Search Results

Search found 11135 results on 446 pages for 'thread safe'.

Page 314/446 | < Previous Page | 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321  | Next Page >

• Web development scheme for staging and production servers using Git Push

  - by ServAce85

  I am using git to manage a dynamic website (PHP + MySQL) and I want to send my files from my localhost to my staging and development servers in the most efficient and hassle-free way. I am currently convinced that the best way for me to approach this problem is to use this git branching model to organize my local git repo. From there, I will use the release branches to push to my staging server for testing. Once I am happy that the release code works on the staging server, I can then merge with my master branch and push that to my production server. Pushing to Staging Server: As noted in many introductory git posts, I could run into problems pushing into a non-bare repo, so, as suggested in this response, I plan to push the release branch to a bare repo on the server and have a post-receive hook that clones the bare repo to a non-bare repo that also acts as the web-hosted directory. Pushing to Production Server: Here's my newest source of confusion... In the response that I cited above, it made me curious as to why @Paul states that it's a completely different story when pushing to a live, development server. I guess I don't see the problem. Would it be safe and hassle-free to follow the same steps as above, but for the master branch? Where are the potential pit-falls? Config Files: With respect to configuration files that are unique to each environment (.htaccess, config.php, etc), it seems simplest to .gitignore each of those files in their respective repos on their respective servers. Can you see anything immediately wrong with this? Better solutions? Accessing Data: Finally, as I initially stated, the site uses MySQL databases to store data. How would you suggest I access that data (for testing purposes) from the staging server and localhost? I realize that I may have asked way too many questions for a single post, but since they're all related to the best way to set up this development scheme, I thought it was necessary.

  Read the article

• Spring: Bean fails to read off values from external Properties file when using @Value annotation

  - by daydreamer

  XML Configuration <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:util="http://www.springframework.org/schema/util" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd http://www.springframework.org/schema/util http://www.springframework.org/schema/util/spring-util.xsd"> <util:properties id="mongoProperties" location="file:///storage/local.properties" /> <bean id="mongoService" class="com.business.persist.MongoService"></bean> </beans> and MongoService looks like @Service public class MongoService { @Value("#{mongoProperties[host]}") private String host; @Value("#{mongoProperties[port]}") private int port; @Value("#{mongoProperties[database]}") private String database; private Mongo mongo; private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(MongoService.class); public MongoService() throws UnknownHostException { LOGGER.info("host=" + host + ", port=" + port + ", database=" + database); mongo = new Mongo(host, port); } public void putDocument(@Nonnull final DBObject document) { LOGGER.info("inserting document - " + document.toString()); mongo.getDB(database).getCollection(getCollectionName(document)).insert(document, WriteConcern.SAFE); } I write my MongoServiceTest as public class MongoServiceTest { @Autowired private MongoService mongoService; public MongoServiceTest() throws UnknownHostException { mongoRule = new MongoRule(); } @Test public void testMongoService() { final DBObject document = DBContract.getUniqueQuery("001"); document.put(DBContract.RVARIABLES, "values"); document.put(DBContract.PVARIABLES, "values"); mongoService.putDocument(document); } and I see failures in tests as 12:37:25.224 [main] INFO c.s.business.persist.MongoService - host=null, port=0, database=null java.lang.NullPointerException at com.business.persist.MongoServiceTest.testMongoService(MongoServiceTest.java:40) Which means bean was not able to read the values from local.properties local.properties ### === MongoDB interaction === ### host="127.0.0.1" port=27017 database=contract How do I fix this? update It doesn't seem to read off the values even after creating setters/getters for the fields. I am really clueless now. How can I even debug this issue? Thanks much!

  Read the article

• Intel MKL memory management and exceptions

  - by Andrew

  Hello everyone, I am trying out Intel MKL and it appears that they have their own memory management (C-style). They suggest using their MKL_malloc/MKL_free pairs for vectors and matrices and I do not know what is a good way to handle it. One of the reasons for that is that memory-alignment is recommended to be at least 16-byte and with these routines it is specified explicitly. I used to rely on auto_ptr and boost::smart_ptr a lot to forget about memory clean-ups. How can I write an exception-safe program with MKL memory management or should I just use regular auto_ptr's and not bother? Thanks in advance. EDIT http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/mkl/win/index.htm this link may explain why I brought up the question UPDATE I used an idea from the answer below for allocator. This is what I have now: template <typename T, size_t TALIGN=16, size_t TBLOCK=4> class aligned_allocator : public std::allocator<T> { public: pointer allocate(size_type n, const void *hint) { pointer p = NULL; size_t count = sizeof(T) * n; size_t count_left = count % TBLOCK; if( count_left != 0 ) count += TBLOCK - count_left; if ( !hint ) p = reinterpret_cast<pointer>(MKL_malloc (count,TALIGN)); else p = reinterpret_cast<pointer>(MKL_realloc((void*)hint,count,TALIGN)); return p; } void deallocate(pointer p, size_type n){ MKL_free(p); } }; If anybody has any suggestions, feel free to make it better.

  Read the article

• Do I really ned bindParam?

  - by sandelius

  Hi there! I'm trying to do a little PDO CRUD to learn some PDO. I have a question about bindParam. Here's my update method right now: public static function update($conditions = array(), $data = array(), $table = '') { self::instance(); // Late static bindings (PHP 5.3) $table = ($table === '') ? self::table() : $table; // Check which data array we want to use $values = (empty($data)) ? self::$_fields : $data; $sql = "UPDATE $table SET "; foreach ($values as $f => $v) { $sql .= "$f = ?, "; } // let's build the conditions self::build_conditions($conditions); // fix our WHERE, AND, OR, LIKE conditions $extra = self::$condition_string; // querystring $sql = rtrim($sql, ', ') . $extra; // let's merge the arrays into on $v_val = array_values($values); $c_val = array_values($conditions); $array = array_merge($v_val, self::$condition_array); $stmt = self::$db->prepare($sql); return $stmt->execute($array); } in my "self::$condition_array" I get all the right values from the ?. SO the query looks like this: UPDATE table SET this = ?, another = ? WHERE title = ? AND time = ? as you can see I dont use bindParams instead I pass the right values in the right order ($array) directly into the execute($array) method. This works like a charm BUT is it safe not use use bindParam here? If not then how can I do it? Thanks from Sweden Tobias

  Read the article

• Storing Credit Card Numbers in SESSION - ways around it?

  - by JM4

  I am well aware of PCI Compliance so don't need an earful about storing CC numbers (and especially CVV nums) within our company database during checkout process. However, I want to be safe as possible when handling sensitive consumer information and am curious how to get around passing CC numbers from page to page WITHOUT using SESSION variables if at all possible. My site is built in this way: Step 1) collect Credit Card information from customer - when customer hits submit, the information is first run through JS validation, then run through PHP validation, if all passes he moves to step 2. Step 2) Information is displayed on a review page for customer to make sure the details of their upcoming transaction are shown. Only the first 6 and last 4 of the CC are shown on this page but card type, and exp date are shwon fully. If he clicks proceed, Step 3) The information is sent to another php page which runs one last validation, sends information through secure payment gateway, and string is returned with details. Step 4) If all is good and well, the consumer information (personal, not CC) is stored in DB and redirected to a completion page. If anything is bad, he is informed and told to revisit the CC processing page to try again (max of 3 times). Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• php error reporting - having trouble matching local & web server settings

  - by Andrew Heath

  I'm trying to add a custom error handler to my site, but in doing so have discovered that my webhost's PHP error reporting settings and those of my localhost (default XAMPP) vary considerably. While I thought I was programming to E_STRICT like a good little boy, adding the error handler to my webhost revealed craploads of Runtime Notices. Example: Runtime notice strtotime() [function.strtotime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. Please use the date.timezone setting, the TZ environment variable or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/Chicago' for 'CST/-6.0/no DST' instead In /home/... Clearly this isn't a red-alert, showstopping error. But what bothers me is that it doesn't show up on my localhost. I'd certainly like to improve my code by addressing these sorts of issues if I could see them! I've looked through both php.ini files, and my webhost's setting is error_reporting = E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE whereas mine was error_reporting = E_STRICT, which I had thought was better. However, changing mine to match and rebooting the server doesn't seem to have accomplished anything. Could someone please point me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• How do actually castings work at the CLR level?

  - by devoured elysium

  When doing an upcast or downcast, what does really happen behind the scenes? I had the idea that when doing something as: string myString = "abc"; object myObject = myString; string myStringBack = (string)myObject; the cast in the last line would have as only purpose tell the compiler we are safe we are not doing anything wrong. So, I had the idea that actually no casting code would be embedded in the code itself. It seems I was wrong: .maxstack 1 .locals init ( [0] string myString, [1] object myObject, [2] string myStringBack) L_0000: nop L_0001: ldstr "abc" L_0006: stloc.0 L_0007: ldloc.0 L_0008: stloc.1 L_0009: ldloc.1 L_000a: castclass string L_000f: stloc.2 L_0010: ret Why does the CLR need something like castclass string? There are two possible implementations for a downcast: You require a castclass something. When you get to the line of code that does an castclass, the CLR tries to make the cast. But then, what would happen had I ommited the castclass string line and tried to run the code? You don't require a castclass. As all reference types have a similar internal structure, if you try to use a string on an Form instance, it will throw an exception of wrong usage (because it detects a Form is not a string or any of its subtypes). Also, is the following statamente from C# 4.0 in a Nutshell correct? Upcasting and downcasting between compatible reference types performs reference conversions: a new reference is created that points to the same object. Does it really create a new reference? I thought it'd be the same reference, only stored in a different type of variable. Thanks

  Read the article

• Are there any security issues to avoid when providing a email-or-username-can-act-as-username login

  - by Tchalvak

  I am in the process of moving from a "username/password" system to one that uses email for login. I don't think that there's any horrible problem with allowing either email or username for login, and I remember seeing sites that I consider somewhat respectable doing it as well, but I'd like to be aware of any major security flaws that I may be introducing. More specifically, here is the pertinent function (the query_row function parameterizes the sql). function authenticate($p_user, $p_pass) { $user = (string)$p_user; $pass = (string)$p_pass; $returnValue = false; if ($user != '' && $pass != '') { // Allow login via username or email. $sql = "SELECT account_id, account_identity, uname, player_id FROM accounts join account_players on account_id=_account_id join players on player_id = _player_id WHERE lower(account_identity) = lower(:login) OR lower(uname) = lower(:login) AND phash = crypt(:pass, phash)"; $returnValue = query_row($sql, array(':login'=>$user, ':pass'=>$pass)); } return $returnValue; } Notably, I have added the WHERE lower(account_identity) = lower(:login) OR lower(uname) = lower(:login) ...etc section to allow graceful backwards compatibility for users who won't be used to using their email for the login procedure. I'm not completely sure that that OR is safe, though. Are there some ways that I should tighten the security of the php code above?

  Read the article

• Algorithm for assigning a unique series of bits for each user?

  - by Mark

  The problem seems simple at first: just assign an id and represent that in binary. The issue arises because the user is capable of changing as many 0 bits to a 1 bit. To clarify, the hash could go from 0011 to 0111 or 1111 but never 1010. Each bit has an equal chance of being changed and is independent of other changes. What would you have to store in order to go from hash - user assuming a low percentage of bit tampering by the user? I also assume failure in some cases so the correct solution should have an acceptable error rate. I would an estimate the maximum number of bits tampered with would be about 30% of the total set. I guess the acceptable error rate would depend on the number of hashes needed and the number of bits being set per hash. I'm worried with enough manipulation the id can not be reconstructed from the hash. The question I am asking I guess is what safe guards or unique positioning systems can I use to ensure this happens.

  Read the article

• Fetching just the Key/id from a ReferenceProperty in App Engine

  - by ozone

  Hi SO, I could use a little help in AppEngine land... Using the [Python] API I create relationships like this example from the docs: class Author(db.Model): name = db.StringProperty() class Story(db.Model): author = db.ReferenceProperty(Author) story = db.get(story_key) author_name = story.author.name As I understand it, that example will make two datastore queries. One to fetch the Story and then one to deference the Author inorder to access the name. But I want to be able to fetch the id, so do something like: story = db.get(story_key) author_id = story.author.key().id() I want to just get the id from the reference. I do not want to have to deference (therefore query the datastore) the ReferenceProperty value. From reading the documentation it says that the value of a ReferenceProperty is a Key Which leads me to think that I could just call .id() on the reference's value. But it also says: The ReferenceProperty model provides features for Key property values such as automatic dereferencing. I can't find anything that explains when this referencing takes place? Is it safe to call .id() on the ReferenceProperty's value? Can it be assumed that calling .id() will not cause a datastore lookup?

  Read the article

• Why does this work?

  - by jsoldi

  I was googling trying to find a way to call Control.DataBindings.Add without using a string literal but getting the property name from the property itself, which I think would be less error prone, at least for my particular case, since I normally let Visual Studio do the renaming when renaming a property. So my code would look something like DataBindings.Add(GetName(myInstance.myObject)... instead of DataBindings.Add("myObject".... So I found this: static string GetName<T>(T item) where T : class { var properties = typeof(T).GetProperties(); if (properties.Length != 1) throw new Exception("Length must be 1"); return properties[0].Name; } That would be called, assuming I have a property called One, this way: string name = GetName(new { this.One }); which would give me "One". I have no clue why does it work and whether is safe to use it or not. I don't even know what that new { this.One } means. And I don't know on which case could it happens that properties.Length is not 1. By the way, I just tested to rename my property One to Two and Visual Studio turned new { this.One } into new { One = this.Two }, which when used with the GetName function gave me "One", which make the whole thing useless since the name I would be passing to Control.DataBindings.Add would be still "One" after renaming the property.

  Read the article

• Would an immutable keyword in Java be a good idea?

  - by berry120

  Generally speaking, the more I use immutable objects in Java the more I'm thinking they're a great idea. They've got lots of advantages from automatically being thread-safe to not needing to worry about cloning or copy constructors. This has got me thinking, would an "immutable" keyword go amiss? Obviously there's the disadvantages with adding another reserved word to the language, and I doubt it will actually happen primarily for the above reason - but ignoring that I can't really see many disadvantages. At present great care has to be taken to make sure objects are immutable, and even then a dodgy javadoc comment claiming a component object is immutable when it's in fact not can wreck the whole thing. There's also the argument that even basic objects like string aren't truly immutable because they're easily vunerable to reflection attacks. If we had an immutable keyword the compiler could surely recursively check and give an iron clad guarantee that all instances of a class were immutable, something that can't presently be done. Especially with concurrency becoming more and more used, I personally think it'd be good to add a keyword to this effect. But are there any disadvantages or implementation details I'm missing that makes this a bad idea?

  Read the article

• How would I instruct extconf.rb to use additional g++ optimization flags, and which are advisable?

  - by mohawkjohn

  I'm using Rice to write a C++ extension for a Ruby gem. The extension is in the form of a shared object (.so) file. This requires 'mkmf-rice' instead of 'mkmf', but the two (AFAIK) are pretty similar. By default, the compiler uses the flags -g -O2. Personally, I find this kind of silly, since it's hard to debug with any optimization enabled. I've resorted to editing the Makefile to take out the flags I don't like (e.g., removing -fPIC -shared when I need to debug using main() instead of Ruby's hooks). But I figure there's got to be a better way. I know I can just do $CPPFLAGS += " -DRICE" to add additional flags. But how do I remove things without editing the Makefile directly? A secondary question: what optimizations are safe for shared objects loaded by Ruby? Can I do things like -funroll-loops? What do you all recommend? It's a scientific computing project, so the faster the better. Memory is not much of an issue. Many thanks!

  Read the article

• Can ScalaCheck/Specs warnings safely be ignored when using SBT with ScalaTest?

  - by pdbartlett

  I have a simple FunSuite-based ScalaTest: package pdbartlett.hello_sbt import org.scalatest.FunSuite class SanityTest extends FunSuite { test("a simple test") { assert(true) } test("a very slightly more complicated test - purposely fails") { assert(42 === (6 * 9)) } } Which I'm running with the following SBT project config: import sbt._ class HelloSbtProject(info: ProjectInfo) extends DefaultProject(info) { // Dummy action, just to show config working OK. lazy val solveQ = task { println("42"); None } // Managed dependencies val scalatest = "org.scalatest" % "scalatest" % "1.0" % "test" } However, when I runsbt test I get the following warnings: ... [info] == test-compile == [info] Source analysis: 0 new/modified, 0 indirectly invalidated, 0 removed. [info] Compiling test sources... [info] Nothing to compile. [warn] Could not load superclass 'org.scalacheck.Properties' : java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.scalacheck.Properties [warn] Could not load superclass 'org.specs.Specification' : java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.specs.Specification [warn] Could not load superclass 'org.specs.Specification' : java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.specs.Specification [info] Post-analysis: 3 classes. [info] == test-compile == For the moment I'm assuming these are just "noise" (caused by the unified test interface?) and that I can safely ignore them. But it is slightly annoying to some inner OCD part of me (though not so annoying that I'm prepared to add dependencies for the other frameworks). Is this a correct assumption, or are there subtle errors in my test/config code? If it is safe to ignore, is there any other way to suppress these errors, or do people routinely include all three frameworks so they can pick and choose the best approach for different tests? TIA, Paul. (ADDED: scala v2.7.7 and sbt v0.7.4)

  Read the article

• HTTP POST with URL query parameters -- good idea or not?

  - by Steven Huwig

  I'm designing an API to go over HTTP and I am wondering if using the HTTP POST command, but with URL query parameters only and no request body, is a good way to go. Considerations: "Good Web design" requires non-idempotent actions to be sent via POST. This is a non-idempotent action. It is easier to develop and debug this app when the request parameters are present in the URL. The API is not intended for widespread use. It seems like making a POST request with no body will take a bit more work, e.g. a Content-Length: 0 header must be explicitly added. It also seems to me that a POST with no body is a bit counter to most developer's and HTTP frameworks' expectations. Are there any more pitfalls or advantages to sending parameters on a POST request via the URL query rather than the request body? Edit: The reason this is under consideration is that the operations are not idempotent and have side effects other than retrieval. See the HTTP spec: In particular, the convention has been established that the GET and HEAD methods SHOULD NOT have the significance of taking an action other than retrieval. These methods ought to be considered "safe". This allows user agents to represent other methods, such as POST, PUT and DELETE, in a special way, so that the user is made aware of the fact that a possibly unsafe action is being requested. ... Methods can also have the property of "idempotence" in that (aside from error or expiration issues) the side-effects of N 0 identical requests is the same as for a single request. The methods GET, HEAD, PUT and DELETE share this property. Also, the methods OPTIONS and TRACE SHOULD NOT have side effects, and so are inherently idempotent.

  Read the article

• x86 Assembly: Before Making a System Call on Linux Should You Save All Registers?

  - by mudge

  I have the below code that opens up a file, reads it into a buffer and then closes the file. The close file system call requires that the file descriptor number be in the ebx register. The ebx register gets the file descriptor number before the read system call is made. My question is should I save the ebx register on the stack or somewhere before I make the read system call, (could int 80h trash the ebx register?). And then restore the ebx register for the close system call? Or is the code I have below fine and safe? I have run the below code and it works, I'm just not sure if it is generally considered good assembly practice or not because I don't save the ebx register before the int 80h read call. ;; open up the input file mov eax,5 ; open file system call number mov ebx,[esp+8] ; null terminated string file name, first command line parameter mov ecx,0o ; access type: O_RDONLY int 80h ; file handle or negative error number put in eax test eax,eax js Error ; test sign flag (SF) for negative number which signals error ;; read in the full input file mov ebx,eax ; assign input file descripter mov eax,3 ; read system call number mov ecx,InputBuff ; buffer to read into mov edx,INPUT_BUFF_LEN ; total bytes to read int 80h test eax,eax js Error ; if eax is negative then error jz Error ; if no bytes were read then error add eax,InputBuff ; add size of input to the begining of InputBuff location mov [InputEnd],eax ; assign address of end of input ;; close the input file ;; file descripter is already in ebx mov eax,6 ; close file system call number int 80h

  Read the article

• Semi-generic function

  - by Fredrik Ullner

  I have a bunch of overloaded functions that operate on certain data types such as int, double and strings. Most of these functions perform the same action, where only a specific set of data types are allowed. That means I cannot create a simple generic template function as I lose type safety (and potentially incurring a run-time problem for validation within the function). Is it possible to create a "semi-generic compile time type safe function"? If so, how? If not, is this something that will come up in C++0x? An (non-valid) idea; template <typename T, restrict: int, std::string > void foo(T bar); ... foo((int)0); // OK foo((std::string)"foobar"); // OK foo((double)0.0); // Compile Error Note: I realize I could create a class that has overloaded constructors and assignment operators and pass a variable of that class instead to the function.

  Read the article

• Ajax request not receiving xml from Django

  - by amougeot

  I have a Django server which handles requests to a URL which will return some HTML for use in an image gallery. I can navigate to the URL and the browser will display the HTML that is returned, but I can't get that same HTML by doing an AJAX call (using jQuery) to the same URL. This is the view that generates the response: def gallery_images(request, gallery_name): return render_to_response('galleryimages.html', {'images': get_images_of_gallery(gallery_name)}, mimetype='text/xml') This is the 'galleryimages.html' template: {% for image in images %} <div id="{{image.name}}big"> <div class="actualImage" style="background-image:url({{image.image.name}});"> <h1>{{image.caption|safe}}</h1> </div> </div> {% endfor %} This is the jQuery call I am making: $("#allImages").load("http://localhost:8000/galleryimages/Web"); However, this loads nothing into my #allImages div. I've used firebug and ran jQuery's Ajax method .get("http://localhost:8000/galleryimages/Web") and firebug says that the response text is completely empty. When I check my Django server log, this is the entry I see for when I navigate to the URL manually, through my browser: [16/Jan/2010 17:34:10] "GET /galleryimages/Web HTTP/1.1" 200 215 This is the entry in the server log for when I make the AJAX call: [16/Jan/2010 17:36:19] "OPTIONS /galleryimages/Web HTTP/1.1" 200 215 Why does the AJAX request not get the xml that my Django page is serving?

  Read the article

• Are there any security issues to avoid when providing a either-email-or-username-can-act-as-username

  - by Tchalvak

  I am in the process of moving from a "username/password" system to one that uses email for login. I don't think that there's any horrible problem with allowing either email or username for login, and I remember seeing sites that I consider somewhat respectable doing it as well, but I'd like to be aware of any major security flaws that I may be introducing. More specifically, here is the pertinent function (the query_row function parameterizes the sql). function authenticate($p_user, $p_pass) { $user = (string)$p_user; $pass = (string)$p_pass; $returnValue = false; if ($user != '' && $pass != '') { // Allow login via username or email. $sql = "SELECT account_id, account_identity, uname, player_id FROM accounts join account_players on account_id=_account_id join players on player_id = _player_id WHERE lower(account_identity) = lower(:login) OR lower(uname) = lower(:login) AND phash = crypt(:pass, phash)"; $returnValue = query_row($sql, array(':login'=>$user, ':pass'=>$pass)); } return $returnValue; } Notably, I have added the WHERE lower(account_identity) = lower(:login) OR lower(uname) = lower(:login) ...etc section to allow graceful backwards compatibility for users who won't be used to using their email for the login procedure. I'm not completely sure that that OR is safe, though. Are there some ways that I should tighten the security of the php code above?

  Read the article

• Does it exist: smart pointer, owned by one object allowing access.

  - by Noah Roberts

  I'm wondering if anyone's run across anything that exists which would fill this need. Object A contains an object B. It wants to provide access to that B to clients through a pointer (maybe there's the option it could be 0, or maybe the clients need to be copiable and yet hold references...whatever). Clients, lets call them object C, would normally, if we're perfect developers, be written carefully so as to not violate the lifetime semantics of any pointer to B they might have...but we're not perfect, in fact we're pretty dumb half the time. So what we want is for object C to have a pointer to object B that is not "shared" ownership but that is smart enough to recognize a situation in which the pointer is no longer valid, such as when object A is destroyed or it destroys object B. Accessing this pointer when it's no longer valid would cause an assertion/exception/whatever. In other words, I wish to share access to data in a safe, clear way but retain the original ownership semantics. Currently, because I've not been able to find any shared pointer in which one of the objects owns it, I've been using shared_ptr in place of having such a thing. But I want clear owneship and shared/weak pointer doesn't really provide that. Would be nice further if this smart pointer could be attached to member variables and not just hold pointers to dynamically allocated memory regions. If it doesn't exist I'm going to make it, so I first want to know if someone's already released something out there that does it. And, BTW, I do realize that things like references and pointers do provide this sort of thing...I'm looking for something smarter.

  Read the article

• Does "delegate" mean a type or an object?

  - by Michal Czardybon

  Reading from MSDN: "A delegate is a type that references a method. Once a delegate is assigned a method, it behaves exactly like that method." Does then "delegate" mean a type or an object?! ...It cannot be both. It seems to me that the single word is used in two different meanings: a type containing a reference to a method of some specified signature, an object of that type, which can be actually called like a method. I would prefer a more precise vocabulary and use "delegate type" for the first case. I have been recently reading a lot about events and delegates and that ambiguity was making me confused many times. Some other uses of "delegate" word in MSDN in the first meaning: "Custom event delegates are needed only when an event generates event data" "A delegate declaration defines a class that is derived from the class System.Delegate" Some other uses of "delegate" word in MSDN in the second meaning: "specify a delegate that will be called upon the occurrence of some event" "Delegates are objects that refer to methods. They are sometimes described as type-safe function pointers" What do you think? Why did people from Microsoft introduced this ambiguity? Am I the only person to have conceptual problems with different notions being referenced with the same word.

  Read the article

• What's the best technique to protect my framework from visitors who are not logged in?

  - by Hermet

  First of all, I would like to say that I have used the search box looking for a similar question and was unsuccessful, maybe because of my poor english skills. I have a a 'homemade' framework. I have certain PHP files that must only be visible for the admin. The way I currently do this is check within every single page to see if a session has been opened. If not, the user gets redirected to a 404 page, to seem like the file which has been requested doesn't exist. I really don't know if this is guaranteed to work or if there's a better and more safe way because I'm currently working with kind of confidential data that should never become public. Could you give me some tips? Or leave a link where I could find some? Thank you very much, and again excuse me for kicking the dictionary. EDIT What I usually write in the top of each file is something like this <?php include("sesion.php"); $rs=comprueba(); //'check' if ($rs==1) { ?> And then, at the end <?php } ?> Is it such a butched job, isn't it? EDIT Let's say I have a customers list in a file named customers.php That file may be currently on http://www.mydomain.com/admin/customers.php and it must only be visible for the admin user. Once the admin user has been logged in, I create a session variable. That variable is what I check on the top of each page, and if it exists, the customers list is shown. If not, the user gets redirected to the 404 page. Thank you for your patience. I really appreciate.

  Read the article

• PHP Outputting File Attachments with Headers

  - by OneNerd

  After reading a few posts here I formulated this function which is sort of a mishmash of a bunch of others: function outputFile( $filePath, $fileName, $mimeType = '' ) { // Setup $mimeTypes = array( 'pdf' => 'application/pdf', 'txt' => 'text/plain', 'html' => 'text/html', 'exe' => 'application/octet-stream', 'zip' => 'application/zip', 'doc' => 'application/msword', 'xls' => 'application/vnd.ms-excel', 'ppt' => 'application/vnd.ms-powerpoint', 'gif' => 'image/gif', 'png' => 'image/png', 'jpeg' => 'image/jpg', 'jpg' => 'image/jpg', 'php' => 'text/plain' ); // Send Headers //-- next line fixed as per suggestion -- header('Content-Type: ' . $mimeTypes[$mimeType]); header('Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="' . $fileName . '"'); header('Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary'); header('Accept-Ranges: bytes'); header('Cache-Control: private'); header('Pragma: private'); header('Expires: Mon, 26 Jul 1997 05:00:00 GMT'); readfile($filePath); } I have a php page (file.php) which does something like this (lots of other code stripped out): // I run this thru a safe function not shown here $safe_filename = $_GET['filename']; outputFile ( "/the/file/path/{$safe_filename}", $safe_filename, substr($safe_filename, -3) ); Seems like it should work, and it almost does, but I am having the following issues: When its a text file, I am getting a strange symbol as the first letter in the text document When its a word doc, it is corrupt (presumably that same first bit or byte throwing things off). I presume all other file types will be corrupt - have not even tried them Any ideas on what I am doing wrong? Thanks - UPDATE: changed line of code as suggested - still same issue.

  Read the article

• Is it OK to write code after [super dealloc]? (Objective-C)

  - by Richard J. Ross III

  I have a situation in my code, where I cannot clean up my classes objects without first calling [super dealloc]. It is something like this: // Baseclass.m @implmentation Baseclass ... -(void) dealloc { [self _removeAllData]; [aVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [anotherVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [super dealloc]; } ... @end This works great. My problem is, when I went to subclass this huge and nasty class (over 2000 lines of gross code), I ran into a problem: when I released my objects before calling [super dealloc] I had zombies running through the code that were activated when I called the [self _removeAllData] method. // Subclass.m @implementation Subclass ... -(void) deallloc { [super dealloc]; [someObjectUsedInTheRemoveAllDataMethod release]; } ... @end This works great, and It didn't require me to refactor any code. My question Is this: Is it safe for me to do this, or should I refactor my code? Or maybe autorelease the objects? I am programming for iPhone if that matters any.

  Read the article

• OOP design issue: Polymorphism

  - by Graham Phillips

  I'm trying to solve a design issue using inheritance based polymorphism and dynamic binding. I have an abstract superclass and two subclasses. The superclass contains common behaviour. SubClassA and SubClassB define some different methods: SubClassA defines a method performTransform(), but SubClassB does not. So the following example 1 var v:SuperClass; 2 var b:SubClassB = new SubClassB(); 3 v = b; 4 v.performTransform(); would cause a compile error on line 4 as performTransform() is not defined in the superclass. We can get it to compile by casting... (v as SubClassA).performTransform(); however, this will cause a runtime exception to be thrown as v is actually an instance of SubClassB, which also does not define performTransform() So we can get around that by testing the type of an object before casting it: if( typeof v == SubClassA) { (cast v to SubClassA).performTransform(); } That will ensure that we only call performTransform() on v's that are instances of SubClassA. That's a pretty inelegant solution to my eyes, but at least its safe. I have used interface based polymorphism (interface meaning a type that can't be instantiated and defines the API of classes that implement it) in the past, but that also feels clunky. For the above case, if SubClassA and SubClassB implemented ISuperClass that defined performTransform, then they would both have to implement performTransform(). If SubClassB had no real need for a performTransform() you would have to implement an empty function. There must be a design pattern out there that addresses the issue.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321  | Next Page >