Search Results

Search found 38284 results on 1532 pages for 'object reference'.

Page 442/1532 | < Previous Page | 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449  | Next Page >

  • Spring FactoryBean and scopes working together

    - by TTar
    I'd like to use FactoryBeans and scopes together. Specifically, I'd like the object created and returned by a FactoryBean to be placed into a specified (perhaps custom) scope. The issue is that doing the following: <bean class="x.y.z.TestFactoryBean" scope="test" /> Results in the FactoryBean itself being scoped, and has somewhat unpredictable behaviour on the object created by the factory. I understand why this is; the factory itself is a first-class spring-managed bean, and has its own lifecycle. However, I can't find a way to specify that the object returned from the factory should itself be scoped. On the other hand, this does exactly what I want (as long as TestFactoryBean does NOT implement the FactoryBean interface): <bean class="x.y.z.TestFactoryBean" name="testFactory"> <bean class="x.y.z.TestBean" factory-bean="testFactory" factory-method="getObject" scope="test" /> So the real question is, how can I make Spring behave like it does for the 2nd example above, but using real FactoryBeans?

    Read the article

  • how to access a firefox extension variable from the current document/window

    - by bosky101
    my firefox extension has an object myExt . myExt = { request: function(){ //makes request to server}, callback: function(json) { //do something with this } }; From a dynamically added script element, I make a call to a server that returns json, i want the json to be sent to myExt.callback that exists within my extension's js code. //from my extension, i add a script element myExt.request(); //from server i get the following response myExt.callback ( {"some":"json"}) ; //but the window doesnt find a reference to myExt how do i make a reference to myExt variable from the webpage ?

    Read the article

  • C++11/14 and return( ... ) vs return

    - by user2485710
    In C++ you are allowed to write a return statement that looks like : return ( ... ); which is different from the more popular : return ... ; In particular the first version returns the address/reference of something that is local to the stack of the function which contains that return statement. Now why something would like to return a reference to something that, at that point, has no lifetime ? What are the use case for this idiom ? Considering the new buzzword and features from C++11 and C++14 there is a different usage for this ?

    Read the article

  • python mock side_effect or return_value dependent on call_count

    - by user18380
    To test a polling function I want to mock the calling of a sub function so that the first time it is called it will fail, and the second time it is called it will succeed. Here's a very simplified version of it: poll_function(var1): value = sub_function(var1) # First call will return None while not value: time.sleep(POLLING_INTERVAL) value = sub_function(var1) # A subsequent call will return a string, e.g "data" return value Is this possible to do with a Mock object from the mock framework? I know Mock objects have a call_count attribute I should be able to use somehow. Right now I've solved it by creating a custom mock object that I use to monkey patch sub_function(), but I feel there should be a better less verbose way of doing it: def test_poll(): class MyMock(object): def __init__(self, *args): self.call_count = 0 def sub_function(self, *args, **kwargs): if self.call_count > 1: return "data" else: self.call_count += 1 return None my_mock = MyMock() with patch('sub_function', my_mock.sub_function): ok_(poll_function())

    Read the article

  • Why does Java ArrayList use per-element casting instead of per-array casting?

    - by user1111929
    What happens inside Java's ArrayList<T> (and probably many other classes) is that there is an internal Object[] array = new Object[n];, to which T Objects are written. Whenever an element is read from it, a cast return (T) array[i]; is done. So, a cast on every single read. I wonder why this is done. To me, it seems like they're just doing unnecessary casts. Wouldn't it be more logical and also slightly faster to just create a T[] array = (T[]) new Object[n]; and then just return array[i]; without cast? This is only one cast per array creation, which is usually far less than the number of reads. Why is their method to be preferred? I fail to see why my idea isn't strictly better?

    Read the article

  • Copy method optimization in compilers

    - by Dženan
    Hi All! I have the following code: void Stack::operator =(Stack &rhs) { //do the actual copying } Stack::Stack(Stack &rhs) //copy-constructor { top=NULL; //initialize this as an empty stack (which it is) *this=rhs; //invoke assignment operator } Stack& Stack::CopyStack() { return *this; //this statement will invoke copy contructor } It is being used like this: unsigned Stack::count() { unsigned c=0; Stack copy=CopyStack(); while (!copy.empty()) { copy.pop(); c++; } return c; } Removing reference symbol from declaration of CopyStack (returning a copy instead of reference) makes no difference in visual studio 2008 (with respect to number of times copying is invoked). I guess it gets optimized away - normally it should first make a copy for the return value, then call assignment operator once more to assign it to variable sc. What is your experience with this sort of optimization in different compilers? Regards, Dženan

    Read the article

  • Javascript looping only through defined properties of array. How?

    - by Beck
    For example if i'm keeping array of references via id like that: if(typeof channel_boards[misc.channel_id] == 'undefined') { channel_boards[misc.channel_id] = $('<div class="channel" channel_id="'+misc.channel_id+'"></div>').appendTo('#board'); } And then i'm looping through array to find required reference. I'm looping through undefined properties as well. Is it possible to loop only through defined properties? for(i=0;i<channel_boards.length;i++) { if(channel_boards[i] != undefined) { if(channel_boards[i].attr('channel_id') != visible) {channel_boards[i].addClass('hidden_board');} else {channel_boards[i].removeClass('hidden_board');} } } Maybe i should change the way i'm storing references? Via object for example, but how i'll be able to find proper reference via id number.

    Read the article

  • Where should I put interface?

    - by Roman
    I program a class in which I have a method which takes an callback object from an external software. At the moment Eclipse says that it does not know the type of the object I gave as argument (it is expectable since I do not specify this type, it's done by the external software). So, I think I need to write an interface for the object which I give as an argument to my method. In this respect I have two questions. Is it really so? Can I solve the mentioned problem in the mentioned way. If it is the case, where should I put this interface? In the same file where my class is? In the class? Outside of the class?

    Read the article

  • Why does the compiler give an ambiguous invocation error when passing inherited types?

    - by Matt Mitchell
    What is happening in the C# compiler to cause the following ambiguous invocation compilation error? The same issue applies to extension methods, or when TestClass is generic and using instance rather than static methods. class Type1 { } class Type2 : Type1 {} class TestClass { public static void Do<T>(T something, object o) where T : Type1 {} public static void Do(Type1 something, string o) {} } void Main() { var firstInstance = new Type1(); TestClass.Do(firstInstance, new object()); // Calls Do(Type1, obj) TestClass.Do(firstInstance, "Test"); // Calls Do<T>(T, string) var secondInstance = new Type2(); TestClass.Do(secondInstance, new object()); // Calls Do(Type1, obj) TestClass.Do(secondInstance, "Test"); // "The call is ambiguous" compile error }

    Read the article

  • How can I make a read-only ObservableCollection property?

    - by thrag
    I'd like to expose a property on a view model that contains a list of objects (from database). I need this collection to be read-only. That is, I want to prevent Add/Remove, etc. But allow the foreach and indexers to work. My intent is to declare a private field holding the editable collection and reference it with a read-only Public Property. As follows public ObservableCollection<foo> CollectionOfFoo { get { return _CollectionOfFoo; } } However, that syntax just prevents changing the reference to the collection. It doesn't prevent add/remove, etc. What is the right way to accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid double construction of proxy with DynamicProxy::CreateClassProxyWithTarget?

    - by Belvasis
    I am decorating an existing object using the CreateClassProxyWithTarget method. However, the constructor and therefore, initialization code, is being called twice. I already have a "constructed" instance (the target). I understand why this happens, but is there a way to avoid it, other than using an empty constructor? Edit: Here is some code: First the proxy creation: public static T Create<T>(T i_pEntity) where T : class { object pResult = m_pGenerator.CreateClassProxyWithTarget(typeof(T), new[] { typeof(IEditableObject), typeof(INotifyPropertyChanged) , typeof(IMarkerInterface), typeof(IDataErrorInfo) }, i_pEntity, ProxyGenerationOptions.Default, new BindingEntityInterceptor<T>(i_pEntity)); return (T)pResult; } I use this for example with an object of the following class: public class KatalogBase : AuditableBaseEntity { public KatalogBase() { Values = new HashedSet<Values>(); Attributes = new HashedSet<Attributes>(); } ... } If i now call BindingFactory.Create(someKatalogBaseObject); the Values and Attributes properties are beeing initialized again.

    Read the article

  • DDD Infrastructure services

    - by Zygimantas
    Hello, I am learning DDD and I am a little bit lost in Infrastructure layer: As I understand, "all good DDD applications" should have 4 layers: Presentation, Application, Domain and Infrastructure. Database should be accessed using Repositories. Repository interfaces should be in Domain layer and repository implementation - in Infrastructure (reference http://stackoverflow.com/questions/693221/ddd-where-to-keep-domain-interfaces-the-infrastructure). Application, Domain and Infrastructure layer should/may have services (reference www.lostechies.com/blogs/jimmy_bogard/archive/2008/08/21/services-in-domain-driven-design.aspx), in example EmailService in Infrastructure layer which sends Email messages. BUT, inside Infrastructure layer we have repository implementations, which are used to access database. So, in this case, repositories are database services? What is the difference between Infrastructure service and repository? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • latex and bibtex problem

    - by Hellnar
    Hello, I am trying to compile an academical paper with chicago style citations. For this I am using a file named chicago.sty, Document compiles however I do not see any reference or citation.Instead I somehow get error when reading the paper.blg file: This is BibTeX, Version 0.99cThe top-level auxiliary file: paper.aux I couldn't open style file chicago.bst ---line 62 of file paper.aux : \bibstyle{chicago} What is a blg file, and how can I generate it from the .sty file so that my citations and references display properly. I do a such include: .... \usepackage{chicago} \addto\captionsenglish{\def\refname{Reference-List}} .... .... %at the bottom of the source file: \bibliographystyle{chicago} \singlespacing \bibliography{paper}%name of the bib file Regards.

    Read the article

  • Why exactly is calling the destructor for the second time undefined behavior in C++?

    - by sharptooth
    As mentioned in this answer simply calling the destructor for the second time is already undefined behavior 12.4/14(3.8). For example: class Class { public: ~Class() {} }; // somewhere in code: { Class* object = new Class(); object->~Class(); delete object; // UB because at this point the destructor call is attempted again } In this example the class is designed in such a way that the destructor could be called multiple times - no things like double-deletion can happen. The memory is still allocated at the point where delete is called - the first destructor call doesn't call the ::operator delete() to release memory. For example, in Visual C++ 9 the above code looks working. Even C++ definition of UB doesn't directly prohibit things qualified as UB from working. So for the code above to break some implementation and/or platform specifics are required. Why exactly would the above code break and under what conditions?

    Read the article

  • Cant append "used" DOMObject in IE

    - by Kein
    I have some objects, that keep created DOMObjects, like here: function category(){ var domBlock; this.block = function(){ if (!domBlock){ // Here dom-object constructor $('<div></div>'); etc } return domBlock; // jquery object, // but i test and native document.createElement } } Then i clear category's area, and append old and new received(with Ajax) objects: area.html(''); for(id in category_list){ area.append( category_list[id].block() ); } where category_list is list that contain category objects. Area is jQuery object. In other browsers (except IE) i get area with all needed categories, but in IE i get only new received categories(that just create DomObject), other old objects that keeped old DomObject not show. I know it possible make with innerHTML, but i wont keep DomObject, not text. Because DomObject keep many events. And it very hard for browser attach events for each DomObject after refresh area.

    Read the article

  • How to expose a control collection to a property grid at design time

    - by Stefano Delendati
    I have a custom control that with a property that is a collection of custom object. This custom object hava a reference to some component/controls. When at design time I tray to add an item to the collection and select the object, VS tells me that the control is not serializable. This is the code (simplified version - but not to much): public class ViewRefObj { public control view { get; set; } public ViewRefObj() { } } private List<ViewRefObj> _controls=new List<ViewRefObj>(); public List<ViewRefObj> Views { get { return _controls; } }

    Read the article

  • Polymorphic behavior not being implemented

    - by Garrett A. Hughes
    The last two lines of this code illustrate the problem: the compiler works when I use the reference to the object, but not when I assign the reference to an array element. The rest of the code is in the same package in separate files. BioStudent and ChemStudent are separate classes, as well as Student. package pkgPoly; public class Poly { public static void main(String[] arg) { Student[] stud = new Student[3]; // create a biology student BioStudent s1 = new BioStudent("Tom"); // create a chemistry student ChemStudent s2 = new ChemStudent("Dick"); // fill the student body with studs stud[0] = s0; stud[1] = s1; // compiler complains that it can't find symbol getMajor on next line System.out.println("major: " + stud[0].getMajor() ); // doesn't compile; System.out.println("major: " + s0.getMajor() ); // works: compiles and runs correctly } }

    Read the article

  • possible to show composition relationship in a diagram generated from PHP source code?

    - by ajsie
    i have tested several UML applications for whether they could show composition relationships in the UML diagrams generated form the PHP source code or not, and the result is they can't. i know that this is a typical problem for PHP cause we don't declare a data type when we code, so it's difficult for the UML applications to know if an instance variable is a reference to an object or not. i also tested nWire with the same result. will there never be applications that could show us a complete map over all object relationships more than just inheritance? i think it's a pity that you can't have a good view over all the relationships for an application. cause when i use an open source solution, i always want to know how the objects are related to each other. maybe we could make comments for the instance variable telling the software that this is an reference to an object? but that would mean that the mapping software is using this solution. i feel its a pity nWire/visual paradigm can't give us a complete map:(

    Read the article

  • linq with Include and criteria

    - by JMarsch
    How would I translate this into LINQ? Say I have A parent table (Say, customers), and child (addresses). I want to return all of the Parents who have addresses in California, and just the california address. (but I want to do it in LINQ and get an object graph of Entity objects) Here's the old fashioned way: SELECT c.blah, a.blah FROM Customer c INNER JOIN Address a on c.CustomerId = a.CustomerId where a.State = 'CA' The problem I'm having with LINQ is that i need an object graph of concrete Entity types (and it can't be lazy loaded. Here's what I've tried so far: // this one doesn't filter the addresses -- I get the right customers, but I get all of their addresses, and not just the CA address object. from c in Customer.Include(c = c.Addresses) where c.Addresses.Any(a = a.State == "CA") select c // this one seems to work, but the Addresses collection on Customers is always null from c in Customer.Include(c = c.Addresses) from a in c.Addresses where a.State == "CA" select c; Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • scala coalesces multiple function call parameters into a Tuple -- can this be disabled?

    - by landon9720
    This is a troublesome violation of type safety in my project, so I'm looking for a way to disable it. It seems that if a function takes an AnyRef (or a java.lang.Object), you can call the function with any combination of parameters, and Scala will coalesce the parameters into a Tuple object and invoke the function. In my case the function isn't expecting a Tuple, and fails at runtime. I would expect this situation to be caught at compile time. object WhyTuple { def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = { fooIt("foo", "bar") } def fooIt(o: AnyRef) { println(o.toString) } } Output: (foo,bar)

    Read the article

  • Generically creating objects in C#

    - by DrLazer
    What I am trying to do is load in objects from an XML save file. The problem is those objects are configurable by the user at runtime, meaning i had to use reflection to get the names and attributes of those objects stored in an XML file. I am in the middle of a recursive loop through the XML and up to the part where I need to create an object then thought ..... ah - no idea how to do that :( I have an array stuffed with empty objects (m_MenuDataTypes), one of each possible type. My recursive loading function looks like this private void LoadMenuData(XmlNode menuDataNode) { foreach (object menuDataObject in m_MenuDataTypes) { Type menuDataObjectType = menuDataObject.GetType(); if (menuDataObjectType.Name == menuDataNode.Name) { //create object } } } I need to put some code where my comment is but I can't have a big switch statement or anything. The objects in my array can change depending on how the user has configured the app.

    Read the article

  • Explain the code: c# locking feature and threads

    - by Mendy
    I used this pattern in a few projects, (this snipped of code is from CodeCampServer), I understand what it does, but I'm really interesting in an explanation about this pattern. Specifically: Why is the double check of _dependenciesRegistered. Why to use lock (Lock){}. Thanks. public class DependencyRegistrarModule : IHttpModule { private static bool _dependenciesRegistered; private static readonly object Lock = new object(); public void Init(HttpApplication context) { context.BeginRequest += context_BeginRequest; } public void Dispose() { } private static void context_BeginRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { EnsureDependenciesRegistered(); } private static void EnsureDependenciesRegistered() { if (!_dependenciesRegistered) { lock (Lock) { if (!_dependenciesRegistered) { new DependencyRegistrar().ConfigureOnStartup(); _dependenciesRegistered = true; } } } } }

    Read the article

  • Which class will be instantiated

    - by Michael
    Say I have 2 subclasses from UIViewController, class A and class B. In Main nib file an object is representing class A and it is set to load file from Secondary nib file. The owner of Secondary nib is of class B. The question is - from which class an object in Main nib file will be instanciated once the nib files unarchived in the memory? The reason this question arised is that I have to take care myself if such reference to external NIB file present, to ensure that the first nib's object and second nib's owner is same. Please correct me if my statement is wrong.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449  | Next Page >