Search Results

Search found 15432 results on 618 pages for 'private inheritance'.

Page 214/618 | < Previous Page | 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221  | Next Page >

  • Hibernate/JPA - annotating bean methods vs fields

    - by Benju
    I have a simple question about usage of Hibernate. I keep seeing people using JPA annotations in one of two ways by annotating the fields of a class and also by annotating the get method on the corresponding beans. My question is as follows: Is there a difference between annotating fields and bean methods with JPA annoations such as @Id. example: @Entity public class User { **@ID** private int id; public int getId(){ return this.id; } public void setId(int id){ this.id=id; } } -----------OR----------- @Entity public class User { private int id; **@ID** public int getId(){ return this.id; } public void setId(int id){ this.id=id; } }

    Read the article

  • VB.Net List.Find. Pass values to predicate

    - by Beta033
    Having a bit of trouble using the List.Find with a custom predicate i have a function that does this private function test () Dim test As Integer = keys.Find(AddressOf FindByOldKeyAndName).NewKey here's the function for the predicate Private Shared Function FindByOldKeyAndName(ByVal k As KeyObj) As Boolean If k.OldKey = currentKey.OldKey And k.KeyName = currentKey.KeyName Then Return True Else Return False End If End Function by doing it this way means i have to have a shared "currentKey" object in the class, and i know there has to be a way to pass in the values i'm interested in of CurrentKey (namely, keyname, and oldkey) ideally i'd like to call it by something like keys.Find(AddressOf FindByOldKeyAndName(Name,OldVal)) however when i do this i get compiler errors. How do i call this method and pass in the values?

    Read the article

  • Custom class object in Initialization list

    - by Michael
    I have a class Bar: class Bar { public: Bar(void); ~Bar(void); }; And a class Foo that gets a reference to Bar object as a constructor parameter and needs to save it in a private member bar_ : class Foo { private: Bar& bar_; public: Foo(Bar& bar) : bar_(bar) {} ~Foo(void) {} }; This doesn't compile : overloaded member function not found in 'Parser' missing type specifier - int assumed. Note: C++ does not support default-int Now i suspect couple of things that i need to assure, the second error is for Bar& bar_; declaration in Foo. Do i need to use an explicit constructor when declaring bar_ ? I am interested in learning how the compiler works regarding this matter, so a detailed explanation would be highly appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Combobox INotifyPropertyChanged event not raised!!!

    - by nagiah
    I created a combobox and set observable collection as the itemsource and implemented INotifyPropertyChanged on the observable collection item. Even after that, when I select different item in the combobox, the OnPropertyChange method is not invoked. I think I am not making the binding properly. Could any one please correct me/ suggest me in this regard. ---------------------------------MainPage.xaml--------------------------------------------------- <StackPanel Width="300"> <ComboBox Name="cboName"></ComboBox> <TextBox Name="tbxName" Text="{Binding Path=name,Mode=TwoWay,ElementName=cboName}" ></TextBox> </StackPanel> ---------------------------MainPage.xaml.cs----------------------------------------------- using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Net; using System.Windows; using System.Windows.Controls; using System.Windows.Documents; using System.Windows.Input; using System.Windows.Media; using System.Windows.Media.Animation; using System.Windows.Shapes; using System.Collections.ObjectModel; using System.Collections.Specialized; using System.ComponentModel; namespace MasterDetailsUpdate { public partial class MainPage : UserControl { public MainPage() { InitializeComponent(); Loaded += new RoutedEventHandler(MainPage_Loaded); } void MainPage_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { ObservableCollection<Person> persons = new ObservableCollection<Person>(); persons.Add(new Person { city = "c1", name = "n1" }); persons.Add(new Person { city = "c2", name = "n2" }); persons.Add(new Person { city = "c3", name = "" }); persons.Add(new Person { city = "c4", name = "" }); persons.Add(new Person { city = "c5", name = "n1" }); cboName.ItemsSource = persons; cboName.DisplayMemberPath = "name"; } } public class Person : INotifyPropertyChanged { private string _name; private string _city; public string name { set { _name = value; OnPropertyChanged("name"); } get { return _name; } } public string city { set { _city = value; OnPropertyChanged("city"); } get { return _city; } } #region INotifyPropertyChanged Members public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged; private void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName) { if (PropertyChanged != null) { this.PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName)); } } #endregion } } Thank You

    Read the article

  • Static vs Non Static constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • Template type deduction with a non-copyable class

    - by Evan Teran
    Suppose I have an autolocker class which looks something like this: template <T> class autolocker { public: autolocker(T *l) : lock(l) { lock->lock(); } ~autolocker() { lock->unlock(); } private: autolocker(const autolocker&); autolocker& operator=(const autolocker&); private: T *lock; } Obviously the goal is to be able to use this autolocker with anything that has a lock/unlock method without resorting to virtual functions. Currently, it's simple enough to use like this: autolocker<some_lock_t> lock(&my_lock); // my_lock is of type "some_lock_t" but it is illegal to do: autolocker lock(&my_lock); // this would be ideal Is there anyway to get template type deduction to play nice with this (keep in my autolocker is non-copyable). Or is it just easiest to just specify the type?

    Read the article

  • How can I use BeanUtils copyProperties to copy from boolean to Boolean?

    - by carrier
    BeanUtils copyProperties, out of the box, doesn't seem to handle copying from Boolean object properties to boolean primitive properties. I figured I could create and register a converter to handle this, but that just didn't seem to work. So, how can I use BeanUtils to copy the properties from class Source to class Destination where: public class Destination { private boolean property; public boolean isProperty() { return property; } public void setProperty(boolean property) { this.property = property; } } public class Source{ private Boolean property; public Boolean getProperty() { return property; } public void setProperty(Boolean property) { this.property = property; } }

    Read the article

  • WebServices does not interact with App

    - by daemonfire300
    I got a Silverlight App with-in a Web Project Web Silverlight The web contains a service: [WebService(Namespace = "svChat")] [WebServiceBinding(ConformsTo = WsiProfiles.BasicProfile1_1)] // To allow this Web Service to be called from script, using ASP.NET AJAX, uncomment the following line. //[System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptService] public class GetIPService : System.Web.Services.WebService { public GetIPService () { //Uncomment the following line if using designed components //InitializeComponent(); } [WebMethod] public string GetIp() { return HttpContext.Current.Request.ServerVariables["HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR"]; } } And I got a class in my Silverlight App using the Service: public class Client { private string ip; private string created; #region Properties public string Ip { get { return ip; } set { ip = value; } } public string Created { get { return created; } set { created = value; } } #endregion public Client() { } public void SetIp() { ServiceReference1.GetIPServiceSoapClient scIpClient = new svChat.ServiceReference1.GetIPServiceSoapClient(); scIpClient.GetIpCompleted += new EventHandler<svChat.ServiceReference1.GetIpCompletedEventArgs>(IpService_Completed); scIpClient.GetIpAsync(); } private void IpService_Completed(object sender, ServiceReference1.GetIpCompletedEventArgs e) { this.ip = e.Result; } } After Client is created, SetIp() is called, and Client.Ip is added to a text box. Nothing happens. Ip = null. Service itselfs works, tested it. Getting Ip by the above code works. Gettings Ip via service through Silverlight App does not work. <configuration> <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="GetIPServiceSoap" maxBufferSize="2147483647" maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483647"> <security mode="None" /> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="http://localhost:2090/svChat.Web/GetIPService.asmx" binding="basicHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="GetIPServiceSoap" contract="ServiceReference1.GetIPServiceSoap" name="GetIPServiceSoap" /> </client> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> Any ideas? regards,

    Read the article

  • WPF - Two way binding use a user control...binding to object, not an element!

    - by Scott
    I created an object with a simple property with a default value. I then created a user control that has a text box in it. I set the datacontext of the user control to the object. The text box correctly shows the properties default value but I can't seem to update the property value when the user changes the text box value. I created a simple project to illustrate my code. Thanks for the help!! public partial class UserControl1 : UserControl { public UserControl1() { InitializeComponent(); } private string _titleValue; public string TitleValue { get { return _titleValue; } set { _titleValue = value; textBox1.Text = _titleValue; } } public static readonly DependencyProperty TitleValueProperty = DependencyProperty.Register( "TitleValue", typeof(string), typeof(UserControl1), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(new PropertyChangedCallback(titleUpdated)) ); //Don't think I should need to do this!!! private static void titleUpdated(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e) { ((UserControl1)d).TitleValue = (string)e.NewValue; } } <UserControl x:Class="WpfApplication1.UserControl1" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:mc="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:d="http://schemas.microsoft.com/expression/blend/2008" mc:Ignorable="d" d:DesignHeight="300" d:DesignWidth="300"> <Grid> <TextBox Height="23" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="94,97,0,0" Name="textBox1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="120" Text="{Binding Path=TitleValue, Mode=TwoWay}"/> </Grid> </UserControl> public partial class MainWindow : Window { public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); var dummy = new DummyObject("This is my title."); userControl11.DataContext = dummy; } private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { MessageBox.Show("The value is: " + ((DummyObject)userControl11.DataContext).Title); } } <Window x:Class="WpfApplication1.MainWindow" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" Title="MainWindow" Height="350" Width="525" xmlns:my="clr-namespace:WpfApplication1"> <Grid> <my:UserControl1 HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="95,44,0,0" x:Name="userControl11" VerticalAlignment="Top" Height="191" Width="293" TitleValue="{Binding Path=Title, Mode=TwoWay}"/> <Button Content="Check Value" Height="23" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="20,12,0,0" Name="button1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="75" Click="button1_Click" /> </Grid> </Window>

    Read the article

  • C++ Constructor Initializer List - using member functions of initialized members

    - by Andy
    I've run into the following a few times with initializer lists and I've never been able to explain it well. Can anyone explain why exactly the following fails (I don't have a compiler to catch typos, so bear with me): class Foo { public: Foo( int i ) : m_i( i ) {} //works with no problem int getInt() {return m_i;} ~Foo {} private: int m_i; }; class Bar { public: Bar() : m_foo( 5 ), //this is ok m_myInt( m_foo.getInt() ) //runtime error, seg 11 {} ~Bar() {} private: Foo m_foo; int m_myInt; }; When trying to call member functions of members initialized higher up the initializer list, I get seg faults. I seem to recall this is a known problem (or perhaps somehow by design) but I've never seen it well described. The attached example is contrived with plain old data types, but substitute the Bar::m_myInt with another object lacking a default (empty) constructor and the issue is more real. Can anyone enlighten me? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Hibernate MappingException Unknown entity: $Proxy2

    - by slynn1324
    I'm using Hibernate annotations and have a VERY basic data object: import java.io.Serializable; import javax.persistence.Entity; import javax.persistence.Id; @Entity public class State implements Serializable { /** * */ private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; @Id private String stateCode; private String stateFullName; public String getStateCode() { return stateCode; } public void setStateCode(String stateCode) { this.stateCode = stateCode; } public String getStateFullName() { return stateFullName; } public void setStateFullName(String stateFullName) { this.stateFullName = stateFullName; } } and am trying to run the following test case: public void testCreateState(){ Session s = HibernateUtil.getSessionFactory().getCurrentSession(); Transaction t = s.beginTransaction(); State state = new State(); state.setStateCode("NE"); state.setStateFullName("Nebraska"); s.save(s); t.commit(); } and get an org.hibernate.MappingException: Unknown entity: $Proxy2 at org.hibernate.impl.SessionFactoryImpl.getEntityPersister(SessionFactoryImpl.java:628) at org.hibernate.impl.SessionImpl.getEntityPersister(SessionImpl.java:1366) at org.hibernate.event.def.AbstractSaveEventListener.saveWithGeneratedId(AbstractSaveEventListener.java:121) .... I haven't been able to find anything referencing the $Proxy part of the error - and am at a loss.. Any pointers to what I'm missing would be greatly appreciated. hibernate.cfg.xml <property name="hibernate.connection.driver_class">org.hsqldb.jdbcDriver</property> <property name="connection.url">jdbc:hsqldb:hsql://localhost/xdb</property> <property name="connection.username">sa</property> <property name="connection.password"></property> <property name="current_session_context_class">thread</property> <property name="dialect">org.hibernate.dialect.HSQLDialect</property> <property name="show_sql">true</property> <property name="hbm2ddl.auto">update</property> <property name="hibernate.transaction.factory_class">org.hibernate.transaction.JDBCTransactionFactory</property> <mapping class="com.test.domain.State"/> in HibernateUtil.java public static SessionFactory getSessionFactory(boolean testing ) { if ( sessionFactory == null ){ try { String configPath = HIBERNATE_CFG; AnnotationConfiguration config = new AnnotationConfiguration(); config.configure(configPath); sessionFactory = config.buildSessionFactory(); } catch (Exception e){ e.printStackTrace(); throw new ExceptionInInitializerError(e); } } return sessionFactory; }

    Read the article

  • Problem setting row backgrounds in Android Listview

    - by zchtodd
    I have an application in which I'd like one row at a time to have a certain color. This seems to work about 95% of the time, but sometimes instead of having just one row with this color, it will allow multiple rows to have the color. Specifically, a row is set to have the "special" color when it is tapped. In rare instances, the last row tapped will retain the color despite a call to setBackgroundColor attempting to make it otherwise. private OnItemClickListener mDirectoryListener = new OnItemClickListener(){ public void onItemClick(AdapterView parent, View view, int pos, long id){ if (stdir.getStationCount() == pos) { stdir.moreStations(); return; } if (playingView != null) playingView.setBackgroundColor(Color.DKGRAY); view.setBackgroundColor(Color.MAGENTA); playingView = view; playStation(pos); } }; I have confirmed with print statements that the code setting the row to gray is always called. Can anyone imagine a reason why this code might intermittently fail? If there is a pattern or condition that causes it, I can't tell. I thought it might have something to do with the activity lifecycle setting the "playingView" variable back to null, but I can't reliably reproduce the problem by switching activities or locking the phone. private class DirectoryAdapter extends ArrayAdapter { private ArrayList<Station> items; public DirectoryAdapter(Context c, int resLayoutId, ArrayList<Station> stations){ super(c, resLayoutId, stations); this.items = stations; } public int getCount(){ return items.size() + 1; } public View getView(int position, View convertView, ViewGroup parent){ View v = convertView; LayoutInflater vi = (LayoutInflater)getContext().getSystemService(Context.LAYOUT_INFLATER_SERVICE); if (position == this.items.size()) { v = vi.inflate(R.layout.morerow, null); return v; } Station station = this.items.get(position); v = vi.inflate(R.layout.songrow, null); if (station.playing) v.setBackgroundColor(Color.MAGENTA); else if (station.visited) v.setBackgroundColor(Color.DKGRAY); else v.setBackgroundColor(Color.BLACK); TextView title = (TextView)v.findViewById(R.id.title); title.setText(station.name); return v; } };

    Read the article

  • Better way to kill a Form after the FormClosing event is overridden to hide rather than close?

    - by Paul Sasik
    I have a simple Windows Form that hosts property controls at runtime. To keep the window and its contents alive rather than killing it by handling the FormClosing event, cancel the event and simply hide the form. That's fine but at close of the application I need to actually close the window. I implemented the below but it feels kludgey. Is there a simpler, more clever way to handle this situation? (The form's controller calls KillForm explicitly after it receives a closing event from the main window.) Friend Class HostForm Private _hideInsteadOfClosing As Boolean = True Private Sub HostForm_FormClosing(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As FormClosingEventArgs) _ Handles Me.FormClosing If _hideInsteadOfClosing Then Me.Hide() e.Cancel = True End If End Sub Public Sub KillForm() _hideInsteadOfClosing = False Me.Close() End Sub End Class

    Read the article

  • C++ - what does the colon after a constructor mean?

    - by waitinforatrain
    I'd happily Google this but don't know what to call it to Google it. I have a piece of code here: class demo { private: unsigned char len, *dat; public: demo(unsigned char le = 5, unsigned char default) : len(le) { dat = new char[len]; for (int i = 0; i <= le; i++) dat[i] = default; } void ~demo(void) { delete [] *dat; } }; class newdemo : public demo { private: int *dat1; public: newdemo(void) : demo(0, 0) { *dat1 = 0; return 0; } }; (It's from a past exam paper and the question is to correct errors in the code so ignore errors!) My question is, what are the ": len(le) " and " : demo(0, 0)" called? Something to do with inheritance?

    Read the article

  • How to set default values to all wrong or null parameters of method?

    - by Roman
    At the moment I have this code (and I don't like it): private RenderedImage private RenderedImage getChartImage (GanttChartModel model, String title, Integer width, Integer height, String xAxisLabel, String yAxisLabel, Boolean showLegend) { if (title == null) { title = ""; } if (xAxisLabel == null) { xAxisLabel = ""; } if (yAxisLabel == null) { yAxisLabel = ""; } if (showLegend == null) { showLegend = true; } if (width == null) { width = DEFAULT_WIDTH; } if (height == null) { height = DEFAULT_HEIGHT; } ... } How can I improve it? I have some thoughts about introducing an object which will contain all these parameters as fields and then, maybe, it'll be possible to apply builder pattern. But still don't have clear vision how to implement that and I'm not sure that it's worth to be done. Any other ideas?

    Read the article

  • HQL multiple updates. Is there a better way?

    - by folone
    I have a Map, that I want to persist. The domain object is something like this: public class Settings { private String key; private String value; public String getKey() { ... } public String getValue() { ... } public void setKey() { ... } public void setValue() { ... } } The standard approach is to generate a Setting for each pair, and saveOrUpdate() it. But it generates way too much queries, because I need to save lots of settings at a time, and it really affects perfomance. Is there a way to do this using one update query?

    Read the article

  • How do I create a thread-safe write-once read-many value in Java?

    - by Software Monkey
    This is a problem I encounter frequently in working with more complex systems and which I have never figured out a good way to solve. It usually involves variations on the theme of a shared object whose construction and initialization are necessarily two distinct steps. This is generally because of architectural requirements, similar to applets, so answers that suggest I consolidate construction and initialization are not useful. By way of example, let's say I have a class that is structured to fit into an application framework like so: public class MyClass { private /*ideally-final*/ SomeObject someObject; MyClass() { someObject=null; } public void startup() { someObject=new SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...); } public void shutdown() { someObject=null; // this is not necessary, I am just expressing the intended scope of someObject explicitly } } I can't make someObject final since it can't be set until startup() is invoked. But I would really like it to reflect it's write-once semantics and be able to directly access it from multiple threads, preferably avoiding synchronization. The idea being to express and enforce a degree of finalness, I conjecture that I could create a generic container, like so: public class WoRmObject<T> { private T object; WoRmObject() { object=null; } public WoRmObject set(T val) { object=val; return this; } public T get() { return object; } } and then in MyClass, above, do: private final WoRmObject<SomeObject> someObject; MyClass() { someObject=new WoRmObject<SomeObject>(); } public void startup() { someObject.set(SomeObject(...arguments from environment which are not available until startup is called...)); } Which raises some questions for me: Is there a better way, or existing Java object (would have to be available in Java 4)? Is this thread-safe provided that no other thread accesses someObject.get() until after it's set() has been called. The other threads will only invoke methods on MyClass between startup() and shutdown() - the framework guarantees this. Given the completely unsynchronized WoRmObject container, it is ever possible under either JMM to see a value of object which is neither null nor a reference to a SomeObject? In other words, does has the JMM always guaranteed that no thread can observe the memory of an object to be whatever values happened to be on the heap when the object was allocated.

    Read the article

  • Mock a void method which change the input value

    - by Kar
    Hi, How could I mock a void method with parameters and change the value parameters? My void method looks like this: public interface IFoo { void GetValue(int x, object y) // takes x and do something then access another class to get the value of y } I prepared a delegate class: private delegate void GetValueDelegate(int x, object y); private void GetValue(int x, object y) { // process x // prepare a new object obj if (y == null) y = new Object(); if (//some checks) y = obj; } I wrote something like this: Expect.Call(delegate {x.GetValue(5, null);}).Do (new GetValueDelegate(GetValue)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Any(); But seems like it's not working. Any clue on what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad idea to use the new Dynamic Keyword as a replacement switch statement?

    - by WeNeedAnswers
    I like the new Dynamic keyword and read that it can be used as a replacement visitor pattern. It makes the code more declarative which I prefer. Is it a good idea though to replace all instances of switch on 'Type' with a class that implements dynamic dispatch. class VistorTest { public string DynamicVisit(object obj) { return Visit((dynamic)obj); } private string Visit(string str) { return "a string was called with value " + str; } private string Visit(int value) { return "an int was called with value " + value; } }

    Read the article

  • Java Best Practice for type resolution at runtime.

    - by Brian
    I'm trying to define a class (or set of classes which implement the same interface) that will behave as a loosely typed object (like JavaScript). They can hold any sort of data and operations on them depend on the underlying type. I have it working in three different ways but none seem ideal. These test versions only allow strings and integers and the only operation is add. Adding integers results in the sum of the integer values, adding strings concatenates the strings and adding an integer to a string converts the integer to a string and concatenates it with the string. The final version will have more types (Doubles, Arrays, JavaScript-like objects where new properties can be added dynamically) and more operations. Way 1: public interface DynObject1 { @Override public String toString(); public DynObject1 add(DynObject1 d); public DynObject1 addTo(DynInteger1 d); public DynObject1 addTo(DynString1 d); } public class DynInteger1 implements DynObject1 { private int value; public DynInteger1(int v) { value = v; } @Override public String toString() { return Integer.toString(value); } public DynObject1 add(DynObject1 d) { return d.addTo(this); } public DynObject1 addTo(DynInteger1 d) { return new DynInteger1(d.value + value); } public DynObject1 addTo(DynString1 d) { return new DynString1(d.toString()+Integer.toString(value)); } } ...and similar for DynString1 Way 2: public interface DynObject2 { @Override public String toString(); public DynObject2 add(DynObject2 d); } public class DynInteger2 implements DynObject2 { private int value; public DynInteger2(int v) { value = v; } @Override public String toString() { return Integer.toString(value); } public DynObject2 add(DynObject2 d) { Class c = d.getClass(); if(c==DynInteger2.class) { return new DynInteger2(value + ((DynInteger2)d).value); } else { return new DynString2(toString() + d.toString()); } } } ...and similar for DynString2 Way 3: public class DynObject3 { private enum ObjectType { Integer, String }; Object value; ObjectType type; public DynObject3(Integer v) { value = v; type = ObjectType.Integer; } public DynObject3(String v) { value = v; type = ObjectType.String; } @Override public String toString() { return value.toString(); } public DynObject3 add(DynObject3 d) { if(type==ObjectType.Integer && d.type==ObjectType.Integer) { return new DynObject3(Integer.valueOf(((Integer)value).intValue()+((Integer)value).intValue())); } else { return new DynObject3(value.toString()+d.value.toString()); } } } With the if-else logic I could use value.getClass()==Integer.class instead of storing the type but with more types I'd change this to use a switch statement and Java doesn't allow switch to use Classes. Anyway... My question is what is the best way to go about something thike this?

    Read the article

  • How to create digital signature that can not be used to reproduce the message twice

    - by freediver
    I am creating a client-server application and I'd like to send data from server to client securely. Using public/private key algorithms makes sense and in PHP we can use openssl_sign and openssl_verify functions to check that the data came by someone who has the private key. Now imagine that one of the actions sent by server to client is destructive in nature. If somebody uses an HTTP sniffer to catch this command (which will be signed properly) how can I further protect the communication to ensure that only commands coming from our server get processed by the client? I was thinking about using current UTC time as part of the encrypted data but client time might be off. Is there a simple solution to the problem?

    Read the article

  • Using a general class for execution with try/catch/finally?

    - by antirysm
    I find myself having a lot of this in different methods in my code: try { runABunchOfMethods(); } catch (Exception ex) { logger.Log(ex); } What about creating this: public static class Executor { private static ILogger logger; public delegate void ExecuteThis(); static Executor() { // logger = ...GetLoggerFromIoC(); } public static void Execute(ExecuteThis executeThis) { try { executeThis(); } catch (Exception ex) { logger.Log(ex); } } } And just using it like this: private void RunSomething() { Method1(someClassVar); Method2(someOtherClassVar); } ... Executor.Execute(RunSomething); Are there any downsides to this approach? (You could add Executor-methods and delegates when you want a finally and use generics for the type of Exeception you want to catch...)

    Read the article

  • How do I make this ASP.NET MVC controller more testable?

    - by Ragesh
    I have a controller that overrides OnActionExecuting and does something like this: protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); string tenantDomain = filterContext.RouteData.Values["tenantDomain"] as string; if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantDomain)) { using (var tx = BeginTransaction()) { this.Tenant = repo.FindOne(t => t.Domain == tenantDomain); } } } Tenant is a protected property with a private setter. The class itself is an abstract base controller that my real controllers derive from. I have code in other controllers that looks a lot like this: if (Tenant == null) { // Do something } else { // Do something else } How do I test this code? What I need to do is to somehow set the Tenant property, but I can't because: It's a protected property, and It has a private setter Changing the visibility of Tenant doesn't "feel" right. What are my alternatives to unit test my derived controllers?

    Read the article

  • Accessing a Clip Inside Another Clip in a Loaded SWF-File

    - by Anders
    I'm writing a card game in AS3. The artist I'm working with has produced (in Flash CS4) a single swf-file containing all the card graphics and animations. The structure of the fla working file looks something like this: - Scene - CardGraphics (Movie Clip) - CardFront - CardBack - CardValueImage (Movie Clip) ... In the program I create 52 instances of my Card class, each having a MovieClip instance created from the loaded swf. The idea is to set the frame of the CardValueImage MovieClip to correspond to the Card instance's suit and rank member variables. However, I can't figure out how I access CardValueImage and call gotoAndStop (or whatever method I will need to call). This is basically what I want to do: // Card Class [Embed(source = 'CardGraphics.swf')] private static var CardsClip:Class; private var clip:MovieClip = new CardsClip; // Card Constructor this.valueImageFrame = suit * 13 + rank; // Calculate which frame contains the // graphical representation of this card this.clip.CardValueImage.gotoAndStop(valueImageFrame);

    Read the article

  • How do Unity 12.04/Compiz bindings really work?

    - by Daniel
    There is a bewildering array of places to set bindings, all inconsistent with one another. E.g. in Unity's System Settings having the Ctrl-key highlight the mouse position is an on/off choice. I like the feature, but not on such a prominent key where I keep activating it accidentally. The keyboard shortcuts allow only one binding per command, where I might like a convenient one on the external keyboard and an emergency alternative for when I'm on the road. Keyboard custom shortcuts has a nice interface, but allows only key bindings — besides it doesn't seem to work for me. So I activated CCSM Commands. There I have the choice of key-, mouse- and/or edge bindings. Whereas some places in CCSM offers only one or two of these binding possibilities, randomly at the whim of the programmer. I have not found a way to differentiate a mouse-drag from a click. E.g. I want <SuperMouse1-drag anywhere on a window to move it, while if I don't drag, it should be raise-lower. On the title bar I want the same without needing the <Super key. Now I find raise-lower only in System Settings where I can't assign a mouse binding. If therefore in CCSM I fallback to only lower and put move on the same binding, the window already gets lowered on mouse down, and I can then invisibly move it. Very useful! I have <Altasciicircum get in the way of an Emacs binding, with some to me useless popup overlay. I can find it nowhere, so I can't turn it off. So how can I go without these frontends until they have matured, and instruct Compiz directly, for example in the way Emacs or Sawfish have keymaps, and separate ones for each context, with inheritance?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221  | Next Page >