Search Results

Search found 467 results on 19 pages for 'weak'.

Page 3/19 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Castle Windsor Weak Typed Factory

    - by JeffN825
    In a very very limited number of scenarios, I need to go from an unknown Type (at compile time) to an instance of the object registered for that type. For the most part, I use typed factories and I know the type I want to resolve at compile time...so I inject a Func<IMyType> into a constructor ...but in these limited number of scenarios, in order to avoid a direct call to the container (and thus having to reference Windsor from the library, which is an anti-pattern I'd like to avoid), I need to inject a Func<Type,object>...which I want to internally container.Resolve(type) for the Type parameter of the Func. Does anyone have some suggestions on the easiest/most straightforward way of setting this up? I tried the following, but with this setup, I end up bypassing the regular TypedFactoryFacility altogether which is definitely not what I want: Kernel.Register(Component.For(typeof (Func<Type, object>)).LifeStyle.Singleton.UsingFactoryMethod( (kernel, componentModel, creationContext) => kernel.Resolve(/* not sure what to put here... */))); Thanks in advance for any assistance.

    Read the article

  • How do I disable MEDIUM and WEAK/LOW strength ciphers in Apache + mod_ssl?

    - by superwormy
    A PCI Compliance scan has suggested that we disable Apache's MEDIUM and LOW/WEAK strength ciphers for security. Can someone tell me how to disable these ciphers? Apache v2.2.14 mod_ssl v2.2.14 This is what they've told us: Synopsis : The remote service supports the use of medium strength SSL ciphers. Description : The remote host supports the use of SSL ciphers that offer medium strength encryption, which we currently regard as those with key lengths at least 56 bits and less than 112 bits. Solution: Reconfigure the affected application if possible to avoid use of medium strength ciphers. Risk Factor: Medium / CVSS Base Score : 5.0 (CVSS2#AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N) [More] Synopsis : The remote service supports the use of weak SSL ciphers. Description : The remote host supports the use of SSL ciphers that offer either weak encryption or no encryption at all. See also : http://www.openssl.org/docs/apps/ciphers .html Solution: Reconfigure the affected application if possible to avoid use of weak ciphers. Risk Factor: Medium / CVSS Base Score : 5.0 (CVSS2#AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N) [More]

    Read the article

  • Why is Visual Studio 2008 stuck in debug mode when compiling

    - by Mark
    I have a .NET project that for some reason gets stuck in debug mode. I've changed the compile mode from debug to release in the toolbar, but my project ends up in the debug directory anyway. Seems like VS is not updating the SLN file or something. Please help! The reason I am asking about this is because it seems that there are weak references "ENCList" clogging up memory when my program runs, and they seem to be created when .NET apps are compiled in debug (or so says other sources I've found online). -Mark

    Read the article

  • Why does by iPhone App cannot load NSURL when linked against iPhone OS SDK 4.0 and run on iPhone OS

    - by Tichel
    I have an iPhone App linked against iPhone SDK 4.0 but as deployment target I selected OS 3.1. When I start the application on my iPod touch running 3.1.3 I get an error that the class NSURL cannot be found: dyld: Symbol not found: _OBJC_CLASS_$_NSURL Referenced from: /var/mobile/Applications/21ECAA8E-8777-4020-82F5-56C510D0AEAE/myTracks4iPhoneOS.app/myTracks4iPhoneOS Expected in: /System/Library/Frameworks/CoreFoundation.framework/CoreFoundation in /var/mobile/Applications/21ECAA8E-8777-4020-82F5-56C510D0AEAE/myTracks4iPhoneOS.app/myTracks4iPhoneOS Data Formatters temporarily unavailable, will re-try after a 'continue'. (Not safe to call dlopen at this time.) mi_cmd_stack_list_frames: Not enough frames in stack. mi_cmd_stack_list_frames: Not enough frames in stack. When I declare CoreFoundation as weak framework then I am able to start the App. But the class NSURL itself does not work. Any idea? Thanks, Dirk

    Read the article

  • weakref list in python

    - by Dan
    I'm in need of a list of weak references that deletes items when they die. Currently the only way I have of doing this is to keep flushing the list (removing dead references manually). I'm aware there's a WeakKeyDictionary and a WeakValueDictionary, but I'm really after a WeakList, is there a way of doing this? Here's an example: import weakref class A(object): def __init__(self): pass class B(object): def __init__(self): self._references = [] def addReference(self, obj): self._references.append(weakref.ref(obj)) def flush(self): toRemove = [] for ref in self._references: if ref() is None: toRemove.append(ref) for item in toRemove: self._references.remove(item) b = B() a1 = A() b.addReference(a1) a2 = A() b.addReference(a2) del a1 b.flush() del a2 b.flush()

    Read the article

  • How does the Garbage Collector decide when to kill objects held by WeakReferences?

    - by Kennet Belenky
    I have an object, which I believe is held only by a WeakReference. I've traced its reference holders using SOS and SOSEX, and both confirm that this is the case (I'm not an SOS expert, so I could be wrong on this point). The standard explanation of WeakReferences is that the GC ignores them when doing its sweeps. Nonetheless, my object survives an invocation to GC.Collect(GC.MaxGeneration, GCCollectionMode.Forced). Is it possible for an object that is only referenced with a WeakReference to survive that collection? Is there an even more thorough collection that I can force? Or, should I re-visit my belief that the only references to the object are weak?

    Read the article

  • Can a conforming C# compiler optimize away a local (but unused) variable if it is the only strong re

    - by stakx
    The title says it all, but let me explain: void Case_1() { var weakRef = new WeakReference(new object()); GC.Collect(); // <-- doesn't have to be an explicit call; just assume that // garbage collection would occur at this point. if (weakRef.IsAlive) ... } In this code example, I obviously have to plan for the possibility that the new'ed object is reclaimed by the garbage collector; therefore the if statement. (Note that I'm using weakRef for the sole purpose of checking if the new'ed object is still around.) void Case_2() { var unusedLocalVar = new object(); var weakRef = new WeakReference(unusedLocalVar); GC.Collect(); // <-- doesn't have to be an explicit call; just assume that // garbage collection would occur at this point. Debug.Assert(weakReferenceToUseless.IsAlive); } The main change in this code example from the previous one is that the new'ed object is strongly referenced by a local variable (unusedLocalVar). However, this variable is never used again after the weak reference (weakRef) has been created. Question: Is a conforming C# compiler allowed to optimize the first two lines of Case_2 into those of Case_1 if it sees that unusedLocalVar is only used in one place, namely as an argument to the WeakReference constructor? i.e. is there any possibility that the assertion in Case_2 could ever fail?

    Read the article

  • Lifetime issue of IDisposable unmanaged resources in a complex object graph?

    - by stakx
    This question is about dealing with unmanaged resources (COM interop) and making sure there won't be any resource leaks. I'd appreciate feedback on whether I seem to do things the right way. Background: Let's say I've got two classes: A class LimitedComResource which is a wrapper around a COM object (received via some API). There can only be a limited number of those COM objects, therefore my class implements the IDisposable interface which will be responsible for releasing a COM object when it's no longer needed. Objects of another type ManagedObject are temporarily created to perform some work on a LimitedComResource. They are not IDisposable. To summarize the above in a diagram, my classes might look like this: +---------------+ +--------------------+ | ManagedObject | <>------> | LimitedComResource | +---------------+ +--------------------+ | o IDisposable (I'll provide example code for these two classes in just a moment.) Question: Since my temporary ManagedObject objects are not disposable, I obviously have no control over how long they'll be around. However, in the meantime I might have Disposed the LimitedComObject that a ManagedObject is referring to. How can I make sure that a ManagedObject won't access a LimitedComResource that's no longer there? +---------------+ +--------------------+ | managedObject | <>------> | (dead object) | +---------------+ +--------------------+ I've currently implemented this with a mix of weak references and a flag in LimitedResource which signals whether an object has already been disposed. Is there any better way? Example code (what I've currently got): LimitedComResource: class LimitedComResource : IDisposable { private readonly IUnknown comObject; // <-- set in constructor ... void Dispose(bool notFromFinalizer) { if (!this.isDisposed) { Marshal.FinalReleaseComObject(comObject); } this.isDisposed = true; } internal bool isDisposed = false; } ManagedObject: class ManagedObject { private readonly WeakReference limitedComResource; // <-- set in constructor ... public void DoSomeWork() { if (!limitedComResource.IsAlive()) { throw new ObjectDisposedException(); // ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ // is there a more suitable exception class? } var ur = (LimitedComResource)limitedComResource.Target; if (ur.isDisposed) { throw new ObjectDisposedException(); } ... // <-- do something sensible here! } }

    Read the article

  • Instance caching in Objective C

    - by zoul
    Hello! I want to cache the instances of a certain class. The class keeps a dictionary of all its instances and when somebody requests a new instance, the class tries to satisfy the request from the cache first. There is a small problem with memory management though: The dictionary cache retains the inserted objects, so that they never get deallocated. I do want them to get deallocated, so that I had to overload the release method and when the retain count drops to one, I can remove the instance from cache and let it get deallocated. This works, but I am not comfortable mucking around the release method and find the solution overly complicated. I thought I could use some hashing class that does not retain the objects it stores. Is there such? The idea is that when the last user of a certain instance releases it, the instance would automatically disappear from the cache. NSHashTable seems to be what I am looking for, but the documentation talks about “supporting weak relationships in a garbage-collected environment.” Does it also work without garbage collection? Clarification: I cannot afford to keep the instances in memory unless somebody really needs them, that is why I want to purge the instance from the cache when the last “real” user releases it. Better solution: This was on the iPhone, I wanted to cache some textures and on the other hand I wanted to free them from memory as soon as the last real holder released them. The easier way to code this is through another class (let’s call it TextureManager). This class manages the texture instances and caches them, so that subsequent calls for texture with the same name are served from the cache. There is no need to purge the cache immediately as the last user releases the texture. We can simply keep the texture cached in memory and when the device gets short on memory, we receive the low memory warning and can purge the cache. This is a better solution, because the caching stuff does not pollute the Texture class, we do not have to mess with release and there is even a higher chance for cache hits. The TextureManager can be abstracted into a ResourceManager, so that it can cache other data, not only textures.

    Read the article

  • How to pass an event to a method and then subscribe to it?

    - by Ryan Peschel
    Event Handler public void DeliverEvent(object sender, EventArgs e) { } #1: This Works public void StartListening(Button source) { source.Click += DeliverEvent; } #2: And so does this.. public void StartListening(EventHandler eventHandler) { eventHandler += DeliverEvent; } But in #2, you cannot call the method because if you try something like this: StartListening(button.Click); You get this error: The event 'System.Windows.Forms.Control.Click' can only appear on the left hand side of += or -= Is there any way around that error? I want to be able to pass the event and not the object housing the event to the StartListening method.

    Read the article

  • WeakReferences are not freed in embedded OS

    - by Carsten König
    I've got a strange behavior here: I get a massive memory leak in production running a WPF application that runs on a DLOG-Terminal (Windows Embedded Standard SP1) that behaves perfectly fine if I run it localy on a normal desktop (Win7 prof.) After many unsucessful attempts to find any problem I put one of those directly beside my monitor, installed the ANTs MemoryProfiler and did one hour test run simulating user operations on both the terminal and my development PC. Result is, that due to some strange reasons the embedded system piles up a huge amount of WeakReference and EffectiveValueEntry[] Objects. Here are are some pictures: Development (PC): And the terminal: Just look at the class list... Has anyone seen something like this before and are there known solutions to this? Where can I get help? (PS the terminals where installed with images prepared for .net4)

    Read the article

  • What's the performance penalty of weak_ptr?

    - by Kornel Kisielewicz
    I'm currently designing a object structure for a game, and the most natural organization in my case became a tree. Being a great fan of smart pointers I use shared_ptr's exclusively. However, in this case, the children in the tree will need access to it's parent (example -- beings on map need to be able to access map data -- ergo the data of their parents. The direction of owning is of course that a map owns it's beings, so holds shared pointers to them. To access the map data from within a being we however need a pointer to the parent -- the smart pointer way is to use a reference, ergo a weak_ptr. However, I once read that locking a weak_ptr is a expensive operation -- maybe that's not true anymore -- but considering that the weak_ptr will be locked very often, I'm concerned that this design is doomed with poor performance. Hence the question: What is the performance penalty of locking a weak_ptr? How significant is it?

    Read the article

  • Constructing a WeakReference<T> throws COMException

    - by ChaseMedallion
    The following code: IDisposable d = ... new WeakReference<IDisposable>(d); Has started throwing the following exception on SOME machines. What could cause this? System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException: Unspecified error (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80004005 (E_FAIL)) EDIT: the machines that experience the error are running Windows Server 2008 R2. Windows Server 2012 and desktop machines running windows 7 work fine. (this is true, but I now think a different issue is the relevant difference... see below). EDIT: as an additional note, this occurred right after updating our codebase to Entity Framework 6.1.1.-beta1. In the above code, The IDisposable is a class which wraps an EF DbContext. EDIT: why the votes to close? EDIT: the stack trace of the failure ends at the WeakReference<T> constructor called in the above code: at System.WeakReference`1..ctor(T target, Boolean trackResurrection) // from here on down it's code we wrote/simple LINQ. None of this code has changed recently; // we just upgraded to EF6 and saw this failure start happening at Core.Data.EntityFrameworkDataContext.RegisterDependentDisposable(IDisposable child) at Core.Data.ServiceFactory.GetConstructorParameter[TService](Type parameterType) at System.Linq.Enumerable.WhereSelectListIterator`2.MoveNext() at System.Linq.Buffer`1..ctor(IEnumerable`1 source) at System.Linq.Enumerable.ToArray[TSource](IEnumerable`1 source) at Core.Data.ServiceFactory.CreateService[TService]() at MVC controller action method EDIT: it turns out that the machines having issues with this were running AppDynamics. Uninstalling that seems to have removed the issue.

    Read the article

  • When would JavaScript == make more sense than ===?

    - by bryantsai
    As 359494 indicates they are basically identical except '===' also ensures type equality and hence '==' might perform type conversion. In Douglas Crockford's JavaScript: The Good Parts, it is advised to always avoid '=='. However, I'm wondering what the original thought of designing two set of equality operators was. Have you seen any situation that using '==' actually is more suitable than using '==='?

    Read the article

  • Criteria for triggering garbage collection in .Net

    - by Kennet Belenky
    I've come across some curious behavior with regard to garbage collection in .Net. The following program will throw an OutOfMemoryException very quickly (after less than a second on a 32-bit, 2GB machine). The Foo finalizer is never called. class Foo { static Dictionary<Guid, WeakReference> allFoos = new Dictionary<Guid, WeakReference>(); Guid guid = Guid.NewGuid(); byte[] buffer = new byte[1000000]; static Random rand = new Random(); public Foo() { // Uncomment the following line and the program will run forever. // rand.NextBytes(buffer); allFoos[guid] = new WeakReference(this); } ~Foo() { allFoos.Remove(guid); } static public void Main(string args[]) { for (; ; ) { new Foo(); } } } If the rand.nextBytes line is uncommented, it will run ad infinitum, and the Foo finalizer is regularly invoked. Why is that? My best guess is that in the former case, either the CLR or the Windows VMM is lazy about allocating physical memory. The buffer never gets written to, so the physical memory is never used. When the address space runs out, the system crashes. In the latter case, the system runs out of physical memory before it runs out of address space, the GC is triggered and the objects are collected. However, here's the part I don't get. Assuming my theory is correct, why doesn't the GC trigger when the address space runs low? If my theory is incorrect, then what's the real explanation?

    Read the article

  • Solved: Chrome v18, self signed certs and &ldquo;signed using a weak signature algorithm&rdquo;

    - by David Christiansen
    So chrome has just updated itself automatically and you are now running v18 – great. Or is it… If like me, you are someone that are running sites using a self-signed SSL Certificate (i.e. when running a site on a developer machine) you may come across the following lovely message; Fear not, this is likely as a result of you following instructions you found on the apache openssl site which results in a self signed cert using the MD5 signature hashing algorithm. Using OpenSSL The simple fix is to generate a new certificate specifying to use the SHA512 signature hashing algorithm, like so; openssl req -new -x509 -sha512 -nodes -out server.crt -keyout server.key Simples! Now, you should be able to confirm the signature algorithm used is sha512 by looking at the details tab of certificate Notes If you change your certificate, be sure to reapply any private key permissions you require – such as allowing access to the application pool user.

    Read the article

  • Solved: Chrome v18, self signed certs and &ldquo;signed using a weak signature algorithm&rdquo;

    - by David Christiansen
    So chrome has just updated itself automatically and you are now running v18 – great. Or is it… If like me, you are someone that are running sites using a self-signed SSL Certificate (i.e. when running a site on a developer machine) you may come across the following lovely message; Fear not, this is likely as a result of you following instructions you found on the apache openssl site which results in a self signed cert using the MD5 signature hashing algorithm. The simple fix is to generate a new certificate specifying to use the SHA1 signature hashing algorithm, like so; openssl req -new -x509 -sha1 -nodes -out server.crt -keyout server.key Simples!

    Read the article

  • How to get the field name of a java (weak) reference pointing to an object in an other class?

    - by Tom
    Imagine I have the following situation: Test1.java import java.lang.ref.WeakReference; public class Test1 { public WeakReference fieldName; public init() { fieldName = new WeakReference(this); Test2.setWeakRef(fieldName); } } Test2.java import java.lang.ref.WeakReference; public class Test2 { public static setWeakRef(WeakReference weakRef) { //at this point I got weakRef in an other class.. now, how do I get the field name this reference was created with? So that it returns exactly "fieldName", because that's the name I gave it in Test1.java? } } At the location of the comment I received the weak reference created in an other class. How would I retreive the field name that this weak reference was created with, in this case "fieldName"? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Should we point to an NSManagedObject entity with weak instead of strong pointer?

    - by Jim Thio
    I think because NSManagedObject is managed by the managedObject context the pointer should be weak. Yet it often goes back to 0 in my cases. for (CategoryNearby * CN in sorted) { //[arrayOfItems addObject:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"%@ - %d",CN.name,[CN.order intValue]]]; NearbyShortcutTVC * tvc=[[NearbyShortcutTVC alloc]init]; tvc.categoryNearby =CN; // tvc.titleString=[NSString stringWithFormat:@"%@",CN.name]; // tvc.displayed=CN.displayed; [arrayOfItemsLocal addObject:tvc]; //CN PO(tvc); PO(tvc.categoryNearby); while (false); } self.arrayOfItems = arrayOfItemsLocal; PO(self.categoriesNearbyInArrayOfItems); [self.tableViewa reloadData]; ... Yet somewhere down the line: tvc.categoryNearby becomes nil. I do not know how or when or where it become nil. How do I debug this? Or should the reference be strong instead? This is the interface of NearbyShortcutTVC by the way @interface NearbyShortcutTVC : BGBaseTableViewCell{ } @property (weak, nonatomic) CategoryNearby * categoryNearby; @end To make sure that we're talking about the same object I print all the memory addresses of the NSArray They're both the exact same object. But somehow the categoryNearby property of the object is magically set to null somewhere. self.categoriesNearbyInArrayOfItems: ( 0x883bfe0, 0x8b6d420, 0x8b6f9f0, 0x8b71de0, 0xb073f90, 0xb061a10, 0xb06a880, 0x8b74940, 0x8b77110, 0x8b794e0, 0x8b7bf40, 0x8b7cef0, 0x8b7f4b0, 0x8b81a30, 0x88622d0, 0x8864e60, 0xb05c9a0 ) self.categoriesNearbyInArrayOfItems: ( 0x883bfe0, 0x8b6d420, 0x8b6f9f0, 0x8b71de0, 0xb073f90, 0xb061a10, 0xb06a880, 0x8b74940, 0x8b77110, 0x8b794e0, 0x8b7bf40, 0x8b7cef0, 0x8b7f4b0, 0x8b81a30, 0x88622d0, 0x8864e60, 0xb05c9a0 )

    Read the article

  • Is there a compiled* programming language with dynamic, maybe even weak typing?

    - by sub
    I wondered if there is a programming language which compiles to machine code/binary (not bytecode then executed by a VM, that's something completely different when considering typing) that features dynamic and/or weak typing, e.g: Think of a compiled language where: Variables don't need to be declared Variables can be created doing runtime Functions can return values of different types Questions: Is there such a programming language? (Why) not? I think that a dynamically yet strong typed, compiled language would really sense, but is it possible?

    Read the article

  • JVMTI: FollowReferences : how to skip Soft/Weak/Phantom references?

    - by Jayan
    I am writing a small code to detect number of objects left behind after certain actions in our tool. This uses FollowReferences() JVMTI-API. This counts instances reachable by all paths. How can I skip paths that included weak/soft/phantom reference? (IterateThroughHeap counts all objects at the moment, so the number is not fully reliable) Thanks, Jayan

    Read the article

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