Search Results

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

Page 45/125 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

• Abstract Classes and ReadOnly Properties

  - by serhio

  Let's have three classes; Line PoliLine SuperPoliLine for all that three classes a Distance is defined. But only for the Line a Distance can be Set. Is there a possibility to build a common abstract (MustInherit) class Segment, having a Distance as (abstract +? ReadOnly) member? Question for VB.NET, but C# answers welcomed too. Business Background Imagine a Bus. It has a lot of Stations, MainStations, and 2 TerminalStations. So Line is between 2 Stations, PoliLine is between 2 MainStations, and SuperPoliLine is between 2 TerminalStations. All "lines" are "Segments", but only the distance A-B between 2 stations - Line can be defined.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to create nested classes in PHP as it is in C#?

  - by Edward Tanguay

  In C# you can have nested classes like this, which are useful if you have classes which do not have meaning outside the scope of one particular class, e.g. in a factory pattern: public abstract class BankAccount { private BankAccount() {} private sealed class SavingsAccount : BankAccount { ... } private sealed class CheckingAccount : BankAccount { ... } public BankAccount MakeSavingAccount() { ... } public BankAccount MakeCheckingAccount() { ... } } Is this possible in PHP? I've read that it was planned for PHP 5, then cancelled, then planned again, but can't find definitive info. Does anyone know how to create nested classes (classes within the scope of another class) as in the above C# example using PHP 5.3?

  Read the article

• C++ (g++) Compile Error, Expected "="/etc. Before 'MyWindow" (my class name)

  - by Ell

  Hi all, I have a very strange problem and the following code wont compile: #ifndef MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED #define MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED class MyWindow{ private: WNDCLASSEX window_class; HWND window_handle; HDC device_context_handle; HGLRC open_gl_render_context; MSG message; BOOL quit; public: Window(int height=416, int width=544, WindowStyle window_style=WINDOWED); void Show(); void Close(); ~Window(); }; #endif // MYWINDOW_HPP_INCLUDED I get the following error: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or 'attribute' before 'MyWindow' I can't see any syntax errors here, although I coukd be wrong as I am very (very) new in c++. Thanks in advance, ell.

  Read the article

• When do you use metaclasses?

  - by johannix

  Just started looking into metaclasses and while they seem powerful, I can think of other ways to accomplish the same type of thing. I was wondering when metaclasses have been found to be the right answer and why.

  Read the article

• Exposing members or make them private in Python?

  - by deamon

  Is there a general convention about exposing members in Python classes? I know that this is a case of "it depends", but maybe there is a rule of thumb. Private member: class Node: def __init__(self): self.__childs = [] def add_childs(self, *args): self.__childs += args node = Node() node.add_childs("one", "two") Public member: class Node2: def __init__(self): self.childs = [] node2 = Node2() node2.childs += "one", "two"

  Read the article

• How to "wrap" implementation in C#

  - by igor

  Hello, I have these classes in C# (.NET Framework 3.5) described below: public class Base { public int State {get; set;} public virtual int Method1(){} public virtual string Method2(){} ... public virtual void Method10(){} } public class B: Base { // some implementation } public class Proxy: Base { private B _b; public class Proxy(B b) { _b = b; } public override int Method1() { if (State == Running) return _b.Method1(); else return base.Method1(); } public override string Method2() { if (State == Running) return _b.Method2(); else return base.Method2(); } public override void Method10() { if (State == Running) _b.Method10(); else base.Method10(); } } I want to get something this: public Base GetStateDependentImplementation() { if (State == Running) // may be some other rule return _b; else return base; // compile error } and my Proxy's implementation will be: public class Proxy: Base { ... public override int Method1() { return GetStateDependentImplementation().Method1(); } public override string Method2() { return GetStateDependentImplementation().Method2(); } ... } Of course, I can do this (aggregation of base implementation): public RepeaterOfBase: Base // no any overrides, just inheritance { } public class Proxy: Base { private B _b; private RepeaterOfBase _Base; public class Proxy(B b, RepeaterOfBase aBase) { _b = b; _base = aBase; } } ... public Base GetStateDependentImplementation() { if (State == Running) return _b; else return _Base; } ... But instance of Base class is very huge and I have to avoid to have other additional copy in memory. So I have to simplify my code have to "wrap" implementation have to avoid a code duplication have to avoid aggregation of any additional instance of Base class (duplication) Is it possible to reach these goals?

  Read the article

• Where do you put your dependencies?

  - by The All Foo

  If I use the dependency injection pattern to remove dependencies they end up some where else. For example, Snippet 1, or what I call Object Maker. I mean you have to instantiate your objects somewhere...so when you move dependency out of one object, you end up putting it another one. I see that this consolidates all my dependencies into one object. Is that the point, to reduce your dependencies so that they all reside in a single ( as close to as possible ) location? Snippet 1 - Object Maker <?php class ObjectMaker { public function makeSignUp() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignUpObject = new ControlSignUp(); $SignUpObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignUpObject; } public function makeSignIn() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignInObject = new ControlSignIn(); $SignInObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignInObject; } public function makeTweet( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $TweetObject = new ControlTweet(); $TweetObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $TweetObject; } public function makeBookmark( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $BookmarkObject = new ControlBookmark(); $BookmarkObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject,$TextObject,$MessageObject); return $BookmarkObject; } }

  Read the article

• design patterns for hierarchical structures

  - by JLBarros

  Anyone knows some design patterns for hierarchical structures? For example, to manage inventory categories, accounting chart of accounts, divisions of human resources, etc.. Thank you very much in advance EDIT: Thanks for your interest. I am looking for a better way of dealing with hierarchical items to which they should apply operations depending on the level of hierarchy. I have been studying the patterns by Martin Fowler, for example Accounting, but I wonder if there are other more generic. The problem is that operations apply to the items must be possible to change even at run time and may depend on other external variables. I thought of a kind of strategy pattern but would like to combine it with the fact that it is a hierarchical scheme. I would appreciate any reference to hierarchical patterns and you'll take care of them in depth.

  Read the article

• 'is instanceof' Interface bad design

  - by peterRit

  Say I have a class A class A { Z source; } Now, the context tells me that 'Z' can be an instance of different classes (say, B and C) which doesn't share any common class in their inheritance tree. I guess the naive approach is to make 'Z' an Interface class, and make classes B and C implement it. But something still doesn't convince me because every time an instance of class A is used, I need to know the type of 'source'. So all finishes in multiple 'ifs' making 'is instanceof' which doesn't sound quite nice. Maybe in the future some other class implements Z, and having hardcoded 'ifs' of this type definitely could break something. The escence of the problem is that I cannot resolve the issue by adding functions to Z, because the work done in each instance type of Z is different. I hope someone can give me and advice, maybe about some useful design pattern. Thanks

  Read the article

• how to handle exceptions/errors in php?

  - by fayer

  when using 3rd part libraries they tend to throw exceptions to the browser and hence kill the script. eg. if im using doctrine and insert a duplicate record to the database it will throw an exception. i wonder, what is best practice for handling these exceptions. should i always do a try...catch? but doesn't that mean that i will have try...catch all over the script and for every single function/class i use? Or is it just for debugging? i don't quite get the picture. Cause if a record already exists in a database, i want to tell the user "Record already exists". And if i code a library or a function, should i always use "throw new Expcetion($message, $code)" when i want to create an error? Please shed a light on how one should create/handle exceptions/errors. Thanks

  Read the article

• Help dealing with data dependency between two registration forms

  - by franko75

  I have a tricky issue here with a registration of both a user and his/her pet. Both the user and the pet are treated as separate entities and both require separate registration forms. However, the user's pet has to be linked to the user via a foreign key in the database. The process is basically that when a new user joins the site, firstly they register their pet, then they register themselves. The reason for this order is to check their pet's eligibility for the site (there are some criteria to be met) first, instead of getting the user to sign up only to then find out their pet is ineligible. It is this ordering of the form submissions which is causing me a bit of a headache, as follows... The site is being developed with an MVC framework, and the User registration process is managed via a method in a User_form controller, while the pet registration process is managed via a method in the Pet_form controller. The pet registration form happens first, and the pet data can be saved without the owner_id at this stage, with the user id possibly being added (e.g by retrieving pet's id from session) following user registration. However, doing it this way could potentially result in redundant data, where pet records would be created in the database, but if the user doesn't actually register themselves too, then the pets will be ownerless records in the DB. Other option is to serialize the new pet's data at the pet registration stage, don't save it to the DB until the user fills out their registration form. Once the user is created, i can pass serialised data AND the owner_id to a method in the Pet Model which can update the DB. However, I also need to set the newly created $pet to $this-pet which I then access for a sequence of other related forms. Should I just set the session variable in the model method? Then in the Pet controller constructor, do a check for pet stored in session, if yes, assign to $this-pet... If this makes any sense to anybody and you have some advice, i'd be grateful to hear it!

  Read the article

• Not very objective - please help

  - by chainwork

  I am having trouble understanding the meaning and more importantly the concept of an object as it relates to jQuery. I understand the basics that its a collection of data that comes in two forms, properties and methods but I kind of get lost on how it works beyond that. Can anyone point me to some good tutorials that maybe helped you understand? I'm hoping to "Get it" once and for all. Many many thanks for your help! =]

  Read the article

• Are variables in the main methods static.

  - by vaibhav

  Its a well known fact that a static method can work only on static members. public static void Main() { Test t1 = new Test(); } Here the Main method is static, but I haven't declared t1 as static. Is it implicitly static?

  Read the article

• Can I have two names for the same variable?

  - by Roman

  The short version of the question: I do: x = y. Then I change x, and y is unchanged. What I want is to "bind" x and y in such a way that I change y whenever I change x. The extended version (with some details): I wrote a class ("first" class) which generates objects of another class ("second" class). In more details, every object of the second class has a name as a unique identifier. I call a static method of the first class with a name of the object from the second class. The first class checks if such an object was already generated (if it is present in the static HashMap of the first class). If it is already there, it is returned. If it is not yet there, it is created, added to the HashMap and returned. And then I have the following problem. At some stage of my program, I take an object with a specific name from the HashMap of the first class. I do something with this object (for example change values of some fields). But the object in the HashMap does not see these changes! So, in fact, I do not "take" an object from the HashMap, I "create a copy" of this object and this is what I would like to avoid.

  Read the article

• What's the benefit of calling new on an object instance?

  - by Geo

  I'm reading [Programming Perl][1], and I found this code snippet: sub new { my $invocant = shift; my $class = ref($invocant) || $invocant; my $self = { color => "bay", legs => 4, owner => undef, @_, # Override previous attributes }; return bless $self, $class; } With constructors like this one, what's the benefit of calling new on an object instance? I assume that it's what it's for, right? My guess is that if anyone would want to write such a constructor, he would have to add some more code that copies the attributes of the first object to the one about to be created.

  Read the article

• Factory vs instance constructors

  - by Neil N

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

  Read the article

• Override java methods without affecting parent behaviour

  - by Timmmm

  suppose I have this classes (sorry it's kind of hard to think of a simple example here; I don't want any "why would you want to do that?" answers!): class Squarer { public void setValue(int v) { mV = v; } public int getValue() { return mV; } private int mV; public void square() { setValue(getValue() * getValue()); } } class OnlyOddInputsSquarer extends Squarer { @Override public void setValue(int v) { if (v % 2 == 0) { print("Sorry, this class only lets you square odd numbers!") return; } super.setValue(v); } } auto s = new OnlyOddInputsSquarer(); s.setValue(3); s.square(); This won't work. When Squarer.square() calls setValue(), it will go to OnlyOddInputsSquarer.setValue() which will reject all its values (since all squares are even). Is there any way I can override setValue() so that all the functions in Squarer still use the method defined there? PS: Sorry, java doesn't have an auto keyword you haven't heard about! Wishful thinking on my part.

  Read the article

• How to pass a linc to class function and call it?

  - by Kabumbus

  So I have a class like class mySafeData { public: void Set( int i ) { myMutex.lock(); myData = i; myMutex.unlock(); } void Get( int& i) { myMutex.lock(); i = myData; myMutex.unlock(); } private: int myData; boost::mutex myMutex; }; its instance is running. Lets call instance A. I want to create a new class that would take as a start up argument some kind of link to Getter from A and would be capable to somehow save link to thet getter for calling it inside its private methods vhen needed. how to do such thing?

  Read the article

• Is it OK to write a constructor which does nothing?

  - by Roman

  To use methods of a class I need to instantiate a class. At the moment the class has not constructor (so I want to write it). But than I have realized that the constructor should do nothing (I do need to specify values of fields). In this context I have a question if it is OK to write constructor which does nothing. For example: public Point() { }

  Read the article

• Passing parameter to base class constructor or using instance variable?

  - by deamon

  All classes derived from a certain base class have to define an attribute called "path". In the sense of duck typing I could rely upon definition in the subclasses: class Base: pass # no "path" variable here def Sub(Base): def __init__(self): self.path = "something/" Another possiblity would be to use the base class constructor: class Base: def __init__(self, path): self.path = path def Sub(Base): def __init__(self): super().__init__("something/") What would you prefer and why? Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• Javascript: Access the right scope "under" apply(...)

  - by Chau

  This is a very old problem, but I cannot seem to get my head around the other solutions presented here. I have an object function ObjA() { var a = 1; this.methodA = function() { alert(a); } } which is instantiated like var myObjA = new ObjA(); Later on, I assign my methodA as a handler function in an external Javascript Framework, which invokes it using the apply(...) method. When the external framework executes my methodA, this belongs to the framework function invoking my method. Since I cannot change how my method is called, how do I regain access to the private variable a? My research tells me, that closures might be what I'm looking for.

  Read the article

• displaying structs in an array using enumerator

  - by Mostaguen

  In an object I have : public IEnumerable<voiture> recup_voitures() { foreach (voiture v in _arrVCollection) { yield return (v); } } voiture being a struct and _arrVCollection being an array containing some struct voiture. In my main class I have : foreach (CarCollection.voiture o in collection.recup_voitures()) { //some code to display the content of each struct } What is happening is that if I have an array of length 5 and only 1 struct voiture in it, it will do the displaying code 5 times instead of only 1. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• how to Clean up(destructor) a dynamic Array of pointers??

  - by Ahmed Sharara

  Is that Destructor is enough or do I have to iterate to delete the new nodes?? #include "stdafx.h" #include<iostream> using namespace std; struct node{ int row; int col; int value; node* next_in_row; node* next_in_col; }; class MultiLinkedListSparseArray { private: char *logfile; node** rowPtr; node** colPtr; // used in constructor node* find_node(node* out); node* ins_node(node* ins,int col); node* in_node(node* ins,node* z); node* get(node* in,int row,int col); bool exist(node* so,int row,int col); //add anything you need public: MultiLinkedListSparseArray(int rows, int cols); ~MultiLinkedListSparseArray(); void setCell(int row, int col, int value); int getCell(int row, int col); void display(); void log(char *s); void dump(); }; MultiLinkedListSparseArray::MultiLinkedListSparseArray(int rows,int cols){ rowPtr=new node* [rows+1]; colPtr=new node* [cols+1]; for(int n=0;n<=rows;n++) rowPtr[n]=NULL; for(int i=0;i<=cols;i++) colPtr[i]=NULL; } MultiLinkedListSparseArray::~MultiLinkedListSparseArray(){ // is that destructor enough?? cout<<"array is deleted"<<endl; delete [] rowPtr; delete [] colPtr; }

  Read the article

• Implimenting Zend MVC for my existing site-first step?

  - by Joel

  Hi guys, OK-newbie question here. I'll try not to bombard SO with lots of questions-and hopefully this first one will show me the method I'll need to follow for subsequent conversions. I have a web-based calendar system that I developed, but it was coded for me procedurally (using PHP). I'm now working on learning OO and wanting to integrate this site into my localhost Zend Framework and slowly start converting parts to OO and the Zend Framework MVC process in particular. As I've said before, I understand that this will be a slow process, and when I'm done, I still probably won't have anything as OO friendly as if I had rewritten it from scratch, but I'd like to use this as a learning experience. So, I have dropped the whole site into my localhose/zend/Public folder, and everything is showing up great and linking to the database, etc. My question is-what would be the easiest first component to switch over to the MVC model? This site has a bit of everything-forms, login, authentication, some jQuery, etc. Can anyone point to a tutorial that would address what I'm trying to do? If indeed, a form would be one of the simpler things to switch, can someone walk me through those changes? Another idea is changing over all the header info, etc? Thanks for any pointers on where to start! EDIT: Also, I understand that SO is mainly for specific coding questions-I'm happy to share specific code, once I have an idea about which section to tackle first...

  Read the article

• How to work with PHP abstract?

  - by YumYumYum

  Why would you use such abstract? Does it speed up work or what exactly its for? // file1.php abstract class Search_Adapter_Abstract { private $ch = null; abstract private function __construct() { } abstract public funciton __destruct() { curl_close($this->ch); } abstract public function search($searchString,$offset,$count); } // file2.php include("file1.php"); class abc extends Search_Adapter_Abstract { // Will the curl_close now automatically be closed? } What is the reason of extending abstract here? Makes me confused. What can i get from it now?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >