Search Results

Search found 42781 results on 1712 pages for 'function calls'.

Page 207/1712 | < Previous Page | 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214  | Next Page >

  • Is there a library available which easily can record and replay results of API calls?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'm working on writing various things that call relatively complicated Win32 API functions. Here's an example: //Encapsulates calling NtQuerySystemInformation buffer management. WindowsApi::AutoArray NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation( SystemInformationClass toGet ) const { AutoArray result; ULONG allocationSize = 1024; ULONG previousSize; NTSTATUS errorCheck; do { previousSize = allocationSize; result.Allocate(allocationSize); errorCheck = WinQuerySystemInformation(toGet, result.GetAs<void>(), allocationSize, &allocationSize); if (allocationSize <= previousSize) allocationSize = previousSize * 2; } while (errorCheck == 0xC0000004L); if (errorCheck != 0) { THROW_MANUAL_WINDOWS_ERROR(WinRtlNtStatusToDosError(errorCheck)); } return result; } //Client of the above. ProcessSnapshot::ProcessSnapshot() { using Dll::NtDll; NtDll ntdll; AutoArray systemInfoBuffer = ntdll.NtQuerySystemInformation( NtDll::SystemProcessInformation); BYTE * currentPtr = systemInfoBuffer.GetAs<BYTE>(); //Loop through the results, creating Process objects. SYSTEM_PROCESSES * asSysInfo; do { // Loop book keeping asSysInfo = reinterpret_cast<SYSTEM_PROCESSES *>(currentPtr); currentPtr += asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta; //Create the process for the current iteration and fill it with data. std::auto_ptr<ProcImpl> currentProc(ProcFactory( static_cast<unsigned __int32>(asSysInfo->ProcessId), this)); NormalProcess* nptr = dynamic_cast<NormalProcess*>(currentProc.get()); if (nptr) { nptr->SetProcessName(asSysInfo->ProcessName); } // Populate process threads for(ULONG idx = 0; idx < asSysInfo->ThreadCount; ++idx) { SYSTEM_THREADS& sysThread = asSysInfo->Threads[idx]; Thread thread( currentProc.get(), static_cast<unsigned __int32>(sysThread.ClientId.UniqueThread), sysThread.StartAddress); currentProc->AddThread(thread); } processes.push_back(currentProc); } while(asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta != 0); } My problem is in mocking out the NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation method -- namely, that the data structure returned is complicated (Well, here it's actually relatively simple but it can be complicated), and writing a test which builds the data structure like the API call does can take 5-6 times as long as writing the code that uses the API. What I'd like to do is take a call to the API, and record it somehow, so that I can return that recorded value to the code under test without actually calling the API. The returned structures cannot simply be memcpy'd, because they often contain inner pointers (pointers to other locations in the same buffer). The library in question would need to check for these kinds of things, and be able to restore pointer values to a similar buffer upon replay. (i.e. check each pointer sized value if it could be interpreted as a pointer within the buffer, change that to an offset, and remember to change it back to a pointer on replay -- a false positive rate here is acceptable) Is there anything out there that does anything like this?

    Read the article

  • Is it weird or strange to make multiple WCF Calls to build a ViewModel before presenting it?

    - by Nate Bross
    Am I doing something wrong if I need code like this in a Controller? Should I be doing something differently? public ActionResult Details(int id) { var svc = new ServiceClient(); var model = new MyViewModel(); model.ObjectA = svc.GetObjectA(id); model.ObjectB = svc.GetObjectB(id); model.ObjectC = svc.GetObjectC(id); return View(model); } The reason I ask, is because I've got Linq-To-Sql on the back end and a WCF Service which exposes functionality through a set of DTOs which are NOT the Linq-To-Sql generated classes and thus do not have the parent/child properties; but in the detail view, I would like to see some of the parent/child data.

    Read the article

  • C++ -- How can we call "delete this; " in a const-member function?

    - by q0987
    Hello all, I saw the code snippet as follows: class UPNumber { public: UPNumber(); UPNumber(int initValue); ... // pseudo-destructor (a const member function, because // even const objects may be destroyed) void destroy() const { delete this; } // why this line is correct??? ... private: ~UPNumber(); }; First, I am sure that above class definition is correct. Here is my question, why we can define the function 'destroy' as above? The reason being asking is that why we can modify 'this' in a const-member function? Thank you

    Read the article

  • What is the ISO C++ way to directly define a conversion function to reference to array?

    - by ben
    According to the standard, a conversion function has a function-id operator conversion-type-id, which would look like, say, operator char(&)[4] I believe. But I cannot figure out where to put the function parameter list. gcc does not accept either of operator char(&())[4] or operator char(&)[4]() or anything I can think of. Now, gcc seems to accept (&operator char ())[4] but clang does not, and I am inclined to not either, since it does not seem to fit the grammar as I understand it. I do not want to use a typedef because I want to avoid polluting the namespace with it.

    Read the article

  • How to make cross-domain AJAX calls to Google Maps API?

    - by Pedro
    Hi everyone, I'm trying to make a jQuery $.getJSON call to the Google Maps Geocoding webservice, but this doesn't work because of cross-domain security issues. I haven't been able to figure it out online, but I've read a bit about Google Javascript API or JSONP, but so far no clear answer... Could anyone enlight me? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Javascript 'class' and singleton problems

    - by Kucebe
    I have a singleton object that use another object (not singleton), to require some info to server: var singleton = (function(){ /*_private properties*/ var myRequestManager = new RequestManager(params, //callbacks function(){ previewRender(response); }, function(){ previewError(); } ); /*_public methods*/ return{ /*make a request*/ previewRequest: function(request){ myRequestManager.require(request); //err:myRequestManager.require is not a func }, previewRender: function(response){ //do something }, previewError: function(){ //manage error } }; }()); This is the 'class' that make the request to the server function RequestManager(params, success, error){ //create an ajax manager this.param = params; this._success = success; //callbacks this._error = error; } RequestManager.prototype = { require: function(text){ //make an ajax request }, otherFunc: function(){ //do other things } } The problem is that i can't call myRequestManager.require from inside singleton object. Firebug consolle says: "myRequestManager.require is not a function", but i don't understand where the problem is. Is there a better solution for implement this situation?

    Read the article

  • Why do most programming languages only support returning a single value from a function?

    - by M4N
    Is there a reason or an explanation why functions in most(?) programming languages are designed to support any number of input parameters but only one return value? In most languages, it is possible to "work around" that limitation, e.g. by using out-parameters, returning pointers or by defining/returning structs/classes. But it seems strange, that programming languages were not designed to support multiple return values in a more "natural" way.

    Read the article

  • How do I combine similar method calls into a delegate pattern?

    - by Daniel T.
    I have three methods: public void Save<T>(T entity) { using (new Transaction()) { Session.Save(entity); } } public void Create<T>(T entity) { using (new Transaction()) { Session.Create(entity); } } public void Delete<T>(T entity) { using (new Transaction()) { Session.Delete(entity); } } As you can see, the only thing that differs is the method call inside the using block. How can I rewrite this so it's something like this instead: public void Save<T>(T entity) { TransactionWrapper(Session.Save(entity)); } public void Create<T>(T entity) { TransactionWrapper(Session.Create(entity)); } public void Save<T>(T entity) { TransactionWrapper(Session.Save(entity)); } So in other words, I pass a method call as a parameter, and the TransactionWrapper method wraps a transaction around the method call.

    Read the article

  • How to see variable in calling function in visual studio?

    - by carter-boater
    Hi all, Does anyone know how to watch a variable in calling function. For example: C#: void fn a() { int myVar=9; b(); } b() { Throw new Exception(); } How can I watch myVar when I get the exception in function b?? I have a really big recursive function with in a loop and get an exception in one iteration. I don't know which iteration it belongs to$%^&*(. The thing I did was to promote my intersted variable to global so I can watch them anywhere. However, I don't think that's a good idea only for debug. Thanks everyone!

    Read the article

  • jQuery: What does (function($) {})(jQuery); mean?

    - by Legend
    I am just starting out with writing jQuery plugins. I wrote three small plugins but I have been simply copying the line into all my plugins without actually knowing what it means. Can someone tell me a little more about these? What does this do? (I know it extends jQuery somehow but is there anything else interesting to know about this) (function($) { })(jQuery); What is the difference between the following two ways of writing a plugin: Type 1: (function($) { $.fn.jPluginName = { }, $.fn.jPluginName.defaults = { } })(jQuery); Type 2: (function($) { $.jPluginName = { } })(jQuery); I could be way off here and maybe both mean the same thing. In some cases, this doesn't seem to be working in a plugin that I was writing using Type 1. Any idea why? But in either case, I would appreciate any explanation.

    Read the article

  • How to call a jquery function from an action method in controller?

    - by Hasan Fahim
    I have a requirement to open a popup from an action method in controller. The action method is basically registering a user. [HttpPost] public ActionResult Register(RegisterModel model) { if (ModelState.IsValid) { MembershipCreateStatus createStatus; Membership.CreateUser(model.UserName, model.Password, model.Email, null, null, true, null, out createStatus); if (createStatus == MembershipCreateStatus.Success) { FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(model.UserName, false /* createPersistentCookie */); //------------------------------------------ //I need to call a jquery function from here //------------------------------------------ return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home"); } else { ModelState.AddModelError("", ErrorCodeToString(createStatus)); } } return View(model); } The jquery function, present in the view, would just make a hidden DIV, visible, and set the opacity, etc, to represent a popup. I need to call such a jquery function from the controller's action method shown above.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to cast the Elapsed Time function to Integer?

    - by nuvio
    I have the following function: (def elapsedtime (with-out-str (time (run-my-function)))) and I was wondering if is possible to store only the integer value of the time, as I can only store a String at the moment.... Any suggestion? Thanks a lot UPDATE So I did use this: (defmacro nsecs [expr] `(let [start# (. System (nanoTime))] ~expr (- (. System (nanoTime)) start#))) And then modified this: (def elapsedtime (nsecs (run-my-function argument1 argument2))) but doesn't work, what am I doing wrong? "Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Wrong number of args (1) passed to: main$fn--105$nsecs"

    Read the article

  • What TypeScript pattern can I use to enforce that a function gets a property?

    - by Matt York
    In JavaScript I can do this: function f() {} f.prop = "property"; I want this in TypeScript, but with type checking. What TypeScript pattern can I use to enforce that a function gets a property? Could I use an interface? interface functionWithProperty { (): any; prop: string; } This seems to be a valid interface in TypeScript, but how do I implement this interface such that the TypeScript compiler checks that prop is set? I saw this example: var f : functionWithProperty = (() => { var _f : any = function () { }; _f.prop = "blah"; return _f; }()); But this doesn't work because I can remove _f.prop = "blah"; and everything will still compile. I need to enforce that prop is set.

    Read the article

  • how to call a javascript function in the top frame?

    - by Rory
    This seems really simple, but how do I call a javascript function that's defined in the top-level html, from a child frame? top html doc - 1st level frame - 2nd level frame my top html doc has a function called testFn(). In the 2nd level frame I have a button with onclick="top.testFn();" but this doesn't call the testFn(). In Firebug if I use a watch to execute top.testFn(); it says TypeError: testFn() is not a function. Should this all just work - in which case it's a problem with my documents, or is there some other way to call functions in the top-level window?

    Read the article

  • JDOQL Any way to avoid multiple .contains() calls in the query when searching for the presence of on

    - by Finbarr
    The question pretty much says it all. If I have a class Class A public class A { ... private List<String> keys; ... } And I want to select all A instances from the DataStore that have atleast one of a List of keys, is there a better way of doing it than this: query = pm.newQuery(A.class); query.setFilter("keys.contains(:key1) || keys.contains(:key2) || keys.contains(:key3)"); List<A> results = (List<A>)query.execute(key1, key2, key3); This has not yet been implemented, so I am open to radical suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Why is my Perl script that calls FTP all of a sudden failing?

    - by Mel
    I have a script that has been running for over a year and now it is failing: It is creating a command file: open ( FTPFILE, ">get_list"); print FTPFILE "dir *.txt"\n"; print FTPFILE "quit\n"; close FTPFILE; Then I run the system command: $command = "ftp ".$Server." < get_list | grep \"\^-\" >new_list"; $code = system($command); The logic the checks: if ($code == 0) { do stuff } else { log error } It is logging an error. When I print the $code variable, I am getting 256. I used this command to parse the $? variable: $exit_value = $? >> 8; $signal_num = $? & 127; $dumped_core = $? & 128; print "Exit: $exit_value Sig: $signal_num Core: $dumped_core\n"; Results: Exit: 1 Sig: 0 Core: 0 Thanks for any help/insight.

    Read the article

  • Extending jQuery Form Validation Script for new form fields

    - by user982124
    I have a simple HTML form that originally was a series of Questions (A1 to A5 and B1 to B3) with yes/no radio buttons like this: <tr> <td width="88%" valign="top" class="field_name_left">A1</td> <td width="12%" valign="top" class="field_data"> <input type="radio" name="CriteriaA1" value="Yes">Yes<input type="radio" name="CriteriaA1" value="No">No</td> </tr> The user could only answer either the A series of questions OR either the B series of questions, but not both. Also they must complete all questions in either the A or B series. I now have an additional series of questions - C1 to C6 - and need to extend my validation scripts to ensure the user enters either A, B or C and answers all questions within each series. My original script for just the A and B looks like this: $(function() { $("#editRecord").submit(function(){ // is anything checked? if(!checkEmpty()){ $("#error").html("Please check something before submitting"); //alert("nothing Checked"); return false; } // Only A _OR_ B if(isAorB()){ $("#error").html("Please complete A or B, not both"); //alert("please complete A or B, not both"); return false; }; // all A's or all B's if(allAorBChecked()){ $("#error").html("It appears you have not completed all questions"); //alert("missing data"); return false; }; if(haveNo()){ // we're going on, but sending "type = C" } //alert("all OK"); return true; }); }); function checkEmpty(){ var OK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ if (this.checked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function isAorB(){ var OK = false; var Achecked = false; var Bchecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // if we have an A checked remember it if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } if(Achecked && theChar == "B" && !Bchecked){ if(this.checked){ Bchecked = true; } } if (Achecked && Bchecked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function allAorBChecked(){ var notOK = false; var Achecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ // skip through to see if we're doing A's or B's var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // check the A's if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } }); if(Achecked){ // set the input to A $("#type").val("A"); // check _all_ a's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "A"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // Yes wasn't checked - is No? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); }else{ // set the input to B $("#type").val("B"); // check _all_ b's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "B"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } function haveNo(){ var thisName; var notOK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var checked = this.checked; if (this.name == thisName){ //Is this checked if(checked){ notOK = true; $("#type").val("C"); } } thisName = this.name; }); return notOK; } This worked well but I'm completely stuck at extending it to include the C series. I now have to check that the user hasn't answered any A and B, A and C and B and C questions. Everything I've tried fails to validate. Here's where I'm at right now with my new script: $(function() { $("#editRecord").submit(function(){ // is anything checked? if(!checkEmpty()){ $("#error").html("Please check something before submitting"); //alert("nothing Checked"); return false; } // Only A or B or C if(isAorBorC()){ $("#error").html("Please complete A or B or C, not both"); //alert("please complete A or B, not both"); return false; }; // all A's or all B's or all C's if(allAorBorCChecked()){ $("#error").html("It appears you have not completed all questions"); //alert("missing data"); return false; }; if(haveNo()){ // we're going on, but sending "type = C" } //alert("all OK"); return true; }); }); function checkEmpty(){ var OK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ if (this.checked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function isAorBorC(){ var OK = false; var Achecked = false; var Bchecked = false; var Cchecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // if we have an A checked remember it if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } if(theChar == "B" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Bchecked = true; } if(theChar == "C" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Cchecked = true; } if(Achecked && theChar == "B" && !Bchecked){ if(this.checked){ Bchecked = true; } } if(Achecked && theChar == "C" && !Cchecked){ if(this.checked){ Cchecked = true; } } if(Bchecked && theChar == "C" && !Cchecked){ if(this.checked){ Cchecked = true; } } if (Achecked && Bchecked){ OK = true; } if (Achecked && CBchecked){ OK = true; } if (Bchecked && Cchecked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function allAorBorCChecked(){ var notOK = false; var Achecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ // skip through to see if we're doing A's or B's var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // check the A's if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } }); if(Achecked){ // set the input to A $("#type").val("A"); // check _all_ a's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "A"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // Yes wasn't checked - is No? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); }elseif{ // set the input to B $("#type").val("B"); // check _all_ b's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "B"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } }else{ // set the input to C $("#type").val("C"); // check _all_ c's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "C"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } function haveNo(){ var thisName; var notOK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var checked = this.checked; if (this.name == thisName){ //Is this checked if(checked){ notOK = true; $("#type").val("C"); } } thisName = this.name; }); return notOK; } Anyone see what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • What is the possible disadvantage of putting declarations in inner blocks, instead of at beginning of function?

    - by shan23
    At the place where I work, there are explicit guidelines for placement of declarations of variables. According to that, it is required to put them at the global level and / or at the beginning of functions, and not in inner blocks (such as a for loop). Since they've been specified by persons more experienced than I am, I'm sure that there must be a good reason for it, but I cannot figure out what that might be. It would be nice to know if there are any compile time / run time advantages at having them declared at a bigger scope.

    Read the article

  • How to set result of function as global variable.

    - by George
    I'm sure this is really simple and I'm drawing a giant blank, but how do you set the result of a function as a global variable? Example, I want to set the first "color" in array "colors" as global variable "color" (I know the example doesn't make much practical sense, but it's just to illustrate my question): var color = ""; function selectColor () { var colors = ["blue","red","green","yellow"]; var color = colors[0]; return color; } window.onload = function () { selectColor (); alert(color); }

    Read the article

  • [Using $this when not in object context in] php error

    - by JasonS
    I have solved this problem, I just need to know what to do. I get the above error because I just realised that the class is being run as class::function($values) instead of class-function($values). Does anyone know how to convert this function to instantiate the class then run the function with values? private function _load($values=null) { define('LOADED_CONTROLLER', $this->controller); define('LOADED_FUNCTION', $this->function); $function = $this->function; $controller = new $this->controller; ($values == null) ? $controller->$function() : call_user_func_array(array($this->controller, $function), $values); }

    Read the article

  • Which way is preferred when doing asynchronous WCF calls?

    - by Mikael Svenson
    When invoking a WCF service asynchronous there seems to be two ways it can be done. 1. public void One() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); client.BegindoSearch("input", ResultOne, null); } private void ResultOne(IAsyncResult ar) { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); string data = client.EnddoSearch(ar); } 2. public void Two() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); client.doSearchCompleted += TwoCompleted; client.doSearchAsync("input"); } void TwoCompleted(object sender, doSearchCompletedEventArgs e) { string data = e.Result; } And with the new Task<T> class we have an easy third way by wrapping the synchronous operation in a task. 3. public void Three() { WcfClient client = new WcfClient(); var task = Task<string>.Factory.StartNew(() => client.doSearch("input")); string data = task.Result; } They all give you the ability to execute other code while you wait for the result, but I think Task<T> gives better control on what you execute before or after the result is retrieved. Are there any advantages or disadvantages to using one over the other? Or scenarios where one way of doing it is more preferable?

    Read the article

  • Will an optimizing compiler remove calls to a method whose result will be multiplied by zero?

    - by Tim R.
    Suppose you have a computationally expensive method, Compute(p), which returns some float, and another method, Falloff(p), which returns another float from zero to one. If you compute Falloff(p) * Compute(p), will Compute(p) still run when Falloff(p) returns zero? Or would you need to write a special case to prevent Compute(p) from running unnecessarily? Theoretically, an optimizing compiler could determine that omitting Compute when Falloff returns zero would have no effect on the program. However, this is kind of hard to test, since if you have Compute output some debug data to determine whether it is running, the compiler would know not to omit it because of that debug info, resulting in sort of a Schrodinger's cat situation. I know the safe solution to this problem is just to add the special case, but I'm just curious.

    Read the article

  • Why are there performance differences when a SQL function is called from .Net app vs when the same c

    - by Dan Snell
    We are having a problem in our test and dev environments with a function that runs quite slowly at times when called from an .Net Application. When we call this function directly from management studio it works fine. Here are the differences when they are profiled: From the Application: CPU: 906 Reads: 61853 Writes: 0 Duration: 926 From SSMS: CPU: 15 Reads: 11243 Writes: 0 Duration: 31 Now we have determined that when we recompile the function the performance returns to what we are expecting and the performance profile when run from the application matches that of what we get when we run it from SSMS. It will start slowing down again at what appear to random intervals. We have not seen this in prod but they may be in part because everything is recompiled there on a weekly basis. So what might cause this sort of behavior?

    Read the article

  • Can a function/class know the context from where it is being invoked or instantiated?

    - by vrode
    Let's take this class as example and assume that get_context() returns the source of the call: class A { public function __construct( ) { if( get_class( get_context( ) ) == B ) { return true; } else { return false; } } } class B { function __construct( ) { $a = new A( ); } } $a = new B( ); // returns true, as B is the invoking class of A $a = new A( ); // returns false, as B is invoked outside of any class So, my questions are: 1) can a function know the context that calls it? 2) can a object know context from where it has been instantiated? Or am I dreaming up new features not implementable in PHP?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214  | Next Page >