Search Results

Search found 674 results on 27 pages for 'magical getters setters'.

Page 2/27 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Create automatically only getters in Eclipse

    - by lerad
    In Eclipse is it possible to create automatically Getters and Setters for a field. But I have a lot of private fields for which only getters should exist. Is somewhere in Eclipse a "create Getters" Function which does not create setters too? Well, it is not so much work to write getters, but doing it automatically would be nice :) Thank you, lerad

    Read the article

  • Implicit vs explicit getters/setters in AS3, which to use and why?

    - by James
    Since the advent of AS3 I have been working like this: private var loggy:String; public function getLoggy ():String { return loggy; } public function setLoggy ( loggy:String ):void { // checking to make sure loggy's new value is kosher etc... this.loggy = loggy; } and have avoided working like this: private var _loggy:String; public function get loggy ():String { return loggy; } public function set loggy ( loggy:String ):void { // checking to make sure loggy's new value is kosher etc... this.loggy = loggy; } I have avoided using AS3's implicit getters/setters partly so that I can just start typing "get.." and content assist will give me a list of all my getters, and likewise for my setters. I also dislike underscores in my code which turned me off the implicit route. Another reason is that I prefer the feel of this: whateverObject.setLoggy( "loggy's awesome new value!" ); to this: whateverObject.loggy = "loggy's awesome new value!"; I feel that the former better reflects what is actually happening in the code. I am calling functions, not setting values directly. After installing Flash Builder and the great new plugin SourceMate ( which helps to get some of the useful features that FDT is famous into FB ) I realized that when I use SourceMate's "generate getters and setters" feature it automatically sets my code up using the implicit route: private var _loggy:String; public function get loggy ():String { return loggy; } public function set loggy ( loggy:String ):void { // do whatever is needed to check to make sure loggy is an acceptable value this.loggy = loggy; } I figure that these SourceMate people must know what they are doing or they wouldn't be writing workflow enhancement plugins for coding in AS3, so now I am questioning my ways. So my question to you is: Can anyone give me a good reason why I should give up my explicit g/s ways, start using the implicit technique, and embrace those stinky little _underscores for my private vars? Or back me up in my reasons for doing things the way that I do?

    Read the article

  • Are trivial protected getters blatant overkill?

    - by Panzercrisis
    Something I really have not thought about before (AS3 syntax): private var m_obj:Object; protected function get obj():Object { return m_obj; } private var m_str:String; protected function get str():String { return m_str; } At least subclasses won't be able to set m_obj or m_str (though they could still modify m_obj). Is this just blatant overkill? I am not talking about doing this as opposed to making them public. I am talking about doing this instead of just making the variables themselves protected. Like this: protected var m_obj:Object; //more accessible than a private variable with a protected getter protected var m_str:String; //more accessible than a private variable with a protected getter

    Read the article

  • Problem with DataTrigger binding - setters are not being called

    - by aoven
    I have a Command bound to a Button in XAML. When executed, the command changes a property value on the underlying DataContext. I would like the button's Content to reflect the new value of the property. This works*: <Button Command="{x:Static Member=local:MyCommands.TestCommand}" Content="{Binding Path=TestProperty, Mode=OneWay}" /> But this doesn't: <Button Command="{x:Static Member=local:MyCommands.TestCommand}"> <Button.Style> <Style TargetType="{x:Type Button}"> <Style.Triggers> <DataTrigger Binding="{Binding Path=TestProperty, Mode=OneWay}" Value="True"> <DataTrigger.Setters> <Setter Property="Content" Value="Yes"/> </DataTrigger.Setters> </DataTrigger> <DataTrigger Binding="{Binding Path=TestProperty, Mode=OneWay}" Value="False"> <DataTrigger.Setters> <Setter Property="Content" Value="No"/> </DataTrigger.Setters> </DataTrigger> </Style.Triggers> </Style> </Button.Style> </Button> Why is that? * By "works" I mean the Content gets updated whenever I click the button. TIA

    Read the article

  • Magical moving desktop icons

    - by Nathan Taylor
    I have encountered a very strange behavior in Windows 7 that I cannot seem to identify and I have never seen or heard of on any system configuration. Whenever I move my mouse to the left-most edge of my primary display (centered in 3-display setup), my desktop icons magically move away from the cursor (up or down and to the right). It only happens when my desktop has focus and the mouse is positioned on the left, top or bottom edge of the main display. Moving the mouse all the way to the right edge of my right secondary display causes the mouse icons to snap back into their correct position. Ridiculous video of the issue My setup is 3 displays on two display adapters. The main display is running at 2560x1600, connected to the machine via a USB-powered DVI-D to DisplayPort adapter and is driven by an NVIDIA NVS 3100M video card. The secondary displays are running at 1440x900 and 1200x1920 and are driven by integrated Intel HD Graphics (mobile). It seems like some kind of panning behavior, but it's obviously not working as expected. I have updated all of my drivers, but no change. It's probably worth noting that the desktop icons are set to auto-arrange.

    Read the article

  • Can Eclipse generate method-chaining setters

    - by Chris R
    I'd like to generate method-chaining setters (setters that return the object being set), like so: public MyObject setField (Object value) { this.field = value; return this; } This makes it easier to do one-liner instantiations, which I find easier to read: myMethod (new MyObject ().setField (someValue).setOtherField (someOtherValue)); Can Eclipse's templates be modified to do this? I've changed the content to include return this; but the signature is not changed.

    Read the article

  • Getters and Setters are bad OO design?

    - by Dan
    Getters and Setters are bad Briefly reading over the above article I find that getters and setters are bad OO design and should be avoided as they go against Encapsulation and Data Hiding. As this is the case how can it be avoided when creating objects and how can one model objects to take this into account. In cases where a getter or setter is required what other alternatives can be used? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Enforcing a coding template in the getters of a class in java

    - by Yoav Schwartz
    Hello, I want to make sure all getters of the classes in a certain package follow a given template. For example, all getters must be of the form: XXX getYYY(){ classLock.lock(); return YYY; finally{ classLock.unlock(); } } Basically, I want that my project will not compile/run unless all getters are of that form. What is the best way to do that? I would prefer a solution that can be used as an Eclipse plugin. Thanks, Yoav

    Read the article

  • How to make Spring accept non-void setters?

    - by Chris
    Hi, I have an API which I am turning into an internal DSL. As such, most methods in my PoJos return a reference to this so that I can chain methods together declaratively as such (syntactic sugar). myComponent .setID("MyId") .setProperty("One","1") .setProperty("Two","2") .setAssociation(anotherComponent) .execute(); My API does not depend on Spring but I wish to make it 'Spring-Friendly' by being PoJo friendly with zero argument constructors, getters and setters. The problem is that Spring seems to not detect my setter methods when I have a non-void return type. The return type of this is very convenient when chaining together my commands so I don't want to destroy my programmatic API just be to compatible with Spring injection. Is there a setting in Spring to allow me to use non-void setters? Chris

    Read the article

  • Getters and Setters: Code smell, Necessary Evil, or Can't Live Without Them [closed]

    - by Avery Payne
    Possible Duplicate: Allen Holub wrote “You should never use get/set functions”, is he correct? Is there a good, no, a very good reason, to go through all the trouble of using getters and setters for object-oriented languages? What's wrong with just using a direct reference to a property or method? Is there some kind of "semantical coverup" that people don't want to talk about in polite company? Was I just too tired and fell asleep when someone walked out and said "Thou Shalt Write Copious Amounts of Code to Obtain Getters and Setters"? Follow-up after a year: It seems to be a common occurrence with Java, less so with Python. I'm beginning to wonder if this is more of a cultural phenomena (related to the limitations of the language) rather than "sage advice". The -1 question score is complete for-the-lulz as far as I am concerned. It's interesting that there are specific questions that are downvoted, not because they are "bad questions", but rather, because they hit someone's raw nerve.

    Read the article

  • Correct OOP design without getters?

    - by kane77
    I recently read that getters/setters are evil and I have to say it makes sense, yet when I started learning OOP one of the first things I learned was "Encapsulate your fields" so I learned to create class give it some fields, create getters, setters for them and create constructor where I initialize these fields. And every time some other class needs to manipulate this object (or for instance display it) I pass it the object and it manipulate it using getters/setters. I can see problems with this approach. But how to do it right? For instance displaying/rendering object that is "data" class - let's say Person, that has name and date of birth. Should the class have method for displaying the object where some Renderer would be passed as an argument? Wouldn't that violate principle that class should have only one purpose (in this case store state) so it should not care about presentation of this object. Can you suggest some good resources where best practices in OOP design are presented? I'm planning to start a project in my spare time and I want it to be my learning project in correct OOP design..

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Custom Error Pages with Magical Unicorn

    - by FLClover
    my question is regarding Pure.Kromes answer to this post. I tried implementing my pages' custom error messages using his method, yet there are some problems I can't quite explain. a) When I provoke a 404 Error by entering in invalid URL such as localhost:3001/NonexistantPage, it defaults to the ServerError() Action of my error controller even though it should go to NotFound(). Here is my ErrorController: public class ErrorController : Controller { public ActionResult NotFound() { Response.TrySkipIisCustomErrors = true; Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.NotFound; var viewModel = new ErrorViewModel() { ServerException = Server.GetLastError(), HTTPStatusCode = Response.StatusCode }; return View(viewModel); } public ActionResult ServerError() { Response.TrySkipIisCustomErrors = true; Response.StatusCode = (int)HttpStatusCode.InternalServerError; var viewModel = new ErrorViewModel() { ServerException = Server.GetLastError(), HTTPStatusCode = Response.StatusCode }; return View(viewModel); } } My error routes in Global.asax.cs: routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.IgnoreRoute("{*favicon}", new { favicon = @"(.*/)?favicon.ico(/.*)?" }); routes.MapRoute( name: "Error - 404", url: "NotFound", defaults: new { controller = "Error", action = "NotFound" } ); routes.MapRoute( name: "Error - 500", url: "ServerError", defaults: new { controller = "Error", action = "ServerError" } ); And my web.config settings: <system.web> <customErrors mode="On" redirectMode="ResponseRewrite" defaultRedirect="/ServerError"> <error statusCode="404" redirect="/NotFound" /> </customErrors> ... </system.web> <system.webServer> <httpErrors errorMode="Custom" existingResponse="Replace"> <remove statusCode="404" subStatusCode="-1" /> <error statusCode="404" path="/NotFound" responseMode="ExecuteURL" /> <remove statusCode="500" subStatusCode="-1" /> <error statusCode="500" path="/ServerError" responseMode="ExecuteURL" /> </httpErrors> ... The Error views are located in /Views/Error/ as NotFound.cshtml and ServerError.cshtml. b) One funny thing is, When a server error occurs, it does in fact display the Server Error view I defined, however it also outputs a default error message as well saying that the Error page could not be found. Here's how it looks like: Do you have any advice how I could fix these two problems? I really like Pure.Kromes approach to implementing these error messages, but if there are better ways of achieving this don't hestitate to tell me. Thanks! *EDIT : * I can directly navigate to my views through the ErrorController by accessing /Error/NotFound or Error/ServerError. The views themselves only contain some text, no markup or anything. As I said, it actually works in some way, just not the way I intended it to work. There seems to be an issue with the redirect in the web.config, but I haven't been able to figure it out.

    Read the article

  • MATLAB Magical Mystery timing behavior

    - by Jacob Lyles
    I am experiencing some very odd timing behavior from a function I wrote. If I wrap my function inside another empty container function, it gets a 3x speedup. > tic; foo(args); toc time elapsed: ~140 seconds >tic; bar(args); toc time elapsed: ~35 seconds Here's the kicker - the definition of bar(): define bar(args) foo(args) end Is there some sort of optimization that gets triggered in MATLAB for nested function calls? Should I be adding a dummy function to every function that I write?

    Read the article

  • Solving the magical footer issue

    - by MasterLee
    If you have a quick look at this website that I am designing: http://miladalami.com The blackline seen in the footer is the one that I want to fix. Is there anyway that I can put that footer at the bottom of the content (wrapper) of the page? I have not done any webdesigning since the golden days of tables so CSS is quite new to me. Anyone that could assist this old man? Please be specific in any reply as I am new to CSS styling...

    Read the article

  • Why are getters prefixed with the word "get"?

    - by Joey
    Generally speaking, creating a fluid API is something that makes all programmers happy; Both for the creators who write the interface, and the consumers who program against it. Looking beyond conventions, why is it that we prefix all our getters with the word "get". Omitting it usually results in a more fluid, easy to read set of instructions, which ultimately leads to happiness (however small or passive). Consider this very simple example. (pseudo code) Conventional: person = new Person("Joey") person.getName().toLower().print() Alternative: person = new Person("Joey") person.name().toLower().print() Of course this only applies to languages where getters/setters are the norm, but is not directed at any specific language. Were these conventions developed around technical limitations (disambiguation), or simply through the pursuit of a more explicit, intentional feeling type of interface, or perhaps this is just a case of trickle a down norm. What are your thoughts? And how would simple changes to these conventions impact your happiness / daily attitudes towards your craft (however minimal). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • "Default approach" when creating a class from scratch: getters for everything, or limited access?

    - by Prog
    Until recently I always had getters (and sometimes setters but not always) for all the fields in my class. It was my 'default': very automatic and I never doubted it. However recently some discussions on this site made me realize maybe it's not the best approach. When you create a class, you often don't know exactly how it's going to be used in the future by other classes. So in that sense, it's good to have getters and setter for all of the fields in the class. So other classes could use it in the future any way they want. Allowing this flexibility doesn't require you to over engineer anything, only to provide getters. However some would say it's better to limit the access to a class, and only allow access to certain fields, while other fields stay completely private. What is your 'default' approach when building a class from scratch? Do you make getters for all the fields? Or do you always choose selectively which fields to expose through a getter and which to keep completely private?

    Read the article

  • Responding to setters

    - by Simon Cave
    What is the best way to respond to data changes when property setters are called. For example, if I have a property called data, how can I react when [object setData:newData] is called and still use the synthesised setter. Instinctively, I would override the synthesised setter like so: - (void)setData:(DataObject *)newData { // defer to synthesised setter [super setData:newData]; // react to new data ... } ...but of course this doesn't make sense - I can't use super like this. So what is the best way to handle this situation? Should I be using KVO? Or something else?

    Read the article

  • Auto-implemented getters and setters vs. public fields

    - by tclem
    I see a lot of example code for C# classes that does this: public class Point { public int x { get; set; } public int y { get; set; } } Or, in older code, the same with an explicit private backing value and without the new auto-implemented properties: public class Point { private int _x; private int _y; public int x { get { return _x; } set { _x = value; } } public int y { get { return _y; } set { _y = value; } } } My question is why. Is there any functional difference between doing the above and just making these members public fields, like below? public class Point { public int x; public int y; } To be clear, I understand the value of getters and setters when you need to do some translation of the underlying data. But in cases where you're just passing the values through, it seems needlessly verbose.

    Read the article

  • Convert Line breaks to html break for all field getters in Symfony project

    - by Ben
    I am working on a Symfony project and I currently have this: <?php echo preg_replace('/\n/','<br />', $review->getComments()); ?> and would very much like to be able to make all getters add html line breaks so i don't have to pepper my code with preg_replace. the $object-getFieldname methods are work automatically so I am looking to extend this somewhere to globally add a new method. What is the best approach here?

    Read the article

  • Which order to define getters and setters in? [closed]

    - by N.N.
    Is there a best practice for the order to define getters and setters in? There seems to be two practices: getter/setter pairs first getters, then setters (or the other way around) To illuminate the difference here is a Java example of getter/setter pairs: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } And here is a Java example of first getters, then setters: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } I think the latter type of ordering is clearer both in code and in class diagrams but I do not know if that is enough to rule out the other type of ordering.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >