Search Results

Search found 25225 results on 1009 pages for 'default constructor'.

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 4/1009 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Constructor being called again?

    - by Halo
    I have this constructor; public UmlDiagramEntity(ReportElement reportElement, int pageIndex, Controller controller) { super(reportElement.getX1(), reportElement.getY1(), reportElement.getX2(), reportElement.getY2()); setLayout(null); this.pageIndex = pageIndex; this.controller = controller; reportElements = reportElement.getInternalReportElements(); components = new ArrayList<AbstractEntity>(); changedComponentIndex = -1; PageListener p = new PageListener(); this.addMouseMotionListener(p); this.addMouseListener(p); setPage(); } And I have an update method in the same class; @Override public void update(ReportElement reportElement) { if (changedComponentIndex == -1) { super.update(reportElement); } else { reportElements = reportElement.getInternalReportElements(); if (components.size() == reportElements.size()) { if (!isCommitted) { if (reportElement.getType() == ReportElementType.UmlRelation) { if (checkInvolvementAndSet(changedComponentIndex)) { anchorEntity(changedComponentIndex); } else { resistChanges(changedComponentIndex); } return; } } ..................goes on When I follow the flow from the debugger, I see that when update is called, somewhere in the method, the program goes into the constructor and executes it all over again (super, pageIndex, etc.). Why does it go to the constructor :D I didn't tell it to go there. I can make a deeper analysis and see where it goes to the constructor if you want. By the way, changedComponentIndex is a static variable.

    Read the article

  • Java Constructor Style (Check parameters aren't null)

    - by Peter
    What are the best practices if you have a class which accepts some parameters but none of them are allowed to be null? The following is obvious but the exception is a little unspecific: public class SomeClass { public SomeClass(Object one, Object two) { if (one == null || two == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("Parameters can't be null"); } //... } } Here the exceptions let you know which parameter is null, but the constructor is now pretty ugly: public class SomeClass { public SomeClass(Object one, Object two) { if (one == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("one can't be null"); } if (two == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("two can't be null"); } //... } Here the constructor is neater, but now the constructor code isn't really in the constructor: public class SomeClass { public SomeClass(Object one, Object two) { setOne(one); setTwo(two); } public void setOne(Object one) { if (one == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("one can't be null"); } //... } public void setTwo(Object two) { if (two == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("two can't be null"); } //... } } Which of these styles is best? Or is there an alternative which is more widely accepted? Cheers, Pete

    Read the article

  • Calling base class constructor

    - by The Void
    In the program below, is the line Derived(double y): Base(), y_(y) correct/allowed? That is, does it follow ANSI rules? #include <iostream> class Base { public: Base(): x_(0) { std::cout << "Base default constructor called" << std::endl; } Base(int x): x_(x) { std::cout << "Base constructor called with x = " << x << std::endl; } void display() const { std::cout << x_ << std::endl; } protected: int x_; }; class Derived: public Base { public: Derived(): Base(1), y_(1.2) { std::cout << "Derived default constructor called" << std::endl; } Derived(double y): Base(), y_(y) { std::cout << "Derived constructor called with y = " << y << std::endl; } void display() const { std::cout << Base::x_ << ", " << y_ << std::endl; } private: double y_; }; int main() { Base b1; b1.display(); Derived d1; d1.display(); std::cout << std::endl; Base b2(-9); b2.display(); Derived d2(-8.7); d2.display(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • C++: Constructor/destructor unresolved when not inline?

    - by Anamon
    In a plugin-based C++ project, I have a TmpClass that is used to exchange data between the main application and the plugins. Therefore the respective TmpClass.h is included in the abstract plugin interface class that is included by the main application project, and implemented by each plugin. As the plugins work on STL vectors of TmpClass instances, there needs to be a default constructor and destructor for the TmpClass. I had declared these in TmpClass.h: class TmpClass { TmpClass(); ~TmpClass(); } and implemented them in TmpClass.cpp. TmpClass::~TmpClass() {} TmpClass::TmpClass() {} However, when compiling plugins this leads to the linker complaining about two unresolved externals - the default constructor and destructor of TmpClass as required by the std::vector<TmpClass> template instantiation - even though all other functions I declare in TmpClass.h and implement in TmpClass.cpp work. As soon as I remove the (empty) default constructor and destructor from the .cpp file and inline them into the class declaration in the .h file, the plugins compile and work. Why is it that the default constructor and destructor have to be inline for this code to compile? Why does it even maatter? (I'm using MSVC++8).

    Read the article

  • Java: design problem with final-value and empty constructor

    - by HH
    $ javac InitInt.java InitInt.java:7: variable right might not have been initialized InitInt(){} ^ 1 error $ cat InitInt.java import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class InitInt { private final int right; // Design Problem? // I feel the initialization problem is just due to bad style. InitInt(){} InitInt{ // Still the error, "may not be initialized" // How to initialise it? if(snippetBuilder.length()>(charwisePos+25)){ right=charwisePos+25; }else{ right=snippetBuilder.length()-1; } } public static void main(String[] args) { InitInt test = new InitInt(); System.out.println(test.getRight()); } public int getRight(){return right;} } Partial Solutions and Suggestions use "this" to access methods in the class, instead of creating empty constructor change final to non-final with final field value: initialize all final values in every constructor remove the empty constructor, keep your code simple and clean

    Read the article

  • C# ArrayList calling on a constructor class

    - by EvanRyan
    I'm aware that an ArrayList is probably not the way to go with this particular situation, but humor me and help me lose this headache. I have a constructor class like follows: class Peoples { public string LastName; public string FirstName; public Peoples(string lastName, string firstName) { LastName = lastName; FirstName = firstName; } } And I'm trying to build an ArrayList to build a collection by calling on this constructor. However, I can't seem to find a way to build the ArrayList properly when I use this constructor. I have figured it out with an Array, but not an ArrayList. I have been messing with this to try to build my ArrayList: ArrayList people = new ArrayList(); people[0] = new Peoples("Bar", "Foo"); people[1] = new Peoples("Quirk", "Baz"); people[2] = new Peopls("Get", "Gad"); My indexing is apparently out of range according to the exception I get.

    Read the article

  • Spring overloaded constructor injection

    - by noob
    This is the code : public class Triangle { private String color; private int height; public Triangle(String color,int height){ this.color = color; this.height = height; } public Triangle(int height ,String color){ this.color = color; this.height = height; } public void draw() { System.out.println("Triangle is drawn , + "color:"+color+" ,height:"+height); } } The Spring config-file is : <bean id="triangle" class="org.tester.Triangle"> <constructor-arg value="20" /> <constructor-arg value="10" /> </bean> Is there any specific rule to determine which constructor will be called by Spring ?

    Read the article

  • c++ Using const in a copy constructor?

    - by Anton
    I have never written copy constructor, so in order to avoid pain i wanted to know if what i have coded is legit. It compiles but i am not sure that it works as a copy constructor should. Also do i have to use const in the copy constructor or i can simply drop it. (What i dont like about const is that the compiler cries if i use some non const functions). //EditNode.h class EditNode { explicit EditNode(QString elementName); EditNode(const EditNode &src); } //EditNodeContainer.h class EditNodeContainer : public EditNode { explicit EditNodeContainer(QString elementName); EditNodeContainer(const EditNodeContainer &src); } //EditNodeContainer.cpp EditNodeContainer::EditNodeContainer(QString elementName):EditNode(elementName) { } //This seems to compile but not sure if it works EditNodeContainer::EditNodeContainer(const EditNodeContainer &src):EditNode(src) { } //the idea whould be to do something like this EditNodeContainer *container1 = new EditNodeContainer("c1"); EditNodeContainer *copyContainer = new EditNodeContainer(container1);

    Read the article

  • Java: design problem with private-final-int-value and empty constructor

    - by HH
    $ javac InitInt.java InitInt.java:7: variable right might not have been initialized InitInt(){} ^ 1 error $ cat InitInt.java import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class InitInt { private final int right; //DUE to new Klowledge: Design Problem //I think having an empty constructor like this // is an design problem, shall I remove it? What do you think? // When to use an empty constructor? InitInt(){} public static void main(String[] args) { InitInt test = new InitInt(); System.out.println(test.getRight()); } public int getRight(){return right;} } Initialization problem with Constructor InitInt{ // Still the error, "may not be initialized" // How to initialise it? if(snippetBuilder.length()>(charwisePos+25)){ right=charwisePos+25; }else{ right=snippetBuilder.length()-1; } }

    Read the article

  • C++ method chaining including class constructor

    - by jena
    Hello, I'm trying to implement method chaining in C++, which turns out to be quite easy if the constructor call of a class is a separate statement, e.g: Foo foo; foo.bar().baz(); But as soon as the constructor call becomes part of the method chain, the compiler complains about expecting ";" in place of "." immediately after the constructor call: Foo foo().bar().baz(); I'm wondering now if this is actually possible in C++. Here is my test class: class Foo { public: Foo() { } Foo& bar() { return *this; } Foo& baz() { return *this; } }; I also found an example for "fluent interfaces" in C++ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluent_interface#C.2B.2B) which seems to be exactly what I'm searching for. However, I get the same compiler error for that code. Thanks in advance for any hint. Best, Jean

    Read the article

  • Would this constructor be acceptable practice?

    - by Robb
    Let's assume I have a c++ class that have properly implemented a copy constructor and an overloaded = operator. By properly implemented I mean they are working and perform a deep copy: Class1::Class1(const Class1 &class1) { // Perform copy } Class1& Class1::operator=(const Class1 *class1) { // perform copy return *this; } Now lets say I have this constructor as well: Class1::Class1(Class1 *class1) { *this = *class1; } My question is would the above constructor be acceptable practice? This is code that i've inherited and maintaining.

    Read the article

  • Constructor return value

    - by Ivan Gromov
    Could you tell me what is wrong with my class constructor? Code: CVector::CVector (int size_) { if (size_ > 0) { this->size = size_; this->data = new double[size]; for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) { (*this)(i) = i; } } cout << "constructor end" << endl; return; } Usage example: tvector = CVector(6); I get an access violation after "constructor end" output.

    Read the article

  • Why Java cannot find my constructor?

    - by Roman
    Well, maybe it is a stupid question, but I cannot resolve this problem. In my ServiceBrowser class I have this line: ServiceResolver serviceResolver = new ServiceResolver(ifIndex, serviceName, regType, domain); And compiler complains about it. It says: cannot find symbol symbol : constructor ServiceResolver(int,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String) This is strange, because I do have a constructor in the ServiceResolver: public void ServiceResolver(int ifIndex, String serviceName, String regType, String domain) { this.ifIndex = ifIndex; this.serviceName = serviceName; this.regType = regType; this.domain = domain; } ADDED: I removed void from the constructor and it works! Why?

    Read the article

  • converting mysql database to sql server

    - by every_answer_gets_a_point
    i have a mysql database: /* MySQL Data Transfer Source Host: 10.0.0.5 Source Database: jnetdata Target Host: 10.0.0.5 Target Database: jnetdata Date: 5/26/2009 12:27:33 PM */ SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS=0; -- ---------------------------- -- Table structure for chavrusas -- ---------------------------- CREATE TABLE `chavrusas` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `date_created` datetime default NULL, `luser_id` int(11) default NULL, `ruser_id` int(11) default NULL, `luser_type` varchar(50) default NULL, `ruser_type` varchar(50) default NULL, `SessionDay` varchar(250) default NULL, `SessionTime` datetime default NULL, `WeeklyReminder` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `reminder_phone` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `calling_card` varchar(50) default NULL, `active` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `notes` mediumtext, `ended` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `end_date` datetime default NULL, `initiated_by_student` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `initiated_by_volunteer` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `student_general_reason` varchar(50) default NULL, `volunteer_general_reason` varchar(50) default NULL, `student_reason` varchar(250) default NULL, `volunteer_reason` varchar(250) default NULL, `student_nli` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `volunteer_nli` tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0', `jnet_initiated` tinyint(1) default '0', `belongs_to` varchar(50) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=5913 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; -- ---------------------------- -- Table structure for tbluseravailability -- ---------------------------- CREATE TABLE `tbluseravailability` ( `availability_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `user_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `weekday_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `timeslot_id` int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`availability_id`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=10865 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; -- ---------------------------- -- Table structure for tblusers -- ---------------------------- CREATE TABLE `tblusers` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `password` varchar(50) default NULL, `title` varchar(255) default NULL, `first` varchar(255) default NULL, `last` varchar(255) default NULL, `gender` varchar(255) default NULL, `address` varchar(255) default NULL, `address_2` varchar(255) default NULL, `city` varchar(255) default NULL, `state` varchar(255) default NULL, `postcode` varchar(255) default NULL, `country` varchar(255) default NULL, `email` varchar(255) default NULL, `emailnotes` varchar(255) default NULL, `Home_Phone` varchar(255) default NULL, `Office_Phone` varchar(255) default NULL, `Cell_Phone` varchar(255) default NULL, `Contact_Preference` varchar(255) default NULL, `Birthdate` datetime default NULL, `Age` varchar(255 and it goes on for about 10mb i need to convert it to ms sql, how do i do it?

    Read the article

  • variadic constructors

    - by FredOverflow
    Are variadic constructors supposed to hide the implicitly generated ones, i.e. the default constructor and the copy constructor? struct Foo { template<typename... Args> Foo(Args&&... x) { std::cout << "inside the variadic constructor\n"; } }; int main() { Foo a; Foo b(a); } Somehow I was expecting this to print nothing after reading this answer, but it prints inside the variadic constructor twice on g++ 4.5.0 :( Is this behavior correct?

    Read the article

  • Dummy/default page for apache

    - by Ency
    I'm trying to set up default page for my apache2, for following cases: User is accessing http://IP_Address instead of hostname Requested protocol (HTTP/HTTPS) is not available (eg. only http*s*://domain.com exists) Currently I've got something like that <VirtualHost eserver:80> ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost DocumentRoot /var/www/local/ <Directory /> Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None </Directory> </VirtualHost> I think, it works well, i'm trying to do similar thing for HTTPS, but it does not work. <VirtualHost eserver:443> SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/apache2/ssl/dummy.key SSLCertificateFile /etc/apache2/ssl/dummy.crt SSLProtocol all SSLCipherSuite HIGH:MEDIUM ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/error.log # Possible values include: debug, info, notice, warn, error, crit, # alert, emerg. LogLevel warn ServerSignature Off </VirtualHost> My default is places in sites-enabled as a first one 000-default I do not care about not certificate validity during accessing default page, my goal is not show different HTTPS page if user one of points is applied

    Read the article

  • Accessing the Private Constructor

    - by harigm
    I am java developer, went for an interview. I have been asked a question about the Private constructor 1) Can I access a Private Constructor of a Class and Instantiate the class. I was thinking and gave the answer directly--- "NO" But its wrong, can any one help Why NO? and How we can achieve this

    Read the article

  • Call a constructor from variable arguments with PHP

    - by zneak
    Hello guys, I have a function that takes variadic arguments, that I obtain from func_get_args(). This function needs to call a constructor with those arguments. However, I don't know how to do it. With call_user_func, you can call functions with an array of arguments, but how would you call a constructor from it? I can't just pass the array of arguments to it; it must believe I've called it "normally". Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Calling assignment operator in copy constructor

    - by stas
    Are there some drawbacks of such implementation of copy-constructor? Foo::Foo(const Foo& i_foo) { *this = i_foo; } As I remember, it was recommend in some book to call copy constructor from assignment operator and use well-known swap trick, but I don't remember, why...

    Read the article

  • behaviour of the implicit copy constructor / assignment operator

    - by Tobias Langner
    Hello, I have a question regarding the C++ Standard. Suppose you have a base class with user defined copy constructor and assignment operator. The derived class uses the implicit one generated by the compiler. Does copying / assignment of the derived class call the user defined copy constructor / assignment operator? Or do you need to implement user defined versions that call the base class? Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • Perl - Calling subclass constructor from superclass (OO)

    - by Emmel
    This may turn out to be an embarrassingly stupid question, but better than potentially creating embarrassingly stupid code. :-) This is an OO design question, really. Let's say I have an object class 'Foos' that represents a set of dynamic configuration elements, which are obtained by querying a command on disk, 'mycrazyfoos -getconfig'. Let's say that there are two categories of behavior that I want 'Foos' objects to have: Existing ones: one is, query ones that exist in the command output I just mentioned (/usr/bin/mycrazyfoos -getconfig`. Make modifications to existing ones via shelling out commands. Create new ones that don't exist; new 'crazyfoos', using a complex set of /usr/bin/mycrazyfoos commands and parameters. Here I'm not really just querying, but actually running a bunch of system() commands. Affecting changes. Here's my class structure: Foos.pm package Foos, which has a new($hashref-{name = 'myfooname',) constructor that takes a 'crazyfoo NAME' and then queries the existence of that NAME to see if it already exists (by shelling out and running the mycrazyfoos command above). If that crazyfoo already exists, return a Foos::Existing object. Any changes to this object requires shelling out, running commands and getting confirmation that everything ran okay. If this is the way to go, then the new() constructor needs to have a test to see which subclass constructor to use (if that even makes sense in this context). Here are the subclasses: Foos/Existing.pm As mentioned above, this is for when a Foos object already exists. Foos/Pending.pm This is an object that will be created if, in the above, the 'crazyfoo NAME' doesn't actually exist. In this case, the new() constructor above will be checked for additional parameters, and it will go ahead and, when called using -create() shell out using system() and create a new object... possibly returning an 'Existing' one... OR As I type this out, I am realizing it is perhaps it's better to have a single: (an alternative arrangement) Foos class, that has a -new() that takes just a name -create() that takes additional creation parameters -delete(), -change() and other params that affect ones that exist; that will have to just be checked dynamically. So here we are, two main directions to go with this. I'm curious which would be the more intelligent way to go.

    Read the article

  • Calling methods in super class constructor of subclass constructor?

    - by deamon
    Calling methods in super class constructor of subclass constructor? Passing configuration to the __init__ method which calls register implicitely: class Base: def __init__(self, *verbs=("get", "post")): self._register(verbs) def _register(self, *verbs): pass class Sub(Base): def __init__(self): super().__init__("get", "post", "put") Or calling register explicitely in the subclass' __init__ method: class Base: def __init__(self): self._register("get", "post") def _register(self, *verbs): pass class Sub(Base): def __init__(self): _register("get", "post", "put") What is better or more pythonic? Or is it only a matter of taste?

    Read the article

  • constructor in objective c

    - by zp26
    HI, I have create my iPhone apps but i have a problem. I have a classViewController where i have implemented my program. I must alloc 3 NSMutableArray but i don't want do it in a grapich methods. There isn't a constructor like java for my class? Thanks so much and sorry for my english XP // I want put it in a method like constructor java arrayPosizioni = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; nomePosizioneCorrente = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"noPosition"];

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