Search Results

Search found 902 results on 37 pages for 'setter'.

Page 16/37 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • How to keep a local value from being set when a binding fails (so inherited values will propagate)

    - by redoced
    Consider the following scenario: I want to bind the TextElement.FontWeight property to an xml attribute. The xml looks somewhat like this and has arbitrary depth. <text font-weight="bold"> bold text here <inlinetext>more bold text</inlinetext> even more bold text </text> I use hierarchical templating to display the text, no problem there, but having a Setter in the template style like: <Setter Property="TextElement.FontWeight" Value="{Binding XPath=@font-weight}"/> sets the fontweight correctly on the first level, but overwrites the second level with null (as the binding can't find the xpath) which reverts to Fontweight normal. I tried all sorts of things here but nothing quite seems to work. e.g. i used a converter to return UnsetValue, which didn't work. I'm currently trying with: <Setter Property="custom:AttributeInserter.Wrapper" Value="{custom:AttributeInserter Property=TextElement.FontWeight, Binding={Binding XPath=@font-weight}}"/> Codebehind: public static class AttributeInserter { public static AttributeInserterExtension GetWrapper(DependencyObject obj) { return (AttributeInserterExtension)obj.GetValue(WrapperProperty); } public static void SetWrapper(DependencyObject obj, AttributeInserterExtension value) { obj.SetValue(WrapperProperty, value); } // Using a DependencyProperty as the backing store for Wrapper. This enables animation, styling, binding, etc... public static readonly DependencyProperty WrapperProperty = DependencyProperty.RegisterAttached("Wrapper", typeof(AttributeInserterExtension), typeof(AttributeInserter), new UIPropertyMetadata(pcc)); static void pcc(DependencyObject o,DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e) { var n=e.NewValue as AttributeInserterExtension; var c = o as FrameworkElement; if (n == null || c==null || n.Property==null || n.Binding==null) return; var bex = c.SetBinding(n.Property, n.Binding); bex.UpdateTarget(); if (bex.Status == BindingStatus.UpdateTargetError) c.ClearValue(n.Property); } } public class AttributeInserterExtension : MarkupExtension { public override object ProvideValue(IServiceProvider serviceProvider) { return this; } public DependencyProperty Property { get; set; } public Binding Binding { get; set; } } which kinda works, but can't track changes of the property Any ideas? Any links? thx for the help

    Read the article

  • creative way for implementing Data object with its corresponding business logic class in java

    - by ekeren
    I have a class that need to be serialized (for both persistentcy and client-server communication) for simplicity's sake let's call the classes Business a BusinessData and I prefix for their Interfaces. All the getter and setter are delegated from Business class to BusinessData class. I thought about implementing IBusinessData interface that will contain all the getter and setters and IBusiness interface that will extend it. I can either make Business extend BuisnessData so I will not need to implement all getter and setter delegates, or make some abstract class ForwardingBusinessData that will only delegate getter and setters. Any of the above option I lose my hierarchy freedom, do any of you have any creative solutions for this problem... I also reviewed DAO pattern: http://java.sun.com/blueprints/patterns/DAO.html

    Read the article

  • How do I make this ASP.NET MVC controller more testable?

    - by Ragesh
    I have a controller that overrides OnActionExecuting and does something like this: protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); string tenantDomain = filterContext.RouteData.Values["tenantDomain"] as string; if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantDomain)) { using (var tx = BeginTransaction()) { this.Tenant = repo.FindOne(t => t.Domain == tenantDomain); } } } Tenant is a protected property with a private setter. The class itself is an abstract base controller that my real controllers derive from. I have code in other controllers that looks a lot like this: if (Tenant == null) { // Do something } else { // Do something else } How do I test this code? What I need to do is to somehow set the Tenant property, but I can't because: It's a protected property, and It has a private setter Changing the visibility of Tenant doesn't "feel" right. What are my alternatives to unit test my derived controllers?

    Read the article

  • Set Validation Tooltip in CodeBehind instead of XAML

    - by KrisTrip
    I would like to know how to translate the following code to codebehind instead of XAML: <Style.Triggers> <Trigger Property="Validation.HasError" Value="true"> <Setter Property="ToolTip" Value="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource Self}, Path=(Validation.Errors)[0].ErrorContent}"/> </Trigger> </Style.Triggers> The part I can't figure out is the Path portion. I have the following but it doesn't work: new Trigger { Property = Validation.HasErrorProperty, Value = true, Setters = { new Setter { Property = Control.ToolTipProperty, // This part doesn't seem to work Value = new Binding("(Validation.Errors)[0].ErrorContent"){RelativeSource = RelativeSource.Self} } } } Help?

    Read the article

  • spring mvc nested model validation

    - by hguser
    I have two models : User,Project public class Project{ private int id; @NotEmpty(message="Project Name can not be empty") private String name; private User manager; private User operator; //getter/setter omitted } public class User{ private int id; private String name; //omit other properties and getter/setter } Now, when I create a new Project, I will submit the following parameters to ProjectController: projects?name=jhon&manager.id=1&operator.id=2... Then I will create a new Project object and insert it to db. However I have to validate the id of the manager and operator is valid,that's to say I will validate that if there is matched id in the user table. So I want to know how to implement this kind of validation?

    Read the article

  • iPhone SDK 3.0 deprecation of UITableViewCell .text

    - by djt9000
    Came across an SDK3.0 deprecation that I am having a bit of trouble tryinig to figure out. If my declaration of @property (nonatomic, retain) UIImage *rowImage; does not work, nor @property (nonatomic, readonly, retain) UIImage *rowImage; and I @synthesize rowImage; Do I need to write my own setter because @synthesize will not properly handle this? cell = [[[UITableViewCell alloc] initWithFrame:CGRectZero reuseIdentifier:RootViewControllerCell] autorelease]; // Dpericated in SDK 3.0 // //cell.text = controller.title; //cell.image = controller.rowImage; // Using what the documentation says to use Error=== cell.textLabel = controller.title; Error=== cell.imageView = controller.rowImage; Error: Object cannot be set - Either readonly property or no setter found. Hope this makes sense, any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can we block the user from unchecking a DataGridView checkbox?

    - by hawbsl
    We have a DataGridViewCheckBox column bound to a boolean property in our class. The property setter has some logic which says that under certain conditions a True flag cannot be changed, ie, it stays checked forever. This is on a per record basis. So the entire column can't be readonly, only certain rows. Pseudo code: Public Property Foo() As Boolean Get Return _Foo End Get Set(ByVal value As Boolean) If _Foo And Bar And value = False Then //do nothing, in this scenario once you're true, you stay true Else _Foo = value End If End Set End Property Databinding is handling all of this fine, except that the checkbox is visibly cleared when it's clicked. Then, of course, when the binding / setter is fired (as you move off that cell) it is restored to its checked status per the underlying logic. Ultimately it doesn't matter too much but it's a clumsy bit of UI. How can we intercept the user's click and keep it checked?

    Read the article

  • WPF DataGrid: How to set content alignment of RowHeader to 'Center'

    - by Nike
    I use WPF DataGrid. I put a text value in RowHeader and want to set alignment of RowHeader content to 'Center'. I tried this: <toolkit:DataGrid.RowHeaderStyle> <Style TargetType="{x:Type toolkit:Primitives.DataGridRowHeader}"> <Setter Property="HorizontalAlignment" Value="Center"/> <Setter Property="HorizontalContentAlignment" Value="Center"/> </Style> </toolkit:DataGrid.RowHeaderStyle> but it doesn't work. Actually I think that there is TextBlock in RowHeader and I need to set its TextAlignment Property to Center. How can do it?

    Read the article

  • Minutia on Objective-C Categories and Extensions.

    - by Matt Wilding
    I learned something new while trying to figure out why my readwrite property declared in a private Category wasn't generating a setter. It was because my Category was named: // .m @interface MyClass (private) @property (readwrite, copy) NSArray* myProperty; @end Changing it to: // .m @interface MyClass () @property (readwrite, copy) NSArray* myProperty; @end and my setter is synthesized. I now know that Class Extension is not just another name for an anonymous Category. Leaving a Category unnamed causes it to morph into a different beast: one that now gives compile-time method implementation enforcement and allows you to add ivars. I now understand the general philosophies underlying each of these: Categories are generally used to add methods to any class at runtime, and Class Extensions are generally used to enforce private API implementation and add ivars. I accept this. But there are trifles that confuse me. First, at a hight level: Why differentiate like this? These concepts seem like similar ideas that can't decide if they are the same, or different concepts. If they are the same, I would expect the exact same things to be possible using a Category with no name as is with a named Category (which they are not). If they are different, (which they are) I would expect a greater syntactical disparity between the two. It seems odd to say, "Oh, by the way, to implement a Class Extension, just write a Category, but leave out the name. It magically changes." Second, on the topic of compile time enforcement: If you can't add properties in a named Category, why does doing so convince the compiler that you did just that? To clarify, I'll illustrate with my example. I can declare a readonly property in the header file: // .h @interface MyClass : NSObject @property (readonly, copy) NSString* myString; @end Now, I want to head over to the implementation file and give myself private readwrite access to the property. If I do it correctly: // .m @interface MyClass () @property (readonly, copy) NSString* myString; @end I get a warning when I don't synthesize, and when I do, I can set the property and everything is peachy. But, frustratingly, if I happen to be slightly misguided about the difference between Category and Class Extension and I try: // .m @interface MyClass (private) @property (readonly, copy) NSString* myString; @end The compiler is completely pacified into thinking that the property is readwrite. I get no warning, and not even the nice compile error "Object cannot be set - either readonly property or no setter found" upon setting myString that I would had I not declared the readwrite property in the Category. I just get the "Does not respond to selector" exception at runtime. If adding ivars and properties is not supported by (named) Categories, is it too much to ask that the compiler play by the same rules? Am I missing some grand design philosophy?

    Read the article

  • Spring data mapping problem.

    - by Yashwant Chavan
    Hi, I am using spring and hibernate along with my different components There is date field in DB as contract_end_date as a Date , so my pojo also contains date getter setter for contract_end_date, but when i submit form to Multiaction controller it gives data bindding exception for contract_end_date. It trying to search string getter setter for contract_end_date. So is there is any solution to handle this kind of problem. This is my pojo. after sumitting the form getting data binding exception public class Clnt implements java.io.Serializable { private String clntId; private String clntNm; private String busUnitNm; private String statCd; private String cmntTx; private Date contractEndDt; }

    Read the article

  • ScrollViewer in a ListBox not working. WPF.

    - by guest
    Hi, I have the following defined in my control: <local:TestListBox.ItemTemplate> <DataTemplate> <Border x:Name="eventBorder" Width="{Binding ElementName=eventsLbx, Path=ActualWidth,BorderBrush="{Binding Color}" BorderThickness="1" CornerRadius="4"> <Border.Background> <LinearGradientBrush StartPoint="0,0" EndPoint="0,1"> <GradientStop x:Name="StartGradient" Color="#FFFFFFFF" Offset="0"/> <GradientStop x:Name="EndGradient" Color="{Binding Color}" Offset="1"/> </LinearGradientBrush> </Border.Background> <Border.ToolTip> <ToolTip Content="{Binding Text}"/> </Border.ToolTip> <TextBlock TextTrimming="CharacterEllipsis" HorizontalAlignment="Center" FontSize="12" Text="{Binding Text}" /> </Border> <DataTemplate.Triggers> <Trigger Property="IsMouseOver" Value="True"> <Setter TargetName="eventBorder" Property="Background" Value="#FFE4EBF5"/> </Trigger> </DataTemplate.Triggers> --> </DataTemplate> </local:TestListBox.ItemTemplate> </local:TestListBox> </ScrollViewer.Content> </ScrollViewer> </Grid> <ControlTemplate.Triggers> <Trigger SourceName="eventsLbx" Property="HasItems" Value="False"> <Setter TargetName="eventsLbx" Property="Visibility" Value="Hidden"/> </Trigger> </ControlTemplate.Triggers> </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> Now if there are more items than are visible, then the scrollviewer appears properly but the user CANNOT drag the scrollviewer middle button for scrolling. The user can click on the arrows at the end of the scrollviewer to scroll but he cannot click the bar that appears on the scrollbar and drag it to actually scroll the contents. I cannot figure out why this is happening...

    Read the article

  • How to tell a UITableView to preload all Rows?

    - by Infinite
    Is there a way to tell a UITableView to preload all rows? The tableView is supposed to show several comments (up to 80 comments). So my CommentCell uses a Setter to adapt the cell to a specific comment. -(void)setComment:(Comment *)newComment { if (newComment != comment) { [comment release]; comment = [newComment retain]; /* * set the cells view variables here */ } } This specific setter takes quite a bunch of processing resources and scrolling gets kinda laggy. I am using a comment-specific reuseIdentifier instead of a static cellIdentifier when calling dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier: in order to assure, that "newComment" equals the old "comment". And in fact this does work great when scrolling over cells which have already been loaded. But when scrolling through the comments for the first time, it still lags like hell. Which leads me to my question: Is there a way to tell the tableview to preload all cells? (which I doubt) or Do I have to implement my own cache instead of relying on "dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:"?

    Read the article

  • iPhone memory management (with specific examples/questions)

    - by donkim
    Hey all. I know this question's been asked but I still don't have a clear picture of memory management in Objective-C. I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of it, but I'd still like some correct answers for the following code. I have a series of examples that I'd love for someone(s) to clarify. Setting a value for an instance variable. Say I have an NSMutableArray variable. In my class, when I initialize it, do I need to call a retain on it? Do I do fooArray = [[[NSMutableArray alloc] init] retain]; or fooArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; Does doing [[NSMutableArray alloc] init] already set the retain count to 1, so I wouldn't need to call retain on it? On the other hand, if I called a method that I know returns an autoreleased object, I would for sure have to call retain on it, right? Like so: fooString = [[NSString stringWithFormat:@"%d items", someInt] retain]; Properties. I ask about the retain because I'm a bit confused about how @property's automatic setter works. If I had set fooArray to be a @property with retain set, Objective-C will automatically create the following setter, right? - (void)setFooArray:(NSMutableArray *)anArray { [fooArray release]; fooArray = [anArray retain]; } So, if I had code like this: self.fooArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; (which I believe is valid code), Objective-C creates a setter method that calls retain on the value assigned to fooArray. In this case, will the retain count actually be 2? Correct way of setting a value of a property. I know there are questions on this and (possibly) debates, but which is the right way to set a @property? This? self.fooArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; Or this? NSMutableArray *anArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; self.fooArray = anArray; [anArray release]; I'd love to get some clarification on these examples. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Are there any Objective-C / Cocoa naming conventions for properties that are acronyms?

    - by t6d
    I have an object that models an online resource. Therefore, my object has to store the URL of the resource it belongs to. How would I name the getter and setter? MyObject *myObject = [[MyObject alloc] init]; // Set values [myObject setURL:url]; myObject.URL = url; // Get values [myObject URL]; myObject.URL; or would the following be better: MyObject *myObject = [[MyObject alloc] init]; // Set values [myObject setUrl:url]; myObject.url = url; // Get values [myObject url]; myObject.url; The former example would of course require to define the property in the following way: @property (retain, getter = URL, setter = setURL:) NSURL *url;

    Read the article

  • How to Map a table with another lookup table using JPA?

    - by Sameer Malhotra
    Hi, I have two tables: 1) Application(int appid, int statusid, String appname, String appcity with getter and Setter methods) 2) App_Status(int statusid,String statusDescription with setter and getter methods) I want to map Application table with App_Status so that I don't have to query separately App_Status table in order to get the statusDescription. One thing I have to careful is that no matter what (Insert,update or delete) to the Application table the App_Status table should be unaffected means its a read only table which is maintained by the DBA internally and used only for lookup table. I am using JPA annotations so please suggest how to handle this.

    Read the article

  • Trouble applying a simple template

    - by Adam S
    I'm having trouble applying a template to my checkboxes. I have the following template: <ControlTemplate x:Key="TriStateRed" TargetType="{x:Type CheckBox}"> <ControlTemplate.Triggers> <Trigger Property="IsChecked" Value="{x:Null}" > <Setter TargetName="path" Property="Data" Value="M 0 2.5 A 5 2.5 0 1 1 5 5 L 5 8 M 5 10 L 5 10" /> <Setter TargetName="path" Property="Stroke" Value="Red" /> </Trigger> </ControlTemplate.Triggers> </ControlTemplate> However, visual studio gives me the following error: Cannot find the Trigger target 'path'. (The target must appear before any Setters, Triggers, or Conditions that use it.) Can anyone make sense of this?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to set default values in ActiveRecord?

    - by ryw
    What is the best way to set default value in ActiveRecord? I see a post from Pratik that describes an ugly, complicated chunk of code: http://m.onkey.org/2007/7/24/how-to-set-default-values-in-your-model class Item < ActiveRecord::Base def initialize_with_defaults(attrs = nil, &block) initialize_without_defaults(attrs) do setter = lambda { |key, value| self.send("#{key.to_s}=", value) unless !attrs.nil? && attrs.keys.map(&:to_s).include?(key.to_s) } setter.call('scheduler_type', 'hotseat') yield self if block_given? end end alias_method_chain :initialize, :defaults end YUCK! I have seen the following examples googling around: def initialize super self.status = ACTIVE unless self.status end and def after_initialize return unless new_record? self.status = ACTIVE end I've also seen people put it in their migration, but I'd rather see it defined in the model code. What's the best way to set default value for fields in ActiveRecord model?

    Read the article

  • Printing a list using reflection

    - by TFool
    public class Service{ String serviceName; //setter and getter } public class Version{ String VersionID; //setter and getter } public void test(Object list){ //it shd print the obtained list } List< Service list1; //Service is a Bean List< Version list2; //Version is a Bean test(list1); test(list2); Now the test method shd print the obtained list - (i.e) If the list is of type Service ,then serviceName should be printed using its getter. If the list type is Version versionID should be printed. Is it possible to achieve this without using Interface or abstract class?

    Read the article

  • "public" or "private" attribute in Python ? What is the best way ?

    - by SeyZ
    Hi ! In Python, I have the following example class : class Foo: self._attr = 0 @property def attr(self): return self._attr @attr.setter def attr(self, value): self._attr = value @attr.deleter def attr(self): del self._attr As you can see, I have a simple "private" attribute "_attr" and a property to access it. There is a lot of codes to declare a simple private attribute and I think that it's not respecting the "KISS" philosophy to declare all attributes like that. So, why not declare all my attributes as public attributes if I don't need a particular getter/setter/deleter ? My answer will be : Because the principle of encapsulation (OOP) says otherwise! What is the best way ? Thanks !

    Read the article

  • Why does set key not do anything in AES/SymmetricAlgorithm?

    - by acidzombie24
    This MESSED ME UP hard. I thought i was setting the key but i was not. No exceptions, nothing happen except bad results. Why is there a setter if everything is ignored and no exceptions are thrown when i attempt to write? What is the point of the setter on the Keys property? When i do the below Key value are not changed. After an hour when i realize what was happening i wrote the loop to verify. I also tried aes.Key[0] = val; var b = val == aes.Key[0]; (and messed with it in immediate mode). Why does it have this behavior? Array.Copy(myKey, aes.Key, aes.Key.Length); int i = 0; foreach (var v in aes.Key) { var b = myKey[i++] == v; if (!b) b = b; }

    Read the article

  • Using Unity Application Block – from basics to generics

    - by nmarun
    I just wanted to have one place where I list all the six Unity blogs I’ve written. Part 1: The very basics – Begin using Unity (code here) Part 2: Registering other types and resolving them (code here) Part 3: Lifetime Management (code here) Part 4: Constructor and Property or Setter Injection (code here) Part 5: Arrays (code here) Part 6: Generics (code here) Hope this helps someone (and this is the smallest blog I’ve posted till now).

    Read the article

  • Abstracting away the type of a property

    - by L. De Leo
    In Python luckily most of the times you don't have to write getters and setters to get access to class properties. That said sometimes you'll have to remember that a certain property is a list or whatnot and a property would save you there by abstracting the type and providing a setter to add something to such list for example rather than exposing the list directly. Where do you draw the line between exposing the type directly or wrapping its access in a property? What's the general "pythonic" advice?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Pitfalls Index

    - by Ricardo Peres
    These are the posts on NHibernate pitfalls I’ve written so far. This post will be updated whenever there are more. The SaveOrUpdate Event Collection Restrictions Specifying Event Listeners in XML Configuration Many to Many and Inverse Bags and Join Lazy Properties in Non-Lazy Entities Adding to a Bag Causes Loading Flushing Changes Private Setter on Id Property

    Read the article

  • Les accesseurs et les détails d'implémentation, un billet de Guillaume Belz

    C'est une discussion qui revient régulièrement sur le chat de Developpez.com. Une personne demande comment fait-on pour accéder aux variables membres privées d'une classe et on lui répond de créer des getter et setter. Viens alors un C++ien moyen (c'est-à-dire un casse-pied, en général moi) qui hurle au scandale et sort l'adage bien connu : "les accesseurs, c'est le mal". S'en suit une discussion sur pourquoi les accesseurs sont à éviter, quand j'ai le temps et l'humeur.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >