Search Results

Search found 5189 results on 208 pages for 'foo wei tau'.

Page 5/208 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Advantages/Disadvantages of different implementations for Comparing Objects using .NET

    - by Kevin Crowell
    This questions involves 2 different implementations of essentially the same code. First, using delegate to create a Comparison method that can be used as a parameter when sorting a collection of objects: class Foo { public static Comparison<Foo> BarComparison = delegate(Foo foo1, Foo foo2) { return foo1.Bar.CompareTo(foo2.Bar); }; } I use the above when I want to have a way of sorting a collection of Foo objects in a different way than my CompareTo function offers. For example: List<Foo> fooList = new List<Foo>(); fooList.Sort(BarComparison); Second, using IComparer: public class BarComparer : IComparer<Foo> { public int Compare(Foo foo1, Foo foo2) { return foo1.Bar.CompareTo(foo2.Bar); } } I use the above when I want to do a binary search for a Foo object in a collection of Foo objects. For example: BarComparer comparer = new BarComparer(); List<Foo> fooList = new List<Foo>(); Foo foo = new Foo(); int index = fooList.BinarySearch(foo, comparer); My questions are: What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of these implementations? What are some more ways to take advantage of each of these implementations? Is there a way to combine these implementations in such a way that I do not need to duplicate the code? Can I achieve both a binary search and an alternative collection sort using only 1 of these implementations?

    Read the article

  • autotools: no rule to make target all

    - by Raffo
    I'm trying to port an application I'm developing to autotools. I'm not an expert in writing makefiles and it's a requisite for me to be able to use autotools. In particular, the structure of the project is the following: .. ../src/Main.cpp ../src/foo/ ../src/foo/x.cpp ../src/foo/y.cpp ../src/foo/A/k.cpp ../src/foo/A/Makefile.am ../src/foo/Makefile.am ../src/bar/ ../src/bar/z.cpp ../src/bar/w.cpp ../src/bar/Makefile.am ../inc/foo/ ../inc/bar/ ../inc/foo/A ../configure.in ../Makefile.am The root folder of the project contains a "src" folder containing the main of the program AND a number of subfolders containing the other sources of the program. The root of the project also contains an "inc" folder containing the .h files that are nothing more than the definitions of the classes in "src", thus "inc" reflects the structure of "src". I have written the following configure.in in the root: AC_INIT([PNAME], [1.0]) AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR([src/Main.cpp]) AC_CONFIG_HEADER([config.h]) AC_PROG_CXX AC_PROG_CC AC_PROG_LIBTOOL AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([foreign]) AC_CONFIG_FILES([Makefile src/Makefile src/foo/Makefile src/foo/A/Makefile src/bar/Makefile]) AC_OUTPUT And the following is ../Makefile.am SUBDIRS = src and then in ../src where the main of the project is contained: bin_PROGRAMS = pname gsi_SOURCES = Main.cpp AM_CPPFLAGS = -I../../inc/foo\ -I../../inc/foo/A \ -I../../inc/bar/ pname_LDADD= foo/libfoo.a bar/libbar.a SUBDIRS = foo bar and in ../src/foo noinst_LIBRARIES = libfoo.a libfoo_a_SOURCES = \ x.cpp \ y.cpp AM_CPPFLAGS = \ -I../../inc/foo \ -I../../inc/foo/A \ -I../../inc/bar And the analogous in src/bar. The problem is that after calling automake and autoconf, when calling "make" the compilation fails. In particular, the program enters the directory src, then foo and creates libfoo.a, but the same fail for libbar.a, with the following error: Making all in bar make[3]: Entering directory `/user/Raffo/project/src/bar' make[3]: *** No rule to make target `all'. Stop. I have read the autotools documentation, but I'm not able to find a similar example to the one I am working on. Unfortunately I can't change the directory structure as this is a fixed requisite of the project I'm working on. I don't know if you can help me or give me any hint, but maybe you can guess the error or give me a link to a similar structured example. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • C# - Advantages/Disadvantages of different implementations for Comparing Objects

    - by Kevin Crowell
    This questions involves 2 different implementations of essentially the same code. First, using delegate to create a Comparison method that can be used as a parameter when sorting a collection of objects: class Foo { public static Comparison<Foo> BarComparison = delegate(Foo foo1, Foo foo2) { return foo1.Bar.CompareTo(foo2.Bar); }; } I use the above when I want to have a way of sorting a collection of Foo objects in a different way than my CompareTo function offers. For example: List<Foo> fooList = new List<Foo>(); fooList.Sort(BarComparison); Second, using IComparer: public class BarComparer : IComparer<Foo> { public int Compare(Foo foo1, Foo foo2) { return foo1.Bar.CompareTo(foo2.Bar); } } I use the above when I want to do a binary search for a Foo object in a collection of Foo objects. For example: BarComparer comparer = new BarComparer(); List<Foo> fooList = new List<Foo>(); Foo foo = new Foo(); int index = fooList.BinarySearch(foo, comparer); My questions are: What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of these implementations? What are some more ways to take advantage of each of these implementations? Is there a way to combine these implementations in such a way that I do not need to duplicate the code? Can I achieve both a binary search and an alternative collection sort using only 1 of these methods?

    Read the article

  • Calling an Overridden Method from a Parent-Class Constructor

    - by Vaibhav Bajpai
    I tried calling an overridden method from a constructor of a parent class and noticed different behavior across languages. C++ - echoes A.foo() class A{ public: A(){foo();} virtual void foo(){cout<<"A.foo()";} }; class B : public A{ public: B(){} void foo(){cout<<"B.foo()";} }; int main(){ B *b = new B(); } Java - echoes B.foo() class A{ public A(){foo();} public void foo(){System.out.println("A.foo()");} } class B extends A{ public void foo(){System.out.println("B.foo()");} } class Demo{ public static void main(String args[]){ B b = new B(); } } C# - echoes B.foo() class A{ public A(){foo();} public virtual void foo(){Console.WriteLine("A.foo()");} } class B : A{ public override void foo(){Console.WriteLine("B.foo()");} } class MainClass { public static void Main (string[] args) { B b = new B(); } } I realize that in C++ objects are created from top-most parent going down the hierarchy, so when the constructor calls the overridden method, B does not even exist, so it calls the A' version of the method. However, I am not sure why I am getting different behavior in Java and C#.

    Read the article

  • Type Casting variables in PHP: Is there a practical example?

    - by Stephen
    PHP, as most of us know, has weak typing. For those who don't, PHP.net says: PHP does not require (or support) explicit type definition in variable declaration; a variable's type is determined by the context in which the variable is used. Love it or hate it, PHP re-casts variables on-the-fly. So, the following code is valid: $var = "10"; $value = 10 + $var; var_dump($value); // int(20) PHP also alows you to explicitly cast a variable, like so: $var = "10"; $value = 10 + $var; $value = (string)$value; var_dump($value); // string(2) "20" That's all cool... but, for the life of me, I cannot conceive of a practical reason for doing this. I don't have a problem with strong typing in languages that support it, like Java. That's fine, and I completely understand it. Also, I'm aware of—and fully understand the usefulness of—type hinting in function parameters. The problem I have with type casting is explained by the above quote. If PHP can swap types at-will, it can do so even after you force cast a type; and it can do so on-the-fly when you need a certain type in an operation. That makes the following valid: $var = "10"; $value = (int)$var; $value = $value . ' TaDa!'; var_dump($value); // string(8) "10 TaDa!" So what's the point? Can anyone show me a practical application or example of type casting—one that would fail if type casting were not involved? I ask this here instead of SO because I figure practicality is too subjective. Edit in response to Chris' comment Take this theoretical example of a world where user-defined type casting makes sense in PHP: You force cast variable $foo as int -- (int)$foo. You attempt to store a string value in the variable $foo. PHP throws an exception!! <--- That would make sense. Suddenly the reason for user defined type casting exists! The fact that PHP will switch things around as needed makes the point of user defined type casting vague. For example, the following two code samples are equivalent: // example 1 $foo = 0; $foo = (string)$foo; $foo = '# of Reasons for the programmer to type cast $foo as a string: ' . $foo; // example 2 $foo = 0; $foo = (int)$foo; $foo = '# of Reasons for the programmer to type cast $foo as a string: ' . $foo;

    Read the article

  • Moved sitemaps to a different subdomain and losing search referrals around the same time. Red herring or correlation?

    - by er1234
    We started to lose search referral traffic around the same time that I moved some of our sitemaps to a subdomain. Could this have hurt us? I followed Google's steps to creating a sitemap under a different subdomain. The new sitemaps.foo.com subdomain is being crawled and indexed well. Both www.foo.com and sitemaps.foo.com have been verified in Google Webmaster Tools. They appear as distinct sites. Is this correct? I can't find a way in Webmaster Tools to say "Hey, sitemaps.foo.com is really owned by www.foo.com, so show them together and make sure to attribute sitemaps.foo urls to www.foo" Our www.foo.com/robots.txt Sitemap: http://www.foo.com/sitemap.xml Sitemap: http://sitemaps.foo.com/subdir/sitemap.xml.gz

    Read the article

  • How to pass an IronPython instance method to a (C#) function parameter of type `Func<Foo>`

    - by Daren Thomas
    I am trying to assign an IronPython instance method to a C# Func<Foo> parameter. In C# I would have a method like: public class CSharpClass { public void DoSomething(Func<Foo> something) { var foo = something() } } And call it from IronPython like this: class IronPythonClass: def foobar(): return Foo() CSharpClass().DoSomething(foobar) But I'm getting the following error: TypeError: expected Func[Foo], got instancemethod

    Read the article

  • Extending a jquery plugins event callback

    - by Greg J
    I'm extending the functionality of a jquery plugin (foo) with another jquery plugin (bar). Essentially, the first plugin specifies an onReady(): var foo = $.foo({ onReady: function() { alert('foo'); }}); Foo is sent to bar as a parameter to bar: var bar = $.bar(foo); I want bar to be able to hook into foo's onReady event: (function($) { $.extend({ bar: function(foo) { var foo = foo; // How to do alert('bar') when foo.onready is called? } }); })(jQuery); I can override foo's onready event: foo.onready = function() { alert('bar'); } But I don't want to override it, I want to extend it so that I'll see both alerts when foo is ready. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to use VirtualBox without using it's resource registry?

    - by Catskul
    Summary VirtualBox seems to want everything to be "registered" which makes it much more annoying to work with on the command line. I'm attempting to create an automated script which will create, move, start, stop, and destroy virtual machines and virtual disks. Requiring registration will complicate the task for the following reasons. leaves state information around that can cause unpredicted edgecases causing scripts to fail. creates potential name space collisions for multiple process creating VMs with the same name moving/copying resources on the same machine is more complicated because references in the registry need to be updated copying resources (disk + vm combination) to another machine require reconfiguration once they reach their target machine, and require the transfer of extra meta data to do the reconfiguration. If something unexpectedly fails, and an unregister thus fails to happen, left over configuration information can cause problems in subsequent runs. Use Case My specific use case is for a continuous integration server which creates and destroys VMs and Disk images potentially with the same name, and would require more logic to deal with the registry's statefulness. Imaginary Example It seems that I should just be able to for example (using some imaginary and/or incorrect commands): mkdir foobar customdiskimg_script ./foo/foo.vdi vboxmanage createvm --name "foo" --ostype Linux --basefolder ./foo/foo.xml vboxmanage storagectl ./foo/foo.xml --name foo --add ide vboxmanage storageattach --storagectl foo --medium ./foo/foo.vdi ./foo/foo.xml vboxmanage startvm ./foo/foo.xml TLDR Is there a way to use virtualbox without "registering" harddisks and VMs?

    Read the article

  • Strange GWT serialization exception when overiding method of serialized object

    - by Flueras Bogdan
    Hi there! I have a GWT serializable class, lets call it Foo. Foo implements IsSerializable, has primitive and serializable members as well as other transient members and a no-arg constructor. class Foo implements IsSerializable { // transient members // primitive members public Foo() {} public void bar() {} } Also a Service which handles RPC comunication. // server code public interface MyServiceImpl { public void doStuff(Foo foo); } public interface MyServiceAsync { void doStuff(Foo foo, AsyncCallback<Void> async); } How i use this: private MyServiceAsync myService = GWT.create(MyService.class); Foo foo = new Foo(); ... AsyncCallback callback = new new AsyncCallback {...}; myService.doStuff(foo, callback); In the above case the code is running, and the onSuccess() method of callback instance gets executed. But when I override the bar() method on foo instance like this: Foo foo = new Foo() { public void bar() { //do smthng different } } AsyncCallback callback = new new AsyncCallback {...}; myService.doStuff(foo, callback); I get the GWT SerializationException. Please enlighten me, because I really don't understand why.

    Read the article

  • Why overload true and false instead of defining bool operator?

    - by Joe Enos
    I've been reading about overloading true and false in C#, and I think I understand the basic difference between this and defining a bool operator. The example I see around is something like: public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA > 0); } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA <= 0); } To me, this is the same as saying: public static implicit operator bool(Foo foo) { return (foo.PropA > 0); } The difference, as far as I can tell, is that by defining true and false separately, you can have an object that is both true and false, or neither true nor false: public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return true; } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return true; } //or public static bool operator true(Foo foo) { return false; } public static bool operator false(Foo foo) { return false; } I'm sure there's a reason this is allowed, but I just can't think of what it is. To me, if you want an object to be able to be converted to true or false, a single bool operator makes the most sense. Can anyone give me a scenario where it makes sense to do it the other way? Thanks

    Read the article

  • shielding #include within namespace { } block?

    - by Jeff
    Edit: I know that method 1 is essentially invalid and will probably use method 2, but I'm looking for the best hack or a better solution to mitigate rampant, mutable namespace proliferation. I have multiple class or method definitions in one namespace that have different dependencies, and would like to use the fewest namespace blocks or explicit scopings possible but while grouping #include directives with the definitions that require them as best as possible. I've never seen any indication that any preprocessor could be told to exclude namespace {} scoping from #include contents, but I'm here to ask if something similar to this is possible: (see bottom for explanation of why I want something dead simple) // NOTE: apple.h, etc., contents are *NOT* intended to be in namespace Foo! // would prefer something most this: namespace Foo { #include "apple.h" B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } #include "banana.h" int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } #include "blueberry.h" void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo ... // over this: #include "apple.h" #include "banana.h" #include "blueberry.h" namespace Foo { B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo ... // or over this: #include "apple.h" namespace Foo { B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo #include "banana.h" namespace Foo { int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo #include "blueberry.h" namespace Foo { void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo My real problem is that I have projects where a module may need to be branched but have coexisting components from the branches in the same program. I have classes like FooA, etc., that I've called Foo::A in the hopes being able to branch less painfully as Foo::v1_2::A, where some program may need both a Foo::A and a Foo::v1_2::A. I'd like "Foo" or "Foo::v1_2" to show up only really once per file, as a single namespace block, if possible. Moreover, I tend to prefer to locate blocks of #include directives immediately above the first definition in the file that requires them. What's my best choice, or alternatively, what should I be doing instead of hijacking the namespaces?

    Read the article

  • alternative to #include within namespace { } block

    - by Jeff
    Edit: I know that method 1 is essentially invalid and will probably use method 2, but I'm looking for the best hack or a better solution to mitigate rampant, mutable namespace proliferation. I have multiple class or method definitions in one namespace that have different dependencies, and would like to use the fewest namespace blocks or explicit scopings possible but while grouping #include directives with the definitions that require them as best as possible. I've never seen any indication that any preprocessor could be told to exclude namespace {} scoping from #include contents, but I'm here to ask if something similar to this is possible: (see bottom for explanation of why I want something dead simple) // NOTE: apple.h, etc., contents are *NOT* intended to be in namespace Foo! // would prefer something most this: namespace Foo { #include "apple.h" B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } #include "banana.h" int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } #include "blueberry.h" void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo ... // over this: #include "apple.h" #include "banana.h" #include "blueberry.h" namespace Foo { B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo ... // or over this: #include "apple.h" namespace Foo { B *A::blah(B const *x) { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo #include "banana.h" namespace Foo { int B::whatever(C const &var) { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo #include "blueberry.h" namespace Foo { void B::something() { /* ... */ } } // namespace Foo My real problem is that I have projects where a module may need to be branched but have coexisting components from the branches in the same program. I have classes like FooA, etc., that I've called Foo::A in the hopes being able to branch less painfully as Foo::v1_2::A, where some program may need both a Foo::A and a Foo::v1_2::A. I'd like "Foo" or "Foo::v1_2" to show up only really once per file, as a single namespace block, if possible. Moreover, I tend to prefer to locate blocks of #include directives immediately above the first definition in the file that requires them. What's my best choice, or alternatively, what should I be doing instead of hijacking the namespaces?

    Read the article

  • Flatten a PHP array

    - by deadkarma
    Say I have a form with these fields, and cannot rename them: <input type="text" name="foo[bar]" /> <input type="text" name="foo[baz]" /> <input type="text" name="foo[bat][faz]" /> When submitted, PHP turns this into an array: Array ( [foo] => Array ( [bar] => foo bar [baz] => foo baz [bat] => Array ( [faz] => foo bat faz ) ) ) What methods are there to convert or flatten this array into a data structure such as: Array ( [foo[bar]] => foo bar [foo[baz]] => foo baz [foo[bat][faz]] => foo bat faz )

    Read the article

  • How do you link to an action that takes an array as a parameter (RedirectToAction and/or ActionLink)

    - by Andrew
    I have an action defined like so: public ActionResult Foo(int[] bar) { ... } Url's like this will work as expected: .../Controller/Foo?bar=1&bar=3&bar=5 I have another action that does some work and then redirects to the Foo action above for some computed values of bar. Is there a simple way of specifying the route values with RedirectToAction or ActionLink so that the url's get generated like the above example? These don't seem to work: return RedirectToAction("Foo", new { bar = new[] { 1, 3, 5 } }); return RedirectToAction("Foo", new[] { 1, 3, 5 }); <%= Html.ActionLink("Foo", "Foo", new { bar = new[] { 1, 3, 5 } }) %> <%= Html.ActionLink("Foo", "Foo", new[] { 1, 3, 5 }) %> However, for a single item in the array, these do work: return RedirectToAction("Foo", new { bar = 1 }); <%= Html.ActionLink("Foo", "Foo", new { bar = 1 }) %> When setting bar to an array, it redirects to the following: .../Controller/Foo?a=System.Int32[] Finally, this is with ASP.NET MVC 2 RC. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Committing file deletions to svn repository whilst ignoring some other local mods

    - by TheJuice
    I have svn repository where I have scheduled some files and folders to be moved in the repository with svn mv. I also have some files that are peers of the files to be moved that have local modifications of which I only want a subset of those files to be committed along with the moves. e.g. the output of svn st would look like: D foo/bar D foo/bar/a.txt D foo/bar/b.txt M foo/exclude.txt M foo/include.txt A foo/whiz/bar A + foo/whiz/bar/c.txt A + foo/whiz/bar/d.txt To commit to the moves to the repository, I would need to perform the commit on foo but that would also commit the modifications to foo/exclude.txt and foo/include.txt. How would I commit only the deletions/additions as a result of the move plus the mods to foo/include.txt whilst excluding foo/exclude.txt? I have a feeling the answer lies with the --depth argument to svn ci but it's not clear to me how it will operate.

    Read the article

  • Groovy: stub typed reference

    - by Don
    Hi, I have a Groovy class similar to class MyClass { Foo foo } Under certain circumstances I don't want to initialize foo and want to stub out all the calls to it. Any methods that return a value should do nothing. I could do it like this: Foo.metaClass.method1 = {param -> } Foo.metaClass.method2 = { -> } Foo.metaClass.method3 = {param1, param2 -> } While this will work, it has a couple of problems Tedious and long-winded, particularly if Foo has a lot of methods This will stub out calls to any instance of Foo (not just foo) Although Groovy provides a StubFor class, if I do this: this.foo = new groovy.mock.interceptor.StubFor(Foo) I get a ClassCastException at runtime. Although this would work if I could redefine foo as: def foo But for reasons I won't go into here, I can't do that. Thanks, Don

    Read the article

  • PHP5: restrict access to function to certain classes

    - by Tim
    Is there a way in PHP5 to only allow a certain class or set of classes to call a particular function? For example, let's say I have three classes ("Foo", "Bar", and "Baz"), all with similarly-named methods, and I want Bar to be able to call Foo::foo() but deny Baz the ability to make that call: class Foo { static function foo() { print "foo"; } } class Bar { static function bar() { Foo::foo(); print "bar"; } // Should work } class Baz { static function baz() { Foo::foo; print "baz"; } // Should fail } Foo::foo(); // Should also fail There's not necessarily inheritance between Foo, Bar, and Baz, so the use of protected or similar modifiers won't help; however, the methods aren't necessarily static (I made them so here for the simplicity of the example).

    Read the article

  • Diff 2 files while ignoring parts of lines

    - by Millianz
    I would like to diff a file system. Currently my bash script prints out the file system recursively into a file (ls -l -R) and diffs it with an expected output. An example for a line in this file would be: drw---- 100000f3 00000400 0 ./foo/ My current diff command is diff "$TEMP_LOG" "$DIFF_FILE_OUT" --strip-trailing-cr --changed-group-format='%' --unchanged-group-format='' "$SubLog" As you can see I ignore additional lines in the current output file, I only care about lines that match with the master output. I now have the problem though that some files may differ in size, or a folder might even have a different name, but due to it's location I know what access rights it should have. For example: Output: ------- 00000000 00000000 528 ./foo/bar.txt Master: ------- 00000000 00000000 200 ./foo/bar.txt Only the size differs here, and it doesn't matter, I would like to just ignore certain parts of the diff, kind of like an ansi c comment. Master: ------- 00000000 00000000 /*200*/ ./foo/bar.txt -- OR -- Master: d------ 00000000 00000000 /*10*/ ./foo//*123123*///*76456546*//bar.txt Output: d------ 00000000 00000000 0 ./foo/asd/sdf/bar.txt And still have it diff correctly. Is this even possible with diff, or will I have to write a custom script for it? Since I'm fairly new to cygwin I might be using the completely wrong tool all together, I'm happy for any suggestions. Update: Taking a step back, here is the general task at hand that I want to achieve. I want to write a script that checks the file system to see if the read/write permissions are set up correctly. The structure of the file system is under my control, so I don't have to worry about it changing too much. Sometimes folders/files might not be present, but if they are their permissions must be checked. For Example assume that the following is a snapshot of the current file system structure drw ./foo drw ./foo/bar -rw ./foow/bar/bar.txt drw ./foo/baz -rw ./foo/baz/baz.txt And this is what the file system structure might dictate, i.e. if these folders / files are present, the permissions must match. drw ./foo drw ./foo/bar -rw ./foo/bar/bar.txt --- ./foo/bar/foobar.txt drw ./foo/baz -rw ./foo/baz/foobaz.txt In this case the file system checked out ok, since all files present match their expected values. The situation becomes more complicated as soon as certain folders might have any arbitrary name, only due to their location I know what their permissions should be. Assume that the directory ./foo/bar in the above example might be such a case, i.e. instead of bar the folder could have any name, but still match the -rw permissions. This seems like a very complicated situation, and I'm not even sure if I can solve it with bash scripting alone. I might have to write an actual application.

    Read the article

  • How to commit a file conversion?

    - by l0b0
    Say you've committed a file of type foo in your favorite vcs: $ vcs add data.foo $ vcs commit -m "My data" After publishing you realize there's a better data format bar. To convert you can use one of these solutions: $ vcs mv data.foo data.bar $ vcs commit -m "Preparing to use format bar" $ foo2bar --output data.bar data.bar $ vcs commit -m "Actual foo to bar conversion" or $ foo2bar --output data.foo data.foo $ vcs commit -m "Converted data to format bar" $ vcs mv data.foo data.bar $ vcs commit -m "Renamed to fit data type" or $ foo2bar --output data.bar data.foo $ vcs rm data.foo $ vcs add data.bar $ vcs commit -m "Converted data to format bar" In the first two cases the conversion is not an atomic operation and the file extension is "lying" in the first commit. In the last case the conversion will not be detected as a move operation, so as far as I can tell it'll be difficult to trace the file history across the commit. Although I'd instinctively prefer the last solution, I can't help thinking that tracing history should be given very high priority in version control. What is the best thing to do here?

    Read the article

  • How to use Parcel in Android?

    - by Mike
    I'm trying to use Parcel to write and then read back a Parcelable. For some reason, when I read the object back from the file, it's coming back as null. public void testFoo() { final Foo orig = new Foo("blah blah"); // Wrote orig to a parcel and then byte array final Parcel p1 = Parcel.obtain(); p1.writeValue(orig); final byte[] bytes = p1.marshall(); // Check to make sure that the byte array seems to contain a Parcelable assertEquals(4, bytes[0]); // Parcel.VAL_PARCELABLE // Unmarshall a Foo from that byte array final Parcel p2 = Parcel.obtain(); p2.unmarshall(bytes, 0, bytes.length); final Foo result = (Foo) p2.readValue(Foo.class.getClassLoader()); assertNotNull(result); // FAIL assertEquals( orig.str, result.str ); } protected static class Foo implements Parcelable { protected static final Parcelable.Creator<Foo> CREATOR = new Parcelable.Creator<Foo>() { public Foo createFromParcel(Parcel source) { final Foo f = new Foo(); f.str = (String) source.readValue(Foo.class.getClassLoader()); return f; } public Foo[] newArray(int size) { throw new UnsupportedOperationException(); } }; public String str; public Foo() { } public Foo( String s ) { str = s; } public int describeContents() { return 0; } public void writeToParcel(Parcel dest, int ignored) { dest.writeValue(str); } } What am I missing? UPDATE: To simplify the test I've removed the reading and writing of files in my original example.

    Read the article

  • Git-svn refuses to create branch on svn repository error: "not in the same repository"

    - by Danny
    I am attempting to create a svn branch using git-svn. The repository was created with --stdlayout. Unfortunately it generates an error stating the "Source and dest appear not to be in the same repository". The error appears to be the result of it not including the username in the source url. $ git svn branch foo-as-bar -m "Attempt to make Foo into Bar." Copying svn+ssh://my.foo.company/r/sandbox/foo/trunk at r1173 to svn+ssh://svnuser@my.foo.company/r/sandbox/foo/branches/foo-as-bar... Trying to use an unsupported feature: Source and dest appear not to be in the same repository (src: 'svn+ssh://my.foo.company/r/sandbox/foo/trunk'; dst: 'svn+ssh://svnuser@my.foo.company/r/sandbox/foo/branches/foo-as-bar') at /home/me/.install/git/libexec/git-core/git-svn line 610 I intially thought this was simply a configuration issue, examination of .git/config doesn't suggest anything incorrect. [svn-remote "svn"] url = svn+ssh://svnuser@my.foo.company/r fetch = sandbox/foo/trunk:refs/remotes/trunk branches = sandbox/foo/branches/*:refs/remotes/* tags = sandbox/foo/tags/*:refs/remotes/tags/* I am using git version 1.6.3.3. Can anyone shed any light on why this might be occuring, and how best to address it?

    Read the article

  • Generating all possible subsets of a given QuerySet in Django

    - by Glen
    This is just an example, but given the following model: class Foo(models.model): bar = models.IntegerField() def __str__(self): return str(self.bar) def __unicode__(self): return str(self.bar) And the following QuerySet object: foobar = Foo.objects.filter(bar__lt=20).distinct() (meaning, a set of unique Foo models with bar <= 20), how can I generate all possible subsets of foobar? Ideally, I'd like to further limit the subsets so that, for each subset x of foobar, the sum of all f.bar in x (where f is a model of type Foo) is between some maximum and minimum value. So, for example, given the following instance of foobar: >> print foobar [<Foo: 5>, <Foo: 10>, <Foo: 15>] And min=5, max=25, I'd like to build an object (preferably a QuerySet, but possibly a list) that looks like this: [[<Foo: 5>], [<Foo: 10>], [<Foo: 15>], [<Foo: 5>, <Foo: 10>], [<Foo: 5>, <Foo: 15>], [<Foo: 10>, <Foo: 15>]] I've experimented with itertools but it doesn't seem particularly well-suited to my needs. I think this could be accomplished with a complex QuerySet but I'm not sure how to start.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >