Search Results

Search found 1494 results on 60 pages for 'prototypal inheritance'.

Page 18/60 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

• Objective-C Custom extend

  - by ryanjm.mp

  I have a couple classes that have nearly identical code. Only a string or two is different between them. What I would like to do is to make them from another class that defines those functions and then uses constants or something else to define those strings that are different. I'm not sure if "___" is inheritance or extending or what. That is what I need help with. For example: objectA.m: -(void)helloWorld { NSLog("Hello %@",child.name); } objectBob.m: #define name @"Bob" objectJoe.m #define name @"Joe" (I'm not sure if it's legal to define strings, but this gets the point across) It would be ideal if objectBob.m and objectJoe.m didn't have to even define the methods, just their relationship to objectA.m. Is there any way to do something like this? If all else fails I'll just make objectA.m: -(void)helloWorld:(NSString *name) { NSLog("Hello %@",name); } And have the other files call that function (and just #import objectA.m).

  Read the article

• Override An Existing Property as a Child form of its return type

  - by Jason

  I apologize if that title is confusing. This question may be a result of lack of coffee and/or sleep, but my mind is not working correctly right now. Anyways, I have an inheritance tree like such (I know the architecture isn't ideal): BaseClass GeneralForm : Inherits BaseClass SpecificForm : Inherits GeneralForm And an object like so: MyItem MySpecificItem : Inherits MyItem I have Items As List (Of MyItem) as a property in BaseClass. I would like for SpecificForm to somehow override Items to return type List (Of MySpecificItem). I feel like this is easy to do, but again, my head is spinning and I can't think straight at the moment. Thank you so much in advance.

  Read the article

• Map derived class as an independent one with FNH's Automap

  - by Anton Gogolev

  Hi! Basically, I have an ImageMetadata class and an Image class, which derives from ImageMetadata. Image adds one property: byte[] Content, which actually contains binary data. What I want to do is to map these two classes onto one table, but I absolutely do not need NHibernates' inheritance support to kick in. I want to tailor FNH Automap to produce something like: <class name="ImageMetadata" ...> <property name="Name" ... /> < ... /> <class name="Image" ...> <property name="Name" ... /> <property name="Content" ... /> < ... /> Is this at all possible?

  Read the article

• C# Inherited member variables behaving undexpectedly

  - by Nilbert

  If I have a class like this: class A { public string fe = "A"; } And a class that inherits from it like so: class B : A { public string fe = "B"; } Visual C++ will tell me that B.fe hides A.fe so I should use the new keyword. So I change class B to look like: class B : A { public new string fe = "B"; } And then I have a function that takes an A (but, by virtue of inheritance, will also take a B) like this: class D { public static void blah(A anAObject) { Console.Writeline(A.fe); } } Even when I pass it an instance of a B object, which it will take without question, it will print "A"! Why is this, and how can I make it work how I want without setting the variable in the constructor?

  Read the article

• Make Java parent class not part of the interface

  - by Bart van Heukelom

  (This is a hypothetical question for discussion, I have no actual problem). Say that I'm making an implementation of SortedSet by extending LinkedHashMap: class LinkedHashSortedMapThing extends LinkedHashMap implements SortedSet { ... } Now programmers who use this class may do LinkedHashMap x = new LinkedHashSortedMapThing(); But what if I consider the extending of LinkedHashMap an implementation detail, and do not want it to be a part of the class' contract? If people use the line above, I can no longer freely change this detail without worrying about breaking existing code. Is there any way to prevent this sort of thing, other than favouring composition over inheritance (which is not always possible due to private/protected members)?

  Read the article

• What to return as an iterator when there is no container?

  - by DaClown

  I have an inheritance structure of objects with begin() and end() as pure virtual member functions in the base class. From this objects I'm planning to build a composite structure. This inner objects have std::vector member the begin() and end() get their data from. But in a leaf class there is no vector. Now I try to find a return value for begin() and end() in the leaf classes. What would be a good way to do that? The easiest way would be to have a vector member in the leaf classes with no elements in it to fuel begin() and end(), but this just doesn't feel right.

  Read the article

• Problem accessing base member in derived constructor

  - by LeopardSkinPillBoxHat

  Given the following classes: class Foo { struct BarBC { protected: BarBC(uint32_t aKey) : mKey(aKey) mOtherKey(0) public: const uint32_t mKey; const uint32_t mOtherKey; }; struct Bar : public BarBC { Bar(uint32_t aKey, uint32_t aOtherKey) : BarBC(aKey), mOtherKey(aOtherKey) // Compile error here }; }; I am getting a compilation error at the point indicated: error: class `Foo::Bar' does not have any field named `mOtherKey'. Can anyone explain this? I suspect it's a syntactical problem due to my Bar class being defined within the Foo class, but can't seem to find a way around it. This is simple public inheritance, so mOtherKey should be accessible from the Bar constructor. Right? Or is it something to do with the fact that mOtherKey is const and I have already initialised it to 0 in the BarBC constructor?

  Read the article

• Polymorphic classes in templates

  - by soxarered

  Let's say we have a class hierarchy where we have a generic Animal class, which has several classes directly inherit from it (such as Dog, Cat, Horse, etc..). When using templates on this inheritance hierarchy, is it legal to just use SomeTemplateClass<Animal> and then shove in Dogs and Cats and Horses into this templated object? For example, assume we have a templated Stack class, where we want to host all sorts of animals. Can I simply state Stack<Animal> s; Dog d; s.push(d); Cat c; s.push(c);

  Read the article

• Inheriting from multiple classes in Java (and possibly not using interface)

  - by sheidaei

  So, let's say we have classes A, B and C and I want to inherit from all those classes and have another class called D, it can be done using implements and interfaces in Java. But let's say we don't want to use this simple solution, would you be able to inherit class D from classes A, B and C in any other way in Java? (This question might be related to design patterns, it has been brought up after challenging my colleague at lunch discussing design patterns) I don't think there is any other way to have multiple inheritance in Java other than using multiple interfaces.

  Read the article

• Property hiding and reflection (C#)

  - by tehMick

  Declaring a property in a derived class that matches the name of a property in the base class "hides" it (unless it overrides it with the override keyword). Both the base and derived class properties will be returned by Type.GetProperties() if their types don't match. However, if their types do match, shockingly only the derived class's property is returned. For instance: class A { protected double p; public int P { get { return (int)p; } set { p = value; } } } class B : A { public new int P { get { return (int)p; } set { p = value; } } } class C : B { public new float P { get { return (float)p; } set { p = value; } } } Calling typeof(C).GetProperties() will only return B.P and C.P. Is it possible to call GetProperties() in a way that returns all three? There is almost certainly a way to do it by traversing the inheritance hierarchy, but is there a cleaner solution?

  Read the article

• Subtyping and assignment in Java

  - by Danrex

  Arghh I just know people are going to hate me for asking this... I was just playing around with inheritance and I noticed you can instantiate a subclass object in one of two ways when you write code. So then I wondered if there is any functional difference between these two methods. So in the code below, does this produce the exact same result...a MountainBike object, or is there some difference I should know about? Bicycle is the superclass for this example. If I do Bicycle bike or MountainBike bike I am effectively making a MountainBike due to new MountainBike()? So basically the difference is just semantics at this point? Bicycle bike = new MountainBike(); MountainBike bike = new MountainBike();

  Read the article

• Using custom DataContractResolver in WCF, to transport inheritance trees involving generics

  - by Benson

  I've got a WCF service, in which there are operations which accept a non-generic base class as parameter. [DataContract] class Foo { ... } This base class is in turn inherited, by such generics classes as [DataContract] class Bar : Foo { ... } To get this to work, I'd previously have to register KnownTypes for the Foo class, and have these include all possible variations of Bar (such as Bar, Bar and even Bar). With the DataContractResolver in .NET 4, however, I should be able to build a resolver which properly stores (and restores) the classes. My questions: Are DataContractResolvers typically only used on the service side, and not by the client? If so, how would that be useful in this scenario? Am I wrong to write a DataContractResolver which serializes the fully qualified type name of a generic type, such as Bar1[List1[string, mscorlib], mscorlib] ? Couldn't the same DataContractResolver on the client side restore these types?

  Read the article

• How to expose service contract interfaces with multiple inheritance in WCF service on single endpoin

  - by Vaibhav Gawali

  I have only simple data types in method signature of service (such as int, string). My service class implements single ServiceContract interface say IMathService, and this interface in turn inherits from some other base interface say IAdderService. I want to expose the MathService using interface contract IAdderService as a service on a single endpoint. However some of the clinet's which know about IMathService should be able to access the extra services provided by IMathService on that single endpoint i.e. by just typecasting IAdderService to IMathService. //Interfaces and classes at server side [ServiceContract] public interface IAdderService { [OperationContract] int Add(int num1, int num2); } [ServiceContract] public interface IMathService : IAdderService { [OperationContract] int Substract(int num1, int num2); } public class MathService : IMathService { #region IMathService Members public int Substract(int num1, int num2) { return num1 - num2; } #endregion #region IAdderService Members public int Add(int num1, int num2) { return num1 + num2; } #endregion } //Run WCF service as a singleton instace MathService mathService = new MathService(); ServiceHost host = new ServiceHost(mathService); host.Open(); Server side Configuration: <configuration> <system.serviceModel> <services> <service name="IAdderService" behaviorConfiguration="AdderServiceServiceBehavior"> <endpoint address="net.pipe://localhost/AdderService" binding="netNamedPipeBinding" bindingConfiguration="Binding1" contract="TestApp.IAdderService" /> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexNamedPipeBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange" /> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.pipe://localhost/AdderService"/> </baseAddresses> </host> </service> </services> <bindings> <netNamedPipeBinding> <binding name="Binding1" > <security mode = "None"> </security> </binding > </netNamedPipeBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="AdderServiceServiceBehavior"> <serviceMetadata /> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="True" /> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> Client Side imeplementation: IAdderService adderService = new ChannelFactory<IAdderService>("AdderService").CreateChannel(); int result = adderService.Add(10, 11); IMathService mathService = adderService as IMathService; result = mathService.Substract(100, 9); Client side configuration: <configuration> <system.serviceModel> <client> <endpoint name="AdderService" address="net.pipe://localhost/AdderService" binding="netNamedPipeBinding" bindingConfiguration="Binding1" contract="TestApp.IAdderService" /> </client> <bindings> <netNamedPipeBinding> <binding name="Binding1" maxBufferSize="65536" maxConnections="10"> <security mode = "None"> </security> </binding > </netNamedPipeBinding> </bindings> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> Using above code and configuration I am not able to typecast IAdderService instnace to IMathService, it fails and I get null instance of IMathService at client side. My observation is if server exposes IMathService to client then client can safely typecast to IAdderService and vice versa is also possible. However if server exposes IAdderService then the typecast fails. Is there any solution to this? or am I doing it in a wrong way.

  Read the article

• Inheritance with POCO entities in Entity Framework 4

  - by Juvaly

  Hi All, I have a Consumer class and a BillableConsumer : Consumer class. When trying to do any operation on my "Consumers" set, I get the error message "Object mapping could not be found for Type with identity Models.BillableConsumer. From the CSDL: <EntityType Name="BillableConsumer" BaseType="Models.Consumer"> <Property Type="String" Name="CardExpiratoin" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="CardNumber" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="City" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="Country" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="CVV" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="NameOnCard" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="PostalCode" Nullable="false" /> <Property Type="String" Name="State" /> <Property Type="String" Name="StreetAddress" Nullable="false" /> </EntityType> From the C-S: <EntitySetMapping Name="Consumers"> <EntityTypeMapping TypeName="IsTypeOf(Models.Consumer)"> <MappingFragment StoreEntitySet="consumer"> <ScalarProperty Name="LoginID" ColumnName="LoginID" /> <ScalarProperty Name="FirstName" ColumnName="FirstName" /> <ScalarProperty Name="LastName" ColumnName="LastName" /> </MappingFragment> </EntityTypeMapping> <EntityTypeMapping TypeName="IsTypeOf(Models.BillableConsumer)"> <MappingFragment StoreEntitySet="billinginformation"> <ScalarProperty Name="CardExpiratoin" ColumnName="CardExpiratoin" /> <ScalarProperty Name="CardNumber" ColumnName="CardNumber" /> <ScalarProperty Name="City" ColumnName="City" /> <ScalarProperty Name="Country" ColumnName="Country" /> <ScalarProperty Name="CVV" ColumnName="CVV" /> <ScalarProperty Name="LoginID" ColumnName="LoginID" /> <ScalarProperty Name="NameOnCard" ColumnName="NameOnCard" /> <ScalarProperty Name="PostalCode" ColumnName="PostalCode" /> <ScalarProperty Name="State" ColumnName="State" /> <ScalarProperty Name="StreetAddress" ColumnName="StreetAddress" /> </MappingFragment> </EntityTypeMapping> </EntitySetMapping> Is this because I did not specifically add the BillableConsumer entity to the object set? How do I do that in a POCO scenario? Thanks! UPDATE: I decided to test whether or not POCOs generated with the T4 template would solve the problem and they did. The most annoying part is that when I restored my original classes from SVN to try and figure out how they are different - they worked as well!! Not adding this as an answer because someone else might have an actual explanation...

  Read the article

• Avoid web.config inheritance in child web application using inheritInChildApplications

  - by Blankman

  I am trying to add <location inheritInChildApplications="false"> to my parent web application's web.config but it doesn't seem to be working. My parent's web.config has: <configuration> <configSections> </configSections> // 10 or so custom config sections like log4net, hibernate, <connectionStrings> </connectionStrings> <appSettings> </appSettings> <system.diagnostics> </system.diagnostics> <system.web> <webParts> </webParts> <membership> </membership> <compilation> </compilation> </system.web> <location ..> <system.web> </system.web> </location> <system.webServer> </system.webServer> My child web application is setup as an application in IIS, and is inheriting from the parent's web.config which is causing problems. Where exactly should I place the <location inheritInChildApplications="false"> so it ignores all the various web.config settings?

  Read the article

• WPF: disable inheritance of properties

  - by Maximilian Csuk

  Hi! I would like to use a TabControl as the main navigation in the application I am working on. So I would like to make the font in the headers of the TabItems bigger and also give it another background-color. However, I do not want this to be inherited. For example, if I use this code: <TabControl FontSize="18pt"> <TabItem Header="Tab 1"> <Button>Button 1</Button> </TabItem> </TabControl> The font in the button is also 18pt big. I know that this is normal dependency property behaviour because the property is inherited, but that's not what I want in this case. I would like to change the TabItems without changing anything in the children. Isn't that possible? Because re-setting all children to default values is a PITA. Thanks for your time.

  Read the article

• MVC2 DataAnnotations validation with inheritance

  - by bhiku

  Hi, I have a .NET 2.0 class the properties of which are marked virtual.I need to use the class as a model in a MVC2 application. So, I have created a .NET 3.5 class inheriting from the .NET 2.0 class and added the DataAnnotations attributes to the overriden properties in the new class. A snippet of what I have done is below // .NET 2.0 class public class Customer { private string _firstName = ""; public virtual string FirstName { get { return _firstName; } set { _firstName = value; } } } // .NET 3.5 class public class MVCCustomer : Customer { [Required(ErrorMessage="Firstname is required")] public override string FirstName { get { return base.FirstName; } set { base.FirstName = value; } } } I have used the class as the model for a MVC2 view using the HtmlFor helpers. Serverside validation works correctly but the client side validation does not. Specifically the validation error is not displayed on the page. What am I missing, or is it only possible to do this using buddy classes. Thanks.

  Read the article

• JS: variable inheritance in anonymous functions - scope

  - by tkSimon

  hey guys, someone from doctype sent me here. long story short: var o="before"; x = function() //this needs to be an anonymous function { alert(o); //the variable "o" is from the parent scope }; o="after"; //this chages "o" in the anonymous function x(); //this results in in alert("after"); //which is not the way i want/need it in reality my code is somewhat more complex. my script iterates through many html objects and adds an event listener each element. i do this by declaring an anonymous function for each element and call another function with an ID as argument. that ID is represented by the "o"-variable in this example. after some thinking i understand why it is the way it is, but is there a way to get js to evaluate o as i declare the anonymous function without dealing with the id attribute and fetching my ID from there? my full source code is here: http://pastebin.com/GMieerdw the anonymous function is on line 303

  Read the article

• How to approach ninject container/kernel in inheritance situation

  - by Bas

  I have the following situation: class RuleEngine {} abstract class RuleImplementation {} class RootRule : RuleImplementation {} class Rule1 : RuleImplementation {} class Rule2 : RuleImplementation {} The RuleEngine is injected by Ninject and has a kernel at it's disposal, the role of the RuleEngine is to fire off the root rule, which on it's turn will load all the other rules also using Ninject, but using a different Module and creating a new Kernel. Now my question is, some of the rules require some dependencies which I want to inject using Ninject. What would be the best way to create the kernel for these rules and also still do proper unit testing with it? (the kernel shouldn't become a real pain in my tests) I've been thinking of the following possibilitys: The kernel that I use in the RuleEngine class could be tossed around to RuleImplementation and thus be available for every rule. But tossing around Kernels isn't really something I wish to do. When creating the rules, I could give the kernel (which creates the rules) as a constructor argument for each rule. I could create a method inside the RuleImplementation which creates a kernel and makes it possible for the rules to retrieve the kernel using a get() in the abstract class Whats the convention of passing around/creating kernels? Just create new kernels, or reuse them?

  Read the article

• How do I stop inheritance in xaml?

  - by cfouche

  Hi Let's say I have some Control that has been disabled. It contains a bunch of elements, but I want one of those child elements to remain enabled. Something like this: <ContentControl IsEnabled="False"> <Border> <Button Content="Button" IsEnabled="True"/> </Border> </ContentControl> So in this example, the Button's IsEnabled="True" setting gets overridden by its parent. Is there a way of stopping this from happening? This seems like a strange thing to be doing, but I have a situation where, when a Control is disabled and a user mouses down on it, I still want an event to be triggered. I read in WPF Unleashed that wrapping something in a Frame control, "..isolates the content from the rest of the UI [and] properties that would normally be inherited down the element tree stop when they reach the Frame", but wrapping the Button in the example above in a Frame doesn't work. Am I on the wrong track here?

  Read the article

• C# inheritance XmlSerializer

  - by ikurtz

  greetngs, i have two classes: [Serializable] public class FireGridUnit { public GridUnit FireGridLocation { get; set; } } [Serializable] public class FireResult: FireGridUnit { public bool Hit { get; set; } public bool ShipDestroyed { get; set; } public Ship.ValidShips DestroyedShipType {get; set;} public bool Win { get; set; } } as you see FireResult inherits FireGrdUnit. in my code when i try to use them i get a runtime error: Unable to cast object of type 'NietzscheBattleships.FireGridUnit' to type 'NietzscheBattleships.FireResult'. is this because if i am serializing the class has to be independant ie not be inherited? many thanks.

  Read the article

• web.config inheritance problem

  - by abszero

  Hello everyone, I am having an issue when I try and prevent inhertiance from a parent web.config down to a child specifically related to the node. My parent web.config contains about a dozen appSettings values while my child web.config contains none. Now, I originally began wrapping around only my system.net, web, etc nodes however when I ran my child application I recieved the following error: The configuration section 'appSettings' cannot be read because it is missing a section declaration I really wasn't sure what this meant and a google search didn't yield me any decent results so I attempted to move the location node to also encompass the field in my parent web.config but to no avail. My child web.config is pretty vanilla so I am not sure what the problem is. Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. The child config is completely vanilla except for the addition of an Xml Namespace and a 'clear' in the config sections as follows: <configuration xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/.NetConfiguration/v2.0"> <configSections> <clear /> <sectionGroup name="system.web.extensions" type="System.Web.Configuration.SystemWebExtensionsSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <sectionGroup name="scripting" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <section name="scriptResourceHandler" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingScriptResourceHandlerSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication"/> <sectionGroup name="webServices" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingWebServicesSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <section name="jsonSerialization" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingJsonSerializationSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="Everywhere" /> <section name="profileService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingProfileServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <section name="authenticationService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingAuthenticationServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <section name="roleService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingRoleServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> </configSections> The error in question is thrown at The parent web.config is far from vanilla as it is part of an Umbraco install. Here is the corrosponding section from the parent config <configuration xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/.NetConfiguration/v2.0"> <configSections> <section name="urlrewritingnet" restartOnExternalChanges="true" requirePermission="false" type="UrlRewritingNet.Configuration.UrlRewriteSection, UrlRewritingNet.UrlRewriter" /> <!-- ASPNETAJAX --> <sectionGroup name="system.web.extensions" type="System.Web.Configuration.SystemWebExtensionsSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35"> <sectionGroup name="scripting" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35"> <section name="scriptResourceHandler" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingScriptResourceHandlerSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <sectionGroup name="webServices" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingWebServicesSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35"> <section name="jsonSerialization" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingJsonSerializationSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="Everywhere" /> <section name="profileService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingProfileServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <section name="authenticationService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingAuthenticationServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=1.0.61025.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> <sectionGroup name="applicationSettings" type="System.Configuration.ApplicationSettingsGroup, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <section name="umbraco.presentation.Properties.Settings" type="System.Configuration.ClientSettingsSection, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" requirePermission="false" /> </sectionGroup> </configSections> The next line after the ConfigSections is: <location path="." inheritInChildApplications="false"> AppSettings, CnxStrings, System.Web, Net, WebServer settings </location>

  Read the article

• Selective Inheritance Python

  - by user1682595

  I am making a python program which is using classes, I want one class to only selectively inherit from another e.g: class X(object): def __init__(self): self.hello = 'hello' class Y(object): def __init__(self): self.moo = 'moo' class Z(): def __init__(self, mode): if mode == 'Y': # Class will now Inherit from Y elif mode == 'X': # Class will now Inherit for X How can I do this without making another class?

  Read the article

• Webservice complex types and class inheritance

  - by pygorex1

  Using the following Webservice definition using aClientArgs as a complex type: [System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptService] public class Controller : System.Web.Services.WebService { [WebMethod] public void save_client(aClientArgs client) { // Save client data } } Then defining aClientArgs as a sub-class: public class aArgs { public string id = null; public string name = null; } public class aClientArgs : aArgs { public string address = null; public string website = null; } Returns the following WSDL fragment for the save_client args: <save_client xmlns="http://tempuri.org/"> <client> <address>string</address> <website>string</website> </client> </save_client> When I'm expecting the following: <save_client xmlns="http://tempuri.org/"> <client> <id>string</id> <name>string</name> <address>string</address> <website>string</website> </client> </save_client> So it appears that the .NET WebService is not treating inherited properties as arguments/variables for purposes of a web service. How do I get .NET to also use the properties of the base class?

  Read the article

• Annotate over Multi-table Inheritance in Django

  - by user341584

  I have a base LoggedEvent model and a number of subclass models like follows: class LoggedEvent(models.Model): user = models.ForeignKey(User, blank=True, null=True) timestamp = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) class AuthEvent(LoggedEvent): good = models.BooleanField() username = models.CharField(max_length=12) class LDAPSearchEvent(LoggedEvent): type = models.CharField(max_length=12) query = models.CharField(max_length=24) class PRISearchEvent(LoggedEvent): type = models.CharField(max_length=12) query = models.CharField(max_length=24) Users generate these events as they do the related actions. I am attempting to generate a usage-report of how many of each event-type each user has caused in the last month. I am struggling with Django's ORM and while I am close I am running into a problem. Here is the query code: ef usage(request): # Calculate date range today = datetime.date.today() month_start = datetime.date(year=today.year, month=today.month - 1, day=1) month_end = datetime.date(year=today.year, month=today.month, day=1) - datetime.timedelta(days=1) # Search for how many LDAP events were generated per user, last month baseusage = User.objects.filter(loggedevent__timestamp__gte=month_start, loggedevent__timestamp__lte=month_end) ldapusage = baseusage.exclude(loggedevent__ldapsearchevent__id__lt=1).annotate(count=Count('loggedevent__pk')) authusage = baseusage.exclude(loggedevent__authevent__id__lt=1).annotate(count=Count('loggedevent__pk')) return render_to_response('usage.html', { 'ldapusage' : ldapusage, 'authusage' : authusage, }, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) Both ldapusage and authusage are both a list of users, each user annotated with a .count attribute which is supposed to represent how many particular events that user generated. However in both lists, the .count attributes are the same value. Infact the annotated 'count' is equal to how many events that user generated, regardless of type. So it would seem that my specific authusage = baseusage.exclude(loggedevent__authevent__id__lt=1) isn't excluding by subclass. I have tried id_lt=1, id_isnull=True, and others. Halp.

  Read the article

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