ms project - Page 355 - Developer IT

Generic SinglyLinkedList in C# with basic and advanced custom operations

Following article describes C# implementation of various basic and advanced operations including some of the programming problems involving singly linked list

Host Silverlight Control in C++ using ATL

Hosting silverlight control in C++ using ATL

Check whether JavaScript and Cookie are enabled using custom control

A custom control for checking whether JavaScript and Cookie are enabled in the client browser

Refactor to Dependency Injection

Further refine our Template Method example to use Dependency Injection

Resize images stored in a sql database and store them back into it

An example how to retrieve images stored as a blob in a sql database, resize them and store them back into the database

Ways to make (relatively) safe assumptions about the type of concrete subclasses?

I have an interface (defined as a abstract base class) that looks like this: class AbstractInterface { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const = 0; } And I have an implementation of this (constructors etc omitted): class ConcreteThing { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const { return m_ImplObject.has_relationship_to(other.m_ImplObject); } private: ImplementationObject m_ImplObject; } The AbstractInterface forms an interface in Project A, and the ConcreteThing lives in Project B as an implementation of that interface. This is so that code in Project A can access data from Project B without having a direct dependency on it - Project B just has to implement the correct interface. Obviously the line in the body of the IsRelatedTo function cannot compile - that instance of ConcreteThing has an m_ImplObject member, but it can't assume that all AbstractInterfaces do, including the other argument. In my system, I can actually assume that all implementations of AbstractInterface are instances of ConcreteThing (or subclasses thereof), but I'd prefer not to be casting the object to the concrete type in order to get at the private member, or encoding that assumption in a way that will crash without a diagnostic later if this assumption ceases to hold true. I cannot modify ImplementationObject, but I can modify AbstractInterface and ConcreteThing. I also cannot use the standard RTTI mechanism for checking a type prior to casting, or use dynamic_cast for a similar purpose. I have a feeling that I might be able to overload IsRelatedTo with a ConcreteThing argument, but I'm not sure how to call it via the base IsRelatedTo(AbstractInterface) method. It wouldn't get called automatically as it's not a strict reimplementation of that method. Is there a pattern for doing what I want here, allowing me to implement the IsRelatedTo function via ImplementationObject::has_relationship_to(ImplementationObject), without risky casts? (Also, I couldn't think of a good question title - please change it if you have a better one.)

Search Results

Search found 32862 results on 1315 pages for 'ms project'.

Page 355/1315 | < Previous Page | 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 | Next Page >

- by Kylotan

- by sfx

- by user368039

- by robUK

< Previous Page | 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 | Next Page >