Search Results

Search found 185180 results on 7408 pages for 'object not callable'.

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 39/7408 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • How to load cascading style sheet into C# object?

    - by Krishnaraj
    Hello, I am developing a web application, where i want to give freedom of changing style elements of css linked to a page via an admin screen. So I am wondering is there any way I can load CSS file into a C# object or into XML passable formate and update it from the admin screen inputs? Thank you, Krishnaraj

    Read the article

  • What is best practice in converting XML to Java object?

    - by newbie
    I need to convert XML data to Java objects. What would be best practice to convert this XML data to object? Idea is to fetch data via a web service (it doesn't use WSDL, just HTTP GET queries, so I cannot use any framework) and answers are in XML. What would be best practice to handle this situation?

    Read the article

  • Is possible to initialize an object in javascript in this way?

    - by Kucebe
    I'd like to initialize an object in javascript calling directly a method that belongs to it: var obj = (function(){ return{ init: function(){ console.log("initialized!"); }, uninit: function(x){ console.log("uninitialized!"); } }; }).init(); //later obj.uninit(); obj.init(); This specific example doesn't work, is there something similar?

    Read the article

  • Displaying individual elements of an object in an Arraylist through a for loop?

    - by user1180888
    I'm trying to Display individual elements of an Object I have created. It is a simple Java program that allows users to add and keep track of Player Details. I'm just stumped when it comes to displaying the details after they have been added already. here is what my code looks like I can create the object and input it into the arraylist no problem using the case 2, but when I try to print it out I want to do something like System.out.println("Player Name" + myPlayersArrayList.PlayerName + "Player Position" + myPlayerArrayList.PlayerPosition + "Player Age" + "Player Age"); I know that is not correct, but I dont really know what to do, if anyone can be of any help it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks System.out.println("Welcome to the Football Player database"); System.out.print(System.getProperty("line.separator")); UserInput myFirstUserInput = new UserInput(); int selection; ArrayList<Player> myPlayersArrayList = new ArrayList<Player>(); while (true) { System.out.println("1. View The Players"); System.out.println("2. Add A Player"); System.out.println("3. Edit A Player"); System.out.println("4. Delete A Player"); System.out.println("5. Exit ") ; System.out.print(System.getProperty("line.separator")); selection = myFirstUserInput.getInt("Please select an option"); System.out.print(System.getProperty("line.separator")); switch(selection){ case 1: if (myPlayersArrayList.isEmpty()) { System.out.println("No Players Have Been Entered Yet"); System.out.print(System.getProperty("line.separator")); break;} else {for(int i = 0; i < myPlayersArrayList.size(); i++){ System.out.println(myPlayersArrayList); } break; case 2: { String playerName,playerPos; int playerAge; playerName = (myFirstUserInput.getString("Enter Player name")); playerPos = (myFirstUserInput.getString("Enter Player Position")); playerAge = (myFirstUserInput.getInt("Enter Player Age")); myPlayersArrayList.add(new Player(playerName, playerPos, playerAge)); ; break; }

    Read the article

  • How might one teach OO without referencing physical real-world objects?

    - by hal10001
    I remember reading somewhere that the original concepts behind OO were to find a better architecture for handling the messaging of data between multiple systems in a way that protected the state of that data. Now that is probably a poor paraphrase, but it made me wonder if there is a way of teaching OO without the (Bike, Car, Person, etc.) object analogies, and that instead focuses on the messaging aspects. If you have articles, links, books, etc., that would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Why is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • Is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • Question about SDLC. How to answer this?

    - by pirzada
    I have seen this asked many times in job interviews but I am still not sure how to answer this. I am a web developer for quite some time but I still have problem with explaining OOP and SDLC (Familiar with system development life cycle) . How to prepare for above 2 topics for an interview point of view. Still I use both all the time during development. I am not clear on OOP SDLC Is there any simplest answer to both of these? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is throwing an error in unpredictable subclass-specific circumstances a violation of LSP?

    - by Motti Strom
    Say, I wanted to create a Java List<String> (see spec) implementation that uses a complex subsystem, such as a database or file system, for its store so that it becomes a simple persistent collection rather than an basic in-memory one. (We're limiting it specifically to a List of Strings for the purposes of discussion, but it could extended to automatically de-/serialise any object, with some help. We can also provide persistent Sets, Maps and so on in this way too.) So here's a skeleton implementation: class DbBackedList implements List<String> { private DbBackedList() {} /** Returns a list, possibly non-empty */ public static getList() { return new DbBackedList(); } public String get(int index) { return Db.getTable().getRow(i).asString(); // may throw DbExceptions! } // add(String), add(int, String), etc. ... } My problem lies with the fact that the underlying DB API may encounter connection errors that are not specified in the List interface that it should throw. My problem is whether this violates Liskov's Substitution Principle (LSP). Bob Martin actually gives an example of a PersistentSet in his paper on LSP that violates LSP. The difference is that his newly-specified Exception there is determined by the inserted value and so is strengthening the precondition. In my case the connection/read error is unpredictable and due to external factors and so is not technically a new precondition, merely an error of circumstance, perhaps like OutOfMemoryError which can occur even when unspecified. In normal circumstances, the new Error/Exception might never be thrown. (The caller could catch if it is aware of the possibility, just as a memory-restricted Java program might specifically catch OOME.) Is this therefore a valid argument for throwing an extra error and can I still claim to be a valid java.util.List (or pick your SDK/language/collection in general) and not in violation of LSP? If this does indeed violate LSP and thus not practically usable, I have provided two less-palatable alternative solutions as answers that you can comment on, see below. Footnote: Use Cases In the simplest case, the goal is to provide a familiar interface for cases when (say) a database is just being used as a persistent list, and allow regular List operations such as search, subList and iteration. Another, more adventurous, use-case is as a slot-in replacement for libraries that work with basic Lists, e.g if we have a third-party task queue that usually works with a plain List: new TaskWorkQueue(new ArrayList<String>()).start() which is susceptible to losing all it's queue in event of a crash, if we just replace this with: new TaskWorkQueue(new DbBackedList()).start() we get a instant persistence and the ability to share the tasks amongst more than one machine. In either case, we could either handle connection/read exceptions that are thrown, perhaps retrying the connection/read first, or allow them to throw and crash the program (e.g. if we can't change the TaskWorkQueue code).

    Read the article

  • What is the diffference between "data hiding" and "encapsulation"?

    - by john smith optional
    I'm reading "Java concurrency in practice" and there is said: "Fortunately, the same object-oriented techniques that help you write well-organized, maintainable classes - such as encapsulation and data hiding -can also help you crate thread-safe classes." The problem #1 - I never heard about data hiding and don't know what it is. The problem #2 - I always thought that encapsulation is using private vs public, and is actually the data hiding. Can you please explain what data hiding is and how it differs from encapsulation?

    Read the article

  • what's the point of method overloading?

    - by David
    I am following a textbook in which I have just come across method overloading. It briefly described method overloading as: when the same method name is used with different parameters its called method overloading. From what I've learned so far in OOP is that if I want different behaviors from an object via methods, I should use different method names that best indicate the behavior, so why should I bother with method overloading in the first place?

    Read the article

  • Nested Classes: A useful tool or an encapsulation violation?

    - by Bryan Harrington
    So I'm still on the fence as to whether or not I should be using these or not. I feel its an extreme violation of encapsulation, however I find that I am able to achieve some degree of encapsulation while gaining more flexibility in my code. Previous Java/Swing projects I had used nested classes to some degree, However now I have moved into other projects in C# and I am avoid their use. How do you feel about nested classes?

    Read the article

  • Isn't MVC anti OOP?

    - by m3th0dman
    The main idea behind OOP is to unify data and behavior in a single entity - the object. In procedural programming there is data and separately algorithms modifying the data. In the Model-View-Controller pattern the data and the logic/algorithms are placed in distinct entities, the model and the controller respectively. In an equivalent OOP approach shouldn't the model and the controller be placed in the same logical entity?

    Read the article

  • best way to "introduce" OOP/OOD to team of experienced C++ engineers

    - by DXM
    I am looking for an efficient way, that also doesn't come off as an insult, to introduce OOP concepts to existing team members? My teammates are not new to OO languages. We've been doing C++/C# for a long time so technology itself is familiar. However, I look around and without major infusion of effort (mostly in the form of code reviews), it seems what we are producing is C code that happens to be inside classes. There's almost no use of single responsibility principle, abstractions or attempts to minimize coupling, just to name a few. I've seen classes that don't have a constructor but get memset to 0 every time they are instantiated. But every time I bring up OOP, everyone always nods and makes it seem like they know exactly what I'm talking about. Knowing the concepts is good, but we (some more than others) seem to have very hard time applying them when it comes to delivering actual work. Code reviews have been very helpful but the problem with code reviews is that they only occur after the fact so to some it seems we end up rewriting (it's mostly refactoring, but still takes lots of time) code that was just written. Also code reviews only give feedback to an individual engineer, not the entire team. I am toying with the idea of doing a presentation (or a series) and try to bring up OOP again along with some examples of existing code that could've been written better and could be refactored. I could use some really old projects that no one owns anymore so at least that part shouldn't be a sensitive issue. However, will this work? As I said most people have done C++ for a long time so my guess is that a) they'll sit there thinking why I'm telling them stuff they already know or b) they might actually take it as an insult because I'm telling them they don't know how to do the job they've been doing for years if not decades. Is there another approach which would reach broader audience than a code review would, but at the same time wouldn't feel like a punishment lecture? I'm not a fresh kid out of college who has utopian ideals of perfectly designed code and I don't expect that from anyone. The reason I'm writing this is because I just did a review of a person who actually had decent high-level design on paper. However if you picture classes: A - B - C - D, in the code B, C and D all implement almost the same public interface and B/C have one liner functions so that top-most class A is doing absolutely all the work (down to memory management, string parsing, setup negotiations...) primarily in 4 mongo methods and, for all intents and purposes, calls almost directly into D. Update: I'm a tech lead(6 months in this role) and do have full support of the group manager. We are working on a very mature product and maintenance costs are definitely letting themselves be known.

    Read the article

  • Making a design for a Problem [closed]

    - by Vaibhav Agarwal
    I have written many codes using OOPS and I am still to understand when is a code good enough to be accepted by experts. The thought procedure of every man is different and so is the design. My question is should I do something in particular to design my programs in such a way that they are good enough to be accepted by people. Other thing I have also read Head First Object Oriented Design but at last I feel that the way they design the problems is much different I would have designed them.

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