Search Results

Search found 23845 results on 954 pages for 'instance methods'.

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 6/954 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • About extension methods

    - by Srinivas Reddy Thatiparthy
    Shall i always need to throw ArgumentNullException(well,extension methods in Enumerable throw ArgumentNullException) when an extension method is called on null?I would like to have a clarification on this?If the answer is an Yes and No please present both the cases.

    Read the article

  • Generate set/get methods for a c++ class

    - by Narek
    Is there any tool that generates set and get methods for a class. Just I create classes very frequently and would like to have a tool which for each class-member wil generate following functions: Member_Type getMemberName() const; void setMemberName(const Member_Type & val);

    Read the article

  • conventions for friend methods in Perl

    - by xenoterracide
    Perl doesn't support a friend relationship between objects, nor does it support private or protected methods. What is usually done for private methods is to prefix the name with an underscore. I occasionally have methods that I think of as friend methods. Meaning that I expect them to be used by a specific object, or an object with a specific responsibility, but I'm not sure if I should make that method public (meaning foo ) or private ( _foo ) or if there's a better convention? is there a convention for friend methods?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: Static Char Methods

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. Often times in our code we deal with the bigger classes and types in the BCL, and occasionally forgot that there are some nice methods on the primitive types as well.  Today we will discuss some of the handy static methods that exist on the char (the C# alias of System.Char) type. The Background I was examining a piece of code this week where I saw the following: 1: // need to get the 5th (offset 4) character in upper case 2: var type = symbol.Substring(4, 1).ToUpper(); 3:  4: // test to see if the type is P 5: if (type == "P") 6: { 7: // ... do something with P type... 8: } Is there really any error in this code?  No, but it still struck me wrong because it is allocating two very short-lived throw-away strings, just to store and manipulate a single char: The call to Substring() generates a new string of length 1 The call to ToUpper() generates a new upper-case version of the string from Step 1. In my mind this is similar to using ToUpper() to do a case-insensitive compare: it isn’t wrong, it’s just much heavier than it needs to be (for more info on case-insensitive compares, see #2 in 5 More Little Wonders). One of my favorite books is the C++ Coding Standards: 101 Rules, Guidelines, and Best Practices by Sutter and Alexandrescu.  True, it’s about C++ standards, but there’s also some great general programming advice in there, including two rules I love:         8. Don’t Optimize Prematurely         9. Don’t Pessimize Prematurely We all know what #8 means: don’t optimize when there is no immediate need, especially at the expense of readability and maintainability.  I firmly believe this and in the axiom: it’s easier to make correct code fast than to make fast code correct.  Optimizing code to the point that it becomes difficult to maintain often gains little and often gives you little bang for the buck. But what about #9?  Well, for that they state: “All other things being equal, notably code complexity and readability, certain efficient design patterns and coding idioms should just flow naturally from your fingertips and are no harder to write then the pessimized alternatives. This is not premature optimization; it is avoiding gratuitous pessimization.” Or, if I may paraphrase: “where it doesn’t increase the code complexity and readability, prefer the more efficient option”. The example code above was one of those times I feel where we are violating a tacit C# coding idiom: avoid creating unnecessary temporary strings.  The code creates temporary strings to hold one char, which is just unnecessary.  I think the original coder thought he had to do this because ToUpper() is an instance method on string but not on char.  What he didn’t know, however, is that ToUpper() does exist on char, it’s just a static method instead (though you could write an extension method to make it look instance-ish). This leads me (in a long-winded way) to my Little Wonders for the day… Static Methods of System.Char So let’s look at some of these handy, and often overlooked, static methods on the char type: IsDigit(), IsLetter(), IsLetterOrDigit(), IsPunctuation(), IsWhiteSpace() Methods to tell you whether a char (or position in a string) belongs to a category of characters. IsLower(), IsUpper() Methods that check if a char (or position in a string) is lower or upper case ToLower(), ToUpper() Methods that convert a single char to the lower or upper equivalent. For example, if you wanted to see if a string contained any lower case characters, you could do the following: 1: if (symbol.Any(c => char.IsLower(c))) 2: { 3: // ... 4: } Which, incidentally, we could use a method group to shorten the expression to: 1: if (symbol.Any(char.IsLower)) 2: { 3: // ... 4: } Or, if you wanted to verify that all of the characters in a string are digits: 1: if (symbol.All(char.IsDigit)) 2: { 3: // ... 4: } Also, for the IsXxx() methods, there are overloads that take either a char, or a string and an index, this means that these two calls are logically identical: 1: // check given a character 2: if (char.IsUpper(symbol[0])) { ... } 3:  4: // check given a string and index 5: if (char.IsUpper(symbol, 0)) { ... } Obviously, if you just have a char, then you’d just use the first form.  But if you have a string you can use either form equally well. As a side note, care should be taken when examining all the available static methods on the System.Char type, as some seem to be redundant but actually have very different purposes.  For example, there are IsDigit() and IsNumeric() methods, which sound the same on the surface, but give you different results. IsDigit() returns true if it is a base-10 digit character (‘0’, ‘1’, … ‘9’) where IsNumeric() returns true if it’s any numeric character including the characters for ½, ¼, etc. Summary To come full circle back to our opening example, I would have preferred the code be written like this: 1: // grab 5th char and take upper case version of it 2: var type = char.ToUpper(symbol[4]); 3:  4: if (type == 'P') 5: { 6: // ... do something with P type... 7: } Not only is it just as readable (if not more so), but it performs over 3x faster on my machine:    1,000,000 iterations of char method took: 30 ms, 0.000050 ms/item.    1,000,000 iterations of string method took: 101 ms, 0.000101 ms/item. It’s not only immediately faster because we don’t allocate temporary strings, but as an added bonus there less garbage to collect later as well.  To me this qualifies as a case where we are using a common C# performance idiom (don’t create unnecessary temporary strings) to make our code better. Technorati Tags: C#,CSharp,.NET,Little Wonders,char,string

    Read the article

  • How to get friendly device name from DEV_BROADCAST_DEVICEINTERFACE and Device Instance ID

    - by snicker
    I've registered a window with RegisterDeviceNotification and can successfully recieve DEV_BROADCAST_DEVICEINTERFACE messages. However, the dbcc_name field in the returned struct is always empty. The struct I have is defined as such: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct DEV_BROADCAST_DEVICEINTERFACE { public int dbcc_size; public int dbcc_devicetype; public int dbcc_reserved; public Guid dbcc_classguid; [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.LPStr)] public string dbcc_name; } And I'm using Marshal.PtrToStructure on the LParam of the WM_DEVICECHANGE message. Should this be working? Or even better... Is there an alternative way to get the name of a device upon connection? EDIT (02/05/2010 20:56GMT): I found out how to get the dbcc_name field to populate by doing this: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential, CharSet = CharSet.Auto)] public struct DEV_BROADCAST_DEVICEINTERFACE { public int dbcc_size; public int dbcc_devicetype; public int dbcc_reserved; public Guid dbcc_classguid; [MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.ByValTStr, SizeConst=255)] public string dbcc_name; } but I still need a way to get a "Friendly" name from what is int dbcc_name. It looks like the following: \?\USB#VID_05AC&PID_1294&MI_00#0#{6bdd1fc6-810f-11d0-bec7-08002be2092f} And I really just want it to say "Apple iPhone" (which is what the device is in this case).

    Read the article

  • Compare base class part of sub class instance to another base class instance

    - by Anders Abel
    I have number of DTO classes in a system. They are organized in an inheritance hierarchy. class Person { public int Id { get; set; } public string FirstName { get; set; } public string ListName { get; set; } } class PersonDetailed : Person { public string WorkPhone { get; set; } public string HomePhone { get; set; } public byte[] Image { get; set; } } The reason for splitting it up is to be able to get a list of people for e.g. search results, without having to drag the heavy image and phone numbers along. Then the full PersonDetail DTO is loaded when the details for one person is selected. The problem I have run into is comparing these when writing unit tests. Assume I have Person p1 = myService.GetAPerson(); PersonDetailed p2 = myService.GetAPersonDetailed(); // How do I compare the base class part of p2 to p1? Assert.AreEqual(p1, p2); The Assert above will fail, as p1 and p2 are different classes. Is it possible to somehow only compare the base class part of p2 to p1? Should I implement IEquatable<> on Person? Other suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Local Declaration "x" hides instance variable xcode warning

    - by Michael Robinson
    I've been have trouble understand this problem. If I change the variable name fifthViewController the error goes away but the view controller doesn't load. Lost. Once again it's probably something simple. Thanks in advance. Here is the code: { FifthViewController *fifthViewController = [[FifthViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"FifthView" bundle:nil]; fifthViewController.transactionID = transactionID; [self.navigationController pushViewController:fifthViewController animated:NO]; [fifthViewController release]; }

    Read the article

  • Accessing "Public" methods from "Private" methods in javascript class

    - by mon4goos
    Is there a way to call "public" javascript functions from "private" ones within a class? Check out the class below: function Class() { this.publicMethod = function() { alert("hello"); } privateMethod = function() { publicMethod(); } this.test = function() { privateMethod(); } } Here is the code I run: var class = new Class(); class.test(); Firebug gives this error: publicMethod is not defined: [Break on this error] publicMethod(); Is there some other way to call publicMethod() within privateMethod() without accessing the global class variable [i.e. class.publicMethod()]?

    Read the article

  • Why does python use 'magic methods'?

    - by Greg Beech
    I've been playing around with Python recently, and one thing I'm finding a bit odd is the extensive use of 'magic methods', e.g. to make its length available an object implements a method def __len__(self) and then it is called when you write len(obj). I was just wondering why objects don't simply define a len(self) method and have it called directly as a member of the object, e.g. obj.len()? I'm sure there must be good reasons for Python doing it the way it does, but as a newbie I haven't worked out what they are yet.

    Read the article

  • Size of Objects in Java Heap w/ Regards to Methods

    - by Eric
    I know about primitives and objects living on the heap, but how does the number of methods effect heap size of the object? For example: public class A { int x; public getX() { return x; } } public class B { int x; public getX() { return x; } public getXString() { return String.valueOf(x); } public doMoreInterestingStuff() { return x * 42; } //etc } When instantiated, both objects live on the heap, both have memory allocated to their primitive x, but is B allocated more heap space due to having more method signatures? Or are those ONLY on the classLoader? In this example its trivial, but when there are 100,000+ of these objects in memory at any given time I imagine it could add up.

    Read the article

  • How extension methods work in background ?

    - by Freshblood
    I am just cuirous about behind of extension method mechanism.Some questions and answer appear in my mind. MyClass.OrderBy(x=>x.a).OrderBy(x=>x.b); I was guessing that mechanism was first orderby method works and order them by a member then returns sorted items in IEnumarable interface then next Orderby method of IEnumarable Order them for b paramater.But i am wrong when i look at this linq query. MyClass.Orderby(x=>x.a).ThenOrderBy(x=>x.b); this is slightly different and tells me that i am wrong.Because this is not ordering by a then b and not possible to have such result if i was right.This get me confuse enough... Similiar structure is possible to write withot extension methods as first query but second is not possible.This prove i am wrong . Can u explain it ?

    Read the article

  • Call methods on native Javascript types without wrapping with ()

    - by Anurag
    In Javascript, we can call methods on string literals directly without enclosing it within round brackets. But not for other types such as numbers, or functions. It is a syntax error, but is there a reason as to why the Javascript lexer needs these other types to be enclosed in round brackets? For example, if we extend Number, String, and Function with an alert method and try calling this method on the literals, it's a SyntaxError for Number and Function, while it works for a String. function alertValue() { alert(this); } Number.prototype.alert = alertValue; String.prototype.alert = alertValue; Function.prototype.alert = alertValue; We can call alert directly on a string object: "someStringLiteral".alert() // alerts someStringLiteral but it's a SyntaxError on numbers, and functions. 7.alert(); function() {}.alert(); To work with these types, we have to enclose it within brackets: (7).alert(); // alerts "7" (function() {}).alert(); // alerts "function() {}"

    Read the article

  • Ruby Methods: return an usage string when insufficient arguments are given

    - by Shyam
    Hi, After creating a serious bunch of classes, with initialize methods, loading them in IRb requires to look back at the code. However, I think it should be easy enough to return a usage message, instead of: ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (0 for 9) So I prefer to return a string with the human readable arguments, by example using "puts" or just a return of a string. Now I have seen the rescue keyword inside begin-end code, but I wonder how I could catch the ArgumentError when the initialize method is called. Thank you for your answers, feedback and comments!

    Read the article

  • Question on Virtual Methods

    - by bobber205
    IF both methods are declared as virtual, shouldn't both instances of Method1() that are called be the derived class's Method1()? I am seeing BASE then DERIVED called each time. I am doing some review for an interview and I want to make sure I have this straight. xD class BaseClass { public: virtual void Method1() { cout << "Method 1 BASE" << endl; } }; class DerClass: public BaseClass { public: virtual void Method1() { cout << "Method 1 DERVIED" << endl; } }; DerClass myClass; ((BaseClass)myClass).Method1(); myClass.Method1(); Method 1 BASE Method 1 DERVIED

    Read the article

  • Differences between extension methods in C#3 & 4

    - by Buh Buh
    I think I remember reading a long time ago that in C#3 extension methods could only be applied to primitive types and interfaces; and that in C#4 they could be used to extend any type. This doesn't seam to match up with what I am seeing now and I am finding it difficult to find this documented. Is there any truth to this or did my memory make it all up? What are the rules relating to which types can be extended? Are there any differences between C# 3 and 4?

    Read the article

  • Extension methods on a static object

    - by Max Malygin
    I know (or so I hear) that writing extension methods for a single stand alone .net class (not an implementation of IEnumerable) is potential code smell. However, for the sake of making the life easier I need to attach a method to the ConfigurationManager class in asp.net. It's a static object so this won't work: public static List<string> GetSupportedDomains(this ConfigurationManager manager) { //the manager needs to be static. } So the question is - is it possible to write an extension method for a static class in .net?

    Read the article

  • Question on methods in Object Oriented Programming

    - by mal
    I’m learning Java at the minute (first language), and as a project I’m looking at developing a simple puzzle game. My question relates to the methods within a class. I have my Block type class; it has its many attributes, set methods, get methods and just plain methods. There are quite a few. Then I have my main board class. At the moment it does most of the logic, positioning of sprites collision detection and then draws the sprites etc... As I am learning to program as much as I’m learning to program games I’m curious to know how much code is typically acceptable within a given method. Is there such thing as having too many methods? All my draw functionality happens in one method, should I break this into a few ‘sub’ methods? My thinking is if I find at a later stage that the for loop I’m using to cycle through the array of sprites searching for collisions in the spriteCollision() method is inefficient I code a new method and just replace the old method calls with the new one, leaving the old code intact. Is it bad practice to have a method that contains one if statement, and place the call for that method in the for loop? I’m very much in the early stages of coding/designing and I need all the help I can get! I find it a little intimidating when people are talking about throwing together a prototype in a day too! Can’t wait until I’m that good!

    Read the article

  • Creating a method that is simultaneously an instance and class method

    - by Mike Axiak
    In Python, I'd like to be able to create a function that behaves both as a class function and an instance method, but with the ability to change behaviors. The use case for this is for a set of serializable objects and types. As an example: >>> class Thing(object): #... >>> Thing.to_json() 'A' >>> Thing().to_json() 'B' I know that given the definition of classmethod() in funcobject.c in the Python source, this looks like it'd be simple with a C module. Is there a way to do this from within python? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Create Generic Class Instance from Static Method in a Derived Class

    - by user343547
    I have a class in C# with a template and static method similar to class BClass<T> { public static BClass<T> Create() { return new BClass<T>(); } } From this I derive a class and specify a template parameter to the base class class DClass : BClass<int> { } A problem occurs when I try to use the static method to create an instance of D class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { DClass d = DClass.Create(); } } Gives a compiler error "Cannot implicitly convert type 'Test.BClass<int ' to 'Test.DClass'." Adding the below cast leads to a runtime casting exception. DClass d = (DClass)DClass.Create(); Is there any succint way to allow the static method to create instances of the derived class? Ideally I would like the equivalent of a c++ typedef and I don't want the below syntax (which does work). BClass<int> d = DClass.Create();

    Read the article

  • Extension methods in class library project

    - by Mostafa
    I've implemented some extension methods and put those in separate Class Library project. Imagine I have a simple extension method like this in class library called MD.Utility: namespace MD.Utility { public static class ExtenMethods { public static bool IsValidEmailAddress(this string s) { Regex regex = new Regex(@"^[\w-\.]+@([\w-]+\.)+[\w-]{2,4}$"); return regex.IsMatch(s); } } } But nowhere in WebApp like App_code folder or WebFroms code-behind page I can't use this Extension method. If I do like this: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.UI; using System.Web.UI.WebControls; using MD.Utility; public partial class _Default : System.Web.UI.Page { protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { string email = "[email protected]"; if (email.IsValidEmailAddress()) { //To do } } } The compiler doesn't recognize IsValidEmailAddress() and even no intellisense support. While if I put my extension method in App_Code folder it's ok for using in another cs file in App_code Folder or Web Form code-behind pages.

    Read the article

  • Accessing Static Methods on a Generic class in c#

    - by mrlane
    Hello, I have the following situation in code, which I suspect may be a bit dodgey: I have a class: abstract class DataAccessBase<T> : IDataAccess where T : AnotherAbstractClass This class DataAccessBase also has a static factory method which creates instances of derived classes of itself using an enum value in a which statement to decide which derived type to create: static IDataAccess CreateInstance(TypeToCreateEnum) Now, the types derived from DataAccessBase<T> are themselves NOT generic, they specify a type for T: class PoLcZoneData : DataAccessBase<PoLcZone> // PoLcZone is derived from AnotherAbstractClass So far I am not sure if this is pushing the limits of good use of generics, but what I am really concerned about is how to access the static CreateInstance() method in the first place: The way I am doing this at the moment is to simply pass any type T where T : AnotherAbstractClass. In particular I am passing AnotherAbstractClass itself. This allows compilation just fine, but it does seem to me that passing any type to a generic class just to get at the statics is a bit dodgey. I have actually simplified the situation somewhat as DataAccessBase<T> is the lower level in the inheritance chain, but the static factory methods exists in a middle tier with classes such as PoLcZoneData being the most derived on the only level that is not generic. What are peoples thoughts on this arrangement?

    Read the article

  • C# ambiguity in Func + extension methods + lambdas

    - by Hobbes
    I've been trying to make my way through this article: http://blogs.msdn.com/wesdyer/archive/2008/01/11/the-marvels-of-monads.aspx ... And something on page 1 made me uncomfortable. In particular, I was trying to wrap my head around the Compose<() function, and I wrote an example for myself. Consider the following two Func's: Func<double, double> addTenth = x => x + 0.10; Func<double, string> toPercentString = x => (x * 100.0).ToString() + "%"; No problem! It's easy to understand what these two do. Now, following the example from the article, you can write a generic extension method to compose these functions, like so: public static class ExtensionMethods { public static Func<TInput, TLastOutput> Compose<TInput, TFirstOutput, TLastOutput>( this Func<TFirstOutput, TLastOutput> toPercentString, Func<TInput, TFirstOutput> addTenth) { return input => toPercentString(addTenth(input)); } } Fine. So now you can say: string x = toPercentString.Compose<double, double, string>(addTenth)(0.4); And you get the string "50%" So far, so good. But there's something ambiguous here. Let's say you write another extension method, so now you have two functions: public static class ExtensionMethods { public static Func<TInput, TLastOutput> Compose<TInput, TFirstOutput, TLastOutput>( this Func<TFirstOutput, TLastOutput> toPercentString, Func<TInput, TFirstOutput> addTenth) { return input => toPercentString(addTenth(input)); } public static Func<double, string> Compose<TInput, TFirstOutput, TLastOutput>(this Func<double, string> toPercentString, Func<double, double> addTenth) { return input => toPercentString(addTenth(input + 99999)); } } Herein is the ambiguity. Don't these two function have overlapping signatures? Yes. Does this even compile? Yes. Which one get's called? The second one (which clearly gives you the "wrong" result) gets called. If you comment out either function, it still compiles, but you get different results. It seems like nitpicking, but there's something that deeply offends my sensibilities here, and I can't put my finger on it. Does it have to do with extension methods? Does it have to do with lambdas? Or does it have to do with how Func< allows you to parameterize the return type? I'm not sure. I'm guessing that this is all addressed somewhere in the spec, but I don't even know what to Google to find this. Help!

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