Search Results

Search found 577 results on 24 pages for 'delegates'.

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

  • RemoveHandler Issues with Custom Events

    - by Jeff Certain
    This is a case of things being more complicated that I thought they should be. Since it took a while to figure this one out, I thought it was worth explaining and putting all of the pieces to the answer in one spot. Let me set the stage. Architecturally, I have the notion of generic producers and consumers. These put items onto, and remove items from, a queue. This provides a generic, thread-safe mechanism to load balance the creation and processing of work items in our application. Part of the IProducer(Of T) interface is: 1: Public Interface IProducer(Of T) 2: Event ItemProduced(ByVal sender As IProducer(Of T), ByVal item As T) 3: Event ProductionComplete(ByVal sender As IProducer(Of T)) 4: End Interface Nothing sinister there, is there? In order to simplify our developers’ lives, I wrapped the queue with some functionality to manage the produces and consumers. Since the developer can specify the number of producers and consumers that are spun up, the queue code manages adding event handlers as the producers and consumers are instantiated. Now, we’ve been having some memory leaks and, in order to eliminate the possibility that this was caused by weak references to event handles, I wanted to remove them. This is where it got dicey. My first attempt looked like this: 1: For Each producer As P In Producers 2: RemoveHandler producer.ItemProduced, AddressOf ItemProducedHandler 3: RemoveHandler producer.ProductionComplete, AddressOf ProductionCompleteHandler 4: producer.Dispose() 5: Next What you can’t see in my posted code are the warnings this caused. The 'AddressOf' expression has no effect in this context because the method argument to 'AddressOf' requires a relaxed conversion to the delegate type of the event. Assign the 'AddressOf' expression to a variable, and use the variable to add or remove the method as the handler.  Now, what on earth does that mean? Well, a quick Bing search uncovered a whole bunch of talk about delegates. The first solution I found just changed all parameters in the event handler to Object. Sorry, but no. I used generics precisely because I wanted type safety, not because I wanted to use Object. More searching. Eventually, I found this forum post, where Jeff Shan revealed a missing piece of the puzzle. The other revelation came from Lian_ZA in this post. However, these two only hinted at the solution. Trying some of what they suggested led to finally getting an invalid cast exception that revealed the existence of ItemProducedEventHandler. Hold on a minute! I didn’t create that delegate. There’s nothing even close to that name in my code… except the ItemProduced event in the interface. Could it be? Naaaaah. Hmmm…. Well, as it turns out, there is a delegate created by the compiler for each event. By explicitly creating a delegate that refers to the method in question, implicitly cast to the generated delegate type, I was able to remove the handlers: 1: For Each producer As P In Producers 2: Dim _itemProducedHandler As IProducer(Of T).ItemProducedEventHandler = AddressOf ItemProducedHandler 3: RemoveHandler producer.ItemProduced, _itemProducedHandler 4:  5: Dim _productionCompleteHandler As IProducer(Of T).ProductionCompleteEventHandler = AddressOf ProductionCompleteHandler 6: RemoveHandler producer.ProductionComplete, _productionCompleteHandler 7: producer.Dispose() 8: Next That’s “all” it took to finally be able to remove the event handlers and maintain type-safe code. Hopefully, this will save you the same challenges I had in trying to figure out how to fix this issue!

    Read the article

  • Investigating Strategies For Functional Decomposition

    - by Liam McLennan
    Introducing Functional Decomposition Before I begin I must apologise. I think I am using the term ‘functional decomposition’ loosely, and probably incorrectly. For the purpose of this article I use functional decomposition to mean the recursive splitting of a large problem into increasingly smaller ones, so that the one large problem may be solved by solving a set of smaller problems. The justification for functional decomposition is that the decomposed problem is more easily solved. As software developers we recognise that the smaller pieces are more easily tested, since they do less and are more cohesive. Functional decomposition is important to all scientific pursuits. Once we understand natural selection we can start to look for humanities ancestral species, once we understand the big bang we can trace our expanding universe back to its origin. Isaac Newton acknowledged the compositional nature of his scientific achievements: If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants   The Two Strategies For Functional Decomposition of Computer Programs Private Methods When I was working on my undergraduate degree I was taught to functionally decompose problems by using private methods. Consider the problem of painting a house. The obvious solution is to solve the problem as a single unit: public void PaintAHouse() { // all the things required to paint a house ... } We decompose the problem by breaking it into parts: public void PaintAHouse() { PaintUndercoat(); PaintTopcoat(); } private void PaintUndercoat() { // everything required to paint the undercoat } private void PaintTopcoat() { // everything required to paint the topcoat } The problem can be recursively decomposed until a sufficiently granular level of detail is reached: public void PaintAHouse() { PaintUndercoat(); PaintTopcoat(); } private void PaintUndercoat() { prepareSurface(); fetchUndercoat(); paintUndercoat(); } private void PaintTopcoat() { fetchPaint(); paintTopcoat(); } According to Wikipedia, at least one computer programmer has referred to this process as “the art of subroutining”. The practical issues that I have encountered when using private methods for decomposition are: To preserve the top level API all of the steps must be private. This means that they can’t easily be tested. The private methods often have little cohesion except that they form part of the same solution. Decomposing to Classes The alternative is to decompose large problems into multiple classes, effectively using a class instead of each private method. The API delegates to related classes, so the API is not polluted by the sub-steps of the problem, and the steps can be easily tested because they are each in their own highly cohesive class. Additionally, I think that this technique facilitates better adherence to the Single Responsibility Principle, since each class can be decomposed until it has precisely one responsibility. Revisiting my previous example using class composition: public class HousePainter { private undercoatPainter = new UndercoatPainter(); private topcoatPainter = new TopcoatPainter(); public void PaintAHouse() { undercoatPainter.Paint(); topcoatPainter.Paint(); } } Summary When decomposing a problem there is more than one way to represent the sub-problems. Using private methods keeps the logic in one place and prevents a proliferation of classes (thereby following the four rules of simple design) but the class decomposition is more easily testable and more compatible with the Single Responsibility Principle.

    Read the article

  • Parallelism in .NET – Part 13, Introducing the Task class

    - by Reed
    Once we’ve used a task-based decomposition to decompose a problem, we need a clean abstraction usable to implement the resulting decomposition.  Given that task decomposition is founded upon defining discrete tasks, .NET 4 has introduced a new API for dealing with task related issues, the aptly named Task class. The Task class is a wrapper for a delegate representing a single, discrete task within your decomposition.  We will go into various methods of construction for tasks later, but, when reduced to its fundamentals, an instance of a Task is nothing more than a wrapper around a delegate with some utility functionality added.  In order to fully understand the Task class within the new Task Parallel Library, it is important to realize that a task really is just a delegate – nothing more.  In particular, note that I never mentioned threading or parallelism in my description of a Task.  Although the Task class exists in the new System.Threading.Tasks namespace: Tasks are not directly related to threads or multithreading. Of course, Task instances will typically be used in our implementation of concurrency within an application, but the Task class itself does not provide the concurrency used.  The Task API supports using Tasks in an entirely single threaded, synchronous manner. Tasks are very much like standard delegates.  You can execute a task synchronously via Task.RunSynchronously(), or you can use Task.Start() to schedule a task to run, typically asynchronously.  This is very similar to using delegate.Invoke to execute a delegate synchronously, or using delegate.BeginInvoke to execute it asynchronously. The Task class adds some nice functionality on top of a standard delegate which improves usability in both synchronous and multithreaded environments. The first addition provided by Task is a means of handling cancellation via the new unified cancellation mechanism of .NET 4.  If the wrapped delegate within a Task raises an OperationCanceledException during it’s operation, which is typically generated via calling ThrowIfCancellationRequested on a CancellationToken, or if the CancellationToken used to construct a Task instance is flagged as canceled, the Task’s IsCanceled property will be set to true automatically.  This provides a clean way to determine whether a Task has been canceled, often without requiring specific exception handling. Tasks also provide a clean API which can be used for waiting on a task.  Although the Task class explicitly implements IAsyncResult, Tasks provide a nicer usage model than the traditional .NET Asynchronous Programming Model.  Instead of needing to track an IAsyncResult handle, you can just directly call Task.Wait() to block until a Task has completed.  Overloads exist for providing a timeout, a CancellationToken, or both to prevent waiting indefinitely.  In addition, the Task class provides static methods for waiting on multiple tasks – Task.WaitAll and Task.WaitAny, again with overloads providing time out options.  This provides a very simple, clean API for waiting on single or multiple tasks. Finally, Tasks provide a much nicer model for Exception handling.  If the delegate wrapped within a Task raises an exception, the exception will automatically get wrapped into an AggregateException and exposed via the Task.Exception property.  This exception is stored with the Task directly, and does not tear down the application.  Later, when Task.Wait() (or Task.WaitAll or Task.WaitAny) is called on this task, an AggregateException will be raised at that point if any of the tasks raised an exception.  For example, suppose we have the following code: Task taskOne = new Task( () => { throw new ApplicationException("Random Exception!"); }); Task taskTwo = new Task( () => { throw new ArgumentException("Different exception here"); }); // Start the tasks taskOne.Start(); taskTwo.Start(); try { Task.WaitAll(new[] { taskOne, taskTwo }); } catch (AggregateException e) { Console.WriteLine(e.InnerExceptions.Count); foreach (var inner in e.InnerExceptions) Console.WriteLine(inner.Message); } .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; } Here, our routine will print: 2 Different exception here Random Exception! Note that we had two separate tasks, each of which raised two distinctly different types of exceptions.  We can handle this cleanly, with very little code, in a much nicer manner than the Asynchronous Programming API.  We no longer need to handle TargetInvocationException or worry about implementing the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern properly by setting the AsyncCompletedEventArgs.Error property.  Instead, we just raise our exception as normal, and handle AggregateException in a single location in our calling code.

    Read the article

  • Comments on Comments

    - by Joe Mayo
    I almost tweeted a reply to Capar Kleijne's question about comments on Twitter, but realized that my opinion exceeded 140 characters. The following is based upon my experience with extremes and approaches that I find useful in code comments. There are a couple extremes that I've seen and reasons why people go the distance in each approach. The most common extreme is no comments in the code at all.  A few bad reasons why this happens is because a developer is in a hurry, sloppy, or is interested in job preservation. The unfortunate result is that the code is difficult to understand and hard to maintain. The drawbacks to no comments in code are a primary reason why teachers drill the need for commenting code into our heads.  This viewpoint assumes the lack of comments are bad because the code is bad, but there is another reason for not commenting that is gaining more popularity. I've heard/and read that code should be self documenting. Following this thought pattern, if code is well written with meaningful names, there should not be a reason for comments.  An addendum to this argument is that comments are often neglected and get out-of-date, but the code is what is kept up-to-date. Presumably, if code contained very good naming, it would be easy to maintain.  This is a noble perspective and I like the practice of meaningful naming of identifiers. However, I think it's also an extreme approach that doesn't cover important cases.  i.e. If an identifier is named badly (subjective differences in opinion) or not changed appropriately during maintenance, then the badly named identifier is no more useful than a stale comment. These were the two no-comment extremes, so let's look at the too many comments extreme. On a regular basis, I'll see cases where the code is over-commented; not nearly as often as the no-comment scenarios, but still prevalent.  These are examples of where every single line in the code is commented.  These comments make the code harder to read because they get in the way of the algorithm.  In most cases, the comments parrot what each line of code does.  If a developer understands the language, then most statements are immediately intuitive.  i.e. what use is it to say that I'm assigning foo to bar when it's clear what the code is doing. I think that over-commenting code is a waste of time that slows down initial development and maintenance.  Understandably, the developer's intentions are admirable because they've had it beaten into their heads that they must comment. However, I think it's an extreme and prefer a more moderate approach. I don't think the extremes do justice to code because each can make maintenance harder.  No comments on bad code is obviously a problem, but the other two extremes are subtle and require qualification to address properly. The problem I see with the code-as-documentation approach is that it doesn't lift the developer out of the algorithm to identify dependencies, intentions, and hacks. Any developer can read code and follow an algorithm, but they still need to know where it fits into the big picture of the application. Because of indirections with language features like interfaces, delegates, and virtual members, code can become complex.  Occasionally, it's useful to point out a nuance or reason why a piece of code is there. i.e. If you've building an app that communicates via HTTP, you'll have certain headers to include for the endpoint, and it could be useful to point out why the code for setting those header values is there and how they affect the application. An argument against this could be that you should extract that code into a separate method with a meaningful name to describe the scenario.  My problem with such an approach would be that your code base becomes even more difficult to navigate and work with because you have all of this extra code just to make the code more meaningful. My opinion is that a simple and well-stated comment stating the reasons and intention for the code is more natural and convenient to the initial developer and maintainer.  I just don't agree with the approach of going out of the way to avoid making a comment.  I'm also concerned that some developers would take this approach as an excuse to not comment their bad code. Another area where I like comments is on documentation comments.  Java has it and so does C# and VB.  It's convenient because we can build automated tools that extract these comments.  These extracted comments are often much better than no documentation at all.  The "go read the code" answer always doesn't fulfill the need for a quick summary of an API. To summarize, I think that the extremes of no comments and too many comments are less than desirable approaches. I prefer documentation comments to explain each class and member (API level) and code comments as necessary to supplement well-written code. Joe

    Read the article

  • Parallelism in .NET – Part 17, Think Continuations, not Callbacks

    - by Reed
    In traditional asynchronous programming, we’d often use a callback to handle notification of a background task’s completion.  The Task class in the Task Parallel Library introduces a cleaner alternative to the traditional callback: continuation tasks. Asynchronous programming methods typically required callback functions.  For example, MSDN’s Asynchronous Delegates Programming Sample shows a class that factorizes a number.  The original method in the example has the following signature: public static bool Factorize(int number, ref int primefactor1, ref int primefactor2) { //... .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; } However, calling this is quite “tricky”, even if we modernize the sample to use lambda expressions via C# 3.0.  Normally, we could call this method like so: int primeFactor1 = 0; int primeFactor2 = 0; bool answer = Factorize(10298312, ref primeFactor1, ref primeFactor2); Console.WriteLine("{0}/{1} [Succeeded {2}]", primeFactor1, primeFactor2, answer); If we want to make this operation run in the background, and report to the console via a callback, things get tricker.  First, we need a delegate definition: public delegate bool AsyncFactorCaller( int number, ref int primefactor1, ref int primefactor2); Then we need to use BeginInvoke to run this method asynchronously: int primeFactor1 = 0; int primeFactor2 = 0; AsyncFactorCaller caller = new AsyncFactorCaller(Factorize); caller.BeginInvoke(10298312, ref primeFactor1, ref primeFactor2, result => { int factor1 = 0; int factor2 = 0; bool answer = caller.EndInvoke(ref factor1, ref factor2, result); Console.WriteLine("{0}/{1} [Succeeded {2}]", factor1, factor2, answer); }, null); This works, but is quite difficult to understand from a conceptual standpoint.  To combat this, the framework added the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern, but it isn’t much easier to understand or author. Using .NET 4’s new Task<T> class and a continuation, we can dramatically simplify the implementation of the above code, as well as make it much more understandable.  We do this via the Task.ContinueWith method.  This method will schedule a new Task upon completion of the original task, and provide the original Task (including its Result if it’s a Task<T>) as an argument.  Using Task, we can eliminate the delegate, and rewrite this code like so: var background = Task.Factory.StartNew( () => { int primeFactor1 = 0; int primeFactor2 = 0; bool result = Factorize(10298312, ref primeFactor1, ref primeFactor2); return new { Result = result, Factor1 = primeFactor1, Factor2 = primeFactor2 }; }); background.ContinueWith(task => Console.WriteLine("{0}/{1} [Succeeded {2}]", task.Result.Factor1, task.Result.Factor2, task.Result.Result)); This is much simpler to understand, in my opinion.  Here, we’re explicitly asking to start a new task, then continue the task with a resulting task.  In our case, our method used ref parameters (this was from the MSDN Sample), so there is a little bit of extra boiler plate involved, but the code is at least easy to understand. That being said, this isn’t dramatically shorter when compared with our C# 3 port of the MSDN code above.  However, if we were to extend our requirements a bit, we can start to see more advantages to the Task based approach.  For example, supposed we need to report the results in a user interface control instead of reporting it to the Console.  This would be a common operation, but now, we have to think about marshaling our calls back to the user interface.  This is probably going to require calling Control.Invoke or Dispatcher.Invoke within our callback, forcing us to specify a delegate within the delegate.  The maintainability and ease of understanding drops.  However, just as a standard Task can be created with a TaskScheduler that uses the UI synchronization context, so too can we continue a task with a specific context.  There are Task.ContinueWith method overloads which allow you to provide a TaskScheduler.  This means you can schedule the continuation to run on the UI thread, by simply doing: Task.Factory.StartNew( () => { int primeFactor1 = 0; int primeFactor2 = 0; bool result = Factorize(10298312, ref primeFactor1, ref primeFactor2); return new { Result = result, Factor1 = primeFactor1, Factor2 = primeFactor2 }; }).ContinueWith(task => textBox1.Text = string.Format("{0}/{1} [Succeeded {2}]", task.Result.Factor1, task.Result.Factor2, task.Result.Result), TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext()); This is far more understandable than the alternative.  By using Task.ContinueWith in conjunction with TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext(), we get a simple way to push any work onto a background thread, and update the user interface on the proper UI thread.  This technique works with Windows Presentation Foundation as well as Windows Forms, with no change in methodology.

    Read the article

  • Simple-Talk development: a quick history lesson

    - by Michael Williamson
    Up until a few months ago, Simple-Talk ran on a pure .NET stack, with IIS as the web server and SQL Server as the database. Unfortunately, the platform for the site hadn’t quite gotten the love and attention it deserved. On the one hand, in the words of our esteemed editor Tony “I’d consider the current platform to be a “success”; it cost $10K, has lasted for 6 years, was finished, end to end in 6 months, and although we moan about it has got us quite a long way.” On the other hand, it was becoming increasingly clear that it needed some serious work. Among other issues, we had authors that wouldn’t blog because our current blogging platform, Community Server, was too painful for them to use. Forgetting about Simple-Talk for a moment, if you ask somebody what blogging platform they’d choose, the odds are they’d say WordPress. Regardless of its technical merits, it’s probably the most popular blogging platform, and it certainly seemed easier to use than Community Server. The issue was that WordPress is normally hosted on a Linux stack running PHP, Apache and MySQL — quite a difference from our Microsoft technology stack. We certainly didn’t want to rewrite the entire site — we just wanted a better blogging platform, with the rest of the existing, legacy site left as is. At a very high level, Simple-Talk’s technical design was originally very straightforward: when your browser sends an HTTP request to Simple-Talk, IIS (the web server) takes the request, does some work, and sends back a response. In order to keep the legacy site running, except with WordPress running the blogs, a different design is called for. We now use nginx as a reverse-proxy, which can then delegate requests to the appropriate application: So, when your browser sends a request to Simple-Talk, nginx takes that request and checks which part of the site you’re trying to access. Most of the time, it just passes the request along to IIS, which can then respond in much the same way it always has. However, if your request is for the blogs, then nginx delegates the request to WordPress. Unfortunately, as simple as that diagram looks, it hides an awful lot of complexity. In particular, the legacy site running on IIS was made up of four .NET applications. I’ve already mentioned one of these applications, Community Server, which handled the old blogs as well as managing membership and the forums. We have a couple of other applications to manage both our newsletters and our articles, and our own custom application to do some of the rendering on the site, such as the front page and the articles. When I say that it was made up of four .NET applications, this might conjure up an image in your mind of how they fit together: You might imagine four .NET applications, each with their own database, communicating over well-defined APIs. Sadly, reality was a little disappointing: We had four .NET applications that all ran on the same database. Worse still, there were many queries that happily joined across tables from multiple applications, meaning that each application was heavily dependent on the exact data schema that each other application used. Add to this that many of the queries were at least dozens of lines long, and practically identical to other queries except in a few key spots, and we can see that attempting to replace one component of the system would be more than a little tricky. However, the problems with the old system do give us a good place to start thinking about desirable qualities from any changes to the platform. Specifically: Maintainability — the tight coupling between each .NET application made it difficult to update any one application without also having to make changes elsewhere Replaceability — the tight coupling also meant that replacing one component wouldn’t be straightforward, especially if it wasn’t on a similar Microsoft stack. We’d like to be able to replace different parts without having to modify the existing codebase extensively Reusability — we’d like to be able to combine the different pieces of the system in different ways for different sites Repeatable deployments — rather than having to deploy the site manually with a long list of instructions, we should be able to deploy the entire site with a single command, allowing you to create a new instance of the site easily whether on production, staging servers, test servers or your own local machine Testability — if we can deploy the site with a single command, and each part of the site is no longer dependent on the specifics of how every other part of the site works, we can begin to run automated tests against the site, and against individual parts, both to prevent regressions and to do a little test-driven development In the next part, I’ll describe the high-level architecture we now have that hopefully brings us a little closer to these five traits.

    Read the article

  • A C# implementation of the CallStream pattern

    - by Bertrand Le Roy
    Dusan published this interesting post a couple of weeks ago about a novel JavaScript chaining pattern: http://dbj.org/dbj/?p=514 It’s similar to many existing patterns, but the syntax is extraordinarily terse and it provides a new form of friction-free, plugin-less extensibility mechanism. Here’s a JavaScript example from Dusan’s post: CallStream("#container") (find, "div") (attr, "A", 1) (css, "color", "#fff") (logger); The interesting thing here is that the functions that are being passed as the first argument are arbitrary, they don’t need to be declared as plug-ins. Compare that with a rough jQuery equivalent that could look something like this: $.fn.logger = function () { /* ... */ } $("selector") .find("div") .attr("A", 1) .css("color", "#fff") .logger(); There is also the “each” method in jQuery that achieves something similar, but its syntax is a little more verbose. Of course, that this pattern can be expressed so easily in JavaScript owes everything to the extraordinary way functions are treated in that language, something Douglas Crockford called “the very best part of JavaScript”. One of the first things I thought while reading Dusan’s post was how I could adapt that to C#. After all, with Lambdas and delegates, C# also has its first-class functions. And sure enough, it works really really well. After about ten minutes, I was able to write this: CallStreamFactory.CallStream (p => Console.WriteLine("Yay!")) (Dump, DateTime.Now) (DumpFooAndBar, new { Foo = 42, Bar = "the answer" }) (p => Console.ReadKey()); Where the Dump function is: public static void Dump(object options) { Console.WriteLine(options.ToString()); } And DumpFooAndBar is: public static void DumpFooAndBar(dynamic options) { Console.WriteLine("Foo is {0} and bar is {1}.", options.Foo, options.Bar); } So how does this work? Well, it really is very simple. And not. Let’s say it’s not a lot of code, but if you’re like me you might need an Advil after that. First, I defined the signature of the CallStream method as follows: public delegate CallStream CallStream (Action<object> action, object options = null); The delegate define a call stream as something that takes an action (a function of the options) and an optional options object and that returns a delegate of its own type. Tricky, but that actually works, a delegate can return its own type. Then I wrote an implementation of that delegate that calls the action and returns itself: public static CallStream CallStream (Action<object> action, object options = null) { action(options); return CallStream; } Pretty nice, eh? Well, yes and no. What we are doing here is to execute a sequence of actions using an interesting novel syntax. But for this to be actually useful, you’d need to build a more specialized call stream factory that comes with some sort of context (like Dusan did in JavaScript). For example, you could write the following alternate delegate signature that takes a string and returns itself: public delegate StringCallStream StringCallStream(string message); And then write the following call stream (notice the currying): public static StringCallStream CreateDumpCallStream(string dumpPath) { StringCallStream str = null; var dump = File.AppendText(dumpPath); dump.AutoFlush = true; str = s => { dump.WriteLine(s); return str; }; return str; } (I know, I’m not closing that stream; sure; bad, bad Bertrand) Finally, here’s how you use it: CallStreamFactory.CreateDumpCallStream(@".\dump.txt") ("Wow, this really works.") (DateTime.Now.ToLongTimeString()) ("And that is all."); Next step would be to combine this contextual implementation with the one that takes an action parameter and do some really fun stuff. I’m only scratching the surface here. This pattern could reveal itself to be nothing more than a gratuitous mind-bender or there could be applications that we hardly suspect at this point. In any case, it’s a fun new construct. Or is this nothing new? You tell me… Comments are open :)

    Read the article

  • How to make creating viewmodels at runtime less painful

    - by Mr Happy
    I apologize for the long question, it reads a bit as a rant, but I promise it's not! I've summarized my question(s) below In the MVC world, things are straightforward. The Model has state, the View shows the Model, and the Controller does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a controller has no state. To do stuff the Controller has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a controller you care about supplying those dependencies, nothing else. When you execute an action (method on Controller), you use those dependencies to retrieve or update the Model or calling some other domain service. If there's any context, say like some user wants to see the details of a particular item, you pass the Id of that item as parameter to the Action. Nowhere in the Controller is there any reference to any state. So far so good. Enter MVVM. I love WPF, I love data binding. I love frameworks that make data binding to ViewModels even easier (using Caliburn Micro a.t.m.). I feel things are less straightforward in this world though. Let's do the exercise again: the Model has state, the View shows the ViewModel, and the ViewModel does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a ViewModel does have state! (to clarify; maybe it delegates all the properties to one or more Models, but that means it must have a reference to the model one way or another, which is state in itself) To do stuff the ViewModel has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a ViewModel you care about supplying those dependencies, but also the state. And this, ladies and gentlemen, annoys me to no end. Whenever you need to instantiate a ProductDetailsViewModel from the ProductSearchViewModel (from which you called the ProductSearchWebService which in turn returned IEnumerable<ProductDTO>, everybody still with me?), you can do one of these things: call new ProductDetailsViewModel(productDTO, _shoppingCartWebService /* dependcy */);, this is bad, imagine 3 more dependencies, this means the ProductSearchViewModel needs to take on those dependencies as well. Also changing the constructor is painful. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelFactory.Create().Initialize(productDTO);, the factory is just a Func, they are easily generated by most IoC frameworks. I think this is bad because Init methods are a leaky abstraction. You also can't use the readonly keyword for fields that are set in the Init method. I'm sure there are a few more reasons. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelAbstractFactory.Create(productDTO); So... this is the pattern (abstract factory) that is usually recommended for this type of problem. I though it was genius since it satisfies my craving for static typing, until I actually started using it. The amount of boilerplate code is I think too much (you know, apart from the ridiculous variable names I get use). For each ViewModel that needs runtime parameters you'll get two extra files (factory interface and implementation), and you need to type the non-runtime dependencies like 4 extra times. And each time the dependencies change, you get to change it in the factory as well. It feels like I don't even use a DI container anymore. (I think Castle Windsor has some kind of solution for this [with it's own drawbacks, correct me if I'm wrong]). do something with anonymous types or dictionary. I like my static typing. So, yeah. Mixing state and behavior in this way creates a problem which don't exist at all in MVC. And I feel like there currently isn't a really adequate solution for this problem. Now I'd like to observe some things: People actually use MVVM. So they either don't care about all of the above, or they have some brilliant other solution. I haven't found an in-depth example of MVVM with WPF. For example, the NDDD-sample project immensely helped me understand some DDD concepts. I'd really like it if someone could point me in the direction of something similar for MVVM/WPF. Maybe I'm doing MVVM all wrong and I should turn my design upside down. Maybe I shouldn't have this problem at all. Well I know other people have asked the same question so I think I'm not the only one. To summarize Am I correct to conclude that having the ViewModel being an integration point for both state and behavior is the reason for some difficulties with the MVVM pattern as a whole? Is using the abstract factory pattern the only/best way to instantiate a ViewModel in a statically typed way? Is there something like an in depth reference implementation available? Is having a lot of ViewModels with both state/behavior a design smell?

    Read the article

  • The Arab HEUG is now a reality, and other random thoughts

    - by user9147039
    I just returned from Doha, Qatar where the first of its kind HEUG (Higher Education User Group) meeting for institutions in the Middle East and North Africa was held at Qatar University and jointly hosted by Damman University from Saudi Arabia. Over 80 delegates attended including representation from education institutions in Oman, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Qatar. There are many other regional HEUG organizations in place (in Australia/New Zealand, APAC, EMEA, as well as smaller regional HEUG’s in the Netherlands, South Africa, and in regions of the US), but it was truly an accomplishment to see this Middle East/North Africa group organize and launch their chapter with a meeting of this quality. To be known as the Arab HEUG going forward, I am excited about the prospects for sharing between the institutions and for the growth of Oracle solutions in the region. In particular the hosts for the event (Qatar University) did a masterful job with logistics and organization, and the quality of the event was a testament to their capabilities. Among the more interesting and enlightening presentations I attended were one from Dammam University on the lessons learned from their implementation of Campus Solutions and transition off of Banner, as well as the use by Qatar University E-business Suite for grants management (both pre-and post-award). The most notable fact coming from this latter presentation was the fit (89%) of e-Business Suite Grants to the university’s requirements. In a few weeks time we will be convening the 5th meeting of the Oracle Education & Research Industry Strategy Council in Redwood Shores (5th since my advent into my current role). The main topics of discussion will be around our Higher Education Applications Strategy for the future (including cloud approaches to ERP (HCM, Finance, and Student Information Systems), how some cases studies on the benefits of leveraging delivered functionality and extensibility in the software (versus customization). On the second day of the event we will turn our attention to Oracle in Research and also budgeting and planning in higher education. Both of these sessions will include significant participation from council members in the form of panel discussions. Our EVP’s for Systems (John Fowler) and for Global Cloud Services and North America application sales (Joanne Olson) will join us for the discussion. I recently read a couple of articles that were surprising to me. The first was from Inside Higher Ed on October 15 entitled, “As colleges prepare for major software upgrades, Kuali tries to woo them from corporate vendors.” It continues to disappointment that after all this time we are still debating whether it is better to build enterprise software through open or community source initiatives when fully functional, flexible, supported, and widely adopted options exist in the marketplace. Over a decade or more ago when these solutions were relatively immature and there was a great deal of turnover in the market I could appreciate the initiatives like Kuali. But let’s not kid ourselves – the real objective of this movement is to counter a perceived predatory commercial software industry. Again, when commercial solutions are deployed as written without significant customization, and standard business processes are adopted, the cost of these solutions (relative to the value delivered) is quite low, and certain much lower than the massive investment (and risk) in in-house developers to support a bespoke community source system. In this era of cost pressures in education and the need to refocus resources on teaching, learning, and research, I believe it’s bordering on irresponsible to continue to pursue open-source ERP. Many of the adopter’s total costs are staggering and have little to show for their efforts and expended resources. The second article was recently in the Chronicle of Higher Education and was entitled “’Big Data’ Is Bunk, Obama Campaign’s Tech Guru Tells University Leaders.” This one was so outrageous I almost don’t want to legitimize it by referencing it here. In the article the writer relays statements made by Harper Reed, President Obama’s former CTO for his 2012 re-election campaign, that big data solutions in education have no relevance and are akin to snake oil. He goes on to state that while he’s a fan of data-driven decision making in education, most of the necessary analysis can be accomplished in Excel spreadsheets. Yeah… right. This is exactly what ails education (higher education in particular). Dozens of shadow and siloed systems running on spreadsheets with limited-to-no enterprise wide initiatives to harness the data-rich environment that is a higher ed institution and transform the data into useable information. I’ll grant Mr. Reed that “Big Data” is overused and hackneyed, but imperatives like improving student success in higher education are classic big data problems that data-mining and predictive analytics can address. Further, higher ed need to be producing a massive amount more data scientists and analysts than are currently in the pipeline, to further this discipline and application of these tools to many many other problems across multiple industries.

    Read the article

  • Global Perspective: Oracle AppAdvantage Does its Stage Debut in the UK

    - by Tanu Sood
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii- mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi- mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} Global Perspective is a monthly series that brings experiences, business needs and real-world use cases from regions across the globe. This month’s feature is a follow-up from last month’s Global Perspective note from a well known ACE Director based in EMEA. My first contribution to this blog was before Oracle Open World and I was quite excited about where this initiative would take me in my understanding of the value of Oracle Fusion Middleware. Rimi Bewtra from the Oracle AppAdvantage team came as promised to the Oracle ACE Director briefings and explained what this initiative was all about and I then asked the directors to take part in the new survey. The story was really well received and then at the SOA advisory board that many of these ACE Directors already take part in there was a further discussion on how this initiative will help customers understand the benefits of adoption. A few days later Rick Beers launched the program at a lunch of invited customer executives which included one from Pella who talked about their projects (a quick recap on that here). I wasn’t able to stay for the whole event but what really interested me was that these executives who understood the technology but where looking for how they could use them to drive their businesses. Lots of ideas were bubbling up in my head about how we can use this in user groups to help our members, and the timing was fantastic as just three weeks later we had UKOUG_Apps13, our flagship Applications conference in the UK. We had independently working with Oracle marketing in the UK on an initiative called Apps Transformation to help our members look beyond just the application they use today. We have had a Fusion community page but felt the options open are now much wider than Fusion Applications, there are acquired applications, social, mobility and of course the underlying technology, Oracle Fusion Middleware. I was really pleased to be allowed to give the Oracle AppAdvantage story as a session in our conference and we are planning a special Apps Transformation event in March where I hope the Oracle AppAdvantage team will take part and we will have the results of the survey to discuss. But, life also came full circle for me. In my first post, I talked about Andrew Sutherland and his original theory that Oracle Fusion Middleware adoption had technical drivers. Well, Andrew was a speaker at our event and he gave a potted, tech-talk free update on Oracle Open World. Andrew talked about the Prevailing Technology Winds, and what is driving this today and he talked about that in the past it was the move from simply automating processes (ERP etc), through the altering of those processes (SOA) and onto consolidation. The next drivers are around the need to predict, both faster and more accurately; how to better exploit the information that we have available. He went on to talk about The Nexus of Forces: Social, Mobile, Cloud and Information – harnessing these forces of change with Oracle technology. Gartner really likes this concept and if you want to know more you can get their paper here. All this has made me think, and I hope it will make you too. Technology can help us drive our businesses better and understanding your needs can be the first step on your journey, which was the theme of our event in the UK. I spoke to a number of the delegates and I hope to share some of their stories in later posts. If you have a story to share, the survey is at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/P335DD3 About the Author: Debra Lilley, Fujitsu Fusion Champion, UKOUG Board Member, Fusion User Experience Advocate and ACE Director. Debra has 18 years experience with Oracle Applications, with E Business Suite since 9.4.1, moving to Business Intelligence Team Leader and then Oracle Alliance Director. She has spoken at over 100 conferences worldwide and posts at debrasoraclethoughts Editor’s Note: Debra has kindly agreed to share her musings and experience in a monthly column on the Fusion Middleware blog so do stay tuned…

    Read the article

  • MVVM - how to make creating viewmodels at runtime less painfull

    - by Mr Happy
    I apologize for the long question, it reads a bit as a rant, but I promise it's not! I've summarized my question(s) below In the MVC world, things are straightforward. The Model has state, the View shows the Model, and the Controller does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a controller has no state. To do stuff the Controller has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a controller you care about supplying those dependencies, nothing else. When you execute an action (method on Controller), you use those dependencies to retrieve or update the Model or calling some other domain service. If there's any context, say like some user wants to see the details of a particular item, you pass the Id of that item as parameter to the Action. Nowhere in the Controller is there any reference to any state. So far so good. Enter MVVM. I love WPF, I love data binding. I love frameworks that make data binding to ViewModels even easier (using Caliburn Micro a.t.m.). I feel things are less straightforward in this world though. Let's do the exercise again: the Model has state, the View shows the ViewModel, and the ViewModel does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a ViewModel does have state! (to clarify; maybe it delegates all the properties to one or more Models, but that means it must have a reference to the model one way or another, which is state in itself) To do stuff the ViewModel has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a ViewModel you care about supplying those dependencies, but also the state. And this, ladies and gentlemen, annoys me to no end. Whenever you need to instantiate a ProductDetailsViewModel from the ProductSearchViewModel (from which you called the ProductSearchWebService which in turn returned IEnumerable<ProductDTO>, everybody still with me?), you can do one of these things: call new ProductDetailsViewModel(productDTO, _shoppingCartWebService /* dependcy */);, this is bad, imagine 3 more dependencies, this means the ProductSearchViewModel needs to take on those dependencies as well. Also changing the constructor is painfull. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelFactory.Create().Initialize(productDTO);, the factory is just a Func, they are easily generated by most IoC frameworks. I think this is bad because Init methods are a leaky abstraction. You also can't use the readonly keyword for fields that are set in the Init method. I'm sure there are a few more reasons. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelAbstractFactory.Create(productDTO); So... this is the pattern (abstract factory) that is usually recommended for this type of problem. I though it was genious since it satisfies my craving for static typing, until I actually started using it. The amount of boilerplate code is I think too much (you know, apart from the ridiculous variable names I get use). For each ViewModel that needs runtime parameters you'll get two extra files (factory interface and implementation), and you need to type the non-runtime dependencies like 4 extra times. And each time the dependencies change, you get to change it in the factory as well. It feels like I don't even use an DI container anymore. (I think Castle Windsor has some kind of solution for this [with it's own drawbacks, correct me if I'm wrong]). do something with anonymous types or dictionary. I like my static typing. So, yeah. Mixing state and behavior in this way creates a problem which don't exist at all in MVC. And I feel like there currently isn't a really adequate solution for this problem. Now I'd like to observe some things: People actually use MVVM. So they either don't care about all of the above, or they have some brilliant other solution. I haven't found an indepth example of MVVM with WPF. For example, the NDDD-sample project immensely helped me understand some DDD concepts. I'd really like it if someone could point me in the direction of something similar for MVVM/WPF. Maybe I'm doing MVVM all wrong and I should turn my design upside down. Maybe I shouldn't have this problem at all. Well I know other people have asked the same question so I think I'm not the only one. To summarize Am I correct to conclude that having the ViewModel being an integration point for both state and behavior is the reason for some difficulties with the MVVM pattern as a whole? Is using the abstract factory pattern the only/best way to instantiate a ViewModel in a statically typed way? Is there something like an in depth reference implementation available? Is having a lot of ViewModels with both state/behavior a design smell?

    Read the article

  • How to make creating viewmodels at runtime less painfull

    - by Mr Happy
    I apologize for the long question, it reads a bit as a rant, but I promise it's not! I've summarized my question(s) below In the MVC world, things are straightforward. The Model has state, the View shows the Model, and the Controller does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a controller has no state. To do stuff the Controller has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a controller you care about supplying those dependencies, nothing else. When you execute an action (method on Controller), you use those dependencies to retrieve or update the Model or calling some other domain service. If there's any context, say like some user wants to see the details of a particular item, you pass the Id of that item as parameter to the Action. Nowhere in the Controller is there any reference to any state. So far so good. Enter MVVM. I love WPF, I love data binding. I love frameworks that make data binding to ViewModels even easier (using Caliburn Micro a.t.m.). I feel things are less straightforward in this world though. Let's do the exercise again: the Model has state, the View shows the ViewModel, and the ViewModel does stuff to/with the Model (basically), a ViewModel does have state! (to clarify; maybe it delegates all the properties to one or more Models, but that means it must have a reference to the model one way or another, which is state in itself) To do stuff the ViewModel has some dependencies on web services, repository, the lot. When you instantiate a ViewModel you care about supplying those dependencies, but also the state. And this, ladies and gentlemen, annoys me to no end. Whenever you need to instantiate a ProductDetailsViewModel from the ProductSearchViewModel (from which you called the ProductSearchWebService which in turn returned IEnumerable<ProductDTO>, everybody still with me?), you can do one of these things: call new ProductDetailsViewModel(productDTO, _shoppingCartWebService /* dependcy */);, this is bad, imagine 3 more dependencies, this means the ProductSearchViewModel needs to take on those dependencies as well. Also changing the constructor is painfull. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelFactory.Create().Initialize(productDTO);, the factory is just a Func, they are easily generated by most IoC frameworks. I think this is bad because Init methods are a leaky abstraction. You also can't use the readonly keyword for fields that are set in the Init method. I'm sure there are a few more reasons. call _myInjectedProductDetailsViewModelAbstractFactory.Create(productDTO); So... this is the pattern (abstract factory) that is usually recommended for this type of problem. I though it was genious since it satisfies my craving for static typing, until I actually started using it. The amount of boilerplate code is I think too much (you know, apart from the ridiculous variable names I get use). For each ViewModel that needs runtime parameters you'll get two extra files (factory interface and implementation), and you need to type the non-runtime dependencies like 4 extra times. And each time the dependencies change, you get to change it in the factory as well. It feels like I don't even use an DI container anymore. (I think Castle Windsor has some kind of solution for this [with it's own drawbacks, correct me if I'm wrong]). do something with anonymous types or dictionary. I like my static typing. So, yeah. Mixing state and behavior in this way creates a problem which don't exist at all in MVC. And I feel like there currently isn't a really adequate solution for this problem. Now I'd like to observe some things: People actually use MVVM. So they either don't care about all of the above, or they have some brilliant other solution. I haven't found an indepth example of MVVM with WPF. For example, the NDDD-sample project immensely helped me understand some DDD concepts. I'd really like it if someone could point me in the direction of something similar for MVVM/WPF. Maybe I'm doing MVVM all wrong and I should turn my design upside down. Maybe I shouldn't have this problem at all. Well I know other people have asked the same question so I think I'm not the only one. To summarize Am I correct to conclude that having the ViewModel being an integration point for both state and behavior is the reason for some difficulties with the MVVM pattern as a whole? Is using the abstract factory pattern the only/best way to instantiate a ViewModel in a statically typed way? Is there something like an in depth reference implementation available? Is having a lot of ViewModels with both state/behavior a design smell?

    Read the article

  • popView from UITabBarController inside UINavigationController

    - by Manu
    Hi, I'm building an application based on the Utility template from Xcode, to which I have added some more views. My application structure would be as follows: MainView (the app menu) Flip-side view (a calculator) UINavigationController Settings view viewDiDLoad: UITabBarController - Tab1 view (options) - Tab2 view (information text) I can navigate correctly from my MainView to my Flip-side view, which is also the root view of the Navigation Controller. From my Flip-side view, I push a second view of my Navigation Controller (Settings view) that is configured to show an UITabBarController, with two tabs, as soon as it loads (with viewDidLoad). If I remove the UITabBarController, I can return with no problems to my Flip-side view using "popViewController" from my Settings view. The problem comes if I load the UITabBarController in viewDiDLoad in my Settings view... the tabs work perfectly, but I'm not able to return to my Flip-side view (root view of the Navigation Controller) anymore. I CAN return if I use the Navigation Bar of the Navigation Controller, but I want to configure my own buttons and have the Navigation Bar hidden. So far I've tried the following methods: [self.navigationController popViewControllerAnimated:YES]; [self.navigationController popToRootViewControllerAnimated:YES]; [self.navigationController popToViewController:FlipSideViewController animated:YES]; But they don't seem to work. The first two just do nothing (the screen remains as it was), and the third one does not recognize the "FlipsideViewController" (maybe because it's a delegate of the MainViewController?). Is there a way to check what is exactly doing the "back" button of the Navigation Bar if I activate it? Should I be using delegates? Can I call a popViewController method in my Settings view from any of the two Tab views? This is my Flip-side view: - (IBAction)showSettingsView { SettingsViewController *controller = [[SettingsViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"SettingsView" bundle:nil]; controller.title = @"Settings"; [self.navigationController pushViewController:controller animated:YES]; [controller release]; } This is my Settings view: - (void)viewDidLoad { [super viewDidLoad]; tabBarController = [[UITabBarController alloc] init]; Tab1ViewController* vc1 = [[Tab1ViewController alloc] init]; Tab2ViewController* vc2 = [[Tab2ViewController alloc] init]; NSArray* controllers = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:vc1, vc2, nil]; tabBarController.viewControllers = controllers; [self.view addSubview:tabBarController.view]; } And the method to return in one of the Tab views: - (IBAction)backFromTab1View { [self.navigationController popToViewController:FlipSideViewController animated:YES]; } Thanks very much and sorry if the question is too basic!

    Read the article

  • Cannot get UISearchBar Scope Bar to appear in Toolbar on iPad

    - by Jann
    This is really causing me fits. I put a toolbar on the IUView on the iPad. I added the following: Search Bar (not Search Bar and Search Display) to the toolbar. I set the options to be as follows: Show Cancel Button, Show Scope Bar, Scope Button Titles are: "Title1" and "Title2" (with Title2's radio button selected). Opaque, Clear Context and Auto Resize are checked. I hooked up the delegate of Search Bar to the "File's Owner" and linked it to IBOutlet theSearchBar. In my viewWillAppear I have the following: [theSearchBar setScopeButtonTitles:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:@"Near Me",@"Everywhere",nil]]; //Just in case: [theSearchBar setShowsScopeBar:YES]; //doesn't seem to do anything: //[theSearchBar sizeToFit]; searchDisplayController = [[UISearchDisplayController alloc] initWithSearchBar:theSearchBar contentsController:self]; [self setSearchDisplayController:searchDisplayController]; [searchDisplayController setDelegate:self]; [searchDisplayController setSearchResultsDataSource:self]; //again--does not seem to do anything..but people have suggested it: [theSearchBar sizeToFit]; Okay, so far, I thought, so good. So, I made the File's Owner .m file to be a delegate for: UISearchBarDelegate, UISearchDisplayDelegate. My issue: I have yet to implement the delegates necessary to do the search but still... shouldn't I be seeing the scopeBar next to the search field when I click into the search field? Just so you know I DO see the log of the characters I type, so the delegate is working. I have the following dummy functions in the .m file (just in case) // called when keyboard search button pressed - (void)searchBarSearchButtonClicked:(UISearchBar *)searchBar { NSLog(@"Search Button Clicked\n"); [theSearchBar resignFirstResponder]; } // called when cancel button pressed - (void)searchBarCancelButtonClicked:(UISearchBar *)searchBar { NSLog(@"Cancel Button Clicked\n"); [theSearchBar resignFirstResponder]; } - (void)searchBar:(UISearchBar *)searchBar textDidChange:(NSString *)searchText { NSLog(@"Search Text So Far: '%@'\n",searchText); } - (BOOL)searchBarShouldBeginEditing:(UISearchBar *)searchBar { return YES; } - (BOOL)searchBarShouldEndEditing:(UISearchBar *)searchBar { return YES; } Why doesn't the Scope Bar appear? A results UIPopoverController appears with the title "Results" and "No results found" (of course) when i type the first character in my search...but no scope bar. (not that i expect anything other than "No Results Found". I am wondering where the scope bar is supposed to appear...in the titleView of the UIPopover? In the toolbar to the right of the search area? Where?

    Read the article

  • Java Builder pattern with Generic type bounds

    - by I82Much
    Hi all, I'm attempting to create a class with many parameters, using a Builder pattern rather than telescoping constructors. I'm doing this in the way described by Joshua Bloch's Effective Java, having private constructor on the enclosing class, and a public static Builder class. The Builder class ensures the object is in a consistent state before calling build(), at which point it delegates the construction of the enclosing object to the private constructor. Thus public class Foo { // Many variables private Foo(Builder b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder { public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder var1(Var var) { // set it return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo(this); } } } I then want to add type bounds to some of the variables, and thus need to parametrize the class definition. I want the bounds of the Foo class to be the same as that of the Builder class. public class Foo<Q extends Quantity> { private final Unit<Q> units; // Many variables private Foo(Builder<Q> b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder<Q extends Quantity> { private Unit<Q> units; public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder units(Unit<Q> units) { this.units = units; return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo<Q>(this); } } } This compiles fine, but the compiler is allowing me to do things I feel should be compiler errors. E.g. public static final Foo.Builder<Acceleration> x_Body_AccelField = new Foo.Builder<Acceleration>() .units(SI.METER) .build(); Here the units argument is not Unit<Acceleration> but Unit<Length>, but it is still accepted by the compiler. What am I doing wrong here? I want to ensure at compile time that the unit types match up correctly.

    Read the article

  • Java language features which have no equivalent in C#

    - by jthg
    Having mostly worked with C#, I tend to think in terms of C# features which aren't available in Java. After working extensively with Java over the last year, I've started to discover Java features that I wish were in C#. Below is a list of the ones that I'm aware of. Can anyone think of other Java language features which a person with a C# background may not realize exists? The articles http://www.25hoursaday.com/CsharpVsJava.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Java_and_C_Sharp give a very extensive list of differences between Java and C#, but I wonder whether I missed anything in the (very) long articles. I can also think of one feature (covariant return type) which I didn't see mentioned in either article. Please limit answers to language or core library features which can't be effectively implemented by your own custom code or third party libraries. Covariant return type - a method can be overridden by a method which returns a more specific type. Useful when implementing an interface or extending a class and you want a method to override a base method, but return a type more specific to your class. Enums are classes - an enum is a full class in java, rather than a wrapper around a primitive like in .Net. Java allows you to define fields and methods on an enum. Anonymous inner classes - define an anonymous class which implements a method. Although most of the use cases for this in Java are covered by delegates in .Net, there are some cases in which you really need to pass multiple callbacks as a group. It would be nice to have the choice of using an anonymous inner class. Checked exceptions - I can see how this is useful in the context of common designs used with Java applications, but my experience with .Net has put me in a habit of using exceptions only for unrecoverable conditions. I.E. exceptions indicate a bug in the application and are only caught for the purpose of logging. I haven't quite come around to the idea of using exceptions for normal program flow. strictfp - Ensures strict floating point arithmetic. I'm not sure what kind of applications would find this useful. fields in interfaces - It's possible to declare fields in interfaces. I've never used this. static imports - Allows one to use the static methods of a class without qualifying it with the class name. I just realized today that this feature exists. It sounds like a nice convenience.

    Read the article

  • iPhone MailComposer class UIViewController dismissModalViewControllerAnimated issues

    - by Scott Pendleton
    I created a class to launch the MailComposer so that my iPhone app would only have one place to go when generating various kinds of e-mail: some with attachments, some not. Some with pre-filled addresses, some not. I didn't want my class implement UIViewController, but it has to so it can be the delegate for the MailComposer. Otherwise, the view controllers that call my class would themselves have to be delegates for the MailComposer, which defeats the purpose. The downside of having my class be a view controller is that it has to load to the screen before it can modally bring up the MailComposer. Unfortunately, view controllers can't be transparent. The effect is, whatever is on screen gets covered by a solid white view controller for a moment before the MailComposer appears. I could maybe live with that, but not this: after the MailComposer goes away, I'm left with my blank view controller occupying the screen. I ought to be able to get rid of it from within itself by calling this: [self.parentViewController dismissModalViewControllerAnimated:NO]; But that dies a horrible death: "Loading 43365 stack frames..." Has my class -- a UIViewController that pre-fills and then launches a MailComposer -- lost track of its parentViewController? It isn't nil, because I've tested for that. As launched from within the current view controller... // My class is called Email. Email *oEmail = [[[Email alloc] init] retain]; // Red, to remind myself that I'd like to someday learn to make it transparent. oEmail.view.backgroundColor = [UIColor redColor]; // Pre-fill whatever fields you want, and specify attachments. oEmail.EmailSubject = @"I am truly stumped"; // This has to go on screen first. [self presentModalViewController:oEmail animated:NO]; // Then this can happen, which brings up the MailComposer. [oEmail f_SendEmail]; // Commenting out the next line didn't help, so I turned it back on. [oEmail release]; Inside the class, you need the mailComposeController:didFinishWithResult:error: method to make the MailComposer go away, and for that to happen, the class has to be the MFMailComposeViewControllerDelegate. Here's what happens in there: // This gets rid of the mail composer. [self dismissModalViewControllerAnimated:YES]; // This never fails to get rid of other modal view controllers when called // from within those controllers, but boy does it not work here. [self.parentViewController dismissModalViewControllerAnimated:NO]; If you can help me, I will be truly thankful!

    Read the article

  • Implement looped movement animation with tap to cancel

    - by Nader
    Hi All; My app is based around a grid and an image that moves within a grid that is contained within a scrollview. I have an imageview that I am animating from one cell to another in time with a slow finger movement and recentering the scrollview. That is rather straight forward. I have also implement the ability to detect a swipe and therefore move the image all the way to the end of the grid and the uiscrollview recentering. I have even implemented the ability to detect a subsequent tap and freeze the swiped movement. The issue with the swipe movement is that the UIScrollView will scroll all the way to the end before the Image reaches the end and so I have to wait for the image to arrive. Also, when I freeze the movement of the image, I have to re-align the image to a cell (which I can do). I have come to the realization that I have to animate the image one cell at a time for swipes and recentering the uiscrollview before moving the image to the next cell. I have attempted to implement this but I cannot come up with a solution that works or works properly. Can anyone suggest how I go about implementing this? Even if you are able to put up code from a different example or sudo code, it would help a lot as I cannot workout how this should be done, should I be using selectors, a listener in delegates, I just simply lack the experience to solve this design pattern. Here is some code: Note that the sprite is an UIImageView - (void)animateViewToPosition:(SpriteView *)sprite Position:(CGPoint)pos Duration:(CFTimeInterval)duration{ CGMutablePathRef traversePath = CGPathCreateMutable(); CGPathMoveToPoint(traversePath, NULL, sprite.center.x, sprite.center.y); CGPathAddLineToPoint(traversePath, NULL, pos.x, pos.y); CAKeyframeAnimation *traverseAnimation = [CAKeyframeAnimation animationWithKeyPath:kAnimatePosition]; traverseAnimation.duration = duration; traverseAnimation.removedOnCompletion = YES; traverseAnimation.timingFunction = [CAMediaTimingFunction functionWithName:kCAMediaTimingFunctionLinear]; traverseAnimation.delegate = sprite; traverseAnimation.path = traversePath; CGPathRelease(traversePath); [sprite.layer addAnimation:traverseAnimation forKey:kAnimatePosition]; sprite.center = pos; }

    Read the article

  • Implement looped movement animation with tap to cancel

    - by Nader
    Hi All; My app is based around a grid and an image that moves within a grid that is contained within a scrollview. I have an imageview that I am animating from one cell to another in time with a slow finger movement and recentering the scrollview. That is rather straight forward. I have also implement the ability to detect a swipe and therefore move the image all the way to the end of the grid and the uiscrollview recentering. I have even implemented the ability to detect a subsequent tap and freeze the swiped movement. The issue with the swipe movement is that the UIScrollView will scroll all the way to the end before the Image reaches the end and so I have to wait for the image to arrive. Also, when I freeze the movement of the image, I have to re-align the image to a cell (which I can do). I have come to the realization that I have to animate the image one cell at a time for swipes and recentering the uiscrollview before moving the image to the next cell. I have attempted to implement this but I cannot come up with a solution that works or works properly. Can anyone suggest how I go about implementing this? Even if you are able to put up code from a different example or sudo code, it would help a lot as I cannot workout how this should be done, should I be using selectors, a listener in delegates, I just simply lack the experience to solve this design pattern. Here is some code: Note that the sprite is an UIImageView - (void)animateViewToPosition:(SpriteView *)sprite Position:(CGPoint)pos Duration:(CFTimeInterval)duration{ CGMutablePathRef traversePath = CGPathCreateMutable(); CGPathMoveToPoint(traversePath, NULL, sprite.center.x, sprite.center.y); CGPathAddLineToPoint(traversePath, NULL, pos.x, pos.y); CAKeyframeAnimation *traverseAnimation = [CAKeyframeAnimation animationWithKeyPath:kAnimatePosition]; traverseAnimation.duration = duration; traverseAnimation.removedOnCompletion = YES; traverseAnimation.timingFunction = [CAMediaTimingFunction functionWithName:kCAMediaTimingFunctionLinear]; traverseAnimation.delegate = sprite; traverseAnimation.path = traversePath; CGPathRelease(traversePath); [sprite.layer addAnimation:traverseAnimation forKey:kAnimatePosition]; sprite.center = pos;

    Read the article

  • Prism Commands - binding error when binding to list element ?

    - by Maciek
    I've got a ItemsControl (to be replaced by listbox) which has it's ItemsSource bound to an ObservableCollection<User> which is located in the view model. The View Model contains some DelegateCommand<T> delegates for handling commands (for instance UpdateUserCommand and RemoveUserCommand). All works fine if the buttons linked to those commands are placed outside of the DataTemplate of the control which is presenting the items. <ItemsControl ItemsSource="{Binding Users, Mode=TwoWay}" HorizontalContentAlignment="Stretch"> <ItemsControl.ItemTemplate> <DataTemplate> <Grid> <Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> <ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/> </Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <TextBlock Grid.Column="0" Text="{Binding UserName}"/> <PasswordBox Grid.Column="1" Password="{Binding UserPass}"/> <TextBox Grid.Column="2" Text="{Binding UserTypeId}"/> <Button Grid.Column="3" Content="Update" cal:Click.Command="{Binding UpdateUserCommand}" cal:Click.CommandParameter="{Binding}"/> <Button Grid.Column="4" Content="Remove" cal:Click.Command="{Binding RemoveUserCommand}" cal:Click.CommandParameter="{Binding}"/> </Grid> </DataTemplate> </ItemsControl.ItemTemplate> </ItemsControl> What I'm trying to achieve, is : Have each row - generated by the ListView/ItemsControl - contain buttons to manage the item represented that particular row. During the runtime, the VS's output panel generated the following messages for each listbox element System.Windows.Data Error: BindingExpression path error: 'UpdateUserCommand' property not found on 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612). BindingExpression: Path='UpdateUserCommand' DataItem='ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612); target element is 'System.Windows.Controls.Button' (Name=''); target property is 'Command' (type 'System.Windows.Input.ICommand').. System.Windows.Data Error: BindingExpression path error: 'RemoveUserCommand' property not found on 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' 'ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612). BindingExpression: Path='RemoveUserCommand' DataItem='ModuleAdmin.Services.User' (HashCode=35912612); target element is 'System.Windows.Controls.Button' (Name=''); target property is 'Command' (type 'System.Windows.Input.ICommand').. Which would imply that there are binding errors present. Is there any way to make this right? or is this not the way?

    Read the article

  • Convert a PDF to a Transparent PNG with GhostScript

    - by Jonathon Wolfe
    Hi all. I am attempting, unsuccessfully, to use Ghostscript to rasterize PDF files with a transparent background to PNG files with a transparent background. I've searched high and low for questions from others attempting the same thing and none of the posted solutions, which as far as I can tell come down to specifying -sDEVICE=pngalpha, have worked with my test files. At this point I would really appreciate any advice or tips a more experienced hand could provide. My test PDF is located here: http://www.kolossus.com/files/test.pdf It could be that the issue is with this file, but I doubt it. As far as I can tell, it has no specified background, and when I open the file with a transparency-aware app like Photoshop or Illustrator, sure enough it displays with a transparent background. However, when opened with an application like Adobe Reader the file is rendered with a white background. I believe that this has more to do with the application rendering the PDF than with the PDF itself -- apps like Adobe Reader assume you want to see what a printed document will look like and therefore always show a white canvas behind the artwork -- but I can't be sure. The gs command I'm using is: gs -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pngalpha -r72 -sOutputFile=test.png test.pdf This produces a PNG that has transparent pixels outside of the bounding box of the artwork in the file, but all pixels that are inside the artwork's bounding box are rasterized against a white background. This is a problem for me, as my artwork has drop shadows and antialiased edges that need to be preserved in the final output, and can't just be postprocessed out with ImageMagick. A sample of my PNG output is at the same location as the pdf above, with .png at the end (stackoverflow won't let me include more than one url in my post). Interestingly, I see no effects from using the -dBackgroundColor flag, even if I set it to something non-white like -dBackgroundColor=16#ff0000. Perhaps my understanding of the syntax of this flag is wrong. Also interestingly, I see no effects from using the -dTextAlphaBits=4 -dGraphicsAlphaBits=4 flags to try to enable subpixel antialiasing. I would also appreciate any advice on how to enable subpixel antialiasing, especially on text. Finally, I'm using GPL Ghostscript 8.64 on Mac OS 10.5.7, and the rendering workflow I'm trying to get set up is to generate transparent PNG images from PDFs output by PrinceXML. I'm calling Ghostscript directly for the rasterization instead of using ImageMagick because ImageMagick delegates to Ghostscript for PDF rasterization and I should be able to control the rasterization better by calling GS directly. Thanks for your help. -Jon Wolfe

    Read the article

  • handling NSStream events when using EASession in MonoTouch

    - by scotru
    Does anyone have an example of how to handle read and write NSStream events in Monotouch when working with accessories via EASession? It looks like there isn't a strongly typed delegate for this and I'm having trouble figuring out what selectors I need to handle on the delegates of my InputStream and OutputStream and what I actually need to do with each selector in order to properly fill and empty the buffers belonging to the EASession object. Basically, I'm trying to port Apple's EADemo app to Monotouch right now. Here's the Objective-C source that I think is relevant to this problem: / / asynchronous NSStream handleEvent method - (void)stream:(NSStream *)aStream handleEvent:(NSStreamEvent)eventCode { switch (eventCode) { case NSStreamEventNone: break; case NSStreamEventOpenCompleted: break; case NSStreamEventHasBytesAvailable: [self _readData]; break; case NSStreamEventHasSpaceAvailable: [self _writeData]; break; case NSStreamEventErrorOccurred: break; case NSStreamEventEndEncountered: break; default: break; } } / low level write method - write data to the accessory while there is space available and data to write - (void)_writeData { while (([[_session outputStream] hasSpaceAvailable]) && ([_writeData length] > 0)) { NSInteger bytesWritten = [[_session outputStream] write:[_writeData bytes] maxLength:[_writeData length]]; if (bytesWritten == -1) { NSLog(@"write error"); break; } else if (bytesWritten > 0) { [_writeData replaceBytesInRange:NSMakeRange(0, bytesWritten) withBytes:NULL length:0]; } } } // low level read method - read data while there is data and space available in the input buffer - (void)_readData { #define EAD_INPUT_BUFFER_SIZE 128 uint8_t buf[EAD_INPUT_BUFFER_SIZE]; while ([[_session inputStream] hasBytesAvailable]) { NSInteger bytesRead = [[_session inputStream] read:buf maxLength:EAD_INPUT_BUFFER_SIZE]; if (_readData == nil) { _readData = [[NSMutableData alloc] init]; } [_readData appendBytes:(void *)buf length:bytesRead]; //NSLog(@"read %d bytes from input stream", bytesRead); } [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:EADSessionDataReceivedNotification object:self userInfo:nil]; } I'd also appreciate any architectural recommendations on how to best implement this in monotouch. For example, in the Objective C implementation these functions are not contained in any class--but in Monotouch would it make sense to make them members of my

    Read the article

  • QT vs. Net - REAL comparisons for R.A.D. projects

    - by Pirate for Profit
    Man in all these Qt vs. .NET discussions 90% these people argue about the dumbest crap. Trying to get a real comparison chart here, because I know a little about both frameworks but I don't know everything. I believe Qt and .NET both have strengths and weaknesses. This is to make a comparison that highlights these so people can make more informed decisions before embarking on a project, in the spirit of R.A.D. Event Handling In Qt the event handling system is very simple. You just emit signals when something cool happens and then catch them in slots. ie. // run some calculations, then emit valueChanged(30, false, 20.2); and then catching it, any object can make a slot to recieve that message easily void MyObj::valueChanged(int percent, bool ok, float timeRemaining). It's easy to "block" an event or "disconnect" when needed, and works seamlessly across threads... once you get the hang of it, it just seems a lot more natural and intuitive than the way the .NET event handling is set up (you know, void valueChanged(object sender, CustomEventArgs e). And I'm not just talking about syntax, because in the end the .NET anonymous delegates are the bomb. I'm also talking about in more than just reflection (because, yes, .NET obviously has much stronger reflection capabilities). I'm talking about in the way the system feels to a human being. Qt wins hands down for the simplest yet still flexible event handling system ever i m o. Plugins and such I do love some of the ease of C# compared to C++, as well as .NET's assembly architecture, even though it leads to a bunch of .dll's (there's ways to combine everything into a single exe though). That is a big bonus for modular projects, which are a PITA to import stuff in C++ as far as RAD is concerned. Database Ease of Doing Crap Also what about datasets and database manipulations. I think .net wins here but I'm not sure. Threading/Conccurency How do you guys think of the threading? In .NET, all I've ever done is make like a list of master worker threads with locks. I like QConcurrentFramework, you don't worry about locks or anything, and with the ease of the signal slot system across threads it's nice to get notified about the progress of things. QConcurrent is the simplest threading mechanism I've ever played with. Memory Usage Also what do you think of the overall memory usage comparison. Is the .NET garbage collector pretty on the ball and quick compared to the instantaneous nature of native memory management? Or does it just let programs leak up a storm and lag the computer then clean it up when it's about to really lag? Doesn't the just-in-time compiler make native code that is pretty good, like and that only happens the first time the program is run? However, I am a n00b who doesn't know what I'm talking about, please school me on the subject.

    Read the article

  • Executing a .NET Managed Assembly from SQL Server 2008 - Pro's, Con's & Recommendations

    - by RPM1984
    Hi guys, looking for opinions/recommendations/links for the following scenario im currently facing. The Platform: .NET 4.0 Web Application SQL Server 2008 The Task: Overhaul a component of the system that performs (fairly) complex mathematical operations based on a specific user activity, and updates numerous tables in the database. A common user activity might be "Bob" decides to post a forum topic. This results in (the end-solution) needing to look at various factors (about the post he did), then after doing some math based on lookup values/ratios as well as other data in the database, inserting some other data as a result of these operations. The Options: Ok - so here's what im thinking. Although it would be much easier to do this in C# (LINQ-SQL) it doesnt make much sense as the majority of the computations are based on values in the db, and it will get difficult to control/optimize/debug the LINQ over time. Hence, im leaning towards created a managed assembly (C# Class Library) that contains the lookup values (constants) as well as leveraging the math classes in the existing .NET BCL. Basically i'd expose a few methods that can be called by the T-SQL Stored Procedures. This to me has the following advantages: Simplicity of math. Do complex math in .NET vs complex math in T-SQL. No brainer. =) Abstraction of computatations, configurable "lookup" values and business logic from raw T-SQL. T-SQL only needs to care about the data, simplifying the stored procedures and making it easier to maintain. When it needs to do math it delegates off to the managed assembly. So, having said that - ive never done this before (call .NET assmembly from T-SQL), and after some googling the best site i could come up with is here, which is useful but outdated. So - what am i asking? Well, firstly - i need some better references on how to actually do this. "This" being how to call a C# .NET 4 Assembly from within T-SQL Stored Procedures in SQL Server 2008. Secondly, who out there has done this, what problems (if any) did you face? Realize this may be difficult to provide a "correct answer", so ill try to give it to whoever gives me the answer with a combination of good links and a list of pro's/con's/problems with this implementation. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • MacRuby + Interface Builder: How to display, then close, then display a window again

    - by Derick Bailey
    I'm a complete n00b with MacRuby and Cocoa, though I've got more than a year of Ruby experience, so keep that in mind when answering - I need lots of details and explanation. :) I've set up a simple project that has 2 windows in it, both of which are built with Interface Builder. The first window is a simple list of accounts using a table view. It has a "+" button below the table. When I click the + button, I want to show an "Add New Account" window. I also have an AccountsController < NSWindowController and a AddNewAccountController class, set up as the delegates for these windows, with the appropriate button click methods wired up, and outlets to reference the needed windows. When I click the "+" button in the Accounts window, I have this code fire: @add_account.center @add_account.display @add_account.makeKeyAndOrderFront(nil) @add_account.orderFrontRegardless this works great the first time I click the + button. Everything shows up, I'm able to enter my data and have it bind to my model. however, when I close the add new account form, things start going bad. if I set the add new account window to release on close, then the second time I click the + button, the window will still pop up but it's frozen. i can't click any buttons, enter any data, or even close the form. i assume this is because the form's code has been released, so there is no message loop processing the form... but i'm not entirely sure about this. if i set the add new account window to not release on close, then the second time i click the + button, the window shows up fine and it is usable - but it still has all the data that i had previously entered... it's still bound to my previous Account class instance. what am I doing wrong? what's the correct way to create a new instance of the Add New Account form, create a new Account model, bind that model to the form and show the form, when I click the + button on the Accounts form? ... this is all being done on OSX 10.6.6, 64bit, with XCode 3.2.4

    Read the article

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