Search Results

Search found 724 results on 29 pages for 'constants'.

Page 3/29 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Java enums vs constants for Strings

    - by Marcus
    I've switched from using constants for Strings: public static final String OPTION_1 = "OPTION_1"; ... to enums: public enum Options { OPTION_1; } With constants, you'd just refer to the constant: String s = TheClass.OPTION_1 But with Enums, you have to specify toString(): String s = Options.OPTION_1.toString(); I don't like that you have to use the toString() statement, and also, in some cases you can forget to include it which can lead to unintended results.. ie: Object o = map.get(Options.OPTION_1); //This won't work as intended if the Map key is a String Is there a better way to use enums for String constants?

    Read the article

  • When to use Constants vs. Config Files to maintain Configuration

    - by CoffeeAddict
    I often fight with myself on whether to put certain keys in my web.config or in a Constants.cs class or something like this. For example if I wanted to store application specific keys for whatever the case may be..I could store it and grab it from my web config via custom keys or consume it by referencing a constant in my constants class. When would you want to use Constants over config keys? This question really applies to any language I think.

    Read the article

  • taglib with constants functionality?

    - by jack
    I need to use some constants in my JSP. Now I'd like to use this without using scriptlets. (and adding getters is not an option, it's an external jar) Using the search I've seen that some people put them in a map. However I've seen that there's a constants function in the unstandard taglib but that is a few years old and so far I haven't found a maven repository with it. So are there any other taglibs with this functionality?

    Read the article

  • Where to put constants in Rails

    - by Sam
    I have a few constants which are arrays that I don't want to create db's for but I don't know where to store the constants without getting errors. For example CONTAINER_SIZES = [["20 foot"],["40 foot"]] Where can I store this so all models and controller have access to this?

    Read the article

  • Problem with constants in application.ini after PHP upgrade

    - by Marek
    Hi, I've upgraded PHP on my local dev system to version 5.3.0, and there is some problem when I use constants in application.ini - following manual http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/learning.quickstart.create-project.html I have: bootstrap.path = APPLICATION_PATH "/Bootstrap.php" which leads to: Warning: require_once(APPLICATION_PATH/Bootstrap.php) [function.require-once]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in Zend\Application.php on line 320 any ideas? SOLVED: Actually name of my constant was _DIR_APPLICATION (code above was copied from ZF manual) - problem lies in this underscore at the begining - it seems that parse_ini_file() in PHP 5.3.0 doesn't replace constants named like this. Short test - you need two files: test.ini bootstrap.path = _DIR_APPLICATION "/Bootstrap.php" bootstrap.class = "Bootstrap" and test.php <?php define('_DIR_APPLICATION', 'test'); $data = parse_ini_file('test.ini'); print_r($data); try to run, then change constant name to 'DIR_APPLICATION' (in both files) and compare result ;)

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't CSS support constants?

    - by Adiel Mittmann
    CSS has never supported constants or variables directly. Whenever I'm writing code like this: span.class1 { color: #377fb6; } div.class2 { border: solid 1px #377fb6; /* Repeated color */ } I wonder why such a seemingly simple feature has never made it into the standard. What could be hard about implementing a scheme whereby we could avoid repetition, something like this: $theme_color1: #377fb6; span.class1 { color: $theme_color1; } div.class2 { border: solid 1px $theme_color1; } I know there are workarounds, like using a class for each color or generating CSS code from templates, but my question is: given that CSS is so rich and complex, why weren't CSS constants ever introduced?

    Read the article

  • sfConfig::get is not returning constants defined in app.yml

    - by morpheous
    I have an interesting problem. I am using Symfony 1.3.2. I have defined some constants in project/apps/frontend/config/app.yml and project/config/app.yml When I use the constant (correct spelling) in a piece of code like this $test=sfConfig::get('app_foobar'); the variable $test is assigned a null value. This is what I have checked so far: CHECK: cache files generated? (YES) CHECK: Do the cache files (config_app.yml.php) in the cache directory contain the constants defined in the app.yml file (YES) CHECK: Constant names used in the code matches the array keys found in config_app.yml? (YES) At this stage, I have run out of ideas. I dont want to supply a default value as a hack, because when I need to change the value of the constant, I will have to replace this in potentially hundreds of instances (too error prone). Is there anything that I have missed?. What could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • Why use constants in programming?

    - by Adam N
    I've just been going back over a bit of C studying using Ivor Horton's Beginning C book. I got to the bit about declaring constants which seems to get mixed up with variables in the same sentence. Just to clarify, what is the difference in specifying constants and variables in C, and really, when do you need to use a constant instead of a variable? I know folks say to use a constant when the information doesn't change during program execution but I can't really think of a time when a variable couldn't be used instead. Thanks

    Read the article

  • how does [<Literal>] differ from other constants in F#

    - by Mitzh
    I am a bit confused by the Literal keyword and why it is necessary in F#. Reading the docs, it sounds to me that [<Literal>] is used to define a constant, however I am a bit confused how this constant differs from all other constants in F#.. Values that are intended to be constants can be marked with the Literal attribute. This attribute has the effect of causing a value to be compiled as a constant. When I think of a constant, I think of something which is immutable.... let x = "a" + "b" //this is a immutable value, its value is constant [<Literal>] let y = "a" + "b" //this is also a immutable value, but why is this a special constant? Is it because the 'normal' F# values are evaluated lazily and the [<Literal>] is not evaluated lazily..? is that what they mean with 'compiled as constant'..? or is there something else to it?

    Read the article

  • aligning extern constants (gcc)

    - by ~buratinas
    I want to make some static constants globally visible. I'm pretty familiar how to do that in C++. The problem is that these constants need to be aligned to some exotic boundary. Do I have to specify the alignment in extern declaration? I'm using GCC4.5 in *.cpp file static const constant_t constant __attribute__((aligned(64))) = {blah,blah,blah}; in *.h file //Which one is correct? extern const constant_t constant; extern const constant_t constant __attribute__((aligned(64)));

    Read the article

  • Can I use string concatenation to define a class CONST in PHP?

    - by selfsimilar
    I know that you can create global constants in terms of each other using string concatenation: define('FOO', 'foo'); define('BAR', FOO.'bar'); echo BAR; will print 'foobar'. However, I'm getting an error trying to do the same using class constants. class foobar { const foo = 'foo'; const foo2 = self::foo; const bar = self::foo.'bar'; } foo2 is defined without issue, but declaring const bar will error out Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '.', expecting ',' or ';' I've also tried using functions like sprintf() but it doesn't like the left paren any more than the string concatenator '.'. So is there any way to create class constants in terms of each other in anything more than a trivial set case like foo2?

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between AF_INET and PF_INET constants?

    - by Denilson Sá
    Looking at examples about socket programming, we can see that some people use AF_INET while others use PF_INET. In addition, sometimes both of them are used at the same example. The question is: Is there any difference between them? Which one should we use? If you can answer that, another question would be... Why there are these two similar (but equal) constants? What I've discovered, so far: The socket manpage In (Unix) socket programming, we have the socket() function that receives the following parameters: int socket(int domain, int type, int protocol); The manpage says: The domain argument specifies a communication domain; this selects the protocol family which will be used for communication. These families are defined in <sys/socket.h>. And the manpage cites AF_INET as well as some other AF_ constants for the domain parameter. Also, at the NOTES section of the same manpage, we can read: The manifest constants used under 4.x BSD for protocol families are PF_UNIX, PF_INET, etc., while AF_UNIX etc. are used for address families. However, already the BSD man page promises: "The protocol family generally is the same as the address family", and subsequent standards use AF_* everywhere. The C headers The sys/socket.h does not actually define those constants, but instead includes bits/socket.h. This file defines around 38 AF_ constants and 38 PF_ constants like this: #define PF_INET 2 /* IP protocol family. */ #define AF_INET PF_INET Python The Python socket module is very similar to the C API. However, there are many AF_ constants but only one PF_ constant (PF_PACKET). Thus, in Python we have no choice but use AF_INET. I think this decision to include only the AF_ constants follows one of the guiding principles: "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." (The Zen of Python)

    Read the article

  • Java: refactoring static constants

    - by akf
    We are in the process of refactoring some code. There is a feature that we have developed in one project that we would like to now use in other projects. We are extracting the foundation of this feature and making it a full-fledged project which can then be imported by its current project and others. This effort has been relatively straight-forward but we have one headache. When the framework in question was originally developed, we chose to keep a variety of constant values defined as static fields in a single class. Over time this list of static members grew. The class is used in very many places in our code. In our current refactoring, we will be elevating some of the members of this class to our new framework, but leaving others in place. Our headache is in extracting the foundation members of this class to be used in our new project, and more specifically, how we should address those extracted members in our existing code. We know that we can have our existing Constants class subclass this new project's Constants class and it would inherit all of the parent's static members. This would allow us to effect the change without touching the code that uses these members to change the class name on the static reference. However, the tight coupling inherent in this choice doesn't feel right. before: public class ConstantsA { public static final String CONSTANT1 = "constant.1"; public static final String CONSTANT2 = "constant.2"; public static final String CONSTANT3 = "constant.3"; } after: public class ConstantsA extends ConstantsB { public static final String CONSTANT1 = "constant.1"; } public class ConstantsB { public static final String CONSTANT2 = "constant.2"; public static final String CONSTANT3 = "constant.3"; } In our existing code branch, all of the above would be accessible in this manner: ConstantsA.CONSTANT2 I would like to solicit arguments about whether this is 'acceptable' and/or what the best practices are.

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad practice to have an interface to define constants?

    - by FabianB
    I am writing a set of junit test classes in java. There are several constants, for example strings that I will need in different test classes. I am thinking about an interface that defines them and every test class would implement it. The benefits I see there are: easy access to constants: "MY_CONSTANT" instead of "ThatClass.MY_CONSTANT" each constant defined only once Is this approach rather a good or bad practice? I feel like abusing the concept of interfaces a little bit. You can answer generally about interfaces/constants, but also about unit tests if there is something special about it.

    Read the article

  • Why Constant Keyword is not introduced In Java?

    - by harigm
    I am curious learner of Java, I was thinking on one topic "CONSTANTS" I have learnt that Java allows us to declare constants by using "Final" keyword. My question is Java didnot introduce Constant(Const) Keyword. Since many people say it has come from C++, in C++ we have Const keyword Is there any strong reason behind, Please share your thoughts on this.

    Read the article

  • Why is there no Constant keyword in Java?

    - by harigm
    I am curious learner of Java, and I was thinking about the topic of "CONSTANTS". I have learnt that Java allows us to declare constants by using final keyword. My question is why didn't Java introduce Constant (const) keyword. Since many people say it has come from C++, in C++ we have const keyword. Please share your thoughts.

    Read the article

  • How do I declare an array as a constant in Objective-c?

    - by Andrew
    The following code is giving me errors: // constants.h extern NSArray const *testArray; // constants.m NSArray const *testArray = [NSArray arrayWithObjects: @"foo", @"bar"]; The error I get is initializer element is not constant Or if I take away the pointer indicator (*) I get: statically allocated instance of Objective-C class 'NSArray'

    Read the article

  • String literals vs constants for Session[...] dictionary keys

    - by FreshCode
    Session[Constant] vs Session["String Literal"] Performance I'm retrieving user-specific data like ViewData["CartItems"] = Session["CartItems"]; with a string literal for keys on every request. Should I be using constants for this? If yes, how should I go about implementing frequently used string literals and will it significantly affect performance on a high-traffic site? Related question does not address ASP.NET MVC or Session.

    Read the article

  • Best practice for Python & Django constants

    - by Dylan Klomparens
    I have a Django model that relies on a tuple. I'm wondering what the best practice is for refering to constants within that tuple for my Django program. Here, for example, I'd like to specify "default=0" as something that is more readable and does not require commenting. Any suggestions? Status = ( (-1, 'Cancelled'), (0, 'Requires attention'), (1, 'Work in progress'), (2, 'Complete'), ) class Task(models.Model): status = models.IntegerField(choices=Status, default=0) # Status is 'Requires attention' (0) by default. EDIT: If possible I'd like to avoid using a number altogether. Somehow using the string 'Requires attention' instead would be more readable.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >