Search Results

Search found 32025 results on 1281 pages for 'crm government public sec'.

Page 286/1281 | < Previous Page | 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293  | Next Page >

  • Static vs Non Static constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • C# - default parameter values from previous parameter

    - by Sagar R. Kothari
    namespace HelloConsole { public class BOX { double height, length, breadth; public BOX() { } // here, I wish to pass 'h' to remaining parameters if not passed // FOLLOWING Gives compilation error. public BOX (double h, double l = h, double b = h) { Console.WriteLine ("Constructor with default parameters"); height = h; length = l; breadth = b; } } } // // BOX a = new BOX(); // default constructor. all okay here. // BOX b = new BOX(10,20,30); // all parameter passed. all okay here. // BOX c = new BOX(10); // Here, I want = length=10, breadth=10,height=10; // BOX d = new BOX(10,20); // Here, I want = length=10, breadth=20,height=10; Question is : 'To achieve above, Is 'constructor overloading' (as follows) is the only option? public BOX(double h) { height = length = breadth = h; } public BOX(double h, double l) { height = breadth = h; length = l; }

    Read the article

  • Comparing two Objects which implement the same interface for equality / equivalence - Design help

    - by gav
    Hi All, I have an interface and two objects implementing that interface, massively simplied; public interface MyInterface { public int getId(); public int getName(); ... } public class A implements MyInterface { ... } public class B implements MyInterface { ... } We are migrating from using one implementation to the other but I need to check that the objects of type B that are generated are equivalent to those of type A. Specifically I mean that for all of the interface methods an object of Type A and Type B will return the same value (I'm just checking my code for generating this objects is correct). How would you go about this? Map<String, MyInterface> oldGeneratedObjects = getOldGeneratedObjects(); Map<String, MyInterface> newGeneratedObjects = getNewGeneratedObjects(); // TODO: Establish that for each Key the Values in the two maps return equivalent values. I'm looking for good coding practices and style here. I appreciate that I could just iterate through one key set pulling out both objects which should be equivalent and then just call all the methods and compare, I'm just thinking there may be a cleaner, more extensible way and I'm interested to learn what options there might be. Would it be appropriate / possible / advised to override equals or implement Comparable? Thanks in advance, Gavin

    Read the article

  • Custom button with property as StaticResource

    - by alin
    I am trying to achieve the following thing: use an svg image into a custom button. In order to do this I created a Custom button: public class MainButton : Button { static MainButton() { DefaultStyleKeyProperty.OverrideMetadata(typeof(MainButton), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(typeof(MainButton))); } public string Text { get { return (string)GetValue(TextProperty); } set { SetValue(TextProperty, value); } } public static readonly DependencyProperty TextProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("Text", typeof(string), typeof(MainButton), new UIPropertyMetadata("")); public object Image { get { return (object)GetValue(ImageProperty); } set { SetValue(ImageProperty, value); } } public static readonly DependencyProperty ImageProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("Image", typeof(object), typeof(MainButton), new UIPropertyMetadata("")); } I took a svg file, opened it in inkscape and saved it as xaml file. I opened Themes.xaml and added the created xaml image as a ControlTemplate And the button style is: Style TargetType="{x:Type local:MainButton}" <StackPanel Canvas.Top="12" Canvas.Left="0" Canvas.ZIndex="2" Width="80"> <ContentControl x:Name="Img" Template="{StaticResource Home}" /> </StackPanel> <StackPanel x:Name="spText" Canvas.Top="45" Canvas.Left="1" Canvas.ZIndex="1" Width="80"> <TextBlock x:Name="Txt" Text="{Binding Path=(local:MainButton.Text), RelativeSource ={RelativeSource FindAncestor, AncestorType ={x:Type Button}}}" VerticalAlignment="Center" HorizontalAlignment="Center" Foreground="White" FontSize="14"/> </StackPanel> ... As you can see I have hardcoded the StaticResource name I want to be able to have a binding with property Image on this Template, something like So that I can set the Image property of the button with the name of the StaticResource I want. For example, having beside "Home" image, another one "Back" I would have two buttons in MainWindow declared like this: Any advice is kindly taken. Thank you for your time.

    Read the article

  • dynamic class property $$value in php

    - by cellis
    How can i reference a class property knowing only a string? class Foo { public $bar; public function TestFoobar() { $this->foobar('bar'); } public function foobar($string) { echo $this->$$string; //doesn't work } } what is the correct way to eval the string?

    Read the article

  • Was delegates static by default?

    - by Sri Kumar
    Hello All, I was just trying to understand delegates using the following code. public class delegatesEx { public delegate int Mydelegate(int first, int second); public int add(int first, int second) { return first + second; } public int sub(int first, int second) { return first - second; } } Here is my main method Console.WriteLine("******** Delegates ************"); delegatesEx.Mydelegate myAddDelegates = new delegatesEx.Mydelegate(new delegatesEx().add); int addRes = myAddDelegates(3, 2); Console.WriteLine("Add :" + addRes); delegatesEx.Mydelegate mySubDelegates = new delegatesEx.Mydelegate(new delegatesEx().sub); int subRes = mySubDelegates(3, 2); Console.WriteLine("Sub :" + subRes); I didn't declare delegate to be static but i was able to access it using the Class name. How is it possible?

    Read the article

  • WPF - Two way binding use a user control...binding to object, not an element!

    - by Scott
    I created an object with a simple property with a default value. I then created a user control that has a text box in it. I set the datacontext of the user control to the object. The text box correctly shows the properties default value but I can't seem to update the property value when the user changes the text box value. I created a simple project to illustrate my code. Thanks for the help!! public partial class UserControl1 : UserControl { public UserControl1() { InitializeComponent(); } private string _titleValue; public string TitleValue { get { return _titleValue; } set { _titleValue = value; textBox1.Text = _titleValue; } } public static readonly DependencyProperty TitleValueProperty = DependencyProperty.Register( "TitleValue", typeof(string), typeof(UserControl1), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(new PropertyChangedCallback(titleUpdated)) ); //Don't think I should need to do this!!! private static void titleUpdated(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e) { ((UserControl1)d).TitleValue = (string)e.NewValue; } } <UserControl x:Class="WpfApplication1.UserControl1" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:mc="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:d="http://schemas.microsoft.com/expression/blend/2008" mc:Ignorable="d" d:DesignHeight="300" d:DesignWidth="300"> <Grid> <TextBox Height="23" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="94,97,0,0" Name="textBox1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="120" Text="{Binding Path=TitleValue, Mode=TwoWay}"/> </Grid> </UserControl> public partial class MainWindow : Window { public MainWindow() { InitializeComponent(); var dummy = new DummyObject("This is my title."); userControl11.DataContext = dummy; } private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { MessageBox.Show("The value is: " + ((DummyObject)userControl11.DataContext).Title); } } <Window x:Class="WpfApplication1.MainWindow" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" Title="MainWindow" Height="350" Width="525" xmlns:my="clr-namespace:WpfApplication1"> <Grid> <my:UserControl1 HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="95,44,0,0" x:Name="userControl11" VerticalAlignment="Top" Height="191" Width="293" TitleValue="{Binding Path=Title, Mode=TwoWay}"/> <Button Content="Check Value" Height="23" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="20,12,0,0" Name="button1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="75" Click="button1_Click" /> </Grid> </Window>

    Read the article

  • How to return a property name when comparing two properties at class-level

    - by CodeMonkey
    Hi I have implemented an 'EqualTo' Validation Attribute, that compares two Properties of an object, during ModelBinding in ASP.NET MVC 2. The problem I have is not with it not working, because it does work. The problem is, when I do my request - which is an ajax request - I get back errors to my front-end, where it sets a class on the input fields to indicate invalid input. What it does is iterate through a list of Errors (in a JsonResult), and set a class. This is all dandy. But the ValidationAtrribute I am having trouble with is set at a Class-level, i.e., it's not like other ValidationAttributes where you set something like "[Required]" or something like that. [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class, AllowMultiple=true, Inherited=false)] public class EqualToAttribute : ValidationAttribute { public String SourceProperty { get; set; } public String MatchProperty { get; set; } public EqualToAttribute(string source, string match) { SourceProperty = source; MatchProperty = match; } public override Boolean IsValid(Object value) { Type objectType = value.GetType(); PropertyInfo[] properties = objectType.GetProperties(); object sourceValue = new object(); object matchValue = new object(); Type sourceType = null; Type matchType = null; int counter = 0; foreach (PropertyInfo propertyInfo in properties) { if (propertyInfo.Name == SourceProperty || propertyInfo.Name == MatchProperty) { if (counter == 0) { sourceValue = propertyInfo.GetValue(value, null); sourceType = propertyInfo.GetValue(value, null).GetType(); } if (counter == 1) { matchValue = propertyInfo.GetValue(value, null); matchType = propertyInfo.GetValue(value, null).GetType(); } counter++; if (counter == 2) { break; } } } if (sourceType != null && matchType != null) { return sourceValue.ToString().Equals(matchValue.ToString()); //return Convert.ChangeType(sourceValue, sourceType) == Convert.ChangeType(matchValue, matchType); } return false; } private object _typeId = new object(); public override object TypeId { get { return this._typeId; } } } Now this code works, except for the fact that the validation process does not return which Property failed. And I simply can't figure out how to make it return one of the two. In reality I don't care which one it returns.. because both are failing.. Do you have an idea how to make it return the/or both Property/Properties that is/are failing.

    Read the article

  • what is the best way to have a Generic Comparer

    - by oo
    I have a lot of comparer classes where the class being compared is simply checking the name property of the object and doing a string compare. For example: public class ExerciseSorter : IComparer<Exercise> { public int Compare(Exercise x, Exercise y) { return String.Compare(x.Name, y.Name); } } public class CarSorter : IComparer<Car> { public int Compare(Car x, Car y) { return String.Compare(x.Name, y.Name); } } what is the best way to have this code generic so i dont need to write redundant code over and over again.

    Read the article

  • Programmatically changing code files

    - by Carra
    I'm changing our webservices to an async model. And for that I have to change over a hundred methods. Doing it manually is one (unappealing) option. Is there no way to programmatically parse & change multiple functions/code files? Example: [Webmethod] public void MyWebservice (string parameter1, string parameter2, string parameter3) { //Logic here } And change this to: public void InternalMyWebservice (string parameter1, string parameter2, string parameter3, AsyncCallback callback) { //Logic here } [Webmethod] public void BeginMyWebservice (string parameter1, string parameter2, string parameter3, AsyncCallback callback, object asyncState) { //Queue InternalMyWebservice in a threadpool } public void EndMyWebservice(IAsyncResult asyncResult) { //Set return values } It's basically the same thing I have to do for each webservice. Change the name to "InternalX", add a parameter and create the begin & end method.

    Read the article

  • Java downcasting dilemma

    - by Shades88
    please have a look at this code here. class Vehicle { public void printSound() { System.out.print("vehicle"); } } class Car extends Vehicle { public void printSound() { System.out.print("car"); } } class Bike extends Vehicle{ public void printSound() { System.out.print("bike"); } } public class Test { public static void main(String[] args) { Vehicle v = new Car(); Bike b = (Bike)v; v.printSound(); b.printSound(); Object myObj = new String[]{"one", "two", "three"}; for (String s : (String[])myObj) System.out.print(s + "."); } } Executing this code will give ClassCastException saying inheritance.Car cannot be cast to inheritance.Bike. Now look at the line Object myObj = new String[]{"one", "two", "three"};. This line is same as Vehicle v = new Car(); right? In both lines we are assigning sub class object to super class reference variable. But downcasting String[]myObj is allowed but (Bike)v is not. Please help me understand what is going on around here.

    Read the article

  • A c# Generics question involving Controllers and Repositories

    - by UpTheCreek
    I have a base repository class which contains all the common repository methods (as generic): public abstract class BaseRepository<T, IdType> : IBaseRepository<T, IdType> My repositories from this base e.g.: public class UserRepository : BaseRepository<User, int>, IUserRepository I also have a base controller class containing common actions, and inherit from this in controllers. The repository is injected into this by DI. E.g. public class UserController : BaseController<User> { private readonly IUserRepository userRepository; public UserController (IUserRepository userRepository) { this.userRepository= userRepository; } My question is this: The base controller needs to be able to access the repository methods that are defined in the base repository. However I'm passing in via DI a different repository type for each controller (even though they all inherrit from the base repository). How can the base controller somehow access the repository that is passed in (regardless of what type it is), so that it can access the common base methods?

    Read the article

  • flash as3, Error #1009

    - by smerels
    I'm making a website that exist out of linked pages. All the pages are on the time line and all the code is in an as3 file. The first page with links works but if I want to place a link on the second frame I get the 1009 error Cannot access a property or method of a null object reference. Because the link doesn't exist on the first frame. This is my code. package { import flash.display.MovieClip; import flash.events.MouseEvent; public class Honger extends MovieClip { public function Honger():void { weten.buttonMode = true; weten.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onClickWeten); spelen.buttonMode = true; spelen.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onClickSpelen); antwoorden.buttonMode = true; antwoorden.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onClickAntwoorden); } public function onClickWeten(e:MouseEvent):void { this.gotoAndStop("vragen"); } public function onClickSpelen(e:MouseEvent):void{ this.gotoAndStop("spel"); } public function onClickAntwoorden(e:MouseEvent):void{ this.gotoAndStop("sp"); } } } Does anyone know how to solve this problem within the code?

    Read the article

  • Web API Getting Http 500 error : Issue Solved See Below

    - by Joe Grasso
    Here is my MVC Controller and everything is fine: private UnitOfWork UOW; public InventoryController() { UOW = new UnitOfWork(); } // GET: /Inventory/ public ActionResult Index() { var products = UOW.ProductRepository.GetAll().ToList(); return View(products); } Same method call in API Controller gives me an Http 500 Error: private UnitOfWork _unitOfWork; public TestController() { _unitOfWork = new UnitOfWork(); } public IEnumerable<Product> Get() { var products = _unitOfWork.ProductRepository.GetAll().ToList(); return products; } Debugging shows that indeed there is data being returned in both controllers' UOW calls. I then added a customer configuration in Global: public static void CustomizeConfig(HttpConfiguration config) { config.Formatters.Remove(config.Formatters.XmlFormatter); var json = config.Formatters.JsonFormatter; json.SerializerSettings.ContractResolver = new CamelCasePropertyNamesContractResolver(); } I am still receiving an Http 500 in API Controller ONLY and at a loss as to why. Any ideas? UPDATE: It appears using lazy loading caused the problem. When I set the associated properties to NON-VIRTUAL the Test API provided the necessary JSON string. However, whereas before I had the Vendor class included, I only have VendorId. I really wanted to included the associated classes. Any ideas? I know there are alot of smart people out there. Anyone?

    Read the article

  • why make said no rule to make target

    - by guilin ??
    Isn't Makefile syntax is target: require_files cmd... Why I got this problem? Makefile MXMLC = /opt/flex/bin/mxmlc MXMLC_RELEASE = $(MXMLC) -debug=false -compiler.optimize=true release: bin-release/Wrapper.swf, bin-release/Application.swf bin-release/Application.swf: src/**/*.as, lib/*.swc $(MXMLC_RELEASE) -output bin-release/Application.swf src/Application.as @@-rm ../server/public/game/Application.swf $(CP) bin-release/Application.swf ../server/public/game/Application.swf bin-release/Wrapper.swf: src/*.as, src/engine/**/*.as, lib/*.swc $(MXMLC_RELEASE) -output bin-release/Wrapper.swf src/Wrapper.as @@-rm ../server/public/game/Wrapper.swf $(CP) bin-release/Wrapper.swf ../server/public/game/Wrapper.swf $: make bin-release/Application.swf ~/workspace/project/src/flash [2]19:20 make: * No rule to make target src/constant/*.as,', needed bybin-release/Application.swf'. Stop.

    Read the article

  • final transient fields and serialization

    - by doublep
    Is it possible to have final transient fields that are set to any non-default value after serialization in Java? My usecase is a cache variable — that's why it is transient. I also have a habit of making Map fields that won't be changed (i.e. contents of the map is changed, but object itself remains the same) final. However, these attributes seem to be contradictory — while compiler allows such a combination, I cannot have the field set to anything but null after unserialization. I tried the following, without success: simple field initialization (shown in the example): this is what I normally do, but the initialization doesn't seem to happen after unserialization; initialization in constructor (I believe this is semantically the same as above though); assigning the field in readObject() — cannot be done since the field is final. In the example cache is public only for testing. import java.io.*; import java.util.*; public class test { public static void main (String[] args) throws Exception { X x = new X (); System.out.println (x + " " + x.cache); ByteArrayOutputStream buffer = new ByteArrayOutputStream (); new ObjectOutputStream (buffer).writeObject (x); x = (X) new ObjectInputStream (new ByteArrayInputStream (buffer.toByteArray ())).readObject (); System.out.println (x + " " + x.cache); } public static class X implements Serializable { public final transient Map <Object, Object> cache = new HashMap <Object, Object> (); } } Output: test$X@1a46e30 {} test$X@190d11 null

    Read the article

  • Problem with OOP Class Definitions

    - by oben
    Hi, this is Oben from Turkey. I work for my homework in C++ and i have some problems with multiply definitions. My graph class ; class Graph{ private: string name; //Graph name fstream* graphFile; //Graph's file protected: string opBuf; //Operations buffer int containsNode(string); //Query if a node is present Node* nodes; //Nodes in the graph int nofNodes; //Number of nodes in the graph public: static int nOfGraphs; //Number of graphs produced Graph(); //Constructors and destructor Graph(int); Graph(string); Graph(const Graph &); ~Graph(); string getGraphName(); //Get graph name bool addNode(string); //add a node to the graph bool deleteNode(string); //delete a node from the graph bool addEdge(string,string); //add an edge to the graph bool deleteEdge(string,string); //delete an edge from the graph void intersect(const Graph&); //intersect the graph with the <par> void unite(const Graph&); //intersect the graph with the <par> string toString(); //get string representation of the graph void acceptTraverse(BreadthFirst*); void acceptTraverse(DepthFirst *); }; and my traversal class; class Traversal { public: string *visitedNodes; virtual string traverse (const Graph & ); }; class BreadthFirst : public Traversal { public : BreadthFirst(); string traverse(); }; class DepthFirst : public Traversal { public : DepthFirst(); string traverse(); }; My problem is in traversal class , i need to declare Graph class at the same time , in graph class i need traversal class to declare. I have big problems with declerations :) Could you please help me ?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing an MVC action method with a Cache dependency?

    - by Steve
    I’m relatively new to testing and MVC and came across a sticking point today. I’m attempting to test an action method that has a dependency on HttpContext.Current.Cache and wanted to know the best practice for achieving the “low coupling” to allow for easy testing. Here's what I've got so far... public class CacheHandler : ICacheHandler { public IList<Section3ListItem> StateList { get { return (List<Section3ListItem>)HttpContext.Current.Cache["StateList"]; } set { HttpContext.Current.Cache["StateList"] = value; } } ... I then access it like such... I'm using Castle for my IoC. public class ProfileController : ControllerBase { private readonly ISection3Repository _repository; private readonly ICacheHandler _cache; public ProfileController(ISection3Repository repository, ICacheHandler cacheHandler) { _repository = repository; _cache = cacheHandler; } [UserIdFilter] public ActionResult PersonalInfo(Guid userId) { if (_cache.StateList == null) _cache.StateList = _repository.GetLookupValues((int)ELookupKey.States).ToList(); ... Then in my unit tests I am able to mock up ICacheHandler. Would this be considered a 'best practice' and does anyone have any suggestions for other approaches? Thanks in advance. Cheers

    Read the article

  • Generics vs inheritance (when no collection classes are involved)

    - by Ram
    This is an extension of this questionand probably might even be a duplicate of some other question(If so, please forgive me). I see from MSDN that generics are usually used with collections The most common use for generic classes is with collections like linked lists, hash tables, stacks, queues, trees and so on where operations such as adding and removing items from the collection are performed in much the same way regardless of the type of data being stored. The examples I have seen also validate the above statement. Can someone give a valid use of generics in a real-life scenario which does not involve any collections ? Pedantically, I was thinking about making an example which does not involve collections public class Animal<T> { public void Speak() { Console.WriteLine("I am an Animal and my type is " + typeof(T).ToString()); } public void Eat() { //Eat food } } public class Dog { public void WhoAmI() { Console.WriteLine(this.GetType().ToString()); } } and "An Animal of type Dog" will be Animal<Dog> magic = new Animal<Dog>(); It is entirely possible to have Dog getting inherited from Animal (Assuming a non-generic version of Animal)Dog:Animal Therefore Dog is an Animal Another example I was thinking was a BankAccount. It can be BankAccount<Checking>,BankAccount<Savings>. This can very well be Checking:BankAccount and Savings:BankAccount. Are there any best practices to determine if we should go with generics or with inheritance ?

    Read the article

  • Assigning a variable of a struct that contains an instance of a class to another variable

    - by xport
    In my understanding, assigning a variable of a struct to another variable of the same type will make a copy. But this rule seems broken as shown on the following figure. Could you explain why this happened? using System; namespace ReferenceInValue { class Inner { public int data; public Inner(int data) { this.data = data; } } struct Outer { public Inner inner; public Outer(int data) { this.inner = new Inner(data); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Outer p1 = new Outer(1); Outer p2 = p1; Console.WriteLine("p1:{0}, p2:{1}", p1.inner.data, p2.inner.data); p1.inner.data = 2; Console.WriteLine("p1:{0}, p2:{1}", p1.inner.data, p2.inner.data); p2.inner.data = 3; Console.WriteLine("p1:{0}, p2:{1}", p1.inner.data, p2.inner.data); Console.ReadKey(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Subclassing ViewPager Breaks Animation

    - by Ryan Thomas
    In my Android application I have an activity which uses a view pager to display 4+ pages (Fragments). I implemented buttons on each screen that move between pages by calling: pager.setCurrentItem(position, true); The view pager and fragments are all working as I desired. I then began looking for a solution to disable user swiping between pages so that the transition between pages in handled by the buttons only. The solution I found was mentioned in a few stackoverflow articles as well as This Blog that suggest subclassing the view pager to intercept touch events to disable swiping. I followed those examples by subclassing the view pager class as follows: public class ViewPager extends android.support.v4.view.ViewPager { private boolean enabled; public ViewPager(Context context, AttributeSet attrs) { super(context, attrs); this.enabled = true; } @Override public boolean onTouchEvent(MotionEvent event) { if (this.enabled) { return super.onTouchEvent(event); } return false; } @Override public boolean onInterceptTouchEvent(MotionEvent event) { if (this.enabled) { return super.onInterceptTouchEvent(event); } return false; } public void setSwipingEnabled(boolean enabled) { this.enabled = enabled; } } Using the subclassed view pager and calling setSwipingEnabled(false) works as was desired. The user can no longer move between pages with swipe gestures and I can still move between pages via button clicks by calling setCurrentItem(int position, boolean smoothScroll). However using the subclass breaks the animation between pages. When I call setCurrentItem(position, true) with android.support.v4.view.ViewPager I get very clean scrolling animations between pages. When I make the same call using the subclass the screen has a very brief 'flash' and then automatically draws the new page. I would like to know how to fix the animation while retaining the ability to disable user swiping between pages. I greatly appreciate any help with this. Let me know if you need any additional information. So far I have tested using a Samsung device running 2.3.5 and an AVD emulator targeting Android 2.3.3.

    Read the article

  • Create generic class instance throws TypeLoadException

    - by Elisa
    My TestLayer class has the namespace: "BLL.Infrastructure.TestLayer" and is inside the assembly: "BLL" public class LayerFactory<T, U> { public static IBaseLayer<T, U> Get() { var obj = Activator.CreateInstance("BLL", "BLL.Infrastructure.TestLayer", new object[] { (IBaseLayer<T, U>)null }); } } When I run the code the Activator throws an TypeLoadException with no more details Thats the concrete class it should create: GenericBaseLayer implements the IBaseLayer. public class TestLayer<T, U> : GenericBaseLayer<MyRequest, MyInfo.ActionType> { public TestLayer(IBaseLayer<MyRequest, MyInfo.ActionType> layer) : base(layer) { } } What do I wrong?

    Read the article

  • Runnable to be run every second only runs once in Fragment onCreateView()

    - by jul
    I'm trying to update the time in a TextView with a Runnable supposed to be run every second. The Runnable is started from a Fragment's onCreateView(), but it's only executed once. Anybody can help? Thanks public class MyFragment extends Fragment { Calendar mCalendar; private Runnable mTicker; private Handler mHandler; TextView mClock; String mFormat; private boolean mClockStopped = false; @Override public View onCreateView(LayoutInflater inflater, ViewGroup container, Bundle savedInstanceState) { RelativeLayout view = (RelativeLayout) inflater.inflate(R.layout.meteo_widget, container, false); /* * Clock (from DigitalClock widget source) */ mClock = (TextView) view.findViewById(R.id.clock); mCalendar = Calendar.getInstance(); mHandler = new Handler(); mTicker = new Runnable() { public void run() { if(mClockStopped) return; mCalendar.setTimeInMillis(System.currentTimeMillis()); mClock.setText(DateFormat.format("hh:mm:ss", mCalendar)); mClock.invalidate(); long now = SystemClock.uptimeMillis(); long next = now + (1000 - now % 1000); mHandler.postAtTime(mTicker, next); } }; mTicker.run(); return view; } @Override public void onResume() { super.onResume(); mClockStopped = true; } @Override public void onPause() { mClockStopped = false; super.onPause(); } }

    Read the article

  • Flex: Package is unexpected error

    - by soden
    import mx.controls.Alert; package dbconfig // error line here { public class DBConn { private var dbConn:SQLConnection; private var dbFile:File; public function DBConn() { this.openConnection(); } public function openConnection(){ dbFile = File.applicationStorageDirectory.resolvePath("accounting.sqlite"); dbConn = new SQLConnection(); try { dbConn.open(dbFile); Alert.show("asdf"); } catch(e:SQLError) { Alert.show("SQL Error Occured: ", e.message); } } } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293  | Next Page >