Search Results

Search found 2069 results on 83 pages for 'anonymous delegates'.

Page 4/83 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • php Set a anonymous function in an instance

    - by geekay
    I am just starting out with PHP, and I am wondering if there is a way to add an anonymous function to a class instance. For instance, lets say... class A{ public B; } $c = new A(); //This is where I am getting a little confused... //The following wont work $c->B = function(){echo('HelloWorld');}; $c->B(); What I am hoping to do is reuse the same spit of code in a great number of different applications, and make it so that I can just 'swap-out' and replace functions in specific instances. I am using php5.3 (so anonymous functions should work, just not in the way that I am using them). Thanks so very much for your time!! -GK

    Read the article

  • Turn on anonymous access in SharePoint2010 Site collection

    - by ybbest
    In this post, I would like to show you how to turn on anonymous access in SharePoint2010 Site collection using SharePoint Web UI. If you would like to achieve the same thing using PowerShell you can check this blog post here. 1. You need to go to Central AdminàManage Web Applications 2. Click Authentication provider 3. Click Default and Enable anonymous access 4. Go to your site collection and click on Site actions then click Site Permissions 5. Click on Anonymous Access 6. Select the Entire Web site and click OK. 7 Navigate to your site collection and boom you are all set for the anonymous access for your SharePoint site collection.

    Read the article

  • Creating an anonymous site in SharePoint 2010

    - by shehan
    Here’s how: Open up the Central Administration site and click on “Manage Web Applications” under the “Application Management” section From the ribbon click on “New” (Note: if its an existing web app, then click on “Extend”) Fill in the fields with appropriate values. Under “Security Configurations” make sure to select “Yes” for “Allow Anonymous” Click OK Once the web application has been created, a site collection would need to be created. Navigate to “Application Management” –> “Create Site Collection” Fill in the fields with the appropriate values and create the site collection Next sign into the newly created site collection as the Site Collection Administrator. From the “Site Actions” menu, select “Site Permissions” In the permissions page that loads, click on the Anonymous Access button appearing on the ribbon. A modal dialog would popup. Select the appropriate option and click OK. If you selected “Entire Web Site” its advisable to restart the browser to test anonymous access Technorati Tags: SharePoint 2010,anonymous,site collection,web application

    Read the article

  • Predicate delegate in C#

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    I am writing few post on different type of delegates and and this post also will be part of it. In this post I am going to write about Predicate delegate which is available from C# 2.0. Following is list of post that I have written about delegates. Delegates in C#. Multicast delegates in C#. Func delegate in C#. Action delegate in C#. Predicate delegate in C#: As per MSDN predicate delegate is a pointer to a function that returns true or false and takes generics types as argument. It contains following signature. Predicate<T> – where T is any generic type and this delegate will always return Boolean value. The most common use of a predicate delegate is to searching items in array or list. So let’s take a simple example. Following is code for that. Read More

    Read the article

  • Anonymous Live OS, l'OS qui ne vient PAS des Anonymous : la déclinaison d'Ubuntu apparue avant-hier reste pleine de mystères

    Anonymous Live OS, l'OS qui ne vient PAS des Anonymous La déclinaison d'Ubuntu apparue hier est pleine de mystères, voire de Trojans La nouvelle a fait le tour du Web en quelques minutes. Mais elle n'avait pas été vérifiée. Et a priori, elle ne risque pas de l'être. L'histoire commence avec la découverte sur SourceForge d'une distribution baptisée Anonymous OS Live. Déclinée de Ubuntu 11.10, le système y était décrit par ses auteurs comme « pédagogique » et/ou destiné à vérifier la sécurité des sites. Des auteurs qui n'ont pas été identifiés (normal pour des membres du mouvement), mais il n'en fallait pas plus pour que l'arrivée d'un OS estampillé Anonymous se propage. Prob...

    Read the article

  • 10 steps to enable &lsquo;Anonymous Access&rsquo; for your SharePoint 2010 site

    - by KunaalKapoor
    What’s Anonymous Access? Anonymous access to your SharePoint site enables all visitors to view your SharePoint site anonymously without having to log in. With this blog I’d like to go through an easy step wise procedure to enable/set up anonymous access. Before you actually enable anonymous access on the site, you’ll have to change some settings at the web app level. So let’s start with that: Prerequisite(s): 1. A hosted SharePoint 2010 farm/server. 2. An existing SharePoint site. I just thought I’d mention the above pre-reqs, since the steps mentioned below would’nt be valid or a different type of a site. Step 1: In Central Administration, under Application Management, click on the Manage web applications. Step 2: Now select the site you want to enable anonymous access and click on the Authentication Providers icon. Step 3: On the modal window click on the Default zone. Step 4: Now under the Edit Authentication section, check Enable anonymous access and click Save. This is basically to make the Anonymous Access authentication mechanism available at the web app level @ IIS. Now, web application will allow anonymous access to be set. 5. Going back to Web Application Management click on the Anonymous Policy icon. Step 6: Also before we proceed any further, under the Anonymous Access Restrictions (@ web app mgmt.) select your Zone and set the Permissions to None – No policy and click Save. Step 7:  Now lets navigate to your top level site collection for the web application. Click the Site Actions > Site Settings. Under Users and Permissions click Site permissions. Step 8: Under Users and Permissions, click on Site Permissions. Step 9: Under the Edit tab, click on Anonymous Access. Step 10: Choose whether you want Anonymous users to have access to the entire Web site or to lists and libraries only, and then click on OK. You should now be able to see the view as below under your permissions Also keep in mind: If you are trying to access the site from a browser within the domain, then you’ll need to change some browser settings to see the after affects. Normally this is because the browsers (Internet Explorer) is set to log in automatically to intranet zone only , not sure if you have explicitly changed the zones and added it to trusted sites. If this is from a box within your domain please try to access the site by temporarily changing the Internet Explorer setting to Anonymous Logon on the zone that the site is added example "Intranet" and try . You will find the same settings by clicking on Tools > Internet Options > Security Tab.

    Read the article

  • How to break WinDbg in an anonymous method?

    - by Richard Berg
    Title kinda says it all. The usual SOS command !bpmd doesn't do a lot of good without a name. Some ideas I had: dump every method, then use !bpmd -md when you find the corresponding MethodDesc not practical in real world usage, from what I can tell. Even if I wrote a macro to limit the dump to anonymous types/methods, there's no obvious way to tell them apart. use Reflector to dump the MSIL name doesn't help when dealing with dynamic assemblies and/or Reflection.Emit. Visual Studio's inability to read local vars inside such scenarios is the whole reason I turned to Windbg in the first place... set the breakpoint in VS, wait for it to hit, then change to Windbg using the noninvasive trick attempting to detach from VS causes it to hang (along with the app). I think this is due to the fact that the managed debugger is a "soft" debugger via thread injection instead of a standard "hard" debugger. Or maybe it's just a VS bug specific to Silverlight (would hardly be the first I've encountered). set a breakpoint on some other location known to call into the anonymous method, then single-step your way in my backup plan, though I'd rather not resort to it if this Q&A reveals a better way

    Read the article

  • Anonymous union definition/declaration in a macro GNU vs VS2008

    - by Alan_m
    I am attempting to alter an IAR specific header file for a lpc2138 so it can compile with Visual Studio 2008 (to enable compatible unit testing). My problem involves converting register definitions to be hardware independent (not at a memory address) The "IAR-safe macro" is: #define __IO_REG32_BIT(NAME, ADDRESS, ATTRIBUTE, BIT_STRUCT) \ volatile __no_init ATTRIBUTE union \ { \ unsigned long NAME; \ BIT_STRUCT NAME ## _bit; \ } @ ADDRESS //declaration //(where __gpio0_bits is a structure that names //each of the 32 bits as P0_0, P0_1, etc) __IO_REG32_BIT(IO0PIN,0xE0028000,__READ_WRITE,__gpio0_bits); //usage IO0PIN = 0x0xAA55AA55; IO0PIN_bit.P0_5 = 0; This is my comparable "hardware independent" code: #define __IO_REG32_BIT(NAME, BIT_STRUCT)\ volatile union \ { \ unsigned long NAME; \ BIT_STRUCT NAME##_bit; \ } NAME; //declaration __IO_REG32_BIT(IO0PIN,__gpio0_bits); //usage IO0PIN.IO0PIN = 0xAA55AA55; IO0PIN.IO0PIN_bit.P0_5 = 1; This compiles and works but quite obviously my "hardware independent" usage does not match the "IAR-safe" usage. How do I alter my macro so I can use IO0PIN the same way I do in IAR? I feel this is a simple anonymous union matter but multiple attempts and variants have proven unsuccessful. Maybe the IAR GNU compiler supports anonymous unions and vs2008 does not. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Linq - How to collect Anonymous Type as Result for a Function

    - by GibboK
    I use c# 4 asp.net and EF 4. I'm precompiling a query, the result should be a collection of Anonymous Type. At the moment I use this code. public static readonly Func<CmsConnectionStringEntityDataModel, string, dynamic> queryContentsList = CompiledQuery.Compile<CmsConnectionStringEntityDataModel, string, dynamic> ( (ctx, TypeContent) => ctx.CmsContents.Where(c => c.TypeContent == TypeContent & c.IsPublished == true & c.IsDeleted == false) .Select(cnt => new { cnt.Title, cnt.TitleUrl, cnt.ContentId, cnt.TypeContent, cnt.Summary } ) .OrderByDescending(c => c.ContentId)); I suspect the RETURN for the FUNCTION Dynamic does not work properly and I get this error Sequence contains more than one element enter code here. I suppose I need to return for my function a Collection of Anonymous Types... Do you have any idea how to do it? What I'm doing wrong? Please post a sample of code thanks! Update: public class ConcTypeContents { public string Title { get; set; } public string TitleUrl { get; set; } public int ContentId { get; set; } public string TypeContent { get; set; } public string Summary { get; set; } } public static readonly Func<CmsConnectionStringEntityDataModel, string, ConcTypeContents> queryContentsList = CompiledQuery.Compile<CmsConnectionStringEntityDataModel, string, ConcTypeContents>( (ctx, TypeContent) => ctx.CmsContents.Where(c => c.TypeContent == TypeContent & c.IsPublished == true & c.IsDeleted == false) .Select(cnt => new ConcTypeContents { cnt.Title, cnt.TitleUrl, cnt.ContentId, cnt.TypeContent, cnt.Summary }).OrderByDescending(c => c.ContentId));

    Read the article

  • Javascript Anonymous Functions and Global Variables

    - by Jonathan Swift
    I thought I would try and be clever and create a Wait function of my own (I realise there are other ways to do this). So I wrote: var interval_id; var countdowntimer = 0; function Wait(wait_interval) { countdowntimer = wait_interval; interval_id = setInterval(function() { --countdowntimer <=0 ? clearInterval(interval_id) : null; }, 1000); do {} while (countdowntimer >= 0); } // Wait a bit: 5 secs Wait(5); This all works, except for the infinite looping. Upon inspection, if I take the While loop out, the anonymous function is entered 5 times, as expected. So clearly the global variable countdowntimer is decremented. However, if I check the value of countdowntimer, in the While loop, it never goes down. This is despite the fact that the anonymous function is being called whilst in the While loop! Clearly, somehow, there are two values of countdowntimer floating around, but why?

    Read the article

  • Overload Anonymous Functions

    - by Nissan Fan
    Still wrapping my head around Delegates and I'm curious: Is it possible to overload anonymous functions? Such that: delegate void Output(string x, int y); Supports: Output show = (x, y) => Console.WriteLine("{0}: {1}", x.ToString(), y.ToString()); And: delegate void Output(string x, string y); Allowing: show( "ABC", "EFG" ); And: show( "ABC", 123 );

    Read the article

  • Delegates: A Practical Understanding

    - by samerpaul
    It's been a while since I have written on this blog, and I'm planning on reviving it this summer, since I have more time to do so again.I've also recently started working on the iPhone platform, so I haven't been as busy in .NET as before.In either case, today's blog post applies to both C# and Objective-C, because it's more about a practical understanding of delegates than it is about code. When I was learning coding, I felt like delegates was one of the hardest things to conceptually understand, and a lot of books don't really do a good job (in my opinion) of explaining it. So here's my stab at it.A Real Life Example of DelegatesLet's say there are three of you. You, your friend, and your brother. You're each in a different room in your house so you can't hear each other, even if you shout. 1)You are playing a computer game2) Friend is building a puzzle3) Brother is nappingNow, you three are going to stay in your room but you want to be informed if anything interesting is happening to the one of you. Let's say you (playing the computer game) want to know when your brother wakes up.You could keep walking to the room, checking to see if he's napping, and then walking back to your room. But that would waste a lot of time / resources, and what if you miss when he's awake before he goes back to sleep? That would be bad.Instead, you hand him a 2-way radio that works between your room and his room. And you inform him that when he wakes up, he should press a button on the radio and say "I'm awake". You are going to be listening to that radio, waiting for him to say he's awake. This, in essence, is how a delegate works.You're creating an "object" (the radio) that allows you to listen in on an event you specify. You don't want him to send any other messages to you right now, except when he wakes up. And you want to know immediately when he does, so you can go over to his room and say hi. (the methods that are called when a delegate event fires). You're also currently specifying that only you are listening on his radio.Let's say you want your friend to come into the room at the same time as you, and do something else entirely, like fluff your brother's pillow. You will then give him an identical radio, that also hooks into your brother's radio, and inform him to wait and listen for the "i'm awake" signal.Then, when your brother wakes up, he says "I'm awake!" and both you and your friend walk into the room. You say hi, and your friend fluffs the pillow, then you both exit.Later, if you decide you don't care to say hi anymore, you turn off your radio. Now, you have no idea when your brother is awake or not, because you aren't listening anymore.So again, you are each classes in this example, and each of you have your own methods. You're playing a computer game (PlayComputerGame()), your friend is building a puzzle (BuildPuzzle()) and your brother is napping (Napping()). You create a delegate (ImAwake) that you set your brother to do, when he wakes up. You listen in on that delegate (giving yourself a radio and turning it on), and when you receive the message, you fire a new method called SayHi()). Your friend is also wired up to the same delegate (using an identical radio) and fires the method FluffPillow().Hopefully this makes sense, and helps shed some light on how delegates operate. Let me know! Feel free to drop me a line at Twitter (preferred method of contact) here: samerabousalbi

    Read the article

  • Accessing C# Anonymous Type Objects

    - by Ali Kazmi
    Hi, How do i access objects of an anonymous type outside the scope where its declared? for e.g. void FuncB() { var obj = FuncA(); Console.WriteLine(obj.Name); } ??? FuncA() { var a = (from e in DB.Entities where e.Id == 1 select new {Id = e.Id, Name = e.Name}).FirstOrDefault(); return a; }

    Read the article

  • Anonymous class implementing interface

    - by Flo
    I have the following code inside a method: var list = new[] { new { Name = "Red", IsSelected = true }, new { Name = "Green", IsSelected = false }, new { Name = "Blue", IsSelected = false }, }; I would like to call a function that requires a list of elements with each element implementing an interface (ISelectable). I know how this is done with normal classes, but in this case I am only trying to fill in some demo data. Is it possible to create an anonymous class implementing an interface? like this: new { Name = "Red", IsSelected = true } : ISelectable

    Read the article

  • How To Test if a Type is Anonymous?

    - by DaveDev
    Hi Guys I have the following method which serialises an object to a HTML tag. I only want to do this though if the type isn't Anonymous. private void MergeTypeDataToTag(object typeData) { if (typeData != null) { Type elementType = typeData.GetType(); if (/* elementType != AnonymousType */) { _tag.Attributes.Add("class", elementType.Name); } // do some more stuff } } Can somebody show me how to achieve this? Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • Arguments to JavaScript Anonymous Function

    - by Phonethics
    for (var i = 0; i < somearray.length; i++) { myclass.foo({'arg1':somearray[i][0]}, function() { console.log(somearray[i][0]); }); } How do I pass somearray or one of its indexes into the anonymous function ? somearray is already in the global scope, but I still get somearray[i] is undefined

    Read the article

  • Closure vs Anonymous function (difference?)

    - by Maxim Gershkovich
    Hi, I have been unable to find a definition that clearly explains the differences between a closure and an anonymous function. Most references I have seen clearly specify that they are distinct "things" yet I can't seem to get my head around why. Could someone please simplify it for me? What are the specific differences between these two language features? Which one is more appropriate in what scenarios?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: The EventHandler and EventHandler&lt;TEventArgs&gt; delegates

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. In the last two weeks, we examined the Action family of delegates (and delegates in general), and the Func family of delegates and how they can be used to support generic, reusable algorithms and classes. So this week, we are going to look at a handy pair of delegates that can be used to eliminate the need for defining custom delegates when creating events: the EventHandler and EventHandler<TEventArgs> delegates. Events and delegates Before we begin, let’s quickly consider events in .NET.  According to the MSDN: An event in C# is a way for a class to provide notifications to clients of that class when some interesting thing happens to an object. So, basically, you can create an event in a type so that users of that type can subscribe to notifications of things of interest.  How is this different than some of the delegate programming that we talked about in the last two weeks?  Well, you can think of an event as a special access modifier on a delegate.  Some differences between the two are: Events are a special access case of delegates They behave much like delegates instances inside the type they are declared in, but outside of that type they can only be (un)subscribed to. Events can specify add/remove behavior explicitly If you want to do additional work when someone subscribes or unsubscribes to an event, you can specify the add and remove actions explicitly. Events have access modifiers, but these only specify the access level of those who can (un)subscribe A public event, for example, means anyone can (un)subscribe, but it does not mean that anyone can raise (invoke) the event directly.  Events can only be raised by the type that contains them In contrast, if a delegate is visible, it can be invoked outside of the object (not even in a sub-class!). Events tend to be for notifications only, and should be treated as optional Semantically speaking, events typically don’t perform work on the the class directly, but tend to just notify subscribers when something of note occurs. My basic rule-of-thumb is that if you are just wanting to notify any listeners (who may or may not care) that something has happened, use an event.  However, if you want the caller to provide some function to perform to direct the class about how it should perform work, make it a delegate. Declaring events using custom delegates To declare an event in a type, we simply use the event keyword and specify its delegate type.  For example, let’s say you wanted to create a new TimeOfDayTimer that triggers at a given time of the day (as opposed to on an interval).  We could write something like this: 1: public delegate void TimeOfDayHandler(object source, ElapsedEventArgs e); 2:  3: // A timer that will fire at time of day each day. 4: public class TimeOfDayTimer : IDisposable 5: { 6: // Event that is triggered at time of day. 7: public event TimeOfDayHandler Elapsed; 8:  9: // ... 10: } The first thing to note is that the event is a delegate type, which tells us what types of methods may subscribe to it.  The second thing to note is the signature of the event handler delegate, according to the MSDN: The standard signature of an event handler delegate defines a method that does not return a value, whose first parameter is of type Object and refers to the instance that raises the event, and whose second parameter is derived from type EventArgs and holds the event data. If the event does not generate event data, the second parameter is simply an instance of EventArgs. Otherwise, the second parameter is a custom type derived from EventArgs and supplies any fields or properties needed to hold the event data. So, in a nutshell, the event handler delegates should return void and take two parameters: An object reference to the object that raised the event. An EventArgs (or a subclass of EventArgs) reference to event specific information. Even if your event has no additional information to provide, you are still expected to provide an EventArgs instance.  In this case, feel free to pass the EventArgs.Empty singleton instead of creating new instances of EventArgs (to avoid generating unneeded memory garbage). The EventHandler delegate Because many events have no additional information to pass, and thus do not require custom EventArgs, the signature of the delegates for subscribing to these events is typically: 1: // always takes an object and an EventArgs reference 2: public delegate void EventHandler(object sender, EventArgs e) It would be insane to recreate this delegate for every class that had a basic event with no additional event data, so there already exists a delegate for you called EventHandler that has this very definition!  Feel free to use it to define any events which supply no additional event information: 1: public class Cache 2: { 3: // event that is raised whenever the cache performs a cleanup 4: public event EventHandler OnCleanup; 5:  6: // ... 7: } This will handle any event with the standard EventArgs (no additional information).  But what of events that do need to supply additional information?  Does that mean we’re out of luck for subclasses of EventArgs?  That’s where the generic for of EventHandler comes into play… The generic EventHandler<TEventArgs> delegate Starting with the introduction of generics in .NET 2.0, we have a generic delegate called EventHandler<TEventArgs>.  Its signature is as follows: 1: public delegate void EventHandler<TEventArgs>(object sender, TEventArgs e) 2: where TEventArgs : EventArgs This is similar to EventHandler except it has been made generic to support the more general case.  Thus, it will work for any delegate where the first argument is an object (the sender) and the second argument is a class derived from EventArgs (the event data). For example, let’s say we wanted to create a message receiver, and we wanted it to have a few events such as OnConnected that will tell us when a connection is established (probably with no additional information) and OnMessageReceived that will tell us when a new message arrives (probably with a string for the new message text). So for OnMessageReceived, our MessageReceivedEventArgs might look like this: 1: public sealed class MessageReceivedEventArgs : EventArgs 2: { 3: public string Message { get; set; } 4: } And since OnConnected needs no event argument type defined, our class might look something like this: 1: public class MessageReceiver 2: { 3: // event that is called when the receiver connects with sender 4: public event EventHandler OnConnected; 5:  6: // event that is called when a new message is received. 7: public event EventHandler<MessageReceivedEventArgs> OnMessageReceived; 8:  9: // ... 10: } Notice, nowhere did we have to define a delegate to fit our event definition, the EventHandler and generic EventHandler<TEventArgs> delegates fit almost anything we’d need to do with events. Sidebar: Thread-safety and raising an event When the time comes to raise an event, we should always check to make sure there are subscribers, and then only raise the event if anyone is subscribed.  This is important because if no one is subscribed to the event, then the instance will be null and we will get a NullReferenceException if we attempt to raise the event. 1: // This protects against NullReferenceException... or does it? 2: if (OnMessageReceived != null) 3: { 4: OnMessageReceived(this, new MessageReceivedEventArgs(aMessage)); 5: } The above code seems to handle the null reference if no one is subscribed, but there’s a problem if this is being used in multi-threaded environments.  For example, assume we have thread A which is about to raise the event, and it checks and clears the null check and is about to raise the event.  However, before it can do that thread B unsubscribes to the event, which sets the delegate to null.  Now, when thread A attempts to raise the event, this causes the NullReferenceException that we were hoping to avoid! To counter this, the simplest best-practice method is to copy the event (just a multicast delegate) to a temporary local variable just before we raise it.  Since we are inside the class where this event is being raised, we can copy it to a local variable like this, and it will protect us from multi-threading since multicast delegates are immutable and assignments are atomic: 1: // always make copy of the event multi-cast delegate before checking 2: // for null to avoid race-condition between the null-check and raising it. 3: var handler = OnMessageReceived; 4: 5: if (handler != null) 6: { 7: handler(this, new MessageReceivedEventArgs(aMessage)); 8: } The very slight trade-off is that it’s possible a class may get an event after it unsubscribes in a multi-threaded environment, but this is a small risk and classes should be prepared for this possibility anyway.  For a more detailed discussion on this, check out this excellent Eric Lippert blog post on Events and Races. Summary Generic delegates give us a lot of power to make generic algorithms and classes, and the EventHandler delegate family gives us the flexibility to create events easily, without needing to redefine delegates over and over.  Use them whenever you need to define events with or without specialized EventArgs.   Tweet Technorati Tags: .NET, C#, CSharp, Little Wonders, Generics, Delegates, EventHandler

    Read the article

  • VB.NET 2008 - Anonymous Function

    - by James Brauman
    Hi, On Form Load I populate a menu with all possible colors so they user can pick a color. However when they pick a color the forecolor of my label is not changed. Private Sub MainForm_Load(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load ' When the form loads, we want to populate the color menu item with all the possible colors that we could change the label to. For Each currentColor As KnownColor In [Enum].GetValues(GetType(KnownColor)) ' Declare the knowColor again - we must do this to be able to do anonymous delegates in VB.NET Dim actualCurrentColor As KnownColor = currentColor ' Get the name for this color Dim colorName As String = [Enum].GetName(GetType(KnownColor), actualCurrentColor) ' Create a new menu item for this color Dim newMenuItem As ToolStripMenuItem = New ToolStripMenuItem(colorName) ' Add a handler to this menu item so when it is clicked, we change the heading color AddHandler newMenuItem.Click, Function(s As System.Object, events As System.EventArgs) (HeadingLabel.ForeColor = Color.FromKnownColor(actualCurrentColor)) ' Add the menu item to the colors menu ColorToolStripMenuItem.DropDownItems.Add(newMenuItem) Next End Sub What am I doing wrong? Thanks

    Read the article

  • C# Anonymous method variable scope problem with IEnumerable<T>

    - by PaN1C_Showt1Me
    Hi. I'm trying to iterate through all components and for those who implements ISupportsOpen allow to open a project. The problem is when the anonymous method is called, then the component variable is always the same element (as coming from the outer scope from IEnumerable) foreach (ISupportsOpen component in something.Site.Container.Components.OfType<ISupportsOpen>()) { MyClass m = new MyClass(); m.Called += new EventHandler(delegate(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (component.CanOpenProject(..)) component.OpenProject(..); }); itemsList.Add(m); } How should it be solved, please?

    Read the article

  • detachEvent not working with named anonymous functions

    - by Polshgiant
    I ran into a problem in IE8 today (Note that I only need to support IE) that I can't seem to explain: detachEvent wouldn't work when using a named anonymous function handler. document.getElementById('iframeid').attachEvent("onreadystatechange", function onIframeReadyStateChange() { if (event.srcElement.readyState != "complete") { return; } event.srcElement.detachEvent("onreadystatechange", onIframeReadyStateChange); // code here was running every time my iframe's readyState // changed to "complete" instead of only the first time }); I eventually figured out that changing onIframeReadyStateChange to use arguments.callee (which I normally avoid) instead solved the issue: document.getElementById('iframeid').attachEvent("onreadystatechange", function () { if (event.srcElement.readyState != "complete") { return; } event.srcElement.detachEvent("onreadystatechange", arguments.callee); // code here now runs only once no matter how many times the // iframe's readyState changes to "complete" }); What gives?! Shouldn't the first snippet work fine?

    Read the article

  • Return/consume dynamic anonymous type across assembly boundaries

    - by friism
    The code below works great. If the Get and Use methods are in different assemblies, the code fails with a RuntimeBinderException. This is because the .Net runtime system only guarantees commonality of anonymous types (<string, int> in this case) within assemblies. Is there any way to fool the runtime system to overcome this? I can expect the object in the debugger on the Use side, and the debugger can see the relevant properties. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { UsePerson(); Console.ReadLine(); } public static void UsePerson() { var person = GetPerson(); Console.WriteLine(person.Name); } public static dynamic GetPerson() { return new { Name = "Foo", Age = 30 }; } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >