Search Results

Search found 52424 results on 2097 pages for 'application dependency'.

Page 7/2097 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Avoiding dependency carrying

    - by dotnetdev
    When coding, I often come across the following pattern: -A method calls another method (Fine), but the method being called/callee takes parameters, so in the wrapping method, I pass in parameters. Problem is, this dependency carrying can go on and on. How could I avoid this (any sample code appreciated)? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Avoiding dependency injection

    - by dotnetdev
    When coding, I often come across the following pattern: -A method calls another method (Fine), but the method being called/callee takes parameters, so in the wrapping method, I pass in parameters. Problem is, this dependency carrying can go on and on. How could I avoid this (any sample code appreciated)? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Binding one dependency property to another

    - by Gregory Dodd
    I have a custom Tab Control that I have created, but I am having an issue. I have an Editable TextBox as part of the custom TabControl View. <Controls:EditableTextControl x:Name="PageTypeName" Style="{StaticResource ResourceKey={x:Type Controls:EditableTextControl}}" Grid.Row="0" TabIndex="0" Uid="0" AutomationProperties.AutomationId="PageTypeNameTextBox" AutomationProperties.Name="PageTypeName" Visibility="{Binding ElementName=PageTabControl,Path=ShowPageType}"> <Controls:EditableTextControl.ContextMenu> <ContextMenu x:Name="TabContextMenu"> <MenuItem Header="Rename Page Type" Command="{Binding Path=PlacementTarget.EnterEditMode, RelativeSource={RelativeSource AncestorType=ContextMenu}}" AutomationProperties.AutomationId="RenamePageTypeMenuItem" AutomationProperties.Name="RenamePageType"/> <MenuItem Header="Delete Page Type" Command="{Binding Path=PageTypeDeletedCommand}" AutomationProperties.AutomationId="DeletePageTypeMenuItem" AutomationProperties.Name="DeletePageType"/> </ContextMenu> </Controls:EditableTextControl.ContextMenu> <Controls:EditableTextControl.Content> <!--<Binding Path="CurrentPageTypeViewModel.Name" Mode="TwoWay"/>--> <Binding ElementName="PageTabControl" Path="CurrentPageTypeName" Mode ="TwoWay"/> </Controls:EditableTextControl.Content> </Controls:EditableTextControl> In the Content section I am binding to a Dependency Prop called CurrentPageTypeName. This Depedency prop is part of this custom Tab Control. public static DependencyProperty CurrentPageTypeNameProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("CurrentPageTypeName", typeof(object), typeof(TabControlView)); public object CurrentPageTypeName { get { return GetValue(CurrentPageTypeNameProperty) as object; } set { SetValue(CurrentPageTypeNameProperty, value); } } In another view, where I am using the custom TabControl I then bind my property, with the actual name value, to CurrentPageTypeName property as seen below: <Views:TabControlView Grid.Row="0" Name="RunPageTabControl" TabItemsSource="{Binding RunPageTypeViewModels}" SelectedTab="{Binding Converter={StaticResource debugConverter}}" CurrentPageTypeName="{Binding Path=RunPageName, Mode=TwoWay}" TabContentTemplateSelector="{StaticResource tabItemTemplateSelector}" SelectedIndex="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource FindAncestor, AncestorType={x:Type UserControl}}, Path=DataContext.SelectedTabIndex}" ShowPageType="Hidden" > <!--<Views:TabControlView.TabContentTemplate> <DataTemplate DataType="{x:Type ViewModels:RunPageTypeViewModel}"> <RunViews:RunPageTypeView/> </DataTemplate> </Views:TabControlView.TabContentTemplate>--> </Views:TabControlView> My problem is that nothing seems to be happening. It is grabbing its Content from the Itemsource, and not from my chained Dependency props. Is what I am trying even possible? If so, what have I done wrong. Thanks for looking.

    Read the article

  • spring.net application scope repository object on loadbalanced application

    - by Bert Vandamme
    Hi, We have an application running on a loadbalanced environment, let say webserver A and B. The loadbalancing is on the HTTP level, so the loadbalancer directs each user request to one of both webservers. The scope of the repositories in the application is managed by the spring.net container, and the application relies on data that can be cached by the repository (performance reasons). In this case we can never be sure that the cached data in the repositories on both webservers is the same. Is there mechanism in spring.net that can manage this kind problem? Or is there another common approach for this kind of thing? Any ideas? Thx, Bert

    Read the article

  • Easy remote communication without WCF

    - by Ralf Westphal
    If you´ve read my previous posts about why I deem WCF more of a problem than a solution and how I think we should switch to asynchronous only communication in distributed application, you might be wondering, how this could be done in an easy way. Since a truely simple example to get started with WCF still is drawing quite some traffic to this blog, let me pick up on that and show you, how to accomplish the same but much easier with an async communication API. For simplicities sake let me put all...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Factories, or Dependency Injection for object instantiation in WCF, when coding against an interface

    - by Saajid Ismail
    Hi I am writing a client/server application, where the client is a Windows Forms app, and the server is a WCF service hosted in a Windows Service. Note that I control both sides of the application. I am trying to implement the practice of coding against an interface: i.e. I have a Shared assembly which is referenced by the client application. This project contains my WCF ServiceContracts and interfaces which will be exposed to clients. I am trying to only expose interfaces to the clients, so that they are only dependant on a contract, not any specific implementation. One of the reasons for doing this is so that I can have my service implementation, and domain change at any time without having to recompile and redeploy the clients. The interfaces/contracts will in this case not change. I only need to recompile and redeploy my WCF service. The design issue I am facing now, is: on the client, how do I create new instances of objects, e.g. ICustomer, if the client doesn't know about the Customer concrete implementation? I need to create a new customer to be saved to the DB. Do I use dependency injection, or a Factory class to instantiate new objects, or should I just allow the client to create new instances of concrete implementations? I am not doing TDD, and I will typically only have one implementation of ICustomer or any other exposed interface.

    Read the article

  • How do I use constructor dependency injection to supply Models from a collection to their ViewModels

    - by GraemeF
    I'm using constructor dependency injection in my WPF application and I keep running into the following pattern, so would like to get other people's opinion on it and hear about alternative solutions. The goal is to wire up a hierarchy of ViewModels to a similar hierarchy of Models, so that the responsibility for presenting the information in each model lies with its own ViewModel implementation. (The pattern also crops up under other circumstances but MVVM should make for a good example.) Here's a simplified example. Given that I have a model that has a collection of further models: public interface IPerson { IEnumerable<IAddress> Addresses { get; } } public interface IAddress { } I would like to mirror this hierarchy in the ViewModels so that I can bind a ListBox (or whatever) to a collection in the Person ViewModel: public interface IPersonViewModel { ObservableCollection<IAddressViewModel> Addresses { get; } void Initialize(); } public interface IAddressViewModel { } The child ViewModel needs to present the information from the child Model, so it's injected via the constructor: public class AddressViewModel : IAddressViewModel { private readonly IAddress _address; public AddressViewModel(IAddress address) { _address = address; } } The question is, what is the best way to supply the child Model to the corresponding child ViewModel? The example is trivial, but in a typical real case the ViewModels have more dependencies - each of which has its own dependencies (and so on). I'm using Unity 1.2 (although I think the question is relevant across the other IoC containers), and I am using Caliburn's view strategies to automatically find and wire up the appropriate View to a ViewModel. Here is my current solution: The parent ViewModel needs to create a child ViewModel for each child Model, so it has a factory method added to its constructor which it uses during initialization: public class PersonViewModel : IPersonViewModel { private readonly Func<IAddress, IAddressViewModel> _addressViewModelFactory; private readonly IPerson _person; public PersonViewModel(IPerson person, Func<IAddress, IAddressViewModel> addressViewModelFactory) { _addressViewModelFactory = addressViewModelFactory; _person = person; Addresses = new ObservableCollection<IAddressViewModel>(); } public ObservableCollection<IAddressViewModel> Addresses { get; private set; } public void Initialize() { foreach (IAddress address in _person.Addresses) Addresses.Add(_addressViewModelFactory(address)); } } A factory method that satisfies the Func<IAddress, IAddressViewModel> interface is registered with the main UnityContainer. The factory method uses a child container to register the IAddress dependency that is required by the ViewModel and then resolves the child ViewModel: public class Factory { private readonly IUnityContainer _container; public Factory(IUnityContainer container) { _container = container; } public void RegisterStuff() { _container.RegisterInstance<Func<IAddress, IAddressViewModel>>(CreateAddressViewModel); } private IAddressViewModel CreateAddressViewModel(IAddress model) { IUnityContainer childContainer = _container.CreateChildContainer(); childContainer.RegisterInstance(model); return childContainer.Resolve<IAddressViewModel>(); } } Now, when the PersonViewModel is initialized, it loops through each Address in the Model and calls CreateAddressViewModel() (which was injected via the Func<IAddress, IAddressViewModel> argument). CreateAddressViewModel() creates a temporary child container and registers the IAddress model so that when it resolves the IAddressViewModel from the child container the AddressViewModel gets the correct instance injected via its constructor. This seems to be a good solution to me as the dependencies of the ViewModels are very clear and they are easily testable and unaware of the IoC container. On the other hand, performance is OK but not great as a lot of temporary child containers can be created. Also I end up with a lot of very similar factory methods. Is this the best way to inject the child Models into the child ViewModels with Unity? Is there a better (or faster) way to do it in other IoC containers, e.g. Autofac? How would this problem be tackled with MEF, given that it is not a traditional IoC container but is still used to compose objects?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Express and VS2010 Web Application .MDF file errors

    - by nannette
    I installed SQL Server 2008 as well as SQL Server Express 2008 on my new Windows 7 development environment, along with Visual Studio 2010. I could get SQL Server 2008 to work fine, but I could not use Express .MDF databases within sample web application projects without receiving the below error: Failed to generate a user instance of SQL Server due to a failure in starting the process for the user instance. The connection will be closed. For instance, I was creating an ASP.NET Web Application. When...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Problems building application for Ubuntu App Showdown

    - by Neil Munro
    I have managed to submit my source application to the Ubuntu build servers, however it's not building. This is the build output: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/109592385/buildlog_ubuntu-precise-i386.liberedit_12.07.20_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz I know that there is a dependency on lxml for my application but I don't know how to correct that, but I can also see that it's failing to find my own python modules. I am not sure what is going on in it's entirety here, but I would greatly appreciate getting this to build so I can submit it to the Ubuntu App Showdown. Thanks, Neil

    Read the article

  • Storing application preferences and data

    - by Rudi Strydom
    I am looking at creating some Ubuntu applications, but finding good resoures are hard. I am using the quickly toolkit, but would really like some more insight. How does one normally store application preferences and settings in Linux / Ubuntu. Is it as simple as creating a XML file and saving the information and then reading from said file on application bootstrap? If someone can point me in a direction it would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Write application indicator with no icon

    - by danjjl
    I wrote an application indicator that displays information about my monthly network consumption. I do not want it to have an icon next to the text I display. How do I write an application indicator without an icon? The code I use to initialize my indicator is: self.indicator = appindicator.Indicator.new("VooMeter", "network", appindicator.IndicatorCategory.SYSTEM_SERVICES) Reading the documentation I can not find the value to put instead of "network"

    Read the article

  • Use IIS Application Initialization for keeping ASP.NET Apps alive

    - by Rick Strahl
    I've been working quite a bit with Windows Services in the recent months, and well, it turns out that Windows Services are quite a bear to debug, deploy, update and maintain. The process of getting services set up,  debugged and updated is a major chore that has to be extensively documented and or automated specifically. On most projects when a service is built, people end up scrambling for the right 'process' to use for administration. Web app deployment and maintenance on the other hand are common and well understood today, as we are constantly dealing with Web apps. There's plenty of infrastructure and tooling built into Web Tools like Visual Studio to facilitate the process. By comparison Windows Services or anything self-hosted for that matter seems convoluted.In fact, in a recent blog post I mentioned that on a recent project I'd been using self-hosting for SignalR inside of a Windows service, because the application is in fact a 'service' that also needs to send out lots of messages via SignalR. But the reality is that it could just as well be an IIS application with a service component that runs in the background. Either way you look at it, it's either a Windows Service with a built in Web Server, or an IIS application running a Service application, neither of which follows the standard Service or Web App template.Personally I much prefer Web applications. Running inside of IIS I get all the benefits of the IIS platform including service lifetime management (crash and restart), controlled shutdowns, the whole security infrastructure including easy certificate support, hot-swapping of code and the the ability to publish directly to IIS from within Visual Studio with ease.Because of these benefits we set out to move from the self hosted service into an ASP.NET Web app instead.The Missing Link for ASP.NET as a Service: Auto-LoadingI've had moments in the past where I wanted to run a 'service like' application in ASP.NET because when you think about it, it's so much easier to control a Web application remotely. Services are locked into start/stop operations, but if you host inside of a Web app you can write your own ticket and control it from anywhere. In fact nearly 10 years ago I built a background scheduling application that ran inside of ASP.NET and it worked great and it's still running doing its job today.The tricky part for running an app as a service inside of IIS then and now, is how to get IIS and ASP.NET launched so your 'service' stays alive even after an Application Pool reset. 7 years ago I faked it by using a web monitor (my own West Wind Web Monitor app) I was running anyway to monitor my various web sites for uptime, and having the monitor ping my 'service' every 20 seconds to effectively keep ASP.NET alive or fire it back up after a reload. I used a simple scheduler class that also includes some logic for 'self-reloading'. Hacky for sure, but it worked reliably.Luckily today it's much easier and more integrated to get IIS to launch ASP.NET as soon as an Application Pool is started by using the Application Initialization Module. The Application Initialization Module basically allows you to turn on Preloading on the Application Pool and the Site/IIS App, which essentially fires a request through the IIS pipeline as soon as the Application Pool has been launched. This means that effectively your ASP.NET app becomes active immediately, Application_Start is fired making sure your app stays up and running at all times. All the other features like Application Pool recycling and auto-shutdown after idle time still work, but IIS will then always immediately re-launch the application.Getting started with Application InitializationAs of IIS 8 Application Initialization is part of the IIS feature set. For IIS 7 and 7.5 there's a separate download available via Web Platform Installer. Using IIS 8 Application Initialization is an optional install component in Windows or the Windows Server Role Manager: This is an optional component so make sure you explicitly select it.IIS Configuration for Application InitializationInitialization needs to be applied on the Application Pool as well as the IIS Application level. As of IIS 8 these settings can be made through the IIS Administration console.Start with the Application Pool:Here you need to set both the Start Automatically which is always set, and the StartMode which should be set to AlwaysRunning. Both have to be set - the Start Automatically flag is set true by default and controls the starting of the application pool itself while Always Running flag is required in order to launch the application. Without the latter flag set the site settings have no effect.Now on the Site/Application level you can specify whether the site should pre load: Set the Preload Enabled flag to true.At this point ASP.NET apps should auto-load. This is all that's needed to pre-load the site if all you want is to get your site launched automatically.If you want a little more control over the load process you can add a few more settings to your web.config file that allow you to show a static page while the App is starting up. This can be useful if startup is really slow, so rather than displaying blank screen while the user is fiddling their thumbs you can display a static HTML page instead: <system.webServer> <applicationInitialization remapManagedRequestsTo="Startup.htm" skipManagedModules="true"> <add initializationPage="ping.ashx" /> </applicationInitialization> </system.webServer>This allows you to specify a page to execute in a dry run. IIS basically fakes request and pushes it directly into the IIS pipeline without hitting the network. You specify a page and IIS will fake a request to that page in this case ping.ashx which just returns a simple OK string - ie. a fast pipeline request. This request is run immediately after Application Pool restart, and while this request is running and your app is warming up, IIS can display an alternate static page - Startup.htm above. So instead of showing users an empty loading page when clicking a link on your site you can optionally show some sort of static status page that says, "we'll be right back".  I'm not sure if that's such a brilliant idea since this can be pretty disruptive in some cases. Personally I think I prefer letting people wait, but at least get the response they were supposed to get back rather than a random page. But it's there if you need it.Note that the web.config stuff is optional. If you don't provide it IIS hits the default site link (/) and even if there's no matching request at the end of that request it'll still fire the request through the IIS pipeline. Ideally though you want to make sure that an ASP.NET endpoint is hit either with your default page, or by specify the initializationPage to ensure ASP.NET actually gets hit since it's possible for IIS fire unmanaged requests only for static pages (depending how your pipeline is configured).What about AppDomain Restarts?In addition to full Worker Process recycles at the IIS level, ASP.NET also has to deal with AppDomain shutdowns which can occur for a variety of reasons:Files are updated in the BIN folderWeb Deploy to your siteweb.config is changedHard application crashThese operations don't cause the worker process to restart, but they do cause ASP.NET to unload the current AppDomain and start up a new one. Because the features above only apply to Application Pool restarts, AppDomain restarts could also cause your 'ASP.NET service' to stop processing in the background.In order to keep the app running on AppDomain recycles, you can resort to a simple ping in the Application_End event:protected void Application_End() { var client = new WebClient(); var url = App.AdminConfiguration.MonitorHostUrl + "ping.aspx"; client.DownloadString(url); Trace.WriteLine("Application Shut Down Ping: " + url); }which fires any ASP.NET url to the current site at the very end of the pipeline shutdown which in turn ensures that the site immediately starts back up.Manual Configuration in ApplicationHost.configThe above UI corresponds to the following ApplicationHost.config settings. If you're using IIS 7, there's no UI for these flags so you'll have to manually edit them.When you install the Application Initialization component into IIS it should auto-configure the module into ApplicationHost.config. Unfortunately for me, with Mr. Murphy in his best form for me, the module registration did not occur and I had to manually add it.<globalModules> <add name="ApplicationInitializationModule" image="%windir%\System32\inetsrv\warmup.dll" /> </globalModules>Most likely you won't need ever need to add this, but if things are not working it's worth to check if the module is actually registered.Next you need to configure the ApplicationPool and the Web site. The following are the two relevant entries in ApplicationHost.config.<system.applicationHost> <applicationPools> <add name="West Wind West Wind Web Connection" autoStart="true" startMode="AlwaysRunning" managedRuntimeVersion="v4.0" managedPipelineMode="Integrated"> <processModel identityType="LocalSystem" setProfileEnvironment="true" /> </add> </applicationPools> <sites> <site name="Default Web Site" id="1"> <application path="/MPress.Workflow.WebQueueMessageManager" applicationPool="West Wind West Wind Web Connection" preloadEnabled="true"> <virtualDirectory path="/" physicalPath="C:\Clients\…" /> </application> </site> </sites> </system.applicationHost>On the Application Pool make sure to set the autoStart and startMode flags to true and AlwaysRunning respectively. On the site make sure to set the preloadEnabled flag to true.And that's all you should need. You can still set the web.config settings described above as well.ASP.NET as a Service?In the particular application I'm working on currently, we have a queue manager that runs as standalone service that polls a database queue and picks out jobs and processes them on several threads. The service can spin up any number of threads and keep these threads alive in the background while IIS is running doing its own thing. These threads are newly created threads, so they sit completely outside of the IIS thread pool. In order for this service to work all it needs is a long running reference that keeps it alive for the life time of the application.In this particular app there are two components that run in the background on their own threads: A scheduler that runs various scheduled tasks and handles things like picking up emails to send out outside of IIS's scope and the QueueManager. Here's what this looks like in global.asax:public class Global : System.Web.HttpApplication { private static ApplicationScheduler scheduler; private static ServiceLauncher launcher; protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Pings the service and ensures it stays alive scheduler = new ApplicationScheduler() { CheckFrequency = 600000 }; scheduler.Start(); launcher = new ServiceLauncher(); launcher.Start(); // register so shutdown is controlled HostingEnvironment.RegisterObject(launcher); }}By keeping these objects around as static instances that are set only once on startup, they survive the lifetime of the application. The code in these classes is essentially unchanged from the Windows Service code except that I could remove the various overrides required for the Windows Service interface (OnStart,OnStop,OnResume etc.). Otherwise the behavior and operation is very similar.In this application ASP.NET serves two purposes: It acts as the host for SignalR and provides the administration interface which allows remote management of the 'service'. I can start and stop the service remotely by shutting down the ApplicationScheduler very easily. I can also very easily feed stats from the queue out directly via a couple of Web requests or (as we do now) through the SignalR service.Registering a Background Object with ASP.NETNotice also the use of the HostingEnvironment.RegisterObject(). This function registers an object with ASP.NET to let it know that it's a background task that should be notified if the AppDomain shuts down. RegisterObject() requires an interface with a Stop() method that's fired and allows your code to respond to a shutdown request. Here's what the IRegisteredObject::Stop() method looks like on the launcher:public void Stop(bool immediate = false) { LogManager.Current.LogInfo("QueueManager Controller Stopped."); Controller.StopProcessing(); Controller.Dispose(); Thread.Sleep(1500); // give background threads some time HostingEnvironment.UnregisterObject(this); }Implementing IRegisterObject should help with reliability on AppDomain shutdowns. Thanks to Justin Van Patten for pointing this out to me on Twitter.RegisterObject() is not required but I would highly recommend implementing it on whatever object controls your background processing to all clean shutdowns when the AppDomain shuts down.Testing it outI'm still in the testing phase with this particular service to see if there are any side effects. But so far it doesn't look like it. With about 50 lines of code I was able to replace the Windows service startup to Web start up - everything else just worked as is. An honorable mention goes to SignalR 2.0's oWin hosting, because with the new oWin based hosting no code changes at all were required, merely a couple of configuration file settings and an assembly directive needed, to point at the SignalR startup class. Sweet!It also seems like SignalR is noticeably faster running inside of IIS compared to self-host. Startup feels faster because of the preload.Starting and Stopping the 'Service'Because the application is running as a Web Server, it's easy to have a Web interface for starting and stopping the services running inside of the service. For our queue manager the SignalR service and front monitoring app has a play and stop button for toggling the queue.If you want more administrative control and have it work more like a Windows Service you can also stop the application pool explicitly from the command line which would be equivalent to stopping and restarting a service.To start and stop from the command line you can use the IIS appCmd tool. To stop:> %windir%\system32\inetsrv\appcmd stop apppool /apppool.name:"Weblog"and to start> %windir%\system32\inetsrv\appcmd start apppool /apppool.name:"Weblog"Note that when you explicitly force the AppPool to stop running either in the UI (on the ApplicationPools page use Start/Stop) or via command line tools, the application pool will not auto-restart immediately. You have to manually start it back up.What's not to like?There are certainly a lot of benefits to running a background service in IIS, but… ASP.NET applications do have more overhead in terms of memory footprint and startup time is a little slower, but generally for server applications this is not a big deal. If the application is stable the service should fire up and stay running indefinitely. A lot of times this kind of service interface can simply be attached to an existing Web application, or if scalability requires be offloaded to its own Web server.Easier to work withBut the ultimate benefit here is that it's much easier to work with a Web app as opposed to a service. While developing I can simply turn off the auto-launch features and launch the service on demand through IIS simply by hitting a page on the site. If I want to shut down an IISRESET -stop will shut down the service easily enough. I can then attach a debugger anywhere I want and this works like any other ASP.NET application. Yes you end up on a background thread for debugging but Visual Studio handles that just fine and if you stay on a single thread this is no different than debugging any other code.SummaryUsing ASP.NET to run background service operations is probably not a super common scenario, but it probably should be something that is considered carefully when building services. Many applications have service like features and with the auto-start functionality of the Application Initialization module, it's easy to build this functionality into ASP.NET. Especially when combined with the notification features of SignalR it becomes very, very easy to create rich services that can also communicate their status easily to the outside world.Whether it's existing applications that need some background processing for scheduling related tasks, or whether you just create a separate site altogether just to host your service it's easy to do and you can leverage the same tool chain you're already using for other Web projects. If you have lots of service projects it's worth considering… give it some thought…© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2013Posted in ASP.NET  SignalR  IIS   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection with Custom Membership Provider

    - by alastairs
    I have an ASP.NET MVC web application that implements a custom membership provider. The custom membership provider takes a UserRepository to its constructor that provides an interface between the membership provider and NHibernate. The UserRepository is provided by the Ninject IoC container. Obviously, however, this doesn't work when the provider is instantiated by .NET: the parameterless constructor does not have a UserRepository and cannot create one (the UserRepository requires an NHibernate session be passed to its constructor), which then means that the provider cannot access its data store. How can I resolve my object dependency? It's probably worth noting that this is an existing application that has been retrofitted with Ninject. Previously I used parameterless constructors that were able to create their required dependencies in conjunction with the parametered constructors to assist unit testing. Any thoughts, or have I built myself into a corner here?

    Read the article

  • Using Dependency Walker

    - by Valter Minute
    Dependency Walker is a very useful tool that can be used to find dependencies of a Portable Executable module. The PE format is used also on Windows CE and this means that Dependency Walker can be used to analyze also Windows CE/Windows Embedded Compact module. On Win32 it can be used also to monitor modules loaded by an application during runtime, this feature is not supported on CE. You can download dependency walker for free here: http://dependencywalker.com/. To analyze the dependencies of a Windows CE/Windows Embedded Compact 7 module you can just open it using Dependency Walker. If you want to check if a specific module can run on a Windows CE/Windows Compact 7 OS Image you can copy the executable in the same directory that contains your OS binaries (FLATRELEASEDIR). In this way Dependency Walker will highlight missing dlls or missing entry points inside existing dlls. Let’s do a quick sample. You need to check if myapp.exe (an application from a third party) can run on an image generated with your Test01 OSDesign. Copy Myapp.exe to the flat release directory of your OS Design. Launch depends.exe and use the File\Open option of its main menu to open the application executable file you just copied. You may receive an error if some of the modules required by your applications are missing. Before you analyze the module dependencies is important to configure Dependency Walker to check DLL in the same folder where your application file is stored. This is needed because some Windows CE DLLs have the same name of Win32 system DLLs but different entry points. To configure the DLL search path select “Options\Configure Module Search Order…” from Depenency Walker main menu. Select “The application directory” from the “Current Search Order” list, select it, and move it to the top of the list using the “Move Up” button. The system will ask to refresh the window contents to reflect your configuration change, click on “Yes” to proceed. Now you can inspect myapp.exe dependencies. Some DLLs are missing (XAMLRUNTIME.DLL and TILEENGINE.DLL) and OLE32.DLL exists but does not export the “CoInitialize” entry point that is required by myapp.exe. The bad news is that MyApp.exe will not run on your OS Image, the good news is that now you know what’s missing and you can add the required modules to your OS Design and fix the problem!

    Read the article

  • How to Create a Portable Version of RocketDock for a USB Flash Drive

    - by Lori Kaufman
    RocketDock is a lightweight, highly customizable application launcher, or dock, for Windows. You can install it on your computer or use a portable version on a USB flash drive to provide quick access to your portable programs. We’ll show you how to make RocketDock portable. However, first you must install RocketDock before making it portable. See our article about installing, setting up, and using RocketDock. Once you have installed RocketDock, right-click anywhere on the dock or on the icons on the dock and select Dock Settings from the popup menu. HTG Explains: What Is RSS and How Can I Benefit From Using It? HTG Explains: Why You Only Have to Wipe a Disk Once to Erase It HTG Explains: Learn How Websites Are Tracking You Online

    Read the article

  • Circular Dependency Solution

    - by gfoley
    Our current project has ran into a circular dependency issue. Our business logic assembly is using classes and static methods from our SharedLibrary assembly. The SharedLibrary contains a whole bunch of helper functions, such as a SQL Reader class, Enumerators, Global Variables, Error Handling, Logging and Validation. The SharedLibrary needs access to the Business objects, but the Business objects need access to SharedLibrary. The old developers solved this obvious code smell by replicating the functionality of the business objects in the shared library (very anti-DRY). I've spent a day now trying to read about my options to solve this but i'm hitting a dead end. I'm open to the idea of architecture redesign, but only as a last resort. So how can i have a Shared Helper Library which can access the business objects, with the business objects still accessing the Shared Helper Library?

    Read the article

  • How far does Dependency Injection reach?

    - by Baddie
    My web app solution consists of 3 projects: Web App (ASP.NET MVC) Business Logic Layer (Class Library) Database Layer (Entity Framework) I want to use Ninject to manage the lifetime of the DataContext generated by the Entity Framework in the Database Layer. The Business Logic layer consists of classes which reference repositories (located in the database layer) and my ASP.NET MVC app references the business logic layer's service classes to run code. Each repository creates an instance of the MyDataContext object from the Entity Framework Repository public class MyRepository { private MyDataContext db; public MyRepository { this.db = new MyDataContext(); } // methods } Business Logic Classes public class BizLogicClass { private MyRepository repos; public MyRepository { this.repos = new MyRepository(); } // do stuff with the repos } Will Ninject handle the lifetime of MyDataContext despite the lengthy dependency chain from the Web App to the Data Layer?

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection in constructor, method or just use a static class instead?

    - by gaetanm
    What is the best between: $dispatcher = new Dispatcher($request); $dispatcher->dispatch(); and $dispatcher = new Dispatcher(); $dispatcher->dispatch($request); or even Dispatcher::dispatch($request); Knowing that only one method of this class uses the $request instance. I naturally tend to the last solution because the class have no other states, but by I feel that it may not be the best OOP solution.

    Read the article

  • Circular dependencies in StructureMap - can they be broken with property injection?

    - by Andy
    Hi, I've got the simplest kind of circular dependency in structuremap - class A relies on class B in its constructor, and class B relies on class A in its constructor. To break the dependency, I made class B take class A as a property, rather than a constructor argument, but structuremap still complains. I've seen circular dependencies broken using this method in other DI frameworks - is this a problem with Structuremap or am I doing something wrong? Edit: I should mention that class B's property is an array of class A instances, wired up like this: x.For<IB>().Singleton().Use<B>().Setter(y => y.ArrayOfA).IsTheDefault();

    Read the article

  • How to do dependency Injection and conditional object creation based on type?

    - by Pradeep
    I have a service endpoint initialized using DI. It is of the following style. This end point is used across the app. public class CustomerService : ICustomerService { private IValidationService ValidationService { get; set; } private ICustomerRepository Repository { get; set; } public CustomerService(IValidationService validationService,ICustomerRepository repository) { ValidationService = validationService; Repository = repository; } public void Save(CustomerDTO customer) { if (ValidationService.Valid(customer)) Repository.Save(customer); } Now, With the changing requirements, there are going to be different types of customers (Legacy/Regular). The requirement is based on the type of the customer I have to validate and persist the customer in a different way (e.g. if Legacy customer persist to LegacyRepository). The wrong way to do this will be to break DI and do somthing like public void Save(CustomerDTO customer) { if(customer.Type == CustomerTypes.Legacy) { if (LegacyValidationService.Valid(customer)) LegacyRepository.Save(customer); } else { if (ValidationService.Valid(customer)) Repository.Save(customer); } } My options to me seems like DI all possible IValidationService and ICustomerRepository and switch based on type, which seems wrong. The other is to change the service signature to Save(IValidationService validation, ICustomerRepository repository, CustomerDTO customer) which is an invasive change. Break DI. Use the Strategy pattern approach for each type and do something like: validation= CustomerValidationServiceFactory.GetStratedgy(customer.Type); validation.Valid(customer) but now I have a static method which needs to know how to initialize different services. I am sure this is a very common problem, What is the right way to solve this without changing service signatures or breaking DI?

    Read the article

  • JSR-303 dependency injection and Hibernate

    - by Jam
    Spring 3.0.2, Hibernate 3.5.0, Hibernate-Validator 4.0.2.GA I am trying to inject Spring dependencies into a ConstraintValidator using: @PersistenceContext private EntityManager entityManager; I have configured the application context with: <bean id="validator" class="org.springframework.validation.beanvalidation.LocalValidatorFactoryBean"/> Which, according to the Spring documentation, should allow “custom ConstraintValidators to benefit from dependency injection like any other Spring bean” Within the debugger I can see Spring calling getBean to create the ConstraintValidator. Later when flush triggers the preInsert, a different ConstraintValidator is created and called. The problem is the EntityManager is null within this new ConstraintValidator. I’ve tried injecting other dependencies within the ConstraintValidator and these are always null. Does anyone know if it is possible to inject dependencies into a ConstraintValidator?

    Read the article

  • Is dependency injection by hand a better alternative to composition and polymorphism?

    - by Drake Clarris
    First, I'm an entry level programmer; In fact, I'm finishing an A.S. degree with a final capstone project over the summer. In my new job, when there isn't some project for me to do (they're waiting to fill the team with more new hires), I've been given books to read and learn from while I wait - some textbooks, others not so much (like Code Complete). After going through these books, I've turned to the internet to learn as much as possible, and started learning about SOLID and DI (we talked some about Liskov's substitution principle, but not much else SOLID ideas). So as I've learned, I sat down to do to learn better, and began writing some code to utilize DI by hand (there are no DI frameworks on the development computers). Thing is, as I do it, I notice it feels familiar... and it seems like it is very much like work I've done in the past using composition of abstract classes using polymorphism. Am I missing a bigger picture here? Is there something about DI (at least by hand) that goes beyond that? I understand the possibility of having configurations not in code of some DI frameworks having some great benefits as far as changing things without having to recompile, but when doing it by hand, I'm not sure if it's any different than stated above... Some insight into this would be very helpful!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >