Search Results

Search found 31013 results on 1241 pages for 'dictionary to object'.

Page 3/1241 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to pass a Dictionary variable to another procedure

    - by salvationishere
    I am developing a C# VS2008/SQL Server website application. I've never used the Dictionary class before, but I am trying to replace my Hashtable with a Dictionary variable. Here is a portion of my aspx.cs code: ... Dictionary<string, string> openWith = new Dictionary<string, string>(); for (int col = 0; col < headers.Length; col++) { @temp = (col + 1); @tempS = @temp.ToString(); @tempT = "@col" + @temp.ToString(); ... openWith.Add(@tempT, headers[col]); } ... for (int r = 0; r < myInputFile.Rows.Count; r++) { resultLabel.Text = ADONET_methods.AppendDataCT(myInputFile, openWith); } But this is giving me a compiler error on this last line: Argument '2': cannot convert from 'System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary' to 'string' How do I pass the entire openWith variable to AppendDataCT? AppendDataCT is the method that calls my SQL stored proc. I want to pass in the whole row where each row has a unique set of values that I want to add to my database table. For example, if each row requires values for cells A, B, and C, then I want to pass these 3 values to AppendDataCT, where all of these values are strings. How do I do this with Dictionary?

    Read the article

  • Enum and Dictionary<Enum, Action>

    - by Selcuk
    I hope I can explain my problem in a way that it's clear for everyone. We need your suggestions on this. We have an Enum Type which has more than 15 constants defined. We receive a report from a web service and translate its one column into this Enum type. And based on what we receive from that web service, we run specific functions using Dictionary Why am I asking for ideas? Let's say 3 of these Enum contants meet specific functions in our Dictionary but the rest use the same function. So, is there a way to add them into our Dictionary in a better way rather than adding them one by one? I also want to keep this structure because when it's time, we might have specific functions in the future for the ones that I described as "the rest". To be more clear here's an example what we're trying to do: Enum: public enum Reason{ ReasonA, ReasonB, ReasonC, ReasonD, ReasonE, ReasonF, ReasonG, ReasonH, ReasonI, ReasonJ, ReasonK } Defining our Dictionary: public Dictionary<Reason, Action<CustomClassObj, string>> ReasonHandlers = new Dictionary<Reason, Action<CustomClassObj, string>>{ { Reason.ReasonA, HandleReasonA }, { Reason.ReasonB, HandleReasonB }, { Reason.ReasonC, HandleReasonC }, { Reason.ReasonD, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonE, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonF, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonG, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonH, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonI, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonJ, HandleReasonGeneral }, { Reason.ReasonK, HandleReasonGeneral } }; So basically what I'm asking is, is there a way to add Reason, Function pair more intelligently? Because as you can see after ReasonC, all other reasons use the same function. Thank you for your suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Should these concerns be separated into separate objects?

    - by Lewis Bassett
    I have objects which implement the interface BroadcastInterface, which represents a message that is to be broadcast to all users of a particular group. It has a setter and getter method for the Subject and Body properties, and an addRecipientRole() method, which takes a given role and finds the contact token (e.g., an email address) for each user in the role and stores it. It then has a getContactTokens() method. BroadcastInterface objects are passed to an object that implements BroadcasterInterface. These objects are responsible for broadcasting a passed BroadcastInterface object. For example, an EmailBroadcaster implementation of the BroadcasterInterface will take EmailBroadcast objects and use the mailer services to email them out. Now, depending on what BroadcasterInterface implementation is used to broadcast, a different implementation of BroadcastInterface is used by client code. The Single Responsibility Principle seems to suggest that I should have a separate BroadcastFactory object, for creating BroadcastInterface objects, depending on what BroadcasterInterface implementation is used, as creating the BroadcastInterface object is a different responsibility to broadcasting them. But the class used for creating BroadcastInterface objects depends on what implementation of BroadcasterInterface is used to broadcast them. I think, because the knowledge of what method is used to send the broadcasts should only be configured once, the BroadcasterInterface object should be responsible for providing new BroadcastInterface objects. Does the responsibility of “creating and broadcasting objects that implement the BroadcastInterface interface” violate the Single Responsibility Principle? (Because the contact token for sending the broadcast out to the users will differ depending on the way it is broadcasted, I need different broadcast classes—though client code will not be able to tell the difference.)

    Read the article

  • When is an object oriented program truly object oriented?

    - by Syed Aslam
    Let me try to explain what I mean: Say, I present a list of objects and I need to get back a selected object by a user. The following are the classes I can think of right now: ListViewer Item App [Calling class] In case of a GUI application, usually click on a particular item is selection of the item and in case of a command line, some input, say an integer representing that item. Let us go with command line application here. A function lists all the items and waits for the choice of object, an integer. So here, I get the choice, is choice going to conceived as an object? And based on the choice, return back the object in the list. Does writing this program like the way explained above make it truly object oriented? If yes, how? If not, why? Or is the question itself wrong and I shouldn't be thinking along those lines?

    Read the article

  • How do I handle priority and propagation in an event system?

    - by Peeter
    Lets say I have a simple event system with the following syntax: object = new Object(); object.bind("my_trigger", function() { print "hello"; }); object.bind("my_trigger", function() { print "hello2"; }); object.trigger("my_trigger"); How could I make sure hello2 is printed out first (I do not want my code to depend on which order the events are binded). Ontop of that, how would I prevent my events from propagating (e.g. I want to stop every other event from being executed)

    Read the article

  • Accessing a dictionary value by custom object value in Python?

    - by Sam
    So I have a square that's made up of a series of points. At every point there is a corresponding value. What I want to do is build a dictionary like this: class Point: def __init__(self, x, y): self._x = x self._y = y square = {} for x in range(0, 5): for y in range(0, 5): point = Point(x,y) square[point] = None However, if I later create a new point object and try to access the value of the dictionary with the key of that point it doesn't work.. square[Point(2,2)] Traceback (most recent call last): File "<pyshell#19>", line 1, in <module> square[Point(2,2)] KeyError: <__main__.Point instance at 0x02E6C378> I'm guessing that this is because python doesn't consider two objects with the same properties to be the same object? Is there any way around this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Getting the ID of an object when the object is given

    - by Pieter
    I have link that calls a function when clicked: <a href="javascript:spawnMenu(this);" id="link1">Test1</a> To make my function work, I need access to the object so that I can perform jQuery operations like this: alert($(objCaller).offset().left); Since objCaller points to the object and not the object ID, this won't work. I need something like this: alert($("a#link1").offset().left); How can I get the object ID from objCaller?

    Read the article

  • Can I delete dictionary entries in Word?

    - by Nick
    You know how it is: Red sqiggly line under word, looks OK to me, click on "Add to Dictionary" -- sudden realisation, that's NOT how you spell it. Now what? Can I make things right again, or am I stuck with Word accepting a mis-spelling?

    Read the article

  • Dictionary Apps for Mac OS X ?

    - by mgpyone
    I like to use "Dictionary" app for seeking unknown meanings for Mac. Are there any freeware app with additional (add-on) dictionaries you recommend over that default app? Any suggestions are most welcome.

    Read the article

  • Class instance clustering in object reference graph for multi-entries serialization

    - by Juh_
    My question is on the best way to cluster a graph of class instances (i.e. objects, the graph nodes) linked by object references (the -directed- edges of the graph) around specifically marked objects. To explain better my question, let me explain my motivation: I currently use a moderately complex system to serialize the data used in my projects: "marked" objects have a specific attributes which stores a "saving entry": the path to an associated file on disc (but it could be done for any storage type providing the suitable interface) Those object can then be serialized automatically (eg: obj.save()) The serialization of a marked object 'a' contains implicitly all objects 'b' for which 'a' has a reference to, directly s.t: a.b = b, or indirectly s.t.: a.c.b = b for some object 'c' This is very simple and basically define specific storage entries to specific objects. I have then "container" type objects that: can be serialized similarly (in fact their are or can-be "marked") they don't serialize in their storage entries the "marked" objects (with direct reference): if a and a.b are both marked, a.save() calls b.save() and stores a.b = storage_entry(b) So, if I serialize 'a', it will serialize automatically all objects that can be reached from 'a' through the object reference graph, possibly in multiples entries. That is what I want, and is usually provides the functionalities I need. However, it is very ad-hoc and there are some structural limitations to this approach: the multi-entry saving can only works through direct connections in "container" objects, and there are situations with undefined behavior such as if two "marked" objects 'a'and 'b' both have a reference to an unmarked object 'c'. In this case my system will stores 'c' in both 'a' and 'b' making an implicit copy which not only double the storage size, but also change the object reference graph after re-loading. I am thinking of generalizing the process. Apart for the practical questions on implementation (I am coding in python, and use Pickle to serialize my objects), there is a general question on the way to attach (cluster) unmarked objects to marked ones. So, my questions are: What are the important issues that should be considered? Basically why not just use any graph parsing algorithm with the "attach to last marked node" behavior. Is there any work done on this problem, practical or theoretical, that I should be aware of? Note: I added the tag graph-database because I think the answer might come from that fields, even if the question is not.

    Read the article

  • LINQ transform Dictionary<key,value> to Dictionary<value,key>

    - by code4life
    I'm having a low-brainwave day... Does anyone know of a quick & elegant way to transform a Dictionary so that the key becomes the value and vice-versa? Example: var originalDictionary = new Dictionary<int, string>() { {1, "One"}, {2, "Two"}, {3, "Three"} }; becomes var newDictionary = new Dictionary<string, int>(); // contents: // { // {"One". 1}, {"Two". 2}, {"Three", 3} // };

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic, extensible C# Expando Object

    - by Rick Strahl
    I love dynamic functionality in a strongly typed language because it offers us the best of both worlds. In C# (or any of the main .NET languages) we now have the dynamic type that provides a host of dynamic features for the static C# language. One place where I've found dynamic to be incredibly useful is in building extensible types or types that expose traditionally non-object data (like dictionaries) in easier to use and more readable syntax. I wrote about a couple of these for accessing old school ADO.NET DataRows and DataReaders more easily for example. These classes are dynamic wrappers that provide easier syntax and auto-type conversions which greatly simplifies code clutter and increases clarity in existing code. ExpandoObject in .NET 4.0 Another great use case for dynamic objects is the ability to create extensible objects - objects that start out with a set of static members and then can add additional properties and even methods dynamically. The .NET 4.0 framework actually includes an ExpandoObject class which provides a very dynamic object that allows you to add properties and methods on the fly and then access them again. For example with ExpandoObject you can do stuff like this:dynamic expand = new ExpandoObject(); expand.Name = "Rick"; expand.HelloWorld = (Func<string, string>) ((string name) => { return "Hello " + name; }); Console.WriteLine(expand.Name); Console.WriteLine(expand.HelloWorld("Dufus")); Internally ExpandoObject uses a Dictionary like structure and interface to store properties and methods and then allows you to add and access properties and methods easily. As cool as ExpandoObject is it has a few shortcomings too: It's a sealed type so you can't use it as a base class It only works off 'properties' in the internal Dictionary - you can't expose existing type data It doesn't serialize to XML or with DataContractSerializer/DataContractJsonSerializer Expando - A truly extensible Object ExpandoObject is nice if you just need a dynamic container for a dictionary like structure. However, if you want to build an extensible object that starts out with a set of strongly typed properties and then allows you to extend it, ExpandoObject does not work because it's a sealed class that can't be inherited. I started thinking about this very scenario for one of my applications I'm building for a customer. In this system we are connecting to various different user stores. Each user store has the same basic requirements for username, password, name etc. But then each store also has a number of extended properties that is available to each application. In the real world scenario the data is loaded from the database in a data reader and the known properties are assigned from the known fields in the database. All unknown fields are then 'added' to the expando object dynamically. In the past I've done this very thing with a separate property - Properties - just like I do for this class. But the property and dictionary syntax is not ideal and tedious to work with. I started thinking about how to represent these extra property structures. One way certainly would be to add a Dictionary, or an ExpandoObject to hold all those extra properties. But wouldn't it be nice if the application could actually extend an existing object that looks something like this as you can with the Expando object:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } } and then simply start extending the properties of this object dynamically? Using the Expando object I describe later you can now do the following:[TestMethod] public void UserExampleTest() { var user = new User(); // Set strongly typed properties user.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; user.Name = "Rickochet"; user.Active = true; // Now add dynamic properties dynamic duser = user; duser.Entered = DateTime.Now; duser.Accesses = 1; // you can also add dynamic props via indexer user["NickName"] = "AntiSocialX"; duser["WebSite"] = "http://www.west-wind.com/weblog"; // Access strong type through dynamic ref Assert.AreEqual(user.Name,duser.Name); // Access strong type through indexer Assert.AreEqual(user.Password,user["Password"]); // access dyanmically added value through indexer Assert.AreEqual(duser.Entered,user["Entered"]); // access index added value through dynamic Assert.AreEqual(user["NickName"],duser.NickName); // loop through all properties dynamic AND strong type properties (true) foreach (var prop in user.GetProperties(true)) { object val = prop.Value; if (val == null) val = "null"; Console.WriteLine(prop.Key + ": " + val.ToString()); } } As you can see this code somewhat blurs the line between a static and dynamic type. You start with a strongly typed object that has a fixed set of properties. You can then cast the object to dynamic (as I discussed in my last post) and add additional properties to the object. You can also use an indexer to add dynamic properties to the object. To access the strongly typed properties you can use either the strongly typed instance, the indexer or the dynamic cast of the object. Personally I think it's kinda cool to have an easy way to access strongly typed properties by string which can make some data scenarios much easier. To access the 'dynamically added' properties you can use either the indexer on the strongly typed object, or property syntax on the dynamic cast. Using the dynamic type allows all three modes to work on both strongly typed and dynamic properties. Finally you can iterate over all properties, both dynamic and strongly typed if you chose. Lots of flexibility. Note also that by default the Expando object works against the (this) instance meaning it extends the current object. You can also pass in a separate instance to the constructor in which case that object will be used to iterate over to find properties rather than this. Using this approach provides some really interesting functionality when use the dynamic type. To use this we have to add an explicit constructor to the Expando subclass:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } public User() : base() { } // only required if you want to mix in seperate instance public User(object instance) : base(instance) { } } to allow the instance to be passed. When you do you can now do:[TestMethod] public void ExpandoMixinTest() { // have Expando work on Addresses var user = new User( new Address() ); // cast to dynamicAccessToPropertyTest dynamic duser = user; // Set strongly typed properties duser.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; // Set properties on address object duser.Address = "32 Kaiea"; //duser.Phone = "808-123-2131"; // set dynamic properties duser.NonExistantProperty = "This works too"; // shows default value Address.Phone value Console.WriteLine(duser.Phone); } Using the dynamic cast in this case allows you to access *three* different 'objects': The strong type properties, the dynamically added properties in the dictionary and the properties of the instance passed in! Effectively this gives you a way to simulate multiple inheritance (which is scary - so be very careful with this, but you can do it). How Expando works Behind the scenes Expando is a DynamicObject subclass as I discussed in my last post. By implementing a few of DynamicObject's methods you can basically create a type that can trap 'property missing' and 'method missing' operations. When you access a non-existant property a known method is fired that our code can intercept and provide a value for. Internally Expando uses a custom dictionary implementation to hold the dynamic properties you might add to your expandable object. Let's look at code first. The code for the Expando type is straight forward and given what it provides relatively short. Here it is.using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Dynamic; using System.Reflection; namespace Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic { /// <summary> /// Class that provides extensible properties and methods. This /// dynamic object stores 'extra' properties in a dictionary or /// checks the actual properties of the instance. /// /// This means you can subclass this expando and retrieve either /// native properties or properties from values in the dictionary. /// /// This type allows you three ways to access its properties: /// /// Directly: any explicitly declared properties are accessible /// Dynamic: dynamic cast allows access to dictionary and native properties/methods /// Dictionary: Any of the extended properties are accessible via IDictionary interface /// </summary> [Serializable] public class Expando : DynamicObject, IDynamicMetaObjectProvider { /// <summary> /// Instance of object passed in /// </summary> object Instance; /// <summary> /// Cached type of the instance /// </summary> Type InstanceType; PropertyInfo[] InstancePropertyInfo { get { if (_InstancePropertyInfo == null && Instance != null) _InstancePropertyInfo = Instance.GetType().GetProperties(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly); return _InstancePropertyInfo; } } PropertyInfo[] _InstancePropertyInfo; /// <summary> /// String Dictionary that contains the extra dynamic values /// stored on this object/instance /// </summary> /// <remarks>Using PropertyBag to support XML Serialization of the dictionary</remarks> public PropertyBag Properties = new PropertyBag(); //public Dictionary<string,object> Properties = new Dictionary<string, object>(); /// <summary> /// This constructor just works off the internal dictionary and any /// public properties of this object. /// /// Note you can subclass Expando. /// </summary> public Expando() { Initialize(this); } /// <summary> /// Allows passing in an existing instance variable to 'extend'. /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// You can pass in null here if you don't want to /// check native properties and only check the Dictionary! /// </remarks> /// <param name="instance"></param> public Expando(object instance) { Initialize(instance); } protected virtual void Initialize(object instance) { Instance = instance; if (instance != null) InstanceType = instance.GetType(); } /// <summary> /// Try to retrieve a member by name first from instance properties /// followed by the collection entries. /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { result = null; // first check the Properties collection for member if (Properties.Keys.Contains(binder.Name)) { result = Properties[binder.Name]; return true; } // Next check for Public properties via Reflection if (Instance != null) { try { return GetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, out result); } catch { } } // failed to retrieve a property result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Property setter implementation tries to retrieve value from instance /// first then into this object /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { // first check to see if there's a native property to set if (Instance != null) { try { bool result = SetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, value); if (result) return true; } catch { } } // no match - set or add to dictionary Properties[binder.Name] = value; return true; } /// <summary> /// Dynamic invocation method. Currently allows only for Reflection based /// operation (no ability to add methods dynamically). /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryInvokeMember(InvokeMemberBinder binder, object[] args, out object result) { if (Instance != null) { try { // check instance passed in for methods to invoke if (InvokeMethod(Instance, binder.Name, args, out result)) return true; } catch { } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection Helper method to retrieve a property /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool GetProperty(object instance, string name, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { result = ((PropertyInfo)mi).GetValue(instance,null); return true; } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to set a property value /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool SetProperty(object instance, string name, object value) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.SetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { ((PropertyInfo)mi).SetValue(Instance, value, null); return true; } } return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to invoke a method /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool InvokeMethod(object instance, string name, object[] args, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; // Look at the instanceType var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0] as MethodInfo; result = mi.Invoke(Instance, args); return true; } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Convenience method that provides a string Indexer /// to the Properties collection AND the strongly typed /// properties of the object by name. /// /// // dynamic /// exp["Address"] = "112 nowhere lane"; /// // strong /// var name = exp["StronglyTypedProperty"] as string; /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// The getter checks the Properties dictionary first /// then looks in PropertyInfo for properties. /// The setter checks the instance properties before /// checking the Properties dictionary. /// </remarks> /// <param name="key"></param> /// /// <returns></returns> public object this[string key] { get { try { // try to get from properties collection first return Properties[key]; } catch (KeyNotFoundException ex) { // try reflection on instanceType object result = null; if (GetProperty(Instance, key, out result)) return result; // nope doesn't exist throw; } } set { if (Properties.ContainsKey(key)) { Properties[key] = value; return; } // check instance for existance of type first var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(key, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) SetProperty(Instance, key, value); else Properties[key] = value; } } /// <summary> /// Returns and the properties of /// </summary> /// <param name="includeProperties"></param> /// <returns></returns> public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,object>> GetProperties(bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(prop.Name, prop.GetValue(Instance, null)); } foreach (var key in this.Properties.Keys) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(key, this.Properties[key]); } /// <summary> /// Checks whether a property exists in the Property collection /// or as a property on the instance /// </summary> /// <param name="item"></param> /// <returns></returns> public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, object> item, bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { bool res = Properties.ContainsKey(item.Key); if (res) return true; if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) { if (prop.Name == item.Key) return true; } } return false; } } } Although the Expando class supports an indexer, it doesn't actually implement IDictionary or even IEnumerable. It only provides the indexer and Contains() and GetProperties() methods, that work against the Properties dictionary AND the internal instance. The reason for not implementing IDictionary is that a) it doesn't add much value since you can access the Properties dictionary directly and that b) I wanted to keep the interface to class very lean so that it can serve as an entity type if desired. Implementing these IDictionary (or even IEnumerable) causes LINQ extension methods to pop up on the type which obscures the property interface and would only confuse the purpose of the type. IDictionary and IEnumerable are also problematic for XML and JSON Serialization - the XML Serializer doesn't serialize IDictionary<string,object>, nor does the DataContractSerializer. The JavaScriptSerializer does serialize, but it treats the entire object like a dictionary and doesn't serialize the strongly typed properties of the type, only the dictionary values which is also not desirable. Hence the decision to stick with only implementing the indexer to support the user["CustomProperty"] functionality and leaving iteration functions to the publicly exposed Properties dictionary. Note that the Dictionary used here is a custom PropertyBag class I created to allow for serialization to work. One important aspect for my apps is that whatever custom properties get added they have to be accessible to AJAX clients since the particular app I'm working on is a SIngle Page Web app where most of the Web access is through JSON AJAX calls. PropertyBag can serialize to XML and one way serialize to JSON using the JavaScript serializer (not the DCS serializers though). The key components that make Expando work in this code are the Properties Dictionary and the TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() methods. The Properties collection is public so if you choose you can explicitly access the collection to get better performance or to manipulate the members in internal code (like loading up dynamic values form a database). Notice that TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() both work against the dictionary AND the internal instance to retrieve and set properties. This means that user["Name"] works against native properties of the object as does user["Name"] = "RogaDugDog". What's your Use Case? This is still an early prototype but I've plugged it into one of my customer's applications and so far it's working very well. The key features for me were the ability to easily extend the type with values coming from a database and exposing those values in a nice and easy to use manner. I'm also finding that using this type of object for ViewModels works very well to add custom properties to view models. I suspect there will be lots of uses for this - I've been using the extra dictionary approach to extensibility for years - using a dynamic type to make the syntax cleaner is just a bonus here. What can you think of to use this for? Resources Source Code and Tests (GitHub) Also integrated in Westwind.Utilities of the West Wind Web Toolkit West Wind Utilities NuGet© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in CSharp  .NET  Dynamic Types   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • New Slides - and a discussion about Dictionary Statistics

    - by Mike Dietrich
    First of all we have just upoaded a new version of the Upgrade and Migration Workshop slides with some added information. So please feel free to download them from here.The slides have one new interesting information which lead to a discussion I've had in the past days with a very large customer regarding their upgrades - and internally on the mailing list targeting an EBS database upgrade from Oracle 10.2 to Oracle 11.2. Why are we creating dictionary statistics during upgrade? I'd believe this forced dictionary statistics creation got introduced with the desupport of the Rule Based Optimizer in Oracle 10g. The goal: as RBO is not supported anymore we have to make sure that the data dictionary has fresh and non-stale statistics. Actually that would have led in Oracle 9i to strange behaviour in some databases - so in Oracle 9i this was strongly disrecommended. The upgrade scripts got hardcoded to create these stats. But during tests we had the following findings: It's important to create dictionary statistics the night before the upgrade. Not two weeks before, not 60 minutes before your downtime begins. But very close to the upgrade. From Oracle 10g onwards you'd just say: $ execute DBMS_STATS.GATHER_DICTIONARY_STATS; This is important to make sure you have fresh dictionary statistics during upgrade for performance reasons. Tests have shown that running an upgrade without valid dictionary statistics might slow down the whole upgrade by factors of 2x-3x. And it would be also a great idea post upgrade to create again fresh dictionary statistics when you've did suppress the stats creation during the upgrade process. Suppress? Yes, you could set this underscore parameter in the init.ora: _optim_dict_stats_at_db_cr_upg=FALSE to suppress the forced dictionary statistics collection during an upgrade. We believe strongly that (a) people using the default statistics creation process which will create dictionary statistics by default and (b) create fresh stats before upgrade on the dictionary. Therefore we find it save once you have followed our advice to use the underscore during upgrade. And we've taken out that forced statistics collection during upgrade in the next release of the database. Please note: If you are using the DBUA for the upgrade it will remove underscore parameters for the upgrade run to improve performance - which is generally a good idea. So you'll have to start the DBUA with that call: $ dbua -initParam "_optim_dict_stats_at_cb_cr_upg"=FALSE -Mike

    Read the article

  • Add collection or array to wpf resource dictionary

    - by Chris Cap
    I've search high and low and can't find an answer to this. I have two questions How do you create an array or collection in XAML. I've got an array I want to stick in there and bind to a combo box. My first idea was to put an ItemsControl in a resource dictionary, but the ItemsSource of a combo box expects IEnumerable so that didn't work. Here's what I've tried in my resource dictionary and neither works <ItemsControl x:Key="stateList"> <sys:String>AL</sys:String> <sys:String>CA</sys:String> <sys:String>CN</sys:String> </ItemsControl> <ItemsControl x:Key="stateList2"> <ComboBoxItem>AL</ComboBoxItem> <ComboBoxItem>CA</ComboBoxItem> <ComboBoxItem>CN</ComboBoxItem> </ItemsControl> and here's how I bind to it <ComboBox SelectedValue="{Binding Path=State}" ItemsSource="{Binding Source={StaticResource stateList2}}" > </ComboBox> EDIT: UPDATED I got this first part to work this way <col:ArrayList x:Key="stateList3"> <sys:String>AL</sys:String> <sys:String>CA</sys:String> <sys:String>CN</sys:String> </col:ArrayList> However, I'd rather not use an array list, I'd like to use a generic list so if anyone knows how please let me know. EDIT UPDATE: I guess XAML has very limited support for generics so maybe an array list is the best I can do for now, but I would still like help on the second question if anyone has an anser 2nd. I've tried referencing a merged resource dictionary in my XAML and had problems because under Window.resources I had more than just the dictionary so it required me to add x:Key. Once I add the key, the system can no longer find the items in my resource dictionary. I had to move the merged dictionary to Grid.Resources instead. Ideally I'd like to reference the merged dictionary in the app.xaml but I have the same problem Here's some sample code. This first part required an x:key to compile because I have converter and it complained that every item must have a key if there is more than one <UserControl.Resources> <win:BooleanToVisibilityConverter x:Key="VisibilityConverter" /> <ResourceDictionary> <ResourceDictionary.MergedDictionaries> <ResourceDictionary Source="/ResourcesD.xaml" /> </ResourceDictionary.MergedDictionaries> </ResourceDictionary> </UserControl.Resources> I had to change it to this <UI:BaseStep.Resources> <win:BooleanToVisibilityConverter x:Key="VisibilityConverter" /> </UI:BaseStep.Resources> <Grid> <Grid.Resources> <ResourceDictionary> <ResourceDictionary.MergedDictionaries> <ResourceDictionary Source="/ResourcesD.xaml" /> </ResourceDictionary.MergedDictionaries> </ResourceDictionary> </Grid.Resources> </Grid> Thank you

    Read the article

  • C# Dictionary as a ListBox.DataSource

    - by Steve H.
    I am trying to bind a dictionary as a DataSource to a ListBox. The solution in How to bind a dicationary to a ListBox in winforms will not work for me because my dictionary is a class-level variable and not a method-level variable, so I can not use var. When you put a class-level variable into new BindingSource(...) with null as the second argument I get an ArgumentNull exception. How do I bind a class-level dictionary as a data source for a list box? I don't like the List< KeyValuePair< string, string work-around becuase Where(...) and First(...) are ugly, complicated, and confusing compared to TryGetValue(...) and other Dictionary functionality.

    Read the article

  • NameValueCollection vs Dictionary<string,string>

    - by frankadelic
    Any reason I should use Dictionary<string,string instead of NameValueCollection? (in C# / .NET Framework) Option 1, using NameValueCollection: //enter values: NameValueCollection nvc = new NameValueCollection() { {"key1", "value1"}, {"key2", "value2"}, {"key3", "value3"} }; // retrieve values: foreach(string key in nvc.AllKeys) { string value = nvc[key]; // do something } Option 2, using Dictionary<string,string... //enter values: Dictionary<string, string> dict = new Dictionary<string, string>() { {"key1", "value1"}, {"key2", "value2"}, {"key3", "value3"} }; // retrieve values: foreach (KeyValuePair<string, string> kvp in dict) { string key = kvp.Key; string val = kvp.Value; // do something } For these use cases, is there any advantage to use one versus the other? Any difference in performance, memory use, sort order, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Python: Filter a dictionary

    - by Adam Matan
    Hi, I have a dictionary of points, say: >>> points={'a':(3,4), 'b':(1,2), 'c':(5,5), 'd':(3,3)} I want to create a new dictionary with all the points whose x and y value is smaller than 5, i.e. points 'a', 'b' and 'd'. According to the the book, each dictionary has the items() function, which returns a list of (key, pair) tuple: >>> points.items() [('a', (3, 4)), ('c', (5, 5)), ('b', (1, 2)), ('d', (3, 3))] So I have written this: >>> for item in [i for i in points.items() if i[1][0]<5 and i[1][1]<5]: ... points_small[item[0]]=item[1] ... >>> points_small {'a': (3, 4), 'b': (1, 2), 'd': (3, 3)} Is there a more elegant way? I was expecting Python to have some super-awesome dictionary.filter(f) function... Adam

    Read the article

  • "Verbose Dictionary" in C#, 'override new' this[] or implement IDictionary

    - by Benjol
    All I want is a dictionary which tells me which key it couldn't find, rather than just saying The given key was not present in the dictionary. I briefly considered doing a subclass with override new this[TKey key], but felt it was a bit hacky, so I've gone with implementing the IDictionary interface, and passing everything through directly to an inner Dictionary, with the only additional logic being in the indexer: public TValue this[TKey key] { get { ThrowIfKeyNotFound(key); return _dic[key]; } set { ThrowIfKeyNotFound(key); _dic[key] = value; } } private void ThrowIfKeyNotFound(TKey key) { if(!_dic.ContainsKey(key)) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("Can't find key [" + key + "] in dictionary"); } Is this the right/only way to go? Would newing over the this[] really be that bad?

    Read the article

  • English dictionary as txt or xml file with support of synonyms

    - by Simon
    Can someone point me to where I can download English dictionary as a txt or xml file. I am building a simple app for myself and looking for something what I could start using immediately without learning complex API. Support for synonyms would be great, that is it should be easier to retrieve all the synonyms for particular word. It would be absolutely fantastic if dictionary would be listing British and American spelling of the words where they are differ. Even if it would be small dictionary (few 000's words) that's ok, I only need it for small project. I even would be willing to buy one if the price is reasonable, and dictionary is easy to use - simple xml wold be great. Any directions please.

    Read the article

  • DataGridView bound to a Dictionary and updated with a thread

    - by Manjoor
    I have a Dictionary binded to DataGridView by using following sample code. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/854953/datagridview-bound-to-a-dictionary Please see the above question first The diffrence is that i am updating dictionary from a thread. (Event handler of another class). My Event handler is as below static void f_PriceChanged(Objet f, eventData e) { if (prices.ContainsKey(e.ItemText)) prices[e.ItemText] = e.price; else prices.Add(e.ItemText, e.price); } Not to mention the prices is declared as class level. I have modified the button code from original post as Button btn = new Button(); btn.Dock = DockStyle.Bottom; btn.Click += delegate { bl.Reset(); }; form.Controls.Add(btn); Internally the Dictionary is updated as expected but grid does not update. Clicking on button generate exception Collection was modified; enumeration operation may not execute What to do?

    Read the article

  • .NET Dictionary as a Property

    - by Anand
    Can someone point me out to some C# code examples or provide some code, where a Dictionary has been used as a property for a Class. The examples I have seen so far don't cover all the aspects viz how to declare the dictionary as property, add, remove, and retrieve the elements from the dictionary.

    Read the article

  • How to get values after dictionary sorting by values with linq

    - by user301639
    hey, I've a dictionary, which i sorted by value with linq, how can i get those sorted value from the sorted result i get that's what i did so far Dictionary<char, int> lettersAcurr = new Dictionary<char, int>();//sort by int value var sortedDict = (from entry in lettersAcurr orderby entry.Value descending select entry); during the debug i can see that sortedDic has a KeyValuePar, but i cant accesses to it thanks for help

    Read the article

  • C++ and Scripting.Dictionary from scrrun.dll

    - by MaxFX
    Hello. I have some trouble with Scripting.Dictionary in C++. I'm trying to use interface IDictionary via smart pointer but methods of creating object don't work and I can't understand why. CoInitialize(NULL); IDictionaryPtr dict; dict.CreateInstance(__uuidof(Dictionary)); _variant_t num1 = 1; _variant_t num2 = 2; dict->Add(&num1, &num2); long i; dict->get_Count(&i); cout << i << "\n"; But method Add does not work and cout of elements in dictionary is always 0. How correct to use Scripting.Dictionary in that case. PS.: I'm getting Scripting interfaces by #import "scrrun.dll"

    Read the article

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