Search Results

Search found 61651 results on 2467 pages for 'function object'.

Page 28/2467 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • Function currying in Javascript

    - by kerry
    Do you catch yourself doing something like this often? 1: Ajax.request('/my/url', {'myParam': paramVal}, function() { myCallback(paramVal); }); Creating a function which calls another function asynchronously is a bad idea because the value of paramVal may change before it is called.  Enter the curry function: 1: Function.prototype.curry = function(scope) { 2: var args = []; 3: for (var i=1, len = arguments.length; i < len; ++i) { 4: args.push(arguments[i]); 5: } 6: var m = this; 7: return function() { 8: m.apply(scope, args); 9: }; 10: } This function creates a wrapper around the function and ‘locks in’ the method parameters.  The first parameter is the scope of the function call (usually this or window).  Any remaining parameters will be passed to the method call.  Using the curry method the above call changes to: 1: Ajax.request('/my/url', {'myParam': paramVal}, myCallback.curry(window,paramVal)); Remember when passing objects to the curry method that the objects members may still change.

    Read the article

  • Ways to ensure unique instances of a class?

    - by Peanut
    I'm looking for different ways to ensure that each instance of a given class is a uniquely identifiable instance. For example, I have a Name class with the field name. Once I have a Name object with name initialised to John Smith I don't want to be able to instantiate a different Name object also with the name as John Smith, or if instantiation does take place I want a reference to the orginal object to be passed back rather than a new object. I'm aware that one way of doing this is to have a static factory that holds a Map of all the current Name objects and the factory checks that an object with John Smith as the name doesn't already exist before passing back a reference to a Name object. Another way I could think of off the top of my head is having a static Map in the Name class and when the constructor is called throwing an exception if the value passed in for name is already in use in another object, however I'm aware throwing exceptions in a constructor is generally a bad idea. Are there other ways of achieving this?

    Read the article

  • Compute if a function is pure

    - by Oni
    As per Wikipedia: In computer programming, a function may be described as pure if both these statements about the function hold: The function always evaluates the same result value given the same argument value(s). The function result value cannot depend on any hidden information or state that may change as program execution proceeds or between different executions of the program, nor can it depend on any external input from I/O devices. Evaluation of the result does not cause any semantically observable side effect or output, such as mutation of mutable objects or output to I/O devices. I am wondering if it is possible to write a function that compute if a function is pure or not. Example code in Javascript: function sum(a,b) { return a+b; } function say(x){ console.log(x); } isPure(sum) // True isPure(say) // False

    Read the article

  • Should main method be only consists of object creations and method calls?

    - by crucified soul
    A friend of mine told me that, the best practice is class containing main method should be named Main and only contains main method. Also main method should only parse inputs, create other objects and call other methods. The Main class and main method shouldn't do anything else. Basically what he is saying that class containing main method should be like: public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { //parse inputs //create other objects //call methods } } Is it the best practice?

    Read the article

  • How can I explain object-oriented programming to someone who's only coded in Fortran 77?

    - by Zonedabone
    My mother did her college thesis in Fortran, and now (over a decade later) needs to learn c++ for fluids simulations. She is able to understand all of the procedural programming, but no matter how hard I try to explain objects to her, it doesn't stick. (I do a lot of work with Java, so I know how objects work) I think I might be explaining it in too high-level ways, so it isn't really making sense to someone who's never worked with them at all and grew up in the age of purely procedural programming. Is there any simple way I can explain them to her that will help her understand?

    Read the article

  • Print all values in a value object

    - by SKDev
    I have to debug an issue which requires me to print all the values of a Value Object that is returned by a web service call. The Value object is a complex object in the sense, it has another object as its member which in turn has another object. Printing all the values by using get methods is cumbersome. So was wondering if there is a way to break down the value object by any way to get to a primitive level like String or int or Date and print them all using one API? I had a look at the below question but my prob is that i don't have access to the source code of the value object. The sources are in obfuscated jar. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2413001/how-to-print-values-of-an-object-in-java

    Read the article

  • Recommended design pattern for object with optional and modifiable attributtes? [on hold]

    - by Ikuzen
    I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

    Read the article

  • Implement DDD and drawing the line between the an Entity and value object

    - by William
    I am implementing an EMR project. I would like to apply a DDD based approach to the problem. I have identified the "Patient" as being the core object of the system. I understand Patient would be an entity object as well as an aggregrate. I have also identified that every patient must have a "Doctor" and "Medical Records". The medical records would encompass Labs, XRays, Encounter.... I believe those would be entity objects as well. Let us take a Encounter for example. My implementation currently has a few fields as "String" properties, which are the complaint, assessment and plan. The other items necessary for an Encounter are vitals. I have implemented vitals as a value object. Given that it will be necessary to retrieve vitals without haveing to retrieve each Encounter then do vitals become part of the Encounter aggregate and patient aggregrate. I am assuming I could view the Encounter as an aggregrate, because other items are spwaned from the Encounter like prescriptions, lab orders, xrays. Is approach right that I am taking in identifying my entities and aggregates. In the case of vitals, they are specific to a patient, but outside of that there is not any other identity associated with them.

    Read the article

  • Getting an Error Trying to Create an Object in Python

    - by Nick Rogers
    I am trying to create an object from a class in python but I am getting an Error, "e_tank = EnemyTank() TypeError: 'Group' object is not callable" I am not sure what this means, I have tried Google but I couldn't get a clear answer on what is causing this error. Does anyone understand why I am unable to create an object from my EnemyTank Class? Here is my code: #Image Variables bg = 'bg.jpg' bunk = 'bunker.png' enemytank = 'enemy-tank.png' #Import Pygame Modules import pygame, sys from pygame.locals import * #Initializing the Screen pygame.init() screen = pygame.display.set_mode((640,360), 0, 32) background = pygame.image.load(bg).convert() bunker_x, bunker_y = (160,0) class EnemyTank(pygame.sprite.Sprite): e_tank = pygame.image.load(enemytank).convert_alpha() def __init__(self, startpos): pygame.sprite.Sprite.__init__(self, self.groups) self.pos = startpos self.image = EnemyTank.image self.rect = self.image.get_rect() def update(self): self.rect.center = self.pos class Bunker(pygame.sprite.Sprite): bunker = pygame.image.load(bunk).convert_alpha() def __init__(self, startpos): pygame.spriter.Sprite.__init__(self, self.groups) self.pos = startpos self.image = Bunker.image self.rect = self.image.get_rect() def getCollisionObjects(self, EnemyTank): if (EnemyTank not in self._allgroup, False): return False self._allgroup.remove(EnemyTank) result = pygame.sprite.spritecollide(EnemyTank, self._allgroup, False) self._allgroup.add(EnemyTank) def update(self): self.rect.center = self.pos #Setting Up The Animation x = 0 clock = pygame.time.Clock() speed = 250 allgroup = pygame.sprite.Group() EnemyTank = allgroup Bunker = allgroup e_tank = EnemyTank() bunker = Bunker()5 #Main Loop while True: for event in pygame.event.get(): if event.type == QUIT: pygame.quit() sys.exit() screen.blit(background, (0,0)) screen.blit(bunker, (bunker_x, bunker_y)) screen.blit(e_tank, (x, 0)) pygame.display.flip() #Animation milli = clock.tick() seconds = milli/1000. dm = seconds*speed x += dm if x>640: x=0 #Update the Screen pygame.display.update()

    Read the article

  • Object.Watch with disabled attribute

    - by Benjamin Fleming
    <html> <head> <script type="text/javascript"> window.onload = function() { var btn = document.getElementById("button"); var tog = document.getElementById("toggle"); tog.onclick = function() { if(btn.disabled) { btn.disabled = false; } else { btn.disabled = true; } }; //btn.watch("disabled", function(prop, val, newval) { }); }; </script> </head> <body> <input type="button" value="Button" id="button" /> <input type="button" value="Toggle" id="toggle" /> </body> </html> If you test this code, the Toggle button will successfully enable and disable the other button. However, un-commenting the btn.watch() line will somehow always set the disabled tag to true. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • javascript using 'this' in global object

    - by Marco Demaio
    What does 'this' keyword refer to when used in gloabl object? Let's say for instance we have: var SomeGlobalObject = { rendered: true, show: function() { /* I should use 'SomeGlobalObject.rendered' below, otherwise it won't work when called from event scope. But it works when called from timer scope!! How can this be? */ if(this.rendered) alert("hello"); } } Now if we call in an inline script in the HTML page: SomeGlobalObject.show(); window.setTimeout("Msg.show()", 1000); everything work ok. But if we do something like AppendEvent(window, 'load', Msg.show); we get an error because this.rendered is undefined when called from the event scope. Do you know why this happens? Could you explain then if there is another smarter way to do this without having to rewrite every time "SomeGlobalObject.someProperty" into the the SomeGlobalObject code? Thanks! AppendEvent is just a simple cross-browser function to append an event, code below, but it does not matter in order to answer the above questions. function AppendEvent(html_element, event_name, event_function) { if(html_element.attachEvent) //IE return html_element.attachEvent("on" + event_name, event_function); else if(html_element.addEventListener) //FF html_element.addEventListener(event_name, event_function, false); }

    Read the article

  • How to create a variadic (with variable length argument list) function wrapper in JavaScript

    - by U-D13
    The intention is to build a wrapper to provide a consistent method of calling native functions with variable arity on various script hosts - so that the script could be executed in a browser as well as in the Windows Script Host or other script engines. I am aware of 3 methods of which each one has its own drawbacks. eval() method: function wrapper () { var str = ''; for (var i=0; i<arguments.lenght; i++) str += (str ?', ':'') + ',arguments['+i+']'; return eval('[native_function] ('+str+')'); } switch() method: function wrapper () { switch (arguments.lenght) { case 0: return [native_function] (arguments[0]); break; case 1: return [native_function] (arguments[0], arguments[1]); break; ... case n: return [native_function] (arguments[0], arguments[1], ... arguments[n]); } } apply() method: function wrapper () { return [native_function].apply([native_function_namespace], arguments); } What's wrong with them you ask? Well, shall we delve into all the reasons why eval() is evil? And also all the string concatenation... Not a solution to be labeled "elegant". One can never know the maximum n and thus how many cases to prepare. This also would strech the script to immense proportions and sin against the holy DRY principle. The script could get executed on older (pre- JavaScript 1.3 / ECMA-262-3) engines that don't support the apply() method. Now the question part: is there any another solution out there?

    Read the article

  • Generic function pointers in C

    - by Lucas
    I have a function which takes a block of data and the size of the block and a function pointer as argument. Then it iterates over the data and performes a calculation on each element of the data block. The following is the essential outline of what I am doing: int myfunction(int* data, int size, int (*functionAsPointer)(int)){ //walking through the data and calculating something for (int n = 0; n < size; n++){ data[n] = (*function)(data[n]); } } The functions I am passing as arguments look something like this: int mycalculation(int input){ //doing some math with input //... return input; } This is working well, but now I need to pass an additional variable to my functionpointer. Something along the lines int mynewcalculation(int input, int someVariable){ //e.g. input = input * someVariable; //... return input; } Is there an elegant way to achieve this and at the same time keeping my overall design idea?

    Read the article

  • Concatenate javascript to a string/parameter in a function

    - by Gerry S
    I am using kottke.org's old JAH example to return some html to a div in a webpage. The code works fine if I use static text. However I need to get the value of a field to add to the string that is getting passed as the parameter to the function. var xmlhttp=false; /*@cc_on @*/ /*@if (@_jscript_version >= 5) try { xmlhttp = new ActiveXObject("Msxml2.XMLHTTP"); } catch (e) { try { xmlhttp = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP"); } catch (E) { xmlhttp = false; } } @end @*/ if (!xmlhttp && typeof XMLHttpRequest != 'undefined') { xmlhttp = new XMLHttpRequest(); } function getMyHTML(serverPage, objID) { var obj = document.getElementById(objID); xmlhttp.open("GET", serverPage); xmlhttp.onreadystatechange = function() { if (xmlhttp.readyState == 4 && xmlhttp.status == 200) { obj.innerHTML = xmlhttp.responseText; } } xmlhttp.send(null); } And on the page.... <a href="javascript://" onclick="getMyHTML('/WStepsDE?open&category="+document.getElementById('Employee').value;+"','goeshere')">Change it!</a></p> <div id ="goeshere">Hey, this text will be replaced.</div> It fails (with the help of Firebug) with the getMyHTML call where I try to get the value of Employee to include in the first parameter. The error is "Unterminated string literal". Thx in advance for your help.

    Read the article

  • How do I repass a function pointer in C++

    - by fneep
    Firstly, I am very new to function pointers and their horrible syntax so play nice. I am writing a method to filter all pixels in my bitmap based on a function that I pass in. I have written the method to dereference it and call it in the pixel buffer but I also need a wrapper method in my bitmap class that takes the function pointer and passes it on. How do I do it? What is the syntax? I'm a little stumped. Here is my code with all the irrelevant bits stripped out and files combined (read all variables initialized filled etc.). struct sColour { unsigned char r, g, b, a; }; class cPixelBuffer { private: sColour* _pixels; int _width; int _height; int _buffersize; public: void FilterAll(sColour (*FilterFunc)(sColour)); }; void cPixelBuffer::FilterAll(sColour (*FilterFunc)(sColour)) { // fast fast fast hacky FAST for (int i = 0; i < _buffersize; i++) { _pixels[i] = (*FilterFunc)(_pixels[i]); } } class cBitmap { private: cPixelBuffer* _pixels; public: inline void cBitmap::Filter(sColour (*FilterFunc)(sColour)) { //HERE!! } };

    Read the article

  • jQuery add() function and the context of jQuery objects

    - by patrick
    Given the following HTML example... <div id='div1'>div one</div> <div id='div2'>div two</div> ...I found that the following jQuery code... $('#div1').click(function() { var $d = $(this); // Using 'this' instead of '#div1' $d.add('#div2').remove(); }); ...would not add #div2 to the set referenced by $d, but this code... $('#div1').click(function() { var $d = $('#div1'); // Using '#div1' instead of 'this' $d.add('#div2').remove(); }); ...successfully added #div2. Upon consulting firebug, I found that using $(this) gave the jQuery object a context of #div1, but doing $('#div1') gave the object a context of document. Given this information I tried... var $d = $(this, document); ...and the add() function worked as expected. So here's the question. Could someone please explain to my why a different context is assigned when using $(this) vs $('#div1')? Thanks much!

    Read the article

  • Save Jquery Object without losing its binding

    - by Ahmad Satiri
    Hi I have object created using jquery where each object has it's own binding. function closeButton(oAny){ var div = create_div(); $(div).attr("id","btn_"+$(oAny).attr("id")); var my_parent = this; $(div).html("<img src='"+ my_parent._base_url +"/assets/images/close.gif'>"); $(div).click(function(){ alert("do some action here"); }); return div; } var MyObject = WindowObject(); var btn = closeButton(MyObject); $(myobject).append(btn); $("body").append(myobject); //at this point button will work as i expected //save to array for future use ObjectCollections[0] = myobject; //remove $(myobject).remove(); $(body).append(ObjectCollections[0]); // at this point button will not work For the first time i can show my object and close button is working as i expected. But if i save myobject to any variable for future use. It will loose its binding. Anybody ever try to do this ? Is there any work around ? or It is definitely a bad idea ? .And thanks for answering my question.

    Read the article

  • function pointers callbacks C

    - by robUK
    Hello, I have started to review callbacks. I found this link: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/142789/what-is-a-callback-in-c-and-how-are-they-implemented which has a good example of callback which is very similar to what we use at work. However, I have tried to get it to work, but I have many errors. #include <stdio.h> /* Is the actual function pointer? */ typedef void (*event_cb_t)(const struct event *evt, void *user_data); struct event_cb { event_cb_t cb; void *data; }; int event_cb_register(event_ct_t cb, void *user_data); static void my_event_cb(const struct event *evt, void *data) { /* do some stuff */ } int main(void) { event_cb_register(my_event_cb, &my_custom_data); struct event_cb *callback; callback->cb(event, callback->data); return 0; } I know that callback use function pointers to store an address of a function. But there is a few things that I find I don't understand. That is what is meet by "registering the callback" and "event dispatcher"? Many thanks for any advice,

    Read the article

  • Doubts in executable and relocatable object file

    - by bala1486
    Hello, I have written a simple Hello World program. #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf("Hello World"); return 0; } I wanted to understand how the relocatable object file and executable file look like. The object file corresponding to the main function is 0000000000000000 <main>: 0: 55 push %rbp 1: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp 4: bf 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%edi 9: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax e: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 13 <main+0x13> 13: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax 18: c9 leaveq 19: c3 retq Here the function call for printf is callq 13. One thing i don't understand is why is it 13. That means call the function at adresss 13, right??. 13 has the next instruction, right?? Please explain me what does this mean?? The executable code corresponding to main is 00000000004004cc <main>: 4004cc: 55 push %rbp 4004cd: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp 4004d0: bf dc 05 40 00 mov $0x4005dc,%edi 4004d5: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax 4004da: e8 e1 fe ff ff callq 4003c0 <printf@plt> 4004df: b8 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%eax 4004e4: c9 leaveq 4004e5: c3 retq Here it is callq 4003c0. But the binary instruction is e8 e1 fe ff ff. There is nothing that corresponds to 4003c0. What is that i am getting wrong? Thanks. Bala

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to restrict instantiation of an object to only one other (parent) object in VB.NET?

    - by Casey
    VB 2008 .NET 3.5 Suppose we have two classes, Order and OrderItem, that represent some type of online ordering system. OrderItem represents a single line item in an Order. One Order can contain multiple OrderItems, in the form of a List(of OrderItem). Public Class Order Public Property MyOrderItems() as List(of OrderItem) End Property End Class It makes sense that an OrderItem should not exist without an Order. In other words, an OrderItem class should not be able to be instantiated on its own, it should be dependent on an Order class to contain it and instantiate it. However, the OrderItem should be public in scope so that it's properties are accessible to other objects. So, the requirements for OrderItem are: Can not be instantiated as a stand alone object; requires Order to exist. Must be public so that any other object can access it's properties/methods through the Order object. e.g. Order.OrderItem(0).ProductID. OrderItem should be able to be passed to other subs/functions that will operate on it. How can I achieve these goals? Is there a better approach?

    Read the article

  • Adding array to an object breaks the array

    - by DisgruntledGoat
    I have an array like this (output from print_r): Array ( [price] => 700.00 [room_prices] => Array ( [0] => [1] => [2] => [3] => [4] => ) [bills] => Array ( [0] => Gas ) ) I'm running a custom function to convert it to an object. Only the top-level should be converted, the sub-arrays should stay as arrays. The output comes out like this: stdClass Object ( [price] => 700.00 [room_prices] => Array ( [0] => Array ) [bills] => Array ( [0] => Array ) ) Here is my conversion function. All it does is set the value of each array member to an object: function array_to_object( $arr ) { $obj = new stdClass; if ( count($arr) == 0 ) return $obj; foreach ( $arr as $k=>$v ) $obj->$k = $v; return $obj; } I can't figure this out for the life of me!

    Read the article

  • object / class methods serialized as well?

    - by Mat90
    I know that data members are saved to disk but I was wondering whether object's/class' methods are saved in binary format as well? Because I found some contradictionary info, for example: Ivor Horton: "Class objects contain function members as well as data members, and all the members, both data and functions, have access specifiers; therefore, to record objects in an external file, the information written to the file must contain complete specifications of all the class structures involved." and: Are methods also serialized along with the data members in .NET? Thus: are method's assembly instructions (opcodes and operands) stored to disk as well? Just like a precompiled LIB or DLL? During the DOS ages I used assembly so now and then. As far as I remember from Delphi and the following site (answer by dan04): Are methods also serialized along with the data members in .NET? sizeof(<OBJECT or CLASS>) will give the size of all data members together (no methods/procedures). Also a nice C example is given there with data and members declared in one class/struct but at runtime these methods are separate procedures acting on a struct of data. However, I think that later class/object implementations like Pascal's VMT may be different in memory.

    Read the article

  • remove duplicated array values in a function PHP

    - by Deividas Juškevicius
    I read all topics related to this question in stackoverflow and whole internet and cant find working sollution... Each owner has his item and when someone buy his item, owner gets an confirmation email, but when in cart is few same owner items, he gets several same email letters, so I need to remove dublicated array entries. I have tried to use DISTINCT and array_uniques functions but no luck. Any advices? I have an array and function to send mail.. function email($mail_array) { foreach(array_unique($mail_array) as $field => $value) { $result = mysql_query("select email from users where $field='$value'"); $row = mysql_fetch_array($result); $maail = mysql_real_escape_string($row['email']); $email_to = "".$maail.""; // rest of mail formatting code // create email headers $headers = 'From: '.$email_from."\r\n" . 'Reply-To: '.$email_from."\r\n" . 'X-Mailer: PHP/' . phpversion(); @mail($email_to, $email_subject, $email_message, $headers); } for ($i = 0; $i < $max; $i++) { $pid = $_SESSION['cart'][$i]['productid']; $owner = get_owner($pid); $mail_array = array( 'name' => $owner ); email($mail_array) //call function to send mail }

    Read the article

  • Firefox extension js object initialization

    - by Michael
    Note: this is about Firefox extension, not a js general question. In Firefox extension project I need my javascript object to be initialized just once per Firefox window. Otherwise each time I open my window a new timers will be engaged, new properties will be used, so everything will start from scratch. hope example below will demystify my question :) var StupidExtension { statusBarValue: "Not Initialized Yet", startup: function () { ... // Show statusBarValue in Status Bar Panel }, initTimerToRetrieveStatusBarValueFromNetwork: function () { ... } } so each time you hit Ctrl+N a new window you will see "Not Initialized Yet" and then new timer will be fired, so after some time it retrieve data from network you will see value also on second window and so on. Ideally would be to have just a single timer function running and updating all status bar panels in all Firefox windows. Of course I can do some caching, like saving the value in prefs or some other storage, then show it from there. But I feel like this is artificial. So the question will be is there "native" technique of making static some parts of the object among all Firefox window instances?

    Read the article

  • PHP Function parameters - problem with var not being set

    - by Marty
    So I am obviously not a very good programmer. I have written this small function: function dispAdjuggler($atts) { extract(shortcode_atts(array( 'slot' => '' ), $atts)); $adspot = ''; $adtype = ''; // Get blog # we're on global $blog_id; switch ($blog_id) { case 1: // root blog HOME page if (is_home()) { switch ($slot) { case 'top_leaderboard': $adspot = '855525'; $adtype = '608934'; break; case 'right_halfpage': $adspot = '855216'; $adtype = '855220'; break; case 'right_med-rectangle': $adspot = '858222'; $adtype = '613526'; break; default: throw new Exception("Ad slot is not defined"); break; } When I reference the function on a page like so: <?php dispAdjuggler("top_leaderboard"); ?> The switch is throwing the default exception. What am I doing wrong here? Thanks!!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >