { alert('hi'); }; window.myVar = myobj; })(window); myVar.boo(); Why don't I get back the alert when I call myVar.boo() ? I've created an anonymous self-executing function and fed in the window object. Inside that I have another object with a method assigned to it. I then assign the global myVar variable to this obj. This should provide an alias to the my myobj object. However when I call the function I get an Cannot call method 'boo' of undefined error

    Read the article

  • Push a variable into global scope?

    - by Spot
    We use instantiate and put system critical objects in $GLOBALS for easy access from anywhere (e.g. DB, Cache, User, etc.). We use $GLOBALS so much that it would (yes, really) drop the amount of code quite a bit if I could reference it like $G = &$GLOBALS for a shorthand call. The problem is that, per my experience and several hours of Googling, I have not found any construct in PHP which allows you to 'flag' a var as global, making $GLOBALS first class, and everything else second class. Am I missing something? Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Variable scope and the 'using' statement in .NET

    - by pete the pagan-gerbil
    If a variable is at class level (ie, private MyDataAccessClass _dataAccess;, can it be used as part of a using statement within the methods of that class to dispose of it correctly? Is it wise to use this method, or is it better to always declare a new variable with a using statement (ie, using (MyDataAccessClass dataAccess = new MyDataAccessClass()) instead of using (_dataAccess = new MyDataAccessClass()))?

    Read the article

  • variable scope when adding a value to a vector in class constructor

    - by TheFuzz
    I have a level class and a Enemy_control class that is based off an vector that takes in Enemys as values. in my level constructor I have: Enemy tmp( 1200 ); enemys.Add_enemy( tmp ); // this adds tmp to the vector in Enemy_control enemys being a variable of type Enemy_control. My program crashes after these statements complaining about some destructor problem in level and enemy_control and enemy. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Retrieve web user's Identity outside of request scope

    - by Kendrick
    I have an ASP.NET app that logs Audit reports using nHibernate's IPreUpdateListener. In order to set the current user in the Listener events, I was using System.Security.Principal.WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent(). This works fine when debugging on my machine, but when I move it to the staging server, I'm getting the ASP.NET process credentials, not the requesting user. In the ASP.NET page, I can use Request.LogonUserIdentity (which works fine since I'm using integrated authentication), but how do I reference this user directly without having to pass it directly to my event? I don't want to have to pass this info through the pipeline because it really doesn't belong in the intermediate events/calls.

    Read the article

  • Query scope within a table trigger in an Oracle database

    - by sisslack
    I'm been trying to write a table trigger the queries another table that is outside the schema where the trigger will reside. Is this possible? It seems like I have no problem querying tables in my schema but I get: Error: ORA-00942: table or view does not exist when trying trying to query tables outside my schema. The documentation seems to elude to this notion, but it's not 100% clear to me.

    Read the article

  • pdo connection scope

    - by Scarface
    Hey guys I have a connection class I found for pdo. I am calling the connection method on the page that the file is included on. The problem is that within functions the $conn variable is not defined even though I stated the method was public (bare with me I am very new to OOP), and I was wondering if anyone had an elegant solution other then using global in every function. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated. CONNECTION class PDOConnectionFactory{ // receives the connection public $con = null; // swich database? public $dbType = "mysql"; // connection parameters // when it will not be necessary leaves blank only with the double quotations marks "" public $host = "localhost"; public $user = "user"; public $senha = "password"; public $db = "database"; // arrow the persistence of the connection public $persistent = false; // new PDOConnectionFactory( true ) <--- persistent connection // new PDOConnectionFactory() <--- no persistent connection public function PDOConnectionFactory( $persistent=false ){ // it verifies the persistence of the connection if( $persistent != false){ $this->persistent = true; } } public function getConnection(){ try{ // it carries through the connection $this->con = new PDO($this->dbType.":host=".$this->host.";dbname=".$this->db, $this->user, $this->senha, array( PDO::ATTR_PERSISTENT => $this->persistent ) ); // carried through successfully, it returns connected return $this->con; // in case that an error occurs, it returns the error; }catch ( PDOException $ex ){ echo "We are currently experiencing technical difficulties. We have a bunch of monkies working really hard to fix the problem. Check back soon: ".$ex->getMessage(); } } // close connection public function Close(){ if( $this->con != null ) $this->con = null; } } PAGE USED ON include("includes/connection.php"); $db = new PDOConnectionFactory(); $conn = $db->getConnection(); function test(){ try{ $sql = 'SELECT * FROM topic'; $stmt = $conn->prepare($sql); $result=$stmt->execute(); } catch(PDOException $e){ echo $e->getMessage(); } } test();

    Read the article

  • Problem about C++ class (inheritance, variables scope and functions)

    - by Luigi Giaccari
    I have a class that contains some data: class DATA Now I would to create some functions that uses those data. I can do it easily by writing member functions like DATA::usedata(); Since there are hundreds of functions, I would to keep an order in my code, so I would like to have some "categories" (not sure of the correct name) like: DATA data; data.memory.free(); data.memory.allocate(); data.file.import(); data.whatever.foo(); where memory, file and whatever are the "categories" and free, allocate and foo are the functions. I tried the inheritance way, but I got lost since I can not declare inside DATA a memory or file object, error C2079 occurs: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9ekhdcxs%28VS.80%29.aspx Since I am not a programmer please don't be too complicated and if you have an easier way I am all ears.

    Read the article

  • JS variable scope missunderstanding

    - by meo
    I have a little problem: slideHelpers.total = 4 for (i=1;i <= slideHelpers.total; i++) { $('<a href="#">' + i + '</a>').bind('click', function(){ alert('go to the ' + i + ' slide')}).appendTo('.slideaccess') } the alert gives out 5 what is logic, because when the function click triggers i is actually 5. But i would like to have the same i as in my <a> tag. What is the best way to handle this? I could put i in the data() of the <a> tag for example but i am sure there is a easier way.

    Read the article

  • Understanding Scope on Scala's For Loops (For Comprehension)

    - by T. Stone
    In Chapter 3 of Programming Scala, the author gives two examples of for loops / for comprehensions, but switches between using ()'s and {}'s. Why is this the case, as these inherently look like they're doing the same thing? Is there a reason breed <- dogBreeds is on the 2nd line in example #2? // #1 ()'s for (breed <- dogBreeds if breed.contains("Terrier"); if !breed.startsWith("Yorkshire") ) println(breed) // #2 {}'s for { breed <- dogBreeds upcasedBreed = breed.toUpperCase() } println(upcasedBreed)

    Read the article

  • jquery ajax calls with scope safety

    - by acidzombie24
    My gut tells me that if i am on a laggy server and the user fires two events fast enough on the success function c will be the value of the most recent event causing func1 to use the wrong value. <--- This is a guess, i haven't proved it. Its a feeling. How do i ensure that i use the right value when calling func1? I prefer not to send c to the server and i dont know if or how to serialize the data and deserialize it back. How do i make this code safe? $('.blah').click(function (event) { var c = $(this).closest('.comment'); ... $.ajax({ url: "/u", type: "POST", dataType: "json", data: { ... }, success: function (data) { func1(c. data.blah);//here

    Read the article

  • Scope of Groovy's ExpandoMetaClass?

    - by TicketMonster
    Groovy exposes an ExpandoMetaClass that allows you to dynamically add instance and class methods/properties to a POJO. I would like to use it to add an instance method to one of my Java classes: public class Fizz { // ...etc. } Fizz fizz = new Fizz(); fizz.metaClass.doStuff = { String blah -> fizz.buzz(blah) } This would be the equivalent to refactoring the Fizz class to have: public class Fizz { // ctors, getters/setters, etc... public void doStuff(String blah) { buzz(blah); } } My question: Does this add doStuff(String blah) to only this particular instance of Fizz? Or do all instances of Fizz now have a doStuff(String blah) instance method? If the former, how do I get all instances of Fizz to have the doStuff instance method? I know that if I made the Groovy: fizz.metaClass.doStuff << { String blah -> fizz.buzz(blah) } Then that would add a static class method to Fizz, such as Fizz.doStuff(String blah), but that's not what I want. I just want all instances of Fizz to now have an instance method called doStuff. Ideas?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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