Search Results

Search found 3488 results on 140 pages for 'scala collections'.

Page 35/140 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • using indexer to retrieve Linq to SQL object from datastore

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    class UserDatastore : IUserDatastore { ... public IUser this[Guid userId] { get { User user = (from u in _dataContext.Users where u.Id == userId select u).FirstOrDefault(); return user; } } ... } One of the developers in our team is arguing that an indexer in the above situation is not appropriate and that a GetUser(Guid id) method should be prefered. The arguments being that: 1) We aren't indexing into an in-memory collection, the indexer is basically performing a hidden SQL query 2) Using a Guid in an indexer is bad (FxCop flagged this also) 3) Returning null from an indexer isn't normal behaviour 4) An API user generally wouldn't expect any of this behaviour I agree to an extent with (most of) these points. But I'm also inclined to argue that one of the characteristics of Linq is to abstract the database access to make it appear that you're simply working with a bunch of collections, even though the lazy evaluation paradigm means those collections aren't evaluated until you run a query over them. It doesn't seem inconsistent to me to access the datastore in the same manner as if it was a concrete in-memory collection here. Also bearing in mind this is an inherited codebase which uses this pattern extensively and consistently, is it worth the refactoring? I accept that it might have been better to use a Get method from the start, but I'm not yet convinced that it's completely incorrect to be using an indexer. I'd be interested to hear all opinions, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Paging over a lazy-loaded collection with NHibernate

    - by HackedByChinese
    I read this article where Ayende states NHibernate can (compared to EF 4): Collection with lazy=”extra” – Lazy extra means that NHibernate adapts to the operations that you might run on top of your collections. That means that blog.Posts.Count will not force a load of the entire collection, but rather would create a “select count(*) from Posts where BlogId = 1” statement, and that blog.Posts.Contains() will likewise result in a single query rather than paying the price of loading the entire collection to memory. Collection filters and paged collections - this allows you to define additional filters (including paging!) on top of your entities collections, which means that you can easily page through the blog.Posts collection, and not have to load the entire thing into memory. So I decided to put together a test case. I created the cliché Blog model as a simple demonstration, with two classes as follows: public class Blog { public virtual int Id { get; private set; } public virtual string Name { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<Post> Posts { get; private set; } public virtual void AddPost(Post item) { if (Posts == null) Posts = new List<Post>(); if (!Posts.Contains(item)) Posts.Add(item); } } public class Post { public virtual int Id { get; private set; } public virtual string Title { get; set; } public virtual string Body { get; set; } public virtual Blog Blog { get; private set; } } My mappings files look like this: <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" default-access="property" auto-import="true" default-cascade="none" default-lazy="true"> <class xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" name="Model.Blog, TestEntityFramework, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null" table="Blogs"> <id name="Id" type="System.Int32, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Id" /> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="Name" type="System.String, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Name" /> </property> <property name="Type" type="System.Int32, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Type" /> </property> <bag lazy="extra" name="Posts"> <key> <column name="Blog_Id" /> </key> <one-to-many class="Model.Post, TestEntityFramework, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null" /> </bag> </class> </hibernate-mapping> <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" default-access="property" auto-import="true" default-cascade="none" default-lazy="true"> <class xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" name="Model.Post, TestEntityFramework, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null" table="Posts"> <id name="Id" type="System.Int32, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Id" /> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="Title" type="System.String, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Title" /> </property> <property name="Body" type="System.String, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <column name="Body" /> </property> <many-to-one class="Model.Blog, TestEntityFramework, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null" name="Blog"> <column name="Blog_id" /> </many-to-one> </class> </hibernate-mapping> My test case looks something like this: using (ISession session = Configuration.Current.CreateSession()) // this class returns a custom ISession that represents either EF4 or NHibernate { blogs = (from b in session.Linq<Blog>() where b.Name.Contains("Test") orderby b.Id select b); Console.WriteLine("# of Blogs containing 'Test': {0}", blogs.Count()); Console.WriteLine("Viewing the first 5 matching Blogs."); foreach (Blog b in blogs.Skip(0).Take(5)) { Console.WriteLine("Blog #{0} \"{1}\" has {2} Posts.", b.Id, b.Name, b.Posts.Count); Console.WriteLine("Viewing first 5 matching Posts."); foreach (Post p in b.Posts.Skip(0).Take(5)) { Console.WriteLine("Post #{0} \"{1}\" \"{2}\"", p.Id, p.Title, p.Body); } } } Using lazy="extra", the call to b.Posts.Count does do a SELECT COUNT(Id)... which is great. However, b.Posts.Skip(0).Take(5) just grabs all Posts for Blog.Id = ?id, and then LINQ on the application side is just taking the first 5 from the resulting collection. What gives?

    Read the article

  • What is the basic design idea behind the Scala for-loop implicit box/unboxing of numerical types?

    - by IODEV
    I'm trying to understand the behavior of Scala for-loop implicit box/unboxing of "numerical" types. Why does the two first fail but not the rest? 1) Fails: scala for (i:Long <- 0 to 10000000L) {} <console>:19: error: type mismatch;<br> found : Long(10000000L) required: Int for (i:Long <- 0 to 10000000L) {} ^ 2 Fails: scala for (i <- 0 to 10000000L) {} <console>:19: error: type mismatch; found : Long(10000000L) required: Int for (i <- 0 to 10000000L) {} ^ 3) Works: scala for (i:Long <- 0L to 10000000L) {} 4) Works: scala for (i <- 0L to 10000000L) {}

    Read the article

  • ABNORMAL LAPTOP RESTART

    - by KIUFELIX
    My dell vostro laptop keeps on restarting when I'm busy using it without commanding it to do so.I'm using windows 7 for O.S.What might be the problem?How can I solve it?Please someone help!

    Read the article

  • Is there a non-unique-key sorted list generic collection in C#?

    - by kdt
    I'm a bit surprised by System.Collections.Generic.SortedList, in that It requires me to use <key, value> instead of <value>(comparer) It only allows on entry per value These seem quirky in the way I want to use it (although I'm sure they're just right for other situations). Is there another collection that doesn't have these two characteristics?

    Read the article

  • Generic tree implementation in Java

    - by Ivan
    Is anyone aware of a generic tree (nodes may have multiple children) implementation for Java? It should come from a well trusted source and must be fully tested. It just doesn't seem right implementing it myself. Almost reminds me of my university years when we were supposed to write all our collections ourselves. EDIT: Found this project on java.net, might be worth looking into.

    Read the article

  • Date Sorting - Latest to Oldest

    - by Erika Szabo
    Collections.sort(someList, new Comparator<SomeObject>() { public int compare(final SomeObject object1, final SomeObject object2) { return (object1.getSomeDate()).compareTo(object2.getSomeDate()); }} ); Would it give me the objects with latest dates meaning the list will contain the set of objects with latest date to oldest date?

    Read the article

  • Java: omitting a data member from the equals method.

    - by cchampion
    public class GamePiece { public GamePiece(char cLetter, int nPointValue) { m_cLetter=cLetter; m_nPointValue=nPointValue; m_nTurnPlaced=0; //has not been placed on game board yet. } public char GetLetter() {return m_cLetter;} public int GetPointValue() {return m_nPointValue;} public int GetTurnPlaced() {return m_nTurnPlaced;} public void SetTurnPlaced(int nTurnPlaced) { m_nTurnPlaced=nTurnPlaced; } @Override public boolean equals(Object obj) { /*NOTE to keep this shorter I omitted some of the null checking and instanceof stuff. */ GamePiece other = (GamePiece) obj; //not case sensitive, and I don`t think we want it to be here. if(m_cLetter != other.m_cLetter) { return false; } if(m_nPointValue != other.m_nPointValue) { return false; } /* NOTICE! m_nPointValue purposely omitted. It does not affect hashcode or equals */ return true; } @Override public int hashCode() { /* NOTICE! m_nPointValue purposely omitted. It should not affect hashcode or equals */ final int prime = 41; return prime * (prime + m_nPointValue + m_cLetter); } private char m_cLetter; private int m_nPointValue; private int m_nTurnPlaced;//turn which the game piece was placed on the game board. Does not affect equals or has code! } Consider the given piece of code. This object has been immutable until the introduction of the m_nTurnPlaced member (which can be modified by the SetTurnPlaced method, so now GamePiece becomes mutable). GamePiece is used in an ArrayList, I call contains and remove methods which both rely on the equals method to be implemented. My question is this, is it ok or common practice in Java for some members to not affect equals and hashcode? How will this affect its use in my ArrayList? What type of java Collections would it NOT be safe to use this object now that it is mutable? I've been told that you're not supposed to override equals on mutable objects because it causes some collections to behave "strangely" (I read that somewhere in the java documentation).

    Read the article

  • What is the minimum interface that has the Count property in .Net

    - by SoMoS
    Hello, I need to change a method that has one parameter that takes a serie of objects. I need to find the lowest Interface (in inheritance tree) that has the Count property. Until now I was using the IEnumerable but as this has not Count I need to change it to the wider interface possible so the method can work with the biggest number of types of series (collections, lists, arrays, etc). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why does sorted list have to have a key value pair?

    - by clawson
    If I just want a sorted list of just dates, integers, or doubles is it really necessary to have to define a SortedList(of Integer, Integer)? Seems intriguing to me, but may just be trival. I'd prefer just to use a SortedList(of Integer). (This question is in relation to the .Net generic collections)

    Read the article

  • Concurrent Linked HashMap java

    - by Nilesh
    Please help me use/create Concurrent LinkedHashMap. As per my belief, if I use Collections.synchronizedMap(), I would have to use synchronized blocks for getter/setter. If I use ConcurrentSkipListMap, is there any way to implement a Comparator to store sequentially. I would like to use java's built in instead of third party packages. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Java equivalent of C++ std::map?

    - by Rudiger
    I'm looking for a Java class with the characteristics of C++ std::map's usual implementation (as I understand it, a self-balancing binary search tree): O(log n) performance for insertion/removal/search Each element is composed of a unique key and a mapped value Keys follow a strict weak ordering I'm looking for implementations with open source or design documents; I'll probably end up rolling my own support for primitive keys/values. This question's style is similar to: Java equivalent of std::deque, whose answer was "ArrayDeque from Primitive Collections for Java".

    Read the article

  • What's the right Java generic for a collection of elements with unique addressable indices?

    - by Rocreex
    I'm on my way to programming a database application and in our course we are told to implement a library of elements using one of the Java Collections. Each of the elements has a unique ID with which it's supposed to be addressed. Now I am wondering how this can be done. I though about using a ListArray but this won't work because the only way of addressing List elements is through the index which you can't control. Do you have some advice for me?

    Read the article

  • Model binding nested collections in ASP.NET MVC

    - by MartinHN
    Hi I'm using Steve Sanderson's BeginCollectionItem helper with ASP.NET MVC 2 to model bind a collection if items. That works fine, as long as the Model of the collection items does not contain another collection. I have a model like this: -Product --Variants ---IncludedAttributes Whenever I render and model bind the Variants collection, it works jusst fine. But with the IncludedAttributes collection, I cannot use the BeginCollectionItem helper because the id and names value won't honor the id and names value that was produced for it's parent Variant: <div class="variant"> <input type="hidden" value="bbd4fdd4-fa22-49f9-8a5e-3ff7e2942126" autocomplete="off" name="Variants.index"> <input type="hidden" value="0" name="Variants[bbd4fdd4-fa22-49f9-8a5e-3ff7e2942126].SlotAmount" id="Variants_bbd4fdd4-fa22-49f9-8a5e-3ff7e2942126__SlotAmount"> <table class="included-attributes"> <input type="hidden" value="0" name="Variants.IncludedAttributes[c5989db5-b1e1-485b-b09d-a9e50dd1d2cb].Id" id="Variants_IncludedAttributes_c5989db5-b1e1-485b-b09d-a9e50dd1d2cb__Id" class="attribute-id"> <tr> <td> <input type="hidden" value="0" name="Variants.IncludedAttributes[c5989db5-b1e1-485b-b09d-a9e50dd1d2cb].Id" id="Variants_IncludedAttributes_c5989db5-b1e1-485b-b09d-a9e50dd1d2cb__Id" class="attribute-id"> </td> </tr> </table> </div> If you look at the name of the first hidden field inside the table, it is Variants.IncludedAttributes - where it should have been Variants[bbd4fdd4-fa22-49f9-8a5e-3ff7e2942126].IncludedAttributes[...]... That is because when I call BeginCollectionItem the second time (On the IncludedAttributes collection) there's given no information about the item index value of it's parent Variant. My code for rendering a Variant looks like this: <div class="product-variant round-content-box grid_6" data-id="<%: Model.AttributeType.Id %>"> <h2><%: Model.AttributeType.AttributeTypeName %></h2> <div class="box-content"> <% using (Html.BeginCollectionItem("Variants")) { %> <div class="slot-amount"> <label class="inline" for="slotAmountSelectList"><%: Text.amountOfThisVariant %>:</label> <select id="slotAmountSelectList"><option value="1">1</option><option value="2">2</option></select> </div> <div class="add-values"> <label class="inline" for="txtProductAttributeSearch"><%: Text.addVariantItems %>:</label> <input type="text" id="txtProductAttributeSearch" class="product-attribute-search" /><span><%: Text.or %> <a class="select-from-list-link" href="#select-from-list" data-id="<%: Model.AttributeType.Id %>"><%: Text.selectFromList.ToLowerInvariant() %></a></span> <div class="clear"></div> </div> <%: Html.HiddenFor(m=>m.SlotAmount) %> <div class="included-attributes"> <table> <thead> <tr> <th><%: Text.name %></th> <th style="width: 80px;"><%: Text.price %></th> <th><%: Text.shipping %></th> <th style="width: 90px;"><%: Text.image %></th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <% for (int i = 0; i < Model.IncludedAttributes.Count; i++) { %> <tr><%: Html.EditorFor(m => m.IncludedAttributes[i]) %></tr> <% } %> </tbody> </table> </div> <% } %> </div> </div> And the code for rendering an IncludedAttribute: <% using (Html.BeginCollectionItem("Variants.IncludedAttributes")) { %> <td> <%: Model.AttributeName %> <%: Html.HiddenFor(m => m.Id, new { @class = "attribute-id" })%> <%: Html.HiddenFor(m => m.ProductAttributeTypeId) %> </td> <td><%: Model.Price.ToCurrencyString() %></td> <td><%: Html.DropDownListFor(m => m.RequiredShippingTypeId, AppData.GetShippingTypesSelectListItems(Model.RequiredShippingTypeId)) %></td> <td><%: Model.ImageId %></td> <% } %>

    Read the article

  • Write-only collections in MongoDB

    - by rcoder
    I'm currently using MongoDB to record application logs, and while I'm quite happy with both the performance and with being able to dump arbitrary structured data into log records, I'm troubled by the mutability of log records once stored. In a traditional database, I would structure the grants for my log tables such that the application user had INSERT and SELECT privileges, but not UPDATE or DELETE. Similarly, in CouchDB, I could write a update validator function that rejected all attempts to modify an existing document. However, I've been unable to find a way to restrict operations on a MongoDB database or collection beyond the three access levels (no access, read-only, "god mode") documented in the security topic on the MongoDB wiki. Has anyone else deployed MongoDB as a document store in a setting where immutability (or at least change tracking) for documents was a requirement? What tricks or techniques did you use to ensure that poorly-written or malicious application code could not modify or destroy existing log records? Do I need to wrap my MongoDB logging in a service layer that enforces the write-only policy, or can I use some combination of configuration, query hacking, and replication to ensure a consistent, audit-able record is maintained?

    Read the article

  • EDM -> POCO -> WCF (.NET4) But transferring Collections causes IsReadOnly set to TRUE

    - by Gary B
    Ok, this may sound a little 'unorthodox', but...using VS2010 and the new POCO t4 template for Entity Framework (http://tinyurl.com/y8wnkt2), I can generate nice POCO's. I can then use these POCO's (as DTO's) in a WCF service essentially going from EDM all the way through to the client. Kinda what this guys is doing (http://tinyurl.com/yb4bslv), except everything is generated automatically. I understand that an entity and a DTO 'should' be different, but in this case, I'm handling client and server, and there's some real advantages to having the DTO in the model and automatically generated. My problem is, that when I transfer an entity that has a relationship, the client generated collection (ICollection) has the read-only value set, so I can't manipulate that relationship. For example, retrieving an existing Order, I can't add a product to the Products collection client-side...the Products collection is read-only. I would prefer to do a bunch of client side 'order-editing' and then send the updated order back rather than making dozens of server round trips (eg AddProductToOrder(product)). I'd also prefer not to have a bunch of thunking between Entity and DTO. So all-in-all this looks good to me...except for the read-only part. Is there a solution, or is this too much against the SOA grain?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate returning duplicate object in child collections when using Fetch

    - by UpTheCreek
    When doing a query like this (using Nhibernate 2.1.2): ICriteria criteria = session.CreateCriteria<MyRootType>() .SetFetchMode("ChildCollection1", FetchMode.Eager) .SetFetchMode("ChildCollection2", FetchMode.Eager) .Add(Restrictions.IdEq(id)); I am getting multiple duplicate objects in some cartesian fashion. E.g. if ChildCollection1 has 3 elements, and ChildColection2 has 2 elements then I get results with each element in ChildColection1 one duplicated, and each element in ChildColection2 triplicated! This was a bit of a WTF moment for me... So how to do this correctly? Is using SetFetchMode like this only supported when specifying one collection? Am I just using it wrong (I've seen some references to results transformers, but imagined this would be simplier). Is this something that's different in NH3? Update: As per Felice's suggestion, I tried using the DistinctRootEntity transformer, but this is still returning duplicates. Code: ICriteria criteria = session.CreateCriteria<MyRootType>() .SetFetchMode("ChildCollection1", FetchMode.Eager) .SetFetchMode("ChildCollection2", FetchMode.Eager) .Add(Restrictions.IdEq(id)); criteria.SetResultTransformer(Transformers.DistinctRootEntity); return criteria.UniqueResult<MyRootType>();

    Read the article

  • Building big, immutable objects without constructors having long parameter lists

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have some big (more than 3 fields) Objects which can and should be immutable. Every time I run into that case i tend to create constructor abominations with long parameter lists. It doesn't feel right, is hard to use and readability suffers. It is even worse if the fields are some sort of collection type like lists. A simple addSibling(S s) would ease the object creation so much but renders the object mutable. What do you guys use in such cases? I'm on Scala and Java, but i think the problem is language agnostic as long as the language is object oriented. Solutions I can think of: "Constructor abominations with long parameter lists" The Builder Pattern Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • Unique items in Hibernate collections

    - by Rickard Lindberg
    I have defined a collection in Hibernate like this: ... public class Item { ... @ElementCollection List<Object> relatedObjects; } It creates a mapping table with colums item_id and object_id. The problem is that object_id seems to be unique. In other words I can not have two different items being related to the same object. But that is what I want. I would like the combination of item_id and object_id to be unique. How do I do that?

    Read the article

  • Using Kate with Simple Build Tool (SBT)

    - by Stefan
    Hello I am working with the Kate editor based on the lack of other good tools for Scala development, I am also using IntelliJ however it still has some bugs, and are slow enough to make me impatient. I have just startet using both Kate and SBT, and in that regard I have a little challenge I hope there is an answer for out there on "The Internet". I am using the standard "Build plugin" in Kate and has changed the commands from make to sbt. This works fine, and I am also getting a error report when the sbt fails during compile time. However I really wish to know if it is possible to integrate the compile errors into Kate such that it would be shown under "Errors and Warnings" instead of just in the output tab, where I have to do a manual search for the compile errors. Im guessing that it has something to do with the format of the output, if that is the case maybe it is "just" a smaller adjustment I need to make to the parsing language.

    Read the article

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