Search Results

Search found 3120 results on 125 pages for 'php5 oop'.

Page 41/125 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

• How to set default values to all wrong or null parameters of method?

  - by Roman

  At the moment I have this code (and I don't like it): private RenderedImage private RenderedImage getChartImage (GanttChartModel model, String title, Integer width, Integer height, String xAxisLabel, String yAxisLabel, Boolean showLegend) { if (title == null) { title = ""; } if (xAxisLabel == null) { xAxisLabel = ""; } if (yAxisLabel == null) { yAxisLabel = ""; } if (showLegend == null) { showLegend = true; } if (width == null) { width = DEFAULT_WIDTH; } if (height == null) { height = DEFAULT_HEIGHT; } ... } How can I improve it? I have some thoughts about introducing an object which will contain all these parameters as fields and then, maybe, it'll be possible to apply builder pattern. But still don't have clear vision how to implement that and I'm not sure that it's worth to be done. Any other ideas?

  Read the article

• Constructor Overloading

  - by Mark Baker

  Normally when I want to create a class constructor that accepts different types of parameters, I'll use a kludgy overloading principle of not defining any args in the constructor definition: e.g. for an ECEF coordinate class constructor, I want it to accept either $x, $y and $z arguments, or to accept a single array argument containg x, y and z values, or to accept a single LatLong object I'd create a constructor looking something like: function __construct() { // Identify if any arguments have been passed to the constructor if (func_num_args() > 0) { $args = func_get_args(); // Identify the overload constructor required, based on the datatype of the first argument $argType = gettype($args[0]); switch($argType) { case 'array' : // Array of Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromArray'; break; case 'object' : // A LatLong object that needs converting to Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromLatLong'; break; default : // Individual Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromXYZ'; break; } // Call the appropriate overload constructor call_user_func_array(array($this,$overloadConstructor),$args); } } // function __construct() I'm looking at an alternative: to provide a straight constructor with $x, $y and $z as defined arguments, and to provide static methods of createECEFfromArray() and createECEFfromLatLong() that handle all the necessary extraction of x, y and z; then create a new ECEF object using the standard constructor, and return that Which option is cleaner from an OO purists perspective?

  Read the article

• Constructor within a constructor

  - by Chiramisu

  Is this a bad idea? Does calling a generic private constructor within a public constructor create multiple instances, or is this a valid way of initializing class variables? Private Class MyClass Dim _msg As String Sub New(ByVal name As String) Me.New() 'Do stuff End Sub Sub New(ByVal name As String, ByVal age As Integer) Me.New() 'Do stuff End Sub Private Sub New() 'Initializer constructor Me._msg = "Hello StackOverflow" 'Initialize other variables End Sub End Class

  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

• How can I add a field with an array value to my Perl object?

  - by superstar

  What's the difference between these two constructors in perl? 1) sub new { my $class = shift; my $self = {}; $self->{firstName} = undef; $self->{lastName} = undef; $self->{PEERS} = []; bless ($self, $class); return $self; } 2) sub new { my $class = shift; my $self = { _firstName => shift, _lastName => shift, _ssn => shift, }; bless $self, $class; return $self; } I am using the second one so far, but I need to implement the PEERS array in the second one? How do I do it with the second constructor and how can we use get and set methods on those array variables?

  Read the article

• MustOverride Shared Methods in .Net

  - by Ben

  Hi I have a few class's that inherit from a base class. I want to enforce that all of these Class's implement a shared method foo(). I am not able to create the following on the base class Public MustOvveride Shared Sub foo() as this is not allowed. I also cant create an Interface that defines a Shared Sub Foo() and implement that in my derrived class's, as this also is not allowed. Does anyone know how i should implement this? p.s i realise my example is in VB and i have also tagged C#, the same problem applies to both languages and presumably the same fix would apply.

  Read the article

• Transferring object from parent to child

  - by waiwai933

  I'm currently developing an Custom Application using the IP.Board framework, which is in PHP, which by default, creates a IPSMember object for the logged-in user. However, I'm developing an additional class, basically class SpecialUser extends IPSMember Is there a way to get the parent object, which is IPSMember to change to SpecialUser?

  Read the article

• How to fetch populated associated models in CakePHP when calling read()

  - by Code Commander

  I have the following Models: class Site extends AppModel { public $name = "Site"; public $useTable = "site"; public $primaryKey = "id"; public $displayField = 'name'; public $hasMany = array('Item' => array('foreignKey' => 'siteId')); public function canView($userId, $isAdmin = false) { if($isAdmin) { return true; } return array_key_exists($this->id, $allowedSites); } } and class Item extends AppModel { public $name = "Item"; public $useTable = "item"; public $primaryKey = "id"; public $displayField = 'name'; public $belongsTo = array('Site' => array('foreignKey' => 'siteId')); public function canView($userId, $isAdmin = false) { // My problem appears to be the next line: return $this->Site->canView($userId, $isAdmin); } } In my controller I am doing something like this: $result = $this->Item->read(null, $this->request->id); // Verify permissions if(!$this->Item->canView($this->Session->read('userId'), $this->Session->read('isAdmin'))) { $this->httpCodes(403); die('Permission denied.'); } I notice that in Item->canView() $this->data['Site'] is populated with the column data from the site table. But it merely an array and not an object. On the other hand $this->Site is a Site object, but it has not been populated with the column data from the site table like $this->data. What is the proper way to have CakePHP get the associated model as the object and containing the data? Or am I going about this all wrong? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Singletons and other design issues

  - by Ahmed Saleh

  I have worked using different languages like C++/Java and currently AS3. Most applications were computer vision, and small 2D computer games. Most companies that I have worked for, they use Singletons in a language like AS3, to retrieve elements or classes in an easy way. Their problem is basically they needs some variables or to call other functions from other classes. In a language like AS3, there is no private constructor, and they write a hacky code to prevent new instances. In Java and C++ I also faced the situation that I need to use other classe's members or to call their functions in different classes. The question is, is there a better or another design, to let other classes interact with each others without using singletons? I feel that composition is the answer, but I need more detailed solutions or design suggestions.

  Read the article

• Using pointers to adjust global objects in objective-c

  - by Rob

  Ok, so I am working with two sets of data that are extremely similar, and at the same time, these data sets are both global NSMutableArrays within the object. data_set_one = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; data_set_two = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; Two new NSMutableArrays are loaded, which need to be added to the old, existing data. These Arrays are also global. xml_dataset_one = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; xml_dataset_two = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; To reduce code duplication (and because these data sets are so similar) I wrote a void method within the class to handle the data combination process for both Arrays: -(void)constructData:(NSMutableArray *)data fromDownloadArray:(NSMutableArray *)down withMatchSelector:(NSString *)sel_str Now, I have a decent understanding of object oriented programming, so I was thinking that if I were to invoke the method with the global Arrays in the data like so... [self constructData:data_set_one fromDownloadArray:xml_dataset_one withMatchSelector:@"id"]; Then the global NSMutableArrays (data_set_one) would reflect the changes that happen to "array" within the method. Sadly, this is not the case, data_set_one doesn't reflect the changes (ex: new objects within the Array) outside of the method. Here is a code snippet of the problem // data_set_one is empty // xml_dataset_one has a few objects [constructData:(NSMutableArray *)data_set_one fromDownloadArray:(NSMutableArray *)xml_dataset_one withMatchSelector:(NSString *)@"id"]; // data_set_one should now be xml_dataset_one, but when echoed to screen, it appears to remain empty And here is the gist of the code for the method, any help is appreciated. -(void)constructData:(NSMutableArray *)data fromDownloadArray:(NSMutableArray *)down withMatchSelector:(NSString *)sel_str { if ([data count] == 0) { data = down; // set data equal to downloaded data } else if ([down count] == 0) { // download yields no results, do nothing } else { // combine the two arrays here } } This project is not ARC enabled. Thanks for the help guys! Rob

  Read the article

• How can I handle multiple views of a data object? Which design pattern is acceptable?

  - by tranquil.byte

  I have a person object. class Person { private $name; ... } I need to be able to change how they are displayed on the front-end ( visitors have control ). They can choose list view, grid view, photo view for example. class PersonDisplay { public function displayList() { // Query database // Output html to display in list mode } public function displayPhoto() { // Query database // Output html to display in photo mode } } Is this an acceptable way to handle the presentation of the items on the front-end or is there a specific design pattern I should be researching to help me with this task? Does anyone have any suggestions or ideas where this could go wrong or if this could potentially make maintenance a nightmare? The Person object was just an example very similiar to what I am using.

  Read the article

• What exception to throw when an important parameter/dependency is missing?

  - by Pentium10

  Take this method public List<String> getGroups() { if (this.getId().equals("")) return null; } I would like to throw exception instead returning null, what's the exception to throw when an important parameter/dependency has not been set?

  Read the article

• Zend_Form and Liskov Substitution Principle

  - by blockhead

  A very common pattern I see (I'm picking on Zend Framework, only because I was dealing with it at the moment of this question), is something like this: class My_Form extends Zend_Form { public function init() { $this->addElement(); } } Zend_Form is not an abstract class, but is perfectly usable on its own. This seems to be "recommended" as place to "encapsulate" your forms into a nice class. Does this violate the Liskov Substitution Principle? Each subclass of Zend_Form will have a wildy different behavior than the base class. Would it be better to use composition for this, or am I totally misunderstanding this principle?

  Read the article

• PHP object class variable

  - by mck89

  I have built a class in PHP and I must declare a class variable as an object. Everytime I want to declare an empty object I use: $var=new stdClass; But if I use it to declare a class variable as class foo { var $bar=new stdClass; } a parse error occurs. Is there a way to do this or must I declare the class variable as an object in the constructor function? PS: I'm using PHP 4.

  Read the article

• How do you create a static class in C++?

  - by superjoe30

  How do you create a static class in C++? I should be able to do something like: cout << "bit 5 is " << BitParser::getBitAt(buffer, 5) << endl; Assuming I created the BitParser class. What would the BitParser class definition look like?

  Read the article

• Abstract attributes in Python

  - by deamon

  What is the shortest / most elegant way to implement the following Scala code with an abstract attribute in Python? abstract class Controller { val path: String } A subclass of Controller is enforced to define "path" by the Scala compiler. A subclass would look like this: class MyController extends Controller { override val path = "/home" }

  Read the article

• Method return values and exceptions

  - by dnagirl

  I have an interface called iIncident which defines a single method when(). when() should return a DateTime object. I'm trying to decide what to do if $object->when() has no DateTime to return as might be the case just after an object is instantiated and before all its properties are set. My choices are: return false throw some kind of Exception return some default DateTime like '9999-01-01' My inclination is to go with an Exception since $object really can't act as an incident until it knows when it occurred. I don't want to return a default DateTime because it complicates comparisons and it's not true. And I don't really want to return false because then I have to check for it every time I call the method- but if that is the preferred method, I guess I will. Is throwing an exception the best way? And is there a predefined exception type I should use (none of the SPL ones struck me as particularly appropriate- but that might just indicate my lack of experience)?

  Read the article

• Java - how to tell class of an object?

  - by lkm

  Given a method that accepts as a parameter a certain supertype. Is there any way, within that method, to determine the actual class of the object that was passed to it? I.e. if a subtype of the allowable parameter was actually passed, is there a way to find out which type it is? If this isn't possible can someone explain why not (from a language design perspective)? Thanks Update: just to make sure I was clear void doSomething(MyType myType) { //determine if myType is MyType OR one of its subclasses } Since the method signature specifies the parameter as being MyType, then how can one tell if the object is actually a subtype of MyType (and which one).

  Read the article

• How to design app to be modular / support plugins

  - by Lee

  I'm currently in the process of refactoring my webplayer so that we'll be more easily able to run it on our other internet radio stations. Much of the setup between these players will be very similar, however, some will need to have different UI plugins / other plugins. Currently in the webplayer I do something like this in it's init(): _this.ui = new UI(); _this.ui.playlist = new Playlist(); _this.ui.channelDropdown = new ChannelDropdown(); _this.ui.timecode = ne Timecode(); etc etc This works fine but that blocks me into requiring those objects at run time. What I'd like to do is be able to add those based on the stations needs. Basically my question is, do I need to add some kind of "addPlugin()" functionality here? And if I do that, do I need to constantly check from my WebPlayer object if that plugin exists before it attempts to use it? Like... if (_hasPlugin('playlist')) this.plugins.playlist.add(track); I apologize if some of this might not be clear... really trying to get my head wrapped around all of this. I feel I'm closer but I'm still stuck. Any advice on how I should proceed with this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Lee

  Read the article

• Why is there no parameter contra-variance for overriding?

  - by Oak

  C++ and Java support return-type covariance when overriding methods. Neither, however, support contra-variance in parameter types - instead, it translates to overloading (Java) or hiding (C++). Why is that? It seems to me that there is no harm in allowing that. I can find one reason for it in Java - since it has the "choose-the-most-specific-version" mechanism for overloading anyway - but can't think of any reason for C++. Example (Java): class A { public void f(String s) {...} } class B extends A { public void f(Object o) {...} // Why doesn't this override A.f? }

  Read the article

• Hierarchy inheritance

  - by reito

  I had faced the problem. In my C++ hierarchy tree I have two branches for entities of difference nature, but same behavior - same interface. I created such hierarchy trees (first in image below). And now I want to work with Item or Base classes independetly of their nature (first or second). Then I create one abstract branch for this use. My mind build (second in image below). But it not working. Working scheme seems (third in image below). It's bad logic, I think... Do anybody have some ideas about such hierarchy inheritance? How make it more logical? More simple for understanding? Image Sorry for my english - russian internet didn't help:) Update: You ask me to be more explicit, and I will be. In my project (plugins for Adobe Framemaker) I need to work with dialogs and GUI controls. In some places I working with WinAPI controls, and some other places with FDK (internal Framemaker) controls, but I want to work throw same interface. I can't use one base class and inherite others from it, because all needed controls - is a hierarchy tree (not one class). So I have one hierarchy tree for WinAPI controls, one for FDK and one abstract tree to use anyone control. For example, there is an Edit control (WinEdit and FdkEdit realization), a Button control (WinButton and FdkButton realization) and base entity - Control (WinControl and FdkControl realization). For now I can link my classes in realization trees (Win and Fdk) with inheritence between each of them (WinControl is base class for WinButton and WinEdit; FdkControl is base class for FdkButton and FdkEdit). And I can link to abstract classes (Control is base class for WinControl and FdkControl; Edit is base class for WinEdit and FdkEdit; Button is base class for WinButton and FdkButton). But I can't link my abstract tree - compiler swears. In fact I have two hierarchy trees, that I want to inherite from another one. Update: I have done this quest! :) I used the virtual inheritence and get such scheme (http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/7782/99614779.png). Abstract tree has only absolute abstract methods. All inheritence in abstract tree are virtual. Link from realization tree to abstract are virtual. On image shown only one realization tree for simplicity. Thanks for help!

  Read the article

• Extend DOMElement object

  - by Comma

  How could I exdend objects provided with Document Object Model? Seems that there is no way according to this [issue][2]. class Application_Model_XmlSchema extends DOMElement { const ELEMENT_NAME = 'schema'; /** * @var DOMElement */ private $_schema; /** * @param DOMDocument $document * @return void */ public function __construct(DOMDocument $document) { $this->setSchema($document->getElementsByTagName(self::ELEMENT_NAME)->item(0)); } /** * @param DOMElement $schema * @return void */ public function setSchema(DOMElement $schema){ $this->_schema = $schema; } /** * @return DOMElement */ public function getSchema(){ return $this->_schema; } /** * @param string $name * @param array $arguments * @return mixed */ public function __call($name, $arguments) { if (method_exists($this->_schema, $name)) { return call_user_func_array( array($this->_schema, $name), $arguments ); } } } $version = $this->getRequest()->getParam('version', null); $encoding = $this->getRequest()->getParam('encoding', null); $source = 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.xsd'; $document = new DOMDocument($version, $encoding); $document->load($source); $xmlSchema = new Application_Model_XmlSchema($document); $xmlSchema->getAttribute('version'); I got an error: Warning: DOMElement::getAttribute(): Couldn't fetch Application_Model_XmlSchema in C:\Nevermind.php on line newvermind

  Read the article

• In what circumstances are instance variables declared as '_var' in 'use fields' readonly?

  - by Pedro Silva

  I'm trying to understand the behavior of the fields pragma, which I find poorly documented, regarding fields prefixed with underscores. This is what the documentation has to say about it: Field names that start with an underscore character are made private to the class and are not visible to subclasses. Inherited fields can be overridden but will generate a warning if used together with the -w switch. This is not consistent with its actual behavior, according to my test, below. Not only are _-prefixed fields visible within a subclass, they are visible within foreign classes as well (unless I don't get what 'visible' means). Also, directly accessing the restricted hash works fine. Where can I find more about the behavior of the fields pragma, short of going at the source code? { package Foo; use strict; use warnings; use fields qw/a _b __c/; sub new { my ( $class ) = @_; my Foo $self = fields::new($class); $self->a = 1; $self->b = 2; $self->c = 3; return $self; } sub a : lvalue { shift->{a} } sub b : lvalue { shift->{_b} } sub c : lvalue { shift->{__c} } } { package Bar; use base 'Foo'; use strict; use warnings; use Data::Dumper; my $o = Bar->new; print Dumper $o; ##$VAR1 = bless({'_b' => 2, '__c' => 3, 'a' => 1}, 'Foo'); $o->a = 4; $o->b = 5; $o->c = 6; print Dumper $o; ##$VAR1 = bless({'_b' => 5, '__c' => 6, 'a' => 4}, 'Foo'); $o->{a} = 7; $o->{_b} = 8; $o->{__c} = 9; print Dumper $o; ##$VAR1 = bless({'_b' => 8, '__c' => 9, 'a' => 7}, 'Foo'); }

  Read the article

• Static vs Non Static constructors

  - by Neil N

  I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

  Read the article

• Actionscript 2.0 Functions problem and somewhat "global" variable

  - by Joshua

  I have two problems. The first problem is with the following functions; when I call the function in (enterFrame), it doesn't work: onClipEvent (load) { function failwhale(levelNum) { _root.gotoAndStop("fail"); failFrom = levelNum; } function guardSightCollision(guardName, guardSightName) { if (_root.guardName.guardSightName.hitTest(_x, _y+radius, true)) { failwhale(1); } if (_root.guardName.guardSightName.hitTest(_x, _y-radius, true)) { failwhale(1); } if (_root.guardName.guardSightName.hitTest(_x-radius, _y, true)) { failwhale(1); } if (_root.guardName.guardSightName.hitTest(_x+radius, _y, true)) { failwhale(1); } } } onClipEvent (enterFrame) { guardSightCollision(guard1, guard1Sight); } Why doesn't it work?... The second problem lies in the failFrom variable: function failwhale(levelNum) { _root.gotoAndStop("fail"); failFrom = levelNum; } How do I make failFrom a "global" variable in that it can be accessed anywhere (from actionscript in frames and even movieclips)...Right now, when I try to trace failFrom in a different frame, it is "undefined".

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >