Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'oop criticism'.

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

Page 18/64 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

  • How to handle the pylint message: Warning: Method could be a function

    - by biffabacon
    Being new to Python, I decided to get some feedback on a class I'd written ASAP so I ran it against pylint. Is the message it gave "Warning: Method could be a function" telling me that it would be better to move this method out of the class because it doesn't use any instance variables? In c# I would make this a static method. What's the most pythonic thing to do here?

    Read the article

  • Can a function return an object? Objective-C and NSMutableArray

    - by seaworthy
    I have an NSMutableArray. It's members eventually become members of an array instance in a class. I want to put the instantiantion of NSMutable into a function and to return an array object. If I can do this, I can make some of my code easier to read. Is this possible? Here is what I am trying to figure out. //Definition: > function Objects (float a, float b) { > NSMutableArray *array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; > [array addObject:[NSNumber numberWithFloat:a]]; > [array addObject:[NSNumber numberWithFloat:b]]; > //[release array]; ???????? return array; > } //Declaration: Math *operator = [[Math alloc] init]; [operator findSum:Objects(20.0,30.0)]; My code compiles if I instantiate NSMutableArray right before I send the message to the receiver. I know I can have an array argument along with the method. What I have problem seeing is how to use a function and to replace the argument with a function call. Any help is appreciated. I am interested in the concept not in suggestions to replace the findSum method.

    Read the article

  • PHP: Array of objects is empty when I come to retrieve one from the array

    - by Tom
    Good morning, I am trying to load rows from a database and then create objects from them and add these objects to a private array. Here are my classes: <?php include("databaseconnect.php"); class stationItem { private $code = ''; private $description = ''; public function setCode($code ){ $this->code = $code; } public function getCode(){ return $this->code; } public function setDescription($description){ $this->description = $description; } public function getDescription(){ return $this->description; } } class stationList { private $stationListing; function __construct() { connect(); $stationListing = array(); $result = mysql_query('SELECT * FROM stations'); while ($row = mysql_fetch_assoc($result)) { $station = new stationItem(); $station->setCode($row['code']); $station->setDescription($row['description']); array_push($stationListing, $station); } mysql_free_result($result); } public function getStation($index){ return $stationListing[$index]; } } ?> As you can see I am creating a stationItem object per database row (which for now has a code and description) and I then push these on to the end of my array which is held as a private variable in stationList. This is code which creates this classes and attempts to access the properties on them: $stations = new stationList(); $station = $stations->getStation(0); echo $station->getCode(); I am finding that the sizeof($stationList) at the end of the constructor is 1 but then it is zero when we come to try to get an object from the array using the index. Therefore the error that I get is: Fatal error: Call to a member function getCode() on a non-object Please can someone explain to me why this is happening? I guess I am misunderstanding how object references work in PHP5.

    Read the article

  • Is this a good way to expose generic base class methods through an interface?

    - by Nate Heinrich
    I am trying to provide an interface to an abstract generic base class. I want to have a method exposed on the interface that consumes the generic type, but whose implementation is ultimately handled by the classes that inherit from my abstract generic base. However I don't want the subclasses to have to downcast to work with the generic type (as they already know what the type should be). Here is a simple version of the only way I can see to get it to work at the moment. public interface IFoo { void Process(Bar_base bar); } public abstract class FooBase<T> : IFoo where T : Bar_base { abstract void Process(T bar); // Explicit IFoo Implementation void IFoo.Process(Bar_base bar) { if (bar == null) throw new ArgumentNullException(); // Downcast here in base class (less for subclasses to worry about) T downcasted_bar = bar as T; if (downcasted_bar == null) { throw new InvalidOperationException( string.Format("Expected type '{0}', not type '{1}'", T.ToString(), bar.GetType().ToString()); } //Process downcasted object. Process(downcasted_bar); } } Then subclasses of FooBase would look like this... public class Foo_impl1 : FooBase<Bar_impl1> { void override Process(Bar_impl1 bar) { //No need to downcast here! } } Obviously this won't provide me compile time Type Checking, but I think it will get the job done... Questions: 1. Will this function as I think it will? 2. Is this the best way to do this? 3. What are the issues with doing it this way? 4. Can you suggest a different approach? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to add event listners / signals to a simple superman class?

    - by Kabumbus
    I can and would love to use boost or std for this. Sorry - I am new to C++. So I created a really simple program like: #include <iostream> #include <string> using namespace std; class superman { public: string punch(){return cout << "superman: I hit the bad guy!" << endl;}; }; int main() { superman clark; clark.punch(); cin.get(); } I want to add an event listner that would tell me when clark punched and cout something like "superman punched!". How to add such event listner and event function to my class?

    Read the article

  • PHP: Recursive array function

    - by Industrial
    Hi everybody, I want to create a function that returns the full path from a set node, back to the root value. I tried to make a recursive function, but ran out of luck totally. What would be an appropriate way to do this? I assume that a recursive function is the only way? Here's the array: Array ( [0] => Array ( [id] => 1 [name] => Root category [_parent] => ) [1] => Array ( [id] => 2 [name] => Category 2 [_parent] => 1 ) [2] => Array ( [id] => 3 [name] => Category 3 [_parent] => 1 ) [3] => Array ( [id] => 4 [name] => Category 4 [_parent] => 3 ) ) The result I want my function to output when getting full path of node id#4: Array ( [0] => Array ( [id] => 1 [name] => Root category [_parent] => ) [1] => Array ( [id] => 3 [name] => Category 3 [_parent] => 1 ) [2] => Array ( [id] => 4 [name] => Category 4 [_parent] => 3 ) ) The notoriously bad example of my recursive skills: function recursive ($id, $array) { $innerarray = array(); foreach ($array as $k => $v) { if ($v['id'] === $id) { if ($v['_parent'] !== '') { $innerarray[] = $v; recursive($v['id'], $array); } } } return $innerarray; } Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Python: Can subclasses overload inherited methods?

    - by Rosarch
    I'm making a shopping cart app in Google App Engine. I have many classes that derive from a base handler: class BaseHandler(webapp.RequestHandler): def get(self, CSIN=None): self.body(CSIN) Does this mean that the body() method of every descendant class needs to have the same argument? This is cumbersome. Only one descendant actually uses that argument. And what about when I add new args? Do I need to go through and change every class? class Detail(BaseHandler): def body(self, CSIN): class MainPage(BaseHandler): def body(self, CSIN=None): #@UnusedVariable class Cart(BaseHandler): def body(self, CSIN): #@UnusedVariable

    Read the article

  • Passing pointer position to an object in Java.

    - by Gabriel A. Zorrilla
    I've got a JPanel class called Board with a static subclass, MouseHanlder, which tracks the mouse position along the appropriate listener in Board. My Board class has fields pointerX and pointerY. How do i pass the e.getX() and e.getY() from the MouseHandler subclass to its super class JPanel? I tried with getters, setters, super, and cant get the data transfer between subclass and parent class. I'm certain it's a concept issue, but im stuck. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • can you explain this jquery method from jquery.js

    - by mrblah
    Trying to understand how jquery works under the covers, what's the difference between: jQuery.fn and jQuery.prototype jQuery = window.jQuery = window.$ = function( selector, context ) { // The jQuery object is actually just the init constructor 'enhanced' return new jQuery.fn.init( selector, context ); }, and then: jQuery.fn = jQuery.prototype = { init: function( selector, context ) {

    Read the article

  • Regular Expressions: RegEx for determining valid PHP class property names?

    - by Brian Lacy
    I am using PHP's magic __set and __get methods to access a private array in a class. I want to make sure the property names requested (i.e. $myObj->FakeProperty) are valid according to PHP property name rules before accessing them. My current RegEx isn't doing the trick; with my test values, _12 always falls through the cracks. I'm not actually sure that my test values even represent a realistic representation of what is and isn't allowed for PHP class property names, but I'm not really too concerned about it, just that I have some sort of rudimentary check in place. Test Fields: albert12 12Albert _12 _Albert12 _12Albert _____a_1 RegEx: ^(?=_*[A-z]+)[A-z0-9_]+$

    Read the article

  • Bug in the official Android Fragments training sample?

    - by Jeff Axelrod
    It seems to me that there must be a bug in the Android Fragments demo. As background, Fragments are apparently sometimes instantiated by the Android OS and thus need a public no-arg constructor: All subclasses of Fragment must include a public empty constructor. The framework will often re-instantiate a fragment class when needed, in particular during state restore, and needs to be able to find this constructor to instantiate it. If the empty constructor is not available, a runtime exception will occur in some cases during state restore. But the NewsReader demo from the official Android training on Fragments constructs the HeadlinesFragment class and configures it with setOnHeadlineSelectedListener(this) from NewsReaderActivity.onCreate(). If the Android OS re-instantiates this fragment, the mHeadlineSelectedListener field will be null because HeadlinesFragment doesn't save or restore its state. Is this a bug or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • What's the deal with Java's public fields?

    - by Annan
    I've been reading two articles (1)(2) on javaworld.com about how all class fields should be private and getter/setter methods are just as bad. An object should act on the data it has rather than allowing access to it. I'm currently working on a University assignment for Connect Four. In designing the program the Agents playing the Game need access to the Board's state (so they can decide what to move). They also need to pass this move to the Game so it can validate it as a legal move. And during deciding what to move pieces are grouped into Threats with a start and end Points. Board, Threat and Point objects don't really do anything. They are just there to store related data that can be accessed in a human readable way. At the start of design I was representing Points on the board as two element int arrays, however that got annoying when creating points or referencing components of them. So, the class: public class Point { public int x; public int y; public Point(int x, int y){ this.x = x; this.y = y; } } Perfect in every way I can think of. Except it breaks every rule I've learned. Have I sinned?

    Read the article

  • iPhone Dev: Animating PNG Sequences

    - by Franky
    What is the best or recommended technique for animating PNG Sequences. Heres what I've learned: Do it Manually Using MutableArrays containing Strings, you can animate a UIImageView with a timer which increments an index number UIImage - animation methods This works, the only problem is to find if an image has completed its animation, you have to check the isAnimating BOOL, and to do that you need a timer. What is the best and recommended? Looking to do Oldschool game sprite animations, ie: Idle Animation Attack Animation Walk Animation ect... Let me know if any one has something. @lessfame

    Read the article

  • understanding the models in MVC

    - by fayer
    i cant fully understand the models in MVC. so i am using symfony with doctrine. the doctrine models are created. does this mean that i don't have to create any models? are the doctrine models the only models i need? where should i put the code that uses the doctrine models: eg. $phoneIds = array(); $phone1 = new Phonenumber(); $phone1['phonenumber'] = '555 202 7890'; $phone1->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone1['id']; $phone2 = new Phonenumber(); $phone2['phonenumber'] = '555 100 7890'; $phone2->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone2['id']; $user = new User(); $user['username'] = 'jwage'; $user['password'] = 'changeme'; $user->save(); $user->link('Phonenumbers', $phoneIds); should this code be in the controller or in another model? and where should i validate these fields (check if it exists in database, that email is email etc)? could someone please shed a light on this. thanks.

    Read the article

  • PHP: Get instance of static class by string value

    - by Tirithen
    I'm working on a php web api that was handed to me with a lot of code that needs to be refactored. The ones that wrote the code wanted to include a static configuration class to an api resource and then get an instance of that class something like this: <?php $obj = "User"; $confObjectSuffix = "_conf"; $confObject = $obj.$confObjectSuffix; if ($confObject::inst()->checkMethod($method)) { ..... This gives the error "Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM in ....." since $confObject is a string and not a object. I wrote some testcode: <?php $class = "User_conf"; echo "<pre>"; print_r($$class::Inst()); echo "</pre>"; class User_conf { private static $INSTANCE = null; public static function Inst() { if(User_conf::$INSTANCE === null) { User_conf::$INSTANCE = new User_conf(); } return User_conf::$INSTANCE; } } But can't get it to work with $$ either, is there some other way around this? I don't want to rewrite more than necessary.

    Read the article

  • OO Design / Patterns - Fat Model Vs Transaction Script?

    - by ben
    Ok, 'Fat' Model and Transaction Script both solve design problems associated with where to keep business logic. I've done some research and popular thought says having all business logic encapsulated within the model is the way to go (mainly since Transaction Script can become really complex and often results in code duplication). However, how does this work if I want to use the TDG of a second Model in my business logic? Surely Transaction Script presents a neater, less coupled solution than using one Model inside the business logic of another? A practical example... I have two classes: User & Alert. When pushing User instances to the database (eg, creating new user accounts), there is a business rule that requires inserting some default Alerts records too (eg, a default 'welcome to the system' message etc). I see two options here: 1) Add this rule as a User method, and in the process create a dependency between User and Alert (or, at least, Alert's Table Data Gateway). 2) Use a Transaction Script, which avoids the dependency between models. (Also, means the business logic is kept in a 'neutral' class & easily accessible by Alert. That probably isn't too important here, though). User takes responsibility for it's own validation etc, however, but because we're talking about a business rule involving two Models, Transaction Script seems like a better choice to me. Anyone spot flaws with this approach?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript check if anonymous object has a method

    - by Baddie
    How can I check if an anonymous object that was created as such: var myObj = { prop1: 'no', prop2: function () { return false; } } does indeed have a prop2 defined? prop2 will always be defined as a function, but for some objects it is not required and will not be defined. I tried what was suggested here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/595766/how-to-determine-if-native-javascript-object-has-a-property-method but I don't think it works for anonymous objects .

    Read the article

  • Why is execution-time method resolution faster than compile-time resolution?

    - by Felix
    At school, we about virtual functions in C++, and how they are resolved (or found, or matched, I don't know what the terminology is -- we're not studying in English) at execution time instead of compile time. The teacher also told us that compile-time resolution is much faster than execution-time (and it would make sense for it to be so). However, a quick experiment would suggest otherwise. I've built this small program: #include <iostream> #include <limits.h> using namespace std; class A { public: void f() { // do nothing } }; class B: public A { public: void f() { // do nothing } }; int main() { unsigned int i; A *a = new B; for (i=0; i < UINT_MAX; i++) a->f(); return 0; } Where I made A::f() once normal, once virtual. Here are my results: [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./normal real 0m25.834s user 0m25.742s sys 0m0.000s [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./virtual real 0m24.630s user 0m24.472s sys 0m0.003s [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./normal real 0m25.860s user 0m25.735s sys 0m0.007s [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./virtual real 0m24.514s user 0m24.475s sys 0m0.000s [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./normal real 0m26.022s user 0m25.795s sys 0m0.013s [felix@the-machine C]$ time ./virtual real 0m24.503s user 0m24.468s sys 0m0.000s There seems to be a steady ~1 second difference in favor of the virtual version. Why is this? Relevant or not: dual-core pentium @ 2.80Ghz, no extra applications running between two tests. Archlinux with gcc 4.5.0. Compiling normally, like: $ g++ test.cpp -o normal Also, -Wall doesn't spit out any warnings, either.

    Read the article

  • C#: Inheritance, Overriding, and Hiding

    - by Rosarch
    I'm having difficulty with an architectural decision for my C# XNA game. The basic entity in the world, such as a tree, zombie, or the player, is represented as a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of at least a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. These three are enough for simple entities, like inanimate trees or rocks. However, as I try to keep the functionality as factored out as possible, the inheritance begins to feel unwieldy. Syntactically, I'm not even sure how best to accomplish my goals. Here is the GameObjectController: public class GameObjectController { protected GameObjectModel model; protected GameObjectView view; public GameObjectController(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager) { this.gameObjectManager = gameObjectManager; model = new GameObjectModel(this); view = new GameObjectView(this); } public GameObjectManager GameObjectManager { get { return gameObjectManager; } } public virtual GameObjectView View { get { return view; } } public virtual GameObjectModel Model { get { return model; } } public virtual void Update(long tick) { } } I want to specify that each subclass of GameObjectController will have accessible at least a GameObjectView and GameObjectModel. If subclasses are fine using those classes, but perhaps are overriding for a more sophisticated Update() method, I don't want them to have to duplicate the code to produce those dependencies. So, the GameObjectController constructor sets those objects up. However, some objects do want to override the model and view. This is where the trouble comes in. Some objects need to fight, so they are CombatantGameObjects: public class CombatantGameObject : GameObjectController { protected new readonly CombatantGameModel model; public new virtual CombatantGameModel Model { get { return model; } } protected readonly CombatEngine combatEngine; public CombatantGameObject(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager, CombatEngine combatEngine) : base(gameObjectManager) { model = new CombatantGameModel(this); this.combatEngine = combatEngine; } public override void Update(long tick) { if (model.Health <= 0) { gameObjectManager.RemoveFromWorld(this); } base.Update(tick); } } Still pretty simple. Is my use of new to hide instance variables correct? Note that I'm assigning CombatantObjectController.model here, even though GameObjectController.Model was already set. And, combatants don't need any special view functionality, so they leave GameObjectController.View alone. Then I get down to the PlayerController, at which a bug is found. public class PlayerController : CombatantGameObject { private readonly IInputReader inputReader; private new readonly PlayerModel model; public new PlayerModel Model { get { return model; } } private float lastInventoryIndexAt; private float lastThrowAt; public PlayerController(GameObjectManager gameObjectManager, IInputReader inputReader, CombatEngine combatEngine) : base(gameObjectManager, combatEngine) { this.inputReader = inputReader; model = new PlayerModel(this); Model.Health = Constants.PLAYER_HEALTH; } public override void Update(long tick) { if (Model.Health <= 0) { gameObjectManager.RemoveFromWorld(this); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { Debug.WriteLine("YOU DEAD SON!!!"); } return; } UpdateFromInput(tick); // .... } } The first time that this line is executed, I get a null reference exception: model.Body.ApplyImpulse(movementImpulse, model.Position); model.Position looks at model.Body, which is null. This is a function that initializes GameObjects before they are deployed into the world: public void Initialize(GameObjectController controller, IDictionary<string, string> data, WorldState worldState) { controller.View.read(data); controller.View.createSpriteAnimations(data, _assets); controller.Model.read(data); SetUpPhysics(controller, worldState, controller.Model.BoundingCircleRadius, Single.Parse(data["x"]), Single.Parse(data["y"]), bool.Parse(data["isBullet"])); } Every object is passed as a GameObjectController. Does that mean that if the object is really a PlayerController, controller.Model will refer to the base's GameObjectModel and not the PlayerController's overriden PlayerObjectModel? In response to rh: This means that now for a PlayerModel p, p.Model is not equivalent to ((CombatantGameObject)p).Model, and also not equivalent to ((GameObjectController)p).Model. That is exactly what I do not want. I want: PlayerController p; p.Model == ((CombatantGameObject)p).Model p.Model == ((GameObjectController)p).Model How can I do this? override?

    Read the article

  • Implementation question involving implementing an interface

    - by Vivin Paliath
    I'm writing a set of collection classes for different types of Trees. I'm doing this as a learning exercise and I'm also hoping it turns out to be something useful. I really want to do this the right way and so I've been reading Effective Java and I've also been looking at the way Joshua Bloch implemented the collection classes by looking at the source. I seem to have a fair idea of what is being done, but I still have a few things to sort out. I have a Node<T> interface and an AbstractNode<T> class that implements the Node interface. I then created a GenericNode<T> (a node that can have 0 to n children, and that is part of an n-ary tree) class that extends AbstractNode<T> and implements Node<T>. This part was easy. Next, I created a Tree<T> interface and an AbstractTree<T> class that implements the Tree<T> interface. After that, I started writing a GenericTree<T> class that extends AbstractTree<T> and implements Tree<T>. This is where I started having problems. As far as the design is concerned, a GenericTree<T> can only consist of nodes of type GenericTreeNode<T>. This includes the root. In my Tree<T> interface I have: public interface Tree<T> { void setRoot(Node<T> root); Node<T> getRoot(); List<Node<T>> postOrder(); ... rest omitted ... } And, AbstractTree<T> implements this interface: public abstract class AbstractTree<T> implements Tree<T> { protected Node<T> root; protected AbstractTree() { } protected AbstractTree(Node<T> root) { this.root = root; } public void setRoot(Node<T> root) { this.root = root; } public Node<T> getRoot() { return this.root; } ... rest omitted ... } In GenericTree<T>, I can have: public GenericTree(Node<T> root) { super(root); } But what this means is that you can create a generic tree using any subtype of Node<T>. You can also set the root of a tree to any subtype of Node<T>. I want to be able to restrict the type of the node to the type of the tree that it can represent. To fix this, I can do this: public GenericTree(GenericNode<T> root) { super(root); } However, setRoot still accepts a parameter of type Node<T>. Which means a user can still create a tree with the wrong type of root node. How do I enforce this constraint? The only way I can think of doing is either: Do an instanceof which limits the check to runtime. I'm not a huge fan of this. Remove setRoot from the interface and have the base class implement this method. This means that it is not part of the contract and anyone who wants to make a new type of tree needs to remember to implement this method. Is there a better way? The second question I have concerns the return type of postOrder which is List<Node<T>>. This means that if a user is operating on a GenericTree<T> object and calls postOrder, he or she receives a list that consists of Node<T> objects. This means when iterating through (using a foreach construct) they would have perform an explicit cast to GenericNode<T> if they want to use methods that are only defined in that class. I don't like having to place this burden on the user. What are my options in this case? I can only think of removing the method from the interface and have the subclass implement this method making sure that it returns a list of appropriate subtype of Node<T>. However, this once again removes it from the contract and it's anyone who wants to create a new type of tree has to remember to implement this method. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Why this method does not use any properties of the object?

    - by Roman
    Here I found this code: import java.awt.*; import javax.swing.*; public class FunWithPanels extends JFrame { public static void main(String[] args) { FunWithPanels frame = new FunWithPanels(); frame.doSomething(); } void doSomething() { Container c = getContentPane(); JPanel p1 = new JPanel(); p1.setLayout(new BorderLayout()); p1.add(new JButton("A"), BorderLayout.NORTH); p1.add(new JButton("B"), BorderLayout.WEST); JPanel p2 = new JPanel(); p2.setLayout(new GridLayout(3, 2)); p2.add(new JButton("F")); p2.add(new JButton("G")); p2.add(new JButton("H")); p2.add(new JButton("I")); p2.add(new JButton("J")); p2.add(new JButton("K")); JPanel p3 = new JPanel(); p3.setLayout(new BoxLayout(p3, BoxLayout.Y_AXIS)); p3.add(new JButton("L")); p3.add(new JButton("M")); p3.add(new JButton("N")); p3.add(new JButton("O")); p3.add(new JButton("P")); c.setLayout(new BorderLayout()); c.add(p1, BorderLayout.CENTER); c.add(p2, BorderLayout.SOUTH); c.add(p3, BorderLayout.EAST); pack(); setVisible(true); } } I do not understand how "doSomething" use the fact that "frame" is an instance of the class JFrame. It is not clear to me because there is no reference to "this" in the code for the method "doSomething".

    Read the article

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

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >