Search Results

Search found 2872 results on 115 pages for 'packet injection'.

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 35/115 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • How do I create different Objects using Google Guice?

    - by kunjaan
    I have a Module which binds an Interface to a particular implementation. I use that module to create an object. How do I create a different kind of object with the the interface bound to a different implementation? Do I need to create a new module with the Interface bound to a different implementation?

    Read the article

  • Structuremap and creating objects with initial state

    - by Simon
    I have an object which needs a dependency injected into it public class FootballLadder { public FootballLadder(IMatchRepository matchRepository, int round) { // set initial state this.matchRepo = matchRepository; this.round = round; } public IEnumerable<LadderEntry> GetLadderEntries() { // calculate the ladder based on matches retrieved from the match repository // return the calculated ladder } private IMatchRepository matchRepo; private int round; } For arguments sake, lets assume that I can't pass the round parameter into the GetLadderEntries call itself. Using StructureMap, how can I inject the dependency on the IMatchRepository and set the initial state? Or is this one of those cases where struggling against the framework is a sign the code should be refactored?

    Read the article

  • How to prevent a specific directory from running Php, Html, and Javascript languages?

    - by Emily
    Hi, Let's say i have an image uploader script, i want to prevent the upload directory from executing Php or even html by only showing it as plain text, i've seen this trick in many websites but i don't know how they do it. Briefly, if i upload evil.php to that directory, and i try to access it i will only see a plain text source , No html or php is executed. ( but i still want the images to appear normally ofcourse) I know i can do like that by header("content-type:text/plain"); but that's will not be helpful, because what i want, is to set the content-type:text/plain automatically by the server for every thing outputed from the upload directory except images. Note: i'm running php 5.3.2/Cent OS and the latest cPanel. Thanks

    Read the article

  • castle windsor container not wiring properties correctly

    - by Damian
    I have a class that i want to instantiate thru castle in configuration. public class MyMappings : IMappings { Mapping FirstMapping { get; set; } Mapping SecondMapping { get; set; } OtherType ThirdMapping { get; set; } OtherType FourthMapping { get; set; } Mapping FifthMapping { get; set; } OtherType SixMapping { get; set; } } In my configuration i have the following: ${anothercomponentIDForCompomentOftypeMapping} The problem i am facing is that is assigning the same value to all properties of the same type, completly ignoring the name of the parameter. This properties are optional, i just want to initialize the value for one of them. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • is right to implement a business logic in the type binding DI framwork?

    - by Martino
    public IRedirect FactoryStrategyRedirect() { if (_PasswordExpired) { return _UpdatePasswordRedirectorFactory.Create(); } else { return _DefaultRedirectorFactory.Create(); } } This strategy factory method can be replaced with type binding and when clause: Bind<IRedirect>.To<UpdatePasswordRedirector>.When(c=> c.kernel.get<SomeContext>().PasswordExpired()) Bind<IRedirect>.To<DefaultRedirector>.When(c=> not c.kernel.get<SomeContext>().PasswordExpired()) I wonder which of the two approaches is the more correct. What are the pros and cons. Especially in the case in which the logic is more complex with more variables to test and more concrete classes to return. is right to implement a business logic in the binding?

    Read the article

  • SimpleInjector - Register a type for all it's interfaces

    - by Karl Cassar
    Is it possible to register a type for all it's implementing interfaces? E.g, I have a: public class Bow : IWeapon { #region IWeapon Members public string Attack() { return "Shooted with a bow"; } #endregion } public class HumanFighter { private readonly IWeapon weapon = null; public HumanFighter(IWeapon weapon) { this.weapon = weapon; } public string Fight() { return this.weapon.Attack(); } } [Test] public void Test2b() { Container container = new Container(); container.RegisterSingle<Bow>(); container.RegisterSingle<HumanFighter>(); // this would match the IWeapon to the Bow, as it // is implemented by Bow var humanFighter1 = container.GetInstance<HumanFighter>(); string s = humanFighter1.Fight(); }

    Read the article

  • How do I set up Array/List dependencies in code with Castle Windsor?

    - by SharePoint Newbie
    Hi, I have the following classes: class Repository : IRepository class ReadOnlyRepository : Repository abstract class Command abstract CommandImpl : Command { public CommandImpl(Repository repository){} } class Service { public Service (Command[] commands){} } I register them in code as follows: var container = new Container("WindsorCOntainer.config"); var container = new WindsorContainer(new XmlInterpreter("WindsorConfig.xml")); container.Kernel.Resolver.AddSubResolver(new ArrayResolver(container.Kernel)); container.AddComponent("repository", typeof(RentServiceRepository)); container.Resolve<RentServiceRepository>(); container.AddComponent("command", typeof(COmmandImpl)); container.AddComponent("rentService", typeof (RentService)); container.Resolve<RentService>(); // Fails here I get the message that "RentService is waiting for dependency commands" What am I doing wrong? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • XNA and Ninject: Syntax for dependency arguments?

    - by Rosarch
    I have a class with a public constructor: public MasterEngine(IInputReader inputReader) { this.inputReader = inputReader; graphicsDeviceManager = new GraphicsDeviceManager(this); Components.Add(new GamerServicesComponent(this)); } How can I inject dependencies like graphicsDeviceManager and new GamerServicesComponent while still supplying the argument this?

    Read the article

  • Usage patterns/use cases for DI or when to start using it

    - by Fabian
    I'm not sure for which use cases one should to use DI in the application. I know that injecting services like PlaceService or CalculationService etc fits very well but should I also create my domain objects with DI like a User? What is if the User has only one constructor which requires a first and lastname. Is this solveable with DI? Should I use DI to create the instances for Set/List interfaces or is this pure overkill? I use guice primarily.

    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

  • 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

  • DI: Injecting ActionFilterAttribute implementation (ASP.NET MVC)

    - by Sosh
    I was wondering if it is possible to inject a particular ActionFilterAttribute implementation using a IoC container. For example, imagine you create a TransactionAttribute class [Transaction] You use this to decorate action which should be wrapped in a transaction in the persistence layer. But implementation details of the attribute will be tied to the persistence tech you are using, but strictly speaking, your controller should not know about this, and you might want to swap this out. What I would like to do, is define some kind of TransactionAttribute interface, and then have my IoC inject the correct implantation. So on my actions I only need specify: [Transaction] public ActionResult SomeAction() { .... } ...and the IoC will inject the correct implementation depending on config (eg. something like NHibernateTransactionAttribute, or SomeOtherORMTransactionAttribute). Is this possible? Has anyone done it?

    Read the article

  • Passing Func<T> to controller constructure when using Unity IoC with MVC, advantages?

    - by user1361315
    I was looking at a sample of how to setup Unity IoC with MVC, and noticed someone who recommended the approach of having the parameters of Func. I believe the advantage is this is kind of like lazy loading the service, if it never gets called it will never get executed and not consume any resources. private readonly Func<IUserService> _userService; public CourseController(Func<IUserService> userService) { this._userService = userService; } Versus a parameter without a Func: private readonly IUserService _userService; public CourseController(IUserService userService) { this._userService = userService; } Can someone explain to me the differences, is it really more effecient?

    Read the article

  • Struts1 and Spring wiring question

    - by Dev er dev
    Recently I had a pleasure of working again on Struts 1.1 application. It uses Spring 2.5, but not for actions. I would like to hook it up to use Spring as DI for Struts Actions also, as it would make my life a loot easier. I found out DelegatingRequestProcessor could be used for this purpose, at least according to documentation, but seems it has been deprecated as of Spring 3.0. Switching to the new version of Struts is not an option. Does anyone have better idea then starting to use deprecated stuff?

    Read the article

  • Should an object be fully complete before injected as a dependency?

    - by Hans
    This is an extension of this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3027082/understanding-how-to-inject-object-dependencies. Since it is a bit different, I wanted to separate them, to make it, hopefully, easier to answer. Also, this is not a real system, just a simplified example that I thought we'd all be familiar with. TIA. : DB threads: thread_id, thread_name, etc posts: post_id, thread_id, post_name, post_contents, post_date, post_user_id, etc Overview Basically I'm looking at the most maintainable way to load $post_id and have it cascade and load the other things I want to know about and I'm trying to keep the controller skinny. BUT: I'm ending up with too many dependencies to inject I'm passing in initialized but empty objects I want to limit how many parameters I am passing around I could inject $post(-many) into $thread(one<-), but on that page I'm not looking at a thread, I'm looking at a post I could combine/inject them into a new object Detail If I am injecting an object into another, is it best to have it fully created first? I'm trying to limit how many parameters I have to pass in to a page, but I end up with a circle. // 1, empty object injected via constructor $thread = new Thread; $post = new Post($thread); // $thread is just an empty object $post->load($post_id); // I could now do something like $post->get('thread_id') to get everything I want in $post // 2, complete object injected via constructor $thread = new Thread; $thread->load($thread_id); // this page would have to have passed in a $thread_id, too $post = new Post($thread); // thread is a complete object, with the data I need, like thread name $post->load($post_id); // 3, inject $post into $thread, but this makes less sense to me, since I'm looking at a post page, not a thread page $post = new Post(); $post->load($post_id); $thread = new Thread($post); $thread->load(); // would load based on the $post->get('post_id') and combine. Now I have all the data I want, but it's non-intuitive to be heirarchially Thread->Post instead of Post-with-thread-info // Or, I could inject $post into $thread, but if I'm on a post page, // having an object with a top level of Thread instead of // Post-which-contains-thread-info, makes less sense to me. // to go with example 1 class post { public function __construct(&$thread) { $this->thread=$thread; } public function load($id) { // ... here I would load all the post data based on $id // now include the thread data $this->thread->load($this->get('thread_id')); return $this; } } // I don't want to do $thread = new Thread; $post = new Post; $post->load($post_id); $thread->load($post->get('post_id')); Or, I could create a new object and inject both $post and $thread into it, but then I have object with an increasing number of dependencies.

    Read the article

  • What's the correct way to instantiate an IRepository class from the Controller?

    - by GenericTypeTea
    I have the following project layout: MVC UI |...CustomerController (ICustomerRepository - how do I instantiate this?) Data Model |...ICustomerRepository DAL (Separate Data access layer, references Data Model to get the IxRepositories) |...CustomerRepository (inherits ICustomerRepository) What's the correct way to say ICustomerRepository repository = new CustomerRepository(); when the Controller has no visibility to the DAL project? Or am I doing this completely wrong?

    Read the article

  • Groovy: Dynamically addings methods with a specific signature.

    - by Reverend Gonzo
    So, I need to dynamically create (or inject) methods into an object that have a specific return type and method signature, because a Java tool we're using will be finding this methods via Reflection and checks for void type. Method names will be determined at runtime. Using metaClass. = { ... } however adds a closure which doesn't show up as a regular method (even if it can be used as one) and also has a return type. I can't modify the method finding code, and it it not Groovy-aware. I can't use methodMissing() or invokeMethod() because the method needs to actually exist. If I could overload class.getMethods() I think it would be possible, but I can't figure out how. Is there any way to do this in Groovy?

    Read the article

  • grailsApplication not getting injected in a service , Grails 2.1.0

    - by vijay tyagi
    I have service in which i am accessing few configuration properties from grailsApplication I am injecting it like this class MyWebService{ def grailsApplication WebService webService = new WebService() def getProxy(url, flag){ return webService.getClient(url) } def getResponse(){ def proxy = getProxy(grailsApplication.config.grails.wsdlURL, true) def response = proxy.getItem(ItemType) return response } } When i call getProxy() method, i see this in tomcat logs No signature of method: org.example.MyWebService.getProxy() is applicable for argument types: (groovy.util.ConfigObject, java.lang.Boolean) values: [[:], true] Possible solutions: getProxy(), getProxy(java.lang.String, boolean), setProxy(java.lang.Object) which means grailsApplication is not getting injected into the service, is there any alternate way to access configuration object ? according to burtbeckwith's post configurationholder has been deprecated, can't think of anything else. Interestingly the very same service works fine in my local IDE(GGTS 3.1.0), that means locally grailsApplication is getting injected, but when i create a war to deploy to a standalone tomcat, it stops getting injected.

    Read the article

  • C++, inject additional data in a method

    - by justik
    I am adding the new modul in some large library. All methods here are implemented as static. Let mi briefly describe the simplified model: typedef std::vector<double> TData; double test ( const TData &arg ) { return arg ( 0 ) * sin ( arg ( 1 ) + ...;} double ( * p_test ) ( const TData> &arg) = &test; class A { public: static T f1 (TData &input) { .... //some computations B::f2 (p_test); } }; Inside f1() some computations are perfomed and a static method B::f2 is called. The f2 method is implemented by another author and represents some simulation algorithm (example here is siplified). class B { public: static double f2 (double ( * p_test ) ( const TData &arg ) ) { //difficult algorithm working p_test many times double res = p_test(arg); } }; The f2 method has a pointer to some weight function (here p_test). But in my case some additional parameters computed in f1 for test() methods are required double test ( const TData &arg, const TData &arg2, char *arg3.... ) { } How to inject these parameters into test() (and so to f2) to avoid changing the source code of the f2 methods (that is not trivial), redesign of the library and without dirty hacks :-) ? The most simple step is to override f2 static double f2 (double ( * p_test ) ( const TData &arg ), const TData &arg2, char *arg3.... ) But what to do later? Consider, that methods are static, so there will be problems with objects. Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • How does the Built-in Bindings of Google Guice work?

    - by lony
    Hello, I tried Google Guice the first time and find it very nice. But, when I reached the part of Built-in Bindings I do not understand the examples. For me it looks like I can use it for logging like an interceptor, but I don't know how. Could someone of you explain this type of Binding and how I can use it? And maybe (if it's possible) use it for logging?

    Read the article

  • IIS 6.0 Server and Unicode Characters

    - by Srikanth
    We are performing a pen test on a simple asp application that uses MS SQL Database. It seems for the authentication they are using dynamic constructed queries but escaping single qoutes. When we use Unicode quotes like %uFFO7,%u02b9 etc we are able to successfully inject SQL injections. Want to understand is it more a kind of configuration issue of IIS server to cannonicalize Unicode characters or the way the validation function to escape single quotes is written is the cause of the problem?

    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 | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >