Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 34/58 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • Is this the correct why of speaking to a "Content Manager" Class?

    - by DeanMc
    I am creating a silverlight site. I am currently breaking out my ideas into pieces of functionality. One of the idea's I have is the concept of a content manager. This is essentially a UI control with 4 regions. Top, Bottom, Right & Left. I also have a collection of objects that are considered "Menu Items". These are controls that function as a way to navigate around, similar to links. The idea I have is to implement an IMenuItem interface. Among the standard pieces of information (Text, PageReference, etc) I was also going to hold a reference to the content manager. My idea behind this thinking is that I can pass the PageReference to a property on the ContentManager and then call a method which knows how to update the content manager accordingly. Is this the best way of implementing this or is their some sort of pattern for it?

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of declaring class functions separately from their actual functionality?

    - by vette982
    In C++, what's the benefit of having a class with functions... say class someClass{ public: void someFunc(int arg1); }; then having the function's actual functionality declared after int main int main() { return 0; } void someClass::someFunc(int arg1) { cout<<arg1; } Furthermore, what's the benefit of declaring the class in a .h header file, then putting the functionality in a .cpp file that #includes the .h file?

    Read the article

  • I'm confused about Polymorphism

    - by Vtanathip
    I'm know polymorphism rule that we can send it via parameter like this code interface Animal { void whoAmI(); } class A implements Animal{ @Override public void whoAmI() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub System.out.println("A"); } } class B implements Animal{ @Override public void whoAmI() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub System.out.println("B"); } } class RuntimePolymorphismDemo { public void WhoRU(List t){ System.out.println(t.getClass()); } public static void main(String[] args) { A a = new A(); B b = new B(); RuntimePolymorphismDemo rp = new RuntimePolymorphismDemo(); rp.WhoRU(a); rp.WhoRU(b); } } but List<Example> examples = new ArrayList<Example>(); This code,I'm don't understand why we must use List. why we can't use like this? ArrayList<Example> examples = new ArrayList<Example>(); Because when we use List we can't use method that only have in ArrayList class like trimToSize() and How I know when to use or not use?

    Read the article

  • How do I create a class in Javascript?

    - by William
    This is what I got so far, and it's not working at all :( <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <title>Class Test</title> <meta charset="utf-8" /> <style> body { text-align: center; background-color: #ffffff;} #box { position: absolute; left: 610px; top: 80px; height: 50px; width: 50px; background-color: #ff0000; color: #000000;} </style> <script type="text/javascript"> document.onkeydown=function(event){keyDown(event)}; document.onkeyup=function(event){keyUp(event)}; var box = 0; function Player () { var speed = 5; var x = 50; var y = 50; } function update() { box.style.left = this.x + "px"; box.style.top = this.y + "px"; box.innerHTML = "<h6 style=\"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;\">X: "+ this.x + "<br /> Y: " + this.y + "</h6>"; } var player = new Player(); var keys = new Array(256); var i = 0; for (i = 0;i <= 256; i++){ keys[i] = false; } function keyDown(event){ keys[event.keyCode] = true; } function keyUp(event){ keys[event.keyCode] = false; } function update(){ if(keys[37]) player.x -= player.speed; if(keys[39]) player.x += player.speed; player.update(); } setInterval(update, 1000/60); </script> </head> <body> <div id="box" ></div> <script type="text/javascript"> box = document.getElementById('box'); box.innerHTML = "<h6 style=\"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;\">X: "+ player.x + "<br /> Y: " + player.y + "</h6>"; </script> </body> </html>

    Read the article

  • Dilemma with two types and operator +

    - by user35443
    I have small problem with operators. I have this code: public class A { public string Name { get; set; } public A() { } public A(string Name) { this.Name = Name; } public static implicit operator B(A a) { return new B(a.Name); } public static A operator+(A a, A b) { return new A(a.Name + " " + b.Name); } } public class B { public string Name { get; set; } public B() { } public B(string Name) { this.Name = Name; } public static implicit operator A(B b) { return new A(b.Name); } public static B operator +(B b, B a) { return new B(b.Name + " " + a.Name); } } Now I want to know, which's conversion operator will be called and which's addition operator will be called in this operation: new A("a") + new B("b"); Will it be operator of A, or of B? (Or both?) Thanks....

    Read the article

  • PHP inheriting/extending a particular instance of an Object

    - by delta9
    Is there any way to force PHP to extend an existing/particular (and for that matter, already instantiated) instance of an object? This imaginary code should explain what I am wondering: class Base { public $var; function __construct($var){ $this->var = $name; } } class Extender extends Base { function __construct($parent) { parent = $parent; } } $base = new Base('yay!'); $extender = new Extender($base); echo 'Extended base var value: '.$extender->var.'<br/>'; Output (would be): Extended base var value: yay! To be clear, I am wanting to instantiate an object that extends a PARTICULAR INSTANCE of another object, one that has already been instantiated. I am aware that I can pass a reference to an object to another object (via it's constructor function) and then add it as a property of the receiving object, I'm wondering if there is a real way to do this?

    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

  • How to call object's method from constructor?

    - by Kirzilla
    Hello, var Dog = function(name) { this.name = name; this.sayName(); } Dog.prototype.sayName = function() { alert(this.name); } I'm creating new instance of Dog object, but method sayName() is undefined. Why? Or maybe I should do something like (but I can't see difference)... var Dog = function(name) { this.name = name; this.prototype.sayName = function() { alert(this.name); } } Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Imitating Multiple Inheritance in PHP

    - by fabieno
    I am working on my own MVC framework and found myself stuck. I need the following construction: Controller -- Backend_Controller -- Backend_Crud_Controller -- Frontend_Controller -- Frontend_Crud_Controller Both 'Backend_Crud_Controller' and 'Frontend_Crud_Controller' have the same functionality and thus they should extend another class named 'Base_Crud_Controller', the only difference comes from the 'Backend/Frontend' Controllers which implement different mechanisms. Basically they should inherit both classes but my problem is that 'Backend/Frontend' controller doesn't necessarily extend 'Base_Crud_Controller'. I know multiple inheritance doesn't exist in PHP but I am looking for a solution, I choose to refrain Mixins (like in Symfony) as I don't consider that an elegant solution. Interfaces do not suit me as all of these end up as concrete classes that should implement methods.

    Read the article

  • what is the difference between static class and normal class?

    - by Phsika
    when i prefer static or normal class? Or what is the difference between them? using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace staticmethodlar { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { SinifA.method1(); } } static class SinifA { public static void method1() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme1"); } } public static class SinifB { public static void method2() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme2"); } } public class sinifC { public void method3() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme3"); } } public class sinifD : sinifC { void method4() { Console.WriteLine("Deneme4"); } sinifC sinifc = new sinifC(); // i need to use it:) } }

    Read the article

  • how to pass a parameter to method with php's is_callable

    - by fayer
    i have to create a variable that is callable with php's is_callable i have done this: $callable = array(new MyClass, 'methodName'); but i want to pass a parameter to the method. how can i do that? cause using symfony's event dispatcher component will be like: $sfEventDispatcher->connect('log.write', array(new IC_Log('logfile.txt'), 'write')); the first parameter is just a event name, the second is the callable variable. but i can only call the write method, i want to pass a parameter to it. could someone help me out. thanks

    Read the article

  • understanding the ORM models in MVC

    - by fayer
    i cant fully understand the ORM models in MVC. so i am using symfony with doctrine. the doctrine models are created. does this mean that i don't have to create any models? are the doctrine models the only models i need? where should i put the code that uses the doctrine models: eg. $phoneIds = array(); $phone1 = new Phonenumber(); $phone1['phonenumber'] = '555 202 7890'; $phone1->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone1['id']; $phone2 = new Phonenumber(); $phone2['phonenumber'] = '555 100 7890'; $phone2->save(); $phoneIds[] = $phone2['id']; $user = new User(); $user['username'] = 'jwage'; $user['password'] = 'changeme'; $user->save(); $user->link('Phonenumbers', $phoneIds); should this code be in the controller or in another model? and where should i validate these fields (check if it exists in database, that email is email etc)? could someone please shed a light on this. thanks.

    Read the article

  • Extend base class properties

    - by user1888033
    I need your help to extend my base class, here is the similar structure i have. public class ShowRoomA { public audi AudiModelA { get; set; } public benz benzModelA { get; set; } } public class audi { public string Name { get; set; } public string AC { get; set; } public string PowerStearing { get; set; } } public class benz { public string Name { get; set; } public string AC { get; set; } public string AirBag { get; set; } public string MusicSystem { get; set; } } //My Implementation class like this class Main() { private void UpdateDetails() { ShowRoomA ojbMahi = new ShowRoomA(); GetDetails( ojbMahi ); // this works fine } private void GetDetails(ShowRoomA objShowRoom) { objShowRoom = new objShowRoom(); objShowRoom.audi = new audi(); objShowRoom.audi.Name = "AUDIMODEL94CD698"; objShowRoom.audi.AC = "6 TON"; objShowRoom.audi.PowerStearing = "Electric"; objShowRoom.benz= new benz(); objShowRoom.audi.Name = "BENZMODEL34LCX"; objShowRoom.audi.AC = "8 TON"; objShowRoom.audi.AirBag = "Two (1+1)"; objShowRoom.audi.MusicSystem = "Poineer 3500W"; } } // Till this cool. // Now I got requirement for ShowRoomB with replacement of old audi and benz with new models and new other brand cars also added. // I don't want to modify GetDetails() method. by reusing this method additional logic i want to apply to my new extended model. // Here I struck in designing my new model of ShowRoomB (base of ShowRoomA) ... I have tried some thing like... but not sure. public class audiModelB:audi { public string JetEngine { get; set; } } public class benzModelB:benz { public string JetEngine { get; set; } } public class ShowRoomB { public audiModelB AudiModelB { get; set; } public benzModelB benzModelB { get; set; } } // My new code to Implementation class like this class Main() { private void UpdateDetails() { ShowRoomB ojbNahi = new ShowRoomB(); GetDetails( ojbNahi ); // this is NOT working! I know this object does not contain base class directly, still some what i want fill my new model with old properties. Kindly suggest here } } Can any one please give me solutions how to achieve my extending requirement for base class "ShowroomA" Really appreciated your time and suggestions. Thanks in advance,

    Read the article

  • how are association, aggregation and composition written?

    - by ajsie
    i have read some posts about the differences between these 3 relationships and i think i get the point. i just wonder, are all these written the same when coding? question 1: all 3 are just a value of the object type in a instance variable? class A { public $b = '' public function __construct($object) { $this->b = $object // <-- could be a association, aggregation or a composition relation? } } question 2: does it have to be an instance variable or can it be a static one? class A { public static $b = '' // <-- nothing changed? public function __construct($object) { $this->b = $object } } question 3: is there a difference in where the object is created? i tend to think that composition object is created inside the object: class A { public $b = '' public function __construct() { $this->b = new Object // is created inside the object } } and aggregation/association is passed through a constructor or another method: class A { public $b = '' public function __construct($object) { // passed through a method $this->b = $object } } question 4: why/when is this important to know. do i have to comment an object inside another what relation its about or do you do it in an UML diagram? could someone shed a light on these questions. thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is it good practise to blank out inherited functionality that will not be used?

    - by Timo Kosig
    I'm wondering if I should change the software architecture of one of my projects. I'm developing software for a project where two sides (in fact a host and a device) use shared code. That helps because shared data, e.g. enums can be stored in one central place. I'm working with what we call a "channel" to transfer data between device and host. Each channel has to be implemented on device and host side. We have different kinds of channels, ordinary ones and special channels which transfer measurement data. My current solution has the shared code in an abstract base class. From there on code is split between the two sides. As it has turned out there are a few cases when we would have shared code but we can't share it, we have to implement it on each side. The principle of DRY (don't repeat yourself) says that you shouldn't have code twice. My thought was now to concatenate the functionality of e.g. the abstract measurement channel on the device side and the host side in an abstract class with shared code. That means though that once we create an actual class for either the device or the host side for that channel we have to hide the functionality that is used by the other side. Is this an acceptable thing to do: public abstract class MeasurementChannelAbstract { protected void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { } protected void MethodUsedByHostSide() { } } public class DeviceMeasurementChannel : MeasurementChannelAbstract { public new void MethodUsedByDeviceSide() { base.MethodUsedByDeviceSide(); } } Now, DeviceMeasurementChannel is only using the functionality for the device side from MeasurementChannelAbstract. By declaring all methods/members of MeasurementChannelAbstract protected you have to use the new keyword to enable that functionality to be accessed from the outside. Is that acceptable or are there any pitfalls, caveats, etc. that could arise later when using the code?

    Read the article

  • Python - Is it possible to get the name of the chained function?

    - by user1326876
    I'm working on a class that basically allows for method chaining, for setting some attrbutes for different dictionaries stored. The syntax is as follows: d = Test() d.connect().setAttrbutes(Message=Blah, Circle=True, Key=True) But there can also be other instances, so, for example: d = Test() d.initialise().setAttrbutes(Message=Blah) Now I believe that I can overwrite the "setattrbutes" function; I just don't want to create a function for each of the dictionary. Instead I want to capture the name of the previous chained function. So in the example above I would then be given "connect" and "initialise" so I know which dictionary to store these inside. I hope this makes sense. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • Is there anything wrong with a class with all static methods?

    - by MatthewMartin
    I'm doing code review and came across a class that uses all static methods. The entrance method takes several arguments and then starts calling the other static methods passing along all or some of the arguments the entrance method received. It isn't like a Math class with largely unrelated utility functions. In my own normal programming, I rarely write methods where Resharper pops and says "this could be a static method", when I do, they tend to be mindless utility methods. Is there anything wrong with this pattern? Is this just a matter of personal choice if the state of a class is held in fields and properties or passed around amongst static methods using arguments?

    Read the article

  • Using PHP interfaces in Codeigniter

    - by John Stewart
    I am trying to find out how can I used PHP interfaces in my MVC design. I want to make sure that the design enforces an interface so that any new module would follow that. For example: <?php interface BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg); } class ServiceAPI implements BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg) { return $msg; } } class Service_Two_API implements BaseAPI { public function postMessage($msg) { return "can't do this: ".$msg; } } ?> I want to do this in CI. Is it possible? how should I design it?

    Read the article

  • javascript function object's inheritFrom method

    - by gawpertron
    I've come across this.inheritFrom that enables you to inherit from a super class. var superClass = function() { this.foo = 'foo'; this.bar = 'bar'; } var subClass = function() { this.inheritFrom = superClass; this.inheritFrom(); this.myFunction = function() { return this.foo; }; } I've looked in Mozilla and MSDN, but I can't seem to find it documented any where. As far as I can see it works in IE6 and Firefox 3. Any reason why it wouldn't be documented?

    Read the article

  • Can you explain this generics behavior and if I have a workaround?

    - by insta
    Sample program below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace GenericsTest { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { IRetrievable<int, User> repo = new FakeRepository(); Console.WriteLine(repo.Retrieve(35)); } } class User { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } } class FakeRepository : BaseRepository<User>, ICreatable<User>, IDeletable<User>, IRetrievable<int, User> { // why do I have to implement this here, instead of letting the // TKey generics implementation in the baseclass handle it? //public User Retrieve(int input) //{ // throw new NotImplementedException(); //} } class BaseRepository<TPoco> where TPoco : class,new() { public virtual TPoco Create() { return new TPoco(); } public virtual bool Delete(TPoco item) { return true; } public virtual TPoco Retrieve<TKey>(TKey input) { return null; } } interface ICreatable<TPoco> { TPoco Create(); } interface IDeletable<TPoco> { bool Delete(TPoco item); } interface IRetrievable<TKey, TPoco> { TPoco Retrieve(TKey input); } } This sample program represents the interfaces my actual program uses, and demonstrates the problem I'm having (commented out in FakeRepository). I would like for this method call to be generically handled by the base class (which in my real example is able to handle 95% of the cases given to it), allowing for overrides in the child classes by specifying the type of TKey explicitly. It doesn't seem to matter what parameter constraints I use for the IRetrievable, I can never get the method call to fall through to the base class. Also, if anyone can see an alternate way to implement this kind of behavior and get the result I'm ultimately looking for, I would be very interested to see it. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • My method is too specific. How can I make it more generic?

    - by EricBoersma
    I have a class, the outline of which is basically listed below. import org.apache.commons.math.stat.Frequency; public class WebUsageLog { private Collection<LogLine> logLines; private Collection<Date> dates; WebUsageLog() { this.logLines = new ArrayList<LogLine>(); this.dates = new ArrayList<Date>(); } SortedMap<Double, String> getFrequencyOfVisitedSites() { SortedMap<Double, String> frequencyMap = new TreeMap<Double, String>(Collections.reverseOrder()); //we reverse order to sort from the highest percentage to the lowest. Collection<String> domains = new HashSet<String>(); Frequency freq = new Frequency(); for (LogLine line : this.logLines) { freq.addValue(line.getVisitedDomain()); domains.add(line.getVisitedDomain()); } for (String domain : domains) { frequencyMap.put(freq.getPct(domain), domain); } return frequencyMap; } } The intention of this application is to allow our Human Resources folks to be able to view Web Usage Logs we send to them. However, I'm sure that over time, I'd like to be able to offer the option to view not only the frequency of visited sites, but also other members of LogLine (things like the frequency of assigned categories, accessed types [text/html, img/jpeg, etc...] filter verdicts, and so on). Ideally, I'd like to avoid writing individual methods for compilation of data for each of those types, and they could each end up looking nearly identical to the getFrequencyOfVisitedSites() method. So, my question is twofold: first, can you see anywhere where this method should be improved, from a mechanical standpoint? And secondly, how would you make this method more generic, so that it might be able to handle an arbitrary set of data?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >