Search Results

Search found 33640 results on 1346 pages for 'java generics'.

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 418/1346 | < Previous Page | 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425  | Next Page >

  • java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: View not attached to window manager

    - by alex2k8
    I have an activity that starts AsyncTask and shows progress dialog for the duration of operation. The activity is declared NOT be recreated by rotation or keyboard slide. <activity android:name=".MyActivity" android:label="@string/app_name" android:configChanges="keyboardHidden|orientation" > <intent-filter> </intent-filter> </activity> Once task completed, I dissmiss dialog, but on some phones (framework: 1.5, 1.6) such error is thrown: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: View not attached to window manager at android.view.WindowManagerImpl.findViewLocked(WindowManagerImpl.java:356) at android.view.WindowManagerImpl.removeView(WindowManagerImpl.java:201) at android.view.Window$LocalWindowManager.removeView(Window.java:400) at android.app.Dialog.dismissDialog(Dialog.java:268) at android.app.Dialog.access$000(Dialog.java:69) at android.app.Dialog$1.run(Dialog.java:103) at android.app.Dialog.dismiss(Dialog.java:252) at xxx.onPostExecute(xxx$1.java:xxx) My code is: final Dialog dialog = new AlertDialog.Builder(context) .setTitle("Processing...") .setCancelable(true) .create(); final AsyncTask<MyParams, Object, MyResult> task = new AsyncTask<MyParams, Object, MyResult>() { @Override protected MyResult doInBackground(MyParams... params) { // Long operation goes here } @Override protected void onPostExecute(MyResult result) { dialog.dismiss(); onCompletion(result); } }; task.execute(...); dialog.setOnCancelListener(new OnCancelListener() { @Override public void onCancel(DialogInterface arg0) { task.cancel(false); } }); dialog.show(); From what I have read (http://bend-ing.blogspot.com/2008/11/properly-handle-progress-dialog-in.html) and seen in Android sources, it looks like the only possible situation to get that exception is when activity was destroyed. But as I have mentioned, I forbid activity recreation for basic events. So any suggestions are very appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why is TreeSet<T> an internal type in .NET?

    - by Justin Niessner
    So, I was just digging around Reflector trying to find the implementation details of HashSet (out of sheer curiosity based on the answer to another question here) and noticed the following: internal class TreeSet<T> : ICollection<T>, IEnumerable<T>, ICollection, IEnumerable, ISerializable, IDeserializationCallback Without looking too deep into the details, it looks like a Self-Balancing Binary Search Tree. My question is, is there anybody out there with the insight as to why this class is internal? Is it simply because the other collection types use it internally and hide the complexities of a BST from the general masses...or am I way off base?

    Read the article

  • Why membership provider is not generic?

    - by Timmy O' Tool
    I have to confess that I hate membership provider. The default implementation is not very appropriate normally and I haven't seen so far a good implementation of a custom membership provider, probably because this is not possible :-) So the question is: In your opinion: which are the reasons for not having membership/role provider as a generic class? I mean, why Microsoft didn't selected this approach.

    Read the article

  • MSMQ - Message Queue Abstraction and Pattern

    - by Maxim Gershkovich
    Hi All, Let me define the problem first and why a messagequeue has been chosen. I have a datalayer that will be transactional and EXTREMELY insert heavy and rather then attempt to deal with these issues when they occur I am hoping to implement my application from the ground up with this in mind. I have decided to tackle this problem by using the Microsoft Message Queue and perform inserts as time permits asynchronously. However I quickly ran into a problem. Certain inserts that I perform may need to be recalled (ie: retrieved) immediately (imagine this is for POS system and what happens if you need to recall the last transaction - one that still hasn’t been inserted). The way I decided to tackle this problem is by abstracting the MessageQueue and combining it in my data access layer thereby creating the illusion of a single set of data being returned to the user of the datalayer (I have considered the other issues that occur in such a scenario (ie: essentially dirty reads and such) and have concluded for my purposes I can control these issues). However this is where things get a little nasty... I’ve worked out how to get the messages back and such (trivial enough problem) but where I am stuck is; how do I create a generic (or at least somewhat generic) way of querying my message queue? One where I can minimize the duplication between the SQL queries and MessageQueue queries. I have considered using LINQ (but have very limited understanding of the technology) and have also attempted an implementation with Predicates which so far is pretty smelly. Are there any patterns for such a problem that I can utilize? Am I going about this the wrong way? Does anyone have an of their own ideas about how I can tackle this problem? Does anyone even understand what I am talking about? :-) Any and ALL input would be highly appreciated and seriously considered… Thanks again.

    Read the article

  • how do I best create a set of list classes to match my business objects

    - by ken-forslund
    I'm a bit fuzzy on the best way to solve the problem of needing a list for each of my business objects that implements some overridden functions. Here's the setup: I have a baseObject that sets up database, and has its proper Dispose() method All my other business objects inherit from it, and if necessary, override Dispose() Some of these classes also contain arrays (lists) of other objects. So I create a class that holds a List of these. I'm aware I could just use the generic List, but that doesn't let me add extra features like Dispose() so it will loop through and clean up. So if I had objects called User, Project and Schedule, I would create UserList, ProjectList, ScheduleList. In the past, I have simply had these inherit from List< with the appropriate class named and then written the pile of common functions I wanted it to have, like Dispose(). this meant I would verify by hand, that each of these List classes had the same set of methods. Some of these classes had pretty simple versions of these methods that could have been inherited from a base list class. I could write an interface, to force me to ensure that each of my List classes has the same functions, but interfaces don't let me write common base functions that SOME of the lists might override. I had tried to write a baseObjectList that inherited from List, and then make my other Lists inherit from that, but there are issues with that (which is really why I came here). One of which was trying to use the Find() method with a predicate. I've simplified the problem down to just a discussion of Dispose() method on the list that loops through and disposes its contents, but in reality, I have several other common functions that I want all my lists to have. What's the best practice to solve this organizational matter?

    Read the article

  • Extension method question. Why do I need to use someObj = someObj.somemethod();

    - by Kettenbach
    Hi All, I have a simple extension method that I would like to use to add an item to an array of items. public static T[] addElement<T>(this T[] array, T elementToAdd) { var list = new List<T>(array) {elementToAdd}; return list.ToArray(); } this works ok, but when I use it, I am having to set the array equal to the return value. I see that I am returning an Array. I likely want this method to be void, but I would like the item added. Does anyone have any ideas on what I need to do , to make this work the way I am wanting? Instead of someArray = someArray.addElement(item), I just want to do someArray.addElement(item) and then someArray be ready to go. What am I missing here? Thanks, ~ck in San Diego

    Read the article

  • C# Get Keys from a Dictionary<string, Stream>

    - by alex
    Suppose I have a Dictionary like so: Dictionary<string, Stream> How can I get a list (or IEnumerable or whatever) of JUST the Keys from this dictionary? Is this possible? I could enumerate the dictionary, and extract the keys one by one, but I was hoping to avoid this. In my instance, the Dictionary contains a list of filenames (file1.doc, filex.bmp etc...) and the stream content of the file from another part of the application.

    Read the article

  • Is converting this ArrayList to a Generic List efficient?

    - by Greg
    The code I'm writing receives an ArrayList from unmanaged code, and this ArrayList will always contain one or more objects of type Grid_Heading_Blk. I've considered changing this ArrayList to a generic List, but I'm unsure if the conversion operation will be so expensive as to nullify the benefits of working with the generic list. Currently, I'm just running a foreach (Grid_Heading_Blk in myArrayList) operation to work with the ArrayList contents after passing the ArrayList to the class that will use it. Should I convert the ArrayList to a generic typed list? And if so, what is the most efficient way of doing so?

    Read the article

  • StaX: Content not allowed in prolog

    - by RalfB
    I have the following (test) XML file below and Java code that uses StaX. I want to apply this code to a file that is about 30 GB large but with fairly small elements, so I thought StaX is a good choice. I am getting the following error: Exception in thread "main" javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamException: ParseError at [row,col]:[1,1] Message: Content is not allowed in prolog at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.XMLStreamReaderImpl.next(XMLStreamReaderImpl.java:598) at at.tuwien.mucke.util.xml.staxtest.StaXTest.main(StaXTest.java:18) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:601) at com.intellij.rt.execution.application.AppMain.main(AppMain.java:120) <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?> <catalog> <book id="bk101"> <author>Gambardella, Matthew</author> <title>XML Developer's Guide</title> <price>44.95</price> <description>An in-depth look at creating applications with XML.</description> </book> <book id="bk102"> <author>Ralls, Kim</author> <title>Midnight Rain</title> <price>5.95</price> <description>A former architect battles corporate zombies, an evil sorceress, and her own childhood to become queen of the world.</description> </book> </catalog> Here the code: package xml.staxtest; import java.io.*; import javax.xml.stream.*; public class StaXTest { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { XMLInputFactory xif = XMLInputFactory.newInstance(); XMLStreamReader streamReader = xif.createXMLStreamReader(new FileReader("D:/Data/testFile.xml")); while(streamReader.hasNext()){ int eventType = streamReader.next(); if(eventType == XMLStreamReader.START_ELEMENT){ System.out.println(streamReader.getLocalName()); } //... more to come here later ... } } }

    Read the article

  • How to infer the type of a derived class in base class?

    - by enzi
    I want to create a method that allows me to change arbitrary properties of classes that derive from my base class, the result should look like this: SetPropertyValue("size.height", 50); – where size is a property of my derived class and height is a property of size. I'm almost done with my implementation but there's one final obstacle that I want to solve before moving on, to describe this I will first have to explain my implementation a bit: Properties that can be modified are decorated with an attribute There's a method in my base class that searches for all derived classes and their decorated properties For each property I generate a "property modifier", a class that contains 2 delegates: one to set and one to get the value of the property. Property Modifiers are stored in a dictionary, with the name of the property as key In my base class, there is another dictionary that contains all property-modifier-dictionaries, with the Type of the respective class as key. What the SetPropertyValue method does is this: Get the correct property-modifier-dictionary, using the concrete type of the derived class (<- yet to solve) Get the property modifier of the property to change (e.g. of the property size) Use the get or set delegate to modify the property's value Some example code to clarify further: private static Dictionary<RuntimeTypeHandle, object> EditableTypes; //property-modifier-dictionary protected void SetPropertyValue<T>(EditablePropertyMap<T> map, string property, object value) { var property = map[property]; // get the property modifier property.Set((T)this, value); // use the set delegate (encapsulated in a method) } In the above code, T is the Type of the actual (derived) class. I need this type for the get/set delegates. The problem is how to get the EditablePropertyMap<T> when I don't know what T is. My current (ugly) solution is to pass the map in an overriden virtual method in the derived class: public override void SetPropertyValue(string property, object value) { base.SetPropertyValue((EditablePropertyMap<ExampleType>)EditableTypes[typeof(ExampleType)], property, value); } What this does is: get the correct dictionary containing the property modifiers of this class using the class's type, cast it to the appropiate type and pass it to the SetPropertyValue method. I want to get rid of the SetPropertyValue method in my derived class (since there are a lot of derived classes), but don't know yet how to accomplish that. I cannot just make a virtual GetEditablePropertyMap<T> method because I cannot infer a concrete type for T then. I also cannot acces my dictionary directly with a type and retrieve an EditablePropertyMap<T> from it because I cannot cast to it from object in the base class, since again I do not know T. I found some neat tricks to infere types (e.g. by adding a dummy T parameter), but cannot apply them to my specific problem. I'd highly appreciate any suggestions you may have for me.

    Read the article

  • Generic Class Vb.net

    - by KoolKabin
    hi guys, I am stuck with a problem about generic classes. I am confused how I call the constructor with parameters. My interface: Public Interface IDBObject Sub [Get](ByRef DataRow As DataRow) Property UIN() As Integer End Interface My Child Class: Public Class User Implements IDBObject Public Sub [Get](ByRef DataRow As System.Data.DataRow) Implements IDBObject.Get End Sub Public Property UIN() As Integer Implements IDBObject.UIN Get End Get Set(ByVal value As Integer) End Set End Property End Class My Next Class: Public Class Users Inherits DBLayer(Of User) #Region " Standard Methods " #End Region End Class My DBObject Class: Public Class DBLayer(Of DBObject As {New, IDBObject}) Public Shared Function GetData() As List(Of DBObject) Dim QueryString As String = "SELECT * ***;" Dim Dataset As DataSet = New DataSet() Dim DataList As List(Of DBObject) = New List(Of DBObject) Try Dataset = Query(QueryString) For Each DataRow As DataRow In Dataset.Tables(0).Rows **DataList.Add(New DBObject(DataRow))** Next Catch ex As Exception DataList = Nothing End Try Return DataList End Function End Class I get error in the starred area of the DBLayer Object. What might be the possible reason? what can I do to fix it? I even want to add New(byval someval as datatype) in IDBObject interface for overloading construction. but it also gives an error? how can i do it? Adding Sub New(ByVal DataRow As DataRow) in IDBObject producess following error 'Sub New' cannot be declared in an interface. Error Produced in DBLayer Object line: DataList.Add(New DBObject(DataRow)) Msg: Arguments cannot be passed to a 'New' used on a type parameter.

    Read the article

  • Casting Type array to Generic array?

    - by George R
    The short version of the question - why can't I do this? I'm restricted to .NET 3.5. T[] genericArray; // Obviously T should be float! genericArray = new T[3]{ 1.0f, 2.0f, 0.0f }; // Can't do this either, why the hell not genericArray = new float[3]{ 1.0f, 2.0f, 0.0f }; Longer version - I'm working with the Unity engine here, although that's not important. What is - I'm trying to throw conversion between its fixed Vector2 (2 floats) and Vector3 (3 floats) and my generic Vector< class. I can't cast types directly to a generic array. using UnityEngine; public struct Vector { private readonly T[] _axes; #region Constructors public Vector(int axisCount) { this._axes = new T[axisCount]; } public Vector(T x, T y) { this._axes = new T[2] { x, y }; } public Vector(T x, T y, T z) { this._axes = new T[3]{x, y, z}; } public Vector(Vector2 vector2) { // This doesn't work this._axes = new T[2] { vector2.x, vector2.y }; } public Vector(Vector3 vector3) { // Nor does this this._axes = new T[3] { vector3.x, vector3.y, vector3.z }; } #endregion #region Properties public T this[int i] { get { return _axes[i]; } set { _axes[i] = value; } } public T X { get { return _axes[0];} set { _axes[0] = value; } } public T Y { get { return _axes[1]; } set { _axes[1] = value; } } public T Z { get { return this._axes.Length (Vector2 vector2) { Vector vector = new Vector(vector2); return vector; } public static explicit operator Vector(Vector3 vector3) { Vector vector = new Vector(vector3); return vector; } #endregion }

    Read the article

  • VB.NET Two different approaches to generic cross-threaded operations; which is better?

    - by BASnappl
    VB.NET 2010, .NET 4 Hello, I recently read about using SynchronizationContext objects to control the execution thread for some code. I have been using a generic subroutine to handle (possibly) cross-thread calls for things like updating UI controls that utilizes Invoke. I'm an amateur and have a hard time understanding the pros and cons of any particular approach. I am looking for some insight on which approach might be preferable and why. Update: This question is motivated, in part, by statements such as the following from the MSDN page on Control.InvokeRequired. An even better solution is to use the SynchronizationContext returned by SynchronizationContext rather than a control for cross-thread marshaling. Method 1: Public Sub InvokeControl(Of T As Control)(ByVal Control As T, ByVal Action As Action(Of T)) If Control.InvokeRequired Then Control.Invoke(New Action(Of T, Action(Of T))(AddressOf InvokeControl), New Object() {Control, Action}) Else Action(Control) End If End Sub Method 2: Public Sub UIAction(Of T As Control)(ByVal Control As T, ByVal Action As Action(Of Control)) SyncContext.Send(New Threading.SendOrPostCallback(Sub() Action(Control)), Nothing) End Sub Where SyncContext is a Threading.SynchronizationContext object defined in the constructor of my UI form: Public Sub New() InitializeComponent() SyncContext = WindowsFormsSynchronizationContext.Current End Sub Then, if I wanted to update a control (e.g., Label1) on the UI form, I would do: InvokeControl(Label1, Sub(x) x.Text = "hello") or UIAction(Label1, Sub(x) x.Text = "hello") So, what do y'all think? Is one way preferred or does it depend on the context? If you have the time, verbosity would be appreciated! Thanks in advance, Brian

    Read the article

  • C# - implementing GetEnumerator() for a collection inherited from List<string>

    - by Vojtech
    Hi, I am trying to implement FilePathCollection. Its items would be simple file names (without a path - such as "image.jpg"). Once the collection is used via foreach cycle, it should return the full path created by concatenating with "baseDirectory". How can I do that? public class FilePathCollection : List<string> { string baseDirectory; public FileCollection(string baseDirectory) { this.baseDirectory = baseDirectory; } new public System.Collections.IEnumerator GetEnumerator() { foreach (string value in this._list) //this does not work because _list is private yield return baseDirectory + value; } } Thanks in advance! :-)

    Read the article

  • Exporting to CSV with dynamic field type handling

    - by serhio
    I have to do an export from DB to CSV. field; fileld; field... etc Have 3 types of fields: Alpha, Numeric and Bool respresented as "alphaValue",intValue and True/False. I try to encapsulate this in a fields collection, in order to export if alpha then set "", if Bool=True/False if numeric let as is. and try to build a CsvField class: Public Structure?Class CsvField(Of T As ???) End Structure Enum FieldType Alpha Bool Numeric End Enum any suggestions welcomed.

    Read the article

  • C# How to check if a class implements generic interface ?

    - by PaN1C_Showt1Me
    How to get generic interface type for an instance ? Suppose this code: interface IMyInterface<T> { T MyProperty { get; set; } } class MyClass : IMyInterface<int> { #region IMyInterface<T> Members public int MyProperty { get; set; } #endregion } MyClass myClass = new MyClass(); /* returns the interface */ Type[] myinterfaces = myClass.GetType().GetInterfaces(); /* returns null */ Type myinterface = myClass.GetType().GetInterface(typeof(IMyInterface<int>).FullName);

    Read the article

  • How do I create a generic method with a generic in the where clause? (Man that's clear as mud!)

    - by Jordan
    Is there a way of doing this: protected void SubscribeToEvent<TEvent, TPayload>(Action<TPayload> a_action) where TEvent : CompositePresentationEvent<TPayload> { TEvent newEvent = _eventAggregator.GetEvent<TEvent>(); SubscriptionToken eventToken = newEvent.Subscribe(a_action); _lstEventSubscriptions.Add(new KeyValuePair<EventBase, SubscriptionToken>(newEvent, eventToken)); } without requiring the user to specify a TPayload parameter?

    Read the article

  • Initialize generic object from a System.Type

    - by CaptnCraig
    I need to create a generic type, but I do not know the type at compile time. I would like to do this: Type t = typeof(whatever); var list = new List<t> this won't compile, because t is not a valid type. But it does know all about a valid type. Is there a way to dynamically create the generic list from a System.Type like this? I may need reflection, and that's ok, I am just a bit lost here.

    Read the article

  • Generic Constraints And Type Parameters Mess

    - by Dummy01
    Hi everyone, I have the following base abstract class defined as: public abstract class BaseObject<T> : IComparable, IComparable<T>, IEquatable<T> {} I also have an interface defined as: public interface ICode<T> where T : struct { T Code { get; } } Now I want to derive a class that is inherited from BaseObject<T> and includes interface ICode<T>. I tried to define it like that: public class DerivedObject<T, U> : BaseObject<T>, ICode<U> where T : DerivedObject<T, U> where U : struct { public DerivedObject(U code) { Code = code; } // From BaseObject protected override int InstanceCompareTo(T obj) { return Code.CompareTo(obj.Code); } // From BaseObject protected override bool InstanceEquals(T obj) { return Code.Equals(obj.Code); } // From ICode U _Code; public U Code { get { return _Code; } protected set { _Code = value; } } } The only error that comes from the compiler is for Code.CompareTo(obj.Code) with the message: 'U' does not contain a definition for 'CompareTo' and no extension method 'CompareTo' accepting a first argument of type 'U' could be found. But U is a value type and should know CompareTo. Have you any idea what I am doing wrong, or if I do all wrong? My final aim is to derive classes such these: public class Account : DerivedObject<Account, int> public class ItemGroup : DerivedObject<ItemGroup, string> Big Thanks In Advance!

    Read the article

  • Where are the function literals c++?

    - by academicRobot
    First of all, maybe literals is not the right term for this concept, but its the closest I could think of (not literals in the sense of functions as first class citizens). The idea is that when you make a conventional function call, it compiles to something like this: callq <immediate address> But if you make a function call using a function pointer, it compiles to something like this: mov <memory location>,%rax callq *%rax Which is all well and good. However, what if I'm writing a template library that requires a callback of some sort with a specified argument list and the user of the library is expected to know what function they want to call at compile time? Then I would like to write my template to accept a function literal as a template parameter. So, similar to template <int int_literal> struct my_template {...};` I'd like to write template <func_literal_t func_literal> struct my_template {...}; and have calls to func_literal within my_template compile to callq <immediate address>. Is there a facility in C++ for this, or a work around to achieve the same effect? If not, why not (e.g. some cataclysmic side effects)? How about C++0x or another language? Solutions that are not portable are fine. Solutions that include the use of member function pointers would be ideal. I'm not particularly interested in being told "You are a <socially unacceptable term for a person of low IQ>, just use function pointers/functors." This is a curiosity based question, and it seems that it might be useful in some (albeit limited) applications. It seems like this should be possible since function names are just placeholders for a (relative) memory address, so why not allow more liberal use (e.g. aliasing) of this placeholder. p.s. I use function pointers and functions objects all the the time and they are great. But this post got me thinking about the don't pay for what you don't use principle in relation to function calls, and it seems like forcing the use of function pointers or similar facility when the function is known at compile time is a violation of this principle, though a small one.

    Read the article

  • Multiple generic types in one container

    - by Lirik
    I was looking at the answer of this question regarding multiple generic types in one container and I can't really get it to work: the properties of the Metadata class are not visible, since the abstract class doesn't have them. Here is a slightly modified version of the code in the original question: public abstract class Metadata { } public class Metadata<T> : Metadata { // ... some other meta data public T Function{ get; set; } } List<Metadata> metadataObjects; metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<double,double>>()); metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<int,double>>()); metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<double,int>>()); foreach( Metadata md in metadataObjects) { var tmp = md.Function; // <-- Error: does not contain a definition for Function } The exact error is: error CS1061: 'Metadata' does not contain a definition for 'Function' and no extension method 'Function' accepting a first argument of type 'Metadata' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) I believe it's because the abstract class does not define the property Function, thus the whole effort is completely useless. Is there a way that we can get the properties?

    Read the article

  • Linq-to-XML explicit casting in a generic method

    - by vlad
    I've looked for a similar question, but the only one that was close didn't help me in the end. I have an XML file that looks like this: <Fields> <Field name="abc" value="2011-01-01" /> <Field name="xyz" value="" /> <Field name="tuv" value="123.456" /> </Fields> I'm trying to use Linq-to-XML to get the values from these fields. The values can be of type Decimal, DateTime, String and Int32. I was able to get the fields one by one using a relatively simple query. For example, I'm getting the 'value' from the field with the name 'abc' using the following: private DateTime GetValueFromAttribute(IEnumerable<XElement> fields, String attName) { return (from field in fields where field.Attribute("name").Value == "abc" select (DateTime)field.Attribute("value")).FirstOrDefault() } this is placed in a separate function that simply returns this value, and everything works fine (since I know that there is only one element with the name attribute set to 'abc'). however, since I have to do this for decimals and integers and dates, I was wondering if I can make a generic function that works in all cases. this is where I got stuck. here's what I have so far: private T GetValueFromAttribute<T>(IEnumerable<XElement> fields, String attName) { return (from field in fields where field.Attribute("name").Value == attName select (T)field.Attribute("value").Value).FirstOrDefault(); } this doesn't compile because it doesn't know how to convert from String to T. I tried boxing and unboxing (i.e. select (T) (Object) field.Attribute("value").Value but that throws a runtime Specified cast is not valid exception as it's trying to convert the String to a DateTime, for instance. Is this possible in a generic function? can I put a constraint on the generic function to make it work? or do I have to have separate functions to take advantage of Linq-to-XML's explicit cast operators?

    Read the article

  • Retrieving the MethodInfo of of the correct overload of a generic method

    - by Anne
    I have this type that contains two overloads of a generic method. I like to retrieve one of the overloads (with the Func<T> parameter) using reflection. The problem however is that I can't find the correct parameter type to supply the Type.GetMethod(string, Type[]) method with. Here is my class definition: public class Foo { public void Bar<T>(Func<T> f) { } public void Bar<T>(Action<T> a) { } } And this is what I've come up with, unfortunately without succes: [TestMethod] public void Test1() { Type parameterType = typeof(Func<>); var method = typeof(Foo).GetMethod("Bar", new Type[] { parameterType }); Assert.IsNotNull(method); // Fails } How can I get the MethodInfo of a generic method of which I know the parameters?

    Read the article

  • c# Why can't open generic types be passed as parameters?

    - by Rich Oliver
    Why can't open generic types be passed as parameters. I frequently have classes like: public class Example<T> where T: BaseClass { public int a {get; set;} public List<T> mylist {get; set;} } Lets say BaseClass is as follows; public BaseClass { public int num; } I then want a method of say: public int MyArbitarySumMethod(Example example)//This won't compile Example not closed { int sum = 0; foreach(BaseClass i in example.myList)//myList being infered as an IEnumerable sum += i.num; sum = sum * example.a; return sum; } I then have to write an interface just to pass this one class as a parameter as follows: public interface IExample { public int a {get; set;} public IEnumerable<BaseClass> myIEnum {get;} } The generic class then has to be modified to: public class Example<T>: IExample where T: BaseClass { public int a {get; set;} public List<T> mylist {get; set;} public IEnumerable<BaseClass> myIEnum {get {return myList;} } } That's a lot of ceremony for what I would have thought the compiler could infer. Even if something can't be changed I find it psychologically very helpful if I know the reasons / justifications for the absence of Syntax short cuts.

    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 | 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425  | Next Page >