Search Results

Search found 9278 results on 372 pages for 'generic handler'.

Page 39/372 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • Avoiding unsafe cast for generic situation involving runtime passing of class

    - by Bart van Heukelom
    public class AutoKeyMap<K,V> { public interface KeyGenerator<K> { public K generate(); } private KeyGenerator<K> generator; public AutoKeyMap(Class<K> keyType) { // WARNING: Unchecked cast from AutoKeyMap.IntKeyGen to AutoKeyMap.KeyGenerator<K> if (keyType == Integer.class) generator = (KeyGenerator<K>) new IntKeyGen(); else throw new RuntimeException("Cannot generate keys for " + keyType); } public void put(V value) { K key = generator.generate(); ... } private static class IntKeyGen implements KeyGenerator<Integer> { private final AtomicInteger ai = new AtomicInteger(1); @Override public Integer generate() { return ai.getAndIncrement(); } } } In the code sample above, what is the correct way to prevent the given warning, without adding a @SuppressWarnings, if any?

    Read the article

  • Invoking EventHandler generic, TargetParameterCountException

    - by Am
    Hi, I have a DirectoryMonitor class which works on another thread. It has the following events declared: public class DirectoryMonitor { public event EventHandler<MonitorEventArgs> CreatedNewBook; public event EventHandler ScanStarted; .... } public class MonitorEventArgs : EventArgs { public Book Book { get; set; } } There is a form using that monitor, and upon receiving the events, it should update the display. Now, this works: void DirectoryMonitor_ScanStarted(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (InvokeRequired) { Invoke(new EventHandler(this.DirectoryMonitor_ScanStarted)); } else {...} } But this throws TargetParameterCountException: void DirectoryMonitor_CreatedNewBook(object sender, MonitorEventArgs e) { if (InvokeRequired) { Invoke(new EventHandler<MonitorEventArgs>(this.DirectoryMonitor_CreatedNewBook)); } else {...} } What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Generic styles for DataGridTemplateColumn Headers & Cells

    - by user557765
    I am struggling to define templates for my DataGrid columns. Here is the code that I have working at the moment: <t:DataGrid.Columns> <t:DataGridTemplateColumn Width="75" > <t:DataGridTemplateColumn.HeaderTemplate> <DataTemplate> <TextBlock Style="{StaticResource FieldNameVertical}" Text="Date" /> </DataTemplate> </t:DataGridTemplateColumn.HeaderTemplate> <t:DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate> <DataTemplate> <TextBlock Style="{StaticResource FieldValue}" Text="{Binding ModifiedDate, StringFormat='{}{0:MM/dd/yyyy}'}" /> </DataTemplate> </t:DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate> </t:DataGridTemplateColumn> .. .. .. </t:DataGrid.Columns> I would like to define HeaderTemplate & CellTemplate as reusable styles -- so that each column would be as brief as something like this: <t:DataGrid.Resources> <DataTemplate x:Key="dgHeaderStyle"> <TextBlock Style="{StaticResource FieldNameVertical}" Text="{Binding}" /> </DataTemplate> <DataTemplate x:Key="dgCellStyle"> <TextBlock Style="{StaticResource FieldValue}" Text="{Binding}" /> </DataTemplate> </t:DataGrid.Resources> <t:DataGrid.Columns> <t:DataGridTemplateColumn Width="75" Header="Date" Binding="{Binding ModifiedDate, StringFormat='{}{0:MM/dd/yyyy}'}" HeaderTemplate="{StaticResource dgHeaderStyle}" CellTemplate="{StaticResource dgCellStyle}" /> <t:DataGridTemplateColumn Width="100" Header="Dealer" HeaderTemplate="{StaticResource dgHeaderStyle}" CellTemplate="{StaticResource dgCellStyle}" /> ... </t:DataGrid.Columns> Every attempt I make has failed. I had hoped to implement something like the "solution" snippet in the initial entry of WPF DataGrid HeaderTemplate Mysterious Padding. However, I can't seem to adapt it to what I'm doing.

    Read the article

  • Castle Windsor upgrade causes TypeLoadException for generic types

    - by Neil Barnwell
    I have the following mapping in my Castle Windsor xml file which has worked okay (unchanged) for some time: <component id="defaultBasicRepository" service="MyApp.Models.Repositories.IBasicRepository`1, MyApp.Models" type="MyApp.Models.Repositories.Linq.BasicRepository`1, MyApp.Models" lifestyle="perWebRequest"/> I got this from the Windsor documentation at http://www.castleproject.org/container/documentation/v1rc3/usersguide/genericssupport.html. Since I upgraded Windsor, I now get the following exception at runtime: Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.TypeLoadException: GenericArguments[0], 'T', on 'MyApp.Models.Repositories.Linq.BasicRepository`1[TEntity]' violates the constraint of type parameter 'TEntity'. Source Error: Line 44: public static void ConfigureIoC() Line 45: { Line 46: var windsor = new WindsorContainer("Windsor.xml"); Line 47: Line 48: ServiceLocator.SetLocatorProvider(() = new WindsorServiceLocator(windsor)); I'm using ASP.NET MVC 1.0, Visual Studio 2008 and Castle Windsor as downloaded from http://sourceforge.net/projects/castleproject/files/InversionOfControl/2.1/Castle-Windsor-2.1.1.zip/download Can anyone shed any light on this? I'm sure the upgrade of Castle Windsor is what caused it - it's been working well for ages.

    Read the article

  • Java Builder pattern with Generic type bounds

    - by I82Much
    Hi all, I'm attempting to create a class with many parameters, using a Builder pattern rather than telescoping constructors. I'm doing this in the way described by Joshua Bloch's Effective Java, having private constructor on the enclosing class, and a public static Builder class. The Builder class ensures the object is in a consistent state before calling build(), at which point it delegates the construction of the enclosing object to the private constructor. Thus public class Foo { // Many variables private Foo(Builder b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder { public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder var1(Var var) { // set it return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo(this); } } } I then want to add type bounds to some of the variables, and thus need to parametrize the class definition. I want the bounds of the Foo class to be the same as that of the Builder class. public class Foo<Q extends Quantity> { private final Unit<Q> units; // Many variables private Foo(Builder<Q> b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder<Q extends Quantity> { private Unit<Q> units; public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder units(Unit<Q> units) { this.units = units; return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo<Q>(this); } } } This compiles fine, but the compiler is allowing me to do things I feel should be compiler errors. E.g. public static final Foo.Builder<Acceleration> x_Body_AccelField = new Foo.Builder<Acceleration>() .units(SI.METER) .build(); Here the units argument is not Unit<Acceleration> but Unit<Length>, but it is still accepted by the compiler. What am I doing wrong here? I want to ensure at compile time that the unit types match up correctly.

    Read the article

  • Create a Generic IEnumerable<T> given a IEnumerable and the member datatypes

    - by ilias
    Hi, I get an IEnumerable which I know is a object array. I also know the datatype of the elements. Now I need to cast this to an IEnumerable<T, where T is a supplied type. For instance IEnumerable results = GetUsers(); IEnumerable<T> users = ConvertToTypedIEnumerable(results, typeof(User)); I now want to cast/ convert this to IEnumerable<User. Also, I want to be able to do this for any type. I cannot use IEnumerable.Cast<, because for that I have to know the type to cast it to at compile time, which I don't have. I get the type and the IEnumerable at runtime. - Thanks

    Read the article

  • Java generics parameters with base of the generic parameter

    - by Iulian Serbanoiu
    Hello, I am wondering if there's an elegant solution for doing this in Java (besides the obvious one - of declaring a different/explicit function. Here is the code: private static HashMap<String, Integer> nameStringIndexMap = new HashMap<String, Integer>(); private static HashMap<Buffer, Integer> nameBufferIndexMap = new HashMap<Buffer, Integer>(); // and a function private static String newName(Object object, HashMap<Object, Integer> nameIndexMap){ .... } The problem is that I cannot pass nameStringIndexMap or nameBufferIndexMap parameters to the function. I don't have an idea about a more elegant solution beside doing another function which explicitly wants a HashMap<String, Integer> or HashMap<Buffer, Integer> parameter. My question is: Can this be made in a more elegant solution/using generics or something similar? Thank you, Iulian

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to create a generic Util Function to be used in Eval Page

    - by Nassign
    I am currently binding a Nullable bit column to a listview control. When you declare a list view item I need to handle the case when the null value is used instead of just true or false. <asp:Checkbox ID="Chk1" runat="server" Checked='<%# HandleNullableBool(Eval("IsUsed")) %>' /> Then in the page I add a HandleNullableBool() function inside the ASPX page. protected static bool HandleNullableBool(object value) { return (value == null) ? false : (bool)value; } This works fine but I need to use this in several pages so I tried creating a utility class with a static HandleNullableBool. But using it in the asp page does not work. Is there a way to do this in another class instead of the ASPX page? <asp:Checkbox ID="Chk1" runat="server" Checked='<%# Util.HandleNullableBool(Eval("IsUsed")) %>' />

    Read the article

  • Modeling a Generic Relationship in a Database

    - by StevenH
    This is most likely one for all you sexy DBAs out there: How would I effieciently model a relational database whereby I have a field in an "Event" table which defines a "SportType". This "SportsType" field can hold a link to different sports tables E.g. "FootballEvent", "RubgyEvent", "CricketEvent" and "F1 Event". Each of these Sports tables have different fields specific to that sport. My goal is to be able to genericly add sports types in the future as required, yet hold sport specific event data (fields) as part of my Event Entity. Is it possible to use an ORM such as NHibernate / Entity framework which would reflect such a relationship? I have thrown together a quick C# example to express my intent at a higher level: public class Event<T> where T : new() { public T Fields { get; set; } public Event() { EventType = new T(); } } public class FootballEvent { public Team CompetitorA { get; set; } public Team CompetitorB { get; set; } } public class TennisEvent { public Player CompetitorA { get; set; } public Player CompetitorB { get; set; } } public class F1RacingEvent { public List<Player> Drivers { get; set; } public List<Team> Teams { get; set; } } public class Team { public IEnumerable<Player> Squad { get; set; } } public class Player { public string Name { get; set; } public DateTime DOB { get; set;} }

    Read the article

  • Self closing Html Generic Control?

    - by Chalkey
    I am writing a bit of code to add a link tag to the head tag in the code behind... i.e. HtmlGenericControl css = new HtmlGenericControl("link"); css.Attributes["rel"] = "Stylesheet"; css.Attributes["type"] = "text/css"; css.Attributes["href"] = String.Format("/Assets/CSS/{0}", cssFile); to try and achieve something like... <link rel="Stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/CSS/Blah.css" /> I am using the HtmlGenericControl to achieve this... the issue I am having is that the control ultimatly gets rendered as... <link rel="Stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/CSS/Blah.css"></link> I cant seem to find what I am missing to not render the additional </link>, I assumed it should be a property on the object. Am I missing something or is this just not possible with this control? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Casting generics and the generic type

    - by Kragen
    Consider, I have the following 3 classes / interfaces: class MyClass<T> { } interface IMyInterface { } class Derived : IMyInterface { } And I want to be able to cast a MyClass<Derived> into a MyClass<IMyInterface> or visa-versa: MyClass<Derived> a = new MyClass<Derived>(); MyClass<IMyInterface> b = (MyClass<IMyInterface>)a; But I get compiler errors if I try: Cannot convert type 'MyClass<Derived>' to 'MyClass<IMyInterface>' I'm sure there is a very good reason why I cant do this, but I can't think of one. As for why I want to do this - The scenario I'm imagining is one whereby you ideally want to work with an instance of MyClass<Derived> in order to avoid lots of nasty casts, however you need to pass your instance to an interface that accepts MyClass<IMyInterface>. So my question is twofold: Why can I not cast between these two types? Is there any way of keeping the niceness of working with an instance of MyClass<Derived> while still being able to cast this into a MyClass<IMyInterface>?

    Read the article

  • Deserialize generic collections - coming up empty

    - by AC
    I've got a settings object for my app that has two collections in it. The collections are simple List generics that contain a collection of property bags. When I serialize it, everything is saved with no problem: XmlSerializer x = new XmlSerializer(settings.GetType()); TextWriter tw = new StreamWriter(@"c:\temp\settings.cpt"); x.Serialize(tw, settings); However when I deserialize it, everything is restored except for the two collections (verified by setting a breakpoint on the setters: XmlSerializer x = new XmlSerializer(typeof(CourseSettings)); XmlReader tr = XmlReader.Create(@"c:\temp\settings.cpt"); this.DataContext = (CourseSettings)x.Deserialize(tr); What would cause this? Everything is pretty vanilla... here's a snippet from the settings object... omitting most of it. The PresentationSourceDirectory works just fine, but the PresentationModules' setter isn't hit: private string _presentationSourceDirectory = string.Empty; public string PresentationSourceDirectory { get { return _presentationSourceDirectory; } set { if (_presentationSourceDirectory != value) { OnPropertyChanged("PresentationSourceDirectory"); _presentationSourceDirectory = value; } } } private List<Module> _presentationModules = new List<Module>(); public List<Module> PresentationModules { get { var sortedModules = from m in _presentationModules orderby m.ModuleOrder select m; return sortedModules.ToList<Module>(); } set { if (_presentationModules != value) { _presentationModules = value; OnPropertyChanged("PresentationModules"); } } }

    Read the article

  • how to use anonymous generic delegate in C# 2.0

    - by matti
    Hi. I have a class called NTree: class NTree<T> { public NTree(T data) { this.data = data; children = new List<NTree<T>>(); _stopTraverse = false; } ... public void Traverse(NTree<T> node, TreeVisitor<T> visitor) { try { _stopTraverse = false; Traverse(node, visitor); } finally { _stopTraverse = false; } } private void TraverseInternal(NTree<T> node, TreeVisitor<T> visitor) { if (_stopTraverse) return; if (!visitor(node.data)) { _stopTraverse = true; } foreach (NTree<T> kid in node.children) Traverse(kid, visitor); } When I try to use Traverse with anonymous delegate I get: Argument '2': cannot convert from 'anonymous method' to 'NisConverter.TreeVisitor' The code: tTable srcTable = new tTable(); DataRow[] rows; rootTree.Traverse(rootTree, delegate(TableRows tr) { if (tr.TableName == srcTable.mappingname) { rows = tr.Rows; return false; } }); This however produces no errors: static bool TableFinder<TableRows>(TableRows tr) { return true; } ... rootTree.Traverse(rootTree, TableFinder); I have tried to put "arrowhead-parenthisis" and everything to anonymous delegate but it just does not work. Please help me! Thanks & BR -Matti

    Read the article

  • Generic collection as a Java method argument

    - by Guido
    Is there any way to make this work in Java? public static void change(List<? extends Object> list, int position1, int position2) { Object obj = list.get(position1); list.set(position1, list.get(position2)); list.set(position2, obj); } The only way I've successfully avoided warnings and errors is this: public static <T> T change(List<T> list, int position1, int position2) { T obj = list.get(position1); list.set(position1, list.get(position2)); list.set(position2, obj); return obj; } but I don't like to be forced to return a value.

    Read the article

  • Equals method of System.Collections.Generic.List<T>...?

    - by Sambo
    I'm creating a class that derives from List... public class MyList : List<MyListItem> {} I've overridden Equals of MyListItem... public override bool Equals(object obj) { MyListItem li = obj as MyListItem; return (ID == li.ID); // ID is a property of MyListItem } I would like to have an Equals method in the MyList object too which will compare each item in the list, calling Equals() on each MyListItem object. It would be nice to simply call... MyList l1 = new MyList() { new MyListItem(1), new MyListItem(2) }; MyList l2 = new MyList() { new MyListItem(1), new MyListItem(2) }; if (l1 == l2) { ... } ...and have the comparisons of the list done by value. What's the best way...?

    Read the article

  • Java generic return type

    - by Colby77
    Hi, I'd like to write a method that can accept a type param (or whatever the method can figure out the type from) and return a value of this type so I don't have to cast the return type. Here is a method: public Object doIt(Object param){ if(param instanceof String){ return "string"; }else if(param instanceof Integer){ return 1; }else{ return null; } } When I call this method, and pass in it a String, even if I know the return type will be a String I have to cast the return Object. This is similar to the int param. How shall I write this method to accept a type param, and return this type?

    Read the article

  • Generic Dictionary and generating a hashcode for multi-part key

    - by Andrew
    I have an object that has a multi-part key and I am struggling to find a suitable way override GetHashCode. An example of what the class looks like is. public class wibble{ public int keypart1 {get; set;} public int keypart2 {get; set;} public int keypart3 {get; set;} public int keypart4 {get; set;} public int keypart5 {get; set;} public int keypart6 {get; set;} public int keypart7 {get; set;} public single value {get; set;} } Note in just about every instance of the class no more than 2 or 3 of the keyparts would have a value greater than 0. Any ideas on how best to generate a unique hashcode in this situation? I have also been playing around with creating a key that is not unique, but spreads the objects evenly between the dictionaries buckets and then storing objects with matched hashes in a List< or LinkedList< or SortedList<. Any thoughts on this?

    Read the article

  • Open Source Utilization Questions: How do you lone wold programmers best take advantage of open sour

    - by Funkyeah
    For Clarity: So you come up with an idea for a new program and want to start hacking, but you also happen to be a one-man army. How do you programming dynamos best find and utilize existing open-source software to give you the highest jumping off point possible when diving into your new project? When you do jump in where the shit do you start from? Any imaginary scenarios would be welcome, e.g. a shitty example might be utilizing a open-source database with an open-source IM client as a starting off point to a make a new client where you could tag and store conversations and query those tags at a later time.

    Read the article

  • Generic function pointers in C

    - by Lucas
    I have a function which takes a block of data and the size of the block and a function pointer as argument. Then it iterates over the data and performes a calculation on each element of the data block. The following is the essential outline of what I am doing: int myfunction(int* data, int size, int (*functionAsPointer)(int)){ //walking through the data and calculating something for (int n = 0; n < size; n++){ data[n] = (*function)(data[n]); } } The functions I am passing as arguments look something like this: int mycalculation(int input){ //doing some math with input //... return input; } This is working well, but now I need to pass an additional variable to my functionpointer. Something along the lines int mynewcalculation(int input, int someVariable){ //e.g. input = input * someVariable; //... return input; } Is there an elegant way to achieve this and at the same time keeping my overall design idea?

    Read the article

  • How to explain traits?

    - by Partial
    How would you explain traits to a new C++ programmer? How would you explain traits to a C programmer? How would you explain traits to a Java/Ruby/Python/C# or any other OOP language programmer?

    Read the article

  • Concrete Implementation of Generic Form Not Working in Designer

    - by Dov
    I have a base class, defined as below (I'm also using DevExpress components): public abstract partial class BaseFormClass<R> : XtraForm where R : DataRow { ... } Contrary to what I've read from elsewhere, I'm still able to design this class. I didn't have to create a concrete class from it to do so. But, when I create a concrete class descended from it (as below), that class won't work in the designer. public partial class ConcreteFormClass : BaseFormClass<StronglyTypedRow> { ... } I get this message: The designer could not be shown for this file because none of the classes within it can be designed. The designer inspected the following classes in the file: ConcreteFormClass --- The base class 'BaseFormClass' could not be loaded. Ensure the assembly has been referenced and that all projects have been built. Has anyone seen this before? Any sort of known workaround?

    Read the article

  • C# Generic Arrays and math operations on it

    - by msedi
    Hello, I'm currently involved in a project where I have very large image volumes. This volumes have to processed very fast (adding, subtracting, thresholding, and so on). Additionally most of the volume are so large that they event don't fit into the memory of the system. For that reason I have created an abstract volume class (VoxelVolume) that host the volume and image data and overloads the operators so that it's possible to perform the regular mathematical operations on volumes. Thereby two more questions opened up which I will put into stackoverflow into two additional threads. Here is my first question. My volume is implemented in a way that it only can contain float array data, but most of the containing data is from an UInt16 image source. Only operations on the volume can create float array images. When I started implementing such a volume the class looked like following: public abstract class VoxelVolume<T> { ... } but then I realized that overloading the operators or return values would get more complicated. An example would be: public abstract class VoxelVolume<T> { ... public static VoxelVolume<T> Import<T>(param string[] files) { } } also adding two overloading operators would be more complicated: ... public static VoxelVolume<T> operator+(VoxelVolume<T> A, VoxelVolume<T> B) { ... } Let's assume I can overcome the problems described above, nevertheless I have different types of arrays that contain the image data. Since I have fixed my type in the volumes to float the is no problem and I can do an unsafe operation when adding the contents of two image volume arrays. I have read a few threads here and had a look around the web, but found no real good explanation of what to do when I want to add two arrays of different types in a fast way. Unfortunately every math operation on generics is not possible, since C# is not able to calculate the size of the underlying data type. Of course there might by a way around this problem by using C++/CLR, but currently everything I have done so far, runs in 32bit and 64bit without having to do a thing. Switching to C++/CLR seemed to me (pleased correct me if I'm wrong) that I'm bound to a certain platform (32bit) and I have to compile two assemblies when I let the application run on another platform (64bit). Is this true? So asked shortly: How is it possible to add two arrays of two different types in a fast way. Is it true that the developers of C# haven't thought about this. Switching to a different language (C# - C++) seems not to be an option. I realize that simply performing this operation float []A = new float[]{1,2,3}; byte []B = new byte[]{1,2,3}; float []C = A+B; is not possible and unnecessary although it would be nice if it would work. My solution I was trying was following: public static class ArrayExt { public static unsafe TResult[] Add<T1, T2, TResult>(T1 []A, T2 []B) { // Assume the length of both arrays is equal TResult[] result = new TResult[A.Length]; GCHandle h1 = GCHandle.Alloc (A, Pinned); GCHandle h2 = GCHandle.Alloc (B, Pinned); GCHandle hR = GCHandle.Alloc (C, Pinned); void *ptrA = h1.ToPointer(); void *ptrB = h2.ToPointer(); void *ptrR = hR.ToPointer(); for (int i=0; i<A.Length; i++) { *((TResult *)ptrR) = (TResult *)((T1)*ptrA + (T2)*ptrB)); } h1.Free(); h2.Free(); hR.Free(); return result; } } Please excuse if the code above is not quite correct, I wrote it without using an C# editor. Is such a solution a shown above thinkable? Please feel free to ask if I made a mistake or described some things incompletely. Thanks for your help Martin

    Read the article

  • C# Delegate under the hood question.

    - by Ted
    Hi Guys I was doing some digging around into delegate variance after reading the following tquestion in SO. "delegate-createdelegate-and-generics-error-binding-to-target-method" (sorry not allowed to post more than one hyperlink as a newbie here!) I found a very nice bit of code from Barry kelly at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8184237816669520763&postID=2109708553230166434 Here it is (in a sugared-up form :-) using System; namespace ConsoleApplication4 { internal class Base { } internal class Derived : Base { } internal delegate void baseClassDelegate(Base b); internal delegate void derivedClassDelegate(Derived d); internal class App { private static void Foo1(Base b) { Console.WriteLine("Foo 1"); } private static void Foo2(Derived b) { Console.WriteLine("Foo 2"); } private static T CastDelegate<T>(Delegate src) where T : class { return (T) (object) Delegate.CreateDelegate( typeof (T), src.Target, src.Method, true); // throw on fail } private static void Main() { baseClassDelegate a = Foo1; // works fine derivedClassDelegate b = Foo2; // works fine b = a.Invoke; // the easy way to assign delegate using variance, adds layer of indirection though b(new Derived()); b = CastDelegate<derivedClassDelegate>(a); // the hard way, avoids indirection b(new Derived()); } } } I understand all of it except this one (what looks very simple) line. b = a.Invoke; // the easy way to assign delegate using variance, adds layer of indirection though Can anyone tell me: how it is possible to call invoke without passing the param required by the static function. When is going on under the hood when you assign the return value from calling invoke What does Barry mean by extra indirection (in his comment)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >