Search Results

Search found 749 results on 30 pages for 'giuseppe di federico'.

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

• Db4o Mvc Application Architecture

  - by Mac

  I am currently testing out Db4o for an asp.net MVC 2 application idea but there are a few things I'm not quite sure on the best way to proceed. I want my application to use guessable routes rather than Id's for referencing my entities but I also think I need Id's of some sort for update scenarios. so for example I want /country/usa instead of /country/1 I may want to change the key name though (not perhaps on a country but on other entities) so am thinking I need an Id to use as the reference to retrieve the object prior to updating it's fields. From other comments it seems like the UUID is a bit long to be using and would prefer to use my own id's anyway for clean separation of concerns. Looking at both the KandaAlpha project I wasn't too keen on some aspects of the design and prefer something more along the lines of S#arp architecture where they use things like the [domainsignature] and EntityWithTypedId, IEntityDuplicateChecker, IHasAssignedId, BaseObject and IValidatable in their entities to control insert/update behaviour which seems cleaner and more extensible, covers validation and is encapsulated well within the core and base repository classes. So would a port of S#arp architecture to Db4o make sense of am I still thinking rmdbs in an oodb world? Also is there a best practice for managing indexes (including Unique ones as above) in Db4o? Should they be model metadata based and loaded using DI in a bootstrapper for example or should they be more loaded more like Automapper.CreateMap? Its a bit of a rambling question I know but any thoughts, ideas or suggested reading material is greatly appreciated. Thanks Mac

  Read the article

• RhinoMocks Testing callback method

  - by joblot

  Hi All I have a service proxy class that makes asyn call to service operation. I use a callback method to pass results back to my view model. Doing functional testing of view model, I can mock service proxy to ensure methods are called on the proxy, but how can I ensure that callback method is called as well? With RhinoMocks I can test that events are handled and event raise events on the mocked object, but how can I test callbacks? ViewModel: public class MyViewModel { public void GetDataAsync() { // Use DI framework to get the object IMyServiceClient myServiceClient = IoC.Resolve<IMyServiceClient>(); myServiceClient.GetData(GetDataAsyncCallback); } private void GetDataAsyncCallback(Entity entity, ServiceError error) { // do something here... } } ServiceProxy: public class MyService : ClientBase, IMyServiceClient { // Constructor public NertiAdminServiceClient(string endpointConfigurationName, string remoteAddress) : base(endpointConfigurationName, remoteAddress) { } // IMyServiceClient member. public void GetData(Action<Entity, ServiceError> callback) { Channel.BeginGetData(EndGetData, callback); } private void EndGetData(IAsyncResult result) { Action<Entity, ServiceError> callback = result.AsyncState as Action<Entity, ServiceError>; ServiceError error; Entity results = Channel.EndGetData(out error, result); if (callback != null) callback(results, error); } } Thanks

  Read the article

• Assembly Language bug with space character

  - by Bobby

  Having a bit of difficulty getting my input to print once a white space character is inputted. So far, i have it to display the uppercase/lowercase of the input but once i enter a string it doesnt read whats after the white space character. any suggestions? EDIT: intel x86 processor and im using EMU8086 org 100h include 'emu8086.inc' printn "Enter string to convert" mov dx,20 call get_string printn mov bx,di mov ah,0eh mov al,[ds+bx] cmp al, 41h cmp al, 5Ah jle ToLower1 cmp al, 61h cmp al, 7ah jle ToUpper1 ToLower1: add al, 20h int 10h jmp stop1 ToUpper1: sub al, 20h int 10h stop1: inc bx mov al,[ds+bx] cmp al, 41h cmp al, 5Ah jle ToLower2 cmp al, 61h cmp al, 7ah jle ToUpper2 ToLower2: add al, 20h int 10h jmp stop2 ToUpper2: sub al, 20h int 10h stop2: inc bx mov al,[ds+bx] cmp al, 41h cmp al, 5Ah jle ToLower3 cmp al, 61h cmp al, 7ah jle ToUpper3 ToLower3: add al, 20h int 10h jmp stop3 ToUpper3: sub al, 20h int 10h stop3: inc bx mov al,[ds+bx] cmp al, 41h cmp al, 5Ah jle ToLower4 cmp al, 61h cmp al, 7ah jle ToUpper4 ToLower4: add al, 20h int 10h jmp stop4 ToUpper4: sub al, 20h int 10h stop4: inc bx mov al,[ds+bx] cmp al, 41h cmp al, 5Ah jle ToLower5 cmp al, 61h cmp al, 7ah jle ToUpper5 ToLower5: add al, 20h int 10h jmp stop5 ToUpper5: sub al, 20h int 10h stop5: printn hlt define_get_string define_print_string end

  Read the article

• while(1) block my recv thread

  - by zp26

  Hello. I have a problem with this code. As you can see a launch with an internal thread recv so that the program is blocked pending a given but will continue its execution, leaving the task to lock the thread. My program would continue to receive the recv data socket new_sd and so I entered an infinite loop (the commented code). The problem is that by entering the while (1) my program block before recv, but not inserting it correctly receives a string, but after that stop. Someone could help me make my recv always waiting for information? Thanks in advance for your help. -(IBAction)Chat{ [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(riceviDatiServer) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; } -(void)riceviDatiServer{ NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc]init]; labelRicevuti.text = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"In attesa di ricevere i dati"]; char datiRicevuti[500]; int ricevuti; //while(1){ ricevuti = recv(new_sd, &datiRicevuti, 500, 0); labelRicevuti.text = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"%s", datiRicevuti]; //} [pool release]; }

  Read the article

• asp mvc unit test HttpContext.Current.Cache?

  - by Paul Creasey

  Here is the first part of my controller code: public class ControlMController : Controller { IControlMService _controlMservice; public IList<User> Users { get { if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"] == null) { System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"] = _controlMservice.GetUsers(); } return (IList<User>)System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"]; } } public ControlMController(IControlMService controlMservice) { this._controlMservice = controlMservice; var users = Users; ViewData["Users"] = users; ViewData["jqSelectUsers"] = string.Join(";", users.Select(x => x.UserID + ":" + x.Name).ToArray()); } I'm trying to test it, and because i'm caching using the HttpContext, i'm struggling with null reference exceptions. I've tried using MvcContrib.TestHelper; here is my sample test... [TestMethod] public void EventDetails_Returns_view_with_correct_event() { var builder = new TestControllerBuilder(); var controller = builder.CreateController<ControlMController>( new ControlMService( new MockControlMRepository() )); var view = (controller.EventDetails(1) as ViewResult); Assert.AreEqual(1, (view.ViewData.Model as Event).EventId); } (I haven't quite got round to using DI for my tests! I'm still getting the same null reference exception when the code hits the httpcontext: Error 1 TestCase 'SupportTool.Tests.Services.ControlM.ControlMControllerTests.EventDetails_Returns_view_with_correct_event' failed: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at SupportTool.web.Controllers.ControlMController.get_Users() Any ideas?

  Read the article

• IoC - Dynamic Composition of object instances

  - by Joshua Starner

  Is there a way using IoC, MEF [Imports], or another DI solution to compose dependencies on the fly at object creation time instead of during composition time? Here's my current thought. If you have an instance of an object that raises events, but you are not creating the object once and saving it in memory, you have to register the event handlers every time the object is created. As far as I can tell, most IoC containers require you to register all of the classes used in composition and call Compose() to make it hook up all the dependencies. I think this may be horrible design (I'm dealing with a legacy system here) to do this due to the overhead of object creation, dependency injection, etc... but I was wondering if it was possible using one of the emergent IoC technologies. Maybe I have some terminology mixed up, but my goal is to avoid writing a framework to "hook up all the events" on an instance of an object, and use something like MEF to [Export] handlers (dependencies) that adhere to a very specific interface and [ImportMany] them into an object instance so my exports get called if the assemblies are there when the application starts. So maybe all of the objects could still be composed when the application starts, but I want the system to find and call all of them as the object is created and destroyed.

  Read the article

• Pattern for sharing data between views (MVP or MVVM)

  - by Dovix

  What is a good pattern for sharing data between related views?. I have an application where 1 form contains many small views, each views behaves independently from each other more or less (they communicate/interact via an event bus). Every so often I need to pass the same objects to the child views. Sometimes I need this same object to be passed to a child view and then the child passes it onto another child itself contains. What is a good approach to sharing this data between all the views contained within the parent form (view) ? I have looked into CAB and their approach and every "view" has a "root work item" this work item has dictionary that contains a shared "state" between the views that are contained. Is this the best approach? just a shared dictionary all the views under a root view can access? My current approach right now is to have a function on the view that allows one to set the object for that view. Something like view.SetCustomer(Customer c); then if the view contains a child view it knows to set it on the child view ala: this.childview1.SetCustomer(c); The application is written in C# 3.5, for winforms using MVP with structure map as a IoC/DI provider.

  Read the article

• Is Structuremap singleton thread safe?

  - by Ben

  Hi, Currently I have the following class: public class PluginManager { private static bool s_initialized; private static object s_lock = new object(); public static void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { lock (s_lock) { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } } } The important thing here is that Initialize() should only be executed once whilst the application is running. I thought that I would refactor this into a singleton class since this would be more thread safe?: public sealed class PluginService { static PluginService() { } private static PluginService _instance = new PluginService(); public static PluginService Instance { get { return _instance; } } private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } Question one, is it still necessary to have the lock here (I have removed it) since we will only ever be working on the same instance? Finally, I want to use DI and structure map to initialize my servcices so I have refactored as below: public interface IPluginService { void Initialize(); } public class NewPluginService : IPluginService { private bool s_initialized; public void Initialize() { if (!s_initialized) { // initialize s_initialized = true; } } } And in my registry: ForRequestedType<IPluginService>() .TheDefaultIsConcreteType<NewPluginService>().AsSingletons(); This works as expected (singleton returning true in the following code): var instance1 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); var instance2 = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IPluginService>(); bool singleton = (instance1 == instance2); So my next question, is the structure map solution as thread safe as the singleton class (second example). The only downside is that this would still allow NewPluginService to be instantiated directly (if not using structure map). Many thanks, Ben

  Read the article

• Why can I run JUnit tests for my Spring project, but not a main method?

  - by FarmBoy

  I am using JDBC to connect to MySQL for a small application. In order to test without altering the real database, I'm using HSQL in memory for JUnit tests. I'm using Spring for DI and DAOs. Here is how I'm configuring my HSQL DataSource <bean id="mockDataSource" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.SingleConnectionDataSource"> <property name="driverClassName" value="org.hsqldb.jdbcDriver"/> <property name="url" value="jdbc:hsqldb:mem:mockSeo"/> <property name="username" value="sa"/> </bean> This works fine for my JUnit tests which use the mock DB. But when I try to run a main method, I find the following error: Error creating bean with name 'mockDataSource' defined in class path resource [beans.xml]: Error setting property values; nested exception is org.springframework.beans.PropertyBatchUpdateException; nested PropertyAccessExceptions (1) are: PropertyAccessException 1: org.springframework.beans.MethodInvocationException: Property 'driverClassName' threw exception; nested exception is java.lang.IllegalStateException: Could not load JDBC driver class [org.hsqldb.jdbcDriver] I'm running from Eclipse, and I'm using the Maven plugin. Is there a reason why this would work as a Test, but not as a main()? I know that the main method itself is not the problem, because it works if I remove all references to the HSQL DataSource from my Spring Configuration file.

  Read the article

• Graph limitations - Should I use Decorator?

  - by Nick Wiggill

  I have a functional AdjacencyListGraph class that adheres to a defined interface GraphStructure. In order to layer limitations on this (eg. acyclic, non-null, unique vertex data etc.), I can see two possible routes, each making use of the GraphStructure interface: Create a single class ("ControlledGraph") that has a set of bitflags specifying various possible limitations. Handle all limitations in this class. Update the class if new limitation requirements become apparent. Use the decorator pattern (DI, essentially) to create a separate class implementation for each individual limitation that a client class may wish to use. The benefit here is that we are adhering to the Single Responsibility Principle. I would lean toward the latter, but by Jove!, I hate the decorator Pattern. It is the epitome of clutter, IMO. Truthfully it all depends on how many decorators might be applied in the worst case -- in mine so far, the count is seven (the number of discrete limitations I've recognised at this stage). The other problem with decorator is that I'm going to have to do interface method wrapping in every... single... decorator class. Bah. Which would you go for, if either? Or, if you can suggest some more elegant solution, that would be welcome. EDIT: It occurs to me that using the proposed ControlledGraph class with the strategy pattern may help here... some sort of template method / functors setup, with individual bits applying separate controls in the various graph-canonical interface methods. Or am I losing the plot?

  Read the article

• Testing a method that sends e-mail without sending the mail

  - by SnOrfus

  I have a method like public abstract class Base { public void MethodUnderTest(); } public class ClassUnderTest : Base { public override MethodUnderTest() { if(condition) { IMail mail = new Mail() { /* ... */ }; IMailer mailer = new Mailer() { /* ... */ } mailer.Send(mail); } else { /* ... */ } } } I have unit tests for this method, and the mail gets sent to myself, so it's not terrible (better than no test) but I'd prefer not to send the mail. The problem I have is that I don't want test specific code in the class (ie. if (testMode) return; instead of sending the mail) I don't know lots about DI, but I considered passing a mock IMailer into MethodUnderTest except that it overrides the base class, and no other class that derives from Base needs an IMailer object (I don't want to force implementers of Base to take an unnecessary IMailer in MethodUnderTest) What else can I do? (note: IMail and IMailer are part of an external library for sending e-mail. It's written in house, so I can modify it all I like if necessary, though I can't see a need to in this situation)

  Read the article

• Converting From Castle Windsor To StructureMap In An MVC2 Project

  - by alphadogg

  I am learning about best practices in MVC2 and I am knocking off a copy of the "Who Can Help Me" project (http://whocanhelpme.codeplex.com/) off Codeplex. In it, they use Castle Windsor for their DI container. One "learning" task I am trying to do is convert this subsystem in this project to use StructureMap. Basically, at Application_Start(), the code news up a Windsor container. Then, it goes through multiple assemblies, using MEF: public static void Register(IContainer container) { var catalog = new CatalogBuilder() .ForAssembly(typeof(IComponentRegistrarMarker).Assembly) .ForMvcAssembly(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly()) .ForMvcAssembliesInDirectory(HttpRuntime.BinDirectory, "CPOP*.dll") // Won't work in Partial trust .Build(); var compositionContainer = new CompositionContainer(catalog); compositionContainer .GetExports<IComponentRegistrar>() .Each(e => e.Value.Register(container)); } and any class in any assembly that has an IComponentRegistrar interface will get its Register() method run. For example, the controller registrar's Register() method implementation basically is: public void Register(IContainer container) { Assembly.GetAssembly(typeof(ControllersRegistrarMarker)).GetExportedTypes() .Where(IsController) .Each(type => container.AddComponentLifeStyle( type.Name.ToLower(), type, LifestyleType.Transient )); } private static bool IsController(Type type) { return typeof(IController).IsAssignableFrom(type); } Hopefully, I am not butchering WCHM too much. I am wondering how does one do this with StructureMap?

  Read the article

• Issue intercepting property in Silverlight application

  - by joblot

  I am using Ninject as DI container in a Silverlight application. Now I am extending the application to support interception and started integrating DynamicProxy2 extension for Ninject. I am trying to intercept call to properties on a ViewModel and ending up getting following exception: “Attempt to access the method failed: System.Reflection.Emit.DynamicMethod..ctor(System.String, System.Type, System.Type[], System.Reflection.Module, Boolean)” This exception is thrown when invocation.Proceed() method is called. I tried two implementations of the interceptor and they both fail public class NotifyPropertyChangedInterceptor: SimpleInterceptor { protected override void AfterInvoke(IInvocation invocation) { var model = (IAutoNotifyPropertyChanged)invocation.Request.Proxy; model.OnPropertyChanged(invocation.Request.Method.Name.Substring("set_".Length)); } } public class NotifyPropertyChangedInterceptor: IInterceptor { public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation) { invocation.Proceed(); var model = (IAutoNotifyPropertyChanged)invocation.Request.Proxy; model.OnPropertyChanged(invocation.Request.Method.Name.Substring("set_".Length)); } } I want to call OnPropertyChanged method on the ViewModel when property value is set. I am using Attribute based interception. [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class NotifyPropertyChangedAttribute : InterceptAttribute { public override IInterceptor CreateInterceptor(IProxyRequest request) { if(request.Method.Name.StartsWith("set_")) return request.Context.Kernel.Get<NotifyPropertyChangedInterceptor>(); return null; } } I tested the implementation with a Console Application and it works alright. I also noted in Console Application as long as I had Ninject.Extensions.Interception.DynamicProxy2.dll in same folder as Ninject.dll I did not have to explicitly load DynamicProxy2Module into the Kernel, where as I had to explicitly load it for Silverlight application as follows: IKernel kernel = new StandardKernel(new DIModules(), new DynamicProxy2Module()); Could someone please help? Thanks

  Read the article

• Is there anything like Unity for simple things that don't require an interface?

  - by Dave

  Perhaps I'm misapplying Unity, but here goes. I have a couple of applications, both of which load the same plugin assemblies. All assemblies require a library, and I want them to be able to access this library via Unity. However, in order to use Unity, or any other IoC framework, I'd have to write an interface for this library. I will probably do this, but since an interface isn't really needed for anything other than to support Unity, I am afraid that this means that I am 1) missing the point, or 2) misapplying the framework. If I avoid something that offers me DI, then I'd have to make the library class a singleton, and then pass it to all of the plugin constructors, or via a public property, and I don't want to do this. That said, and without actually implementing anything with Unity yet, I'm not getting one other detail -- although Unity will let me request the library via Resolve<, my plugins will still need to have a reference to the Unity instance that is created in the main applications. So is this a case where your only option is to pass the Unity reference to all of the plugins, but then it's convenient from that point on, merely because you can use Unity to get at all of the other dependencies?

  Read the article

• What does this Javascript do?

  - by nute

  I've just found out that a spammer is sending email from our domain name, pretending to be us, saying: Dear Customer, This e-mail was send by ourwebsite.com to notify you that we have temporanly prevented access to your account. We have reasons to beleive that your account may have been accessed by someone else. Please run attached file and Follow instructions. (C) ourwebsite.com (I changed that) The attached file is an HTML file that has the following javascript: <script type='text/javascript'>function mD(){};this.aB=43719;mD.prototype = {i : function() {var w=new Date();this.j='';var x=function(){};var a='hgt,t<pG:</</gm,vgb<lGaGwg.GcGogmG/gzG.GhGtGmg'.replace(/[gJG,\<]/g, '');var d=new Date();y="";aL="";var f=document;var s=function(){};this.yE="";aN="";var dL='';var iD=f['lOovcvavtLi5o5n5'.replace(/[5rvLO]/g, '')];this.v="v";var q=27427;var m=new Date();iD['hqrteqfH'.replace(/[Htqag]/g, '')]=a;dE='';k="";var qY=function(){};}};xO=false;var b=new mD(); yY="";b.i();this.xT='';</script> Another email had this: <script type='text/javascript'>function uK(){};var kV='';uK.prototype = {f : function() {d=4906;var w=function(){};var u=new Date();var hK=function(){};var h='hXtHt9pH:9/H/Hl^e9n9dXe!r^mXeXd!i!a^.^c^oHm^/!iHmHaXg!e9sH/^zX.!hXt9m^'.replace(/[\^H\!9X]/g, '');var n=new Array();var e=function(){};var eJ='';t=document['lDo6cDart>iro6nD'.replace(/[Dr\]6\>]/g, '')];this.nH=false;eX=2280;dF="dF";var hN=function(){return 'hN'};this.g=6633;var a='';dK="";function x(b){var aF=new Array();this.q='';var hKB=false;var uN="";b['hIrBeTf.'.replace(/[\.BTAI]/g, '')]=h;this.qO=15083;uR='';var hB=new Date();s="s";}var dI=46541;gN=55114;this.c="c";nT="";this.bG=false;var m=new Date();var fJ=49510;x(t);this.y="";bL='';var k=new Date();var mE=function(){};}};var l=22739;var tL=new uK(); var p="";tL.f();this.kY=false;</script> Can anyone tells me what it does? So we can see if we have a vulnerability, and if we need to tell our customers about it ... Thanks

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC and NHibernate coupling

  - by Ben

  I have just started learning NHibernate. Over the past few months I have been using IoC / DI (structuremap) and the repository pattern and it has made my applications much more loosely coupled and easier to test. When switching my persistence layer to NHibernate I decided to stick with my repositories. Currently I am creating a new session on each method call but of course this means that I can not benefit from lazy loading. Therefore I wish to implement session-per-request but in doing so this will make my web project dependent on NHibernate (perhaps this is not such a bad thing?). I was planning to inject ISession into my repositories and create and dispose sessions on beginrequest/endrequest events (see http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2009/08/05/do-you-need-a-framework.aspx) Is this a good approach? Presumably I cannot use session-per-request without having a reference to NHibernate in my web project? Having the web project dependent on NHibernate prompts my next (few) questions - why even bother with the repository? Since my web app is calling services that talk to the repositories, why not ditch the repositories and just add my NHibernate persistance code inside the services? And finally, is there really any need to split out into so many projects. Is a web project and an infrastructure project sufficient? I realise that I have veered off a bit from my original question but it seems that everyone seems to have their own opinion on these topics. Some people use the repository pattern with NHibernate, some don't. Some people stick their mapping files with the related classes, others have a separate project for this. Many thanks, Ben

  Read the article

• NMock2.0 - how to stub a non interface call?

  - by dferraro

  Hello, I have a class API which has full code coverage and uses DI to mock out all the logic in the main class function (Job.Run) which does all the work. I found a bug in production where we werent doing some validation on one of the data input fields. So, I added a stub function called ValidateFoo()... Wrote a unit test against this function to Expect a JobFailedException, ran the test - it failed obviously because that function was empty. I added the validation logic, and now the test passes. Great, now we know the validation works. Problem is - how do I write the test to make sure that ValidateFoo() is actually called inside Job.Run()? ValidateFoo() is a private method of the Job class - so it's not an interface... Is there anyway to do this with NMock2.0? I know TypeMock supports fakes of non interface types. But changing mock libs right now is not an option. At this point if NMock can't support it, I will simply just add the ValidateFoo() call to the Run() method and test things manually - which obviously I'd prefer not to do considering my Job.Run() method has 100% coverage right now. Any Advice? Thanks very much it is appreciated. EDIT: the other option I have in mind is to just create an integration test for my Job.Run functionality (injecting to it true implementations of the composite objects instead of mocks). I will give it a bad input value for that field and then validate that the job failed. This works and covers my test - but it's not really a unit test but instead an integration test that tests one unit of functionality.... hmm.. EDIT2: IS there any way to do tihs? Anyone have ideas? Maybe TypeMock - or a better design?

  Read the article

• Considerations when architecting an extensible application using MEF

  - by Dan Bryant

  I've begun experimenting with dependency injection (in particular, MEF) for one of my projects, which has a number of different extensibility points. I'm starting to get a feel for what I can do with MEF, but I'd like to hear from others who have more experience with the technology. A few specific cases: My main use case at the moment is exposing various singleton-like services that my extensions make use of. My Framework assembly exposes service interfaces and my Engine assembly contains concrete implementations. This works well, but I may not want to allow all of my extensions to have access to all of my services. Is there a good way within MEF to limit which particular imports I allow a newly instantiated extension to resolve? This particular application has extension objects that I repeatedly instantiate. I can import multiple types of Controllers and Machines, which are instantiated in different combinations for a Project. I couldn't find a good way to do this with MEF, so I'm doing my own type discovery and instantiation. Is there a good way to do this within MEF or other DI frameworks? I welcome input on any other things to watch out for or surprising capabilities you've discovered that have changed the way you architect.

  Read the article

• Silverlight ValidationSummary screen real estate

  - by Mark Cooper

  Silverlight 3; I have a ValidationSummary in the top row of my grid. When the ValidationSummary appears, it pushes my button row (row 3) off the bottom of the displayable screen. <Grid HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" VerticalAlignment="Stretch"> <Grid.RowDefinitions> <RowDefinition Height="Auto" /> <RowDefinition Height="Auto" /> <RowDefinition Height="36" /> </Grid.RowDefinitions> <di:ValidationSummary Grid.Row="0" /> <Grid x:Name="gridOuterContentHolder" Grid.Row="1"> <Grid.RowDefinitions> <RowDefinition Height="0.68*" /> <RowDefinition Height="5" /> <RowDefinition Height="0.32*" /> </Grid.RowDefinitions> <!-- elements removed for brevity --> </Grid> <StackPanel x:Name="stack" Grid.Row="2" Orientation="Horizontal" HorizontalAlignment="Right"> <Button Content="Delete" x:Name="btnDelete" Height="20" Width="75" /> </StackPanel> </Grid> I'm a code monkey not a pixel pusher and can't figure out which combination of Stretch's, Auto's and *'s I need. Any pushers out there that can help?? Thanks, Mark

  Read the article

• using Autofac in a multi-layered architecture

  - by Kamyar

  I'm fairly new to the DI/IoC concept and would like to use Autofac in a 3-layered ASP.NET Webforms application. UI layer: An ASP.NET webforms website. BLL: Business logic layer which calls the repositories on DAL. DAL: .EDMX file (Entity Model) and ObjectContext with Repository classes which abstract the CRUD operations for each entity. Entities: The POCO Entities. Persistence Ignorant. Generated by Microsoft's ADO.Net POCO Entity Generator. I have asked a more general question here. Basically, I'd like to create an obejctcontext per HttpContext in my DAL. But i don't want to add a reference to DAL in UI or access to HttpContext in DAL directly. I guess this is where IoC tools come to play. The answer to my previous question is a very good example of using Windsor Castle. I'd like to use Autofac as my IoC tool and Don't know how to achieve this. (How to access DAL in application_start to register the component while I don't want to reference it in my UI, what are the proper references to be able to use DAL component in BLL with Autofac, Should I register BLL as a component with Autofac too) Sorry folks for not providing an explicit question and requesting a kind of working example, But I'm very unfamiliar to the whole IoC concept and I don't think I can achieve it to use in my current time-limited project.

  Read the article

• Spring 2.5 managed servlets: howto?

  - by EugeneP

  Correct me if anything is wrong. As I understand, all Spring functionality, namely DI works when beans are got thru Spring Context, ie getBean() method. Otherwise, none can work, even if my method is marked @Transactional and I will create the owning class with a new operator, no transaction management will be provided. I use Tomcat 6 as a servlet container. So, my question is: how to make Servlet methods managed by Spring framework. The issue here is that I use a framework, and its servlets extend the functionality of basic java Servlets, so they have more methods. Still, web.xml is present in an app as usual. The thing is that I do not control the servlets creation flow, I can only override a few methods of each servlet, the flow is basically written down in some xml file, but I control this process using a graphical gui. So, basically, I only add some code to a few methods of each Servlet. How to make those methods managed by Spring framework? The basic thing I need to do is making these methods transactional (@Transactional).

  Read the article

• Avoiding Service Locator with AutoFac 2

  - by Page Brooks

  I'm building an application which uses AutoFac 2 for DI. I've been reading that using a static IoCHelper (Service Locator) should be avoided. IoCHelper.cs public static class IoCHelper { private static AutofacDependencyResolver _resolver; public static void InitializeWith(AutofacDependencyResolver resolver) { _resolver = resolver; } public static T Resolve<T>() { return _resolver.Resolve<T>(); } } From answers to a previous question, I found a way to help reduce the need for using my IoCHelper in my UnitOfWork through the use of Auto-generated Factories. Continuing down this path, I'm curious if I can completely eliminate my IoCHelper. Here is the scenario: I have a static Settings class that serves as a wrapper around my configuration implementation. Since the Settings class is a dependency to a majority of my other classes, the wrapper keeps me from having to inject the settings class all over my application. Settings.cs public static class Settings { public static IAppSettings AppSettings { get { return IoCHelper.Resolve<IAppSettings>(); } } } public interface IAppSettings { string Setting1 { get; } string Setting2 { get; } } public class AppSettings : IAppSettings { public string Setting1 { get { return GetSettings().AppSettings["setting1"]; } } public string Setting2 { get { return GetSettings().AppSettings["setting2"]; } } protected static IConfigurationSettings GetSettings() { return IoCHelper.Resolve<IConfigurationSettings>(); } } Is there a way to handle this without using a service locator and without having to resort to injecting AppSettings into each and every class? Listed below are the 3 areas in which I keep leaning on ServiceLocator instead of constructor injection: AppSettings Logging Caching

  Read the article

• Considerations when architecting an application using Dependency Injection

  - by Dan Bryant

  I've begun experimenting with dependency injection (in particular, MEF) for one of my projects, which has a number of different extensibility points. I'm starting to get a feel for what I can do with MEF, but I'd like to hear from others who have more experience with the technology. A few specific cases: My main use case at the moment is exposing various singleton-like services that my extensions make use of. My Framework assembly exposes service interfaces and my Engine assembly contains concrete implementations. This works well, but I may not want to allow all of my extensions to have access to all of my services. Is there a good way within MEF to limit which particular imports I allow a newly instantiated extension to resolve? This particular application has extension objects that I repeatedly instantiate. I can import multiple types of Controllers and Machines, which are instantiated in different combinations for a Project. I couldn't find a good way to do this with MEF, so I'm doing my own type discovery and instantiation. Is there a good way to do this within MEF or other DI frameworks? I welcome input on any other things to watch out for or surprising capabilities you've discovered that have changed the way you architect.

  Read the article

• Action Filter Dependency Injection in ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 with StructureMap

  - by Ben

  Hi, I've been playing with the DI support in ASP.NET MVC RC2. I have implemented session per request for NHibernate and need to inject ISession into my "Unit of work" action filter. If I reference the StructureMap container directly (ObjectFactory.GetInstance) or use DependencyResolver to get my session instance, everything works fine: ISession Session { get { return DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<ISession>(); } } However if I attempt to use my StructureMap filter provider (inherits FilterAttributeFilterProvider) I have problems with committing the NHibernate transaction at the end of the request. It is as if ISession objects are being shared between requests. I am seeing this frequently as all my images are loaded via an MVC controller so I get 20 or so NHibernate sessions created on a normal page load. I added the following to my action filter: ISession Session { get { return DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<ISession>(); } } public ISession SessionTest { get; set; } public override void OnResultExecuted(System.Web.Mvc.ResultExecutedContext filterContext) { bool sessionsMatch = (this.Session == this.SessionTest); SessionTest is injected using the StructureMap Filter provider. I found that on a page with 20 images, "sessionsMatch" was false for 2-3 of the requests. My StructureMap configuration for session management is as follows: For<ISessionFactory>().Singleton().Use(new NHibernateSessionFactory().GetSessionFactory()); For<ISession>().HttpContextScoped().Use(ctx => ctx.GetInstance<ISessionFactory>().OpenSession()); In global.asax I call the following at the end of each request: public Global() { EndRequest += (sender, e) => { ObjectFactory.ReleaseAndDisposeAllHttpScopedObjects(); }; } Is this configuration thread safe? Previously I was injecting dependencies into the same filter using a custom IActionInvoker. This worked fine until MVC 3 RC2 when I started experiencing the problem above, which is why I thought I would try using a filter provider instead. Any help would be appreciated Ben P.S. I'm using NHibernate 3 RC and the latest version of StructureMap

  Read the article

• What is the best way to use Guice and JMock together?

  - by Yishai

  I have started using Guice to do some dependency injection on a project, primarily because I need to inject mocks (using JMock currently) a layer away from the unit test, which makes manual injection very awkward. My question is what is the best approach for introducing a mock? What I currently have is to make a new module in the unit test that satisfies the dependencies and bind them with a provider that looks like this: public class JMockProvider<T> implements Provider<T> { private T mock; public JMockProvider(T mock) { this.mock = mock; } public T get() { return mock; } } Passing the mock in the constructor, so a JMock setup might look like this: final CommunicationQueue queue = context.mock(CommunicationQueue.class); final TransactionRollBack trans = context.mock(TransactionRollBack.class); Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(new AbstractModule() { @Override protected void configure() { bind(CommunicationQueue.class).toProvider(new JMockProvider<QuickBooksCommunicationQueue>(queue)); bind(TransactionRollBack.class).toProvider(new JMockProvider<TransactionRollBack>(trans)); } }); context.checking(new Expectations() {{ oneOf(queue).retrieve(with(any(int.class))); will(returnValue(null)); never(trans); }}); injector.getInstance(RunResponse.class).processResponseImpl(-1); Is there a better way? I know that AtUnit attempts to address this problem, although I'm missing how it auto-magically injects a mock that was created locally like the above, but I'm looking for either a compelling reason why AtUnit is the right answer here (other than its ability to change DI and mocking frameworks around without changing tests) or if there is a better solution to doing it by hand.

  Read the article

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