Search Results

Search found 37074 results on 1483 pages for 'define method'.

Page 3/1483 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How is method group overload resolution different to method call overload resolution?

    - by thecoop
    The following code doesn't compile (error CS0123: No overload for 'System.Convert.ToString(object)' matches delegate 'System.Converter<T,string>'): class A<T> { void Method(T obj) { Converter<T, string> toString = Convert.ToString; } } however, this does: class A<T> { void Method(T obj) { Converter<T, string> toString = o => Convert.ToString(o); } } intellisense gives o as a T, and the Convert.ToString call as using Convert.ToString(object). In c# 3.5, delegates can be created from co/contra-variant methods, so the ToString(object) method can be used as a Converter<T, string>, as T is always guarenteed to be an object. So, the first example (method group overload resolution) should be finding the only applicable method string Convert.ToString(object o), the same as the method call overload resolution. Why is the method group & method call overload resolution producing different results?

    Read the article

  • Mock RequireJS define dependencies with config.map

    - by Aligned
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2014/08/18/mock-requirejs-define-dependencies-with-config.map.aspxI had a module dependency, that I’m pulling down with RequireJS that I needed to use and write tests against. In this case, I don’t care about the actual implementation of the module (it’s simple enough that I’m just avoiding some AJAX calls). EDIT: make sure you look at the bottom example after the edit before using the config.map approach. I found that there is an easier way. I did not want to change the constructor of the consumer as I had a chain of changes that would have to be made and that would have been to invasive for this task. I found a question on StackOverflow with a short, but helpful answer from “Artem Oboturov”. We can use the config.map from RequireJs to achieve this. Here is some code: A module example (“usefulModule” in Common/Modules/usefulModule.js): define([], function() { "use strict"; var testMethod = function() { ... }; // add more functionality of the module return { testMethod; } }); A consumer of usefulModule example: define([ "Commmon/Modules/usefulModule" ], function(usefulModule) { "use strict"; var consumerModule = function(){ var self = this; // add functionality of the module } }); Using config.map in the html of the test runner page (and in your Karma config –> I’m still trying to figure this out): map: {'*': { // replace usefulModule with a mock 'Common/Modules/usefulModule': '/Tests/Specs/Common/usefulModuleMock.js' } } With the new mapping, Require will load usefulModuleMock.js from Tests/Specs/Common instead of the real implementation. Some of the answers on StackOverflow mentioned Squire.js, which looked interesting, but I wasn’t ready to introduce a new library at this time. That’s all you need to be able to mock a depency in RequireJS. However, there are many good cases when you should pass it in through the constructor instead of this approach.   EDIT: After all that, here’s another, probably better way: The consumer class, updated: define([ "Commmon/Modules/usefulModule" ], function(UsefulModule) { "use strict"; var consumerModule = function(){ var self = this; self.usefulModule = new UsefulModule(); // add functionality of the module } }); Jasmine test: define([ "consumerModule", "/UnitTests/Specs/Common/Mocks/usefulModuleMock.js" ], function(consumerModule, UsefulModuleMock){ describe("when mocking out the module", function(){ it("should probably just override the property", function(){ var consumer = new consumerModule(); consumer.usefulModule = new UsefulModuleMock(); }); }); });   Thanks for letting me think out loud :-).

    Read the article

  • Define Instance Variable Outside of Method Defenition (ruby)

    - by Ell
    Hi all, I am developing (well, trying to at least) a Game framework for the Ruby Gosu library. I have made a basic event system wherebye each Blocks::Event has a list of handlers and when the event is fired the methods are called. At the moment the way to implement an event is as follows: class TestClass attr_accessor :on_close def initialize @on_close = Blocks::Event.new end def close @on_close.fire(self, Blocks::OnCloseArgs.new) end end But this method of implementing events seems rather long, my question is, how can I make a way so that when one wants an event in a class, they can just do this class TestClass event :on_close def close @on_close.fire(self, Blocks::OnCloseArgs.new) end end Thanks in advance, ell.

    Read the article

  • When should a method of a class return the same instance after modifying itself?

    - by modiX
    I have a class that has three methods A(), B() and C(). Those methods modify the own instance. While the methods have to return an instance when the instance is a separate copy (just as Clone()), I got a free choice to return void or the same instance (return this;) when modifying the same instance in the method and not returning any other value. When deciding for returning the same modified instance, I can do neat method chains like obj.A().B().C();. Would this be the only reason for doing so? Is it even okay to modify the own instance and return it, too? Or should it only return a copy and leave the original object as before? Because when returning the same modified instance the user would maybe admit the returned value is a copy, otherwise it would not be returned? If it's okay, what's the best way to clarify such things on the method?

    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

  • Any utility to test expand C/C++ #define macros?

    - by Randy
    It seems I often spend way too much time trying to get a #define macro to do exactly what i want. I'll post my current delemia below and any help is appreciated. But really the bigger question is whether there is any utility someone could reccomend, to quickly display what a macro is actually doing? It seems like even the slow trial and error process would go much faster if I could see what is wrong. Currently, I'm dynamically loading a long list of functions from a DLL I made. The way I've set things up, the function pointers have the same nanes as the exported functions, and the typedef(s) used to prototyp them have the same names, but with a prepended underscor. So I want to use a define to simplfy assignments of a long long list of function pointers. For example, In the code statement below, 'hexdump' is the name of a typdef'd function point, and is also the name of the function, while _hexdump is the name of the typedef. If GetProcAddress() fails, a failure counter in incremented. if (!(hexdump = (_hexdump)GetProcAddress(h, "hexdump"))) --iFail; So lets say I'd like to rplace each line like the above with a macro, like this... GETADDR_FOR(hexdump ) Well this is the best I've come up with so far. It doesn't work (my // comment is just to prevent text formatting in the message)... // #define GETADDR_FOR(a) if (!(a = (#_#a)GetProcAddress(h, "/""#a"/""))) --iFail; And again, while I'd APPRECIATE an insight into what silly mistake I've made, it would make my day to have a utility that would show me the error of my ways, by simply plugging in my macro

    Read the article

  • Where should I define constants in scripts?

    - by bshacklett
    When writing scripts using a modern scripting language, e.g. Powershell or JavaScript, where should I define constants? Should I make all constants global for readability and ease of use, or does it make sense to define constants as close to their scopes as possible (in a function, for instance, if it's not needed elsewhere)? I'm thinking mostly of error messages, error IDs, paths to resources or configuration options.

    Read the article

  • Ruby module_function, invoking module's private method, invoked in class method style on module shows error

    - by Jignesh
    test_module.rb module MyModule def module_func_a puts "module_func_a invoked" private_b end module_function :module_func_a private def private_b puts "private_b invoked" end end class MyClass include MyModule def test_module module_func_a end end Invoking module function from class c = MyClass.new c.test_module Output 1: $ ruby test_module.rb module_func_a invoked private_b invoked Invoking module function on module in class method style ma = MyModule.module_func_a Output 2: module_func_a invoked test_module.rb:5:in `module_func_a': undefined local variable or method `private_b' for MyModule:Module (NameError) from test_module.rb:31 As can be seen from the Output 1 and Output 2 when including the module in a class, no issue occurs when a module's private method gets invoked from a module function while in case when directly invoking the module function on the module in class method style the module's private method, invoked from module function, is not found. Can anybody make me understand the reason behind above behavior and whether invoking module function (which in turn invokes module's private method) on module in class method style is possible or not? If possible, then what rectifications are required in my code to do the same? Thanks, Jignesh

    Read the article

  • Inheriting the main method

    - by Eric
    I want to define a base class that defines a main method that instantiates the class, and runs a method. There are a couple of problems though. Here is the base class: public abstract class Strategy { abstract void execute(SoccerRobot robot); public static void main(String args) { Strategy s = new /*Not sure what to put here*/(); s.execute(new SoccerRobot()) } } And here is an example derived class: public class UselessStrategy { void execute(SoccerRobot robot) { System.out.println("I'm useless") } } It defines a simple execute method, which should be called in a main method upon usage as a the main application. However, in order to do so, I need to instantiate the derived class from within the base class's main method. Which doesn't seem to be possible. I'd rather not have to repeat the main method for every derived class, as it feels somewhat unnessary. Is there a right way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • c# passing method names as the argument in a method

    - by Alan Bennett
    hi guys, I have a recuring method which shows up many times in my code its basically checking to make sure that the connection to the odbc is ok and then connects but each time this method is called it calls another method and each instance of the main method this one is different, as each method is about 8 lines of code having it 8 times in the code isnt ideal. so basically i would like to have just one method which i can call passing the name of the new method as an arguement. so basically like: private void doSomething(methodToBeCalled) { if(somthingistrue) { methodToBeCalled(someArgument) } } is this possible? thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Macros's that define macros

    - by David Thornley
    Does anyone know how to pull off something like this... I have alot of repetitive macros as : - #define MYMACRO1(x) Do1(x) #define MYMACRO2(x,y) Do2(x, y) #define MYNEXTMACRO1(x) Do1(x) #define MYNEXTMACRO2(x,y) Do2(x, y) The code above works fine, but I want to write a macro that creates macros (a meta macro). For example: - #define MYMETAMACRO(name) \ #define #name1(x) Do1(x) \ #define #name2(x,y) Do2(x, y) \ Such that I can do : - MYMETAMACRO(MYMACRO); MYMETAMACRO(MYNEXTMACRO); and then : - MYMACRO1(2); MYMACRO2(2,3); MYNEXTMACRO1(4); MYNEXTMACRO2(4, 5); The preprocessor bombs out at the #define as it thinks it is a missing parameter of the macro.

    Read the article

  • Go - Concurrent method

    - by nevalu
    How to get a concurrent method? In my case, the library would be called from a program to get a value to each argument str --in method Get()--. When it's used Get() then it assigns a variable from type bytes.Buffer which it will have the value to return. The returned values --when it been concurrently called-- will be stored into a database or a file and it doesn't matter that its output been of FIFO way (from method). type test struct { foo uint8 bar uint8 } func NewTest(arg1 string) (*test, os.Error) {...} func (self *test) Get(str string) ([]byte, os.Error) { var format bytes.Buffer ... } I think that all code inner of method Get() should be put inner of go func() {...}(), and then to use a channel. Would there be a problem if it's called another method from Get()? Or would it also has to be concurrent?

    Read the article

  • how to save and load the state of a game in scheme

    - by user3667664
    I'm creating the game of chess in scheme, but do not know how to save and load game state is a part I have this code (define-struct ficha(color se-movio? tipo-ficha )) ;;tablero lista de listas de fichas (define-struct estado (tablero turno fichaSel)) (define bpawn (bitmap "b-peon.png")) (define brook (bitmap "b-torre.png")) (define bcaballo (bitmap "b-caballo.png")) (define bbish (bitmap "b-arfil.png")) (define bquee (bitmap "b-reina.png")) (define bking (bitmap "b-rey.png")) (define wpawn (bitmap "w-peon.png")) (define wrook (bitmap "w-torre.png")) (define wcaballo (bitmap "w-caballo.png")) (define wbish (bitmap "w-arfil.png")) (define wquee (bitmap "w-reina.png")) (define wking (bitmap "w-rey.png")) (define board (bitmap "board.jpg")) This is the board that is a list of lists (define tableroini (list (list torreb caballob arfilb reinab reyb arfilb caballob torreb) (list peonb peonb peonb peonb peonb peonb peonb peonb) (list empty empty empty empty empty empty empty empty) (list empty empty empty empty empty empty empty empty) (list empty empty empty empty empty empty empty empty) (list empty empty empty empty empty empty empty empty) (list peonw peonw peonw peonw peonw peonw peonw peonw) (list torrew caballow arfilw reinaw reyw arfilw caballow torrew))) I did this to save the state of the game: (define (Guardar-en-archivo archivo) (write-file (string-append Subcarpeta archivo ".txt") "game state" )) But not as you insert the game state on "game state" for me to save the game How I can do this ?

    Read the article

  • [PHP] Weird problem with dynamic method invocation

    - by Rolf
    Hi everyone, this time, I'm facing a really weird problem. I've the following code: $xml = simplexml_load_file($this->interception_file); foreach($xml->children() as $class) { $path = str_replace('__CLASS_DIR__',CLASS_DIR,$class['path']); if(!is_file($path)) { throw new Exception('Bad configuration: file '.$path.' not found'); } $className = pathinfo($path,PATHINFO_FILENAME); foreach($class as $method) { $method_name = $method['name']; $obj = new $className(); var_dump(in_array($method_name,get_class_methods($className)));exit; echo $obj->$method_name();### not a method ??? } } As you can see, I get the class name and method name from an XML file. I can create an instance of the class without any problem. The var_dump at the end returns true, that means $method_name (which has 2 optional parameters) is a method of $className. BUT, and I am pretty sure the syntax is correct, when I try: $obj-$method_name() I get: Fatal error: Method name must be a string If you have any ideas, pleaaaaase tell me :) Thanks in advance, Rolf

    Read the article

  • When using method chaining, do I reuse the object or create one?

    - by MainMa
    When using method chaining like: var car = new Car().OfBrand(Brand.Ford).OfModel(12345).PaintedIn(Color.Silver).Create(); there may be two approaches: Reuse the same object, like this: public Car PaintedIn(Color color) { this.Color = color; return this; } Create a new object of type Car at every step, like this: public Car PaintedIn(Color color) { var car = new Car(this); // Clone the current object. car.Color = color; // Assign the values to the clone, not the original object. return car; } Is the first one wrong or it's rather a personal choice of the developer? I believe that he first approach may quickly cause the intuitive/misleading code. Example: // Create a car with neither color, nor model. var mercedes = new Car().OfBrand(Brand.MercedesBenz).PaintedIn(NeutralColor); // Create several cars based on the neutral car. var yellowCar = mercedes.PaintedIn(Color.Yellow).Create(); var specificModel = mercedes.OfModel(99).Create(); // Would `specificModel` car be yellow or of neutral color? How would you guess that if // `yellowCar` were in a separate method called somewhere else in code? Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Why are software schedules so hard to define?

    - by 0A0D
    It seems that, in my experience, getting us engineers to accurately estimate and determine tasks to be completed is like pulling teeth. Rather than just giving a swag estimate of 2-3 weeks or 3-6 months... what is the simplest way to define software schedules so they are not so painful to define? For instance, customer A wants a feature by 02/01/2011. How do you schedule time to implement this feature knowing that other bug fixes may be needed along the way and take up additional engineering time?

    Read the article

  • Why are software schedules so hard to define?

    - by 0A0D
    It seems that, in my experience, getting us engineers to accurately estimate and determine tasks to be completed is like pulling teeth. Rather than just giving a swag estimate of 2-3 weeks or 3-6 months... what is the simplest way to define software schedules so they are not so painful to define? For instance, customer A wants a feature by 02/01/2011. How do you schedule time to implement this feature knowing that other bug fixes may be needed along the way and take up additional engineering time?

    Read the article

  • in python: can i pass class method as and a default argument to another class method

    - by alex
    i want to to pass class method as and a default argument to another class method, so that i can re-use the method as a @classmethod @classmethod class foo: def func1(self,x): do somthing; def func2(self, aFunc = self.func1): # make some a call to afunc afunc(4) this why when the method func2 is called within the class aFunc defaults to self.func1, but i can call this same function from outside of the class and pass it a different function at the input. i get NameError: name 'self' is not defined

    Read the article

  • How to name a static factory method in the utility class?

    - by leventov
    I have an interface MyLongNameInterface with a counterpart utility class MyLongNameInterfaces. What is the best name for a static factory method in the utility class, which creates an instance of MyLongNameInterface? MyLongNameInterfaces.newInstance() -- a new instance of the utility class? MyLongNameInterfaces.newMyLongNameInterface() -- too verbose MyLongNameInterfaces.create() -- create an instance of the utility class? Also, create is not a widely used conventional verb in Java better option?

    Read the article

  • call a class method from inside an instance method from a module mixin (rails)

    - by sean
    Curious how one would go about calling a class method from inside an instance method of a module which is included by an active record class. For example I want both user and client models to share the nuts and bolts of password encryption. # app/models class User < ActiveRecord::Base include Encrypt end class Client < ActiveRecord::Base include Encrypt end # app/models/shared/encrypt.rb module Encrypt def authenticate # I want to call the ClassMethods#encrypt_password method when @user.authenticate is run self.password_crypted == self.encrypt_password(self.password) end def self.included(base) base.extend ClassMethods end module ClassMethods def encrypt_password(password) Digest::SHA1.hexdigest(password) end end end However, this fails. Says that the class method cannot be found when the instance method calls it. I can call User.encrypt_password('password') but User.new.encrypt_password fails Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Java Finalize method call

    - by Rajesh Kumar J
    I need to find when finalized method called in the JVM. I Created a test Class which write into file when finalized method called by Overriding the protected finalize method It is not executing. Can anybody tell me the reason why it is not executing?? Thanks in Advance

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET lock thread method

    - by Peter
    Hello, I'm developing an ASP.NET forms webapplication using C#. I have a method which creates a new Order for a customer. It looks similar to this; private string CreateOrder(string userName) { // Fetch current order Order order = FetchOrder(userName); if (order.OrderId == 0) { // Has no order yet, create a new one order.OrderNumber = Utility.GenerateOrderNumber(); order.Save(); } return order; } The problem here is, it is possible that 1 customer in two requests (threads) could cause this method to be called twice while another thread is also inside this method. This can cause two orders to be created. How can I properly lock this method, so it can only be executed by one thread at a time per customer? I tried; Mutex mutex = null; private string CreateOrder(string userName) { if (mutex == null) { mutex = new Mutex(true, userName); } mutex.WaitOne(); // Code from above mutex.ReleaseMutex(); mutex = null; return order; } This works, but on some occasions it hangs on WaitOne and I don't know why. Is there an error, or should I use another method to lock? Thanks

    Read the article

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