Search Results

Search found 16573 results on 663 pages for 'private constructor'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 21/663 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Have some questions about setting up a VPN to my private cloud servers

    - by Pure.Krome
    I've got a number of Virtual Servers running at a pretty big Cloud provider. They are all running Windows 2008 R2. I have a CISCO ASA firewall in front of them. Currently, I've got all ports blocked except 80/443/21/3386 (for Remote Desktop). I asked to have a VPN enabled on the firewall and they said it's easy to do BUT I need to use the 3rd party Cisco software. Now, I don't want to get into a debate about it .. but we don't want to install anything extra on our -client- computers. We all use Windows 7 and we love using the built in VPN client to connect to other private LANS we have setup in other locations. So i'm wondering what options I have to create a VPN tunnel to our private cloud LAN? All our cloud servers are part of WORKGROUP, so there's no Active Directory .. nor do we want to install all that. Secondly, we know we can open up a firewall port - so any ports for starting a VPN is fine! Lastly, I was thinking of just using one of the existing servers as the VPN server (and using the Windows VPN software) .. but I'm not sure this is a good thing? Remember - we just want to use the baked in VPN software in Windows 7 .. which is PPTP or SSTP or L2TP/IPSEC. I would -LOVE- to use some free OSS software. For usernames/passwords? We'd probably just have one account .. like U:Hithere P:whatever.. so we don't need any hardcore account management, like Active Directory, etc. So does anyone have any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SSL with private key on an HSM

    - by Jason
    I have a client-server architecture in my application that uses SSL. Currently, the private key is stored in CAPI's key store location. For security reasons, I'd like to store the key in a safer place, ideally a hardware signing module (HSM) that is built for this purpose. Unfortunately, with the private key stored on such a device, I can't figure out how to use it in my application. On the server, I am simply using the SslStream class and the AuthenticateAsServer(...) call. This method takes an X509Certificate object that has its private key loaded, but since the private key is stored in a secure (e.g. non exportable) location on the HSM, I don't know how to do this. On the client, I am using an HttpWebRequest object and then using the ClientCertificates property to add my client authentication certificate, but I have the same problem here: how do I get the private key? I know there are some HSMs that act as SSL accelerators but I don't really need an accelerator. Also, these products tend to have special integration with web servers such as IIS and Apache which I'm not using. Any ideas? The only thing I can think of would be to write my own SSL library that would allow me to hand off the signing portion of the transaction to the HSM, but this seems like a huge amount of work.

    Read the article

  • Friend WithEvents in VB vs private in C#

    - by serhio
    Hello, friends Who knows, why in vb.net WinForm projects the designer by default use the Friend WithEvents attributes and in C# - private ones. By ex, in a form.designer. .cs private Label Label1; .vb Friend WithEvents Label1 as Label; For WithEvents is more or less clear(for using Handles, apparently). But why Friend in VB and private in C#... Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Exceptions in constructors

    - by FredOverflow
    In C++, the lifetime of an object begins when the constructor finishes successfully. Inside the constructor, the object does not exist yet. Q: What does emitting an exception from a constructor mean? A: It means that construction has failed, the object never existed, its lifetime never began. [source] My question is: Does the same hold true for Java? What happens, for example, if I hand this to another object, and then my constructor fails? Foo() { Bar.remember(this); throw new IllegalStateException(); } Is this well-defined? Does Bar now have a reference to a non-object?

    Read the article

  • Get private SecKeyRef from DER file?

    - by Alexander Parfyanovich
    In my iPhone project I have used this solution to encrypt data with DER encoded certificate, which was generated by openssl commands like this: openssl req -x509 -nodes -days 365 -newkey rsa:2048 -keyout privateKey.pem -out cert.pem openssl x509 -outform der -in cert.pem -out cert.der openssl rsa -in privateKey.pem -outform DER -out privateKey.der And now I want to decrypt data using private key file. How can I get the private SecKeyRef instance from DER encoded private key file?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to use pure Encoding and Decoding keys in asymmetric cryptography instead of private

    - by macropas
    Is it possible to use pure Encoding and Decoding keys instead of private and public keys? As I know in .Net asymmetric RSA implementation private key RSAParameters parameters = (new RSACryptoServiceProvider()).ExportParameters(true) is a superset of public key. And using private key we can both encode and decode our data. But I need key only for decoding data. How to do it? I experimented on nulling RSAParameters fields, but RSACryptoServiceProvider object can't import such parameters.

    Read the article

  • Call private method in Flex, Actionscript.

    - by core07
    I need it in FlexUnit to test private methods. Is there any possibility to do this via reflection by using describeType or maybe flexUnit has some build in facility? I dislike artificial limitation that i cannot test private functions, it greatly reduces flexibility. Yes it is good design for me to test private functions, so please do not advise me to refactor my code. I do not want to break the encapsulation for the sake of unit testing.

    Read the article

  • How to inherit constructors with arguments in .NET?

    - by Soumya92
    I have a "MustInherit" .NET class which declares a constructor with an integer parameter. However, Visual Studio gives me an error when I create any derived class stating that there is no constructor that can be called without any arguments. Is it possible to inherit the constructor with arguments? Right now, I have to use Public Sub New(ByVal A As Integer) MyBase.New(A) End Sub in the derived classes. Is there any way to avoid this?

    Read the article

  • Consolidating coding styles: Funcs, private method, single method classes

    - by jdoig
    Hi all, We currently have 3 devs with, some, conflicting styles and I'm looking for a way to bring peace to the kingdom... The Coders: Foo 1: Likes to use Func's & Action's inside public methods. He uses actions to alias off lengthy method calls and Func's to perform simple tasks that can be expressed in 1 or 2 lines and will be used frequently through out the code Pros: The main body of his code is succinct and very readable, often with only one or 2 public methods per class and rarely any private methods. Cons: The start of methods contain blocks of lambda rich code that other developers don't enjoy reading; and, on occasion, can contain higher order functions that other dev's REALLY don't like reading. Foo 2: Likes to create a private method for (almost) everything the public method will have to do . Pros: Public methods remain small and readable (to all developers). Cons: Private methods are numerous. With private methods that call into other private methods, that call into... etc, etc. Making code hard to navigate. Foo 3: Likes to create a public class with a, single, public method for every, non-trivial, task that needs performing, then dependency inject them into other objects. Pros: Easily testable, easy to understand (one object, one responsibility). Cons: project gets littered by classes, opening multiple class files to understand what code does makes navigation awkward. It would be great to take the best of all these techniques... Foo-1 Has really nice, readable (almost dsl-like) code... for the most part, except for all the Action and Func lambda shenanigans bulked together at the start of a method. Foo-3 Has highly testable and extensible code that just feels a bit "belt-&-braces" for some solutions and has some code-navigation niggles (constantly hitting F12 in VS and opening 5 other .cs files to find out what a single method does). And Foo-2... Well I'm not sure I like anything about the one-huge .cs file with 2 public methods and 12 private ones, except for the fact it's easier for juniors to dig into. I admit I grossly over-simplified the explanations of those coding styles; but if any one knows of any patterns, practices or diplomatic-manoeuvres that can help unite our three developers (without just telling any of them to just "stop it!") that would be great. From a feasibility standpoint : Foo-1's style meets with the most resistance due to some developers finding lambda and/or Func's hard to read. Foo-2's style meets with a less resistance as it's just so easy to fall into. Foo-3's style requires the most forward thinking and is difficult to enforce when time is short. Any ideas on some coding styles or conventions that can make this work?

    Read the article

  • Singleton constructor question

    - by gillyb
    Hi, I created a Singleton class in c#, with a public property that I want to initialize when the Singleton is first called. This is the code I wrote : public class BL { private ISessionFactory _sessionFactory; public ISessionFactory SessionFactory { get { return _sessionFactory; } set { _sessionFactory = value; } } private BL() { SessionFactory = Dal.SessionFactory.CreateSessionFactory(); } private object thisLock = new object(); private BL _instance = null; public BL Instance { get { lock (thisLock) { if (_instance == null) { _instance = new BL(); } return _instance; } } } } As far as I know, when I address the Instance BL object in the BL class for the first time, it should load the constructor and that should initialize the SessionFactory object. But when I try : BL.Instance.SessionFactory.OpenSession(); I get a Null Reference Exception, and I see that SessionFactory is null... why?

    Read the article

  • Do you put a super() call a the beginning of your constructors?

    - by sleske
    This is a question about coding style and recommended practices: As explained in the answers to the question unnecessary to put super() in constructor?, if you write a constructor for a class that is supposed to use the default (no-arg) constructor from the superclass, you may call super() at the beginning of your constructor: public MyClass(int parm){ super(); // leaving this out makes no difference // do stuff... } but you can also omit the call; the compiler will in both cases act as if the super() call were there. So then, do you put the call into your constructors or not? On the one hand, one might argue that including the super() makes things more explicit. OTOH, I always dislike writing redundant code, so personally I tend to leave it out; I do however regularly see it in code from others. What are your experiences? Did you have problems with one or the other approach? Do you have coding guidelines which prescribe one approach?

    Read the article

  • javascript inherance? with Private vars and methods too

    - by Totty
    Hy i need to inherent a class from another. Parent has private var "_data" and private method "_test" and public method "add" Now the child have a public method "add", that uses the private method from the parent "_test" and the private var "_data". How do i do this? var Parent = function(){ var _data = {}; var _test = function(){alert('test')}; this.add = function(){alert('add from parent')} } var Child = function(){ this.add = function(){// here uses the _data and _test from the Parent class alert('add from child') } } // something to inherent Child from Parent // instance Child and use the add method And i think im miss the prototype concept (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/892467/javascript-inheritance)

    Read the article

  • Multiple constructors definitions with same name but different signatures (C++)

    - by PuRe_ChAoS12
    With the following code, I keep getting error C2535 when I compile. It's complaining that a member function already defined or declared. Rationnel.h ... class Rationnel { public: Rationnel(int); //Constructor Rationnel(int,int); //Constructor void add(const Rationnel); ... Rationnel.cpp ... //Constructor Rationnel::Rationnel(int n = 1) { numerateur = n; denominateur = 1; } //Constructor Rationnel::Rationnel(int n = 1, int d = 1) { numerateur = n; denominateur = d; } ... Any idea what could be causing the error? Thanks for your time.

    Read the article

  • Iterator not accessible because of private inheritance

    - by Bo Tian
    I've created a new class that composes std::deque by private inheritance, i.e, class B : private std::deque<A> { ... }; and in my source code I tried to use iterator of B, i.e., B::iterator it The compiler error is error C2247: 'std::deque<_Ty>::iterator' not accessible because 'B' uses 'private' to inherit from 'std::deque<_Ty>' So the question is, how can I make the iterator accessible?

    Read the article

  • Android Dev: The constructor Intent(new View.OnClickListener(){}, Class<DrinksTwitter>) is undefined

    - by Malcolm Woods Spark
    package com.android.drinksonme; import android.app.Activity; import android.content.Intent; import android.os.Bundle; import android.view.View; import android.view.View.OnClickListener; import android.widget.Button; import android.widget.EditText; import android.widget.TextView; public class Screen2 extends Activity { // Declare our Views, so we can access them later private EditText etUsername; private EditText etPassword; private Button btnLogin; private Button btnSignUp; private TextView lblResult; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.main); // Get the EditText and Button References etUsername = (EditText)findViewById(R.id.username); etPassword = (EditText)findViewById(R.id.password); btnLogin = (Button)findViewById(R.id.login_button); btnSignUp = (Button)findViewById(R.id.signup_button); lblResult = (TextView)findViewById(R.id.result); // Set Click Listener btnLogin.setOnClickListener(new OnClickListener() { @Override public void onClick(View v) { // Check Login String username = etUsername.getText().toString(); String password = etPassword.getText().toString(); if(username.equals("test") && password.equals("test")){ final Intent i = new Intent(this, DrinksTwitter.class); //error on this line startActivity(i); // lblResult.setText("Login successful."); } else { lblResult.setText("Invalid username or password."); } } }); final Intent k = new Intent(Screen2.this, SignUp.class); btnSignUp.setOnClickListener(new OnClickListener() { public void onClick(View v) { startActivity(k); } }); } }

    Read the article

  • Should developers *really* have private offices?

    - by Aron Rotteveel
    We will probably be moving within a year, so we have to make some decisions regarding office layout. At the moment, our company is basically one big office. When our developers can't bother to be disturbed at all, we all have our own headphones to mute the outside world. Still, it seems a lot of people feel that private offices are no doubt the way to go. From Joel's article Private Offices Redux: Not every programmer in the world wants to work in a private office. In fact quite a few would tell you unequivocally that they prefer the camaradarie and easy information sharing of an open space. Don't fall for it. They also want M&Ms for breakfast and a pony. Open space is fun but not productive. Even though I can understand the benefit on productivity, does having a private office really result in more net productivity? There seem to be plenty of companies that create wide open spaces and still maintain good productivity. Or so it seems. (I should mention many of them use cubicles, though) What is your opinion on this? What does your company do? Is there some middle ground in this? Some more related information on this matter: Private Offices Redux The new Fog Creek office A Field Guide to Developers Gmail recruitment page. Found this last one somewhat remarkable since the Gmail recruitment page promotes the "wide open space" idea.

    Read the article

  • removing dependancy of a private function inside a public function using Rhino Mocks

    - by L G
    Hi All, I am new to mocking, and have started with Rhino Mocks. My scenario is like this..in my class library i have a public function and inside it i have a private function call, which gets output from a service.I want to remove the private function dependency. public class Employee { public virtual string GetFullName(string firstName, string lastName) { string middleName = GetMiddleName(); return string.Format("{0} {2} {1}", firstName, lastName,middleName ); } private virtual string GetMiddleName() { // Some call to Service return "George"; } } This is not my real scenario though, i just wanted to know how to remove dependency of GetMiddleName() function and i need to return some default value while unit testing. Note : I won't be able to change the private function here..or include Interface..Keeping the functions as such, is there any way to mock this.Thank

    Read the article

  • C++ private inheritance and static members/types

    - by WearyMonkey
    I am trying to stop a class from being able to convert its 'this' pointer into a pointer of one of its interfaces. I do this by using private inheritance via a middle proxy class. The problem is that I find private inheritance makes all public static members and types of the base class inaccessible to all classes under the inheriting class in the hierarchy. class Base { public: enum Enum { value }; }; class Middle : private Base { }; class Child : public Middle { public: void Method() { Base::Enum e = Base::value; // doesn't compile BAD! Base* base = this; // doesn't compile GOOD! } }; I've tried this in both VS2008 (the required version) and VS2010, neither work. Can anyone think of a workaround? Or a different approach to stopping the conversion? Also I am curios of the behavior, is it just a side effect of the compiler implementation, or is it by design? If by design, then why? I always thought of private inheritance to mean that nobody knows Middle inherits from Base. However, the exhibited behavior implies private inheritance means a lot more than that, in-fact Child has less access to Base than any namespace not in the class hierarchy!

    Read the article

  • Static member class - declare class private and class member package-private?

    - by Helper Method
    Consider you have the following class public class OuterClass { ... private static class InnerClass { int foo; int bar; } } I think I've read somewhere (but not the official Java Tutorial) that if I would declare the static member classes attributes private, the compiler had to generate some sort of accessor methods so that the outer class can actually access the static member class's (which is effectively a package-private top level class) attributes. Any ideas on that?

    Read the article

  • Tunnelblick cannot load private key file

    - by Patrick
    I got a certificate from my network administrator and the passphrase for it. Put everything in the Tunnelblick configuration folder, but always get an error: 2010-11-20 13:22:10 Cannot load private key file vpn-pass.key: error:06065064:digital envelope routines:EVP_DecryptFinal:bad decrypt: error:0906A065:PEM routines:PEM_do_header:bad decrypt: error:140B0009:SSL routines:SSL_CTX_use_PrivateKey_file:PEM lib Everything was copy&paste and it works on a windows machine. How can I get this to work?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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