Search Results

Search found 2047 results on 82 pages for 'joined subclass'.

Page 21/82 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • What's a good place to unregister an observer from the notification center?

    - by mystify
    When I add an observer to the default notification center, where would I unregister that? Example: I have a UIView subclass which lives inside a view controller. That subclass is an observer for the FooBarNotification. If this notification is posted, that view will get it. But now, the view controller decides to throw away the view. Is the best place the -dealloc method of the view itself? Are there any rules like memory management rules? For example: Must I unregister an observer where I registered it? i.e. the view registers itself in it's init method, so it should unregister itself in it's -dealloc method? (not talking about push notifications, but NSNotificationCenter)

    Read the article

  • can this keyword be used in an abstract class in java

    - by Reddy
    I tried with below example, it is working fine. I expected it to pick sub-class's value since object won't be created for super class (as it is abstract). But it is picking up super class's field value only. Please help me understand what is the concepts behind this? abstract class SuperAbstract { private int a=2; public void funA() { System.out.println("In SuperAbstract: this.a "+a); } } class SubClass extends SuperAbstract { private int a=34; } I am calling new SubClass.funA(); I am expecting it to print 34, but it is printing 2.

    Read the article

  • C# private (hidden) base class

    - by Loadmaster
    It is possible to make a C# base class accessible only within the library assembly it's compiled into, while making other subclasses that inherit from it public? For example: using System.IO; class BaseOutput: Stream // Hidden base class { protected BaseOutput(Stream o) { ... } ...lots of common methods... } public class MyOutput: BaseOutput // Public subclass { public BaseOutput(Stream o): base(o) { ... } public override int Write(int b) { ... } } Here I'd like the BaseOutput class to be inaccessible to clients of my library, but allow the subclass MyOutput to be completely public. I know that C# does not allow base classes to have more restrictive access than subclasses, but is there some other legal way of achieving the same effect?

    Read the article

  • can the keyword 'this' be used in an abstract class in java

    - by Reddy
    I tried with below example, it is working fine. I expected it to pick sub-class's value since object won't be created for super class (as it is abstract). But it is picking up super class's field value only. Please help me understand what is the concepts behind this? abstract class SuperAbstract { private int a=2; public void funA() { System.out.println("In SuperAbstract: this.a "+a); } } class SubClass extends SuperAbstract { private int a=34; } I am calling new SubClass.funA(); I am expecting it to print 34, but it is printing 2.

    Read the article

  • How to separate model and view with Core Data?

    - by andrewebling
    I have a subclass of UIView which draws itself based on data held in a corresponding model class, which is a subclass of NSManagedObject. The problem is, some fields in the data model (e.g. the position of the view) are already held in the view (i.e. the frame property in this case). I then have a data duplication/synchronization problem to solve. To complicate matters further, the view needs to update in response to changes made to the data model and the data model needs to be updated in responses made to the view (e.g. the user dragging it to a new location). What's the best way to solve this? Using KVO and references in both directions? Or is there a better approach?

    Read the article

  • UIViewController: setToolbarItems vs navigationItem

    - by Paul Sanwald
    my application has a UIViewController subclass which is being managed by a UINavigationController. In the viewDidLoad of my UIViewController subclass, I was attempting to add a UIBarButtonItem to the toolbar like this: settingsButton = [[UIBarButtonItem alloc] initWithTitle:@"Settings" style:UIBarButtonItemStylePlain target:self action:@selector(viewSettings:)]; [self setToolbarItems:[NSArray arrayWithObject:settingsButton]]; this wasn't working out for me, so after some googling around, I tried this: [[self navigationItem] setRightBarButtonItem:settingsButton]; which worked out fine. from reading the UIViewController documentation, I'm still confused about why setToolbarItems wasn't working. I verified in the debugger that the button was in the toolbarItems array in the viewDidAppear method. the button itself just wasn't appearing on my toolbar. so, my question is, why didn't setToolbarItems work for me in the first code snippet? I don't have the toolbar configured in my xib for this view controller at all, if that makes a difference.

    Read the article

  • are Hierarchical SIngletons in Java possible?

    - by Zach H
    I've been toying with an interesting idea (No idea if I'll include it in any code, but it's fun to think about) Let's say we have a program that requires a large number of classes, all of a certain subclass. And those classes all need to be singletons. Now, we could write the singleton pattern for each of those classes, but it seems wasteful to write the same code over and over, and we already have a common base class. It would be really nice to create a getSingleton method of A that when called from a subclass, returns a singleton of the B class (cast to class A for simplicity) class A{ public A getSingleton(){ //Wizardry } } class B extends A{ } A blargh = B.getSingleton() A gish = B.getSingleton() if(A == B) System.out.println("It works!") It seems to me that the way to do this would be to recognize and call B's default constructor (assuming we don't need to pass anything in.) I know a little of the black magic of reflection in Java, but i'm not sure if this can be done. Anyone interested in puzzling over this?

    Read the article

  • Why I have to redeclare a virtual function while overriding [C++]

    - by Neeraj
    #include <iostream> using namespace std; class Duck { public: virtual void quack() = 0; }; class BigDuck : public Duck { public: // void quack(); (uncommenting will make it compile) }; void BigDuck::quack(){ cout << "BigDuckDuck::Quack\n"; } int main() { BigDuck b; Duck *d = &b; d->quack(); } Consider this code, the code doesn't compiles. However when I declare the virtual function in the subclass, then it compiles fine. The compiler already has the signature of the function which the subclass will override, then why a redeclaration is required? Any insights.

    Read the article

  • Add Method to Built In Class

    - by Evorlor
    I am pretty sure this is not doable, but I will go ahead and cross my fingers and ask. I am trying to add a method to a built in class. I want this method to be callable by all of the built in class's subclasses. Specifically: I have a JButton, a JTextPane, and other JComponents. I want to be able to pass in a JDom Element instead of a Rectangle to setBounds(). My current solution is to extend each JComponent subclass with the desired methods, but that is a LOT of duplicate code. Is there a way I can write the following method just one time, and have it callable on all JComponent objects? Or is it required that I extend each subclass individually, and copy and paste the method below? public void setBounds(Element element) { this.setBounds(Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute( "x").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element .getAttribute("y").toString()), Integer .parseInt(element.getAttribute("width").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute("height") .toString())); }

    Read the article

  • Javascript Inheritance and Arrays

    - by Inespe
    Hi all! I am trying to define a javascript class with an array property, and its subclass. The problem is that all instances of the subclass somehow "share" the array property: // class Test function Test() { this.array = []; this.number = 0; } Test.prototype.push = function() { this.array.push('hello'); this.number = 100; } // class Test2 : Test function Test2() { } Test2.prototype = new Test(); var a = new Test2(); a.push(); // push 'hello' into a.array var b = new Test2(); alert(b.number); // b.number is 0 - that's OK alert(b.array); // but b.array is containing 'hello' instead of being empty. why? As you can see I don't have this problem with primitive data types... Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Passing data from one viewcontroller to another

    - by user1392515
    I subclassed two view controllers. The first one is supposed to pass data, a NSUrl object to the second one. .m of the first one: NSURL *temp = [NSURL URLWithString:@"http://example.com"]; UIViewController *presentationsFullScreen_ViewController = [self.storyboard instantiateViewControllerWithIdentifier:@"PresentationsFullScreen_ViewController"]; presentationsFullScreen_ViewController.urlToUse = temp; .h of the second one: #import <UIKit/UIKit.h> @interface PresentationsFullScreen_ViewController : UIViewController { NSURL *urlToUse; } @property (nonatomic,retain) NSURL *urlToUse; It is obviously not working and not compiling,telling me essentially that I didn't subclass it and that the property urlToUse is not found on UIViewController. How do I subclass correctly? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why javabeans framework create the IndexedPropertyDescriptor for the NON index method

    - by George Macus
    I'm not familiar with java beans framework, in the below scenario, I got the IndexedPropertyDescriptor for the method getFooWithX, could someone explain why? public class IntrospectorTest { public static void main(String[] args) throws IntrospectionException { BeanInfo info = Introspector.getBeanInfo(SubClass.class); PropertyDescriptor[] descriptors = info.getPropertyDescriptors(); for (int i = 0; i < descriptors.length; i++) { System.out.println(descriptors[i].getClass().getName() + ":" + descriptors[i].getName()); } } } abstract class BaseClass { public abstract Object getFoo(); } abstract class SubClass extends BaseClass { public Object getFooWithX(int x) { return null; } } and the result will be: java.beans.PropertyDescriptor:class java.beans.PropertyDescriptor:foo java.beans.IndexedPropertyDescriptor:fooWithX Why?

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic, extensible C# Expando Object

    - by Rick Strahl
    I love dynamic functionality in a strongly typed language because it offers us the best of both worlds. In C# (or any of the main .NET languages) we now have the dynamic type that provides a host of dynamic features for the static C# language. One place where I've found dynamic to be incredibly useful is in building extensible types or types that expose traditionally non-object data (like dictionaries) in easier to use and more readable syntax. I wrote about a couple of these for accessing old school ADO.NET DataRows and DataReaders more easily for example. These classes are dynamic wrappers that provide easier syntax and auto-type conversions which greatly simplifies code clutter and increases clarity in existing code. ExpandoObject in .NET 4.0 Another great use case for dynamic objects is the ability to create extensible objects - objects that start out with a set of static members and then can add additional properties and even methods dynamically. The .NET 4.0 framework actually includes an ExpandoObject class which provides a very dynamic object that allows you to add properties and methods on the fly and then access them again. For example with ExpandoObject you can do stuff like this:dynamic expand = new ExpandoObject(); expand.Name = "Rick"; expand.HelloWorld = (Func<string, string>) ((string name) => { return "Hello " + name; }); Console.WriteLine(expand.Name); Console.WriteLine(expand.HelloWorld("Dufus")); Internally ExpandoObject uses a Dictionary like structure and interface to store properties and methods and then allows you to add and access properties and methods easily. As cool as ExpandoObject is it has a few shortcomings too: It's a sealed type so you can't use it as a base class It only works off 'properties' in the internal Dictionary - you can't expose existing type data It doesn't serialize to XML or with DataContractSerializer/DataContractJsonSerializer Expando - A truly extensible Object ExpandoObject is nice if you just need a dynamic container for a dictionary like structure. However, if you want to build an extensible object that starts out with a set of strongly typed properties and then allows you to extend it, ExpandoObject does not work because it's a sealed class that can't be inherited. I started thinking about this very scenario for one of my applications I'm building for a customer. In this system we are connecting to various different user stores. Each user store has the same basic requirements for username, password, name etc. But then each store also has a number of extended properties that is available to each application. In the real world scenario the data is loaded from the database in a data reader and the known properties are assigned from the known fields in the database. All unknown fields are then 'added' to the expando object dynamically. In the past I've done this very thing with a separate property - Properties - just like I do for this class. But the property and dictionary syntax is not ideal and tedious to work with. I started thinking about how to represent these extra property structures. One way certainly would be to add a Dictionary, or an ExpandoObject to hold all those extra properties. But wouldn't it be nice if the application could actually extend an existing object that looks something like this as you can with the Expando object:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } } and then simply start extending the properties of this object dynamically? Using the Expando object I describe later you can now do the following:[TestMethod] public void UserExampleTest() { var user = new User(); // Set strongly typed properties user.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; user.Name = "Rickochet"; user.Active = true; // Now add dynamic properties dynamic duser = user; duser.Entered = DateTime.Now; duser.Accesses = 1; // you can also add dynamic props via indexer user["NickName"] = "AntiSocialX"; duser["WebSite"] = "http://www.west-wind.com/weblog"; // Access strong type through dynamic ref Assert.AreEqual(user.Name,duser.Name); // Access strong type through indexer Assert.AreEqual(user.Password,user["Password"]); // access dyanmically added value through indexer Assert.AreEqual(duser.Entered,user["Entered"]); // access index added value through dynamic Assert.AreEqual(user["NickName"],duser.NickName); // loop through all properties dynamic AND strong type properties (true) foreach (var prop in user.GetProperties(true)) { object val = prop.Value; if (val == null) val = "null"; Console.WriteLine(prop.Key + ": " + val.ToString()); } } As you can see this code somewhat blurs the line between a static and dynamic type. You start with a strongly typed object that has a fixed set of properties. You can then cast the object to dynamic (as I discussed in my last post) and add additional properties to the object. You can also use an indexer to add dynamic properties to the object. To access the strongly typed properties you can use either the strongly typed instance, the indexer or the dynamic cast of the object. Personally I think it's kinda cool to have an easy way to access strongly typed properties by string which can make some data scenarios much easier. To access the 'dynamically added' properties you can use either the indexer on the strongly typed object, or property syntax on the dynamic cast. Using the dynamic type allows all three modes to work on both strongly typed and dynamic properties. Finally you can iterate over all properties, both dynamic and strongly typed if you chose. Lots of flexibility. Note also that by default the Expando object works against the (this) instance meaning it extends the current object. You can also pass in a separate instance to the constructor in which case that object will be used to iterate over to find properties rather than this. Using this approach provides some really interesting functionality when use the dynamic type. To use this we have to add an explicit constructor to the Expando subclass:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } public User() : base() { } // only required if you want to mix in seperate instance public User(object instance) : base(instance) { } } to allow the instance to be passed. When you do you can now do:[TestMethod] public void ExpandoMixinTest() { // have Expando work on Addresses var user = new User( new Address() ); // cast to dynamicAccessToPropertyTest dynamic duser = user; // Set strongly typed properties duser.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; // Set properties on address object duser.Address = "32 Kaiea"; //duser.Phone = "808-123-2131"; // set dynamic properties duser.NonExistantProperty = "This works too"; // shows default value Address.Phone value Console.WriteLine(duser.Phone); } Using the dynamic cast in this case allows you to access *three* different 'objects': The strong type properties, the dynamically added properties in the dictionary and the properties of the instance passed in! Effectively this gives you a way to simulate multiple inheritance (which is scary - so be very careful with this, but you can do it). How Expando works Behind the scenes Expando is a DynamicObject subclass as I discussed in my last post. By implementing a few of DynamicObject's methods you can basically create a type that can trap 'property missing' and 'method missing' operations. When you access a non-existant property a known method is fired that our code can intercept and provide a value for. Internally Expando uses a custom dictionary implementation to hold the dynamic properties you might add to your expandable object. Let's look at code first. The code for the Expando type is straight forward and given what it provides relatively short. Here it is.using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Dynamic; using System.Reflection; namespace Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic { /// <summary> /// Class that provides extensible properties and methods. This /// dynamic object stores 'extra' properties in a dictionary or /// checks the actual properties of the instance. /// /// This means you can subclass this expando and retrieve either /// native properties or properties from values in the dictionary. /// /// This type allows you three ways to access its properties: /// /// Directly: any explicitly declared properties are accessible /// Dynamic: dynamic cast allows access to dictionary and native properties/methods /// Dictionary: Any of the extended properties are accessible via IDictionary interface /// </summary> [Serializable] public class Expando : DynamicObject, IDynamicMetaObjectProvider { /// <summary> /// Instance of object passed in /// </summary> object Instance; /// <summary> /// Cached type of the instance /// </summary> Type InstanceType; PropertyInfo[] InstancePropertyInfo { get { if (_InstancePropertyInfo == null && Instance != null) _InstancePropertyInfo = Instance.GetType().GetProperties(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly); return _InstancePropertyInfo; } } PropertyInfo[] _InstancePropertyInfo; /// <summary> /// String Dictionary that contains the extra dynamic values /// stored on this object/instance /// </summary> /// <remarks>Using PropertyBag to support XML Serialization of the dictionary</remarks> public PropertyBag Properties = new PropertyBag(); //public Dictionary<string,object> Properties = new Dictionary<string, object>(); /// <summary> /// This constructor just works off the internal dictionary and any /// public properties of this object. /// /// Note you can subclass Expando. /// </summary> public Expando() { Initialize(this); } /// <summary> /// Allows passing in an existing instance variable to 'extend'. /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// You can pass in null here if you don't want to /// check native properties and only check the Dictionary! /// </remarks> /// <param name="instance"></param> public Expando(object instance) { Initialize(instance); } protected virtual void Initialize(object instance) { Instance = instance; if (instance != null) InstanceType = instance.GetType(); } /// <summary> /// Try to retrieve a member by name first from instance properties /// followed by the collection entries. /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { result = null; // first check the Properties collection for member if (Properties.Keys.Contains(binder.Name)) { result = Properties[binder.Name]; return true; } // Next check for Public properties via Reflection if (Instance != null) { try { return GetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, out result); } catch { } } // failed to retrieve a property result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Property setter implementation tries to retrieve value from instance /// first then into this object /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { // first check to see if there's a native property to set if (Instance != null) { try { bool result = SetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, value); if (result) return true; } catch { } } // no match - set or add to dictionary Properties[binder.Name] = value; return true; } /// <summary> /// Dynamic invocation method. Currently allows only for Reflection based /// operation (no ability to add methods dynamically). /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryInvokeMember(InvokeMemberBinder binder, object[] args, out object result) { if (Instance != null) { try { // check instance passed in for methods to invoke if (InvokeMethod(Instance, binder.Name, args, out result)) return true; } catch { } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection Helper method to retrieve a property /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool GetProperty(object instance, string name, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { result = ((PropertyInfo)mi).GetValue(instance,null); return true; } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to set a property value /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool SetProperty(object instance, string name, object value) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.SetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { ((PropertyInfo)mi).SetValue(Instance, value, null); return true; } } return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to invoke a method /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool InvokeMethod(object instance, string name, object[] args, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; // Look at the instanceType var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0] as MethodInfo; result = mi.Invoke(Instance, args); return true; } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Convenience method that provides a string Indexer /// to the Properties collection AND the strongly typed /// properties of the object by name. /// /// // dynamic /// exp["Address"] = "112 nowhere lane"; /// // strong /// var name = exp["StronglyTypedProperty"] as string; /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// The getter checks the Properties dictionary first /// then looks in PropertyInfo for properties. /// The setter checks the instance properties before /// checking the Properties dictionary. /// </remarks> /// <param name="key"></param> /// /// <returns></returns> public object this[string key] { get { try { // try to get from properties collection first return Properties[key]; } catch (KeyNotFoundException ex) { // try reflection on instanceType object result = null; if (GetProperty(Instance, key, out result)) return result; // nope doesn't exist throw; } } set { if (Properties.ContainsKey(key)) { Properties[key] = value; return; } // check instance for existance of type first var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(key, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) SetProperty(Instance, key, value); else Properties[key] = value; } } /// <summary> /// Returns and the properties of /// </summary> /// <param name="includeProperties"></param> /// <returns></returns> public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,object>> GetProperties(bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(prop.Name, prop.GetValue(Instance, null)); } foreach (var key in this.Properties.Keys) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(key, this.Properties[key]); } /// <summary> /// Checks whether a property exists in the Property collection /// or as a property on the instance /// </summary> /// <param name="item"></param> /// <returns></returns> public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, object> item, bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { bool res = Properties.ContainsKey(item.Key); if (res) return true; if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) { if (prop.Name == item.Key) return true; } } return false; } } } Although the Expando class supports an indexer, it doesn't actually implement IDictionary or even IEnumerable. It only provides the indexer and Contains() and GetProperties() methods, that work against the Properties dictionary AND the internal instance. The reason for not implementing IDictionary is that a) it doesn't add much value since you can access the Properties dictionary directly and that b) I wanted to keep the interface to class very lean so that it can serve as an entity type if desired. Implementing these IDictionary (or even IEnumerable) causes LINQ extension methods to pop up on the type which obscures the property interface and would only confuse the purpose of the type. IDictionary and IEnumerable are also problematic for XML and JSON Serialization - the XML Serializer doesn't serialize IDictionary<string,object>, nor does the DataContractSerializer. The JavaScriptSerializer does serialize, but it treats the entire object like a dictionary and doesn't serialize the strongly typed properties of the type, only the dictionary values which is also not desirable. Hence the decision to stick with only implementing the indexer to support the user["CustomProperty"] functionality and leaving iteration functions to the publicly exposed Properties dictionary. Note that the Dictionary used here is a custom PropertyBag class I created to allow for serialization to work. One important aspect for my apps is that whatever custom properties get added they have to be accessible to AJAX clients since the particular app I'm working on is a SIngle Page Web app where most of the Web access is through JSON AJAX calls. PropertyBag can serialize to XML and one way serialize to JSON using the JavaScript serializer (not the DCS serializers though). The key components that make Expando work in this code are the Properties Dictionary and the TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() methods. The Properties collection is public so if you choose you can explicitly access the collection to get better performance or to manipulate the members in internal code (like loading up dynamic values form a database). Notice that TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() both work against the dictionary AND the internal instance to retrieve and set properties. This means that user["Name"] works against native properties of the object as does user["Name"] = "RogaDugDog". What's your Use Case? This is still an early prototype but I've plugged it into one of my customer's applications and so far it's working very well. The key features for me were the ability to easily extend the type with values coming from a database and exposing those values in a nice and easy to use manner. I'm also finding that using this type of object for ViewModels works very well to add custom properties to view models. I suspect there will be lots of uses for this - I've been using the extra dictionary approach to extensibility for years - using a dynamic type to make the syntax cleaner is just a bonus here. What can you think of to use this for? Resources Source Code and Tests (GitHub) Also integrated in Westwind.Utilities of the West Wind Web Toolkit West Wind Utilities NuGet© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in CSharp  .NET  Dynamic Types   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • George Bush Talks About Facebook With Mark Zuckerberg [Video]

    - by Gopinath
    George W Bush, the former President of USA, stopped by Facebook office yesterday to talk about Facebook as well as to promote his book. Facebook Mark Zuckerberg joined him during the conversation. Check out the embedded video. This article titled,George Bush Talks About Facebook With Mark Zuckerberg [Video], was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • Show #14 DotNetNuke 5.6.1, Razor/Webmatrix and WebCamps

    - by Chris Hammond
    Once again, it’s been far too long since the last show, this time just over 4 months, For Show #14 I am joined by Joe Brinkman. Take a listen and see what has been going on in the DNN world. Length: 47:56 Size: 43.8mb MP3 Download Welcome back to DNNVoice Welcome to guest Joe Brinkman ( http://blog.theaccidentalgeek.com/ ) Introduction to Joe and Welcome back from Chris Hammond ( http://www.chrishammond.com ) and what he's been doing DotNetNuke Training Free Extensions Module Development Templates...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Times they are a changing…

    - by Jonathan Kehayias
    If you follow me on twitter ( @SQLSarg ), you already know that this has been a week of big announcements for me. Wednesday afternoon Paul Randal ( Blog | Twitter ) announced that I joined SQLskills.com as a full time employee, and Thursday afternoon, Joe Sack ( Blog | Twitter ) announced that I passed the Microsoft Certified Masters for SQL Server 2008 . As a part of my transition to working for SQLskills.com full time, I will be changing blogs over to the SQLskills.com site. You can read about...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Dartisans Ep. 6 - Meet the community - Dart hangout

    Dartisans Ep. 6 - Meet the community - Dart hangout In this episode of Dartisans, we are joined by special guests from the Dart community. John Evans, Adam Smith, Chris Buckett, John McCutchan, and Lars Tackmann talk about their Dart libraries, what they like about Dart, and what they want to see in the future. Get started with Dart at www.dartlang.org From: GoogleDevelopers Views: 4 0 ratings Time: 48:11 More in Science & Technology

    Read the article

  • Google+ Platform Office Hours for February 8th 2012

    Google+ Platform Office Hours for February 8th 2012 This week's office hours were hosted by Jenny Murphy, Jonathan Beri and Wolff Dobson. Several developers from the Google+ developer community joined us. We spent the session responding to your questions and comments about the Google+ platform. Find the full show notes and discuss this session in our support forum: groups.google.com Learn more about our office hours on Google Developers: developers.google.com From: GoogleDevelopers Views: 4507 36 ratings Time: 47:50 More in Science & Technology

    Read the article

  • MIX 2010 recap podcast

    - by Chris Williams
    from www.slickthought.net: Spaghetti Code Podcast: Recapping the MIX Conference 4/2/2010 11:06:10 AM Spaghetti Code (Jeff Brand) is joined by Mike Hodnic, Jason Bock, Adam Grocholski and Chris Williams to share their thoughts and impressions from the Microsoft MIX Conference and their thoughts on Windows Phone, Silverlight 4, and more. Direct Download - click here Subscribe - click here iTunes - click here

    Read the article

  • Should you buy an ATI Radeon x1200 driver?

    If you are looking for a good graphics driver, the choices available to you will boggle your mind. Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has joined up with ATI Technologies to make the most cutting edge graph... [Author: Sunny Makkar - Computers and Internet - March 20, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Xcode workspace with Unity3D as a sub-project?

    - by Di Wu
    Let's say we're developing a 2D game with Cocos2d-iPhone and UIKit and CoreAnimation. But we're also considering leveraging the 3D capabilities of Unity 3D. Is it possible that we add the Unity3D-generated Xcode project as a sub-project into the workspace and expose the 3D UI element as some kind of UIView subclass so that the native UIKit and CoreAnimation code could use them without the need to mess up with their underlying Unity3D implementation?

    Read the article

  • cocos2d: syncing CCAnimation frames with Box2d Shape manipulations

    - by Hezi Cohen
    hi everybody! my cocos2d game currently has a ccsprite attached to a box2d body. during the game i apply different CCAnimations on my sprite, i would like to perform certain manipulations to the box2d body according to the frame currently displayed by the sprite (change rotation of the body, etc.) my current idea on implementing this is to subclass ccsprite and change the setDisplayFrame implementation but i thought somebody here probably did the same and already has a solution, so any suggestions on how to implement this? thanks!

    Read the article

  • Bodies do not stay sticked together by joint in retina display

    - by Mike JM
    I'm rehearsing on Box2D revolute joints. Everything's going pretty well except for one thing. For some reason bodies joined together with revolute joints do not stay sticked, they start getting apart from each other from the app start when I run it on retina device or simulator. On non retina device it works just fine, as expected. Here's the screenshot of the non-retina version: And here's the behavior when I run the same app on retina device/simulator: I'm taking content scale factor into account.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >