Search Results

Search found 8232 results on 330 pages for 'boolean expression'.

Page 24/330 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

• .NET Regular Expression to find actual words in text

  - by Mehdi Anis

  I am using VB .NET to write a program that will get the words from a suplied text file and count how many times each word appears. I am using this regular expression:- parser As New Regex("\w+") It gives me almost 100% correct words. Except when I have words like "Ms Word App file name is word.exe." or "is this a c# statment If(ab?1,0) ?" In such cases I get [word & exe] AND [If, a, b, 1 and 0] as seperate words. it would be nice (for my purpose) that I received word.exe and (If(ab?1,0) as words. I guess \w+ looks for white space, sentence terminating punctuation mark and other punctuation marks to determine a word. I want a similar regular Expression that will not break a word by a punctuation mark, if the punctuation mark is not the end of the word. I think end-of-word can be defined by a trailing WhiteSpace, Sentence terminating Punctuation (you may think of others). if you can suggest some regular expression 9for VB .NET) that will be great help. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Moq.Mock<T> - how to setup a method that takes an expression

  - by Paul

  I am Mocking my repository interface and am not sure how to setup a method that takes an expression and returns an object? I am using Moq and NUnit Interface: public interface IReadOnlyRepository : IDisposable { IQueryable<T> All<T>() where T : class; T Single<T>(Expression<Func<T, bool>> expression) where T : class; } Test with IQueryable already setup, but don't know how to setup the T Single: private Moq.Mock<IReadOnlyRepository> _mockRepos; private AdminController _controller; [SetUp] public void SetUp() { var allPages = new List<Page>(); for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) { allPages.Add(new Page { Id = i, Title = "Page Title " + i, Slug = "Page-Title-" + i, Content = "Page " + i + " on page content." }); } _mockRepos = new Moq.Mock<IReadOnlyRepository>(); _mockRepos.Setup(x => x.All<Page>()).Returns(allPages.AsQueryable()); //Not sure what to do here??? _mockRepos.Setup(x => x.Single<Page>() //---- _controller = new AdminController(_mockRepos.Object); }

  Read the article

• Regular expression, excluding .. in suffix of email addy

  - by user1754700

  This is homework, I've been working on it for a while, I've done lots of reading and feel I have gotten pretty familiar with regex for a beginner. I am trying to find a regular expression for validating/invalidating a list of emails. There are two addresses which are giving me problems, I can't get them both to validate the correct way at the same time. I've gone through a dozen different expressions that work for all the other emails on the list but I can't get those two at the same time. First, the addresses. [email protected] - invalid [email protected] - valid The part of my expression which validates the suffix I originally started with @.+\\.[[a-z]0-9]+ And had a second pattern for checking some more invalid addresses and checked the email against both patterns, one checked for validity the other invalidity but my professor said he wanted it all in on expression. @[[\\w]+\\.[\\w]+]+ or @[\\w]+\\.[\\w]+ I've tried it written many, many different ways but I'm pretty sure I was just using different syntax to express these two expressions. I know what I want it to do, I want it to match a character class of "character+"."character+"+ The plus sign being at least one. It works for the invalid class when I only allow the character class to repeat one time(and obviously the ip doesn't get matched), but when I allow the character class to repeat itself it matches the second period even thought it isn't preceded by a character. I don't understand why.

  Read the article

• Linq generic Expression in query on "element" or on IQueryable (multiple use)

  - by Bogdan Maxim

  Hi, I have the following expression public static Expression<Func<T, bool>> JoinByDateCheck<T>(T entity, DateTime dateToCheck) where T : IDateInterval { return (entityToJoin) => entityToJoin.FromDate.Date <= dateToCheck.Date && (entityToJoin.ToDate == null || entityToJoin.ToDate.Value.Date >= dateToCheck.Date); } IDateInterval interface is defined like this: interface IDateInterval { DateTime FromDate {get;} DateTime? ToDate {get;} } and i need to apply it in a few ways: (1) Query on Linq2Sql Table: var q1 = from e in intervalTable where FunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(e, constantDateTime) select e; or something like this: intervalTable.Where(FunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(e, constantDateTime)) (2) I need to use it in some table joins (as linq2sql doesn't provide comparative join): var q2 = from e1 in t1 join e2 in t2 on e1.FK == e2.PK where OtherFunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(e2, e1.FromDate) or var q2 = from e1 in t1 from e2 in t2 where e1.FK == e2.PK && OtherFunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(e2, e1.FromDate) (3) I need to use it in some queries like this: var q3 = from e in intervalTable.FilterFunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(constantDate); Dynamic linq is not something that I can use, so I have to stick to plain linq. Thank you Clarification: Initially I had just the last method (FilterFunctionThatCallsJoinByDateCheck(this IQueryable<IDateInterval> entities, DateTime dateConstant) ) that contained the code from the expression. The problem is that I get a SQL Translate exception if I write the code in a method and call it like that. All I want is to extend the use of this function to the where clause (see the second query in point 2)

  Read the article

• OrderBy Linq.Expression as parameter = (Of Func(Of T,IComparable)) to perform LinqToEntity is not working

  - by NicoJuicy

  I'd like to get this working: Call: (Count & Page are used for pagination, so Count = 20 and Page = 1 for example, for the first 20 values). Sorting should be by name LeverancierService.GetLeveranciers(Function(el) el.Name, Count, Page) Equivalent in c#: LeverancierService.GetLeveranciers(el= el.Name, Count, Page) Method that gives an error (parameters shown above): Public Overridable Function GetAllPaged(orderby As Expression(Of Func(Of T, IComparable)), ByVal Count As Integer, ByVal Page As Integer) As IEnumerable(Of T) Return dbset.OrderBy(orderby).Skip((Page - 1) * Count).Take(Count).ToList() End Function Already tried changing it to this, but it gives the same error: Public Overridable Function GetAllPaged(Of TOrderBy)(orderby As Expression(Of Func(Of T, TOrderBy)), ByVal Count As Integer, ByVal Page As Integer) As IEnumerable(Of T) Return dbset.OrderBy(orderby).Skip((Page - 1) * Count).Take(Count).ToList() End Function Error: Unable to cast the type 'System.String' to type 'System.IComparable'. LINQ to Entities only supports casting Entity Data Model primitive types. Any idea how to do this? Extra info: I'm in a DDD-layered application, so the parameter should stay the same as the called method is an overridden interface (eg. if i change this, i have to do this for 200 times or so, because it's in VB.Net and not in C# (= 1 change) ) I know there is a way to change the expression to a string and then use DLinq (= Dynamic Linq), but that's not how it should be.

  Read the article

• How to write an R function that evaluates an expression within a data-frame

  - by Prasad Chalasani

  Puzzle for the R cognoscenti: Say we have a data-frame: df <- data.frame( a = 1:5, b = 1:5 ) I know we can do things like with(df, a) to get a vector of results. But how do I write a function that takes an expression (such as a or a > 3) and does the same thing inside. I.e. I want to write a function fn that takes a data-frame and an expression as arguments and returns the result of evaluating the expression "within" the data-frame as an environment. Never mind that this sounds contrived (I could just use with as above), but this is just a simplified version of a more complex function I am writing. I tried several variants ( using eval, with, envir, substitute, local, etc) but none of them work. For example if I define fn like so: fn <- function(dat, expr) { eval(expr, envir = dat) } I get this error: > fn( df, a ) Error in eval(expr, envir = dat) : object 'a' not found Clearly I am missing something subtle about environments and evaluation. Is there a way to define such a function?

  Read the article

• Linq - reuse expression on child property

  - by user175528

  Not sure if what I am trying is possible or not, but I'd like to reuse a linq expression on an objects parent property. With the given classes: class Parent { int Id { get; set; } IList<Child> Children { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } class Child{ int Id { get; set; } Parent Dad { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } If i then have a helper Expression<Func<Parent,bool> ParentQuery() { Expression<Func<Parent,bool> q = p => p.Name=="foo"; } I then want to use this when querying data out for a child, along the lines of: using(var context=new Entities.Context) { var data=context.Child.Where(c => c.Name=="bar" && c.Dad.Where(ParentQuery)); } I know I can do that on child collections: using(var context=new Entities.Context) { var data=context.Parent.Where(p => p.Name=="foo" && p.Childen.Where(childQuery)); } but cant see any way to do this on a property that isnt a collection. This is just a simplified example, actually the ParentQuery will be more complex and I want to avoid having this repeated in multiple places as rather than just having 2 layers I'll have closer to 5 or 6, but all of them will need to reference the parent query to ensure security.

  Read the article

• Why would one want to use the public constructors on Boolean and similar immutable classes?

  - by Robert J. Walker

  (For the purposes of this question, let us assume that one is intentionally not using auto(un)boxing, either because one is writing pre-Java 1.5 code, or because one feels that autounboxing makes it too easy to create NullPointerExceptions.) Take Boolean, for example. The documentation for the Boolean(boolean) constructor says: Note: It is rarely appropriate to use this constructor. Unless a new instance is required, the static factory valueOf(boolean) is generally a better choice. It is likely to yield significantly better space and time performance. My question is, why would you ever want to get a new instance in the first place? It seems like things would be simpler if constructors like that were private. For example, if they were, you could write this with no danger (even if myBoolean were null): if (myBoolean == Boolean.TRUE) It'd be safe because all true Booleans would be references to Boolean.TRUE and all false Booleans would be references to Boolean.FALSE. But because the constructors are public, someone may have used them, which means that you have to write this instead: if (Boolean.TRUE.equals(myBoolean)) But where it really gets bad is when you want to check two Booleans for equality. Something like this: if (myBooleanA == myBooleanB) ...becomes this: if ( (myBooleanA == null && myBooleanB == null) || (myBooleanA == null && myBooleanA.equals(myBooleanB)) ) I can't think of any reason to have separate instances of these objects which is more compelling than not having to do the nonsense above. What say you?

  Read the article

• java phone number validation....

  - by user69514

  Here is my problem: Create a constructor for a telephone number given a string in the form xxx-xxx-xxxx or xxx-xxxx for a local number. Throw an exception if the format is not valid. So I was thinking to validate it using a regular expression, but I don't know if I'm doing it correctly. Also what kind of exception would I have to throw? Do I need to create my own exception? public TelephoneNumber(String aString){ if(isPhoneNumberValid(aString)==true){ StringTokenizer tokens = new StringTokenizer("-"); if(tokens.countTokens()==3){ areaCode = Integer.parseInt(tokens.nextToken()); exchangeCode = Integer.parseInt(tokens.nextToken()); number = Integer.parseInt(tokens.nextToken()); } else if(tokens.countTokens()==2){ exchangeCode = Integer.parseInt(tokens.nextToken()); number = Integer.parseInt(tokens.nextToken()); } else{ //throw an excemption here } } } public static boolean isPhoneNumberValid(String phoneNumber){ boolean isValid = false; //Initialize reg ex for phone number. String expression = "(\\d{3})(\\[-])(\\d{4})$"; CharSequence inputStr = phoneNumber; Pattern pattern = Pattern.compile(expression); Matcher matcher = pattern.matcher(inputStr); if(matcher.matches()){ isValid = true; } return isValid; } Hi sorry, yes this is homework. For this assignments the only valid format are xxx-xxx-xxxx and xxx-xxxx, all other formats (xxx)xxx-xxxx or xxxxxxxxxx are invalid in this case. I would like to know if my regular expression is correct

  Read the article

• Boolean with html helper Hidden and HiddenFor

  - by Martin

  What's up with this? The viewmodel variable is a bool with value true. <%= Html.HiddenFor(m => m.TheBool) %> <%= Html.Hidden("IsTimeExpanded",Model.TheBool) %> <input type="hidden" value="<%=Model.TheBool%>" name="TheBool" id="TheBool"> Results in: <input id="TheBool" name="TheBool" value="False" type="hidden"> <input id="TheBool" name="TheBool" value="False" type="hidden"> <input value="True" name="TheBool" id="TheBool" type="hidden"> What am I doing wrong? Why don't the helpers work as intended?

  Read the article

• Database entries existence depends on time / boolean value of a field changed automatically

  - by lisak

  Hey, I have this situation here. An auction system listing orders that are "active" (their deadline didn't occur yet) There is a lot of orders so it is better to have a field "active" instead of listing them based on time queries I'm not a database expert, just a user. What is the best way to implement this scenario ? Do I have to manually check the "deadLine" field and change "active" status every once in a while ? Is Mysql able to change the field automatically ? How demanding are queries of type "select orders where "deadline" has passed " Do I need to use TIMESTAMP (long data type of number of milisecond since UTC epoch time or DATETIME for the queries to the database to be more efficient ? Finally I have to move old order entries to a different backup table .

  Read the article

• SQL Stored Queries - use result of query as boolean based on existence of records

  - by Christian Mann

  Just getting into SQL stored queries right now... anyway, here's my database schema (simplified for YOUR convenience): member ------ id INT PK board ------ id INT PK officer ------ id INT PK If you're into OOP, Officer Inherits Board Inherits Member. In other words, if someone is listed on the officer table, s/he is listed on the board table and the member table. I want to find out the highest privilege level someone has. So far my SP looks like this: DELIMITER // CREATE PROCEDURE GetAuthLevel(IN targetID MEDIUMINT) BEGIN IF SELECT `id` FROM `member` WHERE `id` = targetID; THEN IF SELECT `id` FROM `board` WHERE `id` = targetID; THEN IF SELECT `id` FROM `officer` WHERE `id` = targetID; THEN RETURN 3; /*officer*/ ELSE RETURN 2; /*board member*/ ELSE RETURN 1; /*general member*/ ELSE RETURN 0; /*not a member*/ END // DELIMITER ; The exact text of the error is #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'SELECT id FROM member WHERE id = targetID; THEN IF SEL' at line 4 I suspect the issue is in the arguments for the IF blocks. What I want to do is return true if the result-set is at least one -- i.e. the id was found in the table. Do any of you guys see anything to do here, or should I reconsider my database design into this:? person ------ id INT PK level SMALLINT

  Read the article

• Format boolean column in MVCContrib grid

  - by Ghecco

  HI, I am using the MVCContrib grid and I would like to display images depending on the values of a column, e.g.: if the column's value is null display the image "<img src="true.gif">" otherwise display the image "<img src="false.gif"> Furthermore I would also need (this should be the same approeach I think) to display different actions depending on the column's/rows' value ... Thanks in advance for your answers! Best regards Stefan

  Read the article

• MySQL Stored Procedure: Boolean Logic in IF THEN

  - by xncroft

  I'm looking for the proper syntax (if this is possible in MySQL stored procedures) for using logical operators in an IF THEN statement. Here's something along the lines of what I would like to do, but I'm not certain if I should type "OR" or "||" in the IF ... THEN clause: DELIMITER $$ CREATE PROCEDURE `MyStoredProc` (_id INT) BEGIN DECLARE testVal1 INT DEFAULT 0; DECLARE testVal2 INT DEFAULT 0; SELECT value1, value2 INTO testVal1, testVal2 FROM ValueTable WHERE id = _id; IF testVal1 > 0 OR testVal2 > 0 THEN UPDATE ValueTable SET value1 = (value1+1) WHERE id=_id; END IF; END$$

  Read the article

• WPF: Bind/Apply Filter on Boolean Property

  - by Julian Lettner

  I want to apply a filter to a ListBox accordingly to the IsSelected property of a CheckBox. At the moment I have something like this. XAML <CheckBox Name="_filterCheckBox" Content="Filter list" Checked="ApplyFilterHandler"/> <ListBox ItemsSource="{Binding SomeItems}" /> CodeBehind public ObservableCollection<string> SomeItems { get; private set; } private void ApplyFilterHandler(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { if (_filterCheckBox.IsChecked.Value) CollectionViewSource.GetDefaultView(SomeItems).Filter += MyFilter; else CollectionViewSource.GetDefaultView(SomeItems).Filter -= MyFilter; } private bool MyFilter(object obj) { return ... } It works but this solution feels like the old-fashioned way (Windows Forms). Question: Is it possible to achieve this with Bindings / in XAML? Thanks for your time.

  Read the article

• controlling if exceptions are swallowed by a static boolean

  - by sandis

  So we are a few guys developing this product that is communicating with a really unstable server. It often returns very strange and corrupt data. During testing we want the resulting crashes to be loud, so we discover them. But every other day we need to demonstrate our product for a potential customer. To the customer the errors will go undiscovered if we just swallow them. I am thinking about implementing something like this around all server communication to quickly switch between swallowing exceptions and crashing: try { apiCall(); } catch (Exception e) { if(!SWALLOW_EXCEPTION) { throw e; } } Is this an awesome idea, or can it be done in a better way?

  Read the article

• Returning a JSON view in combination with a boolean

  - by Rody van Sambeek

  What i would like to accomplish is that a partiel view contains a form. This form is posted using JQuery $.post. After a successfull post javascript picks up the result and uses JQuery's html() method to fill a container with the result. However now I don't want to return the Partial View, but a JSON object containing that partial view and some other object (Success - bool in this case). I tried it with the following code: [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Edit(int id, Item item) { if (ModelState.IsValid) { try { // ... return Json(new { Success = true, PartialView = PartialView("Edit", item) }); } catch(Exception ex) { // ... } } return Json(new { Success = false, PartialView = PartialView("Edit", item) }); } However I don't get the HTML in this JSON object and can't use html() to show the result. I tried using this method to render the partial as Html and send that. However this fails on the RenderControl(tw) method with a: The method or operation is not implemented.

  Read the article

• Boolean with html helpers

  - by Martin

  What's up with this? The viewmodel variable is a bool with value true. <%= Html.HiddenFor(m => m.TheBool) %> <%= Html.Hidden("IsTimeExpanded",Model.TheBool) %> <input type="hidden" value="<%=Model.TheBool%>" name="TheBool" id="TheBool"> Results in: <input id="TheBool" name="TheBool" value="False" type="hidden"> <input id="TheBool" name="TheBool" value="False" type="hidden"> <input value="True" name="TheBool" id="TheBool" type="hidden"> What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• Validate Boolean Query - java

  - by JavaUser

  hi, I need the java code snippet for the below logic: Following is a string and I need to validate the string based on the below condition : "100 or 200 and 345 not 550 " - Valid string "abc or 200 and 345 SAME ** 550 " - Not a Valid String 1 . the operands(eg 100,200 ..) should be positive numbers 2 . the operator should be and/or/not Thx

  Read the article

• Trying to set up nested while loops using a boolean switch

  - by thorn100

  First time posting. I'm trying to set up a while loop that will ask the user for the employee name, hours worked and hourly wage until the user enters 'DONE'. Eventually I'll modify the code to calculate the weekly pay and write it to a list, but one thing at a time. The problem is once the main while loop executes once, it just stops. Doesn't error out but just stops. I have to kill the program to get it to stop. I want it to ask the three questions again and again until the user is finished. Thoughts? Please note that this is just an exercise and not meant for any real world application. def getName(): """Asks for the employee's full name""" firstName=raw_input("\nWhat is your first name? ") lastName=raw_input("\nWhat is your last name? ") fullName=firstName.title() + " " + lastName.title() return fullName def getHours(): """Asks for the number of hours the employee worked""" hoursWorked=0 while int(hoursWorked)<1 or int(hoursWorked) > 60: hoursWorked=raw_input("\nHow many hours did the employee work: ") if int(hoursWorked)<1 or int(hoursWorked) > 60: print "Please enter an integer between 1 and 60." else: return hoursWorked def getWage(): """Asks for the employee's hourly wage""" wage=0 while float(wage)<6.00 or float(wage)>20.00: wage=raw_input("\nWhat is the employee's hourly wage: ") if float(wage)<6.00 or float(wage)>20.00: print ("Please enter an hourly wage between $6.00 and $20.00") else: return wage ##sentry variables employeeName="" employeeHours=0 employeeWage=0 booleanDone=False #Enter employee info print "Please enter payroll information for an employee or enter 'DONE' to quit." while booleanDone==False: while employeeName=="": employeeName=getName() if employeeName.lower()=="done": booleanDone=True break print "The employee's name is", employeeName while employeeHours==0: employeeHours=getHours() if employeeHours.lower()=="done": booleanDone=True break print employeeName, "worked", employeeHours, "this week." while employeeWage==0: employeeWage=getWage() if employeeWage.lower()=="done": booleanDone=True break print employeeName + "'s hourly wage is $" + employeeWage

  Read the article

• Parsing boolean from configuration section in web.config

  - by Bloopy

  I have a custom configuration section in my web.config. One of my classes is grabbing from this: <myConfigSection LabelVisible="" TitleVisible="true"/> I have things working for parsing if I have true or false, however if the attribute is blank I am getting errors. When the config section tries to map the class to the configuration section I get an error of "not a valid value for bool" on the 'LabelVisible' part. How can I parse "" as false in my myConfigSection class? I have tried this: [ConfigurationProperty("labelsVisible", DefaultValue = true, IsRequired = false)] public bool? LabelsVisible { get { return (bool?)this["labelsVisible"]; } But when I try and use what is returned like so: graph.Label.Visible = myConfigSection.LabelsVisible; I get an error of: 'Cannot implicitly convert type 'bool?' to 'bool'. An explicit conversion exists (are you missing a cast?) Thanks for any suggestions!

  Read the article

• ruby / rails boolean method naming conventions

  - by Dennis

  I have a short question on ruby / rails method naming conventions or good practice. Consider the following methods: # some methods performing some sort of 'action' def action; end def action!; end # some methods checking if performing 'action' is permitted def action?; end def can_action?; end def action_allowed?; end So I wonder, which of the three ampersand-methods would be the "best" way to ask for permissions. I would go with the first one somehow, but in some cases I think this might be confused with meaning has_performed_action?. So the second approach might make that clearer but is also a bit more verbose. The third one is actually just for completeness. I don't really like that one. So are there any commonly agreed-on good practices for that?

  Read the article

• How to let an average user design a boolean expression graphically

  - by Svein Bringsli

  In our application there's a list of customers, and a list of keywords (among other things). Each customer can have a number of keywords, but it's not mandatory. So for instance, one customer can have the keywords "retail" and "chain", one can have only "contractor" and a third can have none at all. I want to let the user make a selection of customers based on these keywords, but not having to write (retail AND chain) or contractor and not wholesale I would like to make it as user-friendly as possible, and ideally with only "simple" controls, like checkboxes, comboboxes etc. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to design this? Or maybe some examples of applications where there are similar functionality?

  Read the article

• XCode / gdb debugger showing wrong value for boolean

  - by Sam

  Image says it all really. The debugger is stopped on the line immediately after this, inside the if statement. What is going on here? EDIT: this is debugging on device on an iPhone. I'm going to try the simulator and see if the same problem occurs.

  Read the article

• WPF binding to a boolean on a control

  - by Jose

  I'm wondering if someone has a simple succinct solution to binding to a dependency property that needs to be the converse of the property. Here's an example I have a textbox that is disabled based on a property in the datacontext e.g.: <TextBox IsEnabled={Binding CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> The requirement changes and I want to make it ReadOnly instead of disabled, so without changing my ViewModel I could do this: In the UserControl resources: <UserControl.Resources> <m:NotConverter x:Key="NotConverter"/> </UserControl.Resources> And then change the TextBox to: <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding CanEdit,Converter={StaticResource NotConverter}} Text={Binding MyText}/> Which I personally think is EXTREMELY verbose I would love to be able to just do this(notice the !): <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding !CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> But alas, that is not an option that I know of. I can think of two options. Create an attached property IsNotReadOnly to FrameworkElement(?) and bind to that property If I change my ViewModel then I could add a property CanEdit and another CannotEdit which I would be kind of embarrassed of because I believe it adds an irrelevant property to a class, which I don't think is a good practice. The main reason for the question is that in my project the above isn't just for one control, so trying to keep my project as DRY as possible and readable I am throwing this out to anyone feeling my pain and has come up with a solution :)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >