Search Results

Search found 11639 results on 466 pages for 'numerical 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 63/466 | < Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >

  • Naming member functions/methods with a single underscore, good style or bad?

    - by Extrakun
    In some languages where you cannot override the () operator, I have seen methods with a single underscore, usually for 'helper' classes. Something likes this: class D10 { public function _() { return rand(1,10); } } Is it better to have the function called Roll()? Is a underscore fine? After all, there is only one function, and it removes the need to look up the name of the class. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • C#: why have all static methods/variables in a non-static class?

    - by Craig Johnston
    I have come across a class which is non-static, but all the methods and variables are static. Eg: public class Class1 { private static string String1 = "one"; private static string String2 = "two"; public static void PrintStrings(string str1, string str2) { ... All the variables are static across all instances, so there is no point having separate instances of the class. Is there any reason to create a class such as this?

    Read the article

  • How do I call the methods in a model via controller? Zend Framework

    - by Joel
    Hi guys, I've been searching for tutorials to better understand this, but I'm having no luck. Please forgive the lengthy explination, but I want make sure I explain myself well. First, I'm quite new to the MVC structure, though I have been doing tutorials and learning as best I can. I have been moving over a live site into the Zend Framework model. So far, I have all the views within views/scripts/index/example.phtml. So therefore I'm using one IndexController and I have the code in each Action method for each page: IE public function exampleAction() Because I didn't know how to interact with a model, I put all the methods at the bottom of the controller (a fat controller). So basically, I had a working site by using a View and Controller and no model. ... Now I'm trying to learn how to incorporate the Model. So I created a View at: view/scripts/calendar/index.phtml I created a new Controller at: controller/CalendarControllers.php and a new model at: model/Calendar.php The problem is I think I'm not correctly communication with the model (I'm still new to OOP). Can you look over my controller and model and tell me if you see a problem. I'm needing to return an array from runCalendarScript(), but I'm not sure if I can return an array into the object like I'm trying to? I don't really understand how to "run" the runCalendarScript() from the controller? Thanks for any help! I'm stripping out most of the guts of the methods for the sake of brevity: controller: <?php class CalendarController extends Zend_Controller_Action { public function indexAction() { $finishedFeedArray = new Application_Model_Calendar(); $this->view->googleArray = $finishedFeedArray; } } model: <?php class Application_Model_Calendar { public function _runCalendarScript(){ $gcal = $this->_validateCalendarConnection(); $uncleanedFeedArray = $this->_getCalendarFeed($gcal); $finishedFeedArray = $this->_cleanFeed($uncleanedFeedArray); return $finishedFeedArray; } //Validate Google Calendar connection public function _validateCalendarConnection() { ... return $gcal; } //extracts googles calendar object into the $feed object public function _getCalendarFeed($gcal) { ... return $feed; } //cleans the feed to just text, etc protected function _cleanFeed($uncleanedFeedArray) { $contentText = $this->_cleanupText($event); $eventData = $this->_filterEventDetails($contentText); return $cleanedArray; } //Cleans up all formatting of text from Calendar feed public function _cleanupText($event) { ... return $contentText; } //filterEventDetails protected function _filterEventDetails($contentText) { ... return $data; } }

    Read the article

  • how to change type of value in an php array and sorting it..is it possible ?

    - by justjoe
    hi, i got problem with my code and hopefully someone able to figure it out. The main purpose is to sort array based on its value (then reindex its numerical key). i got this sample of filename : $filename = array("index 198.php", "index 192.php", "index 144.php", "index 2.php", "index 1.php", "index 100.php", "index 111.php"); $alloutput = array(); //all of index in array foreach ($filename as $name) { preg_match('#(\d+)#', $name, $output); // take only the numerical from file name array_shift($output); // cleaned. the last code create duplicate numerical in $output, if (is_array($hasilku)) { $alloutput = array_merge($alloutput, $output); } } //try to check the type of every value in array foreach ($alloutput as $output) { if (is_array($hasil)) { echo "array true </br>"; } elseif (is_int($hasil)) { echo "integer true </br>"; } elseif (is_string($hasil)) { //the numerical taken from filename always resuld "string". echo "string true </br>"; } } the output of this code will be : Array ( [0] = 198 [1] = 192 [2] = 144 [3] = 2 [4] = 1 [5] = 100 [6] = 111 ) i have test every output in array. It's all string (and not numerical), So the question is how to change this string to integer, so i can sort it from the lowest into the highest number ? the main purpose of this code is how to output array where it had been sort from lowest to highest ?

    Read the article

  • Calling methods in super class constructor of subclass constructor?

    - by deamon
    Calling methods in super class constructor of subclass constructor? Passing configuration to the __init__ method which calls register implicitely: class Base: def __init__(self, *verbs=("get", "post")): self._register(verbs) def _register(self, *verbs): pass class Sub(Base): def __init__(self): super().__init__("get", "post", "put") Or calling register explicitely in the subclass' __init__ method: class Base: def __init__(self): self._register("get", "post") def _register(self, *verbs): pass class Sub(Base): def __init__(self): _register("get", "post", "put") What is better or more pythonic? Or is it only a matter of taste?

    Read the article

  • How to pass int values to asp.net page methods from jquery?

    - by Pandiya Chendur
    I am using asp.net page methods with jquery..... Here is my code, $.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "Default.aspx/GetRecords", data: "{}", contentType: "application/json; charset=utf-8", dataType: "json", and asp.net page method is, [WebMethod] public static string GetRecords(int currentPage,int pagesize) { // my logic here } How to pass values for currentPage and pagesize from jquery....

    Read the article

  • Erlang: What are the pros and cons of different methods for avoiding intermediate variables?

    - by erlacher
    At one point while traveling the web, I came across a great page which contrasted the clarity and terseness of different methods of doing a sequence of operations without having to make a bunch of throwaway variables, e.g., Var1, Var2, Var3. It tried list comprehensions, folds, maps, etc. For some reason, now matter what I google, I can't find it again. Anyone have any idea what I'm talking about? Or want to explore the topic anyway?

    Read the article

  • When mocking a class with Moq, how can I CallBase for just specific methods?

    - by Daryn
    I really appreciate Moq's Loose mocking behaviour that returns default values when no expectations are set. It's convenient and saves me code, and it also acts as a safety measure: dependencies won't get unintentionally called during the unit test (as long as they are virtual). However, I'm confused about how to keep these benefits when the method under test happens to be virtual. In this case I do want to call the real code for that one method, while still having the rest of the class loosely mocked. All I have found in my searching is that I could set mock.CallBase = true to ensure that the method gets called. However, that affects the whole class. I don't want to do that because it puts me in a dilemma about all the other properties and methods in the class that hide call dependencies: if CallBase is true then I have to either Setup stubs for all of the properties and methods that hide dependencies -- Even though my test doesn't think it needs to care about those dependencies, or Hope that I don't forget to Setup any stubs (and that no new dependencies get added to the code in the future) -- Risk unit tests hitting a real dependency. Q: With Moq, is there any way to test a virtual method, when I mocked the class to stub just a few dependencies? I.e. Without resorting to CallBase=true and having to stub all of the dependencies? Example code to illustrate (uses MSTest, InternalsVisibleTo DynamicProxyGenAssembly2) In the following example, TestNonVirtualMethod passes, but TestVirtualMethod fails - returns null. public class Foo { public string NonVirtualMethod() { return GetDependencyA(); } public virtual string VirtualMethod() { return GetDependencyA();} internal virtual string GetDependencyA() { return "! Hit REAL Dependency A !"; } // [... Possibly many other dependencies ...] internal virtual string GetDependencyN() { return "! Hit REAL Dependency N !"; } } [TestClass] public class UnitTest1 { [TestMethod] public void TestNonVirtualMethod() { var mockFoo = new Mock<Foo>(); mockFoo.Setup(m => m.GetDependencyA()).Returns(expectedResultString); string result = mockFoo.Object.NonVirtualMethod(); Assert.AreEqual(expectedResultString, result); } [TestMethod] public void TestVirtualMethod() // Fails { var mockFoo = new Mock<Foo>(); mockFoo.Setup(m => m.GetDependencyA()).Returns(expectedResultString); // (I don't want to setup GetDependencyB ... GetDependencyN here) string result = mockFoo.Object.VirtualMethod(); Assert.AreEqual(expectedResultString, result); } string expectedResultString = "Hit mock dependency A - OK"; }

    Read the article

  • Is it ok to throw NotImplemented exception in virtual methods?

    - by Axarydax
    I have a base class for some plugin-style stuff, and there are some methods that are absolutely required to be implemented. I currently declare those in the base class as virtual, for example public virtual void Save { throw new NotImplementedException(); } and in the descendand I have a public override void Save() { //do stuff } Is it a good practice to throw a NotImplementedException there? The descendand classes could for example be the modules for handling different file formats. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is there a C# equivalent of typeof for properties/methods/members?

    - by David
    A classes Type metadata can be obtained in several ways. Two of them are: var typeInfo = Type.GetType("MyClass") and var typeInfo = typeof(MyClass) The advantage of the second way is that typos will be caught by the compiler, and the IDE can understand what I'm talking about (allowing features like refactoring to work without silently breaking the code) Does there exist an equivalent way of strongly referencing members/properties/methods for metadata and reflection? Can I replace: var propertyInfo = typeof(MyClass).GetProperty("MyProperty") with something like: var propertyInfo = property(MyClass.MyProperty)

    Read the article

  • Are methods also serialized along with the data members in C#?

    - by Shaza
    Hey all, The title is obvious, I need to know if methods are serialized along with object instances in C#, I know that they don't in Java but I'm a little new to C#. If they don't, do I have to put the original class with the byte stream(serialized object) in one package when sending it to another PC? Can the original class be like a DLL file?

    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 | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >