Search Results

Search found 4593 results on 184 pages for 'constructor injection'.

Page 6/184 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Java: design problem with private-final-int-value and empty constructor

    - by HH
    $ javac InitInt.java InitInt.java:7: variable right might not have been initialized InitInt(){} ^ 1 error $ cat InitInt.java import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class InitInt { private final int right; //DUE to new Klowledge: Design Problem //I think having an empty constructor like this // is an design problem, shall I remove it? What do you think? // When to use an empty constructor? InitInt(){} public static void main(String[] args) { InitInt test = new InitInt(); System.out.println(test.getRight()); } public int getRight(){return right;} } Initialization problem with Constructor InitInt{ // Still the error, "may not be initialized" // How to initialise it? if(snippetBuilder.length()>(charwisePos+25)){ right=charwisePos+25; }else{ right=snippetBuilder.length()-1; } }

    Read the article

  • C++ method chaining including class constructor

    - by jena
    Hello, I'm trying to implement method chaining in C++, which turns out to be quite easy if the constructor call of a class is a separate statement, e.g: Foo foo; foo.bar().baz(); But as soon as the constructor call becomes part of the method chain, the compiler complains about expecting ";" in place of "." immediately after the constructor call: Foo foo().bar().baz(); I'm wondering now if this is actually possible in C++. Here is my test class: class Foo { public: Foo() { } Foo& bar() { return *this; } Foo& baz() { return *this; } }; I also found an example for "fluent interfaces" in C++ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluent_interface#C.2B.2B) which seems to be exactly what I'm searching for. However, I get the same compiler error for that code. Thanks in advance for any hint. Best, Jean

    Read the article

  • Would this constructor be acceptable practice?

    - by Robb
    Let's assume I have a c++ class that have properly implemented a copy constructor and an overloaded = operator. By properly implemented I mean they are working and perform a deep copy: Class1::Class1(const Class1 &class1) { // Perform copy } Class1& Class1::operator=(const Class1 *class1) { // perform copy return *this; } Now lets say I have this constructor as well: Class1::Class1(Class1 *class1) { *this = *class1; } My question is would the above constructor be acceptable practice? This is code that i've inherited and maintaining.

    Read the article

  • Constructor return value

    - by Ivan Gromov
    Could you tell me what is wrong with my class constructor? Code: CVector::CVector (int size_) { if (size_ > 0) { this->size = size_; this->data = new double[size]; for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) { (*this)(i) = i; } } cout << "constructor end" << endl; return; } Usage example: tvector = CVector(6); I get an access violation after "constructor end" output.

    Read the article

  • Why Java cannot find my constructor?

    - by Roman
    Well, maybe it is a stupid question, but I cannot resolve this problem. In my ServiceBrowser class I have this line: ServiceResolver serviceResolver = new ServiceResolver(ifIndex, serviceName, regType, domain); And compiler complains about it. It says: cannot find symbol symbol : constructor ServiceResolver(int,java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String) This is strange, because I do have a constructor in the ServiceResolver: public void ServiceResolver(int ifIndex, String serviceName, String regType, String domain) { this.ifIndex = ifIndex; this.serviceName = serviceName; this.regType = regType; this.domain = domain; } ADDED: I removed void from the constructor and it works! Why?

    Read the article

  • Concatenating Date Values - SQL Injection

    - by Kyle Rozendo
    Hi All, We currently receive parameters of values as VARCHAR's, and then build a date from them. I am wanting to confirm that the method would stop the possibility of SQL injection from this statement: select CONVERT(datetime, '2010' + '-' + '02' + '-' + '21' + ' ' + '15:11:38.990') Another note is that the actual parameters being passed through to the stored proc are length bound at (4, 2, 2, 10, 12) in correspondence to the above. Thanks a ton, Kyle

    Read the article

  • How would I go about prevent DLL injection.

    - by wowus
    So the other day, I saw this: http://www.edgeofnowhere.cc/viewtopic.php?p=2483118 and it goes over three different methods of DLL injection. How would I prevent these from the process? Or at a bare minimum, how do I prevent the first one? I was thinking maybe a Ring 0 driver might be the only way to stop all three, but I'd like to see what the community thinks.

    Read the article

  • Does this PHP function protect against SQL injection?

    - by George Edison
    I have this function I'm using and I want to be sure that it fully protects against SQL injection attacks: function MakeSafeForQuery($string) { // replace all of the quote // chars by their escape sequence $ret = str_replace("\\","\\\\",$string); $ret = str_replace("'","\\'",$ret); $ret = str_replace("\"","\\\"",$ret); return $ret; } Am I missing anything serious?

    Read the article

  • Prevent SQL Injection in Dynamic column names

    - by Mr Shoubs
    I can't get away without writing some dynamic sql conditions in a part of my system (using Postgres). My question is how best to avoid SQL Injection with the method I am currently using. EDIT (Reasoning): There are many of columns in a number of tables (a number which grows (only) and is maintained elsewhere). I need a method of allowing the user to decide which (predefined) column they want to query (and if necessary apply string functions to). The query itself is far too complex for the user to write themselves, nor do they have access to the db. There are 1000's of users with varying requirements and I need to remain as flexible as possible - I shouldn't have to revisit the code unless the main query needs to change - Also, there is no way of knowing what conditions the user will need to use. I have objects (received via web service) that generates a condition (the generation method is below - it isn't perfect yet) for some large sql queries. The _FieldName is user editable (parameter name was, but it didn't need to be) and I am worried it could be an attack vector. I put double quotes (see quoted identifier) around the field name in an attempt to sanitize the string, this way it can never be a key word. I could also look up the field name against a list of fields, but it would be difficult to maintain on a timely basis. Unfortunately the user must enter the condition criteria, I am sure there must be more I can add to the sanatize method? and does quoting the column name make it safe? (my limited testing seems to think so). an example built condition would be "AND upper(brandloaded.make) like 'O%' and upper(brandloaded.make) not like 'OTHERBRAND'" ... Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Public Function GetCondition() As String Dim sb As New Text.StringBuilder 'put quote around the table name in an attempt to prevent some sql injection 'http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html sb.AppendFormat(" {0} ""{1}"" ", _LogicOperator.ToString, _FieldName) Select Case _ConditionOperator Case ConditionOperatorOptions.Equals sb.Append(" = ") ... End Select sb.AppendFormat(" {0} ", Me.UniqueParameterName) 'for parameter Return Me.Sanitize(sb) End Function Private Function Sanitize(ByVal sb As Text.StringBuilder) As String 'compare against a similar blacklist mentioned here: http://forums.asp.net/t/1254125.aspx sb.Replace(";", "") sb.Replace("'", "") sb.Replace("\", "") sb.Replace(Chr(8), "") Return sb.ToString End Function Public ReadOnly Property UniqueParameterName() As String Get Return String.Concat(":" _UniqueIdentifier) End Get End Property

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection wcf

    - by Diego Dias
    I want inject a implementation of my Interface in the WCF but I want initialize my container of Dependency Injection in the Client of the WCF. So I can have a different implementation for each client of the my service. Help me please.

    Read the article

  • Recovering From An SQL Injection

    - by Bryan
    Let's not go so far as to say that I'm paranoid, but I've been spending hour after hour learning how to prevent SQL injections (and XSS for what it's worth). What I'm wondering is that a SQL injection doesn't seem like it would do permanent harm to my database if I've made daily backups. Doesn't importing yesterday's copy of my tables just restore them and then I can be on my merry way?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: I don't get where to start!

    - by Andy
    I have several articles about Dependency Injection, and I can see the benefits, especially when it comes to unit testing. The units can me loosely coupled, and mocking of dependencies can be made. The trouble is - I just don't get where to start. Consider this snippet below of (much edited for the purpose of this post) code that I have. I am instantiating a Plc object from the main form, and passing in a communications mode via the Connect method. In it's present form it becomes hard to test, because I can't isolate the Plc from the CommsChannel to unit test it. (Can I?) The class depends on using a CommsChannel object, but I am only passing in a mode that is used to create this channel within the Plc itself. To use dependancy injection, I should really pass in an already created CommsChannel (via an 'ICommsChannel' interface perhaps) to the Connect method, or maybe via the Plc constructor. Is that right? But then that would mean creating the CommsChannel in my main form first, and this doesn't seem right either, because it feels like everything will come back to the base layer of the main form, where everything begins. Somehow it feels like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. Where do you start? You have to create an instance of something somewhere, but I'm struggling to understand where that should be. public class Plc() { public bool Connect(CommsMode commsMode) { bool success = false; // Create new comms channel. this._commsChannel = this.GetCommsChannel(commsMode); // Attempt connection success = this._commsChannel.Connect(); return this._connected; } private CommsChannel GetCommsChannel(CommsMode mode) { CommsChannel channel; switch (mode) { case CommsMode.RS232: channel = new SerialCommsChannel( SerialCommsSettings.Default.ComPort, SerialCommsSettings.Default.BaudRate, SerialCommsSettings.Default.DataBits, SerialCommsSettings.Default.Parity, SerialCommsSettings.Default.StopBits); break; case CommsMode.Tcp: channel = new TcpCommsChannel( TCPCommsSettings.Default.IP_Address, TCPCommsSettings.Default.Port); break; default: // Throw unknown comms channel exception. } return channel; } }

    Read the article

  • variadic constructors

    - by FredOverflow
    Are variadic constructors supposed to hide the implicitly generated ones, i.e. the default constructor and the copy constructor? struct Foo { template<typename... Args> Foo(Args&&... x) { std::cout << "inside the variadic constructor\n"; } }; int main() { Foo a; Foo b(a); } Somehow I was expecting this to print nothing after reading this answer, but it prints inside the variadic constructor twice on g++ 4.5.0 :( Is this behavior correct?

    Read the article

  • Stuck trying to get Log4Net to work with Dependency Injection

    - by Pure.Krome
    I've got a simple winform test app i'm using to try some Log4Net Dependency Injection stuff. I've made a simple interface in my Services project :- public interface ILogging { void Debug(string message); // snip the other's. } Then my concrete type will be using Log4Net... public class Log4NetLogging : ILogging { private static ILog Log4Net { get { return LogManager.GetLogger( MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().DeclaringType); } } public void Debug(string message) { if (Log4Net.IsDebugEnabled) { Log4Net.Debug(message); } } } So far so good. Nothing too hard there. Now, in a different project (and therefore namesapce), I try and use this ... public partial class Form1 : Form { public Form1() { FileInfo fileInfo = new FileInfo("Log4Net.config"); log4net.Config.XmlConfigurator.Configure(fileInfo); } private void Foo() { // This would be handled with DI, but i've not set it up // (on the constructor, in this code example). ILogging logging = new Log4NetLogging(); logging.Debug("Test message"); } } Ok .. also pretty simple. I've hardcoded the ILogging instance but that is usually dependency injected via the constructor. Anyways, when i check this line of code... return LogManager.GetLogger(MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().DeclaringType); the DeclaringType type value is of the Service namespace, not the type of the Form (ie. X.Y.Z.Form1) which actually called the method. Without passing the type INTO method as another argument, is there anyway using reflection to figure out the real method that called it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >