Search Results

Search found 21674 results on 867 pages for 'thread static'.

Page 42/867 | < Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >

  • WCF Service with callbacks coming from background thread?

    - by Mark Struzinski
    Here is my situation. I have written a WCF service which calls into one of our vendor's code bases to perform operations, such as Login, Logout, etc. A requirement of this operation is that we have a background thread to receive events as a result of that action. For example, the Login action is sent on the main thread. Then, several events are received back from the vendor service as a result of the login. There can be 1, 2, or several events received. The background thread, which runs on a timer, receives these events and fires an event in the wcf service to notify that a new event has arrived. I have implemented the WCF service in Duplex mode, and planned to use callbacks to notify the UI that events have arrived. Here is my question: How do I send new events from the background thread to the thread which is executing the service? Right now, when I call OperationContext.Current.GetCallbackChannel<IMyCallback>(), the OperationContext is null. Is there a standard pattern to get around this? I am using PerSession as my SessionMode on the ServiceContract. UPDATE: I thought I'd make my exact scenario clearer by demonstrating how I'm receiving events from the vendor code. My library receives each event, determines what the event is, and fires off an event for that particular occurrence. I have another project which is a class library specifically for connecting to the vendor service. I'll post the entire implementation of the service to give a clearer picture: [ServiceBehavior( InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.PerSession )] public class VendorServer:IVendorServer { private IVendorService _vendorService; // This is the reference to my class library public VendorServer() { _vendorServer = new VendorServer(); _vendorServer.AgentManager.AgentLoggedIn += AgentManager_AgentLoggedIn; // This is the eventhandler for the event which arrives from a background thread } public void Login(string userName, string password, string stationId) { _vendorService.Login(userName, password, stationId); // This is a direct call from the main thread to the vendor service to log in } private void AgentManager_AgentLoggedIn(object sender, EventArgs e) { var agentEvent = new AgentEvent { AgentEventType = AgentEventType.Login, EventArgs = e }; } } The AgentEvent object contains the callback as one of its properties, and I was thinking I'd perform the callback like this: agentEvent.Callback = OperationContext.Current.GetCallbackChannel<ICallback>(); How would I pass the OperationContext.Current instance from the main thread into the background thread?

    Read the article

  • How does the event dispatch thread work?

    - by Roman
    With the help of people on stackoverflow I was able to get the following working code of the simples GUI countdown (it just displays a window counting down seconds). My main problem with this code is the invokeLater stuff. As far as I understand the invokeLater send a task to the event dispatching thread (EDT) and then the EDT execute this task whenever it "can" (whatever it means). Is it right? To my understanding the code works like that: In the main method we use invokeLater to show the window (showGUI method). In other words, the code displaying the window will be executed in the EDT. In the main method we also start the counter and the counter (by construction) is executed in another thread (so it is not in the event dispatching thread). Right? The counter is executed in a separate thread and periodically it calls updateGUI. The updateGUI is supposed to update GUI. And GUI is working in the EDT. So, updateGUI should also be executed in the EDT. It is why the code for the updateGUI is inclosed in the invokeLater. Is it right? What is not clear to me is why we call the counter from the EDT. Anyway it is not executed in the EDT. It starts immediately a new thread and the counter is executed there. So, why we cannot call the counter in the main method after the invokeLater block? import javax.swing.JFrame; import javax.swing.JLabel; import javax.swing.SwingUtilities; public class CountdownNew { static JLabel label; // Method which defines the appearance of the window. public static void showGUI() { JFrame frame = new JFrame("Simple Countdown"); frame.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); label = new JLabel("Some Text"); frame.add(label); frame.pack(); frame.setVisible(true); } // Define a new thread in which the countdown is counting down. public static Thread counter = new Thread() { public void run() { for (int i=10; i>0; i=i-1) { updateGUI(i,label); try {Thread.sleep(1000);} catch(InterruptedException e) {}; } } }; // A method which updates GUI (sets a new value of JLabel). private static void updateGUI(final int i, final JLabel label) { SwingUtilities.invokeLater( new Runnable() { public void run() { label.setText("You have " + i + " seconds."); } } ); } public static void main(String[] args) { SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { public void run() { showGUI(); counter.start(); } }); } }

    Read the article

  • Facebook API returning wrong unread thread count

    - by houbysoft
    I'm trying to query the thread FQL table to get all unread messages, and also the count of unread items in the thread. This is how I query the table: SELECT thread_id,updated_time,snippet,snippet_author,unread FROM thread WHERE folder_id=0 AND unread!=0 From reading the doc to which I linked above, it seems to me that unread should include the count of unread messages in the thread. However, I just tested the above call and Facebook gives me back a value of unread=1, despite the thread in question having 4 unread items. This is how the thread looks on facebook.com (notice the (4), showing that unread should be 4): This is what the API returns to me, which is wrong (notice the "unread":1): { "data":[ { "name":"messages", "fql_result_set":[ { "thread_id":"BLAH BLAH BLAH", "updated_time":1333317140, "snippet":"BLAH BLAH BLAH", "snippet_author":BLAH, "unread":1 } ] } ] } Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug?

    Read the article

  • How do I refactor this IEnumerable<T> to be thread-safe?

    - by DayOne
    I am looking at Skeet's AtomicEnumerable but I'm not sure how to integrate it into my current IEnumerable exmaple below (http://msmvps.com/blogs/jon_skeet/archive/2009/10/23/iterating-atomically.aspx) Basically I want to foreach my blahs type in a thread-safe way. thanks public sealed class Blahs : IEnumerable<string> { private readonly IList<string> _data = new List<string>() { "blah1", "blah2", "blah3" }; public IEnumerator<string> GetEnumerator() { return _data.GetEnumerator(); } IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); } }

    Read the article

  • How does one implement a truly asynchronous java thread

    - by Ritesh M Nayak
    I have a function that needs to perfom two operations, one which finishes fast and one which takes a long time to run. I want to be able to delegate the long running operation to a thread and I dont care when the thread finishes, but the threads needs to complete. I implemented this as shown below , but, my secondoperation never gets done as the function exits after the start() call. How I can ensure that the function returns but the second operation thread finishes its execution as well and is not dependent on the parent thread ? public void someFunction(String data) { smallOperation() Blah a = new Blah(); Thread th = new Thread(a); th.Start(); } class SecondOperation implements Runnable { public void run(){ // doSomething long running } }

    Read the article

  • iPhone: One Object, One Thread

    - by GingerBreadMane
    On the iPhone, I would like to do some operations on an image in a separate thread. Rather than dealing with semiphores, locking, etc., I'd like to use the 'One Object, One Thread' method of safely writing this concurrent operation. I'm not sure what is the correct way to copy my object into a new thread so that the object is not accessed in the main thread. Do I use the 'copy' method? If so, do I do this before the thread or inside the thread? ... -(void)someMethod{ UIImage *myImage; [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(getRotatedImage:) toTarget:self withObject:myImage]; } -(void)getRotatedImage:(UIImage *)image{ ... ... UIImage *copiedImage = [image copy]; ... ... }

    Read the article

  • How can I synchronize database access between a write-thread and a read-thread?

    - by Runcible
    My program has two threads: Main execution thread that handles user input and queues up database writes A utility thread that wakes up every second and flushes the writes to the database Inside the main thread, I occasionally need to make reads on the database. When this happens, performance is not important, but correctness is. (In a perfect world, I would be reading from a cache, not making a round-trip to the database - but let's put that aside for the sake of discussion.) How do I make sure that the main thread sees a correct / quiescent database? A standard mutex won't work, since I run the risk of having the main thread grab the mutex before the data gets flushed to the database. This would be a big race condition. What I really want is some sort of mutex that lets the main thread of execution proceed only AFTER the mutex has been grabbed and released once. Does such a thing exist? What's the best way to solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • Creation of Objects: Constructors or Static Factory Methods

    - by Rachel
    I am going through Effective Java and some of my things which I consider as standard are not suggested by the book, for instance creation of object, I was under the impression that constructors are the best way of doing it and books says we should make use of static factory methods, I am not able to few some advantages and so disadvantages and so am asking this question, here are the benefits of using it. Advantages: One advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they have names. A second advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they are not required to create a new object each time they’re invoked. A third advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they can return an object of any subtype of their return type. A fourth advantage of static factory methods is that they reduce the verbosity of creating parameterized type instances. I am not able to understand this advantage and would appreciate if someone can explain this point Disadvantages: The main disadvantage of providing only static factory methods is that classes without public or protected constructors cannot be subclassed. A second disadvantage of static factory methods is that they are not readily distinguishable from other static methods.I am not getting this point and so would really appreciate some explanation. Reference: Effective Java, Joshua Bloch, Edition 2, pg: 5-10 Also, How to decide to use whether to go for Constructor or Static Factory Method for Object Creation ?

    Read the article

  • How can a static class be resolved by the Unity Framework?

    - by user213988
    I wold like the unity framework to resolve a static class "MyStaticObject" specified in my config file. As my class is static, I am getting an error "The type StaticObject does not have an accessible constructor." My config file looks as below: <unity> <typeAliases> <typeAlias alias="singleton" type="Microsoft.Practices.Unity.ContainerControlledLifetimeManager, Microsoft.Practices.Unity" /> <typeAlias alias="StaticObject" type="MyStaticAssembly.MyStaticObject, MyStaticAssembly, Version=1.0.0.0" /> <typeAlias alias="staticobject" type="MyStaticAssembly.MyStaticObject, MyStaticAssembly" /> </typeAliases> <containers> <container> <types> <type type="StaticObject" mapTo="staticobject" name="My Static Object"> <lifetime type="singleton"/> </type> </types> </container> </containers> </unity> I would highly appreciate any help.

    Read the article

  • Using static variables for Strings

    - by Vivart
    below content is taken from Best practice: Writing efficient code but i didn't understand why private static String x = "example"; faster than private static final String x ="example"; Can anybody explain this. Using static variables for Strings When you define static fields (also called class fields) of type String, you can increase application speed by using static variables (not final) instead of constants (final). The opposite is true for primitive data types, such as int. For example, you might create a String object as follows: private static final String x = "example"; For this static constant (denoted by the final keyword), each time that you use the constant, a temporary String instance is created. The compiler eliminates "x" and replaces it with the string "example" in the bytecode, so that the BlackBerry® Java® Virtual Machine performs a hash table lookup each time that you reference "x". In contrast, for a static variable (no final keyword), the String is created once. The BlackBerry JVM performs the hash table lookup only when it initializes "x", so access is faster. private static String x = "example"; You can use public constants (that is, final fields), but you must mark variables as private.

    Read the article

  • Can the lock function be used to implement thread-safe enumeration?

    - by Daniel
    I'm working on a thread-safe collection that uses Dictionary as a backing store. In C# you can do the following: private IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<K, V>> Enumerate() { if (_synchronize) { lock (_locker) { foreach (var entry in _dict) yield return entry; } } else { foreach (var entry in _dict) yield return entry; } } The only way I've found to do this in F# is using Monitor, e.g.: let enumerate() = if synchronize then seq { System.Threading.Monitor.Enter(locker) try for entry in dict -> entry finally System.Threading.Monitor.Exit(locker) } else seq { for entry in dict -> entry } Can this be done using the lock function? Or, is there a better way to do this in general? I don't think returning a copy of the collection for iteration will work because I need absolute synchronization.

    Read the article

  • Putting a thread to sleep until event X occurs

    - by tipu
    I'm writing to many files in a threaded app and I'm creating one handler per file. I have HandlerFactory class that manages the distribution of these handlers. What I'd like to do is that thread A requests and gets foo.txt's file handle from the HandlerFactory class thread B requests foo.txt's file handler handler class recognizes that this file handle has been checked out handler class puts thread A to sleep thread B closes file handle using a wrapper method from HandlerFactory HandlerFactory notifies sleeping threads thread B wakes and successfully gets foo.txt's file handle This is what I have so far, def get_handler(self, file_path, type): self.lock.acquire() if file_path not in self.handlers: self.handlers[file_path] = open(file_path, type) elif not self.handlers[file_path].closed: time.sleep(1) self.lock.release() return self.handlers[file_path][type] I believe this covers the sleeping and handler retrieval successfully, but I am unsure how to wake up all threads, or even better wake up a specific thread.

    Read the article

  • Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    Read the article

  • C++: Static variable inside a constructor, are there any drawbacks or side effects?

    - by doc
    What I want to do: run some prerequisite code whenever instance of the class is going to be used inside a program. This code will check for requiremts etc. and should be run only once. I found that this can be achieved using another object as static variable inside a constructor. Here's an example for a better picture: class Prerequisites { public: Prerequisites() { std::cout << "checking requirements of C, "; std::cout << "registering C in dictionary, etc." << std::endl; } }; class C { public: C() { static Prerequisites prerequisites; std::cout << "normal initialization of C object" << std::endl; } }; What bothers me is that I haven't seen similar use of static variables so far. Are there any drawbacks or side-effects or am I missing something? Or maybe there is a better solution? Any suggestions are welcome.

    Read the article

  • [C++] Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    Read the article

  • Running a loop (such as one for a mock webserver) within a thread

    - by bob c
    I'm trying to run a mock webserver within a thread within a class. I've tried passing the class' @server property to the thread block but as soon as I try to do server.accept the thread stops. Is there some way to make this work? I want to basically be able to run a webserver off of this script while still taking user input via stdin.gets. Is this possible? class Server def initialize() @server = TCPServer.new(8080) end def run() @thread = Thread.new(@server) { |server| while true newsock = server.accept puts "some stuff after accept!" next if !newsock # some other stuff end } end end def processCommand() # some user commands here end test = Server.new while true do processCommand(STDIN.gets) end In the above sample, the thread dies on server.accept

    Read the article

  • What will or won't cause a thread to block (a question from a test)

    - by fingerprint211b
    I've had a test, and there was a question I lost some points on, because I wasn't able to answer it : Which of the following is NOT a condition which can cause a thread to block : Calling an objects's wait() method Waiting for an I/O operation Calling sleep() Calling yield() Calling join() As far as I know, all of these are blocking calls : wait() returns when an something calls notify(), blocks until then If the thread is WAITING for an I/O operation then it's obviously blocked sleep(), obviously, blocks until the time runs out, or something wakes up the thread yield() "cancels the rest of the thread's timeslice" (lacking a better term), and returns only when the thread is active again join() blocks until the thread it's waiting for terminates. Am I missing something here?

    Read the article

  • Windows CE: Changing Static IP Address

    - by Bruce Eitman
    A customer contacted me recently and asked me how to change a static IP address at runtime.  Of course this is not something that I know how to do, but with a little bit of research I figure out how to do it. It turns out that the challenge is to request that the adapter update itself with the new IP Address.  Otherwise, the change in IP address is a matter of changing the address in the registry for the adapter.   The registry entry is something like: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Comm\LAN90001\Parms\TcpIp]    "EnableDHCP"=dword:0    "IpAddress"="192.168.0.100"     "DefaultGateway"="192.168.0.1"    "Subnetmask"="255.255.255.0" Where LAN90001 would be replace with your adapter name.  I have written quite a few articles about how to modify the registry, including a registry editor that you could use. Requesting that the adapter update itself is a matter of getting a handle to the NDIS driver, and then asking it to refresh the adapter.  The code is: #include <windows.h> #include "winioctl.h" #include "ntddndis.h"   void RebindAdapter( TCHAR *adaptername ) {       HANDLE hNdis;       BOOL fResult = FALSE;       int count;         // Make this function easier to use - hide the need to have two null characters.       int length = wcslen(adaptername);       int AdapterSize = (length + 2) * sizeof( TCHAR );       TCHAR *Adapter = malloc(AdapterSize);       wcscpy( Adapter, adaptername );       Adapter[ length ] = '\0';       Adapter[ length +1 ] = '\0';           hNdis = CreateFile(DD_NDIS_DEVICE_NAME,                   GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE,                   FILE_SHARE_READ | FILE_SHARE_WRITE,                   NULL,                   OPEN_ALWAYS,                   0,                   NULL);         if (INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE != hNdis)       {             fResult = DeviceIoControl(hNdis,                         IOCTL_NDIS_REBIND_ADAPTER,                         Adapter,                         AdapterSize,                         NULL,                         0,                         &count,                         NULL);             if( !fResult )             {                   RETAILMSG( 1, (TEXT("DeviceIoControl failed %d\n"), GetLastError() ));             }             CloseHandle(hNdis);       }       else       {             RETAILMSG( 1, (TEXT("Failed to open NDIS Handle\n")));       }   }       int WINAPI WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, LPWSTR    lpCmdLine, int       nCmdShow) {     RebindAdapter( TEXT("LAN90001") );     return 0; }   If you don’t want to write any code, but instead plan to use a registry editor to change the IP Address, then there is a command line utility to do the same thing.  NDISConfig.exe can be used: Ndisconfig adapter rebind LAN90001    Copyright © 2012 – Bruce Eitman All Rights Reserved

    Read the article

  • Naming Convention for Dedicated Thread Locking objects

    - by Chris Sinclair
    A relatively minor question, but I haven't been able to find official documentation or even blog opinion/discussions on it. Simply put: when I have a private object whose sole purpose is to serve for private lock, what do I name that object? class MyClass { private object LockingObject = new object(); void DoSomething() { lock(LockingObject) { //do something } } } What should we name LockingObject here? Also consider not just the name of the variable but how it looks in-code when locking. I've seen various examples, but seemingly no solid go-to advice: Plenty of usages of SyncRoot (and variations such as _syncRoot). Code Sample: lock(SyncRoot), lock(_syncRoot) This appears to be influenced by VB's equivalent SyncLock statement, the SyncRoot property that exists on some of the ICollection classes and part of some kind of SyncRoot design pattern (which arguably is a bad idea) Being in a C# context, not sure if I'd want to have a VBish naming. Even worse, in VB naming the variable the same as the keyword. Not sure if this would be a source of confusion or not. thisLock and lockThis from the MSDN articles: C# lock Statement, VB SyncLock Statement Code Sample: lock(thisLock), lock(lockThis) Not sure if these were named minimally purely for the example or not Kind of weird if we're using this within a static class/method. Several usages of PadLock (of varying casing) Code Sample: lock(PadLock), lock(padlock) Not bad, but my only beef is it unsurprisingly invokes the image of a physical "padlock" which I tend to not associate with the abstract threading concept. Naming the lock based on what it's intending to lock Code Sample: lock(messagesLock), lock(DictionaryLock), lock(commandQueueLock) In the VB SyncRoot MSDN page example, it has a simpleMessageList example with a private messagesLock object I don't think it's a good idea to name the lock against the type you're locking around ("DictionaryLock") as that's an implementation detail that may change. I prefer naming around the concept/object you're locking ("messagesLock" or "commandQueueLock") Interestingly, I very rarely see this naming convention for locking objects in code samples online or on StackOverflow. Question: What's your opinion generally about naming private locking objects? Recently, I've started naming them ThreadLock (so kinda like option 3), but I'm finding myself questioning that name. I'm frequently using this locking pattern (in the code sample provided above) throughout my applications so I thought it might make sense to get a more professional opinion/discussion about a solid naming convention for them. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Inspection, code review - is it really testing?

    - by user970696
    ISTQB, Wikipedia or other sources classify verification acitivities (reviews etc.) as a static testing, yet other do not. If we can say that peer reviews and inspections are actually a kind of a testing, then a lot of standards do not make sense (consider e.g. ISO which say that validation is done by testing, while verification by checking of work products) - it should at least say dynamic testing for validation, shouldn't it? I am completing master thesis dealing with QA and I must admit that I have never seen worse and more ambiguous and contradicting literature than in this field :/ Do you think (and if so, why) that static testing is a good and justifiable term or should we stick to testing and static checks/analysis?

    Read the article

  • C++ Static Initializer - Is it thread safe

    - by Yan Cheng CHEOK
    Usually, when I try to initialize a static variable class Test2 { public: static vector<string> stringList; private: static bool __init; static bool init() { stringList.push_back("string1"); stringList.push_back("string2"); stringList.push_back("string3"); return true; } }; // Implement vector<string> Test2::stringList; bool Test2::__init = Test2::init(); Is the following code thread safe, during static variable initialization? Is there any better way to static initialize stringlist, instead of using a seperate static function (init)?

    Read the article

  • Enabling OUD Entry Cache for large static groups

    - by Sylvain Duloutre
    Oracle Unified Directory can take advantage of several caches to improve performances. especially the so-called database cache and the file system cache. In addition to that, it is possible to use an entry cache to cache LDAP entries. By default, the entry cache is not used. In specific deployements involving large static groups, it may worth loading the group entries to the entry cache to speed up group membership and group-based aci evaluation. To do so, run the following commands: First, specify which entries should reside in the entry cache. In the commad below, only entries matching the LDAP filter " (|(objctclass=groupOfNames)(objectclass=groupOfUniqueNames)) " will be stored in the entry cache. dsconfig set-entry-cache-prop \          --cache-name FIFO \          --add include-filter:\(\|\(objctclass=groupOfNames\)\(objectclass=groupOfUniqueNames\)\)          --port <ADMIN_PORT> \          --bindDN cn=Directory\ Manager \          --bindPassword ****** \          --no-prompt Then enable the entry cache: dsconfig set-entry-cache-prop \          --cache-name FIFO \          --set enabled:true \          --port <ADMIN_PORT> \          --bindDN cn=Directory\ Manager \          --bindPassword ****** \          --no-prompt In addition to that, you can control how much memory the entry cache can use: oud@s96sec1d0-v3:/application/oud : dsconfig -X -n -p <ADMIN PORT> -D "cn=Directory Manager" -w <password> get-entry-cache-prop --cache-name FIFO Property           : Value(s) -------------------:----------------------------------------------------------- cache-level        : 1 enabled            : true exclude-filter     : - include-filter     : (|(objctclass=groupOfNames)(objectclass=groupOfUniqueNames)) max-entries        : 2147483647 max-memory-percent : 90 You can change the max-entries amd max-memory-percent properties to control the entry cache size using the dsconfig set-entry-cache-prop command.

    Read the article

  • Facebook: Sending private messages to FB profile from a static website [migrated]

    - by Frondor
    I need to setup a static website for people to: Complete a form. And using anything from Facebook API, GET the form output via message to a Facebook Profile. I've been punching my head against "facebook developers" page all night long and can't find out how to do it. Seems quite easy, but the problem is that I don't know if you'll get my point :) Like the Send Dialog feature, you can set a certain user as recipient which will be displayed on the "To:" field once the dialog appears. FB.ui({ method: 'send', to: 'UserID', link: 'http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/arts/people-argue-just-to-win-scholars-assert.html', }); Ok, All I need is to be able to use the same behavior but instead of setting a "to:" parameter, I'd like to set a "message:" parameter. I don't know how I can solve this becuase there's no parameter like this on the API actually. This is what I need to build (It's a prototype, this code won't work) <form action="mysite.com" id="order"> <input type="radio" name="chocolate" value="white">White <br/> <input type="radio" name="chocolate" value="black">Black <br/> <input type="submit" value="Order" /> </form> jQuery gets the values $(document).ready(function() { $("#order").on("submit", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var formOutput = $(this).serialize(); var order = "I'd like to eat" + formOutput + "chocolate"; }); }); Facebook sdk sends this output ('order' string) FB.ui({ method: 'send', //or whatever to: 'UserID', message: order, //Its just an example, note the variable coming from the form link: 'http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/arts/people-argue-just-to-win-scholars-assert.html', }); As we all know, what I wrote isn't possible, so I'm asking for any alternative solution if somebody can give me, I'm not very friendly with facebook APIs :) I though in another solution which consist in using the form output directly on the 'link:' parameter of FB.ui and then reading it with jQuery on some landing page. For example, on the message sent, the linked content redirects to this URL: http://mysite.com/dashboard.html?chocolate=white and the dashboard page source code: <script> var choco = getUrlParameter('chocolate'); $("#dashboard").text("This person wants" + choco + "chocolate") </script> <div id="dashboard"></div> And this way, I will be able to see which kind of chocolate the person selected by parsing some parameters on the URL when clicking on the link section of the message: using a code like this: FB.ui({ method: 'send', //or whatever to: 'MyUserID', link: 'http://mysite.com/dashboard.html?chocolate=white', }); But no this try, my biggest problem is that I don't know how to dynamically "customize" that "link:" paramenter with jQuery. I think the best solution is to use a code like this along with the dashboard page in order to "translate" the shared URLs and see what kind of chocolate people are demanding xD FB.ui({ //declaring a variable (example) var string = getFormData().serialize; var orderString = "mysite.com/dashboard.html?" + string; // end the variables // start facebook API code method: 'send', //or whatever to: 'MyUserID', link: orderString, }); I was working here until I gave up and started to post this http://jsfiddle.net/Frondor/sctepn06/2/ Thanks in advance, I'll love you for ever if you help me solving this :D

    Read the article

  • How to write a "thread safe" function in C ?

    - by Andrei Ciobanu
    Hello I am writing some data structures in C, and I've realized that their associated functions aren't thread safe. The i am writing code uses only standard C, and I want to achieve some sort of 'synchronization'. I was thinking to do something like this: enum sync_e { TRUE, FALSE }; typedef enum sync_e sync; struct list_s { //Other stuff struct list_node_s *head; struct list_node_s *tail; enum sync_e locked; }; typedef struct list_s list; , to include a "boolean" field in the list structure that indicates the structures state: locked, unlocked. For example an insertion function will be rewritten this way: int list_insert_next(list* l, list_node *e, int x){ while(l->locked == TRUE){ /* Wait */ } l->locked = TRUE; /* Insert element */ /* -------------- */ l->locked = FALSE; return (0); } While operating on the list the 'locked' field will be set to TRUE, not allowing any other alterations. After operation completes the 'locked' field will be again set to 'TRUE'. Is this approach good ? Do you know other approaches (using only standard C).

    Read the article

  • Windows App. Thread Aborting Issue

    - by Patrick
    I'm working on an application that has to make specific decisions based on files that are placed into a folder being watched by a file watcher. Part of this decision making process involves renaming files before moving them off to another folder to be processed. Since I'm working with files of all different sizes I created an object that checks the file in a seperate thread to verify that it is "available" and when it is it fires an event. When I run the rename code from inside this available event it works. public void RenameFile_Test() { string psFilePath = @"C:\File1.xlsx"; tgt_File target = new FileObject(psFilePath); target.FileAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileAvailable); target.FileUnAvailable += new FileEventHandler(OnFileUnavailable); } private void OnFileAvailable(object source, FileEventArgs e) { ((FileObject)source).RenameFile(@"C:\File2.xlsx"); } The problem I'm running into is that when the extensions are different from the source file and the rename to file I am making a call to a conversion factory that returns a factory object based on the type of conversion and then converts the file accordingly before doing the rename. When I run that particular piece of code in unit test it works, the factory object is returned, and the conversion happens correctly. But when I run it within the process I get up to the... moExcelApp = new Application(); part of converting an .xls or .xlsx to a .csv and i get a "Thread was being Aborted" error. Any thoughts? Update: There is a bit more information and a bit of map of how the application works currently. Client Application running FSW On File Created event Creates a FileObject passing in the path of the file. On construction the file is validated: if file exists is true then, Thread toAvailableCheck = new Thread(new ThreadStart(AvailableCheck)); toAvailableCheck.Start(); The AvailableCheck Method repeatedly tries to open a streamreader to the file until the reader is either created or the number of attempts times out. If the reader is opened, it fires the FileAvailable event, if not it fires the FileUnAvailable event, passing back itself in the event. The client application is wired to catch those events from inside the Oncreated event of the FSW. the OnFileAvailable method then calls the rename functionality which contains the excel interop call. If the file is being renamed (not converted, extensions stay the same) it does a move to change the name from the old file name to the new, and if its a conversion it runs a conversion factory object which returns the correct type of conversion based on the extensions of the source file and the destination file name. If it is a simple rename it works w/o a problem. If its a conversion (which is the XLS to CSV object that is returned as a part of the factory) the very first thing it does is create a new application object. That is where the application bombs. When i test the factory and conversion/rename process outside of the thread and in its own unit test the process works w/o a problem. Update: I tested the Excel Interop inside a thread by doing this: [TestMethod()] public void ExcelInteropTest() { Thread toExcelInteropThreadTest = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Instantiate_App)); toExcelInteropThreadTest.Start(); } private void Instantiate_App() { Application moExcelApp = new Application(); moExcelApp.Quit(); } And on the line where the application is instatntiated I got the 'A first chance exception of type 'System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' error. So I added; toExcelInteropThreadTest.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.MTA); after the thread instantiation and before the thread start call and still got the same error. I'm getting the notion that I'm going to have to reconsider the design.

    Read the article

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