Search Results

Search found 1449 results on 58 pages for 'oop'.

Page 32/58 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • Classes within classes in PHP

    - by Matt
    Can you do this in PHP? I've heard conflicting opinions: Something like: Class bar { function a_function () { echo "hi!"; } } Class foo { public $bar; function __construct() { $this->bar = new bar(); } } $x = new foo(); $x->bar->a_function(); Will this echo "hi!" or not?

    Read the article

  • OO Design: use Properties or Overloaded methods?

    - by Robert Frank
    Question about OO design. Suppose I have a base object vehicle. And two descendants: truck and automobile. Further, suppose the base object has a base method: FixFlatTire(); abstract; When the truck and automobile override the base object's, they require different information from the caller. Am I better off overloading FixFlatTire like this in the two descendant objects: Procedure Truck.FixFlatTire( OfficePhoneNumber: String; NumberOfAxles: Integer): Override; Overload; Procedure Automobile.FixFlatTire( WifesPhoneNumber: String; AAAMembershipID: String): Override; Overload; Or introducing new properties in each of the descendants and then setting them before calling FixFlatTire, like this: Truck.OfficePhoneNumber := '555-555-1212'; Truck.NumberOfAxles := 18; Truck.FixFlatTire(); Automobile.WifesPhoneNumber := '555-555-2323'; Automobile.AAAMembershipID := 'ABC'; Automobile.FixFlatTire();

    Read the article

  • Who needs singletons?

    - by sexyprout
    Imagine you access your MySQL database via PDO. You got some functions, and in these functions, you need to access the database. The first thing I thought of is global, like: $db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'root', 'pwd'); function some_function() { global $db; $db->query('...'); } But it's considered as a bad practice. So, after a little search, I ended up with the Singleton pattern, which "applies to situations in which there needs to be a single instance of a class." According to the example of the manual, we should do this: class Database { private static $instance, $db; private function __construct(){} static function singleton() { if(!isset(self::$instance)) self::$instance = new __CLASS__; return self:$instance; } function get() { if(!isset(self::$db)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd') return self::$db; } } function some_function() { $db = Database::singleton(); $db->get()->query('...'); } some_function(); But I just can't understand why you need that big class when you can do it merely with: class Database { private static $db; private function __construct(){} static function get() { if(!isset(self::$rand)) self::$db = new PDO('mysql:host=127.0.0.1;dbname=toto', 'user', 'pwd'); return self::$db; } } function some_function() { Database::get()->query('...'); } some_function(); This last one works perfectly and I don't need to worry about $db anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting something. So, who's wrong, who's right?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to establish default values for inherited fields in subclasses?

    - by Christian Mann
    I'm trying to establish a default value for inherited fields from superclasses. So, my class hierarchy is thus: Character - Enemy - Boss                 \                   - Hero Each Character has a public static char avatar to represent him on an ASCII playing field. How do I set a default value for the avatar of each class inherited from Character? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • can I put my sqlite connection and cursor in a function?

    - by steini
    I was thinking I'd try to make my sqlite db connection a function instead of copy/pasting the ~6 lines needed to connect and execute a query all over the place. I'd like to make it versatile so I can use the same function for create/select/insert/etc... Below is what I have tried. The 'INSERT' and 'CREATE TABLE' queries are working, but if I do a 'SELECT' query, how can I work with the values it fetches outside of the function? Usually I'd like to print the values it fetches and also do other things with them. When I do it like below I get an error Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Users\steini\Desktop\py\database\test3.py", line 15, in <module> for row in connection('testdb45.db', "select * from users"): ProgrammingError: Cannot operate on a closed database. So I guess the connection needs to be open so I can get the values from the cursor, but I need to close it so the file isn't always locked. Here's my testing code: import sqlite3 def connection (db, arg): conn = sqlite3.connect(db) conn.execute('pragma foreign_keys = on') cur = conn.cursor() cur.execute(arg) conn.commit() conn.close() return cur connection('testdb.db', "create table users ('user', 'email')") connection('testdb.db', "insert into users ('user', 'email') values ('joey', 'foo@bar')") for row in connection('testdb45.db', "select * from users"): print row How can I make this work?

    Read the article

  • mysqli insert into database

    - by Simon
    Hello all i have this script and i will not insert into the database and i get no errors :S, do you know what it is? function createUser($username, $password) { $mysql = connect(); if($stmt = $mysql->prepare('INSERT INTO users (username, password, alder, hood, fornavn, efternavn, city, ip, level, email) VALUES (?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?)')) { $stmt->bind_param('ssssssssss',$username,$password, $alder, $hood, $fornavn, $efternavn, $city, $ip, $level, $email); $stmt->execute(); $stmt->close(); } else { echo 'error: ' . $mysql->error; }

    Read the article

  • How do you determine how coarse or fine-grained a 'responsibility' should be when using the single r

    - by Mark Rogers
    In the SRP, a 'responsibility' is usually described as 'a reason to change', so that each class (or object?) should have only one reason someone should have to go in there and change it. But if you take this to the extreme fine-grain you could say that an object adding two numbers together is a responsibility and a possible reason to change. Therefore the object should contain no other logic, because it would produce another reason for change. I'm curious if there is anyone out there that has any strategies for 'scoping', the single-responsibility principle that's slightly less objective?

    Read the article

  • Is this a problem typically solved with IOC?

    - by Dirk
    My current application allows users to define custom web forms through a set of admin screens. it's essentially an EAV type application. As such, I can't hard code HTML or ASP.NET markup to render a given page. Instead, the UI requests an instance of a Form object from the service layer, which in turn constructs one using a several RDMBS tables. Form contains the kind of classes you would expect to see in such a context: Form= IEnumerable<FormSections>=IEnumerable<FormFields> Here's what the service layer looks like: public class MyFormService: IFormService{ public Form OpenForm(int formId){ //construct and return a concrete implementation of Form } } Everything works splendidly (for a while). The UI is none the wiser about what sections/fields exist in a given form: It happily renders the Form object it receives into a functional ASP.NET page. A few weeks later, I get a new requirement from the business: When viewing a non-editable (i.e. read-only) versions of a form, certain field values should be merged together and other contrived/calculated fields should are added. No problem I say. Simply amend my service class so that its methods are more explicit: public class MyFormService: IFormService{ public Form OpenFormForEditing(int formId){ //construct and return a concrete implementation of Form } public Form OpenFormForViewing(int formId){ //construct and a concrete implementation of Form //apply additional transformations to the form } } Again everything works great and balance has been restored to the force. The UI continues to be agnostic as to what is in the Form, and our separation of concerns is achieved. Only a few short weeks later, however, the business puts out a new requirement: in certain scenarios, we should apply only some of the form transformations I referenced above. At this point, it feels like the "explicit method" approach has reached a dead end, unless I want to end up with an explosion of methods (OpenFormViewingScenario1, OpenFormViewingScenario2, etc). Instead, I introduce another level of indirection: public interface IFormViewCreator{ void CreateView(Form form); } public class MyFormService: IFormService{ public Form OpenFormForEditing(int formId){ //construct and return a concrete implementation of Form } public Form OpenFormForViewing(int formId, IFormViewCreator formViewCreator){ //construct a concrete implementation of Form //apply transformations to the dynamic field list return formViewCreator.CreateView(form); } } On the surface, this seems like acceptable approach and yet there is a certain smell. Namely, the UI, which had been living in ignorant bliss about the implementation details of OpenFormForViewing, must possess knowledge of and create an instance of IFormViewCreator. My questions are twofold: Is there a better way to achieve the composability I'm after? (perhaps by using an IoC container or a home rolled factory to create the concrete IFormViewCreator)? Did I fundamentally screw up the abstraction here?

    Read the article

  • Is it true that in most Object Oriented Programming Languages, an "i" in an instance method always r

    - by Jian Lin
    In the following code: <script type="text/javascript"> var i = 10; function Circle(radius) { this.r = radius; this.i = radius; } Circle.i = 123; Circle.prototype.area = function() { alert(i); } var c = new Circle(1); var a = c.area(); </script> What is being alerted? The answer is at the end of this question. I found that the i in the alert call either refers to any local (if any), or the global variable. There is no way that it can be the instance variable or the class variable even when there is no local and no global defined. To refer to the instance variable i, we need this.i, and to the class variable i, we need Circle.i. Is this actually true for almost all Object oriented programming languages? Any exception? Are there cases that when there is no local and no global, it will look up the instance variable and then the class variable scope? (or in this case, are those called scope?) the answer is: 10 is being alerted.

    Read the article

  • where are the frameworks for creating libraries?

    - by fayer
    whenever i create a php library (not a framework) i tend to reinvent everything everytime. "where to put configuration options" "which design pattern to use here" "how should all the classes extend each other" and so on... then i think, isn't there a good library framework to use anywhere? it's like a framework for a web application (symfony, cakephp...) but instead of creating a web application, this framework will help coder to create a library, providing all the standard structure and classes (observer pattern, dependency injection etc). i think that will be the next major thing if not available right now. in this way there will be a standard to follow when creating libraries, or else, it's like a djungle when everyone creates their own structure, and a lot of coders just code without thinking of reusability etc. there isn't any framework for creating libraries at the moment? if not, don't u agree with me that this is the way to do it, with a library framework? cause i am really throwing a lot of time (weeks!) just thinking about how to organize things, both in code and file level, when i should just start to code the logic. share your thoughts!

    Read the article

  • Extending a form field to add new validations.

    - by duallain
    I've written an app that uses forms to collect information that is then sent in an email. Many of these forms have a filefield used to attach files to the email. I'd like to validate two things, the size of the file (to ensure the emails are accepted by our mail server. I'd also like to check the file extension, to discourage attaching file types not useable for our users. (This is the python class I'm trying to extend) class FileField(Field): widget = FileInput default_error_messages = { 'invalid': _(u"No file was submitted. Check the encoding type on the form."), 'missing': _(u"No file was submitted."), 'empty': _(u"The submitted file is empty."), 'max_length': _(u'Ensure this filename has at most %(max)d characters (it has %(length)d).'), } def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): self.max_length = kwargs.pop('max_length', None) super(FileField, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs) def clean(self, data, initial=None): super(FileField, self).clean(initial or data) if not self.required and data in EMPTY_VALUES: return None elif not data and initial: return initial # UploadedFile objects should have name and size attributes. try: file_name = data.name file_size = data.size except AttributeError: raise ValidationError(self.error_messages['invalid']) if self.max_length is not None and len(file_name) > self.max_length: error_values = {'max': self.max_length, 'length': len(file_name)} raise ValidationError(self.error_messages['max_length'] % error_values) if not file_name: raise ValidationError(self.error_messages['invalid']) if not file_size: raise ValidationError(self.error_messages['empty']) return data

    Read the article

  • Zend Framework-where do calls to my methods go? Controller of Model?

    - by Joel
    Hi guys, I'm confused about exactly what I should have in my controller and what in my method. Specifically, I have this in the action method: public function upcomingshowsAction() { $gcal = $this->_validateCalendarConnection(); $uncleanedFeedArray = $this->_getCalendarFeed($gcal); $finishedFeedArray = $this->_cleanFeed($uncleanedFeedArray); $this->view->googleArray = $finishedFeedArray; } And then (incorrectly I know), I have my methods still in the bottom of my controller. So what I'm wondering, is for those methods in the upcomingshowsAction method, should all the actual methods just be in one model and then I'd have something like this: public function upcomingshowsAction() { $finishedFeedArray = new Application_Model_calendarModelPage(); $this->view->googleArray = $finishedFeedArray; } And then something like this in the model: class Application_Model_CalendarModelPage { $gcal = $this->_validateCalendarConnection(); $uncleanedFeedArray = $this->_getCalendarFeed($gcal); $finishedFeedArray = $this->_cleanFeed($uncleanedFeedArray); public functions { ... ... ... } } Am I on the right track here? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Session State Anti-Pattern

    - by Curiosity
    I know the SOLID principles and other design patterns fairly well and have been programming for some time now - seeing many a bit of code throughout the years. Having said that, I'm having trouble coming up with a name to give the pattern, or lack thereof, to bits of code I've been dealing with at a current engagement. The application is an ASP.NET C# WebForms application, backed by a SQL Server/Mainframe backend (more mainframe than backend) and it's riddled with Session State properties being accessed/mutated from multiple pages/classes. Accessing/mutating global variables/application state was usually shunned upon while I was in school. Apparently the creators of this magnificent application didn't think it was such a bad idea. Question: Is there a name for such a pattern/anti-pattern that relies so heavily on Session State? I'd like to call the pig by its name ...

    Read the article

  • Segmentation fault on instationation of more than 1 object

    - by ECE
    I have a class called "Vertex.hpp" which is as follows: #include <iostream> #include "Edge.hpp" #include <vector> using namespace std; /** A class, instances of which are nodes in an HCTree. */ class Vertex { public: Vertex(char * str){ *name=*str; } vector<Vertex*> adjecency_list; vector<Edge*> edge_weights; char *name; }; #endif When I instantiate an object of type Vector as follows: Vertex *first_read; Vertex *second_read; in.getline(input,256); str=strtok(input," "); first_read->name=str; str=strtok(NULL, " "); second_read->name=str; A segmentation fault occurs when more than 1 object of type Vector is instantiated. Why would this occur if more than 1 object is instantiated, and how can i allow multiple objects to be instantiated?

    Read the article

  • How to Correct & Improve the Design of this Code?

    - by DaveDev
    HI Guys, I've been working on a little experiement to see if I could create a helper method to serialize any of my types to any type of HTML tag I specify. I'm getting a NullReferenceException when _writer = _viewContext.Writer; is called in protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) {/*...*/} I think I'm at a point where it almost works (I've gotten other implementations to work) and I was wondering if somebody could point out what I'm doing wrong? Also, I'd be interested in hearing suggestions on how I could improve the design? So basically, I have this code that will generate a Select box with a number of options: // the idea is I can use one method to create any complete tag of any type // and put whatever I want in the content area <% using (Html.GenerateTag<SelectTag>(Model, new { href = Url.Action("ActionName") })) { %> <%foreach (var fund in Model.Funds) {%> <% using (Html.GenerateTag<OptionTag>(fund)) { %> <%= fund.Name %> <% } %> <% } %> <% } %> This Html.GenerateTag helper is defined as: public static MMTag GenerateTag<T>(this HtmlHelper htmlHelper, object elementData, object attributes) where T : MMTag { return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(T), htmlHelper.ViewContext, elementData, attributes); } Depending on the type of T it'll create one of the types defined below, public class HtmlTypeBase : MMTag { public HtmlTypeBase() { } public HtmlTypeBase(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._viewContext = viewContext; base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } public class SelectTag : HtmlTypeBase { public SelectTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("select"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } public class OptionTag : HtmlTypeBase { public OptionTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("option"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, _elementData); } } public class AnchorTag : HtmlTypeBase { public AnchorTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { base._tag = new TagBuilder("a"); //base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData); } } all of these types (anchor, select, option) inherit from HtmlTypeBase, which is intended to perform base.MergeDataToTag(viewContext, elementData);. This doesn't happen though. It works if I uncomment the MergeDataToTag methods in the derived classes, but I don't want to repeat that same code for every derived class I create. This is the definition for MMTag: public class MMTag : IDisposable { internal bool _disposed; internal ViewContext _viewContext; internal TextWriter _writer; internal TagBuilder _tag; internal object[] _elementData; public MMTag() {} public MMTag(ViewContext viewContext, params object[] elementData) { } public void Dispose() { Dispose(true /* disposing */); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (!_disposed) { _disposed = true; _writer = _viewContext.Writer; _writer.Write(_tag.ToString(TagRenderMode.EndTag)); } } protected void MergeDataToTag(ViewContext viewContext, object[] elementData) { Type elementDataType = elementData[0].GetType(); foreach (PropertyInfo prop in elementDataType.GetProperties()) { if (prop.PropertyType.IsPrimitive || prop.PropertyType == typeof(Decimal) || prop.PropertyType == typeof(String)) { object propValue = prop.GetValue(elementData[0], null); string stringValue = propValue != null ? propValue.ToString() : String.Empty; _tag.Attributes.Add(prop.Name, stringValue); } } var dic = new Dictionary<string, object>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); var attributes = elementData[1]; if (attributes != null) { foreach (PropertyDescriptor descriptor in TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(attributes)) { object value = descriptor.GetValue(attributes); dic.Add(descriptor.Name, value); } } _tag.MergeAttributes<string, object>(dic); _viewContext = viewContext; _viewContext.Writer.Write(_tag.ToString(TagRenderMode.StartTag)); } } Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • How to Execute Base Class's Method Before Implementors's Method?

    - by DaveDev
    I have the following page public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { } where OfflineFactsheetBase is defined as public class OfflineFactsheetBase : System.Web.UI.Page { public OfflineFactsheetBase() { this.Load += new EventHandler(this.Page_Load); this.PreInit += new EventHandler(this.Page_PreInit); } protected void Page_PreInit(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (Request.QueryString["data"] != null) { this.PageData = StringCompressor.DecompressString(Request.QueryString["data"]); this.ExtractPageData(); } } } OfflineFactsheetBase has the following virtual method: public virtual void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase } which is implemented in all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase as follows: public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { public override void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to an OfflineCommentary page. } } Currently, only GenericOfflineCommentary's ExtractPageData() is firing. How can I modify this to first run OfflineFactsheetBase's ExtractPageData() and then GenericOfflineCommentary's? edit: I'm trying to avoid having to call base.ExtractPageData() in every implementor. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • How to properly dispose of an object

    - by VoodooChild
    Hi Guys, I am experiencing something weird and have a workaround already, but I don't think I understood it well. If I call the Method below numerous times within a class: public void Method() { Foo a = new Foo(); a.Delegate1Handler = ViewSomething(); } So I am reinitializing "a" every time but for some reason a.Delegate1Handler is still around from the previous initialization, and therefore ViewSomething() is called again and again and again.... I feel like I am forgetting something critical here? Foo's guts look like: public delegate void Delegate1(T t); public Delegate1 Delegate1Handler { get; set; }

    Read the article

  • Unable to Get values from Web Form to a PHP Class to Display

    - by kentrenholm
    I am having troubles getting the value from my variables submitted via a web form using a PHP class file. Here is my structure of the web page: Order Form Page Process.php Page Book.php Page I can easily get the user data entered (on Order Form Page), process, and display it on the Process.php page. The issue is that I must create a Book class and print the details of the data using the Book class. I have an empty constructor printing out "created" so I know my constructor is being called. I also am able to print the word "title" so I know I can print to the screen by using the Book class. My issue is that I can't get values in my variables in the Book class. Here is my variable declaration: private $title; Here is my printDetails function: public function printDetails () { echo "Title: " . $this->title . "<br />"; } Here is my new instance of the book class: $bookNow = new book; Here are my get and set functions: function __getTitle($title) { return $this->$title; } function __setTitle($title,$value) { $this->$title = $value; } I do have four other variables that I'm looking to display as well. Each of those have their own variable declaration, a line in printDetails, and their own setter and getter. Lastly, I also have a call to the Book class in my process PHP. It looks like this: function __autoload($book) { include $book . '.php'; } $bookNow = new book(); Any help, much appreciated. It must be something so very small (I'm hoping).

    Read the article

  • OO C++ - Virtual Methods

    - by Phorce
    Just a really quick question here. I'm using virtual functions to read in from a text file. Now, it's virtual because in one aspect I want the values to be normalised, and, in the other respect I don't want them to be normalised. I have tried to do this: bool readwav(string theFile, 'native'); So in theory, if the 'native' is used, this method should be called, however, if 'double' is called then a different version of the method is called. Same for if the value is empty, it should just perform the native option. First question, why doesn't the declaration above work? Also, is this the best route to go down? Or, would it be better to have just one class method that switches between the options. Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • Access to an "upper" instance of a class from another instance of a different class

    - by BorrajaX
    Hello everyone! I have a tricky question and probably what I want to do is not even possible but... who knows... Python seems very flexible and powerful... I'd like to know if there's a way to access to the class (or its fields) where an object is instanciated. Let's say I have: def Class1: def __init__(self): self.title = "randomTitle" self.anotherField = float() self.class2Field = Class2() and the class whose type will be the class2Field: def Class2: def __init__(self): self.field1 = "" self.field2 = "" # . . . # I'd like to know if there's a way to access the instance of Class1 from the instance of Class2 that is declared in Class1 (meaning, accessing the fields of Class1 from the variable self.class2Field in that Class1 instance) I know I can always change the init in Class2 to accept a Class1 parameter, but I'd like to know if there's another way of "climbing" through the class hierachy... Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • How to Execute Base Class's ExtractPageData() Before Implementors's ExtractPageData()?

    - by DaveDev
    I have the following page public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { } where OfflineFactsheetBase is defined as public class OfflineFactsheetBase : System.Web.UI.Page { public OfflineFactsheetBase() { this.Load += new EventHandler(this.Page_Load); this.PreInit += new EventHandler(this.Page_PreInit); } protected void Page_PreInit(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (Request.QueryString["data"] != null) { this.PageData = StringCompressor.DecompressString(Request.QueryString["data"]); this.ExtractPageData(); } } } OfflineFactsheetBase has the following virtual method: public virtual void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase } which is implemented in all pages that impmement OfflineFactsheetBase as follows: public partial class GenericOfflineCommentary : OfflineFactsheetBase { public override void ExtractPageData() { // get stuff relevant to an OfflineCommentary page. } } Currently, only GenericOfflineCommentary's ExtractPageData() is firing. How can I modify this to first run OfflineFactsheetBase's ExtractPageData() and then GenericOfflineCommentary's?

    Read the article

  • c++ inheritance

    - by Meloun
    Hi, i am trouble with this.. Is there some solution or i have to keep exactly class types? //header file Class Car { public: Car(); virtual ~Car(); }; class Bmw:Car { public: Bmw(); virtual ~Bmw(); }; void Start(Car& mycar) {}; //cpp file Car::Car(){} Car::~Car() {} Bmw::Bmw() :Car::Car(){} Bmw::~Bmw() {} int main() { Car myCar; Bmw myBmw; Start(myCar); //works Start(myBmw); //!! doesnt work return 0; }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >