Search Results

Search found 3838 results on 154 pages for 'abstract factory'.

Page 20/154 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • Factory pattern vs ease-of-use?

    - by Curtis White
    Background, I am extending the ASP.NET Membership with custom classes and extra tables. The ASP.NET MembershipUser has a protected constructor and a public method to read the data from the database. I have extended the database structure with custom tables and associated classes. Instead of using a static method to create a new member, as in the original API: I allow the code to instantiate a simple object and fill the data because there are several entities. Original Pattern #1 Protected constructor > static CreateUser(string mydata, string, mydata, ...) > User.Data = mydata; > User.Update() My Preferred Pattern #2 Public constructor > newUser = new MembershipUser(); > newUser.data = ... > newUser.ComplextObject.Data = ... > newUser.Insert() > newUser.Load(string key) I find pattern #2 to be easier and more natural to use. But method #1 is more atomic and ensured to contain proper data. I'd like to hear any opinions on pros/cons. The problem in my mind is that I prefer a simple CRUD/object but I am, also, trying to utilize the underlying API. These methods do not match completely. For example, the API has methods, like UnlockUser() and a readonly property for the IsLockedOut

    Read the article

  • Using a custom form in a modelformset factory?

    - by jamida
    I'd like to be able to use a customized form in a modelformset_factory. For example: models.py class Author(models.Model): name = models.CharField() address = models.CharField() class AuthorForm(ModelForm): class Meta: model = Author views.py def test_render(request): myModelFormset = modelformset_factory(Author) items = Author.objects.all() formsetInstance = myModelFormset(queryset = items) return render_to_response('template',locals()) The above code works just fine, but note I'm NOT using AuthorForm. The question is how can I get the modelformset_factory to use the AuthorForm (which I plan to customize later) instead of making a default Author form?

    Read the article

  • Designing a fluent Javascript interface to abstract away the asynchronous nature of AJAX

    - by Anurag
    How would I design an API to hide the asynchronous nature of AJAX and HTTP requests, or basically delay it to provide a fluid interface. To show an example from Twitter's new Anywhere API: // get @ded's first 20 statuses, filter only the tweets that // mention photography, and render each into an HTML element T.User.find('ded').timeline().first(20).filter(filterer).each(function(status) { $('div#tweets').append('<p>' + status.text + '</p>'); }); function filterer(status) { return status.text.match(/photography/); } vs this (asynchronous nature of each call is clearly visible) T.User.find('ded', function(user) { user.timeline(function(statuses) { statuses.first(20).filter(filterer).each(function(status) { $('div#tweets').append('<p>' + status.text + '</p>'); }); }); }); It finds the user, gets their tweet timeline, filters only the first 20 tweets, applies a custom filter, and ultimately uses the callback function to process each tweet. I am guessing that a well designed API like this should work like a query builder (think ORMs) where each function call builds the query (HTTP URL in this case), until it hits a looping function such as each/map/etc., the HTTP call is made and the passed in function becomes the callback. An easy development route would be to make each AJAX call synchronous, but that's probably not the best solution. I am interested in figuring out a way to make it asynchronous, and still hide the asynchronous nature of AJAX.

    Read the article

  • MEF part unable to import Autofac autogenerated factory

    - by Michael Wagner
    This is a (to me) pretty weird problem, because it was already running perfectly but went completely south after some unrelated changes. I've got a Repository which imports in its constructor a list of IExtensions via Autofacs MEF integration. One of these extensions contains a backreference to the Repository as Lazy(Of IRepository) (lazy because of the circular reference that would occur). But as soon as I try to use the repository, Autofac throws a ComponentNotRegisteredException with the message "The requested service 'ContractName=Assembly.IRepository()' has not been registered." That is, however, not really correct, because when I break right after the container-build and explore the list of services, it's there - Exported() and with the correct ContractName. I'd appreciate any help on this... Michael

    Read the article

  • Abstract out repeated code

    - by CookieMonster
    The code in this event is repeated exactly in two other event handlers. How do I put the repeated code into a method and call that method from the event handlers so I only have to maintain it in one place? I'm not sure how to pass the event args to the calling method. protected void gvDocAssoc_RowDataBound(object sender, GridViewRowEventArgs e) { if (e.Row.RowType == DataControlRowType.DataRow) { if ((Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "DETAIL_TYPE_DESC")) == "Transcript") && (Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "INSTITUTION_CODE")) == "")) { e.Row.BackColor = System.Drawing.Color.Red; } if ((Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "DETAIL_TYPE_DESC")) == "Certified Diploma") && (Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "INSTITUTION_CODE")) == "")) { e.Row.BackColor = System.Drawing.Color.Red; } if ((Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "DOC_TYPE_DESC")) == "Post Graduate conditions") && (Convert.ToString(DataBinder.Eval(e.Row.DataItem, "INSTITUTION_CODE")) == "")) { e.Row.BackColor = System.Drawing.Color.Red; } } }

    Read the article

  • Using Doctrine to abstract CRUD operations

    - by TomWilsonFL
    This has bothered me for quite a while, but now it is necessity that I find the answer. We are working on quite a large project using CodeIgniter plus Doctrine. Our application has a front end and also an admin area for the company to check/change/delete data. When we designed the front end, we simply consumed most of the Doctrine code right in the controller: //In semi-pseudocode function register() { $data = get_post_data(); if (count($data) && isValid($data)) { $U = new User(); $U->fromArray($data); $U->save(); $C = new Customer(); $C->fromArray($data); $C->user_id = $U->id; $C->save(); redirect_to_next_step(); } } Obviously when we went to do the admin views code duplication began and considering we were in a "get it DONE" mode so it now stinks with code bloat. I have moved a lot of functionality (business logic) into the model using model methods, but the basic CRUD does not fit there. I was going to attempt to place the CRUD into static methods, i.e. Customer::save($array) [would perform both insert and update depending on if prikey is present in array], Customer::delete($id), Customer::getObj($id = false) [if false, get all data]. This is going to become painful though for 32 model objects (and growing). Also, at times models need to interact (as the interaction above between user data and customer data), which can't be done in a static method without breaking encapsulation. I envision adding another layer to this (exposing web services), so knowing there are going to be 3 "controllers" at some point I need to encapsulate this CRUD somewhere (obviously), but are static methods the way to go, or is there another road? Your input is much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Generic Abstract Singleton with Custom Constructor in C#

    - by Heka
    I want to write a generic singleton with an external constructor. In other words the constructor can be modified. I have 2 designs in my mind but I don't know whether they are practical or not. First one is to enforce derived class' constructor to be non-public but I do not know if there is a way of it? Second one is to use a delegate and call it inside the constructor? It isn't necessarily to be a constructor. The reason I chose custom constructor is doing some custom initializations. Any suggestions would be appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • Factory vs instance constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • Bridge or Factory and How

    - by Chris
    I'm trying to learn patterns and I've got a job that is screaming for a pattern, I just know it but I can't figure it out. I know the filter type is something that can be abstracted and possibly bridged. I'M NOT LOOKING FOR A CODE REWRITE JUST SUGGESTIONS. I'm not looking for someone to do my job. I would like to know how patterns could be applied to this example. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Data; using System.IO; using System.Xml; using System.Text.RegularExpressions; namespace CopyTool { class CopyJob { public enum FilterType { TextFilter, RegExFilter, NoFilter } public FilterType JobFilterType { get; set; } private string _jobName; public string JobName { get { return _jobName; } set { _jobName = value; } } private int currentIndex; public int CurrentIndex { get { return currentIndex; } } private DataSet ds; public int MaxJobs { get { return ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.Count; } } private string _filter; public string Filter { get { return _filter; } set { _filter = value; } } private string _fromFolder; public string FromFolder { get { return _fromFolder; } set { if (Directory.Exists(value)) { _fromFolder = value; } else { throw new DirectoryNotFoundException(String.Format("Folder not found: {0}", value)); } } } private List<string> _toFolders; public List<string> ToFolders { get { return _toFolders; } } public CopyJob() { Initialize(); } private void Initialize() { if (ds == null) { ds = new DataSet(); } ds.ReadXml(Properties.Settings.Default.ConfigLocation); LoadValues(0); } public void Execute() { ExecuteJob(FromFolder, _toFolders, Filter, JobFilterType); } public void ExecuteAll() { string OrigPath; List<string> DestPaths; string FilterText; FilterType FilterWay; foreach (DataRow rw in ds.Tables["Job"].Rows) { OrigPath = rw["FromFolder"].ToString(); FilterText = rw["FilterText"].ToString(); switch (rw["FilterType"].ToString()) { case "TextFilter": FilterWay = FilterType.TextFilter; break; case "RegExFilter": FilterWay = FilterType.RegExFilter; break; default: FilterWay = FilterType.NoFilter; break; } DestPaths = new List<string>(); foreach (DataRow crw in rw.GetChildRows("Job_ToFolder")) { DestPaths.Add(crw["FolderPath"].ToString()); } ExecuteJob(OrigPath, DestPaths, FilterText, FilterWay); } } private void ExecuteJob(string OrigPath, List<string> DestPaths, string FilterText, FilterType FilterWay) { FileInfo[] files; switch (FilterWay) { case FilterType.RegExFilter: files = GetFilesByRegEx(new Regex(FilterText), OrigPath); break; case FilterType.TextFilter: files = GetFilesByFilter(FilterText, OrigPath); break; default: files = new DirectoryInfo(OrigPath).GetFiles(); break; } foreach (string fld in DestPaths) { CopyFiles(files, fld); } } public void MoveToJob(int RecordNumber) { Save(); LoadValues(RecordNumber - 1); } public void AddToFolder(string folderPath) { if (Directory.Exists(folderPath)) { _toFolders.Add(folderPath); } else { throw new DirectoryNotFoundException(String.Format("Folder not found: {0}", folderPath)); } } public void DeleteToFolder(int index) { _toFolders.RemoveAt(index); } public void Save() { DataRow rw = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows[currentIndex]; rw["JobName"] = _jobName; rw["FromFolder"] = _fromFolder; rw["FilterText"] = _filter; switch (JobFilterType) { case FilterType.RegExFilter: rw["FilterType"] = "RegExFilter"; break; case FilterType.TextFilter: rw["FilterType"] = "TextFilter"; break; default: rw["FilterType"] = "NoFilter"; break; } DataRow[] ToFolderRows = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows[currentIndex].GetChildRows("Job_ToFolder"); for (int i = 0; i <= ToFolderRows.GetUpperBound(0); i++) { ToFolderRows[i].Delete(); } foreach (string fld in _toFolders) { DataRow ToFolderRow = ds.Tables["ToFolder"].NewRow(); ToFolderRow["JobId"] = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows[currentIndex]["JobId"]; ToFolderRow["Job_Id"] = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows[currentIndex]["Job_Id"]; ToFolderRow["FolderPath"] = fld; ds.Tables["ToFolder"].Rows.Add(ToFolderRow); } } public void Delete() { ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.RemoveAt(currentIndex); LoadValues(currentIndex++); } public void MoveNext() { Save(); currentIndex++; LoadValues(currentIndex); } public void MovePrevious() { Save(); currentIndex--; LoadValues(currentIndex); } public void MoveFirst() { Save(); LoadValues(0); } public void MoveLast() { Save(); LoadValues(ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.Count - 1); } public void CreateNew() { Save(); int MaxJobId = 0; Int32.TryParse(ds.Tables["Job"].Compute("Max(JobId)", "").ToString(), out MaxJobId); DataRow rw = ds.Tables["Job"].NewRow(); rw["JobId"] = MaxJobId + 1; ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.Add(rw); LoadValues(ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.IndexOf(rw)); } public void Commit() { Save(); ds.WriteXml(Properties.Settings.Default.ConfigLocation); } private void LoadValues(int index) { if (index > ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.Count - 1) { currentIndex = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows.Count - 1; } else if (index < 0) { currentIndex = 0; } else { currentIndex = index; } DataRow rw = ds.Tables["Job"].Rows[currentIndex]; _jobName = rw["JobName"].ToString(); _fromFolder = rw["FromFolder"].ToString(); _filter = rw["FilterText"].ToString(); switch (rw["FilterType"].ToString()) { case "TextFilter": JobFilterType = FilterType.TextFilter; break; case "RegExFilter": JobFilterType = FilterType.RegExFilter; break; default: JobFilterType = FilterType.NoFilter; break; } if (_toFolders == null) _toFolders = new List<string>(); _toFolders.Clear(); foreach (DataRow crw in rw.GetChildRows("Job_ToFolder")) { AddToFolder(crw["FolderPath"].ToString()); } } private static FileInfo[] GetFilesByRegEx(Regex rgx, string locPath) { DirectoryInfo d = new DirectoryInfo(locPath); FileInfo[] fullFileList = d.GetFiles(); List<FileInfo> filteredList = new List<FileInfo>(); foreach (FileInfo fi in fullFileList) { if (rgx.IsMatch(fi.Name)) { filteredList.Add(fi); } } return filteredList.ToArray(); } private static FileInfo[] GetFilesByFilter(string filter, string locPath) { DirectoryInfo d = new DirectoryInfo(locPath); FileInfo[] fi = d.GetFiles(filter); return fi; } private void CopyFiles(FileInfo[] files, string destPath) { foreach (FileInfo fi in files) { bool success = false; int i = 0; string copyToName = fi.Name; string copyToExt = fi.Extension; string copyToNameWithoutExt = Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(fi.FullName); while (!success && i < 100) { i++; try { if (File.Exists(Path.Combine(destPath, copyToName))) throw new CopyFileExistsException(); File.Copy(fi.FullName, Path.Combine(destPath, copyToName)); success = true; } catch (CopyFileExistsException ex) { copyToName = String.Format("{0} ({1}){2}", copyToNameWithoutExt, i, copyToExt); } } } } } public class CopyFileExistsException : Exception { public string Message; } }

    Read the article

  • Castle Windsor Weak Typed Factory

    - by JeffN825
    In a very very limited number of scenarios, I need to go from an unknown Type (at compile time) to an instance of the object registered for that type. For the most part, I use typed factories and I know the type I want to resolve at compile time...so I inject a Func<IMyType> into a constructor ...but in these limited number of scenarios, in order to avoid a direct call to the container (and thus having to reference Windsor from the library, which is an anti-pattern I'd like to avoid), I need to inject a Func<Type,object>...which I want to internally container.Resolve(type) for the Type parameter of the Func. Does anyone have some suggestions on the easiest/most straightforward way of setting this up? I tried the following, but with this setup, I end up bypassing the regular TypedFactoryFacility altogether which is definitely not what I want: Kernel.Register(Component.For(typeof (Func<Type, object>)).LifeStyle.Singleton.UsingFactoryMethod( (kernel, componentModel, creationContext) => kernel.Resolve(/* not sure what to put here... */))); Thanks in advance for any assistance.

    Read the article

  • C++ abstract class template + type-specific subclass = trouble with linker

    - by user333279
    Hi there, The project in question is about different endpoints communicating with each other. An endpoint sends events (beyond the scope of the current problem) and can process incoming events. Each event is represented in a generic object as follows: #pragma interface ... // some includes template<typename T> class Event { public: Event(int senderId, Type type, T payload); // Type is an enum Event(int senderId, Type type, int priority, T payload); virtual ~Event(); virtual int getSenderId(); virtual int getPriority(); virtual T getPayload(); void setPriority(const int priority); protected: const int senderId; const Type type; const T payload; int priority; }; It has its implementing class with #pragma implementation tag. An endpoint is defined as follows: #pragma interface #include "Event.h" template<typename T> class AbstractEndPoint { public: AbstractEndPoint(int id); virtual ~AbstractEndPoint(); virtual int getId(); virtual void processEvent(Event<T> event) = 0; protected: const int id; }; It has its implementing class too, but only the constructor, destructor and getId() are defined. The idea is to create concrete endpoints for each different payload type. Therefore I have different payload objects and specific event classes for each type, e.g. Event<TelegramFormatA>, Event<TelegramFormatB> and ConcreteEndPoint for TelegramFormatA, ConcreteEndPoint for TelegramFormatB respectively. The latter classes are defined as class ConcreteEndPoint : AbstractEndPoint<TelegramFormatA> { ... } I'm using g++ 4.4.3 and ld 2.19. Everything compiles nicely, but the linker complaints about undefined references to type-specific event classes, like Event<TelegramFormatA>::Event(....) . I tried explicit instantiation using template class AbstractEndPoint<TelegramFormatA>; but couldn't get past the aforementioned linker errors. Any ideas would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Identifying a class which is extending an abstract class

    - by Simon A. Eugster
    Good Evening, I'm doing a major refactoring of http://wiki2xhtml.sourceforge.net/ to finally get better overview and maintainability. (I started the project when I decided to start programming, so – you get it, right? ;)) At the moment I wonder how to solve the problem I'll describe now: Every file will be put through several parsers (like one for links, one for tables, one for images, etc.): public class WikiLinks extends WikiTask { ... } public class WikiTables extends WikiTask { ... } The files will then be parsed about this way: public void parse() { if (!parse) return; WikiTask task = new WikiLinks(); do { task.parse(this); } while ((task = task.nextTask()) != null); } Sometimes I may want to use no parser at all (for files that only need to be copied), or only a chosen one (e.g. for testing purposes). So before running task.parse() I need to check whether this certain parser is actually necessary/desired. (Perhaps via Blacklist or Whitelist.) What would you suggest for comparing? An ID for each WikiTask (how to do?)? Comparing the task Object itself against a new instance of a WikiTask (overhead)?

    Read the article

  • An RMIPRoxyFactoryBean factory in Spring?

    - by Robert Munteanu
    I'm currently using a Spring RmiProxyFactoryBean to access remote services. Since requirements have changed, I need to specify at runtime a different host - there can be many of them - , but the remoteServiceInterface and the non-host components of the remoteServiceUrl remain the same. Conceptually speaking, I'd see a bean definition similar to: <bean class="org.springframework.remoting.rmi.RmiProxyFactoryBeanFactory"> <property name="serviceInterface" value="xxx"/> <property name="serviceUrl" value="rmi://#{HOST}:1099/ServiceUrl"/> </bean> which exposes a Object getServiceFor(String hostName); Is there such a service available with Spring? Alternatively, do you see another way of doing this? Please note that the host list will not be known at compile or startup time, so I can't generate it in the xml file.

    Read the article

  • Abstract over X

    - by Bruno Bieth
    Sorry for this english related question but I only came across that expression in the context of IT. What does abstracting over something mean ? For example abstracting over objects or abstracting over classes. Thanks

    Read the article

  • [[alloc] init] as a factory method

    - by iter
    I want to initialize an instance of one of the subclasses of a superclass depending on the arguments to init: [[Vehicle alloc] initWithItinerary: shortWay]; // returns a bicycle [[Vehicle alloc] initWithItinerary: longWay]; // returns a car I can't find examples of code like this. I wonder if this is not idiomatic in Objective C, or I simply am not looking in the right places.

    Read the article

  • Compiler error when using abstract types

    - by Dylan
    I'm trying to implement a "protocol helper" trait that is responsible for matching up Prompts and Responses. The eventual goal is to have an object that defines the various Prompt and Response classes as subclasses of a sealed trait, then have a class that mixes in the ProtocolSupport trait for that Protocol object. The problem is that my current approach won't compile, even though I'm fairly sure it should. Here's a distilled version of what I've got: trait Protocol { type Response type Prompt <: BasePrompt trait BasePrompt { type Data def validate(response: Response): Validated[Data] } } trait ProtocolSupport[P <: Protocol] { def foo(prompt: P#Prompt, response: P#Response) = { // compiler error prompt.validate(response) } } The compiler doesn't like the response as an argument to prompt.validate: [error] found : response.type (with underlying type P#Response) [error] required: _4.Response where val _4: P [error] prompt.validate(response) [error] ^ This isn't very helpful.. it seems to say that it wants a P.Response but that's exactly what I'm giving it, so what's the problem?

    Read the article

  • Best design for generating code from an AST?

    - by Sam Washburn
    I'm working on a pretty complex DSL that I want to compile down into a few high level languages. The whole process has been a learning experience. The compiler is written in java. I was wondering if anyone knew a best practice for the design of the code generator portion. I currently have everything parsed into an abstract syntax tree. I was thinking of using a template system, but I haven't researched that direction too far yet as I would like to hear some wisdom first from stack overflow. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC based CMS - dynamic generation of form helpers

    - by user252160
    I am working on an ASP.NET MVC based CMS that presents a rather extreme case. The system must allow the user to add custom content types based on different fields, and for every field, one can add options and validations. The thing is that everything is stored in a complex DB and extracted at runtime using LINQ. I am pretty fresh with ASPNET MVC so the following dilemma came to mind How should I make the content creation view so that form helpers are not predefined int he view code but are loaded based on the type of the field ? Do I have to create a factory class that checks the value of the type property of the field, and then returns a helper based on that or there's a better way to do it. This one seems pretty rigid to me , because anytime I make a change in the Fieldtypes table, I will have to make sure to create a check for that new type too.

    Read the article

  • How to generate tests with different names in testng, java?

    - by Ula Karzelek
    I'm using testng to run selenium based tests in java. I have a bunch of repeated tests. Generally they do all the same except of test name and one parameter. I want to automate generation of it. I was thinking about using factory. Is there a way to generate tests with different name? What would be the best approach to this? As for now I have something like below and I want to create 10 tests like LinkOfInterestIsActiveAfterClick @Test(dependsOnGroups="loggedin") public class SmokeTest extends BrowserStartingStoping{ public void LinkOfInterestIsActiveAfterClick(){ String link = "link_of_interest"; browser.click("*",link); Assert.assertTrue(browser.isLinkActive(link)); } } My xml suite is auto-generated from java code. test names are crucial for logging which link is active, and which one is not.

    Read the article

  • django modeling

    - by SledgehammerPL
    Concept: Drinks are made of components. E.g. 10ml of Vodka. In some receipt the component is very particular (10ml of Finlandia Vodka), some not (10 ml of ANY Vodka). I wonder how to model a component to solve this problem - on stock I have particular product, which can satisfy more requirements. The model for now is: class Receipt(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=128) (...) components = models.ManyToManyField(Product, through='ReceiptComponent') def __unicode__(self): return self.name class ReceiptComponent(models.Model): product = models.ForeignKey(Product) receipt = models.ForeignKey(Receipt) quantity = models.FloatField(max_length=9) unit = models.ForeignKey(Unit) class Admin: pass def __unicode__(self): return unicode(self.quantity!=0 and self.quantity or '') + ' ' + unicode(self.unit) + ' ' + self.product.genitive class Product(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length = 128) (...) class Admin: pass def __unicode__(self): return self.name class Stock(Store): products = models.ManyToManyField(Product) class Admin: pass def __unicode__(self): return self.name I think about making some table which joins real product (on stock) with abstract product (receiptcomponent). But maybe there's easy solution?

    Read the article

  • A problem with .NET 2.0 project, using a 3.0 DLL which implements WCF services.

    - by avance70
    I made a client for accessing my WCF services in one project, and all classes that work with services inherit from this class: public abstract class ServiceClient<TServiceClient> : IDisposable where TServiceClient : ICommunicationObject This class is where I do stuff like disposing, logging when the client was called, etc. some common stuff which all service classes would normally do. Everything worked fine, until I got the task to implement this on an old system. I got into a problem when I used this project (DLL) in an other project which cannot reference System.ServiceModel (since it's an old .NET 2.0 software that I still maintain, and upgrading it to 3.0 is out of the question). Here, if I omit where TServiceClient : ICommunicationObject then the project can build, but the ServiceClient cannot use, for example, client.Close() or client.State So, is my only solution to drop the where statement, and rewrite the service classes?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >