Search Results

Search found 3493 results on 140 pages for 'constructor'.

Page 47/140 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • Problems using Custom Layout in XML

    - by Kevin
    I've created a new GridLayout class that I want to use in an XML File. The class is in another project. I've created the attrs.xml file in the other project with my properties but when the constructor gets called with the AttributeSet, none of the values are set. In my xml for my screen layout, I refer to the layout with the following: xmlns:gridLayout="@com.mastertechsoftware.AndroidUtil:http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/com.mastertechsoftware.AndroidUtil" Not sure if that is right. I have the attrs.xml file being compiled to R.java in com/mastertechsoftware/AndroidUtil. All the right styleable values are there. In my constructor, I use: TypedArray a = c .obtainStyledAttributes(attrs, R.styleable.GridLayout); this.numRows = a.getInt(R.styleable.GridLayout_numRows, -1); Nothing comes back (-1 does but that means nothing is there) If I use int n = a.getIndexCount(); I get 0.

    Read the article

  • What did I do wrong here when trying to unit test a class that references a web service

    - by zachary
    So I had a class that referenced a class that referenced another class that called a web service. So I learn how to create an interface using partial classes. I inject the web service through the constructor. Then my unit test fails because I am newing up the actual web service in the second level of the class. So I end up modifying all three classes to pass the web service down through the constructor... was not happy :-( gave up.... what should I be doing in this case?

    Read the article

  • Returning and instance of a Class given its .class (MyClass.class)

    - by jax
    I have an enum that will hold my algorithms. I cannot instantiate these classes because I need the application context which is only available once the application has started. I want to load the class at runtime when I choose by calling getAlgorithm(Context cnx). How do I easily instantiate a class at runtime given its .class (and my constructor takes arguments)? All my classes are subclasses of Algorithm. public enum AlgorithmTypes { ALL_FROM_9_AND_LAST_FROM_10_ID(AlgorithmFactory.AlgorithmAllFrom9AndLastFrom10Impl.class), ALL_FROM_9_AND_LAST_FROM_10_CURRENCY_ID(AlgorithmFactory.AlgorithmAllFrom9AndLastFrom10Impl.class), DIVIDE_BY_9_LESS_THAN_100(AlgorithmFactory.AlgorithmAllFrom9AndLastFrom10Impl.class), TABLES_BEYOND_5_BY_5(AlgorithmFactory.AlgorithmAllFrom9AndLastFrom10Impl.class); private Class<? extends Algorithm> algorithm; AlgorithmTypes(Class<? extends Algorithm> c) { algorithm = c; } public Algorithm getAlgorithm(Context cnx) { return //needs to return the current algoriths constructor which takes the Context Algorithm(Context cnx); } }

    Read the article

  • Confusion over C++ new operator and classes

    - by Nils
    Hi all I created a simple class in C++ which has a private dynamic array. In the constructor I initialize the array using new and in the destructor I free it using delete. When I instantiate the class using Class a = Class(..); it works as expected, however it seems I cannot instantiate it using the new operator (Like Class *a = new Class(..);), I always get a segmentation fault. What I don't understand is when I should use new to instantiate a class and when just call the constructor or should it be possible to instantiate a class either with new or by just calling the constructor. float** A = new float*[3]; for (int i=0; i<3; i++) { A[i] = new float[3]; } A[0][0] = 3; A[0][1] = 3; A[0][2] = 4; A[1][0] = 5; A[1][1] = 6; A[1][2] = 7; A[2][0] = 1; A[2][1] = 2; A[2][2] = 3; Matrix *M = new Matrix(A, 3, 3); delete[] A; delete M; Below the class definition.. class Matrix { private: int width; int height; int stride; float* elements; public: Matrix(float** a, int n, int m); ~Matrix(); }; Matrix::Matrix(float** a, int n, int m) { // n: num rows // m: elem per rows elements = new float[n*m]; for (int i=0; i<n; i++) { for (int j=0; j<m; j++) { elements[i*n + j] = a[n][m]; } } } Matrix::~Matrix() { delete[] elements; }

    Read the article

  • Using Boost statechart, how can I transition to a state unconditionally?

    - by nickb
    I have a state A that I would like to transition to its next state B unconditionally, once the constructor of A has completed. Is this possible? I tried posting an event from the constructor, which does not work, even though it compiles. Thanks. Edit: Here is what I've tried so far: struct A : sc::simple_state< A, Active > { public: typedef sc::custom_reaction< EventDoneA > reactions; A() { std::cout << "Inside of A()" << std::endl; post_event( EventDoneA() ); } sc::result react( const EventDoneA & ) { return transit< B >(); } }; This yields the following runtime assertion failure: Assertion failed: get_pointer( pContext_ ) != 0, file /includ e/boost/statechart/simple_state.hpp, line 459

    Read the article

  • Creating immutable objects from javabean

    - by redzedi
    Hi All, I am involved in this project where we are building on good bit of legacy code. I have a particular situation about one big java bean object which has to be transferred over wire. So my first thought was to make it immutable and serializable to do the trick .At this point I am faced with a few difficult choices :- 1 Ideally I want some way to automatically generate an immutable, serializable version of this class. I dont have the scope to refactor or alter this class in any way and i would really really hate to have to copy paste the class with a different name ?? 2 Assuming that i gave up on 1 i.e i actually chose to duplicate code of the HUGE javabean class , i still will be in the unsavoury situation of having to write a constructor with some 20-25 parameters to make this class immutable. what is a better way to make a class immutable other than constructor injection ?? Thanks and Regards,

    Read the article

  • Fast check if an object will be successfully instantiated in PHP?

    - by Gremo
    How can I check if an object will be successfully instantiated with the given argument, without actually creating the instance? Actually I'm only checking (didn't tested this code, but should work fine...) the number of required parameters, ignoring types: // Filter definition and arguments as per configuration $filter = $container->getDefinition($serviceId); $args = $activeFilters[$filterName]; // Check number of required arguments vs arguments in config $constructor = $reflector->getConstructor(); $numRequired = $constructor->getNumberOfRequiredParameters(); $numSpecified = is_array($args) ? count($args) : 1; if($numRequired < $numSpecified) { throw new InvalidFilterDefinitionException( $serviceId, $numRequired, $numSpecified ); }

    Read the article

  • i need help to designe code in c++

    - by user344987
    ) Design and implement a Graph data structure. Use adjacency matrix to implement the unweighted graph edges. The Graph must support the following operations: 1.Constructor 2.Destructor 3.Copy constructor 4.A function to add an edge between two nodes in the graph 5.A display function that outputs all the edges of the graph 6.A function edge that accepts two nodes, the function returns true if there is an edge between the passed nodes, and returns false otherwise. B.(100 points) Depth first search and Breadth first search functions. C.(100 points) A function to output a spanning tree of the graph, use any algorithm you find appropriate, also, make the necessary changes on the data structure in A to implement your algorithm.

    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

  • Where to register for C# events?

    - by themaninthesuitcase
    I am currently transitioning from VB to C# and am having some issues with regards to registering my interest in an event. When using VB it was simply a case of specifying that a method Handles and event, often this was generated by using the object events list. While I can easily use the Class.event += delegate in C# I am unsure where the best place is to place the code to do this. Am I best placing it inside of the InitializeComponent() as per the generated code (say if you select the event in the from designer) or should I place it inside the constructor for better readability/maintenance. If inside the constructor, should it be before or after the call to InitializeComponent()?

    Read the article

  • Constructors + Dependency Injection

    - by Sunny
    If I am writing up a class with more than 1 constructor parameter like: class A{ public A(Dependency1 d1, Dependency2 d2, ...){} } I usually create a "argument holder"-type of class like: class AArgs{ public Dependency1 d1 { get; private set; } public Dependency2 d2 { get; private set; } ... } and then: class A{ public A(AArgs args){} } Typically, using a DI-container I can configure the constructor for dependencies & resolve them & so there is minimum impact when the constructors need to change. Is this considered an anti-pattern and/or any arguments against doing this?

    Read the article

  • how to create a dynamic class at runtime in Java

    - by Mrityunjay
    hi, is it possible to create a new java file from existing java file after changing some of its attributes at runtime?? Suppose i have a java file pubic class Student{ private int rollNo; private String name; // getters and setters // constructor } is it possible to create something like this, provided that rollNo is key element for the table.. public class Student { private StudentKey key; private String name; //getters and setters //constructor } public class StudentKey { private int rollNo; // getters and setters // construcotors } please help..

    Read the article

  • Why can't I enforce derived classes to have parameterless constructors?

    - by FrisbeeBen
    I am trying to do the following: public class foo<T> where T : bar, new() { public foo() { _t = new T(); } private T _t; } public abstract class bar { public abstract void someMethod(); // Some implementation } public class baz : bar { public overide someMethod(){//Implementation} } And I am attempting to use it as follows: foo<baz> fooObject = new foo<baz>(); And I get an error explaining that 'T' must be a non-abstract type with a public parameterless constructor in order to use it as parameter 'T' in the generic type or method. I fully understand why this must be, and also understand that I could pass a pre-initialized object of type 'T' in as a constructor argument to avoid having to 'new' it, but is there any way around this? any way to enforce classes that derive from 'bar' to supply parameterless constructors?

    Read the article

  • How can Java assignment be made to point to an object instead of making a copy?

    - by Matthew Piziak
    In a class, I have: private Foo bar; public Constructor(Foo bar) { this.bar = bar; } Instead of creating a copy of bar from the object provided in the parameter, is it possible to include a pointer to bar in the constructor such that changing the original bar changes the field in this object? Another way of putting it: int x = 7; int y = x; x = 9; System.out.print(y); //Prints 7. It is possible to set it up so that printing y prints 9 instead of 7?

    Read the article

  • as3 this.graphics calls do nothing

    - by zzz
    class A: [SWF(width='800',height='600',frameRate='24')] public class A extends MovieClip { private var b:B; public function A(){ super(); b = new B(); addChild(b); addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, update); } private function update(e:Event):void { b.draw(); } } class B: public class B extends MovieClip { public function draw():void { //! following code works well if put in constructor, but not here this.graphics.beginFill(0xff0000); this.graphics.drawCircle(200,200,50); } } this.graphics calls do nothing in draw method, but work fine inside B`s constructor, what i am doing wrong ?

    Read the article

  • Django GenericRelation doesn't save related object's id - is this a bug or am I doing it wrong?

    - by pinkeen
    I have a model with a generic relation (call it A), when creating an instance of this object I pass an instance of another model (call it B) as the initializer of the content_object field (via kwargs of the constructor). If I don't save B before creating A then when saving A the content_object_id is saved to the db as NULL. If I save B before passing it to the constructor of A then everything's allright. It's not logical. I assumed that the ID of the related object (B) is fetched when doing A.save() and it should throw some kind of an exception if B isn't saved yet but it just fails silently. I don't like the current solution (saving B beforhand) because we don't know yet if I will be always willing to keep the object, not just scrap it, and there are performance considerations - what if I will add some another data and save it once more shortly after. class BaseNodeData(models.Model): ... extnodedata_content_type = models.ForeignKey(ContentType, null=True) extnodedata_object_id = models.PositiveIntegerField(null=True) extnodedata = generic.GenericForeignKey(ct_field='extnodedata_content_type', fk_field='extnodedata_object_id') class MarkupNodeData(models.Model): raw_content = models.TextField() Suppose we do: markup = MarkupNodeData(raw_content='...') base = BaseNodeData(..., extnodedata=markup) markup.save() base.save() # both records are inserted to the DB but base is stored with extnodedata_object_id=NULL markup = MarkupNodeData(raw_content='...') base = BaseNodeData(..., extnodedata=markup) base.save() markup.save() # no exception is thrown and everything is the same as above markup = MarkupNodeData(raw_content='...') markup.save() base = BaseNodeData(..., extnodedata=markup) base.save() # this works as expected Of course I can do it this way, but it doesn't change anything: base = BaseNodeData(...) base.extnodedata = markup My question is - is this a bug in django which I should report or maybe I'm doing something wrong. Docs on GenericRelations aren't exactly verbose.

    Read the article

  • How to access the service instance from host object in WCF?

    - by user1048677
    I am trying to incarnate some sort of ad hoc WCF service. I already managed to launch it and make it call its own web methods as some other guy's methods. The issue that I am facing is instance management. I have set [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode = InstanceContextMode.Single)] so it now has a global instance with the same properties for all clients. But besides that I need it to call other services of its kind while listening to incoming requests from clients (similar crazy services). While debugging I noticed that the ServiceHost's constructor calls the constructor of the service class. So, I assumed it has access to the global instance of this class and I need to find a way to call methods of this instance. Please don't ask what I have been smoking, I just have to make it ad hoc.

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Inherit method from base class and return the subclass's private variable

    - by marisbest2
    I have the following BaseClass defined: function BaseClass (arg1,arg2,arg3) { //constructor code here then - var privateVar = 7500; this.getPrivateVar = function() { return privateVar; }; } I want to have the following subclass which allows changing privateVar like so: function SubClass (arg1,arg2,arg3,privateVar) { //constructor code here then - var privateVar = privateVar; } SubClass.prototype = new BaseClass(); Now I want SubClass to inherit the getPrivateVar method. However, when I try this, it always returns 7500 which is the value in the BaseClass and not the value of privateVar. In other words, is it possible to inherit a BaseClass's public methods but have any references in them refer to the SubClass's properties? And how would I do that?

    Read the article

  • Changing the value of a macro at run time

    - by BrandiNo
    I'm working in Visual Studio 2010, using C++ code. What I'm trying to do is change the value of a preprocessor directive during run time, not sure if it's possible but i've tried this.. somefile.h static int mValue = 0; #define POO = mValue; ... #if POO 0 //define class methods #else //define class methods differently } main.cpp main() { //Code calls constructor and methods allowed when POO is 0 //Code increments mValue //Code calls constructor and methods allowed when POO is 1 } How can POO be changed so that class objects uses a different implementation of other methods? Or if it's not possible, what's a another approach to this?

    Read the article

  • Create Object using ObjectBuilder

    - by dhinesh
    Want to create objects using ObjectBuilder or ObjectBuilder2. I do not want to use StructureMap I was able to create the object having parameterless constructor using the code mentioned below. public class ObjectFactory : BuilderBase<BuilderStage> { public static T BuildUp<T>() { var builder = new Builder(); var locator = new Locator { { typeof(ILifetimeContainer), new LifetimeContainer() } }; var buildUp = builder.BuildUp<T>(locator, null, null); return buildUp; } for creating object of customer you just call ObjectFactory.BuildUp<Customer> However this creates object of class which has no parameters, however I need to create object which are having constructor with parameters.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection in ASP.NET MVC NerdDinner App using Ninject

    - by shiju
    In this post, I am applying Dependency Injection to the NerdDinner application using Ninject. The controllers of NerdDinner application have Dependency Injection enabled constructors. So we can apply Dependency Injection through constructor without change any existing code. A Dependency Injection framework injects the dependencies into a class when the dependencies are needed. Dependency Injection enables looser coupling between classes and their dependencies and provides better testability of an application and it removes the need for clients to know about their dependencies and how to create them. If you are not familiar with Dependency Injection and Inversion of Control (IoC), read Martin Fowler’s article Inversion of Control Containers and the Dependency Injection pattern. The Open Source Project NerDinner is a great resource for learning ASP.NET MVC.  A free eBook provides an end-to-end walkthrough of building NerdDinner.com application. The free eBook and the Open Source Nerddinner application are extremely useful if anyone is trying to lean ASP.NET MVC. The first release of  Nerddinner was as a sample for the first chapter of Professional ASP.NET MVC 1.0. Currently the application is updating to ASP.NET MVC 2 and you can get the latest source from the source code tab of Nerddinner at http://nerddinner.codeplex.com/SourceControl/list/changesets. I have taken the latest ASP.NET MVC 2 source code of the application and applied  Dependency Injection using Ninject and Ninject extension Ninject.Web.Mvc.Ninject &  Ninject.Web.MvcNinject is available at http://github.com/enkari/ninject and Ninject.Web.Mvc is available at http://github.com/enkari/ninject.web.mvcNinject is a lightweight and a great dependency injection framework for .NET.  Ninject is a great choice of dependency injection framework when building ASP.NET MVC applications. Ninject.Web.Mvc is an extension for ninject which providing integration with ASP.NET MVC.Controller constructors and dependencies of NerdDinner application Listing 1 – Constructor of DinnersController  public DinnersController(IDinnerRepository repository) {     dinnerRepository = repository; }  Listing 2 – Constrcutor of AccountControllerpublic AccountController(IFormsAuthentication formsAuth, IMembershipService service) {     FormsAuth = formsAuth ?? new FormsAuthenticationService();     MembershipService = service ?? new AccountMembershipService(); }  Listing 3 – Constructor of AccountMembership – Concrete class of IMembershipService public AccountMembershipService(MembershipProvider provider) {     _provider = provider ?? Membership.Provider; }    Dependencies of NerdDinnerDinnersController, RSVPController SearchController and ServicesController have a dependency with IDinnerRepositiry. The concrete implementation of IDinnerRepositiry is DinnerRepositiry. AccountController has dependencies with IFormsAuthentication and IMembershipService. The concrete implementation of IFormsAuthentication is FormsAuthenticationService and the concrete implementation of IMembershipService is AccountMembershipService. The AccountMembershipService has a dependency with ASP.NET Membership Provider. Dependency Injection in NerdDinner using NinjectThe below steps will configure Ninject to apply controller injection in NerdDinner application.Step 1 – Add reference for NinjectOpen the  NerdDinner application and add  reference to Ninject.dll and Ninject.Web.Mvc.dll. Both are available from http://github.com/enkari/ninject and http://github.com/enkari/ninject.web.mvcStep 2 – Extend HttpApplication with NinjectHttpApplication Ninject.Web.Mvc extension allows integration between the Ninject and ASP.NET MVC. For this, you have to extend your HttpApplication with NinjectHttpApplication. Open the Global.asax.cs and inherit your MVC application from  NinjectHttpApplication instead of HttpApplication.   public class MvcApplication : NinjectHttpApplication Then the Application_Start method should be replace with OnApplicationStarted method. Inside the OnApplicationStarted method, call the RegisterAllControllersIn() method.   protected override void OnApplicationStarted() {     AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas();     RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);     ViewEngines.Engines.Clear();     ViewEngines.Engines.Add(new MobileCapableWebFormViewEngine());     RegisterAllControllersIn(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly()); }  The RegisterAllControllersIn method will enables to activating all controllers through Ninject in the assembly you have supplied .We are passing the current assembly as parameter for RegisterAllControllersIn() method. Now we can expose dependencies of controller constructors and properties to request injectionsStep 3 – Create Ninject ModulesWe can configure your dependency injection mapping information using Ninject Modules.Modules just need to implement the INinjectModule interface, but most should extend the NinjectModule class for simplicity. internal class ServiceModule : NinjectModule {     public override void Load()     {                    Bind<IFormsAuthentication>().To<FormsAuthenticationService>();         Bind<IMembershipService>().To<AccountMembershipService>();                  Bind<MembershipProvider>().ToConstant(Membership.Provider);         Bind<IDinnerRepository>().To<DinnerRepository>();     } } The above Binding inforamtion specified in the Load method tells the Ninject container that, to inject instance of DinnerRepositiry when there is a request for IDinnerRepositiry and  inject instance of FormsAuthenticationService when there is a request for IFormsAuthentication and inject instance of AccountMembershipService when there is a request for IMembershipService. The AccountMembershipService class has a dependency with ASP.NET Membership provider. So we configure that inject the instance of Membership Provider. When configuring the binding information, you can specify the object scope in you application.There are four built-in scopes available in Ninject:Transient  -  A new instance of the type will be created each time one is requested. (This is the default scope). Binding method is .InTransientScope()   Singleton - Only a single instance of the type will be created, and the same instance will be returned for each subsequent request. Binding method is .InSingletonScope()Thread -  One instance of the type will be created per thread. Binding method is .InThreadScope() Request -  One instance of the type will be created per web request, and will be destroyed when the request ends. Binding method is .InRequestScope() Step 4 – Configure the Ninject KernelOnce you create NinjectModule, you load them into a container called the kernel. To request an instance of a type from Ninject, you call the Get() extension method. We can configure the kernel, through the CreateKernel method in the Global.asax.cs. protected override IKernel CreateKernel() {     var modules = new INinjectModule[]     {         new ServiceModule()     };       return new StandardKernel(modules); } Here we are loading the Ninject Module (ServiceModule class created in the step 3)  onto the container called the kernel for performing dependency injection.Source CodeYou can download the source code from http://nerddinneraddons.codeplex.com. I just put the modified source code onto CodePlex repository. The repository will update with more add-ons for the NerdDinner application.

    Read the article

  • Using Unity Application Block – from basics to generics

    - by nmarun
    I just wanted to have one place where I list all the six Unity blogs I’ve written. Part 1: The very basics – Begin using Unity (code here) Part 2: Registering other types and resolving them (code here) Part 3: Lifetime Management (code here) Part 4: Constructor and Property or Setter Injection (code here) Part 5: Arrays (code here) Part 6: Generics (code here) Hope this helps someone (and this is the smallest blog I’ve posted till now).

    Read the article

  • The embarrassingly obvious about SQL Server CE

    - by Edward Boyle
    I have been working with SQL servers in one form or another for almost two decades now. But I am new to SQL Server Compact Edition. In the past weeks I have been working with SQL Serve CE a lot. The SQL, not a problem, but the engine itself is very new to me. One of the issues I ran into was a simple SQL statement taking excusive amounts of time; by excessive, I mean over one second. I wrote a little code to time the method. Sometimes it took under one second, other times as long as three seconds. –But it was a simple update statement! As embarrassing as it is, why it was slow eluded me. I posted my issue to MSDN and I got a reply from ErikEJ (MS MVP) who runs the blog “Everything SQL Server Compact” . I know little to nothing about SQL Server Compact. This guy is completely obsessed very well versed in CE. If you spend any time in MSDN forums, it seems that this guy single handedly has the answer for every CE question that comes up. Anyway, he said: “Opening a connection to a SQL Server Compact database file is a costly operation, keep one connection open per thread (incl. your UI thread) in your app, the one on the UI thread should live for the duration of your app.” It hit me, all databases have some connection overhead and SQL Server CE is not a database engine running as a service drinking Jolt Cola waiting for someone to talk to him so he can spring into action and show off his quarter-mile sprint capabilities. Imagine if you had to start the SQL Server process every time you needed to make a database connection. Principally, that is what you are doing with SQL Server CE. For someone who has worked with Enterprise Level SQL Servers a lot, I had to come to the mental image that my Open connection to SQL Server CE is basically starting a service, my own private service, and by closing the connection, I am shutting down my little private service. After making the changes in my code, I lost any reservations I had with using CE. At present, my Data Access Layer class has a constructor; in that constructor I open my connection, I also have OpenConnection and CloseConnection methods, I also implemented IDisposable and clean up any connections in Dispose(). I am still finalizing how this assembly will function. – That’s beside the point. All I’m trying to say is: “Opening a connection to a SQL Server Compact database file is a costly operation”

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >