Search Results

Search found 11297 results on 452 pages for 'delete operator'.

Page 25/452 | < Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >

  • Showplan Operator of the week - Assert

    As part of his mission to explain the Query Optimiser in practical terms, Fabiano attempts the feat of describing, one week at a time, all the major Showplan Operators used by SQL Server's Query Optimiser to build the Query Plan. He starts with Assert

    Read the article

  • The DELETE statement in SQL Server

    Of the big four DML statements in SQL Server, the DELETE is the one least written about. This is odd considering the extra power conferred on the statement by the addition of the WITH common_table_expression; and the OUTPUT clause that essentially allows you to move data from one table to another in one statement. NEW! SQL Monitor 2.0Monitor SQL Server Central's servers withRed Gate's new SQL Monitor.No installation required. Find out more.

    Read the article

  • Ruby: if statement using regexp and boolean operator [migrated]

    - by bev
    I'm learning Ruby and have failed to make a compound 'if' statement work. Here's my code (hopefully self explanatory) commentline = Regexp.new('^;;') blankline = Regexp.new('^(\s*)$') if (line !~ commentline || line !~ blankline) puts line end the variable 'line' is gotten from reading the following file: ;; alias filename backupDir Prog_i Prog_i.rb ./store Prog_ii Prog_ii.rb ./store This fails and I'm not sure why. Basically I want the comment lines and blank lines to be ignored during the processing of the lines in the file. Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Showplan Operator of the Week – BookMark/Key Lookup

    Fabiano continues in his mission to describe the major Showplan Operators used by SQL Server's Query Optimiser. This week he meets a star, the Key Lookup, a stalwart performer, but most famous for its role in ill-performing queries where an index does not 'cover' the data required to execute the query. If you understand why, and in what circumstances, key lookups are slow, it helps greatly with optimising query performance.

    Read the article

  • How to Delete a Virtual Directory from an FTP Site in IIS 7 and IIS 7.5 using C#/VB.Net and WMI?

    - by Steve Johnson
    Hi all. I hope everybody is doing fine. I try to delete a virtual directory using WMi (Server Manager Class) and recreate with different values. The problem i am facing is that the virtual directory is not getting deleted. Please help. Here is my code. Try Using mgr As New ServerManager() Dim site As Site = mgr.Sites(DomainName) Dim app As Application = site.Applications("/") '.CreateElement() '("/" & VirDirName) Dim VirDir As VirtualDirectory = app.VirtualDirectories.CreateElement() For Each VirDir In app.VirtualDirectories If VirDir("path") = "/" & VirDirName Then app.VirtualDirectories.Remove(VirDir) Exit For End If Next mgr.CommitChanges() End Using Catch Err As Exception Ex = Err Throw New Exception(Err.Message, Ex) End Try

    Read the article

  • How do I overload an operator for an enumeration in C#?

    - by ChrisHDog
    I have an enumerated type that I would like to define the , <, =, and <= operators for. I know that these operators are implictly created on the basis of the enumerated type (as per the documentation) but I would like to explictly define these operators (for clarity, for control, to know how to do it, etc...) I was hoping I could do something like: public enum SizeType { Small = 0, Medium = 1, Large = 2, ExtraLarge = 3 } public SizeType operator >(SizeType x, SizeType y) { } But this doesn't seem to work ("unexpected toke") ... is this possible? It seems like it should be since there are implictly defined operators. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Problem with Delete Link?

    - by Kevin
    When I click on the delete link I created, it doesn't do anything (even the flash[:notice] part) in the controller. Am I not calling the .delete? part correctly? The POST part works as I can add tips. Link: <%= link_to "Delete", :controller => "/admin", :action => "tips", :id => t.id, :method => :delete, :confirm => "Are you sure?" %> Admin Controller def tips @tips = Tip.all if request.post? tip = Tip.new(params[:geek_tips]) if tip.save flash[:notice] = "Saved!" redirect_to :action => "tips" else flash[:notice] = "Error!" end elsif request.delete? tip = Tip.find_by_id(params[:id]) tip.delete! flash[:notice] = "Delete Message" redirect_to :action => "tips" end end

    Read the article

  • Why would the assignment operator ever do something different than its matching constructor?

    - by Neil G
    I was reading some boost code, and came across this: inline sparse_vector &assign_temporary(sparse_vector &v) { swap(v); return *this; } template<class AE> inline sparse_vector &operator=(const sparse_vector<AE> &ae) { self_type temporary(ae); return assign_temporary(temporary); } It seems to be mapping all of the constructors to assignment operators. Great. But why did C++ ever opt to make them do different things? All I can think of is scoped_ptr?

    Read the article

  • Why does javascript's "in" operator return true when testing if 0 exists in an array that doesn't co

    - by Mariano Peterson
    For example, this returns true, and makes sense: var x = [1,2]; 1 in x; // true This returns false, and makes sense: var x = [1,2]; 3 in x; // false However this returns true, and I don't understand why: var x = [1,2]; 0 in x; You can quickly test it by putting this in your browser's address bar: javascript:var x=[1,2]; alert(0 in x); Why does the "in" operator in Javascript return true when testing if "0" exists in array, even when the array doesn't appear to contain "0"?

    Read the article

  • C++ -- How can we call "delete this; " in a const-member function?

    - by q0987
    Hello all, I saw the code snippet as follows: class UPNumber { public: UPNumber(); UPNumber(int initValue); ... // pseudo-destructor (a const member function, because // even const objects may be destroyed) void destroy() const { delete this; } // why this line is correct??? ... private: ~UPNumber(); }; First, I am sure that above class definition is correct. Here is my question, why we can define the function 'destroy' as above? The reason being asking is that why we can modify 'this' in a const-member function? Thank you

    Read the article

  • C++: Overload != When == Overloaded

    - by Mark W
    Say I have a class where I overloaded the operator == as such: Class A { ... public: bool operator== (const A &rhs) const; ... }; ... bool A::operator== (const A &rhs) const { .. return isEqual; } I already have the operator == return the proper Boolean value. Now I want to extend this to the simple opposite (!=). I would like to call the overloaded == operator and return the opposite, i.e. something of the nature bool A::operator!= (const A &rhs) const { return !( this == A ); } Is this possible? I know this will not work, but it exemplifies what I would like to have. I would like to keep only one parameter for the call: rhs. Any help would be appreciated, because I could not come up with an answer after several search attempts.

    Read the article

  • C++ deleting a pointer

    - by eSKay
    On this page, its written that One reason is that the operand of delete need not be an lvalue. Consider: delete p+1; delete f(x); Here, the implementation of delete does not have a pointer to which it can assign zero. Adding a number to a pointer shifts it forward in memory by those many number of sizeof(*p) units. So, what is the difference between delete p and delete p+1, and why would making the pointer 0 only be a problem with delete p+1?

    Read the article

  • What table is affected by delete when form based on query?

    - by webworm
    In MS Access 2003 I have a form whose record source is equal to a query that involves an INNER JOIN. The join is between a location table and a container table. Containers are objects that are stored in specific locations each location and container are specified by ID values. SELECT DISTINCTROW Container.Container_ID, Location.Location_ID FROM Location INNER JOIN Container ON Location.[Location_ID] = Container.[Location_ID] What I am trying to figure out is this …. When I delete a record (using the form navigation controls) in the form based on the above query which tables are affected? Are records in the Container and Location tables deleted or is it just in the location table? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Delete Entity in Many to Many Relation. Don't get error but entity is not deleted

    - by Shapper
    I have, in EF5, two entities: User and Role. Between User and Role there is a many to many relation. I don't have an entity for the UserRoles database which sets the relation. I have a User and I want to delete a role without loading it from the database. Context context = new Context(); User user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id == 4); user.Roles = new List<Role>(); Role role = new Role { Id = 20 }; context.Roles.Attach(role); user.Roles.Remove(role); context.SaveChanges(); I don't get any error but the role is not removed. Any idea why? Thank you, Miguel

    Read the article

  • How to **delete-protect** a file or folder on Windows Server 2003 and onwards using C#/Vb.Net?

    - by Steve Johnson
    Hi all, Is it possible to delete-protect a file/folder using Registry or using a custom written Windows Service in C#? Using Folder Permissions it is possible, but i am looking for a solution that even restricts the admin from deleting specific folders. The requirement is that the administrator must not be easily track the nature of protection and/or may not be able to avert it easily. Obviously all administrators will be able to revert the procedure if the technique is clearly understood. Like folder Permissions/OwnerShip Settings can easily be reset by an administrator. SO that is not an option. Folder protection software can easily be uninstalled and show clear indication that a particular folder is protected by some special kind of software. SO that too is not an option. Most antivirus programs protect folders and files in Program Dir. Windows itself doesnt allow certain files such as registry files in c:\windows\system32\config to not even copied. Such a protection is desired for folders which allowse to read and write to files but not allow deletion. Similar functionality is desired. The protection has to seemless and invisible. I do not want to use any protection features like FolderLock and Invisible secrets/PC Security and Desktop password etc. Moreover, the solution has to be something other than folder encryption. The solution has to be OS-native so ** that it may implemented ** pro grammatically using C#/VB.Net. Please help. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How do I overload the square-bracket operator in C#?

    - by Coderer
    DataGridView, for example, lets you do this: DataGridView dgv = ...; DataGridViewCell cell = dgv[1,5]; but for the life of me I can't find the documentation on the index/square-bracket operator. What do they call it? Where is it implemented? Can it throw? How can I do the same thing in my own classes? ETA: Thanks for all the quick answers. Briefly: the relevant documentation is under the "Item" property; the way to overload is by declaring a property like public object this[int x, int y]{ get{...}; set{...} }; the indexer for DataGridView does not throw, at least according to the documentation. It doesn't mention what happens if you supply invalid coordinates. ETA Again: OK, even though the documentation makes no mention of it (naughty Microsoft!), it turns out that the indexer for DataGridView will in fact throw an ArgumentOutOfRangeException if you supply it with invalid coordinates. Fair warning.

    Read the article

  • How do I overload () operator with two parameters; like (3,5)?

    - by hkBattousai
    I have a mathematical matrix class. It contains a member function which is used to access any element of the class. template >class T> class Matrix { public: // ... void SetElement(T dbElement, uint64_t unRow, uint64_t unCol); // ... }; template <class T> void Matrix<T>::SetElement(T Element, uint64_t unRow, uint64_t unCol) { try { // "TheMatrix" is define as "std::vector<T> TheMatrix" TheMatrix.at(m_unColSize * unRow + unCol) = Element; } catch(std::out_of_range & e) { // Do error handling here } } I'm using this method in my code like this: // create a matrix with 2 rows and 3 columns whose elements are double Matrix<double> matrix(2, 3); // change the value of the element at 1st row and 2nd column to 6.78 matrix.SetElement(6.78, 1, 2); This works well, but I want to use operator overloading to simplify things, like below: Matrix<double> matrix(2, 3); matrix(1, 2) = 6.78; // HOW DO I DO THIS?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >