Search Results

Search found 17407 results on 697 pages for 'static constructor'.

Page 153/697 | < Previous Page | 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160  | Next Page >

• Preserving Permalinks

  - by Daniel Moth

  One of the things that gets me on a rant is websites that break permalinks. If you have posted something somewhere and there is a public URL pointing to it, that URL should never ever return a 404. You are breaking all websites that ever linked to you and you are breaking all search engine links to your content (that others will try and follow). It is a pet peeve of mine. So when I had to move my blog, obviously I would preserve the root URL (www.danielmoth.com/Blog/), but I also wanted to preserve every URL my blog has generated over the years. To be clear, our focus here is on the URL formatting, not the content migration which I'll talk about in my next post. In this post, I'll describe my solution first and then what it solves. 1. The IIS7 Rewrite Module and web.config There are a few ways you can map an old URL to a new one (so when requests to the old URL come in, they get redirected to the new one). The new blog engine I use (dasBlog) has built-in functionality to do that (Scott refers to it here). Instead, the way I chose to address the issue was to use the IIS7 rewrite module. The IIS7 rewrite module allows redirecting URLs based on pattern matching, regular expressions and, of course, hardcoded full URLs for things that don't fall into any pattern. You can configure it visually from IIS Manager using a handy dialog that allows testing patterns against input URLs. Here is what mine looked like after configuring a few rules: To learn more about this technology check out this video, the reference page and this overview blog post; all 3 pages have a collection of related resources at the bottom worth checking out too. All the visual configuration ends up in a web.config file at the root folder of your website. If you are on a shared hosting service, probably the only way you can use the Rewrite Module is by directly editing the web.config file. Next, I'll describe the URLs I had to map and how that manifested itself in the web.config file. What I did was create the rules locally using the GUI, and then took the generated web.config file and uploaded it to my live site. You can view my web.config here. 2. Monthly Archives Observe the difference between the way the two blog engines generate this type of URL Blogger: /Blog/2004_07_01_mothblog_archive.html dasBlog: /Blog/default,month,2004-07.aspx In my web.config file, the rule that deals with this is the one named "monthlyarchive_redirect". 3. Categories Observe the difference between the way the two blog engines generate this type of URL Blogger: /Blog/labels/Personal.html dasBlog: /Blog/CategoryView,category,Personal.aspx In my web.config file the rule that deals with this is the one named "category_redirect". 4. Posts Observe the difference between the way the two blog engines generate this type of URL Blogger: /Blog/2004/07/hello-world.html dasBlog: /Blog/Hello-World.aspx In my web.config file the rule that deals with this is the one named "post_redirect". Note: The decision is taken to use dasBlog URLs that do not include the date info (see the description of my Appearance settings). If we included the date info then it would have to include the day part, which blogger did not generate. This makes it impossible to redirect correctly and to have a single permalink for blog posts moving forward. An implication of this decision, is that no two blog posts can have the same title. The tool I will describe in my next post (inelegantly) deals with duplicates, but not with triplicates or higher. 5. Unhandled by a generic rule Unfortunately, the two blog engines use different rules for generating URLs for blog posts. Most of the time the conversion is as simple as the example of the previous section where a post titled "Hello World" generates a URL with the words separated by a hyphen. Some times that is not the case, for example: /Blog/2006/05/medc-wrap-up.html /Blog/MEDC-Wrapup.aspx or /Blog/2005/01/best-of-moth-2004.html /Blog/Best-Of-The-Moth-2004.aspx or /Blog/2004/11/more-windows-mobile-2005-details.html /Blog/More-Windows-Mobile-2005-Details-Emerge.aspx In short, blogger does not add words to the title beyond ~39 characters, it drops some words from the title generation (e.g. a, an, on, the), and it preserve hyphens that appear in the title. For this reason, we need to detect these and explicitly list them for redirects (no regular expression can help here because the full set of rules is not listed anywhere). In my web.config file the rule that deals with this is the one named "Redirect rule1 for FullRedirects" combined with the rewriteMap named "StaticRedirects". Note: The tool I describe in my next post will detect all the URLs that need to be explicitly redirected and will list them in a file ready for you to copy them to your web.config rewriteMap. 6. C# code doing the same as the web.config I wrote some naive code that does the same thing as the web.config: given a string it will return a new string converted according to the 3 rules above. It does not take into account the 4th case where an explicit hard-coded conversion is needed (the tool I present in the next post does take that into account). static string REGEX_post_redirect = "[0-9]{4}/[0-9]{2}/([0-9a-z-]+).html"; static string REGEX_category_redirect = "labels/([_0-9a-z-% ]+).html"; static string REGEX_monthlyarchive_redirect = "([0-9]{4})_([0-9]{2})_[0-9]{2}_mothblog_archive.html"; static string Redirect(string oldUrl) { GroupCollection g; if (RunRegExOnIt(oldUrl, REGEX_post_redirect, 2, out g)) return string.Concat(g[1].Value, ".aspx"); if (RunRegExOnIt(oldUrl, REGEX_category_redirect, 2, out g)) return string.Concat("CategoryView,category,", g[1].Value, ".aspx"); if (RunRegExOnIt(oldUrl, REGEX_monthlyarchive_redirect, 3, out g)) return string.Concat("default,month,", g[1].Value, "-", g[2], ".aspx"); return string.Empty; } static bool RunRegExOnIt(string toRegEx, string pattern, int groupCount, out GroupCollection g) { if (pattern.Length == 0) { g = null; return false; } g = new Regex(pattern, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase | RegexOptions.Compiled).Match(toRegEx).Groups; return (g.Count == groupCount); } Comments about this post welcome at the original blog.

  Read the article

• Nice Generic Example that implements an interface.

  - by mbcrump

  I created this quick generic example after noticing that several people were asking questions about it. If you have any questions then let me know. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Globalization; namespace ConsoleApplication4 { //New class where Type implements IConvertible interface (interface = contract) class Calculate<T> where T : IConvertible { //Setup fields public T X; NumberFormatInfo fmt = NumberFormatInfo.CurrentInfo; //Constructor 1 public Calculate() { X = default(T); } //Constructor 2 public Calculate (T x) { X = x; } //Method that we know will return a double public double DistanceTo (Calculate<T> cal) { //Remove the.ToDouble if you want to see the methods available for IConvertible return (X.ToDouble(fmt) - cal.X.ToDouble(fmt)); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { //Pass value type and call DistanceTo with an Int. Calculate<int> cal = new Calculate<int>(); Calculate<int> cal2 = new Calculate<int>(10); Console.WriteLine("Int : " + cal.DistanceTo(cal2)); //Pass value type and call DistanceTo with an Double. Calculate<double> cal3 = new Calculate<double>(); Calculate<double> cal4 = new Calculate<double>(10.6); Console.WriteLine("Double : " + cal3.DistanceTo(cal4)); //Pass reference type and call DistanceTo with an String. Calculate<string> cal5 = new Calculate<string>("0"); Calculate<string> cal6 = new Calculate<string>("345"); Console.WriteLine("String : " + cal5.DistanceTo(cal6)); } } }

  Read the article

• C#: LINQ vs foreach - Round 1.

  - by James Michael Hare

  So I was reading Peter Kellner's blog entry on Resharper 5.0 and its LINQ refactoring and thought that was very cool.  But that raised a point I had always been curious about in my head -- which is a better choice: manual foreach loops or LINQ?    The answer is not really clear-cut.  There are two sides to any code cost arguments: performance and maintainability.  The first of these is obvious and quantifiable.  Given any two pieces of code that perform the same function, you can run them side-by-side and see which piece of code performs better.   Unfortunately, this is not always a good measure.  Well written assembly language outperforms well written C++ code, but you lose a lot in maintainability which creates a big techncial debt load that is hard to offset as the application ages.  In contrast, higher level constructs make the code more brief and easier to understand, hence reducing technical cost.   Now, obviously in this case we're not talking two separate languages, we're comparing doing something manually in the language versus using a higher-order set of IEnumerable extensions that are in the System.Linq library.   Well, before we discuss any further, let's look at some sample code and the numbers.  First, let's take a look at the for loop and the LINQ expression.  This is just a simple find comparison:       // find implemented via LINQ     public static bool FindViaLinq(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         return list.Any(item => item == target);     }         // find implemented via standard iteration     public static bool FindViaIteration(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         foreach (var i in list)         {             if (i == target)             {                 return true;             }         }           return false;     }   Okay, looking at this from a maintainability point of view, the Linq expression is definitely more concise (8 lines down to 1) and is very readable in intention.  You don't have to actually analyze the behavior of the loop to determine what it's doing.   So let's take a look at performance metrics from 100,000 iterations of these methods on a List<int> of varying sizes filled with random data.  For this test, we fill a target array with 100,000 random integers and then run the exact same pseudo-random targets through both searches.                       List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method      Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     Any         10       26          0.00046             30.00%     Iteration   10       20          0.00023             -     Any         100      116         0.00201             18.37%     Iteration   100      98          0.00118             -     Any         1000     1058        0.01853             16.78%     Iteration   1000     906         0.01155             -     Any         10,000   10,383      0.18189             17.41%     Iteration   10,000   8843        0.11362             -     Any         100,000  104,004     1.8297              18.27%     Iteration   100,000  87,941      1.13163             -   The LINQ expression is running about 17% slower for average size collections and worse for smaller collections.  Presumably, this is due to the overhead of the state machine used to track the iterators for the yield returns in the LINQ expressions, which seems about right in a tight loop such as this.   So what about other LINQ expressions?  After all, Any() is one of the more trivial ones.  I decided to try the TakeWhile() algorithm using a Count() to get the position stopped like the sample Pete was using in his blog that Resharper refactored for him into LINQ:       // Linq form     public static int GetTargetPosition1(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         return list.TakeWhile(item => item != target).Count();     }       // traditionally iterative form     public static int GetTargetPosition2(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         int count = 0;           foreach (var i in list)         {             if(i == target)             {                 break;             }               ++count;         }           return count;     }   Once again, the LINQ expression is much shorter, easier to read, and should be easier to maintain over time, reducing the cost of technical debt.  So I ran these through the same test data:                       List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method      Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     TakeWhile   10       41          0.00041             128%     Iteration   10       18          0.00018             -     TakeWhile   100      171         0.00171             88%     Iteration   100      91          0.00091             -     TakeWhile   1000     1604        0.01604             94%     Iteration   1000     825         0.00825             -     TakeWhile   10,000   15765       0.15765             92%     Iteration   10,000   8204        0.08204             -     TakeWhile   100,000  156950      1.5695              92%     Iteration   100,000  81635       0.81635             -     Wow!  I expected some overhead due to the state machines iterators produce, but 90% slower?  That seems a little heavy to me.  So then I thought, well, what if TakeWhile() is not the right tool for the job?  The problem is TakeWhile returns each item for processing using yield return, whereas our for-loop really doesn't care about the item beyond using it as a stop condition to evaluate. So what if that back and forth with the iterator state machine is the problem?  Well, we can quickly create an (albeit ugly) lambda that uses the Any() along with a count in a closure (if a LINQ guru knows a better way PLEASE let me know!), after all , this is more consistent with what we're trying to do, we're trying to find the first occurence of an item and halt once we find it, we just happen to be counting on the way.  This mostly matches Any().       // a new method that uses linq but evaluates the count in a closure.     public static int TakeWhileViaLinq2(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         int count = 0;         list.Any(item =>             {                 if(item == target)                 {                     return true;                 }                   ++count;                 return false;             });         return count;     }     Now how does this one compare?                         List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method         Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     TakeWhile      10       41          0.00041             128%     Any w/Closure  10       23          0.00023             28%     Iteration      10       18          0.00018             -     TakeWhile      100      171         0.00171             88%     Any w/Closure  100      116         0.00116             27%     Iteration      100      91          0.00091             -     TakeWhile      1000     1604        0.01604             94%     Any w/Closure  1000     1101        0.01101             33%     Iteration      1000     825         0.00825             -     TakeWhile      10,000   15765       0.15765             92%     Any w/Closure  10,000   10802       0.10802             32%     Iteration      10,000   8204        0.08204             -     TakeWhile      100,000  156950      1.5695              92%     Any w/Closure  100,000  108378      1.08378             33%     Iteration      100,000  81635       0.81635             -     Much better!  It seems that the overhead of TakeAny() returning each item and updating the state in the state machine is drastically reduced by using Any() since Any() iterates forward until it finds the value we're looking for -- for the task we're attempting to do.   So the lesson there is, make sure when you use a LINQ expression you're choosing the best expression for the job, because if you're doing more work than you really need, you'll have a slower algorithm.  But this is true of any choice of algorithm or collection in general.     Even with the Any() with the count in the closure it is still about 30% slower, but let's consider that angle carefully.  For a list of 100,000 items, it was the difference between 1.01 ms and 0.82 ms roughly in a List<T>.  That's really not that bad at all in the grand scheme of things.  Even running at 90% slower with TakeWhile(), for the vast majority of my projects, an extra millisecond to save potential errors in the long term and improve maintainability is a small price to pay.  And if your typical list is 1000 items or less we're talking only microseconds worth of difference.   It's like they say: 90% of your performance bottlenecks are in 2% of your code, so over-optimizing almost never pays off.  So personally, I'll take the LINQ expression wherever I can because they will be easier to read and maintain (thus reducing technical debt) and I can rely on Microsoft's development to have coded and unit tested those algorithm fully for me instead of relying on a developer to code the loop logic correctly.   If something's 90% slower, yes, it's worth keeping in mind, but it's really not until you start get magnitudes-of-order slower (10x, 100x, 1000x) that alarm bells should really go off.  And if I ever do need that last millisecond of performance?  Well then I'll optimize JUST THAT problem spot.  To me it's worth it for the readability, speed-to-market, and maintainability.

  Read the article

• Creating an ITemplate from a String

  - by Damon

  I do a lot of work with control templates, and one of the pieces of functionality that I've always wanted is the ability to build a ITemplate from a string.  Throughout the years, the topic has come up from time to time, and I never really found anything about how to do it. though I have run across a number of postings from people who are also wanting the same capability.  As I was messing around with things the other day, I stumbled on how to make it work and I feel really foolish for not figuring it out sooner. ITemplate is an interface that exposes a single method named InstantiateIn.  I've been searching for years for some magical .NET framework component that would take a string and convert it into an ITemplate, when all along I could just build my own.  Here's the code: /// <summary> ///   Allows string-based ITempalte implementations /// </summary> public class StringTemplate : ITemplate {     #region Constructor(s)     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     /// <summary>     ///   Constructor     /// </summary>     /// <param name="template">String based version of the control template.</param>     public StringTemplate(string template)     {         Template = template;     }     /// <summary>     ///   Constructor     /// </summary>     /// <param name="template">String based version of the control template.</param>     /// <param name="copyToContainer">True to copy intermediate container contents to the instantiation container, False to leave the intermediate container in place.</param>     public StringTemplate(string template, bool copyToContainer)     {         Template = template;         CopyToContainer = copyToContainer;     }     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     #endregion     #region Properties     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     /// <summary>     ///   String based template     /// </summary>     public string Template     {         get;         set;     }     /// <summary>     ///   When a StringTemplate is instantiated it is created inside an intermediate control     ///   due to limitations of the .NET Framework.  Specifying True for the CopyToContainer     ///   property copies all the controls from the intermediate container into instantiation     ///   container passed to the InstantiateIn method.     /// </summary>     public bool CopyToContainer     {         get;         set;     }     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     #endregion     #region ITemplate Members     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     /// <summary>     ///   Creates the template in the specified control.     /// </summary>     /// <param name="container">Control in which to make the template</param>     public void InstantiateIn(Control container)     {         Control tempContainer = container.Page.ParseControl(Template);         if (CopyToContainer)         {             for (int i = tempContainer.Controls.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--)             {                 Control tempControl = tempContainer.Controls[i];                 tempContainer.Controls.RemoveAt(i);                 container.Controls.AddAt(0, tempControl);             }                         }         else         {             container.Controls.Add(tempContainer);         }     }     ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////     #endregion } //class Converting a string into a user control is fairly easy using the ParseControl method from a Page object.  Fortunately, the container passed into the InstantiateIn method has a Page property.  One caveat, however, is that the Page property only has a reference to a Page if the container is located ON the page.  If you run into this problem, you may have to find a creative way to get the Page reference (you can add it to the constructor, store it in the request context, etc).  Another issue that I ran into is that the ParseControl creates a new control, parses the string template, places any controls defined in the template onto the new control it created, and returns that new control with the template on it.  You cannot pass in your own container. Adding this directly to the container provided as a parameter in the InstantiateIn means that you end up with an additional "level" in the control hierarchy.  To avoid this, I added code in that removes each control from the intermediate container and places it into the actual container.  I am not, however, sure about the performance penalty associated with moving a bunch of control from one place to another, nor am I completely sure if doing such a move completely screws something up if you have a code behind, etc.  It seems to work when it's just a template, but my testing was ever-so-slightly shy of thorough when it comes to other crazy scenarios.  As a catch-all, I added a Boolean property called CopyToContainer that allows you to turn the copying on or off depending on your desires and needs. Technorati Tags: .NET,ASP.NET,ITemplate,Development,C#,Custom Controls,Server Controls

  Read the article

• JavaScript objects and Crockford's The Good Parts

  - by Jonathan

  I've been thinking quite a bit about how to do OOP in JS, especially when it comes to encapsulation and inheritance, recently. According to Crockford, classical is harmful because of new(), and both prototypal and classical are limited because their use of constructor.prototype means you can't use closures for encapsulation. Recently, I've considered the following couple of points about encapsulation: Encapsulation kills performance. It makes you add functions to EACH member object rather than to the prototype, because each object's methods have different closures (each object has different private members). Encapsulation forces the ugly "var that = this" workaround, to get private helper functions to have access to the instance they're attached to. Either that or make sure you call them with privateFunction.apply(this) everytime. Are there workarounds for either of two issues I mentioned? if not, do you still consider encapsulation to be worth it? Sidenote: The functional pattern Crockford describes doesn't even let you add public methods that only touch public members, since it completely forgoes the use of new() and constructor.prototype. Wouldn't a hybrid approach where you use classical inheritance and new(), but also call Super.apply(this, arguments) to initialize private members and privileged methods, be superior?

  Read the article

• Dapper and object validation/business rules enforcement

  - by Eugene

  This isn't really Dapper-specific, actually, as it relates to any XML-serializeable object.. but it came up when I was storing an object using Dapper. Anyways, say I have a user class. Normally, I'd do something like this: class User { public string SIN {get; private set;} public string DisplayName {get;set;} public User(string sin) { if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(sin)) throw new ArgumentException("SIN must be specified"); this.SIN = sin; } } Since a SIN is required, I'd just create a constructor with a sin parameter, and make it read-only. However, with a Dapper (and probably any other ORM), I need to provide a parameterless constructor, and make all properties writeable. So now I have this: class User: IValidatableObject { public int Id { get; set; } public string SIN { get; set; } public string DisplayName { get; set; } public IEnumerable<ValidationResult> Validate(ValidationContext validationContext) { // implementation } } This seems.. can't really pick the word, a bad smell? A) I'm allowing to change properties that should not be changed ever after an object has been created (SIN, userid) B) Now I have to implement IValidatableObject or something like that to test those properties before updating them to db. So how do you go about it ?

  Read the article

• Given an XML which contains a representation of a graph, how to apply it DFS algorithm? [on hold]

  - by winston smith

  Given the followin XML which is a directed graph: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?> <!DOCTYPE graph PUBLIC "-//FC//DTD red//EN" "../dtd/graph.dtd"> <graph direct="1"> <vertex label="V0"/> <vertex label="V1"/> <vertex label="V2"/> <vertex label="V3"/> <vertex label="V4"/> <vertex label="V5"/> <edge source="V0" target="V1" weight="1"/> <edge source="V0" target="V4" weight="1"/> <edge source="V5" target="V2" weight="1"/> <edge source="V5" target="V4" weight="1"/> <edge source="V1" target="V2" weight="1"/> <edge source="V1" target="V3" weight="1"/> <edge source="V1" target="V4" weight="1"/> <edge source="V2" target="V3" weight="1"/> </graph> With this classes i parsed the graph and give it an adjacency list representation: import java.io.IOException; import java.util.HashSet; import java.util.LinkedList; import java.util.Collection; import java.util.Iterator; import java.util.logging.Level; import java.util.logging.Logger; import practica3.util.Disc; public class ParsingXML { public static void main(String[] args) { try { // TODO code application logic here Collection<Vertex> sources = new HashSet<Vertex>(); LinkedList<String> lines = Disc.readFile("xml/directed.xml"); for (String lin : lines) { int i = Disc.find(lin, "source=\""); String data = ""; if (i > 0 && i < lin.length()) { while (lin.charAt(i + 1) != '"') { data += lin.charAt(i + 1); i++; } Vertex v = new Vertex(); v.setName(data); v.setAdy(new HashSet<Vertex>()); sources.add(v); } } Iterator it = sources.iterator(); while (it.hasNext()) { Vertex ver = (Vertex) it.next(); Collection<Vertex> adyacencias = ver.getAdy(); LinkedList<String> ls = Disc.readFile("xml/graphs.xml"); for (String lin : ls) { int i = Disc.find(lin, "target=\""); String data = ""; if (lin.contains("source=\""+ver.getName())) { Vertex v = new Vertex(); if (i > 0 && i < lin.length()) { while (lin.charAt(i + 1) != '"') { data += lin.charAt(i + 1); i++; } v.setName(data); } i = Disc.find(lin, "weight=\""); data = ""; if (i > 0 && i < lin.length()) { while (lin.charAt(i + 1) != '"') { data += lin.charAt(i + 1); i++; } v.setWeight(Integer.parseInt(data)); } if (v.getName() != null) { adyacencias.add(v); } } } } for (Vertex vert : sources) { System.out.println(vert); System.out.println("adyacencias: " + vert.getAdy()); } } catch (IOException ex) { Logger.getLogger(ParsingXML.class.getName()).log(Level.SEVERE, null, ex); } } } This is another class: import java.util.Collection; import java.util.Objects; public class Vertex { private String name; private int weight; private Collection ady; public Collection getAdy() { return ady; } public void setAdy(Collection adyacencias) { this.ady = adyacencias; } public String getName() { return name; } public void setName(String nombre) { this.name = nombre; } public int getWeight() { return weight; } public void setWeight(int weight) { this.weight = weight; } @Override public int hashCode() { int hash = 7; hash = 43 * hash + Objects.hashCode(this.name); hash = 43 * hash + this.weight; return hash; } @Override public boolean equals(Object obj) { if (obj == null) { return false; } if (getClass() != obj.getClass()) { return false; } final Vertex other = (Vertex) obj; if (!Objects.equals(this.name, other.name)) { return false; } if (this.weight != other.weight) { return false; } return true; } @Override public String toString() { return "Vertice{" + "name=" + name + ", weight=" + weight + '}'; } } And finally: /** * * @author user */ /* -*-jde-*- */ /* <Disc.java> Contains the main argument*/ import java.io.*; import java.util.LinkedList; /** * Lectura y escritura de archivos en listas de cadenas * Ideal para el uso de las clases para gráficas. * * @author Peralta Santa Anna Victor Miguel * @since Julio 2011 */ public class Disc { /** * Metodo para lectura de un archivo * * @param fileName archivo que se va a leer * @return El archivo en representacion de lista de cadenas */ public static LinkedList<String> readFile(String fileName) throws IOException { BufferedReader file = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(fileName)); LinkedList<String> textlist = new LinkedList<String>(); while (file.ready()) { textlist.add(file.readLine().trim()); } file.close(); /* for(String linea:textlist){ if(linea.contains("source")){ //String generado = linea.replaceAll("<\\w+\\s+\"", ""); //System.out.println(generado); } }*/ return textlist; }//readFile public static int find(String linea,String palabra){ int i,j; boolean found = false; for(i=0,j=0;i<linea.length();i++){ if(linea.charAt(i)==palabra.charAt(j)){ j++; if(j==palabra.length()){ found = true; return i; } }else{ continue; } } if(!found){ i= -1; } return i; } /** * Metodo para la escritura de un archivo * * @param fileName archivo que se va a escribir * @param tofile la lista de cadenas que quedaran en el archivo * @param append el bit que dira si se anexa el contenido o se empieza de cero */ public static void writeFile(String fileName, LinkedList<String> tofile, boolean append) throws IOException { FileWriter file = new FileWriter(fileName, append); for (int i = 0; i < tofile.size(); i++) { file.write(tofile.get(i) + "\n"); } file.close(); }//writeFile /** * Metodo para escritura de un archivo * @param msg archivo que se va a escribir * @param tofile la cadena que quedaran en el archivo * @param append el bit que dira si se anexa el contenido o se empieza de cero */ public static void writeFile(String msg, String tofile, boolean append) throws IOException { FileWriter file = new FileWriter(msg, append); file.write(tofile); file.close(); }//writeFile }// I'm stuck on what can be the best way to given an adjacency list representation of the graph how to apply it Depth-first search algorithm. Any idea of how to aproach to complete the task?

  Read the article

• Is there a clean separation of my layers with this attempt at Domain Driven Design in XAML and C#

  - by Buddy James

  I'm working on an application. I'm using a mixture of TDD and DDD. I'm working hard to separate the layers of my application and that is where my question comes in. My solution is laid out as follows Solution MyApp.Domain (WinRT class library) Entity (Folder) Interfaces(Folder) IPost.cs (Interface) BlogPosts.cs(Implementation of IPost) Service (Folder) Interfaces(Folder) IDataService.cs (Interface) BlogDataService.cs (Implementation of IDataService) MyApp.Presentation(Windows 8 XAML + C# application) ViewModels(Folder) BlogViewModel.cs App.xaml MainPage.xaml (Contains a property of BlogViewModel MyApp.Tests (WinRT Unit testing project used for my TDD) So I'm planning to use my ViewModel with the XAML UI I'm writing a test and define my interfaces in my system and I have the following code thus far. [TestMethod] public void Get_Zero_Blog_Posts_From_Presentation_Layer_Returns_Empty_Collection() { IBlogViewModel viewModel = _container.Resolve<IBlogViewModel>(); viewModel.LoadBlogPosts(0); Assert.AreEqual(0, viewModel.BlogPosts.Count, "There should be 0 blog posts."); } viewModel.BlogPosts is an ObservableCollection<IPost> Now.. my first thought is that I'd like the LoadBlogPosts method on the ViewModel to call a static method on the BlogPost entity. My problem is I feel like I need to inject the IDataService into the Entity object so that it promotes loose coupling. Here are the two options that I'm struggling with: Not use a static method and use a member method on the BlogPost entity. Have the BlogPost take an IDataService in the constructor and use dependency injection to resolve the BlogPost instance and the IDataService implementation. Don't use the entity to call the IDataService. Put the IDataService in the constructor of the ViewModel and use my container to resolve the IDataService when the viewmodel is instantiated. So with option one the layers will look like this ViewModel(Presentation layer) - Entity (Domain layer) - IDataService (Service Layer) or ViewModel(Presentation layer) - IDataService (Service Layer)

  Read the article

• Purpose of "new" keyword

  - by Channel72

  The new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# creates a new instance of a class. This syntax seems to have been inherited from C++, where new is used specifically to allocate a new instance of a class on the heap, and return a pointer to the new instance. In C++, this is not the only way to construct an object. You can also construct an object on the stack, without using new - and in fact, this way of constructing objects is much more common in C++. So, coming from a C++ background, the new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# seemed natural and obvious to me. Then I started to learn Python, which doesn't have the new keyword. In Python, an instance is constructed simply by calling the constructor, like: f = Foo() At first, this seemed a bit off to me, until it occurred to me that there's no reason for Python to have new, because everything is an object so there's no need to disambiguate between various constructor syntaxes. But then I thought - what's really the point of new in Java? Why should we say Object o = new Object();? Why not just Object o = Object();? In C++ there's definitely a need for new, since we need to distinguish between allocating on the heap and allocating on the stack, but in Java all objects are constructed on the heap, so why even have the new keyword? The same question could be asked for Javascript. In C#, which I'm much less familiar with, I think new may have some purpose in terms of distinguishing between object types and value types, but I'm not sure. Regardless, it seems to me that many languages which came after C++ simply "inherited" the new keyword - without really needing it. It's almost like a vestigial keyword. We don't seem to need it for any reason, and yet it's there. Question: Am I correct about this? Or is there some compelling reason that new needs to be in C++-inspired memory-managed languages like Java, Javascript and C#?

  Read the article

• DI and hypothetical readonly setters in C#

  - by Luis Ferrao

  Sometimes I would like to declare a property like this: public string Name { get; readonly set; } I am wondering if anyone sees a reason why such a syntax shouldn't exist. I believe that because it is a subset of "get; private set;", it could only make code more robust. My feeling is that such setters would be extremely DI friendly, but of course I'm more interested in hearing your opinions than my own, so what do you think? I am aware of 'public readonly' fields, but those are not interface friendly so I don't even consider them. That said, I don't mind if you bring them up into the discussion Edit I realize reading the comments that perhaps my idea is a little confusing. The ultimate purpose of this new syntax would be to have an automatic property syntax that specifies that the backing private field should be readonly. Basically declaring a property using my hypothetical syntax public string Name { get; readonly set; } would be interpreted by C# as: private readonly string name; public string Name { get { return this.name; } } And the reason I say this would be DI friendly is because when we rely heavily on constructor injection, I believe it is good practice to declare our constructor injected fields as readonly.

  Read the article

• Questioning the motivation for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

  - by oberlies

  Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So dependency injection may really be an advantage in advanced use cases, but I don't need it for easy construction and testability, do I?

  Read the article

• What's a good entity hierarchy for a 2D game?

  - by futlib

  I'm in the process of building a new 2D game out of some code I wrote a while ago. The object hierarchy for entities is like this: Scene (e.g. MainMenu): Contains multiple entities and delegates update()/draw() to each Entity: Base class for all things in a scene (e.g. MenuItem or Alien) Sprite: Base class for all entities that just draw a texture, i.e. don't have their own drawing logic Does it make sense to split up entities and sprites up like that? I think in a 2D game, the terms entity and sprite are somewhat synonymous, right? But I do believe that I need some base class for entities that just draw a texture, as opposed to drawing themselves, to avoid duplication. Most entities are like that. One weird case is my Text class: It derives from Sprite, which accepts either the path of an image or an already loaded texture in its constructor. Text loads a texture in its constructor and passes that to Sprite. Can you outline a design that makes more sense? Or point me to a good object-oriented reference code base for a 2D game? I could only find 3D engine code bases of decent code quality, e.g. Doom 3 and HPL1Engine.

  Read the article

• This is something new

  - by shmoolca

  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} I have created GUI with lots of my own controls. This control has style as a resource inside control resources. My performance profiler shows that InitializeComponent of this control is 7.5 times longer than control that has defined style in resources of application. It occurs because constructor is loading whole BAML each time constructor is called. Sounds logical for me :)

  Read the article

• Why do memory-managed languages retain the `new` keyword?

  - by Channel72

  The new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# creates a new instance of a class. This syntax seems to have been inherited from C++, where new is used specifically to allocate a new instance of a class on the heap, and return a pointer to the new instance. In C++, this is not the only way to construct an object. You can also construct an object on the stack, without using new - and in fact, this way of constructing objects is much more common in C++. So, coming from a C++ background, the new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# seemed natural and obvious to me. Then I started to learn Python, which doesn't have the new keyword. In Python, an instance is constructed simply by calling the constructor, like: f = Foo() At first, this seemed a bit off to me, until it occurred to me that there's no reason for Python to have new, because everything is an object so there's no need to disambiguate between various constructor syntaxes. But then I thought - what's really the point of new in Java? Why should we say Object o = new Object();? Why not just Object o = Object();? In C++ there's definitely a need for new, since we need to distinguish between allocating on the heap and allocating on the stack, but in Java all objects are constructed on the heap, so why even have the new keyword? The same question could be asked for Javascript. In C#, which I'm much less familiar with, I think new may have some purpose in terms of distinguishing between object types and value types, but I'm not sure. Regardless, it seems to me that many languages which came after C++ simply "inherited" the new keyword - without really needing it. It's almost like a vestigial keyword. We don't seem to need it for any reason, and yet it's there. Question: Am I correct about this? Or is there some compelling reason that new needs to be in C++-inspired memory-managed languages like Java, Javascript and C#?

  Read the article

• Design for object with optional and modifiable attributtes?

  - by Ikuzen

  I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

  Read the article

• How to implement child-parent aggregation link in C++?

  - by Giorgio

  Suppose that I have three classes P, C1, C2, composition (strong aggregation) relations between P <>- C1 and P <>- C2, i.e. every instance of P contains an instance of C1 and an instance of C2, which are destroyed when the parent P instance is destroyed. an association relation between instances of C1 and C2 (not necessarily between children of the same P). To implement this, in C++ I normally define three classes P, C1, C2, define two member variables of P of type boost::shared_ptr<C1>, boost::shared_ptr<C2>, and initialize them with newly created objects in P's constructor, implement the relation between C1 and C2 using a boost::weak_ptr<C2> member variable in C1 and a boost::weak_ptr<C1> member variable in C2 that can be set later via appropriate methods, when the relation is established. Now, I also would like to have a link from each C1 and C2 object to its P parent object. What is a good way to implement this? My current idea is to use a simple constant raw pointer (P * const) that is set from the constructor of P (which, in turn, calls the constructors of C1 and C2), i.e. something like: class C1 { public: C1(P * const p, ...) : paren(p) { ... } private: P * const parent; ... }; class P { public: P(...) : childC1(new C1(this, ...)) ... { ... } private: boost::shared_ptr<C1> childC1; ... }; Honestly I see no risk in using a private constant raw pointer in this way but I know that raw pointers are often frowned upon in C++ so I was wondering if there is an alternative solution.

  Read the article

• How to create a copy of an instance without having access to private variables

  - by Jamie

  Im having a bit of a problem. Let me show you the code first: public class Direction { private CircularList xSpeed, zSpeed; private int[] dirSquare = {-1, 0, 1, 0}; public Direction(int xSpeed, int zSpeed){ this.xSpeed = new CircularList(dirSquare, xSpeed); this.zSpeed = new CircularList(dirSquare, zSpeed); } public Direction(Point dirs){ this(dirs.x, dirs.y); } public void shiftLeft(){ xSpeed.shiftLeft(); zSpeed.shiftRight(); } public void shiftRight(){ xSpeed.shiftRight(); zSpeed.shiftLeft(); } public int getXSpeed(){ return this.xSpeed.currentValue(); } public int getZSpeed(){ return this.zSpeed.currentValue(); } } Now lets say i have an instance of Direction: Direction dir = new Direction(0, 0); As you can see in the code of Direction, the arguments fed to the constructor, are passed directly to some other class. One cannot be sure if they stay the same because methods shiftRight() and shiftLeft could have been called, which changes thos numbers. My question is, how do i create a completely new instance of Direction, that is basically copy(not by reference) of dir? The only way i see it, is to create public methods in both CircularList(i can post the code of this class, but its not relevant) and Direction that return the variables needed to create a copy of the instance, but this solution seems really dirty since those numbers are not supposed to be touched after beeing fed to the constructor, and therefore they are private.

  Read the article

• Balancing dependency injection with public API design

  - by kolektiv

  I've been contemplating how to balance testable design using dependency injection with providing simple fixed public API. My dilemma is: people would want to do something like var server = new Server(){ ... } and not have to worry about creating the many dependencies and graph of dependencies that a Server(,,,,,,) may have. While developing, I don't worry too much, as I use an IoC/DI framework to handle all that (I'm not using the lifecycle management aspects of any container, which would complicate things further). Now, the dependencies are unlikely to be re-implemented. Componentisation in this case is almost purely for testability (and decent design!) rather than creating seams for extension, etc. People will 99.999% of the time wish to use a default configuration. So. I could hardcode the dependencies. Don't want to do that, we lose our testing! I could provide a default constructor with hard-coded dependencies and one which takes dependencies. That's... messy, and likely to be confusing, but viable. I could make the dependency receiving constructor internal and make my unit tests a friend assembly (assuming C#), which tidies the public API but leaves a nasty hidden trap lurking for maintenance. Having two constructors which are implicitly connected rather than explicitly would be bad design in general in my book. At the moment that's about the least evil I can think of. Opinions? Wisdom?

  Read the article

• Code Clone Analysis on Rawr &ndash; Part 1

  - by Dylan Smith

  In this post we’ll take a look at the first result from the Code Clone Analysis, and do some refactoring to eliminate the duplication.  The first result indicated that it found an exact match repeated 14 times across the solution, with 18 lines of duplicated code in each of the 14 blocks.   Net Lines Of Code Deleted: 179     In this case the code in question was a bunch of classes representing the various Bosses.  Every Boss class has a constructor that initializes a whole bunch of properties of that boss, however, for most bosses a lot of these are simply set to 0’s.     Every Boss class inherits from the class MultiDiffBoss, so I simply moved all the initialization of the various properties to the base class constructor, and left it up to the Boss subclasses to only set those that are different than the default values. In this case there are actually 22 Boss subclasses, however, due to some inconsistencies in the code structure Code Clone only identified 14 of them as identical blocks.  Since I was in there refactoring the 14 identified already, it was pretty straightforward to identify the other 8 subclasses that had the same duplicated behavior and refactor those also.   Note: Code Clone Analysis is pretty slow right now.  It takes approx 1 min to build this solution, but it takes 9 mins to run Code Clone Analysis.  Personally, if the results are high quality I’m OK with it taking a long time to run since I don’t expect it’s something I would be running all that often.  However, it would be nice to be able to run it as part of a nightly build, but at this time I don’t believe it’s possible to run outside of Visual Studio due to a dependency on the meta-data available in the VS environment.

  Read the article

• Questioning one of the arguments for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

  - by oberlies

  Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So there may be other arguments for dependency injection (which are out of scope for this question!), but easy creation of testable object graphs is not one of them, is it?

  Read the article

• C++ program...overshoots? [migrated]

  - by Zdrok

  I'm decent at C++, but I may have missed some nuance that applies here. Or maybe I completely missed a giant concept, I have no idea. My program was instantly crashing ("blah.exe is not responding") about 1/5 times it was run (other times it ran completely fine) and I tracked the problem down to a constructor for a world class that was called once in the beginning of the main function. Here is the code (in the constructor) that causes the problem: int ii; for(ii=0;ii<=255;ii++) { cout<<"ent "<<ii<<endl; entity_list[ii]=NULL; } for(ii=0;ii<=255;ii++) { cout<<"sec "<<ii<<endl; sector_list[ii]=NULL; } entity_list[0] = new Entity(0,0); entity_list[0]->_world = this; Specifically the second for loop. The cout references are new for the sake of telling where it is having trouble. It would print the entire "ent 1" to "ent 255" and then "sec 1" to "sec 255" and then crash right after, as if it was going for a 257th run through of the second for loop. I set the second for loop to go until "ii<=254" which stopped all crashes. Does C++ code tend to "overshoot" for loops or something? What is causing it to crash at this specific loop seemingly at random? By the way, entity_list and sector_list point to classes called Entity and Sector, respectively, but they are not constructing anything so I didn't think it would be relevant. I also have a forward declaration for the Entity class in a header for this, but since none were being constructed I didn't think it was relevant either. EDIT: It was due to the new Entity line, I assumed wrongly that the fact that altering the for statement to 254 fixed the crashes meant that it had to be there. I still don't understand why the for loop is related, though.

  Read the article

• Isometric Camera trouble - can't rotate or move correctly

  - by Deukalion

  I'm trying to create a 3D editor, but I've been having some trouble with the Camera and understanding each component. I've created 2 camera that works OK, but now I'm trying to implement an Isometric Camera in XNA without success on the rotation and movement of the camera. All I get working is Zoom. (Cube with x=3f, y=3f, z=1f in center) And this is the constructor for my IsometricCamera (inherits from ICamera, with methods for Rotation, Movement and Zoom, and Properties for World/View/Projection matrices) public IsometricCamera3D(GraphicsDevice device, float startClip = -1000f, float endClip = 1000f) { matrix_projection = Matrix.CreateOrthographic(device.Viewport.Width, device.Viewport.Height, startClip, endClip); rotation = Vector3.Zero; matrix_view = Matrix.CreateScale(zoom) * Matrix.CreateRotationY(MathHelper.ToRadians(45 + 180)) * Matrix.CreateRotationX(MathHelper.ToRadians(30)) * Matrix.CreateRotationZ(MathHelper.ToRadians(120)) * Matrix.CreateTranslation(rotation.X, rotation.Y, rotation.Z); } Problem is when I rotate it, all that happens is that the Cube gets more or less shiny and nothing happens. What is wrong and how should I create my View matrix to move it / rotate it correctly? Rotate, Move and Zoom looks like: MethodName(Vector3 rotation/movement), Zoom(float value); and just increases the value, then calls an update to recreate the View Matrix according to the code in the constructor. Currently, in my editor I use MiddleButton + Mouse Movement to rotate the camera, but it's not working as the other camera. But in my default camera I use World Matrix to move, but I guess that's not the best way to go which is why I'm trying this.

  Read the article

• Using texture() in combination with JBox2D

  - by Valentino Ru

  I'm getting some trouble using the texture() method inside beginShape()/endShape() clause. In the display()-method of my class TowerElement (a bar which is DYNAMIC), I draw the object like following: void display(){ Vec2 pos = level.getLevel().getBodyPixelCoord(body); float a = body.getAngle(); // needed for rotation pushMatrix(); translate(pos.x, pos.y); rotate(-a); fill(temp); // temp is a color defined in the constructor stroke(0); beginShape(); vertex(-w/2,-h/2); vertex(w/2,-h/2); vertex(w/2,h-h/2); vertex(-w/2,h-h/2); endShape(CLOSE); popMatrix(); } Now, according to the API, I can use the texture() method inside the shape definition. Now when I remove the fill(temp) and put texture(img) (img is a PImage defined in the constructor), the stroke gets drawn, but the bar isn't filled and I get the warning texture() is not available with this renderer What can I do in order to use textures anyway? I don't even understand the error message, since I do not know much about different renderers.

  Read the article

• Override methods should call base method?

  - by Trevor Pilley

  I'm just running NDepend against some code that I have written and one of the warnings is Overrides of Method() should call base.Method(). The places this occurs are where I have a base class which has virtual properties and methods with default behaviour but which can be overridden by a class which inherits from the base class and doesn't call the overridden method. For example, in the base class I have a property defined like this: protected virtual char CloseQuote { get { return '"'; } } And then in an inheriting class which uses a different close quote: protected override char CloseQuote { get { return ']'; } } Not all classes which inherit from the base class use different quote characters hence my initial design. The alternatives I thought of were have get/set properties in the base class with the defaults set in the constructor: protected BaseClass() { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; set; } public InheritingClass() { this.CloseQuote = ']'; } Or make the base class require the values as constructor args: protected BaseClass(char closeQuote, ...) { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; private set; } public InheritingClass() base (closeQuote: ']', ...) { } Should I use virtual in a scenario where the base implementation may be replaced instead of extended or should I opt for one of the alternatives I thought of? If so, which would be preferable and why?

  Read the article

• Storing a pass-by-reference parameter as a pointer - Bad practice?

  - by Karl Nicoll

  I recently came across the following pattern in an API I've been forced to use: class SomeObject { public: // Constructor. SomeObject(bool copy = false); // Set a value. void SetValue(const ComplexType &value); private: bool m_copy; ComplexType *m_pComplexType; ComplexType m_complexType; }; // ------------------------------------------------------------ SomeObject::SomeObject(bool copy) : m_copy(copy) { } // ------------------------------------------------------------ void SomeObject::SetValue(const ComplexType &value) { if (m_copy) m_complexType.assign(value); else m_pComplexType = const_cast<ComplexType *>(&value); } The background behind this pattern is that it is used to hold data prior to it being encoded and sent to a TCP socket. The copy weirdness is designed to make the class SomeObject efficient by only holding a pointer to the object until it needs to be encoded, but also provide the option to copy values if the lifetime of the SomeObject exceeds the lifetime of a ComplexType. However, consider the following: SomeObject SomeFunction() { ComplexType complexTypeInstance(1); // Create an instance of ComplexType. SomeObject encodeHelper; encodeHelper.SetValue(complexTypeInstance); // Okay. return encodeHelper; // Uh oh! complexTypeInstance has been destroyed, and // now encoding will venture into the realm of undefined // behaviour! } I tripped over this because I used the default constructor, and this resulted in messages being encoded as blank (through a fluke of undefined behaviour). It took an absolute age to pinpoint the cause! Anyway, is this a standard pattern for something like this? Are there any advantages to doing it this way vs overloading the SetValue method to accept a pointer that I'm missing? Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160  | Next Page >