Search Results

Search found 9271 results on 371 pages for 'properties'.

Page 38/371 | < Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >

  • Is using YIELD a read-only way to return a collection?

    - by Eric
    I'm writing an interface which has a collection property which I want to be read only. I don't want users of the interface to be able to modify the collection. The typical suggestion I've found for creating a read only collection property is to set the type of the property to IEnumerable like this: private List<string> _mylist; public IEnumerable<string> MyList { get { return this._mylist; } } Yet this does not prevent the user from casting the IEnumerable back to a List and modifying it. If I use a Yield keyword instead of returning _mylist directly would this prevent users of my interface from being able to modify the collection. I think so because then I'm only returning the objects one by one, and not the actual collection. private List<string> _mylist; public IEnumerable<string> MyList { get { foreach(string str in this._mylist) { yield return str; } } }

    Read the article

  • Creating a property setter delegate

    - by Jim C
    I have created methods for converting a property lambda to a delegate: public static Delegate MakeGetter<T>(Expression<Func<T>> propertyLambda) { var result = Expression.Lambda(propertyLambda.Body).Compile(); return result; } public static Delegate MakeSetter<T>(Expression<Action<T>> propertyLambda) { var result = Expression.Lambda(propertyLambda.Body).Compile(); return result; } These work: Delegate getter = MakeGetter(() => SomeClass.SomeProperty); object o = getter.DynamicInvoke(); Delegate getter = MakeGetter(() => someObject.SomeProperty); object o = getter.DynamicInvoke(); but these won't compile: Delegate setter = MakeSetter(() => SomeClass.SomeProperty); setter.DynamicInvoke(new object[]{propValue}); Delegate setter = MakeSetter(() => someObject.SomeProperty); setter.DynamicInvoke(new object[]{propValue}); The MakeSetter lines fail with "The type arguments cannot be inferred from the usage. Try specifying the type arguments explicitly." Is what I'm trying to do possible? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How do I place another attribute to a MKAnnotation?

    - by kevin Mendoza
    for my app each annotation on a map corresponds to a mine locality. each mine has its own unique 7 digit integer identifier. I'm trying to add the property minesEntryNumber to the annotation so when the annotation is clicked on later I can bring up specific information on the selected annotation. This is part of my code: for (id mine in mines) { //NSLog(@"in the loop"); workingCoordinate.latitude = [[mine latitudeInitial] doubleValue]; workingCoordinate.longitude = [[mine longitudeInitial] doubleValue]; iProspectAnnotation *tempMine = [[iProspectAnnotation alloc] initWithCoordinate:workingCoordinate]; [tempMine setTitle:[mine mineName]]; tempMine.minesEntryNumber = [mine entryNumber]; //other code for dealing with mine types and adding the annotation to the mapview } the code works fine without the "tempMine.minesEntryNumber = [mine entryNumber];" part. It loads the map and shows the annotations. however when I try and put this in it brings up an error. So how do I add this property to each annotation and how do I access it later in a different .m file?

    Read the article

  • How to render the properties of the view model's base class first when using ViewData.ModelMetadata.

    - by Martin R-L
    When I use the ViewData.ModelMetadata.Properties in order to loop the properties (with an additional Where(modelMetadata => modelMetadata.ShowForEdit && !ViewData.TemplateInfo.Visited(modelMetadata))), and thereby create a generic edit view, the properties of the view model's base class are rendered last. Is it possible to use a clever OrderBy() or is there another way to first get the properties of the base class, and then the sub class'? Reverse won't do the trick since the ordering of each class' properties is perfectly fine. A workaround would of course be composition + delegation, but since we don't have mixins, it's too un-DRY IMHO, why I seek a better solution if possible.

    Read the article

  • Creating a "netbeans property" style dialog box

    - by pikco
    Hi I've been trying to create a GUI using netbeans, that includes a dialog similar to Netbean's own "property dialog" that appears when designing. ie. a dialog that contains a table that can be expanded by tree nodes. Something like the dialog on this page, http://platform.netbeans.org/tutorials/nbm-property-editors.html As far as I can understand, the page I linked to describes a custom editor I can set up for use within netbeans while designing - I'm just looking for a way to doing something similar for my actual application I'm writing. Is there an easy way to do this? I came across this and have tried it but it doesn't quite work in the same way as the standard Netbeans dialog. weblogs.java.net/blog/timboudreau/archive/2008/06/egads_an_actual.html Any tips greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Using property file in hibernate mapping

    - by Zoltan Hamori
    Hi, I have a two nodes environment using the same database. In the database there is a resource table like RESOURCE_ID, CODE, NODE The content of the NODE column can be 1 or 2 depending on which node can use it. As I need to deploy the same ear to the two nodes, I would like to map this table like this: <hibernate-mapping> <class name="ResourceVO" table="RESOURCE" dynamic-update="true" optimistic-lock="dirty" where="NODE=${node.value}" > I would like to store the node.value property on the file system, so the instances could identify which resource to use. Is it possible in hibernate?

    Read the article

  • How to take advantage of an auto-property when refactoring this .Net 1.1 sample?

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    I see a lot of legacy .Net 1.1-style code at work like in example below, which I would like to shrink with the help of an auto-property. This will help many classes shrink by 30-40%, which I think would be good. public int MyIntThingy { get { return _myIntThingy; } set { _myIntThingy = value; } } private int _myIntThingy = -1; This would become: public int MyIntThingy { get; set; } And the only question is - where do I set MyIntThingy = -1;? If I wrote the class from the start, then I would have a better idea, but I did not. An obvious answer would be: put it in the constructor. Trouble is: there are many constructors in this class. Watching the initialization to -1 in the debugger, I see it happen (I believe) before the constructor gets called. It is almost as if I need to use a static constructor as described here: http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/uploadfile/cupadhyay/staticconstructors11092005061428am/staticconstructors.aspx except that my variables are not static. Java's static initializer comes to mind, but again - my variables are not static. http://www.glenmccl.com/tip_003.htm I want to make stylistic but not functional changes to this class. As crappy as it is, it has been tested and working for a few years now. breaking the functionality would be bad. So ... I am looking for shorter, sweeter, cuter, and yet EQUIVALENT code. Let me know if you have questions.

    Read the article

  • asp.net server controls

    - by Richard Friend
    Okay i have a custom server control that has some autocomplete settings, i have this as follows and it works fine. /// <summary> /// Auto complete settings /// </summary> [System.ComponentModel.DesignerSerializationVisibility (System.ComponentModel.DesignerSerializationVisibility.Content), PersistenceMode(PersistenceMode.InnerProperty), Category("Data"), Description("Auto complete settings"), NotifyParentProperty(true)] public AutoCompleteLookupSettings AutoComplete { private set; get; } I also have a ParameterCollection that is really related to the auto complete settings, currently this collection resides off the control itself like so : /// <summary> /// Parameters for any data lookups /// </summary> [System.ComponentModel.DesignerSerializationVisibility(System.ComponentModel.DesignerSerializationVisibility.Content), PersistenceMode(PersistenceMode.InnerProperty)] public ParameterCollection Parameters { get; set; } What i would like to do is move the parameter collection inside of the AutoCompleteSettings as it really relates to my autocomplete, i have tried this but to no avail.. I would like to move from <cc1:TextField ID="TextField1" runat='server'> <AutoComplete MethodName="GetTest" TextField="Item1" TypeName ="AppFrameWork.Utils" /> <Parameters> <asp:ControlParameter ControlID="txtTest" PropertyName="Text" Name="test" /> </Parameters> </cc1:TextField> To <cc1:TextField ID="TextField1" runat='server'> <AutoComplete MethodName="GetTest" TextField="Item1" TypeName ="AppFrameWork.Utils" > <Parameters> <asp:ControlParameter ControlID="txtTest" PropertyName="Text" Name="test" /> </Parameters> </AutoComplete> </cc1:TextField>

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework. Updating EntityCollection using disconnected objects via navigation property.

    - by yougotiger
    I have a question, much liket this unanswered one. I'm trying to work with the entity framework, and having a tough time getting my foreign tables to update. I have something basically like this in the DB: Incident (table): -ID -other fields Responses (table): -FK:Incident.ID -other fields And and entities that match: Incident (entity) -ID -Other fields -Responses (EntityCollection of Responses via navigation property) Each Incident can have 0 or more responses. In my Webpage, I have a form to allow the user to enter all the details of an Incident, including a list of responses. I can add everything to the database when a new Incident is created, however I'm having difficulty with editing the Incident. When the page loads for edit, I populate the form and then store the responses in the viewstate. When the user changes the list of responses (adds one, deletes one or edits one). I store this back into the viewstate. Then when the user clicks the save button, I'd like to save the changes to the Incident and the Responses back to the DB. I cannot figure out how to get the responses from the detached viewstate into the Incident object so that they can be updated together. Currently when the user clicks save, I'm getting the Incident to edit from the db, making changes to the Incident's fields and then saving it back to the DB. However I can't figure out how to have the detached list of responses from the viewstate attach to the Incident. I have tried the following without success: Clearning the Incident.Responses collection and adding the ones from the viewstate back in: Incident.Responses.Clear() for each objResponse in Viewstate("Responses") Incident.Responses.add(objResponse) next Creating an EntityCollection from my list and then assiging that to the Incident.Responses Incident.Responses = EntityCollectionFromViewstateList Iterating through the responses in Incident.Response and assigning the corresponding object from viewstate: for each ObjResponse in Incident.Responses objResponse = objCorrespondingModifedResonseFromViewState Next These all fail, I'd like to be able to merge the changes into the Inicdent object so that when the BLL calls SaveChanges on the changes to both the Incident and Responses will happen at the same time. Any suggestions? I keep finding lots of stuff about assigning foreign keys (singular), but I haven't found a great solution for doing a set of entities assigned to another entity in this manner.

    Read the article

  • Can the get of a property be abstract and the set be virtual?

    - by K. Georgiev
    I have a base class like this: public class Trajectory{ public int Count { get; set; } public double Initial { get; set { Count = 1; } } public double Current { get; set { Count ++ ; } } } So, I have code in the base class, which makes the set-s virtual, but the get-s must stay abstract. So I need something like this: ... public double Initial { abstract get; virtual set { Count = 1; } } ... But this code gives an error. The whole point is to implement the counter functionality in the base class instead in all the derived classes. So, how can I make the get and set of a property with different modifiers?

    Read the article

  • escaping a dollar in the middle of an ant property

    - by jk
    I have a property whose value contains a $. I'd like to use this property as a regexp in a propertyregexp. Ant appears to resolve the property as a paramater to the propertyregexp, but then the dollar gets interpreted as a regexp symbol. Example: <property name="a" value="abc$" /> <property name="b" value="xyz" /> <path id="paths"> <pathelement location="abc$/def" /> <pathelement location="abc$/ghi" /> </path> <pathconvert property="list" refid="paths" pathsep="${line.separator}" dirsep="/" /> <propertyregex property="list" input="${list}" override="true" regexp="${a}(.*)" replace="${b}\1" /> <echo message="${list}" /> I'd like to the pair xyz/def and xyz/ghi. Is this possible? I'm using Ant 1.8.

    Read the article

  • If I specify a System property multiple times when invoking JVM which value is used?

    - by RobV
    If I specify a system property multiple times when invoking the JVM which value will I actually get when I retrieve the property? e.g. java -Dprop=A -Dprop=B -jar my.jar What will be the result when I call System.getProperty("prop");? The Java documentation on this does not really tell me anything useful on this front. In my non-scientific testing on a couple of machines running different JVMs it seems like the last value is the one returned (which is actually the behavior I need) but I wondered if this behavior is actually defined officially anywhere or can it vary between JVMs?

    Read the article

  • Why can I not add a set accessor to an overriden property?

    - by Svish
    In a base class I have this property: public virtual string Text { get { return text; } } I want to override that and return a different text, but I would also like to be able to set the text, so I did this: public override string Text { get { return differentText; } set { differentText = value; } } This however does not work. I get a red squiggly under set saying that I can not override because it does not have a set accessor. Why is this aproblem? What should I do?

    Read the article

  • Binding a Value from a View-Model to the View-Model of a child User Control in Silverlight?

    - by andrej351
    Hi there, So i have a UserControl for one of my Views and have another 'child' UserControl inside that. The outer 'parent' UserControl has a Collection on its View-Model and a Grid control on it to display a list of Items. I want to place another UserControl inside this UserControl to display a form representing the details of one Item. The outer / parent UserControl's View-Model already has a property on it to hold the currently selected Item and i would like to bind this to a DependancyProperty on the inner / child UserControl. I would then like to bind that DependancyProperty to a property on the child UserControl's View-Model. I can then set the DependancyProperty once in XAML with a binding expression and have the child UserControl do all its work in its View-Model like it should. The code i have looks like this.. Parent UserControl: <UserControl x:Class="ItemsListView" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" DataContext="{Binding Source={StaticResource ServiceLocator}, Path=ItemsListViewModel}"> <!-- Grid Control here... --> <ItemDetailsView Item="{Binding Source={StaticResource ServiceLocator}, Path=ItemsListViewModel.SelectedItem}" /> </UserControl> Child UserControl: <UserControl x:Class="ItemDetailsView" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" DataContext="{Binding Source={StaticResource ServiceLocator}, Path=ItemDetailsViewModel}" ItemDetailsView.Item="{Binding Source={StaticResource ServiceLocator}, Path=ItemDetailsViewModel.Item, Mode=TwoWay}"> <!-- Form controls here... --> </UserControl> The selected Item is bound to the DependancyProperty fine. However from the DependancyProperty to the child View-Model does not. I've used this sort of apporach in a WPF app without problems. It appears to be a situation where there are two concurrent bindings which need to work but with the same target for two sources. Why won't the second (in the child UserControl) binding work?? Is there a way to acheive the behaviour I'm after?? Cheers.

    Read the article

  • empty() behavior

    - by lightalloy
    Maybe I'm asking a stupid question, but I can't understand this behavior: <?php $this->meeting->google_id = 'test'; $test = $this->meeting->google_id; var_dump(empty($test)); var_dump(empty($this->meeting)); var_dump(empty($this->meeting->google_id)); ?> gives output: bool(false) bool(false) bool(true) Why the result of empty($this->meeting->google_id); is true? And how should I check this property then?

    Read the article

  • attaching id to a movieclip

    - by Ross
    I have a loop that creates mc from a database for (var i:Number = 0; i < t.length; i++) { var portfolioItem:PortfolioItem = new PortfolioItem(); addChild(portfolioItem); portfolioItem.name = t[i][0]; portfolioItem.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, getThisName); } public function getThisName(evt:Event) { trace(evt.target.name); } I try and assign t[i][0] which is the table id to the name attribute but I jsut get 'instance4' or instance 14. How can I give these dynamically create mc's a name or custom property? ideally I would like to use a custom property called portfolio.id but would use the name property or another default property if it works.

    Read the article

  • Virtual member call in a constructor when assigning value to property

    - by comecme
    I have an Abstract class and a Derived class. The abstract class defines an abstract property named Message. In the derived class, the property is implemented by overriding the abstract property. The constructor of the derived class takes a string argument and assigns it to its Message property. In Resharper, this assignment leads to a warning "Virtual member call in constructor". The AbstractClass has this definition: public abstract class AbstractClass { public abstract string Message { get; set; } protected AbstractClass() { } public abstract void PrintMessage(); } And the DerivedClass is as follows: using System; public class DerivedClass : AbstractClass { private string _message; public override string Message { get { return _message; } set { _message = value; } } public DerivedClass(string message) { Message = message; // Warning: Virtual member call in a constructor } public DerivedClass() : this("Default DerivedClass message") {} public override void PrintMessage() { Console.WriteLine("DerivedClass PrintMessage(): " + Message); } } I did find some other questions about this warning, but in those situations there is an actual call to a method. For instance, in this question, the answer by Matt Howels contains some sample code. I'll repeat it here for easy reference. class Parent { public Parent() { DoSomething(); } protected virtual void DoSomething() {}; } class Child : Parent { private string foo; public Child() { foo = "HELLO"; } protected override void DoSomething() { Console.WriteLine(foo.ToLower()); } } Matt doesn't describe on what error the warning would appear, but I'm assuming it will be on the call to DoSomething in the Parent constructor. In this example, I understand what is meant by a virtual member being called. The member call occurs in the base class, in which only a virtual method exists. In my situation however, I don't see why assigning a value to Message would be calling a virtual member. Both the call to and the implementation of the Message property are defined in the derived class. Although I can get rid of the error by making my Derived Class sealed, I would like to understand why this situation is resulting in the warning.

    Read the article

  • How can I bind another DependencyProperty to the IsChecked Property of a CheckBox?

    - by speedmetal
    Here's an example of what I'm trying to accomplish: <Window x:Class="CheckBoxBinding.MainWindow" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" Title="MainWindow" Height="350" Width="525"> <StackPanel> <CheckBox Name="myCheckBox">this</CheckBox> <Grid> <Grid.Resources> <Style TargetType="ListBox"> <Style.Triggers> <Trigger Property="{Binding ElementName=myCheckBox, Path=IsChecked}" Value="True"> <Setter Property="Background" Value="Red" /> </Trigger> </Style.Triggers> </Style> </Grid.Resources> <ListBox> <ListBoxItem>item</ListBoxItem> <ListBoxItem>another</ListBoxItem> </ListBox> </Grid> </StackPanel> </Window> When I try to run it, I get this XamlParseException: A 'Binding' cannot be set on the 'Property' property of type 'Trigger'. A 'Binding' can only be set on a DependencyProperty of a DependencyObject. So how can I bind a property on the ListBox to the IsChecked property of a CheckBox?

    Read the article

  • How do I test if a property exists on a object before reading its value?

    - by Jeremy Rudd
    I'm attempting to read a property on a series of Sprites. This property may or may not be present on these objects, and may not even be declared, worse than being null. My code is: if (child["readable"] == true){ // this Sprite is activated for reading } And so Flash shows me: Error #1069: Property selectable not found on flash.display.Sprite and there is no default value. Is there a way to test if a property exists before reading its value? Something like: if (child.isProperty("readable") && child["readable"] == true){ // this Sprite is activated for reading }

    Read the article

  • WPF custom DependencyProperty notify changes

    - by morsanu
    Hey guys I have a class called MyComponent and it has a DependencyProperty caled BackgroundProperty. public class MyComponent { public MyBackground Background { get { return (MyBackground)GetValue(BackgroundProperty); } set { SetValue(BackgroundProperty, value); } } public static readonly DependencyProperty BackgroundProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("Background", typeof(MyBackground), typeof(MyComponent), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(default(MyBackground), new PropertyChangedCallback(OnPropertyChanged))); } MyBackground is a class that derives from DependencyObject and it has some DependencyProperties. public class MyBackground : DependencyObject { public Color BaseColor { set { SetValue(BaseColorProperty, value); } get { return (Color)GetValue(BaseColorProperty); } } public static readonly DependencyProperty BaseColorProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("BaseColor", typeof(Color), typeof(MyBackground ), new UIPropertyMetadata(Colors.White)); [...] } Now, what I want is when a property from MyBackground is changed, MyComponent to be notified that MyBackground has changed and the PropertyChangedCallback named OnPropertyChanged to be called.

    Read the article

  • How can I load a property lazily in JDO (on Google App Engine)?

    - by luciano
    I have this code in one of my @PersistenceCapable classes: @Persistent private Blob data; The Blob can be quite big, so I'd like to load it lazily since most of the times I don't need it. How can I annotate that property to avoid immediate loading? I could create another class that contains the Blob alone and then use a lazy one-to-one, but I'd like to solve this with annotations.

    Read the article

  • Getting 'this' pointer inside dependency property changed callback

    - by mizipzor
    I have the following dependency property inside a class: class FooHolder { public static DependencyProperty CurrentFooProperty = DependencyProperty.Register( "CurrentFoo", typeof(Foo), typeof(FooHandler), new PropertyMetadata(OnCurrentFooChanged)); private static void OnCurrentFooChanged(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e) { FooHolder holder = (FooHolder) d.Property.Owner; // <- something like this // do stuff with holder } } I need to be able to retrieve a reference to the class instance in which the changed property belongs. This is since FooHolder has some event handlers that needs to be hooked/unhooked when the value of the property is changed. The property changed callback must be static, but the event handler is not.

    Read the article

  • WPF - How do I use the UserControl with a dependency property and view model?

    - by user320849
    Hello, My goal is to have a user select a year and a month. Translate the selection into a date and have the user control send the date back to my view model. That part works for me....However, I cannot get the ViewModel's initial date to set those drop downs. public static readonly DependencyProperty Date = DependencyProperty.Register("ReturnDate", typeof(DateTime), typeof(DatePicker), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata{BindsTwoWayByDefault = true,}); public DateTime ReturnDate { get { return Convert.ToDateTime(GetValue(Date)); } set { SetDropDowns(value); SetValue(Date, value); } } The SetDropDowns(value) just sets the selected items on the combo boxes, however, the program never makes it to that method. On the view I am using: <cc1:DatePicker ReturnDate="{Binding Path=StartDate, Mode=TwoWay}" IsStart="True" /> If this has been answered, then my bad. I looked around and didn't see anything that worked for me. Thus, when the program loads how do I get the value from the view model to a method in order to set the combo boxes? Thanks, -Scott

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >