Search Results

Search found 7020 results on 281 pages for 'shared ptr'.

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 42/281 | < Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >

  • Unable to access SQL reporting services on shared site with Themes enabled

    - by Grant
    Hi, i am having some trouble with my IIS web server & SQL reporting services. At the current time my site is playing host to both reporting services (/reports & /reportserver) as well as my personal website (domain.com) Only just recently have i implemented a Theme on my site and as such i have placed a statement in my web.config file directing it to apply a certain theme in the following manner <pages styleSheetTheme="General"> Because of this when i try to access the report pages it failed telling me it couldnt find the Theme so what i did was locate the source files for the /reports & /reportserver directories and place the App_Theme folder in them hoping that would sort everything out. What i am getting now is the following error *Using themed css files requires a header control on the page. e.g. head runat="server" * Does anyone know how i can get around this? Do i have to hack the sql reporting aspx pages? Please note i do NOT want to remove the web.config declaration.

    Read the article

  • Velocity engine fails to load template from a remote shared folder

    - by performanceuser
    I have following code File temlateFile = new File( "D:/config/emails/MailBody.vm" ); temlateFile.exists(); VelocityEngine velocityEngine = new VelocityEngine(); velocityEngine.setProperty(RuntimeConstants.RESOURCE_LOADER, "file"); velocityEngine.setProperty("file.resource.loader.class", FileResourceLoader.class.getName()); velocityEngine.setProperty("file.resource.loader.path", temlateFile.getParentFile().getAbsolutePath()); velocityEngine.init(); template = velocityEngine.getTemplate( temlateFile.getName() ); This works because it is loading a file from local file system. Once I change the first like to: File temlateFile = new File( "//remote/config/emails/MailBody.vm" ); It doesn't work. org.apache.velocity.exception.ResourceNotFoundException: Unable to find resource 'MailBody.vm' at org.apache.velocity.runtime.resource.ResourceManagerImpl.loadResource(ResourceManagerImpl.java:474) at org.apache.velocity.runtime.resource.ResourceManagerImpl.getResource(ResourceManagerImpl.java:352) at org.apache.velocity.runtime.RuntimeInstance.getTemplate(RuntimeInstance.java:1533) at org.apache.velocity.runtime.RuntimeInstance.getTemplate(RuntimeInstance.java:1514) at org.apache.velocity.app.VelocityEngine.getTemplate(VelocityEngine.java:373) at com.actuate.iserver.mail.VelocityContent.<init>(VelocityContent.java:33) at com.actuate.iserver.mail.VolumeCreationMail.<init>(VolumeCreationMail.java:40) at com.actuate.iserver.mail.VolumeCreationMail.main(VolumeCreationMail.java:67) In both cases temlateFile.exists() always return true. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Make password case unsensitive in shared ASP.Net membership tables web ap

    - by bill
    Hi all, i have two webapps.. that share ASP.Net membership tables. Everything works fine except i cannot remove case-sensitivity in one of the apps the way i am doing it in the other. in the non-working app void Login1_LoggingIn(object sender, LoginCancelEventArgs e) { string username = Login1.UserName.Trim(); if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(username)) { MembershipUser user = Membership.GetUser(username); if (user != null) { // Only adjust the UserName if the password is correct. This is more secure // so a hacker can't find valid usernames if we adjust the case of mis-cased // usernames with incorrect passwords. string password = Login1.Password.ToUpper(); if (Membership.ValidateUser(user.UserName, password)) { Login1.UserName = user.UserName; } } } } is not working. the password is stored as all upper case. Converted at the time the membership user is created! So if the password is PASSWORD, typing PASSWORD allows me to authenticate. but typing password does not! Even though i can see the string being sent is PASSWORD (converted with toUpper()). I am at a complete loss on this.. in the other app i can type in lower or upper or mixed and i am able to authenticate. In the other app i am not using the textboxes from the login control though.. not sure if this is making the difference??

    Read the article

  • Immutability and shared references - how to reconcile?

    - by davetron5000
    Consider this simplified application domain: Criminal Investigative database Person is anyone involved in an investigation Report is a bit of info that is part of an investigation A Report references a primary Person (the subject of an investigation) A Report has accomplices who are secondarily related (and could certainly be primary in other investigations or reports These classes have ids that are used to store them in a database, since their info can change over time (e.g. we might find new aliases for a person, or add persons of interest to a report) If these are stored in some sort of database and I wish to use immutable objects, there seems to be an issue regarding state and referencing. Supposing that I change some meta-data about a Person. Since my Person objects immutable, I might have some code like: class Person( val id:UUID, val aliases:List[String], val reports:List[Report]) { def addAlias(name:String) = new Person(id,name :: aliases,reports) } So that my Person with a new alias becomes a new object, also immutable. If a Report refers to that person, but the alias was changed elsewhere in the system, my Report now refers to the "old" person, i.e. the person without the new alias. Similarly, I might have: class Report(val id:UUID, val content:String) { /** Adding more info to our report */ def updateContent(newContent:String) = new Report(id,newContent) } Since these objects don't know who refers to them, it's not clear to me how to let all the "referrers" know that there is a new object available representing the most recent state. This could be done by having all objects "refresh" from a central data store and all operations that create new, updated, objects store to the central data store, but this feels like a cheesy reimplementation of the underlying language's referencing. i.e. it would be more clear to just make these "secondary storable objects" mutable. So, if I add an alias to a Person, all referrers see the new value without doing anything. How is this dealt with when we want to avoid mutability, or is this a case where immutability is not helpful?

    Read the article

  • Which libraries use the "We Know Where You Live" optimization for std::make_shared?

    - by KnowItAllWannabe
    Over two years ago, Stephan T. Lavavej described a space-saving optimization he implemented in Microsoft's implementation of std::make_shared, and I know from speaking with him that Microsoft has nothing against other library implementations adopting this optimization. If you know for sure whether other libraries (e.g., for Gnu C++, Clang, Intel C++, plus Boost (for boost::make_shared)) have adopted this implementation, please contribute an answer. I don't have ready access to that many make_shared implementations, nor am I wild about digging into the bowels of the ones I have to see if they've implemented the WKWYL optimization, but I'm hoping that SO readers know the answers for some libraries off-hand. I know from looking at the code that as of Boost 1.52, the WKWYL optimization had not been implemented, but Boost is now up to version 1.55. Note that this optimization is different from std::make_shared's ability to avoid a dedicated heap allocation for the reference count used by std::shared_ptr. For a discussion of the difference between WKWYL and that optimication, consult this question.

    Read the article

  • shared_ptr as class member

    - by idimba
    It's common to declared contained objects as a pointers to that class, while "forward declarating" them in header file. This in order to reduce physical dependencies in code. For example class B; // forward declaration class A { private: B* pB; }; Would it be good idea to declare such a member as shared_ptr, instead of naked pointer? I would prefer scoped_ptr, but AFAIKit it won't be in standard.

    Read the article

  • Force an object to be allocated on the heap

    - by Warren Seine
    A C++ class I'm writing uses shared_from_this() to return a valid boost::shared_ptr<>. Besides, I don't want to manage memory for this kind of object. At the moment, I'm not restricting the way the user allocates the object, which causes an error if shared_from_this() is called on a stack-allocated object. I'd like to force the object to be allocated with new and managed by a smart pointer, no matter how the user declares it. I thought it could be done through a proxy or an overloaded new operator, but I can't find a proper way of doing that. Is there a common design pattern for such usage? If it's not possible, how can I test it at compile time?

    Read the article

  • What would be a better implementation of shared variable among subclass

    - by Churk
    So currently I have a spring unit testing application. And it requires me to get a session cookie from a foreign authentication source. Problem what that is, this authentication process is fairly expensive and time consuming, and I am trying to create a structure where I am authenticate once, by any subclass, and any subsequent subclass is created, it will reuse this session cookie without hitting the authentication process again. My problem right now is, the static cookie is null each time another subclass is created. And I been reading that using static as a global variable is a bad idea, but I couldn't think of another way to do this because of Spring framework setting things during run time and how I would set the cookie so that all other classes can use it. Another piece of information. The variable is being use, but is change able during run time. It is not a single user being signed in and used across the board. But more like a Sub1 would call login, and we have a cookie. Then multiple test will be using that login until SubX will come in and say, I am using different credential, so I need to login as something else. And repeats. Here is a outline of my code: public class Parent implements InitializingBean { protected static String BASE_URL; public static Cookie cookie; ... All default InitializingBean methods ... afterPropertiesSet() { cookie = // login process returns a cookie } } public class Sub1 extends Parent { @resource public String baseURL; @PostConstruct public void init() { // set parents with my baseURL; BASE_URL = baseURL; } public void doSomething() { // Do something with cookie, because it should have been set by parent class } } public class Sub2 extends Parent { @resource public String baseURL; @PostConstruct public void init() { // set parents with my baseURL; BASE_URL = baseURL; } public void doSomethingElse() { // Do something with cookie, because it should have been set by parent class } }

    Read the article

  • Updating a modul leve shared dictionary

    - by Vishal
    Hi, A module level dictionary 'd' and is accessed by different threads/requests in a django web application. I need to update 'd' every minute with a new data and the process takes about 5 seconds. What could be best solution where I want the users to get either the old value or the new value of d and nothing in between. I can think of a solution where a temp dictionary is constructed with a new data and assigned to 'd' but not sure how this works! Appreciate your ideas. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why it's can be compiled in GNU/C++, can't compiled in VC++2010 RTM?

    - by volnet
    #include #include #include #include "copy_of_auto_ptr.h" #ifdef _MSC_VER #pragma message("#include ") #include // http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Diagnostic-Pragmas.html#Diagnostic-Pragmas #endif /* case 1-4 is the requirement of the auto_ptr. which form http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/020163371X/autoptrupdate/auto_ptr_update.html */ /* case 1. (1) Direct-initialization, same type, e.g. */ std::auto_ptr source_int() { // return std::auto_ptr(new int(3)); std::auto_ptr tmp(new int(3)); return tmp; } /* case 2. (2) Copy-initialization, same type, e.g. */ void sink_int(std::auto_ptr p) { std::cout source_derived() { // return std::auto_ptr(new Derived()); std::auto_ptr tmp(new Derived()); return tmp; } /* case 4. (4) Copy-initialization, base-from-derived, e.g. */ void sink_base( std::auto_ptr p) { p-go(); } int main(void) { /* // auto_ptr */ // case 1. // auto_ptr std::auto_ptr p_int(source_int()); std::cout p_derived(source_derived()); p_derived-go(); // case 4. // auto_ptr sink_base(source_derived()); return 0; } In Eclipse(GNU C++.exe -v gcc version 3.4.5 (mingw-vista special r3)) it's two compile error: Description Resource Path Location Type initializing argument 1 of void sink_base(std::auto_ptr<Base>)' from result ofstd::auto_ptr<_Tp::operator std::auto_ptr<_Tp1() [with _Tp1 = Base, _Tp = Derived]' auto_ptr_ref_research.cpp auto_ptr_ref_research/auto_ptr_ref_research 190 C/C++ Problem Description Resource Path Location Type no matching function for call to `std::auto_ptr::auto_ptr(std::auto_ptr)' auto_ptr_ref_research.cpp auto_ptr_ref_research/auto_ptr_ref_research 190 C/C++ Problem But it's right in VS2010 RTM. Questions: Which compiler stand for the ISO C++ standard? The content of case 4 is the problem "auto_ptr & auto_ptr_ref want to resolve?"

    Read the article

  • Iterating through boost ptr_vector

    - by Ockonal
    Hello, I have a ptr_vector list of my own objects. Something like this: boost::ptr_vector<SomeClass> *list; list.push_back(new SomeClass()>; ... BOOST_FOREACH(SomeClass *tempObj, list) // [x] { tempObj->... } >‘boost::ptr_vector<SomeClass>*’ is not a class, struct, or union type

    Read the article

  • java objects, shared variables

    - by raven
    hello, I have a simple question here. If I declare a variable inside an object which was made [declared] in the main class, like this: public static int number; ( usually I declare it like this : private int number; ) can it be used in a different object which was also made [declared] in the main class? btw I do not care about security atm, I just want to make something work, don't care about protection)

    Read the article

  • Why is std::tr1::shared_ptr<>.reset() so expensive?

    - by Paul Oyster
    Profiling some code that heavily uses shared_ptrs, I discovered that reset() was surprisingly expensive. For example: struct Test { int i; Test() { this->i = 0; } Test(int i) { this->i = i; } } ; ... auto t = make_shared<Test>(1); ... t.reset(somePointerToATestObject); Tracing the reset() in the last line (under VC++ 2010), I discovered that it creates a new reference-counting object. Is there a cheaper way, that reuses the existing ref-count and does not bother the heap?

    Read the article

  • Updating a module level shared dictionary

    - by Vishal
    Hi, A module level dictionary 'd' and is accessed by different threads/requests in a django web application. I need to update 'd' every minute with a new data and the process takes about 5 seconds. What could be best solution where I want the users to get either the old value or the new value of d and nothing in between. I can think of a solution where a temp dictionary is constructed with a new data and assigned to 'd' but not sure how this works! Appreciate your ideas. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Adding and sorting a linked list in C

    - by user1202963
    In my assignment, I have to write a function that takes as arguments a pointer to a "LNode" structure and an integer argument. Then, I have to not only add that integer into the linked list, but also put place it so that the list is in proper ascending order. I've tried several various attempts at this, and this is my code as of posting. LNode* AddItem(LNode *headPtr, int newItem) { auto LNode *ptr = headPtr; ptr = malloc(sizeof(LNode)); if (headPtr == NULL) { ptr->value = newItem; ptr->next = headPtr; return ptr; } else { while (headPtr->value > newItem || ptr->next != NULL) { printf("While\n"); // This is simply to let me know how many times the loop runs headPtr = headPtr->next; } ptr->value = newItem; ptr->next = headPtr; return ptr; } } // end of "AddItem" When I run it, and try to insert say a 5 and then a 3, the 5 gets inserted, but then the while loop runs once and I get a segmentation fault. Also I cannot change the arguments as it's part of a skeletal code for this project. Thanks to anyone who can help. If it helps this is what the structure looks like typedef struct LNode { int value; struct LNode *next; } LNode;

    Read the article

  • Shared data in an ASP.NET application

    - by Barguast
    I have a basic ASP.NET application which is used to request data which is stored on disk. This is loaded from files and sent as the response. I want to be able to store the data loaded from these files in memory to reduce the number of reads from disk. All of the requests will be asking for the same data, so it makes sense to have a single cache of in-memory data which is accessible to all requests. What is the best way to create a single accessible object instance which I can use to store and access this cached data? I've looked into HttpApplication, but apparently a new instance of this is created for parallel requests and so it doesn't fit my needs.

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to return something like a collection of `std::auto_ptr`s in C++03?

    - by Billy ONeal
    std::auto_ptr is not allowed to be stored in an STL container, such as std::vector. However, occasionally there are cases where I need to return a collection of polymorphic objects, and therefore I can't return a vector of objects (due to the slicing problem). I can use std::tr1::shared_ptr and stick those in the vector, but then I have to pay a high price of maintaining separate reference counts, and object that owns the actual memory (the container) no longer logically "owns" the objects because they can be copied out of it without regard to ownership. C++0x offers a perfect solution to this problem in the form of std::vector<std::unique_ptr<t>>, but I don't have access to C++0x. Some other notes: I don't have access to C++0x, but I do have TR1 available. I would like to avoid use of Boost (though it is available if there is no other option) I am aware of boost::ptr_container containers (i.e. boost::ptr_vector), but I would like to avoid this because it breaks the debugger (innards are stored in void *s which means it's difficult to view the object actually stored inside the container in the debugger)

    Read the article

  • Detecting inconsistent revisions of shared sources in SVN

    - by maxim1000
    I have an SVN repository containing several components: LibraryA LibraryB - depends on LibraryA Application - depends on LibraryB and LibraryA More detailed structure (branches and tags are not related to the problem): LibraryA LibraryA_code LibraryB LibraryB_code svn:externals to a fixed revision R1 of LibraryA_code Application Application_code svn:externals to a fixed revision R2 of LibraryA_code svn:externals to a fixed revision R3 of LibraryB_code The problem I'm trying to solve is automatic detection of situation when R2 differs from R1 (breaking expectations of LibraryB_code) and notification about this (e.g. build failure). I'll describe in an answer the only solution which I see for now, but I hope for something more elegant :) Environment: Windows, Visual Studio, SVN.

    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 | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >