Search Results

Search found 3061 results on 123 pages for 'interfaces'.

Page 5/123 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • A question about entities, roles and interfaces in Entity Framework 4.

    - by mvole
    Hi, I am an experienced .NET developer but new to EF - so please bear with me. I will use an example of a college application to illustrate my problem. I have these user roles: Lecturer, Student, Administrator. In my code I envisage working with these entities as distinct classes so e.g. a Lecturer teaches a collection of Students. And work with 'is Student' 'TypeOf' etc. Each of these entities share lots of common properties/methods e.g. they can all log onto the system and do stuff related to their role. In EF designer I can create a base entity Person (or User...) and have Lecturer, Student and Administrator all inherit from that. The difficulty I have is that a Lecturer can be an Administrator - and in fact on occasion a Student can be a Lecturer. If I were to add other entities such as Employee and Warden then this gets even more of an issue. I could presumably work with Interfaces so a person could implement ILecturer and IStudent, however I do not see how this fits within EF. I would like to work within the EF designer if possible and I'm working model-first (coding in C#). So any help and advice/samples would be very welcome and much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Proper QUuid usage in Qt ? (7-Zip DLL usage problems (QLibrary, QUuid GUID conversion, interfaces))

    - by whipsnap
    Hi, I'm trying to write a program that would use 7-Zip DLL for reading files from inside archive files (7z, zip etc). Here's where I'm so far: #include QtCore/QCoreApplication #include QLibrary #include QUuid #include iostream using namespace std; #include "7z910/CPP/7zip/Archive/IArchive.h" #include "7z910/CPP/7zip/IStream.h" #include "MyCom.h" // {23170F69-40C1-278A-1000-000110070000} QUuid CLSID_CFormat7z(0x23170F69, 0x40C1, 0x278A, 0x10, 0x00, 0x00, 0x01, 0x10, 0x07, 0x00, 0x00); typedef int (*CreateObjectFunc)( const GUID *clsID, const GUID *interfaceID, void **outObject); void readFileInArchive() { QLibrary myLib("7z.dll"); CreateObjectFunc myFunction = (CreateObjectFunc)myLib.resolve("CreateObject"); if (myFunction == 0) { cout outArchive; myFunction(&CLSID_CFormat7z, &IID_IOutArchive, (void **)&outArchive); } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { QCoreApplication a(argc, argv); readFileInArchive(); return a.exec(); } Trying to build that in Qt Creator will lead to following error: cannot convert 'QUuid*' to 'const GUID*' in argument passing How should QUuid be correctly used in this context? Also, being a C++ and Qt newbie I haven't yet quite grasped templates or interfaces, so overall I'm having trouble getting through these first steps. If someone could give tips or even example code on how for example an image file could be extracted from ZIP file (to be shown in Qt GUI later on*), I would highly appreciate that. My main goal at the moment is to write a program with GUI for selecting archive files containing image files (PNG, JPG etc) and displaying those files one at a time in the GUI. A Qt based CDisplayEx in short.

    Read the article

  • Hierarchy flattening of interfaces in WCF

    - by nmarun
    Alright, so say I have my service contract interface as below: 1: [ServiceContract] 2: public interface ILearnWcfService 3: { 4: [OperationContract(Name = "AddInt")] 5: int Add(int arg1, int arg2); 6: } Say I decided to add another interface with a similar add “feature”. 1: [ServiceContract] 2: public interface ILearnWcfServiceExtend : ILearnWcfService 3: { 4: [OperationContract(Name = "AddDouble")] 5: double Add(double arg1, double arg2); 6: } My class implementing the ILearnWcfServiceExtend ends up as: 1: public class LearnWcfService : ILearnWcfServiceExtend 2: { 3: public int Add(int arg1, int arg2) 4: { 5: return arg1 + arg2; 6: } 7:  8: public double Add(double arg1, double arg2) 9: { 10: return arg1 + arg2; 11: } 12: } Now when I consume this service and look at the proxy that gets generated, here’s what I see: 1: public interface ILearnWcfServiceExtend 2: { 3: [System.ServiceModel.OperationContractAttribute(Action="http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfService/AddInt", ReplyAction="http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfService/AddIntResponse")] 4: int AddInt(int arg1, int arg2); 5: 6: [System.ServiceModel.OperationContractAttribute(Action="http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfServiceExtend/AddDouble", ReplyAction="http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfServiceExtend/AddDoubleResponse")] 7: double AddDouble(double arg1, double arg2); 8: } Only the ILearnWcfServiceExtend gets ‘listed’ in the proxy class and not the (base interface) ILearnWcfService interface. But then to uniquely identify the operations that the service exposes, the Action and ReplyAction properties are set. So in the above example, the AddInt operation has the Action property set to ‘http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfService/AddInt’ and the AddDouble operation has the Action property of ‘http://tempuri.org/ILearnWcfServiceExtend/AddDouble’. Similarly the ReplyAction properties are set corresponding to the namespace that they’re declared in. The ‘http://tempuri.org’ is chosen as the default namespace, since the Namespace property on the ServiceContract is not defined. The other thing is the service contract itself – the Add() method. You’ll see that in both interfaces, the method names are the same. As you might know, this is not allowed in WSDL-based environments, even though the arguments are of different types. This is allowed only if the Name attribute of the ServiceContract is set (as done above). This causes a change in the name of the service contract itself in the proxy class. See that their names are changed to AddInt / AddDouble respectively. Lesson learned: The interface hierarchy gets ‘flattened’ when the WCF service proxy class gets generated.

    Read the article

  • Two network interfaces and two IP addresses on the same subnet in Linux

    - by Scott Duckworth
    I recently ran into a situation where I needed two IP addresses on the same subnet assigned to one Linux host so that we could run two SSL/TLS sites. My first approach was to use IP aliasing, e.g. using eth0:0, eth0:1, etc, but our network admins have some fairly strict settings in place for security that squashed this idea: They use DHCP snooping and normally don't allow static IP addresses. Static addressing is accomplished by using static DHCP entries, so the same MAC address always gets the same IP assignment. This feature can be disabled per switchport if you ask and you have a reason for it (thankfully I have a good relationship with the network guys and this isn't hard to do). With the DHCP snooping disabled on the switchport, they had to put in a rule on the switch that said MAC address X is allowed to have IP address Y. Unfortunately this had the side effect of also saying that MAC address X is ONLY allowed to have IP address Y. IP aliasing required that MAC address X was assigned two IP addresses, so this didn't work. There may have been a way around these issues on the switch configuration, but in an attempt to preserve good relations with the network admins I tried to find another way. Having two network interfaces seemed like the next logical step. Thankfully this Linux system is a virtual machine, so I was able to easily add a second network interface (without rebooting, I might add - pretty cool). A few keystrokes later I had two network interfaces up and running and both pulled IP addresses from DHCP. But then the problem came in: the network admins could see (on the switch) the ARP entry for both interfaces, but only the first network interface that I brought up would respond to pings or any sort of TCP or UDP traffic. After lots of digging and poking, here's what I came up with. It seems to work, but it also seems to be a lot of work for something that seems like it should be simple. Any alternate ideas out there? Step 1: Enable ARP filtering on all interfaces: # sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter=1 # echo "net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter = 1" >> /etc/sysctl.conf From the file networking/ip-sysctl.txt in the Linux kernel docs: arp_filter - BOOLEAN 1 - Allows you to have multiple network interfaces on the same subnet, and have the ARPs for each interface be answered based on whether or not the kernel would route a packet from the ARP'd IP out that interface (therefore you must use source based routing for this to work). In other words it allows control of which cards (usually 1) will respond to an arp request. 0 - (default) The kernel can respond to arp requests with addresses from other interfaces. This may seem wrong but it usually makes sense, because it increases the chance of successful communication. IP addresses are owned by the complete host on Linux, not by particular interfaces. Only for more complex setups like load- balancing, does this behaviour cause problems. arp_filter for the interface will be enabled if at least one of conf/{all,interface}/arp_filter is set to TRUE, it will be disabled otherwise Step 2: Implement source-based routing I basically just followed directions from http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html, although that page was written with a different goal in mind (dealing with two ISPs). Assume that the subnet is 10.0.0.0/24, the gateway is 10.0.0.1, the IP address for eth0 is 10.0.0.100, and the IP address for eth1 is 10.0.0.101. Define two new routing tables named eth0 and eth1 in /etc/iproute2/rt_tables: ... top of file omitted ... 1 eth0 2 eth1 Define the routes for these two tables: # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 table eth0 # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 table eth1 # ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.100 table eth0 # ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth1 src 10.0.0.101 table eth1 Define the rules for when to use the new routing tables: # ip rule add from 10.0.0.100 table eth0 # ip rule add from 10.0.0.101 table eth1 The main routing table was already taken care of by DHCP (and it's not even clear that its strictly necessary in this case), but it basically equates to this: # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0 # ip route add 130.127.48.0/23 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.100 # ip route add 130.127.48.0/23 dev eth1 src 10.0.0.101 And voila! Everything seems to work just fine. Sending pings to both IP addresses works fine. Sending pings from this system to other systems and forcing the ping to use a specific interface works fine (ping -I eth0 10.0.0.1, ping -I eth1 10.0.0.1). And most importantly, all TCP and UDP traffic to/from either IP address works as expected. So again, my question is: is there a better way to do this? This seems like a lot of work for a seemingly simple problem.

    Read the article

  • Abstract class + Inheritance vs Interface

    - by RealityDysfunction
    Hello fellow programmers, I am reading a book on C# and the author is comparing Abstract classes and Interfaces. He claims that if you have the following "abstract class:" abstract class CloneableType { public abstract object Clone(); } Then you cannot do this: public class MiniVan : Car, CloneableType {} This, I understand. However he claims that because of this inability to do multiple inheritance that you should use an interface for CloneableType, like so: public interface ICloneable { object Clone(); } My question is, isn't this somewhat misleading, because you can create an abstract class which is "above" class Car with the method Clone, then have Car inherit that class and then Minivan will inherit Car with all these methods, CloneAble class - Car class - Minivan Class. What do you think? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Switching from abstract class to interface

    - by nischayn22
    I have an abstract class which has all abstract methods except one which constructs objects of the subclasses. Now my mentor asked me to move this abstract class to an interface. Having an interface is no problem except with the method used to construct subclass objects. Where should this method go now? Also, I read somewhere that interfaces are more efficient than abstract classes. Is this true? Here's an example of my classes abstract class Animal { //many abstract methods getAnimalobject(some parameter) { return //appropriate subclass } } class Dog extends Animal {} class Elephant extends Animal {}

    Read the article

  • Should concrete classes avoid calling other concrete classes, except for data objects?

    - by Kazark
    In Appendix A to The Art of Unit Testing, Roy Osherove, speaking about ways to write testable code from the start, says, An abstract class shouldn't call concrete classes, and concerete classes shouldn't call concrete classes either, unless they're data objects (objects holding data, with no behavior). (259) The first half of the sentence is simply Dependency Inversion from SOLID. The second half seems rather extreme to me. That means that every time I'm going to write a class that isn't a simple data structure, which is most classes, I should write an interface or abstract class first, right? Is it really worthwhile to go that far in defining abstract classes an interfaces? Can anyone explain why in more detail, or refute it in spite of its benefit for testability?

    Read the article

  • Creating an Interface To a Language's Standard Library?

    - by Nathan Arthur
    In the process of learning test-driven development, I've been introduced to dependency injection and the use of interfaces, and have started using these concepts in my own PHP code in order to make it more testable. There have been times when I've needed to test code that was doing things like calling the PHP time() function. In order to make these tests predictable, it seemed logical to create an interface to the standard PHP functions I use so that I can mock them out in my tests. Is this good software design? What are the pros and cons of doing this? I've found myself groaning at how quickly my PHP interface can stick its fingers into everything I do. Is there a better way to make code that relies on PHP-accessed state and functions more testable?

    Read the article

  • Is this a pattern? Proxy/delegation of interface to existing concrete implementation

    - by Ian Newson
    I occasionally write code like this when I want to replace small parts of an existing implementation: public interface IFoo { void Bar(); } public class Foo : IFoo { public void Bar() { } } public class ProxyFoo : IFoo { private IFoo _Implementation; public ProxyFoo(IFoo implementation) { this._Implementation = implementation; } #region IFoo Members public void Bar() { this._Implementation.Bar(); } #endregion } This is a much smaller example than the real life cases in which I've used this pattern, but if implementing an existing interface or abstract class would require lots of code, most of which is already written, but I need to change a small part of the behaviour, then I will use this pattern. Is this a pattern or an anti pattern? If so, does it have a name and are there any well known pros and cons to this approach? Is there a better way to achieve the same result? Rewriting the interfaces and/or the concrete implementation is not normally an option as it will be provided by a third party library.

    Read the article

  • Interface hierarchy design for separate domains

    - by jerzi
    There are businesses and people. People could be liked and businesses could be commented on: class Like class Comment class Person implements iLikeTarget class Business implements iCommentTarget Likes and comments are performed by a user(person) so they are authored: class Like implements iAuthored class Comment implements iAuthored People's like could also be used in their history: class history class Like implements iAuthored, iHistoryTarget Now, a smart developer comes and says each history is attached to a user so history should be authored: interface iHistoryTarget extends iAuthored so it could be removed from class Like: class Person implements iLikeTarget class Business implements iCommentTarget class Like implements iHistoryTarget class Comment implements iAuthored class history interface iHistoryTarget extends iAuthored Here, another smart guy comes with a question: How could I capture the Authored fact in Like and Comment classes? He may knows nothing about history concept in the project. By scalling these kind of functionallities, interfaces may goes to their encapsulated types which cause more type strength, on the other hand explicitness suffered and also code end users will face much pain to process. So here is the question: Should I encapsulate those dependant types to their parent types (interface hierarchies) or not or explicitly repeat each type for every single level of my type system or ...?

    Read the article

  • Use one NIC to create multiple interfaces for Linux KVM

    - by Phanto
    I am working on a thesis research project, and I am having some difficulty figuring out how to make one NIC spawn several "bridge" interfaces such that each KVM VM can be seen on the local network. I am very new to KVM, and am still exploring what it can do. Below is the scenario that I am attempting to make (on a CentOS/RHEL 6 system): Linux KVM Host has 1 NIC (eth0) connected to a switch. Create multiple "bridge" or equivalent interfaces that are spawned off of eth0 that would provide a unique IP for each VM. This is so that each VM can communicate with other hosts on the network, and that other hosts on the network can communicate with the VM. IMPORTANT: I would like iptables on the KVM host to be able to manipulate/control/restrict the traffic that would be sent on those "bridge" interfaces. I would like to create a minimum of three VM's, each using their own unique "bridge" interfaces. I have previously made a br0 interface off of eth0, but unfortunately, I am unable to add any more to it. It appears that you can only bridge 1 interface to the NIC. I would like to bridge many to one. Would a tap device be able to do this? If so, how would it be set up? Effectively, I am attempting to replicate what can easily be created with VirtualBox on Windows, where each VM is given a "bridged" interface, and can live on the network. I want to achieve this very same thing with Linux KVM. Thank You EDIT: To be more descriptive, I want to achieve something that looks like this: This can be found on this page: http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/KVM#Networking_2 HOST +---------------+ | | KVM GUEST1 | | +--------------+ | +------+ | | | LAN ---+--- eth0 | +--+---+---- nic0 | KVM GUEST2 | | tap0----+ | |192.168.1.13 | +--------------+ | | tap1----+ | +--------------+ | | | +------+ | | | | | br0 +--+----------------------+---- nic0 | |192.168.1.12 | |192.168.1.14 | +---------------+ +--------------+

    Read the article

  • Multiple WAN interfaces on SonicWall TZ 100?

    - by Chad Decker
    I'm using a SonicWall TZ 100 with a basic configuration of X0 for the LAN and X1 for the WAN. The WAN uses DHCP to obtain its routable IP address. I want to obtain a second routable IP from my ISP. I'm in luck because my cable company will provide me with an additional dynamic IP for $5/mo. How do I bind this IP to my SonicWall? My additional dynamic IP will not be consecutive to the original one. It won't even be on the same class C. I think what I want to do is to use one of the empty ports/interfaces (X2, X3, or X4), tell that interface to use DHCP, and then add that interface to the WAN "zone". I can't figure out how to do this though. Here's what I've tried so far: (1) I've looked in Network Interfaces. I see X0 and X1 but the other unused interfaces don't show up. I don't see an "Add" button to add the new interfaces. (2) I've looked in Network Zones. I see that X0, X2, X3, X4 are in the LAN zone. I tried to drag X3 into the WAN zone but I can't. Nor does clicking the "Configure" button allow me to move an unused interface from LAN to WAN. (3) I've read the post entitled Splitting up multiple WAN's on Sonicwall. This doesn't seem applicable to me. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Two DHCP interfaces asigned to two default gateways to OS

    - by user140600
    I have a Ubuntu box that has two networking interfaces (eth0 and wlan0). They are both configured for DHCP in /etc/network/interfaces, but they both assign a default gateway: /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet dhcp auto wlan0 iface wlan0 inet dhcp wireless-essid test Result of route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 172.16.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 wlan0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wlan0 How can I set up /etc/network/interfaces to have only one default gateway, on the interface I want? Worst case scenario, how can I at least control which one gets on top on the route -n command, each boot? Note: This box will travel a lot, and will be connected to different networks, so I don´t know in advance the IP addresses/ranges it will have. Sometimes the default gw interface will be eth0. Sometimes it will be wlan0 ... So, this needs to be kind of automatic ...

    Read the article

  • Renaming VLAN Interfaces in Linux

    - by rhololkeolke
    I need to know how to rename VLAN interfaces. I'm currently running Ubuntu 11.04. I'm running a networking application that takes frames on one interface applies things like delays and errors and then forwards the frames out another interface. The default naming convention which names things <interface>.<vlan> e.g. eth0.2 will not work for my purposes because the program which parses the configuration script for the networking application doesn't like the decimal in the interface name. I ran vconfig set_name_type VLAN_PLUS_VID which solves the decimal in the interface name problem, however, I can then no longer assign the same vlan id to multiple interfaces because they have the same name. I know how to change physical interface names using udev rules, but because the vlan's will have the same MAC address and they aren't physical interfaces I can't use those rules to rename the interfaces. Is there a way to rename any interface in linux, including the virtual ones? Is there a way to specify your own naming convention for config set_name_type option without having to recompile the source of vconfig?

    Read the article

  • What level of detail to use in an interface members descriptions?

    - by famousgarkin
    I am extracting interfaces from some classes in .NET, and I am not completely sure about what level of detail of description to use for some of the interface members (properties, methods). An example: interface ISomeInterface { /// <summary> /// Checks if the object is checked out. /// </summary> /// <returns> /// Returns true if the object is checked out, or if the object locking is not enabled, /// otherwise returns false. /// </returns> bool IsObjectCheckedOut(); } class SomeImplementation : ISomeInterface { public bool IsObjectCheckedOut() { // An implementation of the method that returns true if the object is checked out, // or if the object locking is not enabled } } The part in question is the <returns>...</returns> section of the IsObjectCheckedOut description in the interface. Is it ok to include such a detail about return value in the interface itself, as the code that will work with the interface should know exactly what that method will do? All the current implementations of the method will do just that. But is it ok to limit the possible other/future implementations by description this way? Or should this not be included in the interface description, as there is no way to actually ensure that other/future implementations will do exactly this? Is it better to be as general as possible regarding the interface in such circumstances? I am currently inclined to the latter option.

    Read the article

  • Designing communications for extensibility

    - by Thomas S.
    I am working on the design stages of an application that will a) collect data from various sources (in my case that's scientific data from serial ports), keeping track of the age of the data, b) generate real-time statistics (e.g. running averages) c) display, record, and otherwise handle the data (and statistics). I anticipate that I will be adding both data producers and consumers over time, and would like to design this application abstractly so that I will be able to trivially add functionality with a small amount of interface code. What I'm stumbling on is deciding what communication infrastructure I should use to handle the interfaces. In particular, how should I make the processed data and statistics available to multiple consumers? Some things I've considered: Writing to several named pipes (variable number). Each consumer reads from one of them. Using FUSE to make a userspace filesystem where a read() returns the latest line of data even if another process has already read it. Making a TCP server, and having consumers connect and request data individually. Simply writing the consumers as part of the same program that aggregates the data. So I would like to hear your all's advice on deciding how to interface these functions in the best way to keep them separate and allow room for extenstions.

    Read the article

  • Graphical Interface and Object Selection/Manipulation

    - by ToriArendt
    I have a project I want to try to implement, but I'm kind of stuck on how to get started. I know there are probably a lot of resources that I can look at, but I'm really just stuck on what to even search for and where to begin. Basically, I have a program written in Java that separates 3D coordinates from a 3D reconstructed model into different objects. I then want to be able to perform a logistic regression on these objects to determine if they are type A or type B. But first, I need to classify a training set of objects as type A or B by hand. I don't know ANYTHING about graphing or user interfaces in Java, so I have been plotting the coordinates of a given object in MATLAB so that I can visualize the object and assign it a type. Now, as I am trying to make this program more "user friendly" I want to create an interface in Java where I can simply graph all the coordinates of the objects from the entire 3D model (on the same graph). I then want to be able to click on the each object and assign it to be either of type A or type B. I hope this description makes sense and someone can point me in the direction of something that will help me. I'm sorry if some of this terminology is off; I'm a bit new to software development. P.S. If anyone also has some tips on implementing logistic regression in Java, I'm sure I'll need them down the road :).

    Read the article

  • All nework interfaces hang for seconds while one interface goes up/down

    - by user3698377
    I am building a client/server application that uses several network interfaces in parallel for redundancy, and I have noticed that while one network interface goes down or goes up, the communication on other interfaces hangs for several seconds. I could reproduce this behavior without my application in a simple way: there are 2 interfaces available on computer 1 ( Ethernet and WiFi ) ping from computer 2 the IP address of the Ethernet connection of computer 1 disconnect the WiFi of computer 1 ping hangs for seconds, and then the packets are traveling again between the 2 computers. The hanging happens as well if I turn back on the WiFi connection on computer 1. It happens as well if I ping the WiFi IP, and turn off/on the Ethernet connection ( or unplug/plug the cable). I am using Linux Ubuntu 12.04 on both computers. Any ideas why is this happening, and if / how can it be avoided?

    Read the article

  • The term "interface" in C++

    - by Flexo
    Java makes a clear distinction between class and interface. (I believe C# does also, but I have no experience with it). When writing C++ however there is no language enforced distinction between class and interface. Consequently I've always viewed interface as a workaround for the lack of multiple inheritance in Java. Making such a distinction feels arbitrary and meaningless in C++. I've always tended to go with the "write things in the most obvious way" approach, so if in C++ I've got what might be called an interface in Java, e.g.: class Foo { public: virtual void doStuff() = 0; ~Foo() = 0; }; and I then decided that most implementers of Foo wanted to share some common functionality I would probably write: class Foo { public: virtual void doStuff() = 0; ~Foo() {} protected: // If it needs this to do its thing: int internalHelperThing(int); // Or if it doesn't need the this pointer: static int someOtherHelper(int); }; Which then makes this not an interface in the Java sense anymore. Instead C++ has two important concepts, related to the same underlying inheritance problem: virtual inhertiance Classes with no member variables can occupy no extra space when used as a base "Base class subobjects may have zero size" Reference Of those I try to avoid #1 wherever possible - it's rare to encounter a scenario where that genuinely is the "cleanest" design. #2 is however a subtle, but important difference between my understanding of the term "interface" and the C++ language features. As a result of this I currently (almost) never refer to things as "interfaces" in C++ and talk in terms of base classes and their sizes. I would say that in the context of C++ "interface" is a misnomer. It has come to my attention though that not many people make such a distinction. Do I stand to lose anything by allowing (e.g. protected) non-virtual functions to exist within an "interface" in C++? (My feeling is the exactly the opposite - a more natural location for shared code) Is the term "interface" meaningful in C++ - does it imply only pure virtual or would it be fair to call C++ classes with no member variables an interface still?

    Read the article

  • Interface contracts – forcing code contracts through interfaces

    - by DigiMortal
    Sometimes we need a way to make different implementations of same interface follow same rules. One option is to duplicate contracts to all implementation but this is not good option because we have duplicated code then. The other option is to force contracts to all implementations at interface level. In this posting I will show you how to do it using interface contracts and contracts class. Using code from previous example about unit testing code with code contracts I will go further and force contracts at interface level. Here is the code from previous example. Take a careful look at it because I will talk about some modifications to this code soon. public interface IRandomGenerator {     int Next(int min, int max); }   public class RandomGenerator : IRandomGenerator {     private Random _random = new Random();       public int Next(int min, int max)     {         return _random.Next(min, max);     } }    public class Randomizer {     private IRandomGenerator _generator;       private Randomizer()     {         _generator = new RandomGenerator();     }       public Randomizer(IRandomGenerator generator)     {         _generator = generator;     }       public int GetRandomFromRangeContracted(int min, int max)     {         Contract.Requires<ArgumentOutOfRangeException>(             min < max,             "Min must be less than max"         );           Contract.Ensures(             Contract.Result<int>() >= min &&             Contract.Result<int>() <= max,             "Return value is out of range"         );           return _generator.Next(min, max);     } } If we look at the GetRandomFromRangeContracted() method we can see that contracts set in this method are applicable to all implementations of IRandomGenerator interface. Although we can write new implementations as we want these implementations need exactly the same contracts. If we are using generators somewhere else then code contracts are not with them anymore. To solve the problem we will force code contracts at interface level. NB! To make the following code work you must enable Contract Reference Assembly building from project settings. Interface contracts and contracts class Interface contains no code – only definitions of members that implementing type must have. But code contracts must be defined in body of member they are part of. To get over this limitation, code contracts are defined in separate contracts class. Interface is bound to this class by special attribute and contracts class refers to interface through special attribute. Here is the IRandomGenerator with contracts and contracts class. Also I write simple fake so we can test contracts easily based only on interface mock. [ContractClass(typeof(RandomGeneratorContracts))] public interface IRandomGenerator {     int Next(int min, int max); }   [ContractClassFor(typeof(IRandomGenerator))] internal sealed class RandomGeneratorContracts : IRandomGenerator {     int IRandomGenerator.Next(int min, int max)     {         Contract.Requires<ArgumentOutOfRangeException>(                 min < max,                 "Min must be less than max"             );           Contract.Ensures(             Contract.Result<int>() >= min &&             Contract.Result<int>() <= max,             "Return value is out of range"         );           return default(int);     } }   public class RandomFake : IRandomGenerator {     private int _testValue;       public RandomGen(int testValue)     {         _testValue = testValue;     }       public int Next(int min, int max)     {         return _testValue;     } } To try out these changes use the following code. var gen = new RandomFake(3);   try {     gen.Next(10, 1); } catch(Exception ex) {     Debug.WriteLine(ex.Message); }   try {     gen.Next(5, 10); } catch(Exception ex) {     Debug.WriteLine(ex.Message); } Now we can force code contracts to all types that implement our IRandomGenerator interface and we must test only the interface to make sure that contracts are defined correctly.

    Read the article

  • Building Interactive User Interfaces with Microsoft ASP.NET AJAX: Refreshing An UpdatePanel With Jav

    The ASP.NET AJAX UpdatePanel provides a quick and easy way to implement a snappier, AJAX-based user interface in an ASP.NET WebForm. In a nutshell, UpdatePanels allow page developers to refresh selected parts of the page (instead of refreshing the entire page). Typically, an UpdatePanel contains user interface elements that would normally trigger a full page postback - controls like Buttons or DropDownLists that have their AutoPostBack property set to True. Such controls, when placed inside an UpdatePanel, cause a partial page postback to occur. On a partial page postback only the contents of the UpdatePanel are refreshed, avoiding the "flash" of having the entire page reloaded. (For a more in-depth look at the UpdatePanel control, refer back to the Using the UpdatePanel installment in this article series.) Triggering a partial page postback refreshes the contents within an UpdatePanel, but what if you want to refresh an UpdatePanel's contents via JavaScript? Ideally, the UpdatePanel would have a client-side function named something like Refresh that could be called from script to perform a partial page postback and refresh the UpdatePanel. Unfortunately, no such function exists. Instead, you have to write script that triggers a partial page postback for the UpdatePanel you want to refresh. This article looks at how to accomplish this using just a single line of markup/script and includes a working demo you can download and try out for yourself. Read on to learn more! Read More >Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Programming user interfaces using F# workflows

    F# asynchronous workflows can be used to solve a wide range of programming problems. In this article we'll look how to use asynchronous workflows for elegantly expressing the control flow of interaction with the user. We'll also look at clear functional way for encoding drag&drop-like algorithm.

    Read the article

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