Search Results

Search found 11067 results on 443 pages for 'generic collection'.

Page 163/443 | < Previous Page | 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170  | Next Page >

  • simple image upload in aspnet mvc

    - by FosterZ
    hi,i'm building a simple school portal, i have stucked at uploading an image into my application, i.e a user should upload school image to my server, i have directory for images as ./Content/Images -- all uploading images should be uploaded to this directory. i have following code input type="file" id="SchoolImageUrl" name="SchoolImageUrl" class="required" using this m'getting a browse button, i have no idea how to upload that image to server and how would be my action controller ? i have following controller for creating school public ActionResult SchoolCreate(_ASI_School schoolToCreate, FormCollection collection) { if (!ModelState.IsValid) return View(); try { // TODO: Add insert logic here schoolToCreate.SchoolId = Guid.NewGuid().ToString(); schoolToCreate.UserId = new Guid(Request.Form["currentUser"]); schoolToCreate.SchoolAddedBy = User.Identity.Name; HttpPostedFileBase file = Request.Files["SchoolImageUrl"]; file.SaveAs(file.FileName); //schoolToCreate.SchoolImageUrl = Reuseable.ImageUpload(Request.Files["SchoolImageUrl"], Server.MapPath("../Content")); //schoolToCreate.SchoolImageUrl = Path.GetFullPath(Request.Files[0].FileName); schoolToCreate.SchoolImageUrl = collection["SchoolImageUrl"]; UpdateModel(schoolToCreate); _schoolRepository.CreateSchool(schoolToCreate); //_schoolRepository.SaveToDb(); return RedirectToAction("DepartmentCreate", "Department", new { userId = schoolToCreate.UserId, schoolId = schoolToCreate.SchoolId }); } catch { return View("CreationFailed"); } } here im geting object referece error

    Read the article

  • KODO: how set up fetch plan for bidirectional relationships?

    - by BestPractices
    Running KODO 4.2 and having an issue inefficient queries being generated by KODO. This happens when fetching an object that contains a collection where that collection has a bidrectional relationship back to the first object. Class Classroom { List<Student> _students; } Class Student { Classroom _classroom; } If we create a fetch plan to get a list of Classrooms and their corresponding Students by setting up the following fetch plan: fetchPlan.addField(Classroom.class,”_students”); This will result in two queries (get the classrooms and then get all students that are in those classrooms), which is what we would expect. However, if we include the reference back to the classroom in our fetch plan in order for the _classroom field to get populated by doing fetchPlan.addField(Student.class, “_classroom”), this will result in X number of additional queries where X is the number of students in each classroom. Can anyone explain how to fix this? KODO already has the original Classroom objects at the point that it's executing the queries to retrieve the Classroom objects and set them in each Student object's _classroom field. So I would expect KODO to simply set those objects in the _classroom field on each Student object accordingly and not go back to the database. Once again, the documentation is sorely lacking with Kodo/JDO/OpenJPA but from what I've read it should be able to do this more efficiently. Note-- EAGER_FETCH.PARALLEL is turned on and I have tried this with caching (query and data caches) turned on and off and there is no difference in the resultant queries.

    Read the article

  • Javascript Callback when variable is set to X

    - by Erik
    Hey everyone, Have an issue I can't seem to wrap my head around. I'm wanting to write a generic javascript function that will accept a variable and a callback, and continue to execute until that variable is something other than false. For example, the variable SpeedFeed.user.sid is false until something else happens in the code, but I don't want to execute a particular callback until it has been set. The call: SpeedFeed.helper_ready(SpeedFeed.user.sid, function(){ alert(SpeedFeed.user.sid); // Run function that requires sid to be set. }); The function: helper_ready: function(vtrue, callback){ if(vtrue != false){ callback(); } else { setTimeout(function(){ SpeedFeed.helper_ready(vtrue, callback); }, SpeedFeed.apiCheckTime); } } The issue I've narrowed it down to appears to be that because in the setTimeout I call vtrue instead of the actual SpeedFeed.user.sid, it's going to be set to false always. I realize I could write a specific function for each time that just evaluates the SpeedFeed.user.sid, but I'd like to have a generic method that I could use throughout the application. Thanks for any insight :)

    Read the article

  • How to convert many thousands of lines of VBScript to C#?

    - by Ross Patterson
    I have a collection of about 10,000 small VBScript programs (50-100 lines each) and a small collection of larger ones, and I'm looking for a way to convert them to C# without resorting to by-hand transliteration. The programs are automated test cases for a web application, written for HP/Mercury's QuickTest Pro, and I'm trying to turn them into test cases for Selenium. Luckily, the tests appear to be well-written, using a library of building blocks and idioms (the larger programs), so the test cases actually resemble a domain-specific language more than they do VBScript, and the QTP-ness is well-buried inside the libraries. Ideally, what I'm searching for is a tool that can do the syntactic transformation from VBScript to C# for both the dsl-ish test cases and also the more complicated building-block libraries. That would leave me with a manual cleanup of the libraries, and probably very little work on the test cases. If I could find a VBScript-to-VB.NET translator, I'd take that also, as I suspect I could compile the VB.NET and then de-compile to C# using .NET Relector or something similar. Plan B is to write a translator of my own for the test cases, since they're in a very straight-line style, but it wouldn't help with the libraries. Any suyggestions? I haven't written a compiler in at least 15 years, and while I haven't forgotten how, I'm not looking forward to it - least of all for VBScript!

    Read the article

  • How to get a Class literal from a generically specific Class

    - by h2g2java
    There are methods like these which require Class literals as argument. Collection<EmpInfo> emps = SomeSqlUtil.select( EmpInfo.class, "select * from emps"); or GWT.create(Razmataz.class); The problem presents itself when I need to supply generic specific classes like EmpInfo<String> Razmataz<Integer> The following would be wrong syntax Collection<EmpInfo<String>> emps = SomeSqlUtil.select( EmpInfo<String>.class, "select * from emps"); or GWT.create(Razmataz<Integer>.class); Because you cannot do syntax like Razmataz<Integer>.class So, how would I be able to squeeze a class literal out of EmpInfo<String> Razmataz<Integer> so that I could feed them as arguments to methods requiring Class literals? Further info Okay, I confess that I am asking this primarily for GWT. I have a pair of GWT RPC interface Razmataz. (FYI, GWT RPC interface has to be defined in server-client pairs). I plan to use the same interface pair for communicating whether it be String, Integer, Boolean, etc. GWT.create(Razmataz) for Razmataz<T> complains that, since I did not specify T, GWT compiler treated it as Object. Then GWT compiler would not accept Object class. It needs to be more specific than being an Object. So, it seems there is no way for me to tell GWT.create what T is because a Class literal is a runtime concept while generics is a compile time concept, Right?

    Read the article

  • How to handle checkboxes in ASP.NET MVC forms?

    - by Will
    This seems a bit bizarre to me, but as far as I can tell, this is how you do it. I have a collection of objects, and I want users to select one or more of them. This says to me "form with checkboxes." My objects don't have any concept of "selected" (they're rudimentary POCO's formed by deserializing a wcf call). So, I do the following: public class SampleObject{ public Guid Id {get;set;} public string Name {get;set;} } In the view: <% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%foreach (var o in ViewData.Model) {%> <%=Html.CheckBox(o.Id)%>&nbsp;<%= o.Name %> <%}%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <%}%> And, in the controller, this is the only way I can see to figure out what objects the user checked: public ActionResult ThisLooksWeird(FormCollection result) { var winnars = from x in result.AllKeys where result[x] != "false" select x; // yadda } Its freaky in the first place, and secondly, for those items the user checked, the FormCollection lists its value as "true false" rather than just true. Obviously, I'm missing something. I think this is built with the idea in mind that the objects in the collection that are acted upon within the html form are updated using UpdateModel() or through a ModelBinder. But my objects aren't set up for this; does that mean that this is the only way? Is there another way to do it?

    Read the article

  • Are there pitfalls to using static class/event as an application message bus

    - by Doug Clutter
    I have a static generic class that helps me move events around with very little overhead: public static class MessageBus<T> where T : EventArgs { public static event EventHandler<T> MessageReceived; public static void SendMessage(object sender, T message) { if (MessageReceived != null) MessageReceived(sender, message); } } To create a system-wide message bus, I simply need to define an EventArgs class to pass around any arbitrary bits of information: class MyEventArgs : EventArgs { public string Message { get; set; } } Anywhere I'm interested in this event, I just wire up a handler: MessageBus<MyEventArgs>.MessageReceived += (s,e) => DoSomething(); Likewise, triggering the event is just as easy: MessageBus<MyEventArgs>.SendMessage(this, new MyEventArgs() {Message="hi mom"}); Using MessageBus and a custom EventArgs class lets me have an application wide message sink for a specific type of message. This comes in handy when you have several forms that, for example, display customer information and maybe a couple forms that update that information. None of the forms know about each other and none of them need to be wired to a static "super class". I have a couple questions: fxCop complains about using static methods with generics, but this is exactly what I'm after here. I want there to be exactly one MessageBus for each type of message handled. Using a static with a generic saves me from writing all the code that would maintain the list of MessageBus objects. Are the listening objects being kept "alive" via the MessageReceived event? For instance, perhaps I have this code in a Form.Load event: MessageBus<CustomerChangedEventArgs>.MessageReceived += (s,e) => DoReload(); When the Form is Closed, is the Form being retained in memory because MessageReceived has a reference to its DoReload method? Should I be removing the reference when the form closes: MessageBus<CustomerChangedEventArgs>.MessageReceived -= (s,e) => DoReload();

    Read the article

  • State Animation on ListBox ItemTemplate

    - by Peanut
    I have a listbox which reads from Observable collection, and is ItemTemplate'ed: <DataTemplate x:Key="DataTemplate1"> <Grid x:Name="grid" Height="47.333" Width="577" Opacity="0.495"> <Image HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="10.668,8,0,8" Width="34" Source="{Binding ImageLocation}"/> <TextBlock Margin="56,8,172.334,8" TextWrapping="Wrap" Text="{Binding ApplicationName}" FontSize="21.333"/> <Grid x:Name="grid1" HorizontalAlignment="Right" Margin="0,10.003,-0.009,11.33" Width="26" Opacity="0" RenderTransformOrigin="0.5,0.5"> <Image HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" Margin="0" Source="image/downloads.png" Stretch="Fill" MouseDown="Image_MouseDown" /> </Grid> </Grid> </DataTemplate> <ListBox x:Name="searchlist" Margin="8" ItemTemplate="{DynamicResource DataTemplate1}" ItemsSource="{Binding SearchResults}" SelectionChanged="searchlist_SelectionChanged" ItemContainerStyle="{DynamicResource ListBoxItemStyle1}" /> In general, my question is "What is the easiest way to do Animation on Particular Items in this listbox As they are selected? Basically the image inside the "grid1" will be setting its opacity to 1, slowly. I would prefer to use states, but I do not know of any way to just tell blend and xaml to "When a selected item is changed, change the image opacity to 1 over a period of .3 seconds". Infact, I have been doing this in the .cs file using the VisualStateManager. Also, there is another issue. When the selected index is changed, we goto the CS file and look at SelectedItem. SelectedItem returns an instance of the Object in which it was bound to (The object inside the observable collection), and NOT an instance of the DataTemplate/ListItem etc. So how am I able to pull the correct image out of this list? State animation with VisualStateManager I can handle fine if its just normal things, but when it comes to generated listboxes' items, I'm lost. Thanks

    Read the article

  • (500) Internal Server Error with C# and Web Dev 2008 Express

    - by user32848
    The code below is generic, found in a variety of places, including a book I have. I have used it as a base for a working program in VS 2005. Now I've resurrected it with my current Visual Web Developer 2008 Express Edition and I seem to have problems connecting it to my default development server (I don't have IIS on my XP). The error is: (500) Internal Server Error. Is this saying what I thought it did (above) or something else, and how do I solve this problem? using System; using System.Collections; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Configuration; using System.IO; using System.Net; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Security; using System.Web.UI; using System.Web.UI.WebControls; using System.Web.UI.WebControls.WebParts; using System.Web.UI.HtmlControls; using System.Text.RegularExpressions; public partial class _Default : System.Web.UI.Page { protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { string strResult = ""; string url = "http://weather.unisys.com"; WebResponse objResponse; WebRequest objRequest; try { objRequest = System.Net.HttpWebRequest.Create(url); } catch { objRequest = System.Net.HttpWebRequest.Create("http://"+ url); } objResponse = objRequest.GetResponse(); using (StreamReader sr = new StreamReader(objResponse.GetResponseStream())) { strResult = sr.ReadToEnd(); sr.Close(); } } }

    Read the article

  • django join-like expansion of queryset

    - by jimbob
    I have a list of Persons each which have multiple fields that I usually filter what's upon, using the object_list generic view. Each person can have multiple Comments attached to them, each with a datetime and a text string. What I ultimately want to do is have the option to filter comments based on dates. class Person(models.Model): name = models.CharField("Name", max_length=30) ## has ~30 other fields, usually filtered on as well class Comment(models.Model): date = models.DateTimeField() person = models.ForeignKey(Person) comment = models.TextField("Comment Text", max_length=1023) What I want to do is get a queryset like Person.objects.filter(comment__date__gt=date(2011,1,1)).order_by('comment__date') send that queryset to object_list and be able to only see the comments ordered by date with only so many objects on a page. E.g., if "Person A" has comments 12/3/11, 1/2/11, 1/5/11, "Person B" has no comments, and person C has a comment on 1/3, I would see: "Person A", 1/2 - comment "Person C", 1/3 - comment "Person A", 1/5 - comment I would strongly prefer not to have to switch to filtering based on Comments.objects.filter(), as that would make me have to largely repeat large sections of code in the both the view and template. Right now if I tried executing the following command, I will get a queryset returning (PersonA, PersonC, PersonA), but if I try rendering that in a template each persons comment_set will contain all their comments even if they aren't in the date range. Ideally they're would be some sort of functionality where I could expand out a Person queryset's comment_set into a larger queryset that can be sorted and ordered based on the comment and put into a object_list generic view. This normally is fairly simple to do in SQL with a JOIN, but I don't want to abandon the ORM, which I use everywhere else.

    Read the article

  • Intermittent Issue Writing to Google Appengine Datastore

    - by user242153
    Hi, I have a functioning app and recently have had intermittent problems writing to the datastore. I did not make any relevant code changes, however in the last few days my attempts to write to the datastore sometimes work and sometimes don't. I am trying to save an object that is in a many to one relationship with an existing persisted parent. So, the logic works like this: 1) Parent pulled from the datastore 2) Child created / instantiated using constructor 3) Parent.addSingleChild(child); // the "addSingleChild" method just adds the object argument to the collection of children 4) child.setParent(Parent); // sets the Parent object to the parent field I am using transactions as explained in the documentation ending with "finally {if (tx.isActive()) {tx.rollback(); } }" When the servlet is called, the parent is called from the datastore and the child object is created and added to the many to one mapping to the pre-existing parent. The child should automatically be persisted, since the parent is already persistent, and the child is added to the collection of children that map to the parent. And it worked this way in the past. However, to be sure, i did add a pm.makePersistent(child). Doesn't seem to help, still have the intermittent problem. Any suggestions would be appreciated, and if you need to see the actual code I can post. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Validations for a has_many/belongs_to relationship

    - by Craig Walker
    I have a Recipe model which has_many Ingredients (which in turn belongs_to Recipe). I want Ingredient to be existent dependent on Recipe; an Ingredient should never exist without a Recipe. I'm trying to enforce the presence of a valid Recipe ID in the Ingredient. I've been doing this with a validates :recipe, :presence => true (Rails 3) statement in Ingredient. This works fine if I save the Recipe before adding an Ingredient to it's ingredients collection. However, if I don't have explicit control over the saving (such as when I'm creating a Recipe and its Ingredients from a nested form) then I get an error: Ingredients recipe can't be blank I can get around this simply by dropping the presence validation on Ingredient.recipe. However, I don't particularly like this, as it means I'm working without a safety net. What is the best way to enforce existence-dependence in Rails? Things I'm considering (please comment on the wisdom of each): Adding a not-null constraint on the ingredients.recipe_id database column, and letting the database do the checking for me. A custom validation that somehow checks whether the Ingredient is in an unsaved recipe's ingredient collection (and thus can't have a recipe_id but is still considered valid).

    Read the article

  • Writing to the DataContext

    - by user738383
    I have a function. This function takes an IEnumerable<Customer> (Customer being an entity). What the function needs to do is tell the DataContext (which has a collection of Customers as a property) that its Customers property needs to be overwritten with this passed in IEnumerable<Customer>. I can't use assignment because DomainContext.Customers cannot be assigned to, as it is read only. I guess it's not clear what I'm asking, so I suppose I should say... how do I do that? So we have DataContext.Customers (of type System.Data.Linq.Table) which wants to be replaced with a System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable. I can't just assign the latter to the former because DataContext's properties are read only. But there must be a way. Edit: here's an image: Further edit: Yes, this image does not feature a collection of the type 'Customer' but rather 'Connection'. It doesn't matter though, they are both created from tables within the linked SQL database. So there is a dc.Connections, a dc.Customers, a dc.Media and so on. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to display two ObservableCollections as a single list in WPF?

    - by nareshbhatia
    I have two ObservableCollections, say ObservableCollection<Cat> and ObservableCollections<Dog>. Cat and Dog both derive from class Pet. I want to display a list of all Pets. How do I do this? I prefer not want create a new ObservableCollection<Pet> by adding items from the two source lists because this list will become stale as more Cats and Dogs are added to the source lists. I can think of two approaches: 1) Create a "Decorator" ObservableCollection that keeps the two source collections as members and iterates over them every time. 2) Create an ObservableCollection<Pet> that does have the combined elements of the two source collections, but is also dependent on the source collections. Thus if a Cat is added to the Cat collection, this collection is notified and it adds the new Cat to itself. Is there a standard way to solve this issue? I don't want to reinvent the wheel!

    Read the article

  • Visitor Pattern can be replaced with Callback functions?

    - by getit
    Is there any significant benefit to using either technique? In case there are variations, the Visitor Pattern I mean is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_pattern And below is an example of using a delegate to achieve the same effect (at least I think it is the same) Say there is a collection of nested elements: Schools contain Departments which contain Students Instead of using the Visitor pattern to perform something on each collection item, why not use a simple callback (Action delegate in C#) Say something like this class Department { List Students; } class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student> actionDelegate) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu); } } } } School A = new School(); ...//populate collections A.Visit((student)=> { ...Do Something with student... }); *EDIT Example with delegate accepting multiple params Say I wanted to pass both the student and department, I could modify the Action definition like so: Action class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student, Department> actionDelegate, Action<Department> d2) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { d2(dep); //This performs a different process. //Using Visitor pattern would avoid having to keep adding new delegates. //This looks like the main benefit so far foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu, dep); } } } }

    Read the article

  • Flexible forms and supporting database structure

    - by sunwukung
    I have been tasked with creating an application that allows administrators to alter the content of the user input form (i.e. add arbitrary fields) - the contents of which get stored in a database. Think Modx/Wordpress/Expression Engine template variables. The approach I've been looking at is implementing concrete tables where the specification is consistent (i.e. user profiles, user content etc) and some generic field data tables (i.e. text, boolean) to store non-specific values. Forms (and model fields) would be generated by first querying the tables and retrieving the relevant columns - although I've yet to think about how I would setup validation. I've taken a look at this problem, and it seems to be indicating an EAV type approach - which, from my brief research - looks like it could be a greater burden than the blessings it's flexibility would bring. I've read a couple of posts here, however, which suggest this is a dangerous route: How to design a generic database whose layout may change over time? Dynamic Database Schema I'd appreciate some advice on this matter if anyone has some to give regards SWK

    Read the article

  • How to determine one to many column name from entity type

    - by snicker
    I need a way to determine the name of the column used by NHibernate to join one-to-many collections from the collected entity's type. I need to be able to determine this at runtime. Here is an example: I have some entities: namespace Entities { public class Stable { public virtual int Id {get; set;} public virtual string StableName {get; set;} public virtual IList<Pony> Ponies { get; set; } } public class Dude { public virtual int Id { get; set; } public virtual string DudesName { get; set; } public virtual IList<Pony> PoniesThatBelongToDude { get; set; } } public class Pony { public virtual int Id {get; set;} public virtual string Name {get; set;} public virtual string Color { get; set; } } } I am using NHibernate to generate the database schema, which comes out looking like this: create table "Stable" (Id integer, StableName TEXT, primary key (Id)) create table "Dude" (Id integer, DudesName TEXT, primary key (Id)) create table "Pony" (Id integer, Name TEXT, Color TEXT, Stable_id INTEGER, Dude_id INTEGER, primary key (Id)) Given that I have a Pony entity in my code, I need to be able to find out: A. Does Pony even belong to a collection in the mapping? B. If it does, what are the column names in the database table that pertain to collections In the above instance, I would like to see that Pony has two collection columns, Stable_id and Dude_id.

    Read the article

  • Java Generics Class Parameter Type Inference

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

    Read the article

  • How to specify allowed exceptions in WCF's configuration file?

    - by tucaz
    Hello! I´m building a set of WCF services for internal use through all our applications. For exception handling I created a default fault class so I can return treated message to the caller if its the case or a generic one when I have no clue what happened. Fault contract: [DataContract(Name = "DefaultFault", Namespace = "http://fnac.com.br/api/2010/03")] public class DefaultFault { public DefaultFault(DefaultFaultItem[] items) { if (items == null || items.Length== 0) { throw new ArgumentNullException("items"); } StringBuilder sbItems = new StringBuilder(); for (int i = 0; i Specifying that my method can throw this exception so the consuming client will be aware of it: [OperationContract(Name = "PlaceOrder")] [FaultContract(typeof(DefaultFault))] [WebInvoke(UriTemplate = "/orders", BodyStyle = WebMessageBodyStyle.Bare, ResponseFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, RequestFormat = WebMessageFormat.Json, Method = "POST")] string PlaceOrder(Order newOrder); Most of time we will use just .NET to .NET communication with usual binds and everything works fine since we are talking the same language. However, as you can see in the service contract declaration I have a WebInvoke attribute (and a webHttp binding) in order to be able to also talk JSON since one of our apps will be built for iPhone and this guy will talk JSON. My problem is that whenever I throw a FaultException and have includeExceptionDetails="false" in the config file the calling client will get a generic HTTP error instead of my custom message. I understand that this is the correct behavior when includeExceptionDetails is turned off, but I think I saw some configuration a long time ago to allow some exceptions/faults to pass through the service boundaries. Is there such thing like this? If not, what do u suggest for my case? Thanks a LOT!

    Read the article

  • using STI and ActiveRecordBase<> with full FindAll

    - by oillio
    Is it possible to use generic support with single table inheritance, and still be able to FindAll of the base class? As a bonus question, will I be able to use ActiveRecordLinqBase< as well? I do love those queries. More detail: Say I have the following classes defined: public interface ICompany { int ID { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord("companies", DiscriminatorColumn="type", DiscriminatorType="String", DiscriminatorValue="NA")] public abstract class Company<T> : ActiveRecordBase<T>, ICompany { [PrimaryKey] private int Id { get; set; } [Property] public String Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="firm")] public class Firm : Company<Firm> { [Property] public string Description { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="client")] public class Client : Company<Client> { [Property] public int ChargeRate { get; set; } } This works fine for most cases. I can do things like: var x = Client.FindAll(); But sometimes I want all of the companies. If I was not using generics I could do: var x = (Company[]) FindAll(Company); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Firm b = (Firm)x[1]; Is there a way to write a FindAll that returns an array of ICompany's that can then be typecast into their respective types? Something like: var x = (ICompany[]) FindAll(Company<ICompany>); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Or maybe I am going about implementing the generic support all wrong?

    Read the article

  • Componentizing complex functionality in an MVC web app

    - by NXT
    Hi Everyone, This is question about MVC web-app architecture, and how it can be extended to handle componentizing moderately complex units of functionality. I have an MVC style web-app with a customer facing credit card charge page. I've been asked to allow the admins to enter credit card payments as well, for times when credit cards are taken over the phone. The customer facing credit card charge section of the website is currently it's own controller, with approximately 3 pages and a login. That controller is responsible for: Customer login credential authentication Credit card data collection Calling a library to do the actual charge. reporting the results to the user. I would like to extract the card data collection pages into a component of some kind so that I can easily reuse the code on the admin side of the app. Right now my components are limited to single "view" pages with PHP style embedded Perl code. This is a simple, custom MVC framework written in Perl. Right now, controllers are called directly from the framework to service web requests. My idea is to allow controllers to be called from other controllers, so that I can componentize more complex functionality. For simplicity I think I prefer composition over inheritance, even though it will require writing a bunch of pass-through methods (actions). Being Perl, I could in theory do multiple inheritance. I'm wondering if anyone with experience in other MVC web frameworks can comment on how this sort of thing is usually done. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • jQuery ajax form submit - how to ensure dynamically loaded form's action is used

    - by kenny99
    Hi, i'm having a problem with dynamically loaded forms - instead of using the action attribute of the newly loaded form, my jquery code is still using the action attribute of the first form loaded. I have the following code: //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); But when the next form is loaded, the above code does not pick up the new action attribute. I have tried adding the above code to my callback on successful ajax load (shown below), but this doesn't make any difference. Can anyone help? Many thanks function ajaxFormStage(url) { var $data = $('#main_body #content'); $.validationEngine.closePrompt('body'); //close any validation messages $data.fadeOut('fast', function(){ $data.load(url, function(){ $data.animate({ opacity: 'show' }, 'fast'); '); //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); }); });

    Read the article

  • Why Backbone.js isn't binding my event

    - by Saif Bechan
    I have a router like this, as main entry point: window.AppRouter = Backbone.Router.extend({ routes: { '': 'login' }, login: function(){ userLoginView = new UserLoginView(); } }); var appRouter = new AppRouter; Backbone.history.start({pushState: true}); I have a model/collection/view like this: window.User = Backbone.Model.extend({}); window.Users = Backbone.Collection.extend({ model: User }); window.UserLoginView = Backbone.View.extend({ events: { 'click #login-button': 'loginAction' }, initialize: function(){ _.bindAll(this, 'render', 'loginAction'); }, loginAction: function(){ var uid = $("#login-username").val(); var pwd = $("#login-password").val(); var user = new User({uid:uid, pwd:pwd}); } }); And body of my HTML looks like this: <form action="#" method="POST" id="login-form"> <p> <label for="login-username">username</label> <input type="text" id="login-username" autofocus /> </p> <p> <label for="login-password">password</label> <input type="password" id="login-password" /> </p> <a id="login-button" href="#">Inloggen</a> </form> Note: The HTML comes from Node.js using express.js, should I maybe wait for a document ready event somewhere? Edit: I have tried this, create the view when ready, did not solve the problem. $(function(){ userLoginView = new UserLoginView(); });

    Read the article

  • C# Type conversion between two similar Datatable objects

    - by Ali
    I have .NET project with sync framework and two separate Datasets for MS SQL and Compact SQL. in my base class I have a generic DataTable object. in my derived classed I assign Typed DataTable to the generic object based on whether the application is operating online or offline: example: if (online) _dataTable = new MSSQLDataSet.Customer; else _dataTable = new CompactSQLDataSet.Customer; Now every where in my code i have to check and do a cast based on the current network mode like this: public void changeCustomerID(int ID) { if (online) (MSSQLDataSet.CustomerDataTable)_dataTable)[i].CustomerID = value; else (CompactMSSQLDataSet.CustomerDataTable)_dataTable)[i].CustomerID = value; } but I don't think this is very efficient and I believe it can be done in a smarter way to only use one line of code by dynamically getting the Type of _dataTable on the run time. my problem is at the design time, in order to acess datatable porperties such as "CustomerID" it has to be casted to either MSSQLDataSet.CustomerDataTable or CompactMSSQLDataSet.CustomerDataTable. Is there a way to have a function or a operator to convert the _datatable to its runtime type but still be able to use it's design time properties which are the same between the two types? something like: ((aType)_dataTable)[i].CustomerID = value; //or GetRuntimeType(_dataTable)[i].CustomerID = value;

    Read the article

  • Dealing with multiple generics in a method call

    - by thaBadDawg
    I've been dealing a lot lately with abstract classes that use generics. This is all good and fine because I get a lot of utility out of these classes but now it's making for some rather ugly code down the line. For example: abstract class ClassBase<T> { T Property { get; set; } } class MyClass : ClassBase<string> { OtherClass PropertyDetail { get; set; } } This implementation isn't all that crazy, except when I want to reference the abstract class from a helper class and then I have to make a list of generics just to make reference to the implemented class, like this below. class Helper { void HelpMe<C, T>(object Value) where C : ClassBase<T>, new() { DoWork(); } } This is just a tame example, because I have some method calls where the list of where clauses end up being 5 or 6 lines long to handle all of the generic data. What I'd really like to do is class Helper { void HelpMe<C>(object Value) where C : ClassBase, new() { DoWork(); } } but it obviously won't compile. I want to reference ClassBase without having to pass it a whole array of generic classes to get the function to work, but I don't want to reference the higher level classes because there are a dozen of those. Am I the victim of my own cleverness or is there an avenue that I haven't considered yet?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170  | Next Page >