Search Results

Search found 6711 results on 269 pages for 'generic noob'.

Page 26/269 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

• A generic C++ library that provides QtConcurrent functionality?

  - by Lucas

  QtConcurrent is awesome. I'll let the Qt docs speak for themselves: QtConcurrent includes functional programming style APIs for parallel list processing, including a MapReduce and FilterReduce implementation for shared-memory (non-distributed) systems, and classes for managing asynchronous computations in GUI applications. For instance, you give QtConcurrent::map() an iterable sequence and a function that accepts items of the type stored in the sequence, and that function is applied to all the items in the collection. This is done in a multi-threaded manner, with a thread pool equal to the number of logical CPU's on the system. There are plenty of other function in QtConcurrent, like filter(), filteredReduced() etc. The standard CompSci map/reduce functions and the like. I'm totally in love with this, but I'm starting work on an OSS project that will not be using the Qt framework. It's a library, and I don't want to force others to depend on such a large framework like Qt. I'm trying to keep external dependencies to a minimum (it's the decent thing to do). I'm looking for a generic C++ framework that provides me with the same/similar high-level primitives that QtConcurrent does. AFAIK boost has nothing like this (I may be wrong though). boost::thread is very low-level compared to what I'm looking for. I know C# has something very similar with their Parallel Extensions so I know this isn't a Qt-only idea. What do you suggest I use?

  Read the article

• Unit test approach for generic classes/methods

  - by Greg

  Hi, What's the recommended way to cover off unit testing of generic classes/methods? For example (referring to my example code below). Would it be a case of have 2 or 3 times the tests to cover testing the methods with a few different types of TKey, TNode classes? Or is just one class enough? public class TopologyBase<TKey, TNode, TRelationship> where TNode : NodeBase<TKey>, new() where TRelationship : RelationshipBase<TKey>, new() { // Properties public Dictionary<TKey, NodeBase<TKey>> Nodes { get; private set; } public List<RelationshipBase<TKey>> Relationships { get; private set; } // Constructors protected TopologyBase() { Nodes = new Dictionary<TKey, NodeBase<TKey>>(); Relationships = new List<RelationshipBase<TKey>>(); } // Methods public TNode CreateNode(TKey key) { var node = new TNode {Key = key}; Nodes.Add(node.Key, node); return node; } public void CreateRelationship(NodeBase<TKey> parent, NodeBase<TKey> child) { . . .

  Read the article

• A generic error has occurred in GDI+

  - by sysigy

  I know this has been asked a million times but I think I need to make it a million and one. I am getting "A generic error has occurred in GDI+" when trying to save a new bitmap. I have completely stripped down to the most basic lines of code and I still get the error with the following method: public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { return this.View(); } public void CreatePicture() { try { // THIS WORKS System.IO.File.Copy("C:\\copyTest.bmp", "C:\\test folder\\copyTest2.bmp"); // THIS WORKS System.IO.File.Delete("C:\\test folder\\deleteTest.bmp"); using (Bitmap newBitmap = new Bitmap(120, 120)) { // THIS FAILS newBitmap.Save("C:\\test folder\\test.bmp", ImageFormat.Bmp); } } catch (Exception ex) { throw ex; } } } The code is called from an html link on a blank page within an MVC 3.0 website using anonymous login. View: @Html.ActionLink("Create Picture", "CreatePicture", "Home", new { }) I have checked the folder permissions of "test folder" and have given full access to the following: ASPNET NETWORK SERVICE IUSR I still get the error... what have I missed / done wrong ?

  Read the article

• Trouble swapping values as keys in generic java BST class

  - by user1729869

  I was given a generic binary search tree class with the following declaration: public class BST<K extends Comparable<K>, V> I was asked to write a method that reverses the BST such that the values become the keys and keys become values. When I call the following method (defined in the class given) reverseDict.put(originalDict.get(key), key); I get the following two error messages from Netbeans: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncompilable source code - Erroneous sym type: BST.put And also: no suitable method found for put(V,K) method BST.put(BST<K,V>.Node,K,V) is not applicable (actual and formal argument lists differ in length) method BST.put(K,V) is not applicable (actual argument V cannot be converted to K by method invocation conversion) where V,K are type-variables: V extends Object declared in method <K,V>reverseBST(BST<K,V>) K extends Comparable<K> declared in method <K,V>reverseBST(BST<K,V>) From what the error messages are telling me, since my values do not extend Comparable I am unable to use them as keys. If I am right, how can I get around that without changing the class given (maybe a cast)?

  Read the article

• Can I pass a non-generic type where a generic type is expected?

  - by Water Cooler v2

  I want to define a set of classes that collect and persist data. I want to call them either on-demand basis, or in a chain-of-responsibility fashion, as the caller pleases. To support the chaining, I have declared my interface like so: interface IDataManager<T, K> { T GetData(K args); void WriteData(Stream stream); void WriteData(T data, Stream stream); IDataCollectionPolicy Policy; IDataManager<T, K> NextDataManager; } But the T's and K's for each concrete types will be different. If I give it like this: IDataManager<T, K> NextDataManager; I assume that the calling code will only be able to chain types that have the same T's and K's. Is there a way I can have it chain any type of IDataManager? One thing that occurs to me is to have IDataManager inherit from a non-generic IDataManager like so: interface IDataManager { } interface IDataManager<T, K>: IDataManager { T GetData(K args); void WriteData(Stream stream); void WriteData(T data, Stream stream); IDataCollectionPolicy Policy; IDataManager NextDataManager; } Is this going to work?

  Read the article

• C# specifying generic delegate type param at runtime

  - by smerlin

  following setup, i have several generic functions, and i need to choose the type and the function identified by two strings at runtime. my first try looked like this: public static class FOOBAR { public delegate void MyDelegateType(int param); public static void foo<T>(int param){...} public static void bar<T>(int param){...} public static void someMethod(string methodstr, string typestr) { MyDelegateType mydel; Type mytype; switch(typestr) { case "int": mytype = typeof(int); break; case "double": mytype = typeof(double); break; default: throw new InvalidTypeException(typestr); } switch(methodstr) { case "foo": mydel = foo<mytype>; //error break; case "bar": mydel = bar<mytype>; //error break; default: throw new InvalidTypeException(methodstr); } for(int i=0; i<1000; ++i) mydel(i); } } since this didnt work, i nested those switchs (a methodstr switch inside the typestr switch or viceversa), but that solution is really ugly and unmaintainable. The number of types is pretty much fixed, but the number of functions like foo or bar will increase by high numbers, so i dont want nested switchs. So how can i make this working without using nested switchs ?

  Read the article

• .NET: Calling GetInterface method of Assembly obj with a generic interface argument

  - by Khnle

  I have the following interface: public interface PluginInterface<T> where T : MyData { List<T> GetTableData(); } In a separate assembly, I have a class that implements this interface. In fact, all classes that implement this interface are in separate assemblies. The reason is to architect my app as a plugin host, where plugin can be done in the future as long as they implement the above interface and the assembly DLLs are copied to the appropriate folder. My app discovers the plugins by first loading the assembly and performs the following: List<PluginInterface<MyData>> Plugins = new List<PluginInterface<MyData>>(); string FileName = ...;//name of the DLL file that contains classes that implement the interface Assembly Asm = Assembly.LoadFile(Filename); foreach (Type AsmType in Asm.GetTypes()) { //Type type = AsmType.GetInterface("PluginInterface", true); // Type type = AsmType.GetInterface("PluginInterface<T>", true); if (type != null) { PluginInterface<MyData> Plugin = (PluginInterface<MyData>)Activator.CreateInstance(AsmType); Plugins.Add(Plugin); } } The trouble is because neither line where I am getting the type as by doing Type type = ... seems to work, as both seems to be null. I have the feeling that the generic somehow contributes to the trouble. Do you know why?

  Read the article

• Java - How to pass a Generic parameter as Class<T> to a constructor

  - by Joe Almore

  I have a problem here that still cannot solve, the thing is I have this abstract class: public abstract class AbstractBean<T> { private Class<T> entityClass; public AbstractBean(Class<T> entityClass) { this.entityClass = entityClass; }... Now I have another class that inherits this abstract: @Stateless @LocalBean public class BasicUserBean<T extends BasicUser> extends AbstractBean<T> { private Class<T> user; public BasicUserBean() { super(user); // Error: cannot reference user before supertype contructor has been called. } My question is how can I make this to work?, I am trying to make the class BasicUserBean inheritable, so if I have class PersonBean which inherits BasicUserBean then I could set in the Generic the entity Person which also inherits the entity BasicUser. And it will end up being: @Stateless @LocalBean public class PersonBean extends BasicUserBean<Person> { public PersonBean() { super(Person.class); } ... I just want to inherit the basic functionality from BasicUserBean to all descendants, so I do not have to repeat the same code among all descendants. Thanks!.

  Read the article

• Operator overloading in generic struct: can I create overloads for specific kinds(?) of generic?

  - by Carson Myers

  I'm defining physical units in C#, using generic structs, and it was going okay until I got the error: One of the parameters of a binary operator must be the containing type when trying to overload the mathematical operators so that they convert between different units. So, I have something like this: public interface ScalarUnit { } public class Duration : ScalarUnit { } public struct Scalar<T> where T : ScalarUnit { public readonly double Value; public Scalar(double Value) { this.Value = Value; } public static implicit operator double(Scalar<T> Value) { return Value.Value; } } public interface VectorUnit { } public class Displacement : VectorUnit { } public class Velocity : VectorUnit { } public struct Vector<T> where T : VectorUnit { #... public static Vector<Velocity> operator /(Vector<Displacement> v1, Scalar<Duration> v2) { return new Vector<Velocity>(v1.Magnitude / v2, v1.Direction); } } There aren't any errors for the + and - operators, where I'm just working on a Vector<T>, but when I substitute a unit for T, suddenly it doesn't like it. Is there a way to make this work? I figured it would work, since Displacement implements the VectorUnit interface, and I have where T : VectorUnit in the struct header. Am I at least on the right track here? I'm new to C# so I have difficulty understanding what's going on sometimes.

  Read the article

• Making Extension method Generic

  - by Ian

  In this post there's a very interesting way of updating UI threads using a static extension method. public static void InvokeIfRequired(this Control c, Action<Control> action) { if(c.InvokeRequired) { c.Invoke(() => action(c)); } else { action(c); } } What I want to do, is to make a generic version, so I'm not constrained by a control. This would allow me to do the following for example (because I'm no longer constrained to just being a Control) this.progressBar1.InvokeIfRequired(pb => pb.Value = e.Progress); I've tried the following: public static void InvokeIfRequired<T>(this T c, Action<T> action) where T : Control { if (c.InvokeRequired) { c.Invoke(() => action(c)); } else { action(c); } } But I get the following error that I'm not sure how to fix. Anyone any suggestions? Error 5 Cannot convert lambda expression to type 'System.Delegate' because it is not a delegate type

  Read the article

• Type contraint problem of C#

  - by user351565

  I meet a problem about type contraint of c# now. I wrote a pair of methods that can convert object to string and convert string to object. ex. static string ConvertToString(Type type, object val) { if (type == typeof(string)) return (string)val; if (type == typeof(int)) return val.ToString(); if (type.InSubclassOf(typeof(CodeObject))) return ((CodeObject)val).Code; } static T ConvertToObject<T>(string str) { Type type = typeof(T); if (type == typeof(string)) return (T)(object)val; if (type == typeof(int)) return (T)(object)int.Parse(val); if (type.InSubclassOf(typeof(CodeObject))) return Codes.Get<T>(val); } where CodeObject is a base class of Employees, Offices ..., which can fetch by static method Godes.Get where T: CodeObject but the code above cannot be compiled because error #CS0314 the generic type T of method ConvertToObject have no any constraint but Codes.Get request T must be subclass of CodeObject i tried use overloading to solve the problem but not ok. is there any way to clear up the problem? like reflection?

  Read the article

• Why can't these generic type parameters be inferred?

  - by Jon M

  Given the following interfaces/classes: public interface IRequest<TResponse> { } public interface IHandler<TRequest, TResponse> where TRequest : IRequest<TResponse> { TResponse Handle(TRequest request); } public class HandlingService { public TResponse Handle<TRequest, TResponse>(TRequest request) where TRequest : IRequest<TResponse> { var handler = container.GetInstance<IHandler<TRequest, TResponse>>(); return handler.Handle(request); } } public class CustomerResponse { public Customer Customer { get; set; } } public class GetCustomerByIdRequest : IRequest<CustomerResponse> { public int CustomerId { get; set; } } Why can't the compiler infer the correct types, if I try and write something like the following: var service = new HandlingService(); var request = new GetCustomerByIdRequest { CustomerId = 1234 }; var response = service.Handle(request); // Shouldn't this know that response is going to be CustomerResponse? I just get the 'type arguments cannot be inferred' message. Is this a limitation with generic type inference in general, or is there a way to make this work?

  Read the article

• Suggestions on Working with this Inherited Generic Method

  - by blu

  We have inherited a project that is a wrapper around a section of the core business model. There is one method that takes a generic, finds items matching that type from a member and then returns a list of that type. public List<T> GetFoos<T>() { List<IFoo> matches = Foos.FindAll( f => f.GetType() == typeof(T) ); List<T> resultList = new List<T>(); foreach (var match in matches) { resultList.Add((T)obj); } } Foos can hold the same object cast into various classes in inheritance hierarchy to aggregate totals differently for different UI presentations. There are 20+ different types of descendants that can be returned by GetFoos. The existing code basically has a big switch statement copied and pasted throughout the code. The code in each section calls GetFoos with its corresponding type. We are currently refactoring that into one consolidated area, but as we are doing that we are looking at other ways to work with this method. One thought was to use reflection to pass in the type, and that worked great until we realized the Invoke returned an object, and that it needed to be cast somehow to the List <T>. Another was to just use the switch statement until 4.0 and then use the dynamic language options. We welcome any alternate thoughts on how we can work with this method. I have left the code pretty brief, but if you'd like to know any additional details please just ask.

  Read the article

• Container of Generic Types in java

  - by Cyker

  I have a generic class Foo<T> and parameterized types Foo<String> and Foo<Integer>. Now I want to put different parameterized types into a single ArrayList. What is the correct way of doing this? Candidate 1: public class MMM { public static void main(String[] args) { Foo<String> fooString = new Foo<String>(); Foo<Integer> fooInteger = new Foo<Integer>(); ArrayList<Foo<?> > list = new ArrayList<Foo<?> >(); list.add(fooString); list.add(fooInteger); for (Foo<?> foo : list) { // Do something on foo. } } } class Foo<T> {} Candidate 2: public class MMM { public static void main(String[] args) { Foo<String> fooString = new Foo<String>(); Foo<Integer> fooInteger = new Foo<Integer>(); ArrayList<Foo> list = new ArrayList<Foo>(); list.add(fooString); list.add(fooInteger); for (Foo foo : list) { // Do something on foo. } } } class Foo<T> {} In a word, it is related to the difference between Foo<?> and the raw type Foo. Update: Grep What is the difference between the unbounded wildcard parameterized type and the raw type? on this link may be helpful.

  Read the article

• Using overloaded operator== in a generic function

  - by Dimitri C.

  Consider the following code: class CustomClass { public CustomClass(string value) { m_value = value; } public static bool operator==(CustomClass a, CustomClass b) { return a.m_value == b.m_value; } public static bool operator!=(CustomClass a, CustomClass b) { return a.m_value != b.m_value; } public override bool Equals(object o) { return m_value == (o as CustomClass).m_value; } public override int GetHashCode() { return 0; /* not needed */ } string m_value; } class G { public static bool enericFunction1<T>(T a1, T a2) where T : class { return a1.Equals(a2); } public static bool enericFunction2<T>(T a1, T a2) where T : class { return a1==a2; } } Now when I call both generic functions, one succeeds and one fails: var a = new CustomClass("same value"); var b = new CustomClass("same value"); Debug.Assert(G.enericFunction1(a, b)); // Succeeds Debug.Assert(G.enericFunction2(a, b)); // Fails Apparently, G.enericFunction2 executes the default operator== implementation instead of my override. Can anybody explain why this happens?

  Read the article

• A generic Re-usable C# Property Parser utility

  - by Shyam K Pananghat

  This is about a utility i have happened to write which can parse through the properties of a data contracts at runtime using reflection. The input required is a look like XPath string. since this is using reflection, you dont have to add the reference to any of your data contracts thus making pure generic and re- usable.. you can read about this and get the full c# sourcecode here. Property-Parser-A-C-utility-to-retrieve-values-from-any-Net-Data-contracts-at-runtime Now about the doubts which i have about this utility. i am using this utility enormously i many places of my code I am using Regex repetedly inside a recursion method. does this affect the memmory usage or GC collection badly ?do i have to dispose this manually. if yes how ?. The statements like obj.GetType().GetProperty() and obj.GetType().GetField() returns .net "object" which makes difficult or imposible to introduce generics here. Does this cause to have any overheads like boxing ? on an overall, please suggest to make this utility performance efficient and more light weight on memmory

  Read the article

• Configuring Unity with a closed generic constructor parmater

  - by fearofawhackplanet

  I've been trying to read the article here but I still can't understand it. I have a constructor resembling the following: IOrderStore orders = new OrderStore(new Repository<Order>(new OrdersDataContext())); The constructor for OrderStore: public OrderStore(IRepository<Order> orderRepository) Constructor for Repository<T>: public Repository(DataContext dataContext) How do I set this up in the Unity config file? UPDATE: I've spent the last few hours banging my head against this, and although I'm not really any closer to getting it right I think at least I can be a little more specific about the problem. I've got my IRespository<T> working ok: <typeAlias alias="IRepository" type="MyAssembly.IRepository`1, MyAssembly" /> <typeAlias alias="Repository" type="MyAssembly.Repository`1, MyAssembly" /> <typeAlias alias="OrdersDataContext" type="MyAssembly.OrdersDataContext, MyAssembly" /> <types> <type type="OrdersDataContext"> <typeConfig> <constructor /> <!-- ensures paramaterless constructor used --> </typeConfig> </type> <type type="IRepository" mapTo="Repository"> <typeConfig> <constructor> <param name="dataContext" parameterType="OrdersDataContext"> <dependency /> </param> </constructor> </typeConfig> </type> </types> So now I can get an IRepository like so: IRepository rep = _container.Resolve(); and that all works fine. The problem now is when trying to add the configuration for IOrderStore <type type="IOrderStore" mapTo="OrderStore"> <typeConfig> <constructor> <param name="ordersRepository" parameterType="IRepository"> <dependency /> </param> </constructor> </typeConfig> </type> When I add this, Unity blows up when trying to load the config file. The error message is OrderStore does not have a constructor that takes the parameters (IRepository`1). What I think this is complaining about is because the OrderStore constructor takes a closed IRepository generic type, ie OrderStore(IRepository<Order>) and not OrderStore(IRepository<T>) I don't have any idea how to resolve this.

  Read the article

• Marshal.PtrToStructure (and back again) and generic solution for endianness swapping

  - by cgyDeveloper

  I have a system where a remote agent sends serialized structures (from and embedded C system) for me to read and store via IP/UDP. In some cases I need to send back the same structure types. I thought I had a nice setup using Marshal.PtrToStructure (receive) and Marshal.StructureToPtr (send). However, a small gotcha is that the network big endian integers need to be converted to my x86 little endian format to be used locally. When I'm sending them off again, big endian is the way to go. Here are the functions in question: private static T BytesToStruct<T>(ref byte[] rawData) where T: struct { T result = default(T); GCHandle handle = GCHandle.Alloc(rawData, GCHandleType.Pinned); try { IntPtr rawDataPtr = handle.AddrOfPinnedObject(); result = (T)Marshal.PtrToStructure(rawDataPtr, typeof(T)); } finally { handle.Free(); } return result; } private static byte[] StructToBytes<T>(T data) where T: struct { byte[] rawData = new byte[Marshal.SizeOf(data)]; GCHandle handle = GCHandle.Alloc(rawData, GCHandleType.Pinned); try { IntPtr rawDataPtr = handle.AddrOfPinnedObject(); Marshal.StructureToPtr(data, rawDataPtr, false); } finally { handle.Free(); } return rawData; } And a quick example structure that might be used like this: byte[] data = this.sock.Receive(ref this.ipep); Request request = BytesToStruct<Request>(ref data); Where the structure in question looks like: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential, CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, Pack = 1)] private struct Request { public byte type; public short sequence; [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.ByValArray, SizeConst = 5)] public byte[] address; } What (generic) way can I swap the endianness when marshalling the structures? My need is such that the locally stored 'public short sequence' in this example will be little-endian for displaying to the user. I don't want to have to swap the endianness on a structure-specific way. My first thought was to use Reflection, but I'm not very familiar with that feature. Also, I hoped that there would be a better solution out there that somebody could point me towards. Thanks in advance :)

  Read the article

• Generic linked list in c++

  - by itsaboy

  I have been struggling for too long a time now with a rather simple question about how to create a generic linked list in c++. The list should be able contain several types of structs, but each list will only contain one type of struct. The problem arises when I want to implement the getNode() function [see below], because then I have to specify which of the structs it should return. I have tried to substitute the structs with classes, where the getNode function returns a base class that is inherited by all the other classes, but it still does not do the trick, since the compiler does not allow the getNode function to return anything but the base class then. So here is some code snippet: typedef struct struct1 { int param1; (...) } struct1; typedef struct struct2 { double param1; (...) } struct2; typedef struct node { struct1 data; node* link; } node; class LinkedList { public: node *first; int nbrOfNodes; LinkedList(); void addNode(struct1); struct1 getNode(); bool isEmpty(); }; LinkedList::LinkedList() { first = NULL; nbrOfNodes = 0; } void LinkedList::addNode(struct1 newData) { if (nbrOfNodes == 0) { first = new node; first->data = newData; } else { node *it = first; for (int i = 0; i < nbrOfNodes; i++) { it = it->link; } node *newNode = new node; newNode->data = newData; it->link = newNode; } nbrOfNodes++; } bool LinkedList::isEmpty() { return !nbrOfNodes; } struct1 LinkedList::getNode() { param1 returnData = first->data; node* deleteNode = first; nbrOfNodes--; if (nbrOfNodes) first = deleteNode->link; delete deleteNode; return returnData; } So the question, put in one sentence, is as follows: How do I adjust the above linked list class so that it can also be used for struct2, without having to create a new almost identical list class for struct2 objects? As I said above, each instance of LinkedList will only deal with either struct1 or struct2. Grateful for hints or help

  Read the article

• Creating a generic NotFound View in ASP.MVC

  - by George

  Hello guys, I'm having a problem to create a generic View to represent NotFound pages. The view is created and it's fine. I need to know how i can direct the user to the NotFound view in my Controllers and how to render a specific "Return to Index" in each controller. Here is some code: public class NotFoundModel { private string _contentName; private string _notFoundTitle; private string _apologiesMessage; public string ContentName { get; private set; } public string NotFoundTitle { get; private set; } public string ApologiesMessage { get; private set; } public NotFoundModel(string contentName, string notFoundTitle, string apologiesMessage) { this._contentName = contentName; this._notFoundTitle = notFoundTitle; this._apologiesMessage = apologiesMessage; } } // NotFound View <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<Geographika.Models.NotFoundModel>" %> <asp:Content ID="Content1" ContentPlaceHolderID="TitleContent" runat="server"> <%= Html.Encode(Model.ContentName) %> </asp:Content> <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <h2><%= Html.Encode(Model.NotFoundTitle) %></h2> <p><%= Html.Encode(Model.ApologiesMessage) %></p> <!-- How can i render here a specific "BackToIndexView", but that it's not bound to my NotFoundModel? --> </asp:Content> // Controller piece of code // // GET: /Term/Details/2 public ActionResult Details(int id) { Term term = termRepository.SingleOrDefault(t => t.TermId == id); if (term == null) return View("NotFound"); // how can i return the specific view that its not bound to Term Model? // the idea here would be something like: // return View("NotFound",new NotFoundModel("a","b","c")); else return View("Details", term); } I'm not sure how to redirect to a whole different page. Can anyone give me any pointers? Thanks

  Read the article

• [C#] Problems with implementing generic IEnumerator and IComparable

  - by r0h

  Hi all! I'm working on an AVL Tree. The tree itself seems to be working but I need a iterator to walk through the values of the tree. Therefore I tried to implement the IEnumerator interace. Unfortunately I get a compile time error implementing IEnumerator and IComparable. First the code and below that the error. class AvlTreePreOrderEnumerator<T> : IEnumerator<T> where T :IComparable<T> { private AvlTreeNode<T> current = default(T); private AvlTreeNode<T> tree = null; private Queue<AvlTreeNode<T>> traverseQueue = null; public AvlTreePreOrderEnumerator(AvlTreeNode<T> tree) { this.tree = tree; //Build queue traverseQueue = new Queue<AvlTreeNode<T>>(); visitNode(this.tree.Root); } private void visitNode(AvlTreeNode<T> node) { if (node == null) return; else { traverseQueue.Enqueue(node); visitNode(node.LeftChild); visitNode(node.RightChild); } } public T Current { get { return current.Value; } } object IEnumerator.Current { get { return Current; } } public void Dispose() { current = null; tree = null; } public void Reset() { current = null; } public bool MoveNext() { if (traverseQueue.Count > 0) current = traverseQueue.Dequeue(); else current = null; return (current != null); } } The error given by VS2008: Error 1 The type 'T' cannot be used as type parameter 'T' in the generic type or method 'Opdr2_AvlTreeTest_Final.AvlTreeNode'. There is no boxing conversion or type parameter conversion from 'T' to 'System.IComparable'. For now I've not included the tree and node logic. I anybody thinks is necessary to resolve this probleem, just say so! Thx!

  Read the article

• Generic Type constraint in .net

  - by Jose

  Okay I'm looking for some input, I'm pretty sure this is not currently supported in .NET 3.5 but here goes. I want to require a generic type passed into my class to have a constructor like this: new(IDictionary<string,object>) so the class would look like this public MyClass<T> where T : new(IDictionary<string,object>) { T CreateObject(IDictionary<string,object> values) { return new T(values); } } But the compiler doesn't support this, it doesn't really know what I'm asking. Some of you might ask, why do you want to do this? Well I'm working on a pet project of an ORM so I get values from the DB and then create the object and load the values. I thought it would be cleaner to allow the object just create itself with the values I give it. As far as I can tell I have two options: 1) Use reflection(which I'm trying to avoid) to grab the PropertyInfo[] array and then use that to load the values. 2) require T to support an interface like so: public interface ILoadValues { void LoadValues(IDictionary values); } and then do this public MyClass<T> where T:new(),ILoadValues { T CreateObject(IDictionary<string,object> values) { T obj = new T(); obj.LoadValues(values); return obj; } } The problem I have with the interface I guess is philosophical, I don't really want to expose a public method for people to load the values. Using the constructor the idea was that if I had an object like this namespace DataSource.Data { public class User { protected internal User(IDictionary<string,object> values) { //Initialize } } } As long as the MyClass<T> was in the same assembly the constructor would be available. I personally think that the Type constraint in my opinion should ask (Do I have access to this constructor? I do, great!) Anyways any input is welcome.

  Read the article

• Derived template override return type of member function C++

  - by Ruud v A

  I am writing matrix classes. Take a look at this definition: template <typename T, unsigned int dimension_x, unsigned int dimension_y> class generic_matrix { ... generic_matrix<T, dimension_x - 1, dimension_y - 1> minor(unsigned int x, unsigned int y) const { ... } ... } template <typename T, unsigned int dimension> class generic_square_matrix : public generic_matrix<T, dimension, dimension> { ... generic_square_matrix(const generic_matrix<T, dimension, dimension>& other) { ... } ... void foo(); } The generic_square_matrix class provides additional functions like matrix multiplication. Doing this is no problem: generic_square_matrix<T, 4> m = generic_matrix<T, 4, 4>(); It is possible to assign any square matrix to M, even though the type is not generic_square_matrix, due to the constructor. This is possible because the data does not change across children, only the supported functions. This is also possible: generic_square_matrix<T, 4> m = generic_square_matrix<T, 5>().minor(1,1); Same conversion applies here. But now comes the problem: generic_square_matrix<T, 4>().minor(1,1).foo(); //problem, foo is not in generic_matrix<T, 3, 3> To solve this I would like generic_square_matrix::minor to return a generic_square_matrix instead of a generic_matrix. The only possible way to do this, I think is to use template specialisation. But since a specialisation is basically treated like a separate class, I have to redefine all functions. I cannot call the function of the non-specialised class as you would do with a derived class, so I have to copy the entire function. This is not a very nice generic-programming solution, and a lot of work. C++ almost has a solution for my problem: a virtual function of a derived class, can return a pointer or reference to a different class than the base class returns, if this class is derived from the class that the base class returns. generic_square_matrix is derived from generic_matrix, but the function does not return a pointer nor reference, so this doesn't apply here. Is there a solution to this problem (possibly involving an entirely other structure; my only requirements are that the dimensions are a template parameter and that square matrices can have additional functionality). Thanks in advance, Ruud

  Read the article

• Error:A generic error occurred in GDI+

  - by sanfra1983

  Hi, I created a web project on the server, and when I upload an image shows me the error Error: A generic error occurred in GDI +. I have read many links on the net that talk about this issue, and although I made the changes, nothing went wrong. I was thinking if the case is not an issue of permissions to folders. In fact I have two folders one inside the other. This is the code to resize the image: public Bitmaps ResizeImage (Stream stream, int? width, int? height) ( System.Drawing.Bitmap bmpOut = null; const int defaultWidth = 800; const int defaultHeight = 600; int width = lnWidth == null? defaultWidth: (int) width; int height = lnHeight == null? defaultHeight: (int) height; try ( LoBMP bitmap = new Bitmap (stream); ImageFormat loFormat = loBMP.RawFormat; decimal lnRatio; lnNewWidth int = 0; lnNewHeight int = 0; if (loBMP.Width <& & lnWidth loBMP.Height <lnHeight) ( loBMP return; ) if (loBMP.Width> loBMP.Height) ( lnRatio = (decimal) lnWidth / loBMP.Width; lnNewWidth = lnWidth; decimal = lnTemp loBMP.Height lnRatio *; lnNewHeight = (int) lnTemp; ) else ( lnRatio = (decimal) lnHeight / loBMP.Height; lnNewHeight = lnHeight; decimal = lnTemp loBMP.Width lnRatio *; lnNewWidth = (int) lnTemp; ) bmpOut = new Bitmap (lnNewWidth, lnNewHeight); Graphics g = Graphics.FromImage (bmpOut); g.InterpolationMode = System.Drawing.Drawing2D.InterpolationMode.HighQualityBicubic; g.FillRectangle (Brushes.White, 0, 0, lnNewWidth, lnNewHeight); g.DrawImage (loBMP, 0, 0, lnNewWidth, lnNewHeight); loBMP.Dispose (); ) catch ( return null; ) bmpOut return; ) and this is the code that I insert in the codebehind: string filepath = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory + img_veterinario / "; string = filepathM AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory + img_veterinario / img_veterinarioM; Reseize Reseize R = new (); Bitmap = photosFileOriginal r.ResizeImage (fucasiclinici.PostedFile.InputStream, 400, 400); Bitmap = photosFileMiniatura r.ResizeImage (fucasiclinici.PostedFile.InputStream, 72, 72); String filename = Path.GetFileName (fucasiclinici.PostedFile.FileName); photosFileOriginal.Save (Path.Combine (filepath, filename)); photosFileMiniatura.Save (Path.Combine (filepathM, filename)); Can you help me? Thanks

  Read the article

• The model item passed into the dictionary is of type 'System.Collections.Generic.Lis

  - by mazhar

  Calling Index view is giving me this very very annoying error . Can anybody tell me what to do about it Error: The model item passed into the dictionary is of type 'System.Collections.Generic.List1[MvcApplication13.Models.Groups]', but this dictionary requires a model item of type 'MvcApplication13.Helpers.PaginatedList1[MvcApplication13.Models.Groups]'. public ActionResult Index(int? page) { const int pageSize = 10; var group =from p in _db.Groups orderby p.int_GroupId select p; var paginatedGroup = group.Skip((page ?? 0) * pageSize).Take(pageSize).ToList(); return View(paginatedGroup); } View: <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage" % Index <h2>Index</h2> <table> <tr> <th></th> <th> int_GroupId </th> <th> vcr_GroupName </th> <th> txt_GroupDescription </th> <th> bit_Is_Deletable </th> <th> bit_Active </th> <th> int_CreatedBy </th> <th> dtm_CreatedDate </th> <th> int_ModifiedBy </th> <th> dtm_ModifiedDate </th> </tr> <% foreach (var item in Model) { %> <tr> <td> <%= Html.ActionLink("Edit", "Edit", new { id=item.int_GroupId }) %> | <%= Html.ActionLink("Details", "Details", new { id=item.int_GroupId })%> | <%= Html.ActionLink("Delete", "Delete", new { id=item.int_GroupId })%> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.int_GroupId) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.vcr_GroupName) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.txt_GroupDescription) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.bit_Is_Deletable) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.bit_Active) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.int_CreatedBy) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(String.Format("{0:g}", item.dtm_CreatedDate)) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(item.int_ModifiedBy) %> </td> <td> <%= Html.Encode(String.Format("{0:g}", item.dtm_ModifiedDate)) %> </td> </tr> <% } %> </table> <% if (Model.HasPreviousPage) { % <%= Html.RouteLink("<<<", "UpcomingDinners", new { page = (Model.PageIndex-1) }) % <% } % <% if (Model.HasNextPage) { % <%= Html.RouteLink("", "UpcomingDinners", new { page = (Model.PageIndex + 1) }) % <% } % <p> <%= Html.ActionLink("Create New", "Create") %> </p>

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >