Search Results

Search found 2727 results on 110 pages for 'operator overloading'.

Page 27/110 | < Previous Page | 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34  | Next Page >

  • Can you overload controller methods in ASP.Net MVC?

    - by Eric Brown
    Im curious to see if you can overload controller methods in ASP.Net MVC. Whenever I try, I get the error below. The two methods accept different arguements. Is this something that cannot be done? The current request for action 'MyMethod' on controller type 'MyController' is ambiguous between the following action methods:

    Read the article

  • Properly removing an Integer from a List<Integer>

    - by Yuval A
    Here's a nice pitfall I just encountered. Consider a list of integers: List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); list.add(5); list.add(6); list.add(7); list.add(1); Any educated guess on what happens when you execute list.remove(1)? What about list.remove(new Integer(1))? This can cause some nasty bugs. What is the proper way to differentiate between remove(int index), which removes an element from given index and remove(Object o), which removes an element by reference, when dealing with lists of integers? The main point to consider here is the one @Nikita mentioned - exact parameter matching takes precedence over auto-boxing.

    Read the article

  • uint8_t and unsigned char linking error

    - by mnn
    I'm using template function: template<typename T> void func(const T& value) { obj->func(value); } where obj is object of class: void my_object::func(int64_t value) { ... } void my_object::func(uint64_t value) { ... } void my_object::func(uint32_t value) { ... } void my_object::func(uint16_t value) { ... } void my_object::func(uint8_t value) { ... } The problem is with uint8_t overload of my_object::func() override. Linker complains about unresolved external symbols to overloads, which should have unsigned char parameter. Should I replace uint8_t overload with unsigned char overload? Edit: Just now noticed, that linker complains about uint64_t and int64_t too. I compile on Windows using MSVC++ 2008 Express.

    Read the article

  • How does Java pick which method to call?

    - by Gaurav
    Given the following code: public class Test { public void method(Object o){ System.out.println("object"); } public void method(String s) { System.out.println("String"); } public void method() { System.out.println("blank"); } /** * @param args */ public static void main(String[] args) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub Test test=new Test(); test.method(null); } } Java prints "String". Why is this the case?

    Read the article

  • polymorphism and interfaces

    - by mixm
    if i have two classes x and y, both extend class w. and x implementing interface z. if i have methods doSomething(w object) and doSomething(x object), what would happen if i call doSomething(x)? edit: im implementing this on java, more specifically on android. im asking this because some classes which implement a specific interface mostly does the same thing when doSomething() is called. but there are special cases which i would like to single out.

    Read the article

  • Java Best Practice for type resolution at runtime.

    - by Brian
    I'm trying to define a class (or set of classes which implement the same interface) that will behave as a loosely typed object (like JavaScript). They can hold any sort of data and operations on them depend on the underlying type. I have it working in three different ways but none seem ideal. These test versions only allow strings and integers and the only operation is add. Adding integers results in the sum of the integer values, adding strings concatenates the strings and adding an integer to a string converts the integer to a string and concatenates it with the string. The final version will have more types (Doubles, Arrays, JavaScript-like objects where new properties can be added dynamically) and more operations. Way 1: public interface DynObject1 { @Override public String toString(); public DynObject1 add(DynObject1 d); public DynObject1 addTo(DynInteger1 d); public DynObject1 addTo(DynString1 d); } public class DynInteger1 implements DynObject1 { private int value; public DynInteger1(int v) { value = v; } @Override public String toString() { return Integer.toString(value); } public DynObject1 add(DynObject1 d) { return d.addTo(this); } public DynObject1 addTo(DynInteger1 d) { return new DynInteger1(d.value + value); } public DynObject1 addTo(DynString1 d) { return new DynString1(d.toString()+Integer.toString(value)); } } ...and similar for DynString1 Way 2: public interface DynObject2 { @Override public String toString(); public DynObject2 add(DynObject2 d); } public class DynInteger2 implements DynObject2 { private int value; public DynInteger2(int v) { value = v; } @Override public String toString() { return Integer.toString(value); } public DynObject2 add(DynObject2 d) { Class c = d.getClass(); if(c==DynInteger2.class) { return new DynInteger2(value + ((DynInteger2)d).value); } else { return new DynString2(toString() + d.toString()); } } } ...and similar for DynString2 Way 3: public class DynObject3 { private enum ObjectType { Integer, String }; Object value; ObjectType type; public DynObject3(Integer v) { value = v; type = ObjectType.Integer; } public DynObject3(String v) { value = v; type = ObjectType.String; } @Override public String toString() { return value.toString(); } public DynObject3 add(DynObject3 d) { if(type==ObjectType.Integer && d.type==ObjectType.Integer) { return new DynObject3(Integer.valueOf(((Integer)value).intValue()+((Integer)value).intValue())); } else { return new DynObject3(value.toString()+d.value.toString()); } } } With the if-else logic I could use value.getClass()==Integer.class instead of storing the type but with more types I'd change this to use a switch statement and Java doesn't allow switch to use Classes. Anyway... My question is what is the best way to go about something thike this?

    Read the article

  • How to make an ambiguous call distinct in C++?

    - by jcyang
    void outputString(const string &ss) { cout << "outputString(const string& ) " + ss << endl; } void outputString(const string ss) { cout << "outputString(const string ) " + ss << endl; } int main(void) { //! outputString("ambigiousmethod"); const string constStr = "ambigiousmethod2"; //! outputString(constStr); } ///:~ How to make distinct call? EDIT: This piece of code could be compiled with g++ and msvc. thanks.

    Read the article

  • Using __str__ representation for printing objects in containers in Python

    - by BobDobbs
    I've noticed that when an instance with an overloaded str method is passed to the print() function as an argument, it prints as intended. However, when passing a container that contains one of those instances to print(), it uses the repr method instead. That is to say, print(x) displays the correct string representation of x, and print(x, y) works correctly, but print([x]) or print((x, y)) prints the repr representation instead. First off, why does this happen? Secondly, is there a way to correct that behavior of print() in this circumstance?

    Read the article

  • Constructor Overload Problem in C++ Inheritance

    - by metdos
    Here my code snippet: class Request { public: Request(void); ……….. } Request::Request(void) { qDebug()<<"Request: "<<"Hello World"; } class LoginRequest :public Request { public: LoginRequest(void); LoginRequest(QDomDocument); …………… } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(void) { qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World"; requestType=LOGIN; requestId=-1; } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(QDomDocument doc){ qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World with QDomDocument"; LoginRequest::LoginRequest(); xmlDoc_=doc; } When call constructor of Overrided LoginRequest LoginRequest *test=new LoginRequest(doc); I came up with this result: Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World with QDomDocument Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World Obviously both constructor of LoginRequest called REquest constructor. Is there any way to cape with this situation? I can construct another function that does the job I want to do and have both constructors call that function. But I wonder is there any solution?

    Read the article

  • Constructor Overload Problem in C++ Inherrentance

    - by metdos
    Here my code snippet: class Request { public: Request(void); ……….. } Request::Request(void) { qDebug()<<"Request: "<<"Hello World"; } class LoginRequest :public Request { public: LoginRequest(void); LoginRequest(QDomDocument); …………… } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(void) { qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World"; requestType=LOGIN; requestId=-1; } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(QDomDocument doc){ qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World with QDomDocument"; LoginRequest::LoginRequest(); xmlDoc_=doc; } When call constructor of Overrided LoginRequest LoginRequest *test=new LoginRequest(doc); I came up with this result: Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World with QDomDocument Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World Obviously both constructor of LoginRequest called REquest constructor. Is there any way to cape with this situation? I can construct another function that does the job I want to do and have both constructors call that function. But I wonder is there any solution?

    Read the article

  • Invoking a method overloaded where all arguments implement the same interface

    - by double07
    Hello, My starting point is the following: - I have a method, transform, which I overloaded to behave differently depending on the type of arguments that are passed in (see transform(A a1, A a2) and transform(A a1, B b) in my example below) - All these arguments implement the same interface, X I would like to apply that transform method on various objects all implementing the X interface. What I came up with was to implement transform(X x1, X x2), which checks for the instance of each object before applying the relevant variant of my transform. Though it works, the code seems ugly and I am also concerned of the performance overhead for evaluating these various instanceof and casting. Is that transform the best I can do in Java or is there a more elegant and/or efficient way of achieving the same behavior? Below is a trivial, working example printing out BA. I am looking for examples on how to improve that code. In my real code, I have naturally more implementations of 'transform' and none are trivial like below. public class A implements X { } public class B implements X { } interface X { } public A transform(A a1, A a2) { System.out.print("A"); return a2; } public A transform(A a1, B b) { System.out.print("B"); return a1; } // Isn't there something better than the code below??? public X transform(X x1, X x2) { if ((x1 instanceof A) && (x2 instanceof A)) { return transform((A) x1, (A) x2); } else if ((x1 instanceof A) && (x2 instanceof B)) { return transform((A) x1, (B) x2); } else { throw new RuntimeException("Transform not implemented for " + x1.getClass() + "," + x2.getClass()); } } @Test public void trivial() { X x1 = new A(); X x2 = new B(); X result = transform(x1, x2); transform(x1, result); }

    Read the article

  • Cant overload python socket.send

    - by ralu
    Code from socket import socket class PolySocket(socket): def __init__(self,*p): print "PolySocket init" socket.__init__(self,*p) def sendall(self,*p): print "PolySocket sendall" return socket.sendall(self,*p) def send(self,*p): print "PolySocket send" return socket.send(self,*p) def connect(self,*p): print "connecting..." socket.connect(self,*p) print "connected" HOST="stackoverflow.com" PORT=80 readbuffer="" s=PolySocket() s.connect((HOST, PORT)) s.send("a") s.sendall("a") Output: PolySocket init connecting... connected PolySocket sendall As we can see, send method is not overloaded.

    Read the article

  • [Netbeans 6.9] Java MethodOverloading error with double values

    - by Nimitips
    Here is a part of my code I'm having trouble with: ===Class Overload=== public class Overload { public void testOverLoadeds() { System.out.printf("Square of integer 7 is %d\n",square(7)); System.out.printf("Square of double 7.5 is %d\n",square(7.5)); }//..end testOverloadeds public int square(int intValue) { System.out. printf("\nCalled square with int argument: %d\n",intValue); return intValue * intValue; }//..end square int public double square(double doubleValue) { System.out.printf("\nCalled square with double argument: %d\n", doubleValue); return doubleValue * doubleValue; }//..end square double }//..end class overload ===Main=== public static void main(String[] args) { Overload methodOverload = new Overload(); methodOverload.testOverLoadeds(); } It compiles with no error, however when I try to run it the output is: Called square with int argument: 7 Square of integer 7 is 49 Exception in thread "main" java.util.IllegalFormatConversionException: d != java.lang.Double at java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifier.failConversion(Formatter.java:3999) at java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifier.printInteger(Formatter.java:2709) at java.util.Formatter$FormatSpecifier.print(Formatter.java:2661) at java.util.Formatter.format(Formatter.java:2433) at java.io.PrintStream.format(PrintStream.java:920) at java.io.PrintStream.printf(PrintStream.java:821) at methodoverload.Overload.square(Overload.java:19) at methodoverload.Overload.testOverLoadeds(Overload.java:8) at methodoverload.Main.main(Main.java:9) Called square with double argument:Java Result: 1 What am I doing wrong? I'm on Ubuntu 10.10, Netbeans 6.9. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why does the Scala compiler disallow overloaded methods with default arguments?

    - by soc
    While there might be valid cases where such method overloadings could become ambiguous, why does the compiler disallow code which is neither ambiguous at compile time nor at run time? Example: // This fails: def foo(a: String)(b: Int = 42) = a + b def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b // This fails, too. Even if there is no position in the argument list, // where the types are the same. def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b def foo(a: String)(b: String = "Foo") = a + b // This is OK: def foo(a: String)(b: Int) = a + b def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b // Even this is OK. def foo(a: Int)(b: Int) = a + b def foo(a: Int)(b: String = "Foo") = a + b val bar = foo(42)_ // This complains obviously ... Are there any reasons why these restrictions can't be loosened a bit? Especially when converting heavily overloaded Java code to Scala default arguments are a very important and it isn't nice to find out after replacing plenty of Java methods by one Scala methods that the spec/compiler imposes arbitrary restrictions.

    Read the article

  • Overload and hide methods in Java

    - by Marco
    Hi, i have an abstract class BaseClass with a public insert() method: public abstract class BaseClass { public void insert(Object object) { // Do something } } which is extended by many other classes. For some of those classes, however, the insert() method must have additional parameters, so that they instead of overriding it I overload the method of the base class with the parameters required, for example: public class SampleClass extends BaseClass { public void insert(Object object, Long param){ // Do Something } } Now, if i instantiate the SampleClass class, i have two insert() methods: SampleClass sampleClass = new SampleClass(); sampleClass.insert(Object object); sampleClass.insert(Object object, Long param); what i'd like to do is to hide the insert() method defined in the base class, so that just the overload would be visible: SampleClass sampleClass = new SampleClass(); sampleClass.insert(Object object, Long param); Could this be done in OOP?

    Read the article

  • MS SQL tuning tools for finding overload

    - by SkyFox
    I use MS SQL server as a DBMS for my very big corporate DB (with different financial data). And some times my system go down. I don't understand why. What programs/tools I can use for finding process/program/thread, that overload my SQL-server? Thanks for all answers!

    Read the article

  • Overload with different return type in java?

    - by nunos
    So, I am just starting Java and, even though I have looked in some question about it here at stackoverflow.com and elsewhere, haven't been able to find a straightforward answer to why isn't possible to overload a function just by changing the return type. Why is it so? Will that provably change in a future version of Java? By the way, just for reference, is this possible in C++? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Backward compatibility in dlls

    - by michaelleuzinger
    Hi I do have three dlls. a.dll - released many years ago b.dll - released not so many years c.dll - released shortly Each one contains the same function - unfortunatelly with different parameters. so I do have the following Methods aMethod(param1) aMethod(param1, param2) aMethod(param1, param2, param3) My Task is to make a new dll (or new dlls) wich is backward compatible. But as far as I've learned from Google there is no possibility to overload methods in a dll. Does any one have a tip how I can solve this problem elegantly? -- Michael

    Read the article

  • Detect if class has overloaded function fails on Comeau compiler

    - by Frank
    Hi Everyone, I'm trying to use SFINAE to detect if a class has an overloaded member function that takes a certain type. The code I have seems to work correctly in Visual Studio and GCC, but does not compile using the Comeau online compiler. Here is the code I'm using: #include <stdio.h> //Comeau doesnt' have boost, so define our own enable_if_c template<bool value> struct enable_if_c { typedef void type; }; template<> struct enable_if_c< false > {}; //Class that has the overloaded member function class TestClass { public: void Func(float value) { printf( "%f\n", value ); } void Func(int value) { printf( "%i\n", value ); } }; //Struct to detect if TestClass has an overloaded member function for type T template<typename T> struct HasFunc { template<typename U, void (TestClass::*)( U )> struct SFINAE {}; template<typename U> static char Test(SFINAE<U, &TestClass::Func>*); template<typename U> static int Test(...); static const bool Has = sizeof(Test<T>(0)) == sizeof(char); }; //Use enable_if_c to only allow the function call if TestClass has a valid overload for T template<typename T> typename enable_if_c<HasFunc<T>::Has>::type CallFunc(TestClass &test, T value) { test.Func( value ); } int main() { float value1 = 0.0f; int value2 = 0; TestClass testClass; CallFunc( testClass, value1 ); //Should call TestClass::Func( float ) CallFunc( testClass, value2 ); //Should call TestClass::Func( int ) } The error message is: no instance of function template "CallFunc" matches the argument list. It seems that HasFunc::Has is false for int and float when it should be true. Is this a bug in the Comeau compiler? Am I doing something that's not standard? And if so, what do I need to do to fix it?

    Read the article

  • Creating methods with infinite overloads ? (.NET)

    - by MarceloRamires
    In C# you can do this: foo = string.Format("{0} {1} {2} {3} ...", "aa", "bb", "cc" ...); This method Format() accepts infinite parameters, being the first one how the string should be formatted and the rest are values to be put in the string. Today I've come to a situation where I had to get a set of strings and test them, then I remembered this language functionality, but I had no clue. After a few unsuccessful web searches, I've realised it would be more prudent to just get an array, which didn't make me quite satisfied. Q: How do I make a function that accepts infinite parameters? And how do I use it ?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34  | Next Page >