Search Results

Search found 597 results on 24 pages for 'constructors'.

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

• Why Is Java Missing Access Specifiers?

  - by Tom Tresansky

  Does anyone understand why Java is missing: An access specifier which allows access by the class and all subclasses, but NOT by other classes in the same package? (Protected-minus) An access specifier which allows access by the class, all classes in the same package, AND all classes in any sub-package? (Default-plus) An access specifier which adds classes in sub-packages to the entities currently allowed access by protected? (Protected-plus) I wish I had more choices than protected and default. In particular, I'm interested in the Protected-plus option. Say I want to use a Builder/Factory patterned class to produce an object with many links to other objects. The constructors on the objects are all default, because I want to force you to use the factory class to produce instances, in order to make sure the linking is done correctly. I want to group the factories in a sub-package to keep them all together and distinct from the objects they are instantiating---this just seems like a cleaner package structure to me. No can do, currently. I have to put the builders in the same package as the objects they are constructing, in order to gain the access to defaults. But separating project.area.objects from project.area.objects.builders would be so nice. So why is Java lacking these options? And, is there anyway to fake it?

  Read the article

• Calling a constructor to reinitialize variables doesn't seem to work?

  - by Matt

  I wanted to run 1,000 iterations of a program, so set a counter for 1000 in main. I needed to reinitialize various variables after each iteration, and since the class constructor had all the initializations already written out - I decided to call that after each iteration, with the result of each iteration being stored in a variable in main. However, when I called the constructor, it had no effect...it took me a while to figure out - but it didn't reinitialize anything! I created a function exactly like the constructor - so the object would have its own version. When I called that, it reinitialized everything as I expected. int main() { Class MyClass() int counter = 0; while ( counter < 1000 ) { stuff happens } Class(); // This is how I tried to call the constructor initially. // After doing some reading here, I tried: // Class::Class(); // - but that didn't work either /* Later I used... MyClass.function_like_my_constructor; // this worked perfectly */ } ...Could someone try to explain why what I did was wrong, or didn't work, or was silly or what have you? I mean - mentally, I just figured - crap, I can call this constructor and have all this stuff reinitialized. Are constructors (ideally) ONLY called when an object is created?

  Read the article

• T-SQL Improvements And Data Types in ms sql 2008

  - by Aamir Hasan

   Microsoft SQL Server 2008 is a new version released in the first half of 2008 introducing new properties and capabilities to SQL Server product family. All these new and enhanced capabilities can be defined as the classic words like secure, reliable, scalable and manageable. SQL Server 2008 is secure. It is reliable. SQL2008 is scalable and is more manageable when compared to previous releases. Now we will have a look at the features that are making MS SQL Server 2008 more secure, more reliable, more scalable, etc. in details.Microsoft SQL Server 2008 provides T-SQL enhancements that improve performance and reliability. Itzik discusses composable DML, the ability to declare and initialize variables in the same statement, compound assignment operators, and more reliable object dependency information. Table-Valued ParametersInserts into structures with 1-N cardinality problematicOne order -> N order line items"N" is variable and can be largeDon't want to force a new order for every 20 line itemsOne database round-trip / line item slows things downNo ARRAY data type in SQL ServerXML composition/decomposition used as an alternativeTable-valued parameters solve this problemTable-Valued ParametersSQL Server has table variablesDECLARE @t TABLE (id int);SQL Server 2008 adds strongly typed table variablesCREATE TYPE mytab AS TABLE (id int);DECLARE @t mytab;Parameters must use strongly typed table variables Table Variables are Input OnlyDeclare and initialize TABLE variable  DECLARE @t mytab;  INSERT @t VALUES (1), (2), (3);  EXEC myproc @t;Procedure must declare variable READONLY  CREATE PROCEDURE usetable (    @t mytab READONLY ...)  AS    INSERT INTO lineitems SELECT * FROM @t;    UPDATE @t SET... -- no!T-SQL Syntax EnhancementsSingle statement declare and initialize  DECLARE @iint = 4;Compound Assignment Operators  SET @i += 1;Row constructors  DECLARE @t TABLE (id int, name varchar(20));  INSERT INTO @t VALUES    (1, 'Fred'), (2, 'Jim'), (3, 'Sue');Grouping SetsGrouping Sets allow multiple GROUP BY clauses in a single SQL statementMultiple, arbitrary, sets of subtotalsSingle read pass for performanceNested subtotals provide ever better performanceGrouping Sets are an ANSI-standardCOMPUTE BY is deprecatedGROUPING SETS, ROLLUP, CUBESQL Server 2008 - ANSI-syntax ROLLUP and CUBEPre-2008 non-ANSI syntax is deprecatedWITH ROLLUP produces n+1 different groupings of datawhere n is the number of columns in GROUP BYWITH CUBE produces 2^n different groupingswhere n is the number of columns in GROUP BYGROUPING SETS provide a "halfway measure"Just the number of different groupings you needGrouping Sets are visible in query planGROUPING_ID and GROUPINGGrouping Sets can produce non-homogeneous setsGrouping set includes NULL values for group membersNeed to distinguish by grouping and NULL valuesGROUPING (column expression) returns 0 or 1Is this a group based on column expr. or NULL value?GROUPING_ID (a,b,c) is a bitmaskGROUPING_ID bits are set based on column expressions a, b, and cMERGE StatementMultiple set operations in a single SQL statementUses multiple sets as inputMERGE target USING source ON ...Operations can be INSERT, UPDATE, DELETEOperations based onWHEN MATCHEDWHEN NOT MATCHED [BY TARGET] WHEN NOT MATCHED [BY SOURCE]More on MERGEMERGE statement can reference a $action columnUsed when MERGE used with OUTPUT clauseMultiple WHEN clauses possible For MATCHED and NOT MATCHED BY SOURCEOnly one WHEN clause for NOT MATCHED BY TARGETMERGE can be used with any table sourceA MERGE statement causes triggers to be fired onceRows affected includes total rows affected by all clausesMERGE PerformanceMERGE statement is transactionalNo explicit transaction requiredOne Pass Through TablesAt most a full outer joinMatching rows = when matchedLeft-outer join rows = when not matched by targetRight-outer join rows = when not matched by sourceMERGE and DeterminismUPDATE using a JOIN is non-deterministicIf more than one row in source matches ON clause, either/any row can be used for the UPDATEMERGE is deterministicIf more than one row in source matches ON clause, its an errorKeeping Track of DependenciesNew dependency views replace sp_dependsViews are kept in sync as changes occursys.dm_sql_referenced_entitiesLists all named entities that an object referencesExample: which objects does this stored procedure use?sys.dm_sql_referencing_entities 

  Read the article

• JustMock and Moles – A short overview for TDD alpha geeks

  - by RoyOsherove

  People have been lurking near my house, asking me to write something about Moles and JustMock, so I’ll try to be as objective as possible, taking in the fact that I work at Typemock. If I were NOT working at Typemock I’d write: JustMock JustMock tries to be Typemock at so many levels it’s not even funny. Technically they work the same and the API almost looks like it’s a search and replace work based on the Isolator API (awesome compliment!), but JustMock still has too many growing pains and bugs to be usable. Also, JustMock is missing alot of the legacy abilities such as Non public faking, faking all types and various other things that are really needed in real legacy code. Biggest thing (in terms of isolation integration) is that it does not integrate with other profilers such as coverage, NCover etc.) When JustMock comes out of beta, I feel that it should cost about half as Isolator costs, as it currently provides about half the abilities. Moles Moles is an addon of Pex and was originally only intended to work within the Pex environment. It started as a research project and now it’s a power-tool for VS (so it’s a separate install) Now it’s it’s own little stubbing framework. It’s not really an Isolation framework in the classic sense, because it does not provide any kind of API built in to verify object interactions. You have to use manual flags all on your own to do that. It generates two types of classes per assembly: Manual Stubs(just like you’d hand code them) and Mole classes. Each Mole class is a special API to change and break the behavior that the corresponding type. so MDateTime is how you change behavior for DateTime. In that sense the API is al over the place, and it can become highly unreadable and unmentionable over time in your test. Also, the Moles API isn’t really designed to deal with real Legacy code. It only deals with public types and methods. anything internal or private is ignored and you can’t change its behavior. You also can’t control static constructors. That takes about 95% of legacy scenarios out of the picture if that’s what you’re trying to use it for. Personally, I found it hard to get used to the idea of two parallel APIs for different abilities, and when to choose which. and I know this stuff. I would expect more usability from the API to make it more widely used. I don’t think that Moles in planning to go that route. Publishing it as an Isolation framework is really an afterthought of a tool that was design with a specific task in mind, and generic Isolation isn’t it. it’s only hope is DEQ – a simple code example that shows a simple Isolation API built on the Moles generic engine. Moles can and should be used for very simple cases of detouring functionality such a simple static methods or interfaces and virtual functions (like rhinomock and MOQ do).   Oh, Wait. Ah, good thing I work at Typemock. I won’t write all that. I’ll just write: JustMock and Moles are great tools that enlarge the market space for isolation related technologies, and they prove that the idea of productivity and unit testing can go hand in hand and get people hooked. I look forward to compete with them at this growing market.

  Read the article

• Subterranean IL: Pseudo custom attributes

  - by Simon Cooper

  Custom attributes were designed to make the .NET framework extensible; if a .NET language needs to store additional metadata on an item that isn't expressible in IL, then an attribute could be applied to the IL item to represent this metadata. For instance, the C# compiler uses DecimalConstantAttribute and DateTimeConstantAttribute to represent compile-time decimal or datetime constants, which aren't allowed in pure IL, and FixedBufferAttribute to represent fixed struct fields. How attributes are compiled Within a .NET assembly are a series of tables containing all the metadata for items within the assembly; for instance, the TypeDef table stores metadata on all the types in the assembly, and MethodDef does the same for all the methods and constructors. Custom attribute information is stored in the CustomAttribute table, which has references to the IL item the attribute is applied to, the constructor used (which implies the type of attribute applied), and a binary blob representing the arguments and name/value pairs used in the attribute application. For example, the following C# class: [Obsolete("Please use MyClass2", true)] public class MyClass { // ... } corresponds to the following IL class definition: .class public MyClass { .custom instance void [mscorlib]System.ObsoleteAttribute::.ctor(string, bool) = { string('Please use MyClass2' bool(true) } // ... } and results in the following entry in the CustomAttribute table: TypeDef(MyClass) MemberRef(ObsoleteAttribute::.ctor(string, bool)) blob -> {string('Please use MyClass2' bool(true)} However, there are some attributes that don't compile in this way. Pseudo custom attributes Just like there are some concepts in a language that can't be represented in IL, there are some concepts in IL that can't be represented in a language. This is where pseudo custom attributes come into play. The most obvious of these is SerializableAttribute. Although it looks like an attribute, it doesn't compile to a CustomAttribute table entry; it instead sets the serializable bit directly within the TypeDef entry for the type. This flag is fully expressible within IL; this C#: [Serializable] public class MySerializableClass {} compiles to this IL: .class public serializable MySerializableClass {} For those interested, a full list of pseudo custom attributes is available here. For the rest of this post, I'll be concentrating on the ones that deal with P/Invoke. P/Invoke attributes P/Invoke is built right into the CLR at quite a deep level; there are 2 metadata tables within an assembly dedicated solely to p/invoke interop, and many more that affect it. Furthermore, all the attributes used to specify p/invoke methods in C# or VB have their own keywords and syntax within IL. For example, the following C# method declaration: [DllImport("mscorsn.dll", SetLastError = true)] [return: MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.U1)] private static extern bool StrongNameSignatureVerificationEx( [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.LPWStr)] string wszFilePath, [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.U1)] bool fForceVerification, [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.U1)] ref bool pfWasVerified); compiles to the following IL definition: .method private static pinvokeimpl("mscorsn.dll" lasterr winapi) bool marshal(unsigned int8) StrongNameSignatureVerificationEx( string marshal(lpwstr) wszFilePath, bool marshal(unsigned int8) fForceVerification, bool& marshal(unsigned int8) pfWasVerified) cil managed preservesig {} As you can see, all the p/invoke and marshal properties are specified directly in IL, rather than using attributes. And, rather than creating entries in CustomAttribute, a whole bunch of metadata is emitted to represent this information. This single method declaration results in the following metadata being output to the assembly: A MethodDef entry containing basic information on the method Four ParamDef entries for the 3 method parameters and return type An entry in ModuleRef to mscorsn.dll An entry in ImplMap linking ModuleRef and MethodDef, along with the name of the function to import and the pinvoke options (lasterr winapi) Four FieldMarshal entries containing the marshal information for each parameter. Phew! Applying attributes Most of the time, when you apply an attribute to an element, an entry in the CustomAttribute table will be created to represent that application. However, some attributes represent concepts in IL that aren't expressible in the language you're coding in, and can instead result in a single bit change (SerializableAttribute and NonSerializedAttribute), or many extra metadata table entries (the p/invoke attributes) being emitted to the output assembly.

  Read the article

• Optional Parameters and Named Arguments in C# 4 (and a cool scenario w/ ASP.NET MVC 2)

  - by ScottGu

  [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] This is the seventeenth in a series of blog posts I’m doing on the upcoming VS 2010 and .NET 4 release. Today’s post covers two new language feature being added to C# 4.0 – optional parameters and named arguments – as well as a cool way you can take advantage of optional parameters (both in VB and C#) with ASP.NET MVC 2. Optional Parameters in C# 4.0 C# 4.0 now supports using optional parameters with methods, constructors, and indexers (note: VB has supported optional parameters for awhile). Parameters are optional when a default value is specified as part of a declaration.  For example, the method below takes two parameters – a “category” string parameter, and a “pageIndex” integer parameter.  The “pageIndex” parameter has a default value of 0, and as such is an optional parameter: When calling the above method we can explicitly pass two parameters to it: Or we can omit passing the second optional parameter – in which case the default value of 0 will be passed:   Note that VS 2010’s Intellisense indicates when a parameter is optional, as well as what its default value is when statement completion is displayed: Named Arguments and Optional Parameters in C# 4.0 C# 4.0 also now supports the concept of “named arguments”.  This allows you to explicitly name an argument you are passing to a method – instead of just identifying it by argument position.  For example, I could write the code below to explicitly identify the second argument passed to the GetProductsByCategory method by name (making its usage a little more explicit): Named arguments come in very useful when a method supports multiple optional parameters, and you want to specify which arguments you are passing.  For example, below we have a method DoSomething that takes two optional parameters: We could use named arguments to call the above method in any of the below ways: Because both parameters are optional, in cases where only one (or zero) parameters is specified then the default value for any non-specified arguments is passed. ASP.NET MVC 2 and Optional Parameters One nice usage scenario where we can now take advantage of the optional parameter support of VB and C# is with ASP.NET MVC 2’s input binding support to Action methods on Controller classes. For example, consider a scenario where we want to map URLs like “Products/Browse/Beverages” or “Products/Browse/Deserts” to a controller action method.  We could do this by writing a URL routing rule that maps the URLs to a method like so: We could then optionally use a “page” querystring value to indicate whether or not the results displayed by the Browse method should be paged – and if so which page of the results should be displayed.  For example: /Products/Browse/Beverages?page=2. With ASP.NET MVC 1 you would typically handle this scenario by adding a “page” parameter to the action method and make it a nullable int (which means it will be null if the “page” querystring value is not present).  You could then write code like below to convert the nullable int to an int – and assign it a default value if it was not present in the querystring: With ASP.NET MVC 2 you can now take advantage of the optional parameter support in VB and C# to express this behavior more concisely and clearly.  Simply declare the action method parameter as an optional parameter with a default value: C# VB If the “page” value is present in the querystring (e.g. /Products/Browse/Beverages?page=22) then it will be passed to the action method as an integer.  If the “page” value is not in the querystring (e.g. /Products/Browse/Beverages) then the default value of 0 will be passed to the action method.  This makes the code a little more concise and readable. Summary There are a bunch of great new language features coming to both C# and VB with VS 2010.  The above two features (optional parameters and named parameters) are but two of them.  I’ll blog about more in the weeks and months ahead. If you are looking for a good book that summarizes all the language features in C# (including C# 4.0), as well provides a nice summary of the core .NET class libraries, you might also want to check out the newly released C# 4.0 in a Nutshell book from O’Reilly: It does a very nice job of packing a lot of content in an easy to search and find samples format. Hope this helps, Scott

  Read the article

• Adventures in MVVM &ndash; ViewModel Location and Creation

  - by Brian Genisio's House Of Bilz

  More Adventures in MVVM In this post, I am going to explore how I prefer to attach ViewModels to my Views.  I have published the code to my ViewModelSupport project on CodePlex in case you'd like to see how it works along with some examples.  Some History My approach to View-First ViewModel creation has evolved over time.  I have constructed ViewModels in code-behind.  I have instantiated ViewModels in the resources sectoin of the view. I have used Prism to resolve ViewModels via Dependency Injection. I have created attached properties that use Dependency Injection containers underneath.  Of all these approaches, I continue to find issues either in composability, blendability or maintainability.  Laurent Bugnion came up with a pretty good approach in MVVM Light Toolkit with his ViewModelLocator, but as John Papa points out, it has maintenance issues.  John paired up with Glen Block to make the ViewModelLocator more generic by using MEF to compose ViewModels.  It is a great approach, but I don’t like baking in specific resolution technologies into the ViewModelSupport project. I bring these people up, not to name drop, but to give them credit for the place I finally landed in my journey to resolve ViewModels.  I have come up with my own version of the ViewModelLocator that is both generic and container agnostic.  The solution is blendable, configurable and simple to use.  Use any resolution mechanism you want: MEF, Unity, Ninject, Activator.Create, Lookup Tables, new, whatever. How to use the locator 1. Create a class to contain your resolution configuration: public class YourViewModelResolver: IViewModelResolver { private YourFavoriteContainer container = new YourFavoriteContainer(); public YourViewModelResolver() { // Configure your container } public object Resolve(string viewModelName) { return container.Resolve(viewModelName); } } Examples of doing this are on CodePlex for MEF, Unity and Activator.CreateInstance. 2. Create your ViewModelLocator with your custom resolver in App.xaml: <VMS:ViewModelLocator x:Key="ViewModelLocator"> <VMS:ViewModelLocator.Resolver> <local:YourViewModelResolver /> </VMS:ViewModelLocator.Resolver> </VMS:ViewModelLocator> 3. Hook up your data context whenever you want a ViewModel (WPF): <Border DataContext="{Binding YourViewModelName, Source={StaticResource ViewModelLocator}}"> This example uses dynamic properties on the ViewModelLocator and passes the name to your resolver to figure out how to compose it. 4. What about Silverlight? Good question.  You can't bind to dynamic properties in Silverlight 4 (crossing my fingers for Silverlight 5), but you CAN use string indexing: <Border DataContext="{Binding [YourViewModelName], Source={StaticResource ViewModelLocator}}"> But, as John Papa points out in his article, there is a silly bug in Silverlight 4 (as of this writing) that will call into the indexer 6 times when it binds.  While this is little more than a nuisance when getting most properties, it can be much more of an issue when you are resolving ViewModels six times.  If this gets in your way, the solution (as pointed out by John), is to use an IndexConverter (instantiated in App.xaml and also included in the project): <Border DataContext="{Binding Source={StaticResource ViewModelLocator}, Converter={StaticResource IndexConverter}, ConverterParameter=YourViewModelName}"> It is a bit uglier than the WPF version (this method will also work in WPF if you prefer), but it is still not all that bad.  Conclusion This approach works really well (I suppose I am a bit biased).  It allows for composability from any mechanisim you choose.  It is blendable (consider serving up different objects in Design Mode if you wish... or different constructors… whatever makes sense to you).  It works in Cider.  It is configurable.  It is flexible.  It is the best way I have found to manage View-First ViewModel hookups.  Thanks to the guys mentioned in this article for getting me to something I love using.  Enjoy.

  Read the article

• SQL SERVER – Query Hint – Contest Win Joes 2 Pros Combo (USD 198) – Day 1 of 5

  - by pinaldave

  August 2011 we ran a contest where every day we give away one book for an entire month. The contest had extreme success. Lots of people participated and lots of give away. I have received lots of questions if we are doing something similar this month. Absolutely, instead of running a contest a month long we are doing something more interesting. We are giving away USD 198 worth gift every day for this week. We are giving away Joes 2 Pros 5 Volumes (BOOK) SQL 2008 Development Certification Training Kit every day. One copy in India and One in USA. Total 2 of the giveaway (worth USD 198). All the gifts are sponsored from the Koenig Training Solution and Joes 2 Pros. The books are available here Amazon | Flipkart | Indiaplaza How to Win: Read the Question Read the Hints Answer the Quiz in Contact Form in following format Question Answer Name of the country (The contest is open for USA and India residents only) 2 Winners will be randomly selected announced on August 20th. Question of the Day: Which of the following queries will return dirty data? a) SELECT * FROM Table1 (READUNCOMMITED) b) SELECT * FROM Table1 (NOLOCK) c) SELECT * FROM Table1 (DIRTYREAD) d) SELECT * FROM Table1 (MYLOCK) Query Hints: BIG HINT POST Most SQL people know what a “Dirty Record” is. You might also call that an “Intermediate record”. In case this is new to you here is a very quick explanation. The simplest way to describe the steps of a transaction is to use an example of updating an existing record into a table. When the insert runs, SQL Server gets the data from storage, such as a hard drive, and loads it into memory and your CPU. The data in memory is changed and then saved to the storage device. Finally, a message is sent confirming the rows that were affected. For a very short period of time the update takes the data and puts it into memory (an intermediate state), not a permanent state. For every data change to a table there is a brief moment where the change is made in the intermediate state, but is not committed. During this time, any other DML statement needing that data waits until the lock is released. This is a safety feature so that SQL Server evaluates only official data. For every data change to a table there is a brief moment where the change is made in this intermediate state, but is not committed. During this time, any other DML statement (SELECT, INSERT, DELETE, UPDATE) needing that data must wait until the lock is released. This is a safety feature put in place so that SQL Server evaluates only official data. Additional Hints: I have previously discussed various concepts from SQL Server Joes 2 Pros Volume 1. SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Dirty Records and Table Hints SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Row Constructors SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Finding un-matching Records SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Efficient Query Writing Strategy SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Finding Apostrophes in String and Text SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Wildcard – Querying Special Characters SQL Joes 2 Pros Development Series – Wildcard Basics Recap Next Step: Answer the Quiz in Contact Form in following format Question Answer Name of the country (The contest is open for USA and India) Bonus Winner Leave a comment with your favorite article from the “additional hints” section and you may be eligible for surprise gift. There is no country restriction for this Bonus Contest. Do mention why you liked it any particular blog post and I will announce the winner of the same along with the main contest. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: Joes 2 Pros, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Puzzle, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

  Read the article

• MvcExtensions - ActionFilter

  - by kazimanzurrashid

  One of the thing that people often complains is dependency injection in Action Filters. Since the standard way of applying action filters is to either decorate the Controller or the Action methods, there is no way you can inject dependencies in the action filter constructors. There are quite a few posts on this subject, which shows the property injection with a custom action invoker, but all of them suffers from the same small bug (you will find the BuildUp is called more than once if the filter implements multiple interface e.g. both IActionFilter and IResultFilter). The MvcExtensions supports both property injection as well as fluent filter configuration api. There are a number of benefits of this fluent filter configuration api over the regular attribute based filter decoration. You can pass your dependencies in the constructor rather than property. Lets say, you want to create an action filter which will update the User Last Activity Date, you can create a filter like the following: public class UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute : FilterAttribute, IResultFilter { public UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute(IUserService userService) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(userService, "userService"); UserService = userService; } public IUserService UserService { get; private set; } public void OnResultExecuting(ResultExecutingContext filterContext) { // Do nothing, just sleep. } public void OnResultExecuted(ResultExecutedContext filterContext) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(filterContext, "filterContext"); string userName = filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated ? filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.Name : null; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(userName)) { UserService.UpdateLastActivity(userName); } } } As you can see, it is nothing different than a regular filter except that we are passing the dependency in the constructor. Next, we have to configure this filter for which Controller/Action methods will execute: public class ConfigureFilters : ConfigureFiltersBase { protected override void Configure(IFilterRegistry registry) { registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute>(); } } You can register more than one filter for the same Controller/Action Methods: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(); You can register the filters for a specific Action method instead of the whole controller: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(c => c.Index()); You can even set various properties of the filter: registry.Register<ControlPanelController, CustomAuthorizeAttribute>( attribute => { attribute.AllowedRole = Role.Administrator; }); The Fluent Filter registration also reduces the number of base controllers in your application. It is very common that we create a base controller and decorate it with action filters and then we create concrete controller(s) so that the base controllers action filters are also executed in the concrete controller. You can do the  same with a single line statement with the fluent filter registration: Registering the Filters for All Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type))); Registering Filters for selected Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type) && (type.Name.StartsWith("Home") || type.Name.StartsWith("Post")))); You can also use the built-in filters in the fluent registration, for example: registry.Register<HomeController, OutputCacheAttribute>(attribute => { attribute.Duration = 60; }); With the fluent filter configuration you can even apply filters to controllers that source code is not available to you (may be the controller is a part of a third part component). That’s it for today, in the next post we will discuss about the Model binding support in MvcExtensions. So stay tuned.

  Read the article

• Improvements to Joshua Bloch's Builder Design Pattern?

  - by Jason Fotinatos

  Back in 2007, I read an article about Joshua Blochs take on the "builder pattern" and how it could be modified to improve the overuse of constructors and setters, especially when an object has a large number of properties, most of which are optional. A brief summary of this design pattern is articled here [http://rwhansen.blogspot.com/2007/07/theres-builder-pattern-that-joshua.html]. I liked the idea, and have been using it since. The problem with it, while it is very clean and nice to use from the client perspective, implementing it can be a pain in the bum! There are so many different places in the object where a single property is reference, and thus creating the object, and adding a new property takes a lot of time. So...I had an idea. First, an example object in Joshua Bloch's style: Josh Bloch Style: public class OptionsJoshBlochStyle { private final String option1; private final int option2; // ...other options here <<<< public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private String option1; private int option2; // other options here <<<<< public Builder option1(String option1) { this.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.option2 = option2; return this; } public OptionsJoshBlochStyle build() { return new OptionsJoshBlochStyle(this); } } private OptionsJoshBlochStyle(Builder builder) { this.option1 = builder.option1; this.option2 = builder.option2; // other options here <<<<<< } public static void main(String[] args) { OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation1 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation2 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } Now my "improved" version: public class Options { // note that these are not final private String option1; private int option2; // ...other options here public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private final Options options = new Options(); public Builder option1(String option1) { this.options.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.options.option2 = option2; return this; } public Options build() { return options; } } private Options() { } public static void main(String[] args) { Options optionsVariation1 = new Options.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); Options optionsVariation2 = new Options.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } As you can see in my "improved version", there are 2 less places in which we need to add code about any addition properties (or options, in this case)! The only negative that I can see is that the instance variables of the outer class are not able to be final. But, the class is still immutable without this. Is there really any downside to this improvement in maintainability? There has to be a reason which he repeated the properties within the nested class that I'm not seeing?

  Read the article

• What C++ coding standard do you use?

  - by gablin

  For some time now, I've been unable to settle on a coding standard and use it concistently between projects. When starting a new project, I tend to change some things around (add a space there, remove a space there, add a line break there, an extra indent there, change naming conventions, etc.). So I figured that I might provide a piece of sample code, in C++, and ask you to rewrite it to fit your standard of coding. Inspiration is always good, I say. ^^ So here goes: #ifndef _DERIVED_CLASS_H__ #define _DERIVED_CLASS_H__ /** * This is an example file used for sampling code layout. * * @author Firstname Surname */ #include <stdio> #include <string> #include <list> #include "BaseClass.h" #include "Stuff.h" /** * The DerivedClass is completely useless. It represents uselessness in all its * entirety. */ class DerivedClass : public BaseClass { //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // CONSTRUCTORS / DESTRUCTORS //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// public: /** * Constructs a useless object with default settings. * * @param value * Is never used. * @throws Exception * If something goes awry. */ DerivedClass (const int value) : uselessSize_ (0) {} /** * Constructs a copy of a given useless object. * * @param object * Object to copy. * @throws OutOfMemoryException * If necessary data cannot be allocated. */ ItemList (const DerivedClass& object) {} /** * Destroys this useless object. */ ~ItemList (); //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // PUBLIC METHODS //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// public: /** * Clones a given useless object. * * @param object * Object to copy. * @return This useless object. */ DerivedClass& operator= (const DerivedClass& object) { stuff_ = object.stuff_; uselessSize_ = object.uselessSize_; } /** * Does absolutely nothing. * * @param useless * Pointer to useless data. */ void doNothing (const int* useless) { if (useless == NULL) { return; } else { int womba = *useless; switch (womba) { case 0: cout << "This is output 0"; break; case 1: cout << "This is output 1"; break; case 2: cout << "This is output 2"; break; default: cout << "This is default output"; break; } } } /** * Does even less. */ void doEvenLess () { int mySecret = getSecret (); int gather = 0; for (int i = 0; i < mySecret; i++) { gather += 2; } } //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // PRIVATE METHODS //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// private: /** * Gets the secret value of this useless object. * * @return A secret value. */ int getSecret () const { if ((RANDOM == 42) && (stuff_.size() > 0) || (1000000000000000000 > 0) && true) { return 420; } else if (RANDOM == -1) { return ((5 * 2) + (4 - 1)) / 2; } int timer = 100; bool stopThisMadness = false; while (!stopThisMadness) { do { timer--; } while (timer > 0); stopThisMadness = true; } } //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // FIELDS //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// private: /** * Don't know what this is used for. */ static const int RANDOM = 42; /** * List of lists of stuff. */ std::list <Stuff> stuff_; /** * Specifies the size of this object's uselessness. */ size_t uselessSize_; }; #endif

  Read the article

• How should an object that uses composition set its composed components?

  - by Casey

  After struggling with various problems and reading up on component-based systems and reading Bob Nystrom's excellent book "Game Programming Patterns" and in particular the chapter on Components I determined that this is a horrible idea: //Class intended to be inherited by all objects. Engine uses Objects exclusively. class Object : public IUpdatable, public IDrawable { public: Object(); Object(const Object& other); Object& operator=(const Object& rhs); virtual ~Object() =0; virtual void SetBody(const RigidBodyDef& body); virtual const RigidBody* GetBody() const; virtual RigidBody* GetBody(); //Inherited from IUpdatable virtual void Update(double deltaTime); //Inherited from IDrawable virtual void Draw(BITMAP* dest); protected: private: }; I'm attempting to refactor it into a more manageable system. Mr. Nystrom uses the constructor to set the individual components; CHANGING these components at run-time is impossible. It's intended to be derived and be used in derivative classes or factory methods where their constructors do not change at run-time. i.e. his Bjorne object is just a call to a factory method with a specific call to the GameObject constructor. Is this a good idea? Should the object have a default constructor and setters to facilitate run-time changes or no default constructor without setters and instead use a factory method? Given: class Object { public: //...See below for constructor implementation concerns. Object(const Object& other); Object& operator=(const Object& rhs); virtual ~Object() =0; //See below for Setter concerns IUpdatable* GetUpdater(); IDrawable* GetRenderer(); protected: IUpdatable* _updater; IDrawable* _renderer; private: }; Should the components be read-only and passed in to the constructor via: class Object { public: //No default constructor. Object(IUpdatable* updater, IDrawable* renderer); //...remainder is same as above... }; or Should a default constructor be provided and then the components can be set at run-time? class Object { public: Object(); //... SetUpdater(IUpdater* updater); SetRenderer(IDrawable* renderer); //...remainder is same as above... }; or both? class Object { public: Object(); Object(IUpdater* updater, IDrawable* renderer); //... SetUpdater(IUpdater* updater); SetRenderer(IDrawable* renderer); //...remainder is same as above... };

  Read the article

• How to safely copy an object?

  - by Prog

  This question is going to be a little long. Please bear with me. Something that happened in a project of mine made me think about how to safely copy objects. I'll present the situation I had and then ask a question. There was a class SomeClass: class SomeClass{ Thing[] things; public SomeClass(Thing[] things){ this.things = things; } // irrelevant stuff omitted public SomeClass copy(){ return new SomeClass(things); } } There was another class Processor that takes SomeClass objects, copies them (via someClassInstance.copy()), manipulates the copy's state, and returns the copy. Here it is: class Processor{ public SomeClass processObject(SomeClass object){ SomeClass copy = object.copy(); manipulateTheCopy(copy); return copy; } // irrelevant stuff omitted } I ran this, and it had bugs. I looked into these bugs, and it turned out that the manipulations Processor does on copy actually affect not only the copy, but also the original SomeClass object that was passed into processObject. I found out that it was because the original and the copy shared state - because the original passed it's field things into the copy when creating it. This made me realize that copying objects is harder than simply instantiating them with the same fields as the original. For the two objects to be completely disconnected, without any shared state, each of the fields passed to the copy also has to be copied. And if that object contains other objects - they have to be copied too. And so on. So basically, in order to be able to actually copy an object, each class in the system must have a copy() method, that also invokes copy() on all of it's fields, and so on. So for example, for copy() in SomeClass to work, it needs to look like this: public SomeClass copy(){ Thing[] copyThings = new Thing[things.length]; for(int i=0; i<things.length; i++) copyThings[i] = things[i].copy(); return new SomeClass(copyThings); } And if Thing has object fields of it's own, than it's own copy() method must be appropriate: class Thing{ Apple apple; Pencil pencil; int number; public Thing(Apple apple, Pencil pencil, int number){ this.apple = apple; this.pencil = pencil; this.number = number; } public Thing copy(){ // 'number' is a primitve. return new Thing(apple.getCopy(), pencil.getCopy(), number); } } And so on. Of course, instead of all classes having a copy() method, the copying mechanism can happen in all of the getters and the constructors of classes (unless places where it isn't suitable, for example when the field points to an external object, not to an object that 'is part' of this object). Still, that means that in order to be able to safely copy an object - most classes would have to have copying mechanisms in their getters. My question is divided into two parts: How frequently do you need to get a copy of an object? Is this a regular issue? Is the technique described common and/or reasonable? Or is there a better way to make safe copies of objects? Or is there an easier way to safely copy objects, without them sharing any state?

  Read the article

• Javascript Inheritance Part 2

  - by PhubarBaz

  A while back I wrote about Javascript inheritance, trying to figure out the best and easiest way to do it (http://geekswithblogs.net/PhubarBaz/archive/2010/07/08/javascript-inheritance.aspx). That was 2 years ago and I've learned a lot since then. But only recently have I decided to just leave classical inheritance behind and embrace prototypal inheritance. For most of us, we were trained in classical inheritance, using class hierarchies in a typed language. Unfortunately Javascript doesn't follow that model. It is both classless and typeless, which is hard to fathom for someone who's been using classes the last 20 years. For the last two or three years since I've got into Javascript I've been trying to find the best way to force it into the class model without much success. It's clunky and verbose and hard to understand. I think my biggest problem was that it felt so wrong to add or change object members at run time. Every time I did it I felt like I needed a shower. That's the 20 years of classical inheritance in me. Finally I decided to embrace change and do something different. I decided to use the factory pattern to build objects instead of trying to use inheritance. Javascript was made for the factory pattern because of the way you can construct objects at runtime. In the factory pattern you have a factory function that you call and tell it to give you a certain type of object back. The factory function takes care of constructing the object to your specification. Here's an example. Say we want to have some shape objects and they have common attributes like id and area that we want to depend on in other parts of your application. So first thing to do is create a factory object and give it a factory method to create an abstract shape object. The factory method builds the object then returns it. var shapeFactory = { getShape: function(id){ var shape = { id: id, area: function() { throw "Not implemented"; } }; return shape; }}; Now we can add another factory method to get a rectangle. It calls the getShape() method first and then adds an implementation to it. getRectangle: function(id, width, height){ var rect = this.getShape(id); rect.width = width; rect.height = height; rect.area = function() { return this.width * this.height; }; return rect;} That's pretty simple right? No worrying about hooking up prototypes and calling base constructors or any of that crap I used to do. Now let's create a factory method to get a cuboid (rectangular cube). The cuboid object will extend the rectangle object. To get the area we will call into the base object's area method and then multiply that by the depth. getCuboid: function(id, width, height, depth){ var cuboid = this.getRectangle(id, width, height); cuboid.depth = depth; var baseArea = cuboid.area; cuboid.area = function() { var a = baseArea.call(this); return a * this.depth; } return cuboid;} See how we called the area method in the base object? First we save it off in a variable then we implement our own area method and use call() to call the base function. For me this is a lot cleaner and easier than trying to emulate class hierarchies in Javascript.

  Read the article

• Parallelism in .NET – Part 16, Creating Tasks via a TaskFactory

  - by Reed

  The Task class in the Task Parallel Library supplies a large set of features.  However, when creating the task, and assigning it to a TaskScheduler, and starting the Task, there are quite a few steps involved.  This gets even more cumbersome when multiple tasks are involved.  Each task must be constructed, duplicating any options required, then started individually, potentially on a specific scheduler.  At first glance, this makes the new Task class seem like more work than ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem in .NET 3.5. In order to simplify this process, and make Tasks simple to use in simple cases, without sacrificing their power and flexibility, the Task Parallel Library added a new class: TaskFactory. The TaskFactory class is intended to “Provide support for creating and scheduling Task objects.”  Its entire purpose is to simplify development when working with Task instances.  The Task class provides access to the default TaskFactory via the Task.Factory static property.  By default, TaskFactory uses the default TaskScheduler to schedule tasks on a ThreadPool thread.  By using Task.Factory, we can automatically create and start a task in a single “fire and forget” manner, similar to how we did with ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem: Task.Factory.StartNew(() => this.ExecuteBackgroundWork(myData) ); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } This provides us with the same level of simplicity we had with ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem, but even more power.  For example, we can now easily wait on the task: // Start our task on a background thread var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => this.ExecuteBackgroundWork(myData) ); // Do other work on the main thread, // while the task above executes in the background this.ExecuteWorkSynchronously(); // Wait for the background task to finish task.Wait(); TaskFactory simplifies creation and startup of simple background tasks dramatically. In addition to using the default TaskFactory, it’s often useful to construct a custom TaskFactory.  The TaskFactory class includes an entire set of constructors which allow you to specify the default configuration for every Task instance created by that factory.  This is particularly useful when using a custom TaskScheduler.  For example, look at the sample code for starting a task on the UI thread in Part 15: // Given the following, constructed on the UI thread // TaskScheduler uiScheduler = TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext(); // When inside a background task, we can do string status = GetUpdatedStatus(); (new Task(() => { statusLabel.Text = status; })) .Start(uiScheduler); This is actually quite a bit more complicated than necessary.  When we create the uiScheduler instance, we can use that to construct a TaskFactory that will automatically schedule tasks on the UI thread.  To do that, we’d create the following on our main thread, prior to constructing our background tasks: // Construct a task scheduler from the current SynchronizationContext (UI thread) var uiScheduler = TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext(); // Construct a new TaskFactory using our UI scheduler var uiTaskFactory = new TaskFactory(uiScheduler); If we do this, when we’re on a background thread, we can use this new TaskFactory to marshal a Task back onto the UI thread.  Our previous code simplifies to: // When inside a background task, we can do string status = GetUpdatedStatus(); // Update our UI uiTaskFactory.StartNew( () => statusLabel.Text = status); Notice how much simpler this becomes!  By taking advantage of the convenience provided by a custom TaskFactory, we can now marshal to set data on the UI thread in a single, clear line of code!

  Read the article

• Getting a Web Resource Url in non WebForms Applications

  - by Rick Strahl

  WebResources in ASP.NET are pretty useful feature. WebResources are resources that are embedded into a .NET assembly and can be loaded from the assembly via a special resource URL. WebForms includes a method on the ClientScriptManager (Page.ClientScript) and the ScriptManager object to retrieve URLs to these resources. For example you can do: ClientScript.GetWebResourceUrl(typeof(ControlResources), ControlResources.JQUERY_SCRIPT_RESOURCE); GetWebResourceUrl requires a type (which is used for the assembly lookup in which to find the resource) and the resource id to lookup. GetWebResourceUrl() then returns a nasty old long URL like this: WebResource.axd?d=-b6oWzgbpGb8uTaHDrCMv59VSmGhilZP5_T_B8anpGx7X-PmW_1eu1KoHDvox-XHqA1EEb-Tl2YAP3bBeebGN65tv-7-yAimtG4ZnoWH633pExpJor8Qp1aKbk-KQWSoNfRC7rQJHXVP4tC0reYzVw2&t=634533278261362212 While lately excessive resource usage has been frowned upon especially by MVC developers who tend to opt for content distributed as files, I still think that Web Resources have their place even in non-WebForms applications. Also if you have existing assemblies that include resources like scripts and common image links it sure would be nice to access them from non-WebForms pages like MVC views or even in plain old Razor Web Pages. Where's my Page object Dude? Unfortunately natively ASP.NET doesn't have a mechanism for retrieving WebResource Urls outside of the WebForms engine. It's a feature that's specifically baked into WebForms and that relies specifically on the Page HttpHandler implementation. Both Page.ClientScript (obviously) and ScriptManager rely on a hosting Page object in order to work and the various methods off these objects require control instances passed. The reason for this is that the script managers can inject scripts and links into Page content (think RegisterXXXX methods) and for that a Page instance is required. However, for many other methods - like GetWebResourceUrl() - that simply return resources or resource links the Page reference is really irrelevant. While there's a separate ClientScriptManager class, it's marked as sealed and doesn't have any public constructors so you can't create your own instance (without Reflection). Even if it did the internal constructor it does have requires a Page reference. No good… So, can we get access to a WebResourceUrl generically without running in a WebForms Page instance? We just have to create a Page instance ourselves and use it internally. There's nothing intrinsic about the use of the Page class in ClientScript, at least for retrieving resources and resource Urls so it's easy to create an instance of a Page for example in a static method. For our needs of retrieving ResourceUrls or even actually retrieving script resources we can use a canned, non-configured Page instance we create on our own. The following works just fine: public static string GetWebResourceUrl(Type type, string resource ) { Page page = new Page(); return page.ClientScript.GetWebResourceUrl(type, resource); } A slight optimization for this might be to cache the created Page instance. Page tends to be a pretty heavy object to create each time a URL is required so you might want to cache the instance: public class WebUtils { private static Page CachedPage { get { if (_CachedPage == null) _CachedPage = new Page(); return _CachedPage; } } private static Page _CachedPage; public static string GetWebResourceUrl(Type type, string resource) { return CachedPage.ClientScript.GetWebResourceUrl(type, resource); } } You can now use GetWebResourceUrl in a Razor page like this: <!DOCTYPE html> <html <head> <script src="@WebUtils.GetWebResourceUrl(typeof(ControlResources),ControlResources.JQUERY_SCRIPT_RESOURCE)"> </script> </head> <body> <div class="errordisplay"> <img src="@WebUtils.GetWebResourceUrl(typeof(ControlResources),ControlResources.WARNING_ICON_RESOURCE)" /> This is only a Test! </div> </body> </html> And voila - there you have WebResources served from a non-Page based application. WebResources may be a on the way out, but legacy apps have them embedded and for some situations, like fallback scripts and some common image resources I still like to use them. Being able to use them from non-WebForms applications should have been built into the core ASP.NETplatform IMHO, but seeing that it's not this workaround is easy enough to implement.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

  Read the article

• Using Lazy<T> and abstract wrapper class to lazy-load complex system parameters

  - by DigiMortal

  .NET Framework 4.0 introduced new class called Lazy<T> and I wrote blog post about it: .Net Framework 4.0: Using System.Lazy<T>. One thing is annoying for me – we have to keep lazy loaded value and its value loader as separate things. In this posting I will introduce you my Lazy<T> wrapper for complex to get system parameters that uses template method to keep lazy value loader in parameter class. Problem with original implementation Here’s the sample code that shows you how Lazy<T> is usually used. This is just sample code, don’t focus on the fact that this is dummy console application. class Program {     static void Main(string[] args)     {         var temperature = new Lazy<int>(LoadMinimalTemperature);           Console.WriteLine("Minimal room temperature: " + temperature.Value);         Console.ReadLine();     }       protected static int LoadMinimalTemperature()     {         var returnValue = 0;           // Do complex stuff here           return true;     } } The problem is that our class with many lazy loaded properties will grow messy if it has all value loading code inside it. This code may be complex for more than one parameter and in this case it is better to use separate class for this parameter. Defining base class for parameters As a first step I will define base class for all lazy-loaded parameters. This class is wrapper around Lazy<T> and it also offers one template method that parameter classes have to override to provide loaded data. public abstract class LazyParameter<T> {     private Lazy<T> _lazyParam;       public LazyParameter()     {         _lazyParam = new Lazy<T>(Load);     }       protected abstract T Load();       public T Value     {         get { return _lazyParam.Value; }     } } It is also possible to extend Lazy<T> but I don’t prefer to do it as Lazy<T> has six constructors we have to take care of. Also I don’t like to expose Lazy<T> public interface to users of my parameter classes. Creating parameter class Now it’s time to create our first parameter class. Notice how few stuff we have in this class besides overridden Load() method. public class MinimalRoomTemperature : LazyParameter<int> {     protected override int Load()     {         var returnValue = 0;           // Do complex stuff here           return returnValue;     } } Using parameter class is simple. Here’s my test code. class Program {     static void Main(string[] args)     {         var parameter = new MinimalRoomTemperature();         Console.WriteLine("Minimal room temperature: " + parameter.Value);         Console.ReadLine();     } } Conclusion Lazy<T> is useful class that you usually don’t want to use outside from API-s. I like this class but I don’t like when people are using this class directly in application code. In this posting I showed you how to use Lazy<T> with wrapper class to get complex parameter loading code out from classes that use this parameter. We ended up with generic base class for parameters that you can also use as base for other similar classes (you have to find better name to base class in this case).

  Read the article

• Doing unit and integration tests with the Web API HttpClient

  - by cibrax

  One of the nice things about the new HttpClient in System.Net.Http is the support for mocking responses or handling requests in a http server hosted in-memory. While the first option is useful for scenarios in which we want to test our client code in isolation (unit tests for example), the second one enables more complete integration testing scenarios that could include some more components in the stack such as model binders or message handlers for example.   The HttpClient can receive a HttpMessageHandler as argument in one of its constructors. public class HttpClient : HttpMessageInvoker { public HttpClient(); public HttpClient(HttpMessageHandler handler); public HttpClient(HttpMessageHandler handler, bool disposeHandler); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } For the first scenario, you can create a new HttpMessageHandler that fakes the response, which you can use in your unit test. The only requirement is that you somehow inject an HttpClient with this custom handler in the client code. public class FakeHttpMessageHandler : HttpMessageHandler { HttpResponseMessage response; public FakeHttpMessageHandler(HttpResponseMessage response) { this.response = response; } protected override Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, System.Threading.CancellationToken cancellationToken) { var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<HttpResponseMessage>(); tcs.SetResult(response); return tcs.Task; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } In an unit test, you can do something like this. var fakeResponse = new HttpResponse(); var fakeHandler = new FakeHttpMessageHandler(fakeResponse); var httpClient = new HttpClient(fakeHandler); var customerService = new CustomerService(httpClient); // Do something // Asserts .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } CustomerService in this case is the class under test, and the one that receives an HttpClient initialized with our fake handler. For the second scenario in integration tests, there is a In-Memory host “System.Web.Http.HttpServer” that also derives from HttpMessageHandler and you can use with a HttpClient instance in your test. This has been discussed already in these two great posts from Pedro and Filip. 

  Read the article

• Get and Set property accessors are ‘actually’ methods

  - by nmarun

  Well, they are ‘special’ methods, but they indeed are methods. See the class below: 1: public class Person 2: { 3: private string _name; 4:  5: public string Name 6: { 7: get 8: { 9: return _name; 10: } 11: set 12: { 13: if (value == "aaa") 14: { 15: throw new ArgumentException("Invalid Name"); 16: } 17: _name = value; 18: } 19: } 20:  21: public void Save() 22: { 23: Console.WriteLine("Saving..."); 24: } 25: } Ok, so a class with a field, a property with the get and set accessors and a method. Now my calling code says: 1: static void Main() 2: { 3: try 4: { 5: Person person1 = new Person 6: { 7: Name = "aaa", 8: }; 9:  10: } 11: catch (Exception ex) 12: { 13: Console.WriteLine(ex.Message); 14: Console.WriteLine(ex.StackTrace); 15: Console.WriteLine("--------------------"); 16: } 17: } When the code is run, you’ll get the following exception message displayed: Now, you see the first line of the stack trace where it says that the exception was thrown in the method set_Name(String value). Wait a minute, we have not declared any method with that name in our Person class. Oh no, we actually have. When you create a property, this is what happens behind the screen. The CLR creates two methods for each get and set property accessor. Let’s look at the signature once again: set_Name(String value) This also tells you where the ‘value’ keyword comes from in our set property accessor. You’re actually wiring up a method parameter to a field. 1: set 2: { 3: if (value == "aaa") 4: { 5: throw new ArgumentException("Invalid Name"); 6: } 7: _name = value; 8: } Digging deeper on this, I ran the ILDasm tool and this is what I see: We see the ‘free’ constructor (named .ctor) that the compiler gives us, the _name field, the Name property and the Save method. We also see the get_Name and set_Name methods. In order to compare the Save and the set_Name methods, I double-clicked on the two methods and this is what I see: The ‘.method’ keyword tells that both Save and set_Name are both methods (no guessing there!). Seeing the set_Name method as a public method did kinda surprise me. So I said, why can’t I do a person1.set_Name(“abc”) since it is declared as public. This cannot be done because the get_Name and set_Name methods have an extra attribute called ‘specialname’. This attribute is used to identify an IL (Intermediate Language) token that can be treated with special care by the .net language. So the thumb-rule is that any method with the ‘specialname’ attribute cannot be generally called / invoked by the user (a simple test using intellisense proves this). Their functionality is exposed through other ways. In our case, this is done through the property itself. The same concept gets extended to constructors as well making them special methods too. These so-called ‘special’ methods can be identified through reflection. 1: static void ReflectOnPerson() 2: { 3: Type personType = typeof(Person); 4:  5: MethodInfo[] methods = personType.GetMethods(); 6:  7: for (int i = 0; i < methods.Length; i++) 8: { 9: Console.Write("Method: {0}", methods[i].Name); 10: // Determine whether or not each method is a special name. 11: if (methods[i].IsSpecialName) 12: { 13: Console.Write(" has 'SpecialName' attribute"); 14: } 15: Console.WriteLine(); 16: } 17: } Line 11 shows the ‘IsSpecialName’ boolean property. So a method with a ‘specialname’ attribute gets mapped to the IsSpecialName property. The output is displayed as: Wuhuuu! There they are.. our special guests / methods. Verdict: Getting to know the internals… helps!

  Read the article

• Subterranean IL: Constructor constraints

  - by Simon Cooper

  The constructor generic constraint is a slightly wierd one. The ECMA specification simply states that it: constrains [the type] to being a concrete reference type (i.e., not abstract) that has a public constructor taking no arguments (the default constructor), or to being a value type. There seems to be no reference within the spec to how you actually create an instance of a generic type with such a constraint. In non-generic methods, the normal way of creating an instance of a class is quite different to initializing an instance of a value type. For a reference type, you use newobj: newobj instance void IncrementableClass::.ctor() and for value types, you need to use initobj: .locals init ( valuetype IncrementableStruct s1 ) ldloca 0 initobj IncrementableStruct But, for a generic method, we need a consistent method that would work equally well for reference or value types. Activator.CreateInstance<T> To solve this problem the CLR designers could have chosen to create something similar to the constrained. prefix; if T is a value type, call initobj, and if it is a reference type, call newobj instance void !!0::.ctor(). However, this solution is much more heavyweight than constrained callvirt. The newobj call is encoded in the assembly using a simple reference to a row in a metadata table. This encoding is no longer valid for a call to !!0::.ctor(), as different constructor methods occupy different rows in the metadata tables. Furthermore, constructors aren't virtual, so we would have to somehow do a dynamic lookup to the correct method at runtime without using a MethodTable, something which is completely new to the CLR. Trying to do this in IL results in the following verification error: newobj instance void !!0::.ctor() [IL]: Error: Unable to resolve token. This is where Activator.CreateInstance<T> comes in. We can call this method to return us a new T, and make the whole issue Somebody Else's Problem. CreateInstance does all the dynamic method lookup for us, and returns us a new instance of the correct reference or value type (strangely enough, Activator.CreateInstance<T> does not itself have a .ctor constraint on its generic parameter): .method private static !!0 CreateInstance<.ctor T>() { call !!0 [mscorlib]System.Activator::CreateInstance<!!0>() ret } Going further: compiler enhancements Although this method works perfectly well for solving the problem, the C# compiler goes one step further. If you decompile the C# version of the CreateInstance method above: private static T CreateInstance() where T : new() { return new T(); } what you actually get is this (edited slightly for space & clarity): .method private static !!T CreateInstance<.ctor T>() { .locals init ( [0] !!T CS$0$0000, [1] !!T CS$0$0001 ) DetectValueType: ldloca.s 0 initobj !!T ldloc.0 box !!T brfalse.s CreateInstance CreateValueType: ldloca.s 1 initobj !!T ldloc.1 ret CreateInstance: call !!0 [mscorlib]System.Activator::CreateInstance<T>() ret } What on earth is going on here? Looking closer, it's actually quite a clever performance optimization around value types. So, lets dissect this code to see what it does. The CreateValueType and CreateInstance sections should be fairly self-explanatory; using initobj for value types, and Activator.CreateInstance for reference types. How does the DetectValueType section work? First, the stack transition for value types: ldloca.s 0 // &[!!T(uninitialized)] initobj !!T // ldloc.0 // !!T box !!T // O[!!T] brfalse.s // branch not taken When the brfalse.s is hit, the top stack entry is a non-null reference to a boxed !!T, so execution continues to to the CreateValueType section. What about when !!T is a reference type? Remember, the 'default' value of an object reference (type O) is zero, or null. ldloca.s 0 // &[!!T(null)] initobj !!T // ldloc.0 // null box !!T // null brfalse.s // branch taken Because box on a reference type is a no-op, the top of the stack at the brfalse.s is null, and so the branch to CreateInstance is taken. For reference types, Activator.CreateInstance is called which does the full dynamic lookup using reflection. For value types, a simple initobj is called, which is far faster, and also eliminates the unboxing that Activator.CreateInstance has to perform for value types. However, this is strictly a performance optimization; Activator.CreateInstance<T> works for value types as well as reference types. Next... That concludes the initial premise of the Subterranean IL series; to cover the details of generic methods and generic code in IL. I've got a few other ideas about where to go next; however, if anyone has any itching questions, suggestions, or things you've always wondered about IL, do let me know.

  Read the article

• concurrency::index<N> from amp.h

  - by Daniel Moth

  Overview C++ AMP introduces a new template class index<N>, where N can be any value greater than zero, that represents a unique point in N-dimensional space, e.g. if N=2 then an index<2> object represents a point in 2-dimensional space. This class is essentially a coordinate vector of N integers representing a position in space relative to the origin of that space. It is ordered from most-significant to least-significant (so, if the 2-dimensional space is rows and columns, the first component represents the rows). The underlying type is a signed 32-bit integer, and component values can be negative. The rank field returns N. Creating an index The default parameterless constructor returns an index with each dimension set to zero, e.g. index<3> idx; //represents point (0,0,0) An index can also be created from another index through the copy constructor or assignment, e.g. index<3> idx2(idx); //or index<3> idx2 = idx; To create an index representing something other than 0, you call its constructor as per the following 4-dimensional example: int temp[4] = {2,4,-2,0}; index<4> idx(temp); Note that there are convenience constructors (that don’t require an array argument) for creating index objects of rank 1, 2, and 3, since those are the most common dimensions used, e.g. index<1> idx(3); index<2> idx(3, 6); index<3> idx(3, 6, 12); Accessing the component values You can access each component using the familiar subscript operator, e.g. One-dimensional example: index<1> idx(4); int i = idx[0]; // i=4 Two-dimensional example: index<2> idx(4,5); int i = idx[0]; // i=4 int j = idx[1]; // j=5 Three-dimensional example: index<3> idx(4,5,6); int i = idx[0]; // i=4 int j = idx[1]; // j=5 int k = idx[2]; // k=6 Basic operations Once you have your multi-dimensional point represented in the index, you can now treat it as a single entity, including performing common operations between it and an integer (through operator overloading): -- (pre- and post- decrement), ++ (pre- and post- increment), %=, *=, /=, +=, -=,%, *, /, +, -. There are also operator overloads for operations between index objects, i.e. ==, !=, +=, -=, +, –. Here is an example (where no assertions are broken): index<2> idx_a; index<2> idx_b(0, 0); index<2> idx_c(6, 9); _ASSERT(idx_a.rank == 2); _ASSERT(idx_a == idx_b); _ASSERT(idx_a != idx_c); idx_a += 5; idx_a[1] += 3; idx_a++; _ASSERT(idx_a != idx_b); _ASSERT(idx_a == idx_c); idx_b = idx_b + 10; idx_b -= index<2>(4, 1); _ASSERT(idx_a == idx_b); Usage You'll most commonly use index<N> objects to index into data types that we'll cover in future posts (namely array and array_view). Also when we look at the new parallel_for_each function we'll see that an index<N> object is the single parameter to the lambda, representing the (multi-dimensional) thread index… In the next post we'll go beyond being able to represent an N-dimensional point in space, and we'll see how to define the N-dimensional space itself through the extent<N> class. Comments about this post by Daniel Moth welcome at the original blog.

  Read the article

• "Imprinting" as a language feature?

  - by MKO

  Idea I had this idea for a language feature that I think would be useful, does anyone know of a language that implements something like this? The idea is that besides inheritance a class can also use something called "imprinting" (for lack of better term). A class can imprint one or several (non-abstract) classes. When a class imprints another class it gets all it's properties and all it's methods. It's like the class storing an instance of the imprinted class and redirecting it's methods/properties to it. A class that imprints another class therefore by definition also implements all it's interfaces and it's abstract class. So what's the point? Well, inheritance and polymorphism is hard to get right. Often composition gives far more flexibility. Multiple inheritance offers a slew of different problems without much benefits (IMO). I often write adapter classes (in C#) by implementing some interface and passing along the actual methods/properties to an encapsulated object. The downside to that approach is that if the interface changes the class breaks. You also you have to put in a lot of code that does nothing but pass things along to the encapsulated object. A classic example is that you have some class that implements IEnumerable or IList and contains an internal class it uses. With this technique things would be much easier Example (c#) [imprint List<Person> as peopleList] public class People : PersonBase { public void SomeMethod() { DoSomething(this.Count); //Count is from List } } //Now People can be treated as an List<Person> People people = new People(); foreach(Person person in people) { ... } peopleList is an alias/variablename (of your choice)used internally to alias the instance but can be skipped if not needed. One thing that's useful is to override an imprinted method, that could be achieved with the ordinary override syntax public override void Add(Person person) { DoSomething(); personList.Add(person); } note that the above is functional equivalent (and could be rewritten by the compiler) to: public class People : PersonBase , IList<Person> { private List<Person> personList = new List<Person>(); public override void Add(object obj) { this.personList.Add(obj) } public override int IndexOf(object obj) { return personList.IndexOf(obj) } //etc etc for each signature in the interface } only if IList changes your class will break. IList won't change but an interface that you, someone in your team, or a thirdparty has designed might just change. Also this saves you writing a whole lot of code for some interfaces/abstract classes. Caveats There's a couple of gotchas. First we, syntax must be added to call the imprinted classes's constructors from the imprinting class constructor. Also, what happends if a class imprints two classes which have the same method? In that case the compiler would detect it and force the class to define an override of that method (where you could chose if you wanted to call either imprinted class or both) So what do you think, would it be useful, any caveats? It seems it would be pretty straightforward to implement something like that in the C# language but I might be missing something :) Sidenote - Why is this different from multiple inheritance Ok, so some people have asked about this. Why is this different from multiple inheritance and why not multiple inheritance. In C# methods are either virtual or not. Say that we have ClassB who inherits from ClassA. ClassA has the methods MethodA and MethodB. ClassB overrides MethodA but not MethodB. Now say that MethodB has a call to MethodA. if MethodA is virtual it will call the implementation that ClassB has, if not it will use the base class, ClassA's MethodA and you'll end up wondering why your class doesn't work as it should. By the terminology sofar you might already confused. So what happens if ClassB inherits both from ClassA and another ClassC. I bet both programmers and compilers will be scratching their heads. The benefit of this approach IMO is that the imprinting classes are totally encapsulated and need not be designed with multiple inheritance in mind. You can basically imprint anything.

  Read the article

• Deep Cloning C++ class that inherits CCNode in Cocos2dx

  - by A Devanney

  I stuck with something in Cocos2dx ... I'm trying to deep clone one of my classes that inherits CCNode. Basically i have.... GameItem* pTemp = new GameItem(*_actualItem); // loops through all the blocks in gameitem and updates their position pTemp->moveDown(); // if in boundary or collision etc... if (_gameBoard->isValidMove(pTemp)) { _actualItem = pTemp; // display the position CCLog("pos (1) --- (X : %d,Y : %d)", _actualItem->getGridX(),_actualItem->getGridY()); } Then doesn't work, because the gameitem inherits CCNode and has the collection of another class that also inherits CCNode. its just creating a shallow copy and when you look at children of the gameitem node in the copy, just point to the original? class GameItem : public CCNode { // maps to the actual grid position of the shape CCPoint* _rawPosition; // tracks the current grid position int _gridX, _gridY; // tracks the change if the item has moved CCPoint _offset; public: //constructors GameItem& operator=(const GameItem& item); GameItem(Shape shape); ... } then in the implementation.... GameItem& GameItem::operator=(const GameItem& item) { _gridX = item.getGridX(); _gridY = item.getGridY(); _offset = item.getOffSet(); _rawPosition = item.getRawPosition(); // how do i copy the node? return *this; } // shape contains an array of position for the game character GameItem::GameItem(Shape shape) { _rawPosition = shape.getShapePositions(); //loop through all blocks in position for (int i = 0; i < 7; i++) { // get the position of the first block in the shape and add to the position of the first block int x = (int) (getRawPosition()[i].x + getGridX()); int y = (int) (getRawPosition()[i].y + getGridY()); //instantiate a block with the position and type Block* block = Block::blockWithFile(x,y,(i+1), shape); // add the block to the this node this->addChild(block); } } And for clarity here is the block class class Block : public CCNode{ private: // using composition over inheritance CCSprite* _sprite; // tracks the current grid position int _gridX, _gridY; // used to store actual image number int _blockNo; public: Block(void); Block(int gridX, int gridY, int blockNo); Block& operator=(const Block& block); // static constructor for the creation of a block static Block* blockWithFile(int gridX, int gridY,int blockNo, Shape shape); ... } The blocks implementation..... Block& Block::operator=(const Block& block) { _sprite = new CCSprite(*block._sprite); _gridX = block._gridX; _gridY = block._gridY; _blockNo = block._blockNo; //again how to clone CCNode? return *this; } Block* Block::blockWithFile(int gridX, int gridY,int blockNo, Shape shape) { Block* block = new Block(); if (block && block->initBlockWithFile(gridX, gridY,blockNo, shape)) { block->autorelease(); return block; } CC_SAFE_DELETE(block); return NULL; } bool Block::initBlockWithFile(int gridX, int gridY,int blockNo, Shape shape) { setGridX(gridX); setGridY(gridY); setBlockNo(blockNo); const char* characterImg = helperFunctions::Format(shape.getFileName(),blockNo); // add to the spritesheet CCTexture2D* gameArtTexture = CCTextureCache::sharedTextureCache()->addImage("Character.pvr.ccz"); CCSpriteBatchNode::createWithTexture(gameArtTexture); // block settings _sprite = CCSprite::createWithSpriteFrameName(characterImg); // set the position of the block and add it to the layer this->setPosition(CONVERTGRIDTOACTUALPOS_X_Y(gridX,gridY)); this->addChild(_sprite); return true; } Any ideas are welcome at this point!! thanks

  Read the article

• Ninject WithConstructorArgument : No matching bindings are available, and the type is not self-bindable

  - by Jean-François Beauchamp

  My understanding of WithConstructorArgument is probably erroneous, because the following is not working: I have a service, lets call it MyService, whose constructor is taking multiple objects, and a string parameter called testEmail. For this string parameter, I added the following Ninject binding: string testEmail = "[email protected]"; kernel.Bind<IMyService>().To<MyService>().WithConstructorArgument("testEmail", testEmail); However, when executing the following line of code, I get an exception: var myService = kernel.Get<MyService>(); Here is the exception I get: Error activating string No matching bindings are available, and the type is not self-bindable. Activation path: 2) Injection of dependency string into parameter testEmail of constructor of type MyService 1) Request for MyService Suggestions: 1) Ensure that you have defined a binding for string. 2) If the binding was defined in a module, ensure that the module has been loaded into the kernel. 3) Ensure you have not accidentally created more than one kernel. 4) If you are using constructor arguments, ensure that the parameter name matches the constructors parameter name. 5) If you are using automatic module loading, ensure the search path and filters are correct. What am I doing wrong here? UPDATE: Here is the MyService constructor: [Ninject.Inject] public MyService(IMyRepository myRepository, IMyEventService myEventService, IUnitOfWork unitOfWork, ILoggingService log, IEmailService emailService, IConfigurationManager config, HttpContextBase httpContext, string testEmail) { this.myRepository = myRepository; this.myEventService = myEventService; this.unitOfWork = unitOfWork; this.log = log; this.emailService = emailService; this.config = config; this.httpContext = httpContext; this.testEmail = testEmail; } I have standard bindings for all the constructor parameter types. Only 'string' has no binding, and HttpContextBase has a binding that is a bit different: kernel.Bind<HttpContextBase>().ToMethod(context => new HttpContextWrapper(new HttpContext(new MyHttpRequest("", "", "", null, new StringWriter())))); and MyHttpRequest is defined as follows: public class MyHttpRequest : SimpleWorkerRequest { public string UserHostAddress; public string RawUrl; public MyHttpRequest(string appVirtualDir, string appPhysicalDir, string page, string query, TextWriter output) : base(appVirtualDir, appPhysicalDir, page, query, output) { this.UserHostAddress = "127.0.0.1"; this.RawUrl = null; } }

  Read the article

• MVVM load data during or after ViewModel construction?

  - by mkmurray

  My generic question is as the title states, is it best to load data during ViewModel construction or afterward through some Loaded event handling? I'm guessing the answer is after construction via some Loaded event handling, but I'm wondering how that is most cleanly coordinated between ViewModel and View? Here's more details about my situation and the particular problem I'm trying to solve: I am using the MVVM Light framework as well as Unity for DI. I have some nested Views, each bound to a corresponding ViewModel. The ViewModels are bound to each View's root control DataContext via the ViewModelLocator idea that Laurent Bugnion has put into MVVM Light. This allows for finding ViewModels via a static resource and for controlling the lifetime of ViewModels via a Dependency Injection framework, in this case Unity. It also allows for Expression Blend to see everything in regard to ViewModels and how to bind them. So anyway, I've got a parent View that has a ComboBox databound to an ObservableCollection in its ViewModel. The ComboBox's SelectedItem is also bound (two-way) to a property on the ViewModel. When the selection of the ComboBox changes, this is to trigger updates in other views and subviews. Currently I am accomplishing this via the Messaging system that is found in MVVM Light. This is all working great and as expected when you choose different items in the ComboBox. However, the ViewModel is getting its data during construction time via a series of initializing method calls. This seems to only be a problem if I want to control what the initial SelectedItem of the ComboBox is. Using MVVM Light's messaging system, I currently have it set up where the setter of the ViewModel's SelectedItem property is the one broadcasting the update and the other interested ViewModels register for the message in their constructors. It appears I am currently trying to set the SelectedItem via the ViewModel at construction time, which hasn't allowed sub-ViewModels to be constructed and register yet. What would be the cleanest way to coordinate the data load and initial setting of SelectedItem within the ViewModel? I really want to stick with putting as little in the View's code-behind as is reasonable. I think I just need a way for the ViewModel to know when stuff has Loaded and that it can then continue to load the data and finalize the setup phase. Thanks in advance for your responses.

  Read the article

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