Search Results

Search found 63668 results on 2547 pages for 'object type'.

Page 4/2547 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Console.log in IE on an object just outputted [object Object]

    - by LookitsPuck
    All, I'm used to debugging JavaScript in Chrome or Firefox just because their built in developer tools are a lot cleaner than IE's. IE8 came along way with the Developer Tools being more polished, but they're still not completely up to snuff. I like being able to step through code as if I was in Visual Studio, and that is pretty nice about IE, however, when trying to do a simple console.log on an object that I have, in Firefox/Chrome/etc. I can actually explore that object. In IE, the console is simply outputting the following: LOG: [object Object] Is there any way to drill down into that object in IE like in Chrome/Firefox/etc.? Thanks all! -Steve

    Read the article

  • Difference between null==object and object==null

    - by priyank.mp
    Hi I would like to know diff between the above comparisons? I am getting null pointer exception when I check object.getItems() == null. But if I change it to null == object.getItems(), it workes fine. I did look into this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2938476/what-is-the-difference-between-null-object-and-objectnull-closed But I didnt get satisfactory answer.

    Read the article

  • Switch Case on type of object (C#)

    - by Sem Dendoncker
    If you want to switch a type of object, what is the best way to do this? ex: private int GetNodeType(NodeDTO node) { switch (node.GetType()) { case typeof(CasusNodeDTO): return 1; case typeof(BucketNodeDTO): return 3; case typeof(BranchNodeDTO): return 0; case typeof(LeafNodeDTO): return 2; default: return -1; } } I know this doesn't work that way, but I was wondering how you could solve this. Is an if then else else else statement appropriate in this case? Or do you use this switch and add .ToString() to the types? Kind regards, Sem

    Read the article

  • Uncaught TypeError: Property 'dist2' of object [object Object] is not a function

    - by Radu Vlad
    I have this functions that should return me the distance from point p to segment line v-w. The problem i have is after some time i receive the following error: Uncaught TypeError: Property 'dist2' of object [object Object] is not a function. I receive it in distToSegmentSquared directly,not even calling the function dist2().Is it any other dist2() anywhere in jquery?I found none... function sqr(x) { return x * x; } function dist2(v, w) { console.log(v); console.log(w); return sqr(v.x - w.x) + sqr(v.y - w.y); } function distToSegmentSquared(p, v, w) { var l2 = dist2(v, w); if (l2 == 0) return dist2(p, v); var t = ((p.x - v.x) * (w.x - v.x) + (p.y - v.y) * (w.y - v.y)) / l2; if (t < 0) return dist2(p, v); if (t > 1) return dist2(p, w); return dist2(p, {x: v.x + t * (w.x - v.x), y: v.y + t * (w.y - v.y)}); } function distToSegment(p, v, w) { return Math.sqrt(distToSegmentSquared(p, v, w)); } The values that are given in for that error are: p: Object x: 461 y: 333 v: Object x: 80 y: 120 w: Object x: 260 y: 120

    Read the article

  • PHP Object References in Frameworks

    - by bigstylee
    Before I dive into the disscusion part a quick question; Is there a method to determine if a variable is a reference to another variable/object? For example $foo = 'Hello World'; $bar = &$foo; echo (is_reference($bar) ? 'Is reference' : 'Is orginal'; I have been using PHP5 for a few years now (personal use only) and I would say I am moderately reversed on the topic of Object Orientated implementation. However the concept of Model View Controller Framework is fairly new to me. I have looked a number of tutorials and looked at some of the open source frameworks (mainly CodeIgnitor) to get a better understanding how everything fits together. I am starting to appreciate the real benefits of using this type of structure. I am used to implementing object referencing in the following technique. class Foo{ public $var = 'Hello World!'; } class Bar{ public function __construct(){ global $Foo; echo $Foo->var; } } $Foo = new Foo; $Bar = new Bar; I was surprised to see that CodeIgnitor and Yii pass referencs of objects and can be accessed via the following method: $this->load->view('argument') The immediate advantage I can see is a lot less code and more user friendly. But I do wonder if it is more efficient as these frameworks are presumably optimised? Or simply to make the code more user friendly? This was an interesting article Do not use PHP references.

    Read the article

  • Dynamically creating a Generic Type at Runtime

    - by Rick Strahl
    I learned something new today. Not uncommon, but it's a core .NET runtime feature I simply did not know although I know I've run into this issue a few times and worked around it in other ways. Today there was no working around it and a few folks on Twitter pointed me in the right direction. The question I ran into is: How do I create a type instance of a generic type when I have dynamically acquired the type at runtime? Yup it's not something that you do everyday, but when you're writing code that parses objects dynamically at runtime it comes up from time to time. In my case it's in the bowels of a custom JSON parser. After some thought triggered by a comment today I realized it would be fairly easy to implement two-way Dictionary parsing for most concrete dictionary types. I could use a custom Dictionary serialization format that serializes as an array of key/value objects. Basically I can use a custom type (that matches the JSON signature) to hold my parsed dictionary data and then add it to the actual dictionary when parsing is complete. Generic Types at Runtime One issue that came up in the process was how to figure out what type the Dictionary<K,V> generic parameters take. Reflection actually makes it fairly easy to figure out generic types at runtime with code like this: if (arrayType.GetInterface("IDictionary") != null) { if (arrayType.IsGenericType) { var keyType = arrayType.GetGenericArguments()[0]; var valueType = arrayType.GetGenericArguments()[1]; … } } The GetArrayType method gets passed a type instance that is the array or array-like object that is rendered in JSON as an array (which includes IList, IDictionary, IDataReader and a few others). In my case the type passed would be something like Dictionary<string, CustomerEntity>. So I know what the parent container class type is. Based on the the container type using it's then possible to use GetGenericTypeArguments() to retrieve all the generic types in sequential order of definition (ie. string, CustomerEntity). That's the easy part. Creating a Generic Type and Providing Generic Parameters at RunTime The next problem is how do I get a concrete type instance for the generic type? I know what the type name and I have a type instance is but it's generic, so how do I get a type reference to keyvaluepair<K,V> that is specific to the keyType and valueType above? Here are a couple of things that come to mind but that don't work (and yes I tried that unsuccessfully first): Type elementType = typeof(keyvalue<keyType, valueType>); Type elementType = typeof(keyvalue<typeof(keyType), typeof(valueType)>); The problem is that this explicit syntax expects a type literal not some dynamic runtime value, so both of the above won't even compile. I turns out the way to create a generic type at runtime is using a fancy bit of syntax that until today I was completely unaware of: Type elementType = typeof(keyvalue<,>).MakeGenericType(keyType, valueType); The key is the type(keyvalue<,>) bit which looks weird at best. It works however and produces a non-generic type reference. You can see the difference between the full generic type and the non-typed (?) generic type in the debugger: The nonGenericType doesn't show any type specialization, while the elementType type shows the string, CustomerEntity (truncated above) in the type name. Once the full type reference exists (elementType) it's then easy to create an instance. In my case the parser parses through the JSON and when it completes parsing the value/object it creates a new keyvalue<T,V> instance. Now that I know the element type that's pretty trivial with: // Objects start out null until we find the opening tag resultObject = Activator.CreateInstance(elementType); Here the result object is picked up by the JSON array parser which creates an instance of the child object (keyvalue<K,V>) and then parses and assigns values from the JSON document using the types  key/value property signature. Internally the parser then takes each individually parsed item and adds it to a list of  List<keyvalue<K,V>> items. Parsing through a Generic type when you only have Runtime Type Information When parsing of the JSON array is done, the List needs to be turned into a defacto Dictionary<K,V>. This should be easy since I know that I'm dealing with an IDictionary, and I know the generic types for the key and value. The problem is again though that this needs to happen at runtime which would mean using several Convert.ChangeType() calls in the code to dynamically cast at runtime. Yuk. In the end I decided the easier and probably only slightly slower way to do this is a to use the dynamic type to collect the items and assign them to avoid all the dynamic casting madness: else if (IsIDictionary) { IDictionary dict = Activator.CreateInstance(arrayType) as IDictionary; foreach (dynamic item in items) { dict.Add(item.key, item.value); } return dict; } This code creates an instance of the generic dictionary type first, then loops through all of my custom keyvalue<K,V> items and assigns them to the actual dictionary. By using Dynamic here I can side step all the explicit type conversions that would be required in the three highlighted areas (not to mention that this nested method doesn't have access to the dictionary item generic types here). Static <- -> Dynamic Dynamic casting in a static language like C# is a bitch to say the least. This is one of the few times when I've cursed static typing and the arcane syntax that's required to coax types into the right format. It works but it's pretty nasty code. If it weren't for dynamic that last bit of code would have been a pretty ugly as well with a bunch of Convert.ChangeType() calls to litter the code. Fortunately this type of type convulsion is rather rare and reserved for system level code. It's not every day that you create a string to object parser after all :-)© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in .NET  CSharp   Tweet (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Use a subclass object to modify a protected propety within its superclass object

    - by gadmeer
    Sorry for the crappy title I failed to think of a better version for my Java question. I am right now using Java version: 1.6.0_18 and Netbeans version: 6.8 Now for the question. What I've done is created a class with only one protected int property and next I made a public method to Set the int property to a given value. Then I made an object of that class and used said public method to set the int property to 5. Now I need your help to create another class that will take said object and expose it's protected int property. The way I could think of doing this was to create a sub class to inherit said class and then create a method to Get the int property of the super class. I kind of succeeded to create the code to Get the int property but now I can't figure out how to use this new sub class to reference the object of the super class. Here are the 2 classes I have thus far: public class A { protected int iNumber; public void setNumber ( int aNumber ) { iNumber = aNumber; } } public class B extends A { public int getNumber() { return super.iNumber; } } I created an object of 'A' and used its method to set its property to 5, like this: A objA = new A(); objA.setNumber ( 5 ); Now I want to create an object of 'B' to output the int stored within the property of 'objA'. I've tried to run this code: B objB = (B) objA; String aNumber_String = String.valueOf( objB.getNumber() ); System.out.println( aNumber_String ); but I got the error: "java.lang.ClassCastException" on the first line B objB = (B) objA; Please is there anyway of doing what I am trying to do? P.S. I am hoping to make this idea work because I do not want to edit class A (unless I have no choice) by giving it a getter method. P.P.S Also I know it's a 'bad' idea to expose the property instead of making it private and use public setter / getter methods but I like it this way :). Edit: Added code tags

    Read the article

  • VB.NET - Object reference not set to an instance of an object

    - by Daniel
    I need some help with my program. I get this error when I run my VB.NET program with a custom DayView control. ***** Exception Text ******* System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at SeaCow.Main.DayView1_ResolveAppointments(Object sender, ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs args) in C:\Users\Daniel\My Programs\Visual Basic\SeaCow\SeaCow\SeaCow\Main.vb:line 120 at Calendar.DayView.OnResolveAppointments(ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs args) at Calendar.DayView.OnPaint(PaintEventArgs e) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.PaintWithErrorHandling(PaintEventArgs e, Int16 layer) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WmPaint(Message& m) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WndProc(Message& m) at System.Windows.Forms.NativeWindow.Callback(IntPtr hWnd, Int32 msg, IntPtr wparam, IntPtr lparam) According to the error code, the 'for each' loop below is causing the NullReferenceException error. At default, the 'appointments' list is assigned to nothing and I can't find where the ResolveAppointments function is being called at. Private Sub DayView1_ResolveAppointments(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal args As Calendar.ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs) Handles DayView1.ResolveAppointments Dim m_Apps As New List(Of Calendar.Appointment) For Each m_App As Calendar.Appointment In appointments If (m_App.StartDate >= args.StartDate) AndAlso (m_App.StartDate <= args.EndDate) Then m_Apps.Add(m_App) End If Next args.Appointments = m_Apps End Sub Anyone have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Profile:Object reference not set to an instance of an object

    - by sallalman83
    Hi, i just lunch my web site i used the asp.net routing technology on it, and its work fine in my localhost but when i moved the project to the hosting server(Godaddy.com) its just work fine when there is no virtual sub directories like this(havebreak.com) but when u click on this link (havebreak.com/Registration/) or any other links that contain a virtual sub-directories its give Object reference not set to an instance of an object error on the profile object if (!Profile.IsAnonymous) Line 18: mlvRegistratioin.ActiveViewIndex = 1; i check my IIS settings and found it using the "Integrated pipeline" as recommended (at least at my knowledge), i checked the httpModules and httpHandlers tags under the system.webServer (since my hosting plan use the IIS7) and under the normal tag and every thing is fine then i used the url-rewriting instead of URL-Routing and the same problem exist and i notice that the session also not working in the virtual sub-directories too and by the way the ASP.NET routing work fine with my site its just the profile and session objects that not workin any help will be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Information Spilling Across Object Boundaries

    - by Winston Ewert
    Many times my business objects tend to have situations where information needs to cross object boundaries too often. When doing OO, we want information to be in one object and as much as possible all code dealing with that information should be in that object. However, business rules do not follow this principle giving me trouble. As an example suppose that we have an Order which has a number of OrderItems which refers to an InventoryItem which has a price. I invoke Order.GetTotal() which sums the result of OrderItem.GetPrice() which multiples a quantity by InventoryItem.GetPrice(). So far so good. But then we find out that some items are sold with a two for one deal. We can handle this by having OrderItem.GetPrice() do something like InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity ) and letting InventoryItem deal with this. However, then we find out that the two-for-one deal only lasts for a particular time period. This time period needs to be based on the date of the order. Now we change OrderItem.GetPrice() to be InventoryItem.GetPrice( quatity, order.GetDate() ) But then we need to support different prices depending on how long the customer has been in the system: InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity, order.GetDate(), order.GetCustomer() ) But then it turns out that the two-for-one deals apply not just to buying multiple of the same inventory item but multiple for any item in a InventoryCategory. At this point we throw up our hands and just give the InventoryItem the order item and allow it to travel over the object reference graph via accessors to get the information its needs: InventoryItem.GetPrice( this ) TL;DR I want to have coupling in objects, but business rules often force me to access information from all over the place in order to make particular decisions. Are there good techniques for dealing with this? Do others find the same problem?

    Read the article

  • Types in Haskell

    - by Linda Cohen
    I'm kind of new in Haskell and I have difficulty understanding how inferred types and such works. map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] (.) :: (a -> b) -> (c -> a) -> c -> b What EXACTLY does that mean? foldr :: (a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> b foldl :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> [b] -> a foldl1 :: (a -> a -> a) -> [a] -> a What are the differences between these? And how would I define the inferred type of something like foldr map THANKS!

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic, extensible C# Expando Object

    - by Rick Strahl
    I love dynamic functionality in a strongly typed language because it offers us the best of both worlds. In C# (or any of the main .NET languages) we now have the dynamic type that provides a host of dynamic features for the static C# language. One place where I've found dynamic to be incredibly useful is in building extensible types or types that expose traditionally non-object data (like dictionaries) in easier to use and more readable syntax. I wrote about a couple of these for accessing old school ADO.NET DataRows and DataReaders more easily for example. These classes are dynamic wrappers that provide easier syntax and auto-type conversions which greatly simplifies code clutter and increases clarity in existing code. ExpandoObject in .NET 4.0 Another great use case for dynamic objects is the ability to create extensible objects - objects that start out with a set of static members and then can add additional properties and even methods dynamically. The .NET 4.0 framework actually includes an ExpandoObject class which provides a very dynamic object that allows you to add properties and methods on the fly and then access them again. For example with ExpandoObject you can do stuff like this:dynamic expand = new ExpandoObject(); expand.Name = "Rick"; expand.HelloWorld = (Func<string, string>) ((string name) => { return "Hello " + name; }); Console.WriteLine(expand.Name); Console.WriteLine(expand.HelloWorld("Dufus")); Internally ExpandoObject uses a Dictionary like structure and interface to store properties and methods and then allows you to add and access properties and methods easily. As cool as ExpandoObject is it has a few shortcomings too: It's a sealed type so you can't use it as a base class It only works off 'properties' in the internal Dictionary - you can't expose existing type data It doesn't serialize to XML or with DataContractSerializer/DataContractJsonSerializer Expando - A truly extensible Object ExpandoObject is nice if you just need a dynamic container for a dictionary like structure. However, if you want to build an extensible object that starts out with a set of strongly typed properties and then allows you to extend it, ExpandoObject does not work because it's a sealed class that can't be inherited. I started thinking about this very scenario for one of my applications I'm building for a customer. In this system we are connecting to various different user stores. Each user store has the same basic requirements for username, password, name etc. But then each store also has a number of extended properties that is available to each application. In the real world scenario the data is loaded from the database in a data reader and the known properties are assigned from the known fields in the database. All unknown fields are then 'added' to the expando object dynamically. In the past I've done this very thing with a separate property - Properties - just like I do for this class. But the property and dictionary syntax is not ideal and tedious to work with. I started thinking about how to represent these extra property structures. One way certainly would be to add a Dictionary, or an ExpandoObject to hold all those extra properties. But wouldn't it be nice if the application could actually extend an existing object that looks something like this as you can with the Expando object:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } } and then simply start extending the properties of this object dynamically? Using the Expando object I describe later you can now do the following:[TestMethod] public void UserExampleTest() { var user = new User(); // Set strongly typed properties user.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; user.Name = "Rickochet"; user.Active = true; // Now add dynamic properties dynamic duser = user; duser.Entered = DateTime.Now; duser.Accesses = 1; // you can also add dynamic props via indexer user["NickName"] = "AntiSocialX"; duser["WebSite"] = "http://www.west-wind.com/weblog"; // Access strong type through dynamic ref Assert.AreEqual(user.Name,duser.Name); // Access strong type through indexer Assert.AreEqual(user.Password,user["Password"]); // access dyanmically added value through indexer Assert.AreEqual(duser.Entered,user["Entered"]); // access index added value through dynamic Assert.AreEqual(user["NickName"],duser.NickName); // loop through all properties dynamic AND strong type properties (true) foreach (var prop in user.GetProperties(true)) { object val = prop.Value; if (val == null) val = "null"; Console.WriteLine(prop.Key + ": " + val.ToString()); } } As you can see this code somewhat blurs the line between a static and dynamic type. You start with a strongly typed object that has a fixed set of properties. You can then cast the object to dynamic (as I discussed in my last post) and add additional properties to the object. You can also use an indexer to add dynamic properties to the object. To access the strongly typed properties you can use either the strongly typed instance, the indexer or the dynamic cast of the object. Personally I think it's kinda cool to have an easy way to access strongly typed properties by string which can make some data scenarios much easier. To access the 'dynamically added' properties you can use either the indexer on the strongly typed object, or property syntax on the dynamic cast. Using the dynamic type allows all three modes to work on both strongly typed and dynamic properties. Finally you can iterate over all properties, both dynamic and strongly typed if you chose. Lots of flexibility. Note also that by default the Expando object works against the (this) instance meaning it extends the current object. You can also pass in a separate instance to the constructor in which case that object will be used to iterate over to find properties rather than this. Using this approach provides some really interesting functionality when use the dynamic type. To use this we have to add an explicit constructor to the Expando subclass:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } public User() : base() { } // only required if you want to mix in seperate instance public User(object instance) : base(instance) { } } to allow the instance to be passed. When you do you can now do:[TestMethod] public void ExpandoMixinTest() { // have Expando work on Addresses var user = new User( new Address() ); // cast to dynamicAccessToPropertyTest dynamic duser = user; // Set strongly typed properties duser.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; // Set properties on address object duser.Address = "32 Kaiea"; //duser.Phone = "808-123-2131"; // set dynamic properties duser.NonExistantProperty = "This works too"; // shows default value Address.Phone value Console.WriteLine(duser.Phone); } Using the dynamic cast in this case allows you to access *three* different 'objects': The strong type properties, the dynamically added properties in the dictionary and the properties of the instance passed in! Effectively this gives you a way to simulate multiple inheritance (which is scary - so be very careful with this, but you can do it). How Expando works Behind the scenes Expando is a DynamicObject subclass as I discussed in my last post. By implementing a few of DynamicObject's methods you can basically create a type that can trap 'property missing' and 'method missing' operations. When you access a non-existant property a known method is fired that our code can intercept and provide a value for. Internally Expando uses a custom dictionary implementation to hold the dynamic properties you might add to your expandable object. Let's look at code first. The code for the Expando type is straight forward and given what it provides relatively short. Here it is.using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Dynamic; using System.Reflection; namespace Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic { /// <summary> /// Class that provides extensible properties and methods. This /// dynamic object stores 'extra' properties in a dictionary or /// checks the actual properties of the instance. /// /// This means you can subclass this expando and retrieve either /// native properties or properties from values in the dictionary. /// /// This type allows you three ways to access its properties: /// /// Directly: any explicitly declared properties are accessible /// Dynamic: dynamic cast allows access to dictionary and native properties/methods /// Dictionary: Any of the extended properties are accessible via IDictionary interface /// </summary> [Serializable] public class Expando : DynamicObject, IDynamicMetaObjectProvider { /// <summary> /// Instance of object passed in /// </summary> object Instance; /// <summary> /// Cached type of the instance /// </summary> Type InstanceType; PropertyInfo[] InstancePropertyInfo { get { if (_InstancePropertyInfo == null && Instance != null) _InstancePropertyInfo = Instance.GetType().GetProperties(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly); return _InstancePropertyInfo; } } PropertyInfo[] _InstancePropertyInfo; /// <summary> /// String Dictionary that contains the extra dynamic values /// stored on this object/instance /// </summary> /// <remarks>Using PropertyBag to support XML Serialization of the dictionary</remarks> public PropertyBag Properties = new PropertyBag(); //public Dictionary<string,object> Properties = new Dictionary<string, object>(); /// <summary> /// This constructor just works off the internal dictionary and any /// public properties of this object. /// /// Note you can subclass Expando. /// </summary> public Expando() { Initialize(this); } /// <summary> /// Allows passing in an existing instance variable to 'extend'. /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// You can pass in null here if you don't want to /// check native properties and only check the Dictionary! /// </remarks> /// <param name="instance"></param> public Expando(object instance) { Initialize(instance); } protected virtual void Initialize(object instance) { Instance = instance; if (instance != null) InstanceType = instance.GetType(); } /// <summary> /// Try to retrieve a member by name first from instance properties /// followed by the collection entries. /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { result = null; // first check the Properties collection for member if (Properties.Keys.Contains(binder.Name)) { result = Properties[binder.Name]; return true; } // Next check for Public properties via Reflection if (Instance != null) { try { return GetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, out result); } catch { } } // failed to retrieve a property result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Property setter implementation tries to retrieve value from instance /// first then into this object /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { // first check to see if there's a native property to set if (Instance != null) { try { bool result = SetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, value); if (result) return true; } catch { } } // no match - set or add to dictionary Properties[binder.Name] = value; return true; } /// <summary> /// Dynamic invocation method. Currently allows only for Reflection based /// operation (no ability to add methods dynamically). /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryInvokeMember(InvokeMemberBinder binder, object[] args, out object result) { if (Instance != null) { try { // check instance passed in for methods to invoke if (InvokeMethod(Instance, binder.Name, args, out result)) return true; } catch { } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection Helper method to retrieve a property /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool GetProperty(object instance, string name, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { result = ((PropertyInfo)mi).GetValue(instance,null); return true; } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to set a property value /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool SetProperty(object instance, string name, object value) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.SetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { ((PropertyInfo)mi).SetValue(Instance, value, null); return true; } } return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to invoke a method /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool InvokeMethod(object instance, string name, object[] args, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; // Look at the instanceType var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0] as MethodInfo; result = mi.Invoke(Instance, args); return true; } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Convenience method that provides a string Indexer /// to the Properties collection AND the strongly typed /// properties of the object by name. /// /// // dynamic /// exp["Address"] = "112 nowhere lane"; /// // strong /// var name = exp["StronglyTypedProperty"] as string; /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// The getter checks the Properties dictionary first /// then looks in PropertyInfo for properties. /// The setter checks the instance properties before /// checking the Properties dictionary. /// </remarks> /// <param name="key"></param> /// /// <returns></returns> public object this[string key] { get { try { // try to get from properties collection first return Properties[key]; } catch (KeyNotFoundException ex) { // try reflection on instanceType object result = null; if (GetProperty(Instance, key, out result)) return result; // nope doesn't exist throw; } } set { if (Properties.ContainsKey(key)) { Properties[key] = value; return; } // check instance for existance of type first var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(key, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) SetProperty(Instance, key, value); else Properties[key] = value; } } /// <summary> /// Returns and the properties of /// </summary> /// <param name="includeProperties"></param> /// <returns></returns> public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,object>> GetProperties(bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(prop.Name, prop.GetValue(Instance, null)); } foreach (var key in this.Properties.Keys) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(key, this.Properties[key]); } /// <summary> /// Checks whether a property exists in the Property collection /// or as a property on the instance /// </summary> /// <param name="item"></param> /// <returns></returns> public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, object> item, bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { bool res = Properties.ContainsKey(item.Key); if (res) return true; if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) { if (prop.Name == item.Key) return true; } } return false; } } } Although the Expando class supports an indexer, it doesn't actually implement IDictionary or even IEnumerable. It only provides the indexer and Contains() and GetProperties() methods, that work against the Properties dictionary AND the internal instance. The reason for not implementing IDictionary is that a) it doesn't add much value since you can access the Properties dictionary directly and that b) I wanted to keep the interface to class very lean so that it can serve as an entity type if desired. Implementing these IDictionary (or even IEnumerable) causes LINQ extension methods to pop up on the type which obscures the property interface and would only confuse the purpose of the type. IDictionary and IEnumerable are also problematic for XML and JSON Serialization - the XML Serializer doesn't serialize IDictionary<string,object>, nor does the DataContractSerializer. The JavaScriptSerializer does serialize, but it treats the entire object like a dictionary and doesn't serialize the strongly typed properties of the type, only the dictionary values which is also not desirable. Hence the decision to stick with only implementing the indexer to support the user["CustomProperty"] functionality and leaving iteration functions to the publicly exposed Properties dictionary. Note that the Dictionary used here is a custom PropertyBag class I created to allow for serialization to work. One important aspect for my apps is that whatever custom properties get added they have to be accessible to AJAX clients since the particular app I'm working on is a SIngle Page Web app where most of the Web access is through JSON AJAX calls. PropertyBag can serialize to XML and one way serialize to JSON using the JavaScript serializer (not the DCS serializers though). The key components that make Expando work in this code are the Properties Dictionary and the TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() methods. The Properties collection is public so if you choose you can explicitly access the collection to get better performance or to manipulate the members in internal code (like loading up dynamic values form a database). Notice that TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() both work against the dictionary AND the internal instance to retrieve and set properties. This means that user["Name"] works against native properties of the object as does user["Name"] = "RogaDugDog". What's your Use Case? This is still an early prototype but I've plugged it into one of my customer's applications and so far it's working very well. The key features for me were the ability to easily extend the type with values coming from a database and exposing those values in a nice and easy to use manner. I'm also finding that using this type of object for ViewModels works very well to add custom properties to view models. I suspect there will be lots of uses for this - I've been using the extra dictionary approach to extensibility for years - using a dynamic type to make the syntax cleaner is just a bonus here. What can you think of to use this for? Resources Source Code and Tests (GitHub) Also integrated in Westwind.Utilities of the West Wind Web Toolkit West Wind Utilities NuGet© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in CSharp  .NET  Dynamic Types   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • How do I prove or disprove "god" objects are wrong?

    - by honestduane
    Problem Summary: Long story short, I inherited a code base and an development team I am not allowed to replace and the use of God Objects is a big issue. Going forward, I want to have us re-factor things but I am getting push-back from the teams who want to do everything with God Objects "because its easier" and this means I would not be allowed to re-factor. I pushed back citing my years of dev experience, that I'm the new boss who was hired to know these things, etc, and so did the third party offshore companies account sales rep, and this is now at the executive level and my meeting is tomorrow and I want to go in with a lot of technical ammo to advocate best practices because I feel it will be cheaper in the long run (And I personally feel that is what the third party is worried about) for the company. My issue is from a technical level, I know its good long term but I'm having trouble with the ultra short term and 6 months term, and while its something I "know" I cant prove it with references and cited resources outside of one person (Robert C. Martin, aka Uncle Bob), as that is what I am being asked to do as I have been told having data from one person and only one person (Robert C Martin) is not good enough of an argument. Question: What are some resources I can cite directly (Title, year published, page number, quote) by well known experts in the field that explicitly say this use of "God" Objects/Classes/Systems is bad (or good, since we are looking for the most technically valid solution)? Research I have already done: I have a number of books here and I have searched their indexes for the use of the words "god object" and "god class". I found that oddly its almost never used and the copy of the GoF book I have for example, never uses it (At least according to the index in front of me) but I have found it in 2 books per the below, but I want more I can use. I checked the Wikipedia page for "God Object" and its currently a stub with little reference links so although I personally agree with that it says, It doesn't have much I can use in an environment where personal experience is not considered valid. The book cited is also considered too old to be valid by the people I am debating these technical points with as the argument they are making is that "it was once thought to be bad but nobody could prove it, and now modern software says "god" objects are good to use". I personally believe that this statement is incorrect, but I want to prove the truth, whatever it is. In Robert C Martin's "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#" (ISBN: 0-13-185725-8, hardcover) where on page 266 it states "Everybody knows that god classes are a bad idea. We don't want to concentrate all the intelligence of a system into a single object or a single function. One of the goals of OOD is the partitioning and distribution of behavior into many classes and many function." -- And then goes on to say sometimes its better to use God Classes anyway sometimes (Citing micro-controllers as an example). In Robert C Martin's "Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship" page 136 (And only this page) talks about the "God class" and calls it out as a prime example of a violation of the "classes should be small" rule he uses to promote the Single Responsibility Principle" starting on on page 138. The problem I have is all my references and citations come from the same person (Robert C. Martin), and am from the same single person/source. I am being told that because he is just one guy, my desire to not use "God Classes" is invalid and not accepted as a standard best practice in the software industry. Is this true? Am I doing things wrong from a technical perspective by trying to keep to the teaching of Uncle Bob? God Objects and Object Oriented Programming and Design: The more I think of this the more I think this is more something you learn when you study OOP and its never explicitly called out; Its implicit to good design is my thinking (Feel free to correct me, please, as I want to learn), The problem is I "know" this, but but not everybody does, so in this case its not considered a valid argument because I am effectively calling it out as universal truth when in fact most people are statistically ignorant of it since statistically most people are not programmers. Conclusion: I am at a loss on what to search for to get the best additional results to cite, since they are making a technical claim and I want to know the truth and be able to prove it with citations like a real engineer/scientist, even if I am biased against god objects due to my personal experience with code that used them. Any assistance or citations would be deeply appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Object-Oriented equivalent of LISP's progn function?

    - by Archer
    I'm currently writing a LISP parser that iterates through some AutoLISP code and does its best to make it a little easier to read (changing prefix notation to infix notation, changing setq assignments to "=" assignments, etc.) for those that aren't used to LISP code/only learned object oriented programming. While writing commands that LISP uses to add to a "library" of LISP commands, I came across the LISP command "progn". The only problem is that it looks like progn is simply executing code in a specific order and sometimes (not usually) assigning the last value to a variable. Am I incorrect in assuming that for translating progn to object-oriented understanding that I can simply forgo the progn function and print the statements that it contains? If not, what would be a good equivalent for progn in an object-oriented language?

    Read the article

  • Domain Models (PHP)

    - by Calum Bulmer
    I have been programming in PHP for several years and have, in the past, adopted methods of my own to handle data within my applications. I have built my own MVC, in the past, and have a reasonable understanding of OOP within php but I know my implementation needs some serious work. In the past I have used an is-a relationship between a model and a database table. I now know after doing some research that this is not really the best way forward. As far as I understand it I should create models that don't really care about the underlying database (or whatever storage mechanism is to be used) but only care about their actions and their data. From this I have established that I can create models of lets say for example a Person an this person object could have some Children (human children) that are also Person objects held in an array (with addPerson and removePerson methods, accepting a Person object). I could then create a PersonMapper that I could use to get a Person with a specific 'id', or to save a Person. This could then lookup the relationship data in a lookup table and create the associated child objects for the Person that has been requested (if there are any) and likewise save the data in the lookup table on the save command. This is now pushing the limits to my knowledge..... What if I wanted to model a building with different levels and different rooms within those levels? What if I wanted to place some items in those rooms? Would I create a class for building, level, room and item with the following structure. building can have 1 or many level objects held in an array level can have 1 or many room objects held in an array room can have 1 or many item objects held in an array and mappers for each class with higher level mappers using the child mappers to populate the arrays (either on request of the top level object or lazy load on request) This seems to tightly couple the different objects albeit in one direction (ie. a floor does not need to be in a building but a building can have levels) Is this the correct way to go about things? Within the view I am wanting to show a building with an option to select a level and then show the level with an option to select a room etc.. but I may also want to show a tree like structure of items in the building and what level and room they are in. I hope this makes sense. I am just struggling with the concept of nesting objects within each other when the general concept of oop seems to be to separate things. If someone can help it would be really useful. Many thanks

    Read the article

  • Good Literature for "Object oriented programming in C"

    - by Dipan Mehta
    This is not a debate question about whether or not C is a good candidate for Object oriented programming or not. Quite often C is the primary platform where the development is happening. I have seen, and hopefully learnt through crawling many open source and commercial projects - that while the language inherently doesn't stop you if you create "non-object" code. However, you can still think in the "Object" way and reasonably write code that captures this designs thinking. For those who has done this, OO way is still the best way to write code even when you are programming in C. While, I have learnt most of it through the hard way, are there any deep literature that can help educate the relatively young guys about how to do OO programming in C?

    Read the article

  • What is a good design model for my new class?

    - by user66662
    I am a beginning programmer who, after trying to manage over 2000 lines of procedural php code, now has discovered the value of OOP. I have read a few books to get me up to speed on the beginning theory, but would like some advice on practical application. So,for example, let's say there are two types of content objects - an ad and a calendar event. what my application does is scan different websites (a predefined list), and, when it finds an ad or an event, it extracts the data and saves it to a database. All of my objects will share a $title and $description. However, the Ad object will have a $price and the Event object will have $startDate. Should I have two separate classes, one for each object? Should I have a 'superclass' with the $title and $description with two other Ad and Event classes with their own properties? The latter is at least the direction I am on now. My second question about this design is how to handle the logic that extracts the data for $title, $description, $price, and $date. For each website in my predefined list, there is a specific regex that returns the desired value for each property. Currently, I have an extremely large switch statement in my constructor which determines what website I am own, sets the regex variables accordingly, and continues on. Not only that, but now I have to repeat the logic to determine what site I am on in the constructor of each class. This doesn't feel right. Should I create another class Algorithms and store the logic there for each site? Should the functions of to handle that logic be in this class? or specific to the classes whos properties they set? I want to take into account in my design two things: 1) I will add different content objects in the future that share $title and $description, but will have their own properties, so, I want to be able to easily grow these as needed. 2) I will add more websites constantly (each with their own algorithms for data extraction) so I would like to plan efficienty managing and working with these now. I thought about extending the Ad or Event class with 'websiteX' class and store its functions there. But, this didn't feel right either as now I have to manage 100s of little website specific class files. Note, I didn't know if this was the correct site or stackoverflow was the better choice. If so, let me know and I'll post there.

    Read the article

  • Is the "impossible object" possible in computer graphics?

    - by CPP_Person
    This may be a silly question but I want to know the answer to it. I saw this thing called the "impossible object", while they're many different images of this online, it's suppost to be impossible geometry. Here is an example: Now as far as logic goes, I know you don't have to obey it in games, such as a flying cow, or an impossible object. So that's out of the way, but what stands in my way is whether or not there is a way to draw this onto a 3D scene. Like is there a way to represent it as a 3D object? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Javascript object list sorting by object property

    - by Constructor
    I need to do this: (sorry not in javascript syntax-still learning object language :) ) object=car attibutes:top-speed, brand.... now I want to sort the list of those cars in order by top-speed, brand... How do I do this (please note the solution must be javascript only, no php or other stuff) ?

    Read the article

  • Nhibernate/Hibernate, lookup tables and object design

    - by Simon G
    Hi, I've got two tables. Invoice with columns CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID (CustomerID and InvoiceDate make up a composite key) and InvoiceType with InvoiceTypeID and InvoiceTypeName columns. I know I can create my objects like: public class Invoice { public virtual int CustomerID { get; set; } public virtual DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; } public virtual decimal Value { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceType InvoiceType { get; set; } } public class InvoiceType { public virtual InvoiceTypeID { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeName { get; set; } } So the generated sql would look something like: SELECT CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID FROM Invoice WHERE CustomerID = x AND InvoiceDate = y SELECT InvoiceTypeID, InvoiceTypeName FROM InvoiceType WHERE InvoiceTypeID = z But rather that having two select queries executed to retrieve the data I would rather have one. I would also like to avoid using child object for simple lookup lists. So my object would look something like: public class Invoice { public virtual int CustomerID { get; set; } public virtual DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; } public virtual decimal Value { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeID { get; set; } public virtual InvoiceTypeName { get; set; } } And my sql would look something like: SELECT CustomerID, InvoiceDate, Value, InvoiceTypeID FROM Invoice INNER JOIN InvoiceType ON Invoice.InvoiceTypeID = InvoiceType.InvoiceTypeID WHERE CustomerID = x AND InvoiceDate = y My question is how do I create the mapping for this? I've tried using join but this tried to join using CustomerID and InvoiceDate, am I missing something obvious? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Getting my head around object oriented programing

    - by nLL
    I am entry level .Net developer and using it to develop web sites. I started with classic asp and last year jumped on the ship with a short C# book. As I developed I learned more and started to see that coming from classic asp I always used C# like scripting language. For example in my last project I needed to encode video on the webserver and wrote a code like public class Encoder { Public static bool Encode(string videopath) { ...snip... return true; } } While searching samples related to my project I’ve seen people doing this public class Encoder { Public static Encode(string videopath) { EncodedVideo encoded = new EncodedVideo(); ...snip... encoded.EncodedVideoPath = outputFile; encoded.Success = true; ...snip... } } public class EncodedVideo { public string EncodedVideoPath { get; set; } public bool Success { get; set; } } As I understand second example is more object oriented but I don’t see the point of using EncodedVideo object. Am I doing something wrong? Does it really necessary to use this sort of code in a web app?

    Read the article

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