Search Results

Search found 32512 results on 1301 pages for 'object oriented analysis'.

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 231/1301 | < Previous Page | 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238  | Next Page >

  • How can I declare an object with properties that I will be passing around inside of my function using Typescript?

    - by Marilou
    I've been using the following: var modal = { content: '', form: '', href: '' } But now I have started to use Typescript is there a better way I can declare an object and how can I declare the types of my properties. The reason I am using this object is that it's inside of a function and inside that function I have other functions that set and use the values of the properties. Is this the best way for me to do this or is there another way I could better do this with typescript?

    Read the article

  • Where is a good javascript reference for object event handlers?

    - by GregH
    I am relatively new to Javascript and constantly need to look up how to handle various events for objects. For example, I have a table containing a few text fields and need to know when somebody starts typing in any of the text boxes. Is there any good concise reference on the web anyplace that documents all of the objects and event handlers associated with all objects? I'd like to be able to look up the object and see all of the events I can handle for that object.

    Read the article

  • Can you get a Func<T> (or similar) from a MethodInfo object?

    - by Dan Tao
    I realize that, generally speaking, there are performance implications of using reflection. (I myself am not a fan of reflection at all, actually; this is a purely academic question.) Suppose there exists some class that looks like this: public class MyClass { public string GetName() { return "My Name"; } } Bear with me here. I know that if I have an instance of MyClass called x, I can call x.GetName(). Furthermore, I could set a Func<string> variable to x.GetName. Now here's my question. Let's say I don't know the above class is called MyClass; I've got some object, x, but I have no idea what it is. I could check to see if that object has a GetName method by doing this: MethodInfo getName = x.GetType().GetMethod("GetName"); Suppose getName is not null. Then couldn't I furthermore check if getName.ReturnType == typeof(string) and getName.GetParameters().Length == 0, and at this point, wouldn't I be quite certain that the method represented by my getName object could definitely be cast to a Func<string>, somehow? I realize there's a MethodInfo.Invoke, and I also realize I could always create a Func<string> like: Func<string> getNameFunc = () => getName.Invoke(x, null); I guess what I'm asking is if there's any way to go from a MethodInfo object to the actual method it represents, incurring the performance cost of reflection in the process, but after that point being able to call the method directly (via, e.g., a Func<string> or something similar) without a performance penalty. What I'm envisioning might look something like this: // obviously this would throw an exception if GetActualInstanceMethod returned // something that couldn't be cast to a Func<string> Func<string> getNameFunc = (Func<string>)getName.GetActualInstanceMethod(x); (I realize that doesn't exist; I'm wondering if there's anything like it.) If what I'm asking doesn't make sense, or if I'm being unclear, I'll be happy to attempt to clarify.

    Read the article

  • JQuery UI: is it possible to know where an object has been dropped?

    - by Jack Duluoz
    Hi, what I want to do is to know where (not in terms of position (x, y), but a reference to the DOM element) an object was dropped. I have a grid made up with divs where you can drop various items and I need to know which div on the grid was the item dropped on (getting its id would be fine). The callback function function(event, ui) { //code here } has just that ui object who doesn't apparently contain any information about this, but only about the draggable item or its helper.

    Read the article

  • Fill business object from database by calling stored procedurs?

    - by grady
    Hello, I have several stored procedures in my database, some of them have params, some have no params. I tried to fill a business object by calling the stored procedures, but failed so far. How could I do that dynamically? Later, I want to use this object as a datasource for a report...but thats the next step. The important facts are: different stored procs return different amount of columns stored procs can have params, but its not required How could I achieve that? Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • In Ruby, how to write a method to display any object's instance variable names and its values

    - by Jian Lin
    Given any object in Ruby (on Rails), how can I write a method so that it will display that object's instance variable names and its values, like this: @x: 1 @y: 2 @link_to_point: #<Point:0x10031b298 @y=20, @x=38> I also want to be able to print <br> to the end of each instance variable's value so as to print them out nicely on a webpage. the difficulty now seems to be that not every instance variable has an accessor, so it can't be called with obj.send(var_name) (the var_name has the "@" removed, so "@x" becomes "x")

    Read the article

  • <object> pasted into textarea is removed... why?

    - by swt83
    I have a textarea that saves data into a database. For some reason it is removing <object> tags from anything that I paste into it -- none of the other tags are removed, only <object> tags. I've never had this problem before and have done this same thing in times past -- any ideas as to what could cause this? I'm not filtering the data before it's saved to the db at all.

    Read the article

  • Is it better to create methods with a long list of parameters or wrap the parameters into an object?

    - by GigaPr
    Hi, Is it better(what is the best practice) to create methods with a long list of parameters or wrap the parameters into an object? I mean lets say i have a Client data type with a long list of properties and i want to update all the properties at once. is it better to do something like public int Update(int id, string name, string surname, string streetAddress, string streetAddress2, string postcode, string town, string city, string nationality, string age, string gender,string job){ } or wrap all the properties in a object and do something like public int Update(Client client){} thanks

    Read the article

  • How to convert a PHP object to a string?

    - by Rohan
    I get this error: Catchable fatal error: Object of class stdClass could not be converted to string So, my question is, how do I convert an object to a string in PHP? I don't want to serialize it though. Just a note: the code I use works in PHP 4, but not in PHP 5 Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Grails - how to save a domain object inside a Service ?

    - by w-
    I have a service and inside one of the functions i'm creating a domain object and trying to save it. when it gets to the save part, i get the error No Hibernate Session bound to thread, and configuration does not allow creation of non-transactional one here What do i need to do in order to save a domain object inside of a service. everything on the internet makes it look like this should just work....

    Read the article

  • Adding object to child collection causes entire collection to load in Fluent NHibernate.

    - by Mike C.
    Hello, I have my Parent object, which contains an ICollection of Children objects. The Children are lazy loaded and I do not need them in the context of my scenario. However, when I try to add a new child object to my Children collection, it kicks off the lazy load and loads all 7000 child records. I assume I am making a newbie mistake. Anybody out there know how I can fix this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Where to store the session object in a Standalone application?

    - by HanuAthena
    I'm having a session object that does NOT implement the java.lang.Serializable. (its a legacy application, and now I can't go and change the code) Is there any way where I can store the session object some where and later GET BACK THE SAME STATE in a STANDALONE application. One thought is to use RMI. Is there any better way of achieving this. Thank you :)

    Read the article

  • Entlib validation to syntax to accept only numeric month numbers?

    - by ElHaix
    I've got an enum defined as such: Private Enum AllowedMonthNumbers _1 _2 _3 _4 _5 _6 _7 _8 _9 _10 _11 _12 End Enum Then a property validator defined as: <TypeConversionValidator(GetType(Int32), MessageTemplate:="Card expiry month must be numeric.", Ruleset:="CreditCard")> _ <EnumConversionValidator(GetType(AllowedMonthNumbers), MessageTemplate:="Card expiry month must be between 1 and 12.", Ruleset:="CreditCard")> _ The validation expects "_#", as when I remove the TypeConversionValidator, it passes with setting the value to "_3" or any other number in the enum. What I need is for this to only accept b/t 1-12, and simply having numeric values in the enum won't work. Any tips? Thanks. UPDATE I replaced the EnumConversionValidator with a RangeValidator, and attempting to set the parameter to "1", but received the following error: <RangeValidator(1, RangeBoundaryType.Inclusive, 12, RangeBoundaryType.Inclusive, MessageTemplate:="..."> However that's now giving me the following error: System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException : System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: Server was unable to process request. ---> System.ArgumentException: Object must be of type Int32. at System.Int32.CompareTo(Object value) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.RangeChecker`1.IsInRange(T target) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.RangeValidator`1.DoValidate(T objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validator`1.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.AndCompositeValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.ValueAccessValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.AndCompositeValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.GenericValidatorWrapper`1.DoValidate(T objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validator`1.Validate(T target, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validation.Validate[T](T target, String[] rulesets) at ....

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice for using lock within inherited classes

    - by JDMX
    I want to know if one class is inheriting from another, is it better to have the classes share a lock object that is defined at the base class or to have a lock object defined at each inheritance level. A very simple example of a lock object on each level of the class public class Foo { private object thisLock = new object(); private int ivalue; public int Value { get { lock( thisLock ) { return ivalue; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { ivalue= value; } } } } public class Foo2: Foo { private object thisLock2 = new object(); public int DoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock2 ) { return base.Value * 2; } } set { lock( thisLock2 ) { base.Value = value / 2; } } } } public class Foo6: Foo2 { private object thisLock6 = new object(); public int TripleDoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock6 ) { return base.DoubleValue * 3; } } set { lock( thisLock6 ) { base.DoubleValue = value / 3; } } } } A very simple example of a shared lock object public class Foo { protected object thisLock = new object(); private int ivalue; public int Value { get { lock( thisLock ) { return ivalue; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { ivalue= value; } } } } public class Foo2: Foo { public int DoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock ) { return base.Value * 2; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { base.Value = value / 2; } } } } public class Foo6: Foo2 { public int TripleDoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock ) { return base.DoubleValue * 3; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { base.DoubleValue = value / 3; } } } } Which example is the preferred way to manage locking within an inherited class?

    Read the article

  • Using LINQ in generic collections

    - by Hugo S Ferreira
    Hi, Please consider the following snippet from an implementation of the Interpreter pattern: public override object Execute(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable<string>; return (list != null) ? list.FirstOrDefault() : null; } What about if I want to use the same function for integers? public override object Execute(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable<string>; if (list != null) return list.FirstOrDefault(); var list = ctx as IEnumerable<int>; return (list != null) ? list.FirstOrDefault() : null; } What I wanted was something like: public override object Execute(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable; return (list != null) ? list.FirstOrDefault() : null; } But Linq doesn't act on IEnumerables. Instead, to get to this solution, I would be forced to write something like: public override object Execute(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable; if (list != null) foreach(var i in list) { yield return i; return; } return null; } Or use a generic method: public override T Execute<T>(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable<T>; return (list != null) ? list.FirstOrDefault() : null; } Which would break the Interpreter pattern (as it was implemented in this system). Covariance would also fail (at least in C#3), though would it work, it would be the exact behavior I wanted: public override object Execute(Interpreter interpreter, object ctx) { var list = ctx as IEnumerable<object>; return (list != null) ? list.FirstOrDefault() : null; } So, my question is: what's the best way to achieve the intended behavior? Thanks :-)

    Read the article

  • Synchronizing Access to a member of the ASP.NET session

    - by Sam
    I'm building a Javascript application and eash user has an individual UserSession. The application makes a bunch of Ajax calls. Each Ajax call needs access to a single UserSession object for the user. Each Ajax call needs a UserSession object. Data in the UserSession object is unique to each user. Originally, during each Ajax call I would create a new UserSession object and it's data members were stored in the ASP.NET Session. However, I found that the UserSession object was being instantiated a lot. To minimize the construction of the UserSession object, I wrapped it in a Singleton pattern and sychronized access to it. I believe that the synchronization is happening application wide, however I only need it to happen per user. I saw a post here that says the ASP.NET cache is synchronized, however the time between creating the object and inserting it into the cache another Thread could start construction it's another object and insert it into the cache. Here is the way I'm currently synchronizing access to the object. Is there a better way than using "lock"... should be be locking on the HttpContext.Session object? private static object SessionLock = new object(); public static WebSession GetSession { get { lock (SessionLock) { try { var context = HttpContext.Current; WebSession result = null; if (context.Session["MySession"] == null) { result = new WebSession(context); context.Session["MySession"] = result; } else { result = (WebSession)context.Session["MySession"]; } return result; } catch (Exception ex) { ex.Handle(); return null; } } } }

    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 | 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238  | Next Page >