Search Results

Search found 46143 results on 1846 pages for 'input method'.

Page 162/1846 | < Previous Page | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >

• .before method adds unexpected close tags

  - by timkl

  I have a table in my markup on which I want to add some divs before and efter like this: <div class="widebox"> <div class="widebox-header">Opret/rediger bruger</div> <div class="widebox-middle"> <table id="Table3"></table> </div> <div class="widebox-bottom"></div> </div> I'm trying to do this with jQuery, like this: $('#Table3').before('<div class="widebox"><div class="widebox-header">Opret/rediger bruger</div><div class="widebox-middle">'); $('#Table3').after('</div><div class="widebox-bottom"></div></div>'); However this is what renders out, the method seems to close my opening divs: <div class="widebox"> <div class="widebox-header">Opret/rediger bruger</div> <div class="widebox-middle"></div></div><!-- unexpected close divs --> <table id="Table3"></table> <div class="widebox-bottom"></div> Anyone know what could be causing this?

  Read the article

• Performance of C# method polymorphism with generics

  - by zildjohn01

  I noticed in C#, unlike C++, you can combine virtual and generic methods. For example: using System.Diagnostics; class Base { public virtual void Concrete() {Debug.WriteLine("base concrete");} public virtual void Generic<T>() {Debug.WriteLine("base generic");} } class Derived : Base { public override void Concrete() {Debug.WriteLine("derived concrete");} public override void Generic<T>() {Debug.WriteLine("derived generic");} } class App { static void Main() { Base x = new Derived(); x.Concrete(); x.Generic<PerformanceCounter>(); } } Given that any number of versions of Generic<T> could be instantiated, it doesn't look like the standard vtbl approach could be used to resolve method calls, and in fact it's not. Here's the generated code: x.Concrete(); mov ecx,dword ptr [ebp-8] mov eax,dword ptr [ecx] call dword ptr [eax+38h] x.Generic<PerformanceCounter>(); push 989A38h mov ecx,dword ptr [ebp-8] mov edx,989914h call 76A874F1 mov dword ptr [ebp-4],eax mov ecx,dword ptr [ebp-8] call dword ptr [ebp-4] The extra code appears to be looking up a dynamic vtbl according to the generic parameters, and then calling into it. Has anyone written about the specifics of this implementation? How well does it perform compared to the non-generic case?

  Read the article

• Choosing design method for ladder-like word game.

  - by owca

  I'm trying to build a simple application, with the finished program looking like this : I will also have to implement two different GUI layouts for this. Now I'm trying to figure out the best method to perform this task. My professor told me to introduce Element class with 4 states : - empty - invisible (used in GridLayout) - first letter - other letter I've thought about following solutions (by List I mean any sort of Collection) : 1. Element is a single letter, and each line is Element[]. Game class will be array of arrays Element[]. I guess that's the dumbest way, and the validation might be troublesome. 2. Like previously but Line is a List of Element. Game is an array of Lines. 3. Like previously but Game is a List of Lines. Which one should I choose ? Or maybe do you have better ideas ? What collection would be best if to use one ?

  Read the article

• C# class can not disguise to be another class because GetType method cannot be override

  - by zinking

  there is a statement in the CLR via C# saying in C#, one class cannot disguise to be another, because GetType is virutal and thus it cannot be override but I think in C# we can still hide the parent implementation of GetType. I must missed something if I hide the base GetType implementation then I can disguise my class to be another class, is that correct? The key here is not whether GetType is virutal or not, the question is can we disguise one class to be another in C# Following is the NO.4 answer from the possible duplicate, so My question is more on this. is this kind of disguise possible, if so, how can we say that we can prevent class type disguise in C# ? regardless of the GetType is virtual or not While its true that you cannot override the object.GetType() method, you can use "new" to overload it completely, thereby spoofing another known type. This is interesting, however, I haven't figured out how to create an instance of the "Type" object from scratch, so the example below pretends to be another type. public class NotAString { private string m_RealString = string.Empty; public new Type GetType() { return m_RealString.GetType(); } } After creating an instance of this, (new NotAString()).GetType(), will indeed return the type for a string. share|edit|flag answered Mar 15 at 18:39 Dr Snooze 213 By almost anything that looks at GetType has an instance of object, or at the very least some base type that they control or can reason about. If you already have an instance of the most derived type then there is no need to call GetType on it. The point is as long as someone uses GetType on an object they can be sure it's the system's implementation, not any other custom definition. – Servy Mar 15 at 18:54 add comment

  Read the article

• How do you pass a generic delegate argument to a method in .NET 2.0 - UPDATED

  - by Seth Spearman

  Hello, I have a class with a delegate declaration as follows... Public Class MyClass Public Delegate Function Getter(Of TResult)() As TResult ''#the following code works. Public Shared Sub MyMethod(ByVal g As Getter(Of Boolean)) ''#do stuff End Sub End Class However, I do not want to explicitly type the Getter delegate in the Method call. Why can I not declare the parameter as follows... ... (ByVal g As Getter(Of TResult)) Is there a way to do it? My end goal was to be able to set a delegate for property setters and getters in the called class. But my reading indicates you can't do that. So I put setter and getter methods in that class and then I want the calling class to set the delegate argument and then invoke. Is there a best practice for doing this. I realize in the above example that I can set set the delegate variable from the calling class...but I am trying to create a singleton with tight encapsulation. For the record, I can't use any of the new delegate types declared in .net35. Answers in C# are welcome. Any thoughts? Seth

  Read the article

• Why NOT use POST method here?

  - by Camran

  I have a classifieds website. In the main page (index) I have several form fields which the user may or may not fill in, in order to specify a detailed search of classifieds. Ex: Category: Cars Price from: 3000 Price to: 10000 Color: Red Area: California The forms' action is set to a php page: <form action='query_sql.php' method='post'> In query_sql.php I fetch the variables like this: category=$_POST['category']; etc etc... Then query MySql: $query="SELECT........WHERE category='$category' etc etc.... $results = mysql_query($query); Then I simply display the results of the query to the user by creating a table which is filled in dynamically depending on the results set. However, according to an answer by Col. Shrapnel in my previous Q I shouldn't use POST here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3004754/how-to-hide-url-from-users-when-submitting-this-form The reason I use post is simply to hide the "one-page-word-document" long URL in the browsers adress bar. I am very confused, is it okay to use POST or not? It is working fine both when I use GET or POST now... And it is already on a production server... Btw, in the linked question, I wasn't referring to make URL invisible (or hide it) I just wanted it too look better (which I have accomplished with mod_rewrite). UPDATE: If I use GET, then how should I make the url better looking (beautiful)? Check this previous Q out: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3000524/how-to-make-this-very-long-url-appear-short

  Read the article

• Long running method causing race condition

  - by keeleyt83

  Hi, I'm relatively new with hibernate so please be gentle. I'm having an issue with a long running method (~2 min long) and changing the value of a status field on an object stored in the DB. The pseudo-code below should help explain my issue. public foo(thing) { if (thing.getStatus() == "ready") { thing.setStatus("finished"); doSomethingAndTakeALongTime(); } else { // Thing already has a status of finished. Send the user back a message. } } The pseudo-code shouldn't take much explanation. I want doSomethingAndTakeALongTime() to run, but only if it has a status of "ready". My issue arises whenever it takes 2 minutes for doSomethingAndTakeALongTime() to finish and the change to thing's status field doesn't get persisted to the database until it leaves foo(). So another user can put in a request during those 2 minutes and the if statement will evaluate to true. I've already tried updating the field and flushing the session manually, but it didn't seem to work. I'm not sure what to do from here and would appreciate any help. PS: My hibernate session is managed by spring.

  Read the article

• Problem with generic list and extension method(C#3.0)

  - by Newbie

  I have an issue. I am making an extension class for a Collection and it is generic.. like public static class ListExtensions { public static ICollection<T> Search<T>(this ICollection<T> collection, string stringToSearch) { ICollection<T> t1=null; foreach (T t in collection) { Type k = t.GetType(); PropertyInfo pi = k.GetProperty("Name"); if (pi.GetValue(t,null).Equals(stringToSearch)) { t1.Add(t); } } return t1; } } But I cannot add items to t1 as it is declared null. Error: object reference not set to an instance of the object. I am calling the method like List<TestClass> listTC = new List<TestClass>(); listTC.Add(new TestClass { Name = "Ishu", Age = 21 }); listTC.Add(new TestClass { Name = "Vivek", Age = 40 }); listTC.Add(new TestClass { Name = "some one else", Age = 12 }); listTC.Search("Ishu"); And the test class is public class TestClass { public string Name { get; set; } public int Age { get; set; } } Using : (C#3.0) & Framework - 3.5 Thanks

  Read the article

• Flex: Method doesn't work when being called on parentDocument

  - by ChrisInCambo

  Hi, I wonder is anyone can look at this code and tell me why calling the removeSelectedChild works when called from the same document, but returns the following error when called from the child document/component. "ArgumentError: Error #2025: The supplied DisplayObject must be a child of the caller." <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <mx:Application xmlns:mx="http://www.adobe.com/2006/mxml" > <mx:Accordion id="myAccordion" width="100%" height="100%" selectedIndex="0"> <mx:Script> <![CDATA[ public function removeSelectedChild():void { myAccordion.removeChild(myAccordion.selectedChild); } ]]> </mx:Script> <mx:headerRenderer> <mx:Component> <mx:Button click="{ parentDocument.removeSelectedChild() }" /> </mx:Component> </mx:headerRenderer> <mx:HBox> <mx:Button click="{ removeSelectedChild() }" /> </mx:HBox> </mx:Accordion> </mx:Application> Clicking on the button in the child produces the expected result, whilst clicking on the header throws an error despite the fact they both call exactly the same method. Sorry that the example is a little contrived, this problem arose in a quite complicated view, which was using all kinds of custom components. This was the only way I could display it in a way that will be quick for you to compile and easy to focus on the real issue without background noise. I'm pulling my hair out on this one and would really appreciate it if anyone could help. Cheers, Chris

  Read the article

• Name for method that takes a string value and returns DBNull.Value || string

  - by David Murdoch

  I got tired of writing the following code: /* Commenting out irrelevant parts public string MiddleName; public void Save(){ SqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); // blah blah...boring INSERT statement with params etc go here. */ if(MiddleName==null){ myCmd.Parameters.Add("@MiddleName", DBNull.Value); } else{ myCmd.Parameters.Add("@MiddleName", MiddleName); } /* // more boring code to save to DB. }*/ So, I wrote this: public static object DBNullValueorStringIfNotNull(string value) { object o; if (value == null) { o = DBNull.Value; } else { o = value; } return o; } // which would be called like: myCmd.Parameters.Add("@MiddleName", DBNullValueorStringIfNotNull(MiddleName)); If this is a good way to go about doing this then what would you suggest as the method name? DBNullValueorStringIfNotNull is a bit verbose and confusing. I'm also open to ways to alleviate this problem entirely. I'd LOVE to do this: myCmd.Parameters.Add("@MiddleName", MiddleName==null ? DBNull.Value : MiddleName); but that won't work. I've got C# 3.5 and SQL Server 2005 at my disposal if it matters.

  Read the article

• release object of a return method object c

  - by Piero

  in run the app with the analyze build, and Xcode found me a lot of memory leak and there is one in particular that i don't know how solve here it is: - (UIView *) tableView:(UITableView *)tableView viewForHeaderInSection:(NSInteger)section { UIImageView *sectionImage = [[UIImageView alloc] init]; if (section == 0)sectionImage.image = [UIImage imageNamed:@"myImage.png"]; return sectionImage; } so my question is, how i can release this sectionImage? if is the return of the method? EDIT: i have another question, analyze give me another memory leak, i have this: .h @property (nonatomic, retain) NSIndexPath *directCellPath; .m @synthesize directCellPath = _directCellPath; - (id)init{ if ((self = [super initWithNibName:@"MyViewController" bundle:nil])) { self.directCellPath = [[NSIndexPath alloc] init]; } return self; } then in the code i use it and finally in the dealloc i do this: - (void)dealloc { [_directCellPath release]; [super dealloc]; } and give me a memory leak on this line: self.directCellPath = [[NSIndexPath alloc] init]; why if i have deallocated it in the dealloc?

  Read the article

• What design pattern to use for one big method calling many private methods

  - by Jeune

  I have a class that has a big method that calls on a lot of private methods. I think I want to extract those private methods into their own classes for one because they contain business logic and I think they should be public so they can be unit tested. Here's a sample of the code: public void handleRow(Object arg0) { if (continueRunning){ hashData=(HashMap<String, Object>)arg0; Long stdReportId = null; Date effDate=null; if (stdReportIds!=null){ stdReportId = stdReportIds[index]; } if (effDates!=null){ effDate = effDates[index]; } initAndPutPriceBrackets(hashData, stdReportId, effDate); putBrand(hashData,stdReportId,formHandlerFor==0?true:useLiveForFirst); putMultiLangDescriptions(hashData,stdReportId); index++; if (stdReportIds!=null && stdReportIds[0].equals(stdReportIds[1])){ continueRunning=false; } if (formHandlerFor==REPORTS){ putBeginDate(hashData,effDate,custId); } //handle logic that is related to pricemaps. lstOfData.add(hashData); } } What design pattern should I apply to this problem?

  Read the article

• A more effecient millisecond conversion method?

  - by cube

  I am currently using this method to convert milliseconds to min:sec:1/10sec. However it does not seem to be efficient at all. Would anyone know of a faster more efficient and optimized way of accomplishing the same. mills.prototype.formatTime = function(time) { var elapsedTime = (time * 1000); //Minutes var elapsedM = (elapsedTime/60000)|0; var remaining = elapsedTime - (elapsedM * 60000); //add a leading zero if it's a single digit number if (elapsedM < 10) { elapsedM = "0"+elapsedM; } //Seconds var elapsedS = ((remaining/1000)|0); remaining -= (elapsedS*1000); ////add leading zero if (elapsedS<10) { elapsedS = "0"+elapsedS; } //Hundredths var elapsedFractions = ((remaining/10)|0); if (elapsedFractions < 10) { elapsedFractions = "0"+elapsedFractions; } //display results nicely var time_data = elapsedM+":"+elapsedS+":"+elapsedFractions; //return time_data; return[time_data,elapsedM,elapsedS,elapsedFractions] };

  Read the article

• Best method to select an object from another unknown jQuery object

  - by Yosi

  Lets say I have a jQuery object/collection stored in a variable named obj, which should contain a DOM element with an id named target. I don't know in advance if target will be a child in obj, i.e.: obj = $('<div id="parent"><div id="target"></div></div>'); or if obj equals target, i.e.: obj = $('<div id="target"></div>'); or if target is a top-level element inside obj, i.e.: obj = $('<div id="target"/><span id="other"/>'); I need a way to select target from obj, but I don't know in advance when to use .find and when to use .filter. What would be the fastest and/or most concise method of extracting target from obj? What I've come up with is: var $target = obj.find("#target").add(obj.filter("#target")); UPDATE I'm adding solutions to a JSPERF test page to see which one is the best. Currently my solution is still the fastest. Here is the link, please run the tests so that we'll have more data: http://jsperf.com/jquery-selecting-objects

  Read the article

• Optimizing this "Boundarize" method for Numerics in Ruby

  - by mstksg

  I'm extending Numerics with a method I call "Boundarize" for lack of better name; I'm sure there are actually real names for this. But its basic purpose is to reset a given point to be within a boundary. That is, "wrapping" a point around the boundary; if the area is betweeon 0 and 100, if the point goes to -1, -1.boundarize(0,100) = 99 (going one too far to the negative "wraps" the point around to one from the max). 102.boundarize(0,100) = 2 It's a very simple function to implement; when the number is below the minimum, simply add (max-min) until it's in the boundary. If the number is above the maximum, simply subtract (max-min) until it's in the boundary. One thing I also need to account for is that, there are cases where I don't want to include the minimum in the range, and cases where I don't want to include the maximum in the range. This is specified as an argument. However, I fear that my current implementation is horribly, terribly, grossly inefficient. And because every time something moves on the screen, it has to re-run this, this is one of the bottlenecks of my application. Anyone have any ideas? module Boundarizer def boundarize min=0,max=1,allow_min=true,allow_max=false raise "Improper boundaries #{min}/#{max}" if min >= max new_num = self if allow_min while new_num < min new_num += (max-min) end else while new_num <= min new_num += (max-min) end end if allow_max while new_num > max new_num -= (max-min) end else while new_num >= max new_num -= (max-min) end end return new_num end end class Numeric include Boundarizer end

  Read the article

• returning reference to a vector from a method and using its public members

  - by memC

  dear experts, I have a vector t_vec that stores references to instances of class Too. The code is shown below. In the main , I have a vector t_vec_2 which has the same memory address as B::t_vec. But when I try to access t_vec_2[0].val1 it gives error val1 not declared. Could you please point out what is wrong? Also, if you know of a better way to return a vector from a method, please let me know! Thanks in advance. class Too { public: Too(); ~Too(){}; int val1; }; Too::Too(){ val1 = 10; }; class B { public: vector<Too*> t_vec; Too* t1; vector<Too*>& get_tvec(); B(){t1 = new Too();}; ~B(){delete t1;}; }; vector<Too*>& B::get_tvec(){ t_vec.push_back(t1); return t_vec; } int main(){ B b; b = B(); vector<Too*>& t_vec_2 = b.get_tvec(); // Getting error std::cout << "\n val1 = " << t_vec_2[0].val1; return 0; }

  Read the article

• WCF Multiple contracts with duplicate method names

  - by haxelit

  Hello, I have a service with multiple contracts like so. [ServiceContract] public partial interface IBusinessFunctionDAO { [OperationContract] BusinessFunction GetBusinessFunction(Int32 businessFunctionRefID); [OperationContract] IEnumerable<Project> GetProjects(Int32 businessFunctionRefID); } [ServiceContract] public partial interface IBusinessUnitDAO { [OperationContract] BusinessUnit GetBusinessUnit(Int32 businessUnitRefID); [OperationContract] IEnumerable<Project> GetProjects(Int32 businessUnitRefID); } I then explicitly implemented each one of the interfaces like so. public class TrackingTool : IBusinessFunctionDAO, IBusinessUnitDAO { BusinessFunction IBusinessFunctionDAO.GetBusinessFunction(Int32 businessFunctionRefID) { // implementation } IEnumerable<Project> IBusinessFunctionDAO.GetProjects(Int32 businessFunctionRefID) { // implementation } BusinessUnit IBusinessUnitDAO.GetBusinessUnit(Int32 businessUnitRefID) { // implementation } IEnumerable<Project> IBusinessUnitDAO.GetProjects(Int32 businessUnitRefID) { // implementation } } As you can see I have two GetProjects(int) methods, but each one is implemented explicitly so this compiles just fine and is perfectly valid. The problem arises when I actually start this as a service. It gives me an error staying that TrackingTool already contains a definition GetProject. While it is true, it is part of a different service contract. Does WCF not distinguish between service contracts when generating the method names ? Is there a way to get it to distinguish between the service contracts ? My App.Config looks like this <service name="TrackingTool"> <endpoint address="BusinessUnit" contract="IBusinessUnitDAO" /> <endpoint address="BusinessFunction" contract="IBusinessFunctionDAO" /> </service> Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Raul

  Read the article

• writing a meta refresh method for rails

  - by aaronstacy

  I want a method in app/controllers/application.rb that can prepend/append text to whatever template gets rendered. Of course I can't call render twice w/o getting a double render error, so is this possible? I want to redirect after a delay using a meta refresh. Here's what I've got: app/controllers/application_controller.rb: def redirect_after_delay (url, delay) @redirect_delay = delay @redirect_url = url render end app/views/layouts/application.html.erb <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <%= yield :refresh_tag %> </head> <body> <%= yield %> </body> </html> So then if I want to add a redirect-after-delay, I add the following to 1) my controller and 2) the action's view: app/controllers/my_controller.rb def my_action redirect_after_delay 'http://www.google.com', 3 if some_condition end app/views/my_controller/my_action.html.erb <% content_for :refresh_tag do %> <meta http-equiv='refresh' content='<%=@redirect_delay%>;url=<%=@redirect_url%>'> <% end %> <h1>Please wait while you are redirected...</h1> Since the content_for block never changes, is it possible to do this in some generic way so that I don't have to put <%= yield :refresh_tag %> in each template? (e.g. could redirect_after_delay add it into whatever template is going to be rendered?)

  Read the article

• How to prevent the other threads from accessing a method when one thread is accessing a method?

  - by geeta

  I want to search for a string in 10 files and write the matching lines to a single file. I wrote the matching lines from each file to 10 output files(o/p file1,o/p file2...) and then copied those to a single file using 10 threads. But the output single file has mixed output(one line from o/p file1,another line from o/p file 2 etc...) because its accessed simultaneously by many threads. If I wait for all threads to complete and then write the single file it will be much slower. I want the output file to be written by one thread at a time. What should i do? My source code:(only writing to single file method) public void WriteSingle(File output_file,File final_output) throws IOException { synchronized(output_file){ System.out.println("Writing Single file"); FileOutputStream fo = new FileOutputStream(final_output,true); FileChannel fi = fo.getChannel(); FileInputStream fs = new FileInputStream(output_file); FileChannel fc = fs.getChannel(); int maxCount = (64 * 1024 * 1024) - (32 * 1024); long size = fc.size(); long position = 0; while (position < size) { position += fc.transferTo(position, maxCount, fi); } } }

  Read the article

• Invoking code both before and after WebControl.Render method

  - by Dirk

  I have a set of custom ASP.NET server controls, most of which derive from CompositeControl. I want to implement a uniform look for "required" fields across all control types by wrapping each control in a specific piece of HTML/CSS markup. For example: <div class="requiredInputContainer"> ...custom control markup... </div> I'd love to abstract this behavior in such a way as to avoid having to do something ugly like this in every custom control, present and future: public class MyServerControl : TextBox, IRequirableField { public IRequirableField.IsRequired {get;set;} protected override void Render(HtmlTextWriter writer){ RequiredFieldHelper.RenderBeginTag(this, writer) //render custom control markup RequiredFieldHelper.RenderEndTag(this, writer) } } public static class RequiredFieldHelper{ public static void RenderBeginTag(IRequirableField field, HtmlTextWriter writer){ //check field.IsRequired, render based on its values } public static void RenderEndTag(IRequirableField field, HtmlTextWriter writer){ //check field.IsRequired , render based on its values } } If I was deriving all of my custom controls from the same base class, I could conceivably use Template Method to enforce the before/after behavior;but I have several base classes and I'd rather not end up with really a convoluted class hierarchy anyway. It feels like I should be able to design something more elegant (i.e. adheres to DRY and OCP) by leveraging the functional aspects of C#, but I'm drawing a blank.

  Read the article

• javascript :Object doesn't support this property or method

  - by Kaushik

  In my jsp page, I have in the tag, the following code: <script type="text/javascript" src="<%=request.getContextPath()%>/static/js/common/common.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> // Function for Suppressing the JS Error function silentErrorHandler() {return true;} window.onerror=silentErrorHandler; </script> If there is some javascript executing on the jsp page after this, then I guess silentErrorHandler() will have no effect. i.e. the error will still show on page. IS this correct? Because the error is showing and am not sure why. The second part of the question is this: The error is Webpage error details User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; InfoPath.2; AskTbFXTV5/5.9.1.14019) Timestamp: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 21:26:23 UTC Message: Object doesn't support this property or method Line: 613 Char: 1 Code: 0 URI: http://localhost:9080/Claris/static/js/common/common.js And finally, line 613 states document.captureEvents(Event.MOUSEUP); There is error on IE8. Runs fine on Mozilla and IE7. Any suggestions will be very helpful

  Read the article

• method used like a type error in a unit test

  - by Josepth Vodary

  I am trying to unit test a simple factory - but it keeps telling me that I am trying to use a method like a type? My unit test using System; using System.Text; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting; using Home; namespace HomeTest { [TestClass] public class TestFactory { [TestMethod] public void DoTestFactory() { InventoryType.InventorySelect select = new InventoryType.InventorySelect(); select.inventoryTypes.Add("cds"); Home.Services.Factory.CreateInventory get = new Home.Services.Factory.CreateInventory(); get.InventoryImpl(); if (select.Validate() == true) Console.WriteLine("Test Passed"); else if (select.Validate() == false) Console.WriteLine("Test Returned False"); else Console.WriteLine("Test Failed To Run"); Console.ReadLine(); } } } My facotry using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace Home.Services { public class Factory { public InventorySvc CreateInventory() { return new InventoryImpl(); } } }

  Read the article

• How do you pass a generic delegate argument to a method in .NET 2.0

  - by Seth Spearman

  Hello, I have a class with a delegate declaration as follows... Public Class MyClass Public Delegate Function Getter(Of TResult)() As TResult 'the following code works. Public Shared Sub MyMethod(ByVal g As Getter(Of Boolean)) 'do stuff End Sub End Class However, I do not want to explicitly type the Getter delegate in the Method call. Why can I not declare the parameter as follows... ... (ByVal g As Getter(Of TResult)) Is there a way to do it? My end goal was to be able to set a delegate for property setters and getters in the called class. But my reading indicates you can't do that. So I put setter and getter methods in that class and then I want the calling class to set the delegate argument and then invoke. Is there a best practice for doing this. I realize in the above example that I can set set the delegate variable from the calling class...but I am trying to create a singleton with tight encapsulation. For the record, I can't use any of the new delegate types declared in .net35. Answers in C# are welcome. Any thoughts? Seth

  Read the article

• Android: sending xml as document object, POST method

  - by juro

  i am new at programming and i need some help with that please =/ web service is already written but not by me. so all i have to do is send xml as document object by post method through web service. my code: public class send extends application { @Override public void onCreate(Bundle icicle) { super.onCreate(icicle); HttpClient httpclient = new DefaultHttpClient(); HttpPost httppost = new HttpPost("http://app.local/test/"); try { DocumentBuilderFactory documentBuilderFactory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance(); DocumentBuilder documentBuilder = documentBuilderFactory.newDocumentBuilder(); Document document = documentBuilder.newDocument(); Element rootElement = document.createElement("packet"); rootElement.setAttribute("version", "1.2"); document.appendChild(rootElement); Element em = document.createElement("imei"); em.appendChild(document.createTextNode("000000000000000")); rootElement.appendChild(em); em = document.createElement("username"); em.appendChild(document.createTextNode("5555")); rootElement.appendChild(em); HttpResponse response = httpclient.execute(httppost); } catch (Exception e) { System.out.println("XML Pasing Excpetion = " + e); } } }

  Read the article

• Code Analysis Warning CA1004 with generic method

  - by Vaccano

  I have the following generic method: // Load an object from the disk public static T DeserializeObject<T>(String filename) where T : class { XmlSerializer xmlSerializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(T)); try { TextReader textReader = new StreamReader(filename); var result = (T)xmlSerializer.Deserialize(textReader); textReader.Close(); return result; } catch (FileNotFoundException) { } return null; } When I compile I get the following warning: CA1004 : Microsoft.Design : Consider a design where 'MiscHelpers.DeserializeObject(string)' doesn't require explicit type parameter 'T' in any call to it. I have considered this and I don't know a way to do what it requests with out limiting the types that can be deserialized. I freely admit that I might be missing an easy way to fix this. But if I am not, then is my only recourse to suppress this warning? I have a clean project with no warnings or messages. I would like to keep it that way. I guess I am asking "why this is a warning?" At best this seems like it should be a message. And even that seems a bit much. Either it can or it can't be fixed. If it can't then you are just stuck with the warning with no recourse but suppressing it. Am I wrong?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >