Search Results

Search found 40757 results on 1631 pages for 'inferred type'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 5/1631 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How do I create Ntlm Type 1 and Type 3 messages in .Net

    - by brj011
    I need to create Type 1 message and Type 3 message for NTLM handshaking. Is there any .Net API for this? Essentially, the application is WPF based, but Socket is used in order to stream data from the server. Use of socket is a technical requirement, but the problem is when user needs to connect to the server using a proxy server. Further, if the proxy authorization is based on Ntlm, the client application needs to create Type 1 and Type 3 messages in order to handshake with the proxy server. My question is: Is there any API already available in .NET libraries that can be consumed in order to create these different types of NTLM messages? Any help or alternatives will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • PHP: SUBMIT Type vs IMAGE Type

    - by sebb
    I have noticed that when using a SUBMIT type its name attribute gets passed via POST , while an IMAGE type button do not have this data sent, can any one clear this up for me? In both instances the NAME attribute is present at HTML level, but only the SUMBIT type has the NAME sent via POST....is this right?

    Read the article

  • Getting a Type variable knowing the name of type C#

    - by StuffHappens
    Hello! I'm developing a TypeTranslator class which has a method Type TranslateType(Type type). This method gets a type of an interface and if there's a class of interface name without leading I it creates it, otherwise an exception is raised. Here's some code to clearify what's written before: class Program { interface IAnimal { } class Animal : IAnimal { } void Function() { TypeTranslator typeTranslator = new TypeTranslator(); Assert(typeTranslator.TranslateType(typeof(IAnimal) == typeof(Animal))); } } Is it possible to get what I want? Thank you for your help!

    Read the article

  • calling template function without <>; type inference

    - by Oops
    Hi, if I have a function template with typename T, where the compiler can set the type by itself, I do not have to write the type explicitely when I call the function like: template < typename T > T min( T v1, T v2 ) { return ( v1 < v2 ) ? v1: v2; } int i1 = 1, i2 = 2; int i3 = min( i1, i2 ); //no explicit <type> but if I have a function template with two different typenames like... template < typename TOut, typename TIn > TOut round( TIn v ) { return (TOut)( v + 0.5 ); } double d = 1.54; int i = round<int>(d); //explicit <int> Is it true that I have to specify at least 1 typename, always? I assume the reason is because C++ can not distinguish functions between different return types, true? but if I use a void function and handover a reference, again I must not explicitely specify the return typename: template < typename TOut, typename TIn > void round( TOut & vret, TIn vin ) { vret = (TOut)(vin + 0.5); } double d = 1.54; int i; round(i, d); //no explicit <int> should the conclusion be to avoid functions with return and more prefer void functions that return via a reference when writing templates? Or is there a possibility to avoid explicitely writing the return type? something like "type inference" for templates... is "type inference" possible in C++0x? I hope I was not too unclear. many thanks in advance Oops

    Read the article

  • Scala path dependent return type from parameter

    - by Rich Oliver
    In the following code using 2.10.0M3 in Eclipse plugin 2.1.0 for 2.10M3. I'm using the default setting which is targeting JVM 1.5 class GeomBase[T <: DTypes] { abstract class NewObjs { def newHex(gridR: GridBase, coodI: Cood): gridR.HexRT } class GridBase { selfGrid => type HexRT = HexG with T#HexTr def uniformRect (init: NewObjs) { val hexCood = Cood(2 ,2) val hex: HexRT = init.newHex(selfGrid, hexCood)// won't compile } } } Error message: Description Resource Path Location Type type mismatch; found: GeomBase.this.GridBase#HexG with T#HexTr required: GridBase.this.HexRT (which expands to) GridBase.this.HexG with T#HexTr GeomBase.scala Why does the compiler think the method returns the type projection GridBase#HexG when it should be this specific instance of GridBase? Edit transferred to a simpler code class in responce to comments now getting a different error message. package rStrat class TestClass { abstract class NewObjs { def newHex(gridR: GridBase): gridR.HexG } class GridBase { selfGrid => def uniformRect (init: NewObjs) { val hex: HexG = init.newHex(this) //error here } class HexG { val test12 = 5 } } } . Error line 11:Description Resource Path Location Type type mismatch; found : gridR.HexG required: GridBase.this.HexG possible cause: missing arguments for method or constructor TestClass.scala /SStrat/src/rStrat line 11 Scala Problem Update I've switched to 2.10.0M4 and updated the plug-in to the M4 version on a fresh version of Eclipse and switched to JVM 1.6 (and 1.7) but the problems are unchanged.

    Read the article

  • Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?

    - by FarmBoy
    I'm studying Haskell for the purpose of understanding functional programming, with the expectation that I'll apply the insight that I gain in other languages (Groovy, Python, JavaScript mainly.) I choose Haskell because I had the impression that it is very purely functional, and wouldn't allow for any reliance on state. I did not choose to learn Haskell because I was interested in navigating an extremely rigid type system. My question is this: Is a strong type system a necessary by-product of an extremely pure functional language, or is this an unrelated design choice particular to Haskell? If it is the latter, I'm curious what would be the most purely functional language that is dynamically typed. I'm not particularly opposed to strong typing, it has its place, but I'm having a hard time seeing how it benefits me in this educational endeavor.

    Read the article

  • Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?

    - by Eric Wilson
    I'm studying Haskell for the purpose of understanding functional programming, with the expectation that I'll apply the insight that I gain in other languages (Groovy, Python, JavaScript mainly.) I choose Haskell because I had the impression that it is very purely functional, and wouldn't allow for any reliance on state. I did not choose to learn Haskell because I was interested in navigating an extremely rigid type system. My question is this: Is a strong type system a necessary by-product of an extremely pure functional language, or is this an unrelated design choice particular to Haskell? If it is the latter, I'm curious what would be the most purely functional language that is dynamically typed. I'm not particularly opposed to strong typing, it has its place, but I'm having a hard time seeing how it benefits me in this educational endeavor.

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on type aliases/synonyms?

    - by Rei Miyasaka
    I'm going to try my best to frame this question in a way that doesn't result in a language war or list, because I think there could be a good, technical answer to this question. Different languages support type aliases to varying degrees. C# allows type aliases to be declared at the beginning of each code file, and they're valid only throughout that file. Languages like ML/Haskell use type aliases probably as much as they use type definitions. C/C++ are sort of a Wild West, with typedef and #define often being used seemingly interchangeably to alias types. The upsides of type aliasing don't invoke too much dispute: It makes it convenient to define composite types that are described naturally by the language, e.g. type Coordinate = float * float or type String = [Char]. Long names can be shortened: using DSBA = System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepBoundaryAttribute. In languages like ML or Haskell, where function parameters often don't have names, type aliases provide a semblance of self-documentation. The downside is a bit more iffy: aliases can proliferate, making it difficult to read and understand code or to learn a platform. The Win32 API is a good example, with its DWORD = int and its HINSTANCE = HANDLE = void* and its LPHANDLE = HANDLE FAR* and such. In all of these cases it hardly makes any sense to distinguish between a HANDLE and a void pointer or a DWORD and an integer etc.. Setting aside the philosophical debate of whether a king should give complete freedom to their subjects and let them be responsible for themselves or whether they should have all of their questionable actions intervened, could there be a happy medium that would allow the benefits of type aliasing while mitigating the risk of its abuse? As an example, the issue of long names can be solved by good autocomplete features. Visual Studio 2010 for instance will alllow you to type DSBA in order to refer Intellisense to System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepBoundaryAttribute. Could there be other features that would provide the other benefits of type aliasing more safely?

    Read the article

  • HTTP Content-Type in ASP.Net SoapHttpClientProtocol

    - by Daniel Fone
    Hi there, I have a problem with a Web Service Consumer written in ASP.NET. The error message is: System.InvalidOperationException: Client found response content type of 'application/xml; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'. The client is based on System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol. We can't change the Content-Type given by the provider, this has to be 'application/xml; charset=utf-8'. Is there any way to change what Content-Type the SoapHttpClientProtocol expects? Unfortunately, we are probably limited to .NET 1.1. Thanks! Update: We found a way to change the Content-Type sent by the provider, and this solved the problem. I'd still be curious to know how to change the expectations of the consumer though.

    Read the article

  • Getting ActiveRecord (Rails) to_xml to use xsi:nil and xsi:type instead of nil and type

    - by nbeyer
    The default behavior of XML serialization (to_xml) for ActiveRecord objects will emit 'type' and 'nil' attributes that are similar to XML Schema Instance attributes, but aren't set in a XML Namespace. For example, a model might produce an output like this: <user> <username nil="true" /> <first-name type="string">Name</first-name> </user> Is there anyway to get to_xml to utilize the XML Schema Instance namespace and prefix the attributes and the values? Using the above example, I'd like to produce the following: <user xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema"> <username xsi:nil="true" /> <first-name xsi:type="xs:string">Name</first-name> </user>

    Read the article

  • Type attribute for text_field

    - by Koning Baard XIV
    I have this code: <%= f.text_field :email, :type => "email", :placeholder => "[email protected]" %> So people can enter their email on an iPhone with the email keyboard instead of the ASCII keyboard. However, the output is: <input id="user_email" name="user[email]" placeholder="[email protected]" size="30" type="text" /> which should be: <input id="user_email" name="user[email]" placeholder="[email protected]" size="30" type="email" /> Is there a way to force Rails to use the email type instead of text, or must I use HTML directly? Thanks

    Read the article

  • wpf: design time error while writing Nested type in xaml

    - by viky
    I have created a usercontrol which accept type of enum and assign the values of that enum to a ComboBox control in that usercontrol. Very Simple. I am using this user control in DataTemplates. Problem comes when there comes nested type. I assign that using this notation EnumType="{x:Type myNamespace:ParentType + NestedType}" It works fine at runtime. but at design time it throws error saying Could not create an instance of type 'TypeExtension' Why? Due to this I am not able to see my window at design time. Any help?

    Read the article

  • Java class object from type variable

    - by Alexander Temerev
    Is there a way to get Class object from the type variable in Java generic class? Something like that: public class Bar extends Foo<T> { public Class getParameterClass() { return T.class; // doesn't compile } } This type information is available at compile time and therefore should not be affected by type erasure, so, theoretically, there should be a way to accomplish this. Does it exist?

    Read the article

  • LINQ DefaultIfEmpty(), generating inferred argument error

    - by Refracted Paladin
    I am trying to get the below linq query to return -1 if there isn't any current value. I was looking at this article on MSDN, here, and it seemed that DefaultIfEmpty() was what I wanted. Unfortunately, I am getting a The type arguments cannot be inferred from the usage. Try specifying the type arguments explicitly. error. I guess I am not sure what that means or what it is telling me to do. Can someone explain, please. public static int CheckForDRIID(int personID) { using (var context = ConnectDataContext.Create()) { var masterIndex = (from applicationAssociation in context.tblApplicationAssociations where applicationAssociation.ApplicationID == 1 && applicationAssociation.PersonID == personID select applicationAssociation.PersonApplicationID).DefaultIfEmpty(-1).Single(); return Convert.ToInt32(masterIndex); } }

    Read the article

  • Type-inferring a constant in C#

    - by Andreas Grech
    In C#, the following type-inference works: var s = "abcd"; But why can't the type be inferred when the variable is a constant? The following throws a compile-time exception: const var s = "abcd"; // <= Compile time error: // Implicitly-typed local variables cannot be constant

    Read the article

  • Explain ML type inference to a C++ programmer

    - by Tsubasa Gomamoto
    How does ML perform the type inference in the following function definition: let add a b = a + b Is it like C++ templates where no type-checking is performed until the point of template instantiation after which if the type supports the necessary operations, the function works or else a compilation error is thrown ? i.e. for example, the following function template template <typename NumType> NumType add(NumType a, NumType b) { return a + b; } will work for add<int>(23, 11); but won't work for add<ostream>(cout, fout); Is what I am guessing is correct or ML type inference works differently? PS: Sorry for my poor English; it's not my native language.

    Read the article

  • functional dependencies vs type families

    - by mhwombat
    I'm developing a framework for running experiments with artificial life, and I'm trying to use type families instead of functional dependencies. Type families seems to be the preferred approach among Haskellers, but I've run into a situation where functional dependencies seem like a better fit. Am I missing a trick? Here's the design using type families. (This code compiles OK.) {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies, FlexibleContexts #-} import Control.Monad.State (StateT) class Agent a where agentId :: a -> String liveALittle :: Universe u => a -> StateT u IO a -- plus other functions class Universe u where type MyAgent u :: * withAgent :: (MyAgent u -> StateT u IO (MyAgent u)) -> String -> StateT u IO () -- plus other functions data SimpleUniverse = SimpleUniverse { mainDir :: FilePath -- plus other fields } defaultWithAgent :: (MyAgent u -> StateT u IO (MyAgent u)) -> String -> StateT u IO () defaultWithAgent = undefined -- stub -- plus default implementations for other functions -- -- In order to use my framework, the user will need to create a typeclass -- that implements the Agent class... -- data Bug = Bug String deriving (Show, Eq) instance Agent Bug where agentId (Bug s) = s liveALittle bug = return bug -- stub -- -- .. and they'll also need to make SimpleUniverse an instance of Universe -- for their agent type. -- instance Universe SimpleUniverse where type MyAgent SimpleUniverse = Bug withAgent = defaultWithAgent -- boilerplate -- plus similar boilerplate for other functions Is there a way to avoid forcing my users to write those last two lines of boilerplate? Compare with the version using fundeps, below, which seems to make things simpler for my users. (The use of UndecideableInstances may be a red flag.) (This code also compiles OK.) {-# LANGUAGE MultiParamTypeClasses, FunctionalDependencies, FlexibleInstances, UndecidableInstances #-} import Control.Monad.State (StateT) class Agent a where agentId :: a -> String liveALittle :: Universe u a => a -> StateT u IO a -- plus other functions class Universe u a | u -> a where withAgent :: Agent a => (a -> StateT u IO a) -> String -> StateT u IO () -- plus other functions data SimpleUniverse = SimpleUniverse { mainDir :: FilePath -- plus other fields } instance Universe SimpleUniverse a where withAgent = undefined -- stub -- plus implementations for other functions -- -- In order to use my framework, the user will need to create a typeclass -- that implements the Agent class... -- data Bug = Bug String deriving (Show, Eq) instance Agent Bug where agentId (Bug s) = s liveALittle bug = return bug -- stub -- -- And now my users only have to write stuff like... -- u :: SimpleUniverse u = SimpleUniverse "mydir"

    Read the article

  • GHC.Generics and Type Families

    - by jberryman
    This is a question related to my module here, and is simplified a bit. It's also related to this previous question, in which I oversimplified my problem and didn't get the answer I was looking for. I hope this isn't too specific, and please change the title if you can think if a better one. Background My module uses a concurrent chan, split into a read side and write side. I use a special class with an associated type synonym to support polymorphic channel "joins": {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-} class Sources s where type Joined s newJoinedChan :: IO (s, Messages (Joined s)) -- NOT EXPORTED --output and input sides of channel: data Messages a -- NOT EXPORTED data Mailbox a instance Sources (Mailbox a) where type Joined (Mailbox a) = a newJoinedChan = undefined instance (Sources a, Sources b)=> Sources (a,b) where type Joined (a,b) = (Joined a, Joined b) newJoinedChan = undefined -- and so on for tuples of 3,4,5... The code above allows us to do this kind of thing: example = do (mb , msgsA) <- newJoinedChan ((mb1, mb2), msgsB) <- newJoinedChan --say that: msgsA, msgsB :: Messages (Int,Int) --and: mb :: Mailbox (Int,Int) -- mb1,mb2 :: Mailbox Int We have a recursive action called a Behavior that we can run on the messages we pull out of the "read" end of the channel: newtype Behavior a = Behavior (a -> IO (Behavior a)) runBehaviorOn :: Behavior a -> Messages a -> IO () -- NOT EXPORTED This would allow us to run a Behavior (Int,Int) on either of msgsA or msgsB, where in the second case both Ints in the tuple it receives actually came through separate Mailboxes. This is all tied together for the user in the exposed spawn function spawn :: (Sources s) => Behavior (Joined s) -> IO s ...which calls newJoinedChan and runBehaviorOn, and returns the input Sources. What I'd like to do I'd like users to be able to create a Behavior of arbitrary product type (not just tuples) , so for instance we could run a Behavior (Pair Int Int) on the example Messages above. I'd like to do this with GHC.Generics while still having a polymorphic Sources, but can't manage to make it work. spawn :: (Sources s, Generic (Joined s), Rep (Joined s) ~ ??) => Behavior (Joined s) -> IO s The parts of the above example that are actually exposed in the API are the fst of the newJoinedChan action, and Behaviors, so an acceptable solution can modify one or all of runBehaviorOn or the snd of newJoinedChan. I'll also be extending the API above to support sums (not implemented yet) like Behavior (Either a b) so I hoped GHC.Generics would work for me. Questions Is there a way I can extend the API above to support arbitrary Generic a=> Behavior a? If not using GHC's Generics, are there other ways I can get the API I want with minimal end-user pain (i.e. they just have to add a deriving clause to their type)?

    Read the article

  • Cannot initialize non-const reference from convertible type

    - by Julien L.
    Hi, I cannot initialize a non-const reference to type T1 from a convertible type T2. However, I can with a const reference. long l; const long long &const_ref = l; // fine long long &ref = l; // error: invalid initialization of reference of // type 'long long int&' from expression of type // 'long int' Most problems I encountered were related to r-values that cannot be assigned to a non-const reference. This is not the case here -- can someone explain? Thanks.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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