Search Results

Search found 11360 results on 455 pages for 'helper classes'.

Page 7/455 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • When do you use a struct instead of a class?

    - by jkohlhepp
    What are your rules of thumb for when to use structs vs. classes? I'm thinking of the C# definition of those terms but if your language has similar concepts I'd like to hear your opinion as well. I tend to use classes for almost everything, and use structs only when something is very simplistic and should be a value type, such as a PhoneNumber or something like that. But this seems like a relatively minor use and I hope there are more interesting use cases.

    Read the article

  • Helper class to dynamically modify the Location configuration element

    - by anas
    The location element is used to restrict user or role access on a specific path.The path could be a folder,aspx page,ashx,axd or any other file that is handled by ASP.NET runtime. In most cases, you use that element declarativley in the web.config file of your website.In this case, you are declaratively telling the ASP.NET runtime and specifically the UrlAuthorizationModule or the FileAuthorizationModule (depending on the Authentication Mode) to grant/deny the access to that path for the specified...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Helper methods StartOfMonth and StartOfNextMonth

    - by Michael Freidgeim
    There are couple methods recently added to My DateTimeHelper class     public static DateTime StartOfMonth(this DateTime dateValue)         {             return new DateTime(dateValue.Year,dateValue.Month,1,0,0,0);         }         public static DateTime StartOfNextMonth(this DateTime dateValue)         {             return StartOfMonth(dateValue).AddMonths(1);         }

    Read the article

  • Static / Shared Helper Functions vs Built-In Methods

    - by Nathan
    This is a simple question but a design consideration that I often run across in my day to day development work. Lets say that you have a class that represents some kinds of collection. Public Class ModifiedCustomerOrders Public Property Orders as List(Of ModifiedOrders) End Class Within this class you do all kinds of important work, such as combining many different information sources and, eventually, build the Modified Customer Orders. Now, you have different processes that consume this class, each of which needs a slightly different slice of the ModifiedCustomerOrders items. To enable this, you want to add filtering functionality. How do you go about this? Do you: Add Filtering calls to the ModifiedCustomerOrders class so that you can say: MyOrdersClass.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a Static / Shared "tooling" class that allows you to call: OrdersFilters.RemoveCanceledOrders(MyOrders) Create an extension method to accomplish the same feat as #2 but with less typing: MyOrders.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a "Service" method that handles the getting of Orders as appropriate to the calling function, while using one of the previous approaches "under the hood". OrdersService.GetOrdersForProcessA() Others? I tend to prefer the tooling / extension method approaches as they make testing a little bit simpler. Although I dependency inject all my sourcing data into the ModifiedCustomerOrders, having it as part of the class makes it a little bit more complicated to test. Typically, I choose to use extension methods where I am doing parameterless transformations / filters. As they get more complex, I will move it into a static class instead. Thoughts on this approach? How would you approach it?

    Read the article

  • Fluent MVC Route Testing Helper

    - by Nettuce
    static class GetUrlFromController<T> where T : Controller     {         public static string WithAction(Expression<Func<T, ActionResult>> expression)         {             var controllerName = typeof(T).Name.Replace("Controller", string.Empty);             var methodCall = (MethodCallExpression)expression.Body;             var actionName = methodCall.Method.Name;             var routeValueDictionary = new RouteValueDictionary();             for (var i = 0; i < methodCall.Arguments.Count; i++)             {                 routeValueDictionary.Add(methodCall.Method.GetParameters()[i].Name, methodCall.Arguments[i]);             }             var routes = new RouteCollection();             MvcApplication.RegisterRoutes(routes);             return UrlHelper.GenerateUrl(null, actionName, controllerName, routeValueDictionary, routes, ContextMocks.RequestContext, true);         }     } I'm using FluentAssertions too, so you get this: GetUrlFromController<HomeController>.WithAction(x => x.Edit(1)).Should().Be("/Home/Edit/1");

    Read the article

  • Chaining CSS classes in IE6 - Trying to find a jQuery solution?

    - by Mike Baxter
    Right, perhaps I ask the impossible? I consider myself fairly new to Javscript and jQuery, but that being said, I have written some fairly complex code recently so I am definitely getting there... however I am now possed with a rather interesting issue at my current freelance contract. The previous web coder has taken a Grid-960 approach to the HTML and as a result has used chained classes to style many of the elements. The example below is typical of what can be found in the code: <div class='blocks four-col-1 orange highlight'>Some content</div> And in the css there will be different declarations for: (not actual css... but close enough) .blocks {margin-right:10px;} .orange {background-image:url(someimage.jpg);} .highlight {font-weight:bold;} .four-col-1 {width:300px;} and to make matters worse... this is in the CSS: .blocks.orange.highlight {background-colour:#dd00ff;} Anyone not familiar with this particular bug can read more on it here: http://www.ryanbrill.com/archives/multiple-classes-in-ie/ it is very real and very annoying. Without wanting to go into the merrits of not chaining classes (I told them this, but it is no longer feasible to change their approach... 100 hand coded pages into a 150 page website, no CMS... sigh) and without the luxury of being able to change the way these blocks are styled... can anyone advise me on the complexity and benefits between any of my below proposed approaches or possible other options that would adequately solve this problem. Potential Solution 1 Using conditional comments I am considering loading a jquery script only for IE6 that: Reads the class of all divs in a certain section of the page and pushes to an array creates empty boxes off screen with only one of the classes applied at a time Reads the applied CSS values for each box Re-applies these styles to the individual box, somehow bearing in mind the order in which they are called and overwriting conflicting instructions as required Potential Solution 2 read the class of all divs in a certain section of the page and push to an array Scan the document for links to style sheets Ajax grab the stylesheets and traverse looking for matching names to those in class array Apply styles as needed Potential Solution 3 Create an IE6 only stylesheet containing the exact style to be applied as a unique name (ie: class='blocks orange highlight' becomes class='blocks-orange-highlight') Traverse the document in IE6 and convert all spaces in class declarations to hyphens and reapply classes based on new style name Summary: Solution 1 allows the people at this company to apply any styles in the future and the script will adjust as needed. However it does not allow for the chained style to be added, only the individual style... it is also processor intensive and time consuming, but also the most likely to be converted into a plugin that could be used the world over Solution 2 is a potential nightmare to code. But again will allow for an endless number of updates without breaking Solution 3 will require someone at the companty to hardcode the new styles every time they make a change, and if they don't, IE6 will break. Ironically the site, whilst needing to conform to IE6 in a limited manner, does not need to run wihtout javascript (they've made the call... have JS or go away), so consider all jQuery and JS solutions to be 'game on'. Did I mention how much i hate IE6? Anyway... any thoughts or comments would be appreciated. I will continue to develop my own solution and if I discover one that can be turned into a jQuery plugin I will post it here in the comments. Regards, Mike.

    Read the article

  • Why are static classes considered “classes” and “reference types”?

    - by Timwi
    I’ve been pondering about the C# and CIL type system today and I’ve started to wonder why static classes are considered classes. There are many ways in which they are not really classes: A “normal” class can contain non-static members, a static class can’t. In this respect, a class is more similar to a struct than it is to a static class, and yet structs have a separate name. You can have a reference to an instance of a “normal” class, but not a static class (despite it being considered a “reference type”). In this respect, a class is more similar to an interface than it is to a static class, and yet interfaces have a separate name. The name of a static class can never be used in any place where a type name would normally fit: you can’t declare a variable of this type, you can’t use it as a base type, and you can’t use it as a generic type parameter. In this respect, static classes are somewhat more like namespaces. A “normal” class can implement interfaces. Once again, that makes classes more similar to structs than to static classes. A “normal” class can inherit from another class. It is also bizarre that static classes are considered to derive from System.Object. Although this allows them to “inherit” the static methods Equals and ReferenceEquals, the purpose of that inheritance is questionable as you would call those methods on object anyway. C# even allows you to specify that useless inheritance explicitly on static classes, but not on interfaces or structs, where the implicit derivation from object and System.ValueType, respectively, actually has a purpose. Regarding the subset-of-features argument: Static classes have a subset of the features of classes, but they also have a subset of the features of structs. All of the things that make a class distinct from the other kinds of type, do not seem to apply to static classes. Regarding the typeof argument: Making a static class into a new and different kind of type does not preclude it from being used in typeof. Given the sheer oddity of static classes, and the scarcity of similarities between them and “normal” classes, shouldn’t they have been made into a separate kind of type instead of a special kind of class?

    Read the article

  • Classes. Whats the point?

    - by Ben Shelock
    I'm fairly new to OOP in PHP, I've made a couple of basic scripts but nothing impressive. All I've really taken from it is that it would probably be easier just make a collection of functions and include them. The structure of classes seems to just confuse what was otherwise a simple process. And in collating everything into a class it doesn't really add any functionality. So I'm clearly missing something. Could someone explain what functionality is added by creating classes

    Read the article

  • What should I put into classes and what stuff I shouldnt?

    - by jpjp
    I am learning about classes right now in PHP and their examples are like.. class table { //makes a table private $tag ; function Begin($border=0, $align="center", $width='100%', $cellpadding=2, $cellspacing=2, $class='', $id='', $bgcolor='', $style='') { $this->tag = '<table ' ; if ($align) $this->tag .= 'align="' . $align . '" ' ; if ($width) $this->tag .= 'width="' . $width . '" ' ; if ($border > 0) $this->tag .= 'border="' . $border . '" ' ; if ($cellpadding > 0) $this->tag .= 'cellpadding="' . $cellpadding . '" ' ; if ($cellspacing > 0) $this->tag .= 'cellspacing="' . $cellspacing . '" ' ; if ($class) $this->tag .= 'class="' . $class . '" ' ; if ($id) $this->tag .= 'id="' . $id . '" ' ; if ($bgcolor) $this->tag .= 'bgcolor="' . $bgcolor . '" ' ; if ($style) $this->tag .= 'style="' . $style . '" ' ; $this->tag .= ">" ; return $this->tag ; } Then you just instantiate it and make a table by $table =new table; $table->$table($border=2, $align='center', etc); Should I be coding like this where html, css are in classes? i feel making tables and forms this way is more confusing then actually just typing . Should I only put like validation, getting data from db, and the logic stuff in classes? What should I use classes for and not?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid general names for abstract classes?

    - by djechlin
    In general it's good to avoid words like "handle" or "process" as part of routine names and class names, unless you are dealing with (e.g.) file handles or (e.g.) unix processes. However abstract classes often don't really know what they're going to do with something besides, say, process it. In my current situation I have an "EmailProcessor" that logs into a user's inbox and processes messages from it. It's not really clear to me how to give this a more precise name, although I've noticed the following style matter arises: better to treat derived classes as clients and named the base class by the part of the functionality it implements? Gives it more meaning but will violate is-a. E.g. EmailAcquirer would be a reasonable name since it's acquiring for the derived class, but the derived class won't be acquiring for anyone. Or just really vague name since who knows what the derived classes will do. However "Processor" is still too general since it's doing many relevant operations, like logging in and using IMAP. Any way out of this dilemma? Problem is more evident for abstract methods, in which you can't really answer the question "what does this do?" because the answer is simply "whatever the client wants."

    Read the article

  • Html 5 clock, part ii - CSS marker classes and getElementsByClassName

    - by Norgean
    The clock I made in part i displays the time in "long" - "It's a quarter to ten" (but in Norwegian). To save space, some letters are shared, "sevenineight" is four letters shorter than "seven nine eight". We only want to highlight the "correct" parts of this, for example "sevenineight". When I started programming the clock, each letter had its own unique ID, and my script would "get" each element individually, and highlight / hide each element according to some obscure logic. I quickly realized, despite being in a post surgery haze, …this is a stupid way to do it. And, to paraphrase NPH, if you find yourself doing something stupid, stop, and be awesome instead. We want an easy way to get all the items we want to highlight. Perhaps we can use the new getElementsByClassName function? Try to mark each element with a classname or two. So in "sevenineight": 's' is marked as 'h7', and the first 'n' is marked with both 'h7' and 'h9' (h for hour). <div class='h7 h9'>N</div><div class='h9'>I</div> getElementsByClassName('h9') will return the four letters of "nine". Notice that these classes are not backed by any CSS, they only appear directly in html (and are used in javascript). I have not seen classes used this way elsewhere, and have chosen to call them "marker classes" - similar to marker interfaces - until somebody comes up with a better name.

    Read the article

  • Should conditional expressions go inside or outside of classes?

    - by Rupert
    It seems that often I will want to execute some methods from a Class when I call it and choosing which function will depend on some condition. This leads me to write classes like in Case 1 because it allows me to rapidly include their functionality. The alternative would be Case 2 which can take a lot of time if there is a lot of code and also means more code being written twice when I drop the Class into different pages. Having said that, Case 1 feels very wrong for some reason that I can't quite put my finger on. I haven't really seen any classes written like this, I suppose. Is there anything wrong with writing classes like in Case 1 or is Case 2 superior? Or is there a better way? What the advantages and disadvantages of each? Case 1 class Foo { public function __construct($bar) { if($bar = 'action1') $this->method1(); else if($bar = 'action2') $this->method2(); else $this->method1(); } public function method1() { } public function method2() { } } $bar = 'action1' $foo = new Foo($bar); Case 2 class Foo { public function __construct() { } public function method1() { } public function method2() { } } $foo = new Foo; $bar = 'action1'; if($bar == 'action1') $foo->method1(); else if($bar == 'action2') $foo->method2(); else $foo->method1();

    Read the article

  • helper functions as static functions or procedural functions?

    - by fayer
    i wonder if one should create a helper function in a class as a static function or just have it declared as a procedural function? i tend to think that a static helper function is the right way to go cause then i can see what kind of helper function it is eg. Database::connect(), File::create(). what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • can't install eclipse plugin "m2e connector for build-helper-maven-plugin 0.15.0.201109290002"

    - by dermoritz
    i just tried to move from helios to maven with my gwt 2.4 application. so i began to follow the steps here: http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/WorkingWithMaven but on step 3 - installing the feature "m2e connector for build-helper-maven-plugin" i get an error from Eclipse: Cannot complete the install because one or more required items could not be found. Software being installed: m2e connector for build-helper-maven-plugin 0.15.0.201109290002 (org.sonatype.m2e.buildhelper.feature.feature.group 0.15.0.201109290002) Missing requirement: m2e connector for build-helper-maven-plugin 0.15.0.201109290002 (org.sonatype.m2e.buildhelper 0.15.0.201109290002) requires 'bundle org.eclipse.m2e.jdt [1.1.0,1.2.0)' but it could not be found Cannot satisfy dependency: From: m2e connector for build-helper-maven-plugin 0.15.0.201109290002 (org.sonatype.m2e.buildhelper.feature.feature.group 0.15.0.201109290002) To: org.sonatype.m2e.buildhelper [0.15.0.201109290002] Is there a workaround for that or did I do something wrong?

    Read the article

  • Can You Have "Empty" Abstract/Classes?

    - by ShrimpCrackers
    Of course you can, I'm just wondering if it's rational to design in such a way. I'm making a breakout clone and was doing some class design. I wanted to use inheritance, even though I don't have to, to apply what I've learned in C++. I was thinking about class design and came up with something like this: GameObject - base class (consists of data members like x and y offsets, and a vector of SDL_Surface* MovableObject : GameObject - abstract class + derived class of GameObject (one method void move() = 0; ) NonMovableObject : GameObject - empty class...no methods or data members other than constructor and destructor(at least for now?). Later I was planning to derive a class from NonMovableObject, like Tileset : NonMovableObject. I was just wondering if "empty" abstract classes or just empty classes are often used...I notice that the way I'm doing this, I'm just creating the class NonMovableObject just for sake of categorization. I know I'm overthinking things just to make a breakout clone, but my focus is less on the game and more on using inheritance and designing some sort of game framework.

    Read the article

  • Getting Started with TypeScript – Classes, Static Types and Interfaces

    - by dwahlin
    I had the opportunity to speak on different JavaScript topics at DevConnections in Las Vegas this fall and heard a lot of interesting comments about JavaScript as I talked with people. The most frequent comment I heard from people was, “I guess it’s time to start learning JavaScript”. Yep – if you don’t already know JavaScript then it’s time to learn it. As HTML5 becomes more and more popular the amount of JavaScript code written will definitely increase. After all, many of the HTML5 features available in browsers have little to do with “tags” and more to do with JavaScript (web workers, web sockets, canvas, local storage, etc.). As the amount of JavaScript code being used in applications increases, it’s more important than ever to structure the code in a way that’s maintainable and easy to debug. While JavaScript patterns can certainly be used (check out my previous posts on the subject or my course on Pluralsight.com), several alternatives have come onto the scene such as CoffeeScript, Dart and TypeScript. In this post I’ll describe some of the features TypeScript offers and the benefits that they can potentially offer enterprise-scale JavaScript applications. It’s important to note that while TypeScript has several great features, it’s definitely not for everyone or every project especially given how new it is. The goal of this post isn’t to convince you to use TypeScript instead of standard JavaScript….I’m a big fan of JavaScript. Instead, I’ll present several TypeScript features and let you make the decision as to whether TypeScript is a good fit for your applications. TypeScript Overview Here’s the official definition of TypeScript from the http://typescriptlang.org site: “TypeScript is a language for application-scale JavaScript development. TypeScript is a typed superset of JavaScript that compiles to plain JavaScript. Any browser. Any host. Any OS. Open Source.” TypeScript was created by Anders Hejlsberg (the creator of the C# language) and his team at Microsoft. To sum it up, TypeScript is a new language that can be compiled to JavaScript much like alternatives such as CoffeeScript or Dart. It isn’t a stand-alone language that’s completely separate from JavaScript’s roots though. It’s a superset of JavaScript which means that standard JavaScript code can be placed in a TypeScript file (a file with a .ts extension) and used directly. That’s a very important point/feature of the language since it means you can use existing code and frameworks with TypeScript without having to do major code conversions to make it all work. Once a TypeScript file is saved it can be compiled to JavaScript using TypeScript’s tsc.exe compiler tool or by using a variety of editors/tools. TypeScript offers several key features. First, it provides built-in type support meaning that you define variables and function parameters as being “string”, “number”, “bool”, and more to avoid incorrect types being assigned to variables or passed to functions. Second, TypeScript provides a way to write modular code by directly supporting class and module definitions and it even provides support for custom interfaces that can be used to drive consistency. Finally, TypeScript integrates with several different tools such as Visual Studio, Sublime Text, Emacs, and Vi to provide syntax highlighting, code help, build support, and more depending on the editor. Find out more about editor support at http://www.typescriptlang.org/#Download. TypeScript can also be used with existing JavaScript frameworks such as Node.js, jQuery, and others and even catch type issues and provide enhanced code help. Special “declaration” files that have a d.ts extension are available for Node.js, jQuery, and other libraries out-of-the-box. Visit http://typescript.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/fe3bc0bfce1f#samples%2fjquery%2fjquery.d.ts for an example of a jQuery TypeScript declaration file that can be used with tools such as Visual Studio 2012 to provide additional code help and ensure that a string isn’t passed to a parameter that expects a number. Although declaration files certainly aren’t required, TypeScript’s support for declaration files makes it easier to catch issues upfront while working with existing libraries such as jQuery. In the future I expect TypeScript declaration files will be released for different HTML5 APIs such as canvas, local storage, and others as well as some of the more popular JavaScript libraries and frameworks. Getting Started with TypeScript To get started learning TypeScript visit the TypeScript Playground available at http://www.typescriptlang.org. Using the playground editor you can experiment with TypeScript code, get code help as you type, and see the JavaScript that TypeScript generates once it’s compiled. Here’s an example of the TypeScript playground in action:   One of the first things that may stand out to you about the code shown above is that classes can be defined in TypeScript. This makes it easy to group related variables and functions into a container which helps tremendously with re-use and maintainability especially in enterprise-scale JavaScript applications. While you can certainly simulate classes using JavaScript patterns (note that ECMAScript 6 will support classes directly), TypeScript makes it quite easy especially if you come from an object-oriented programming background. An example of the Greeter class shown in the TypeScript Playground is shown next: class Greeter { greeting: string; constructor (message: string) { this.greeting = message; } greet() { return "Hello, " + this.greeting; } } Looking through the code you’ll notice that static types can be defined on variables and parameters such as greeting: string, that constructors can be defined, and that functions can be defined such as greet(). The ability to define static types is a key feature of TypeScript (and where its name comes from) that can help identify bugs upfront before even running the code. Many types are supported including primitive types like string, number, bool, undefined, and null as well as object literals and more complex types such as HTMLInputElement (for an <input> tag). Custom types can be defined as well. The JavaScript output by compiling the TypeScript Greeter class (using an editor like Visual Studio, Sublime Text, or the tsc.exe compiler) is shown next: var Greeter = (function () { function Greeter(message) { this.greeting = message; } Greeter.prototype.greet = function () { return "Hello, " + this.greeting; }; return Greeter; })(); Notice that the code is using JavaScript prototyping and closures to simulate a Greeter class in JavaScript. The body of the code is wrapped with a self-invoking function to take the variables and functions out of the global JavaScript scope. This is important feature that helps avoid naming collisions between variables and functions. In cases where you’d like to wrap a class in a naming container (similar to a namespace in C# or a package in Java) you can use TypeScript’s module keyword. The following code shows an example of wrapping an AcmeCorp module around the Greeter class. In order to create a new instance of Greeter the module name must now be used. This can help avoid naming collisions that may occur with the Greeter class.   module AcmeCorp { export class Greeter { greeting: string; constructor (message: string) { this.greeting = message; } greet() { return "Hello, " + this.greeting; } } } var greeter = new AcmeCorp.Greeter("world"); In addition to being able to define custom classes and modules in TypeScript, you can also take advantage of inheritance by using TypeScript’s extends keyword. The following code shows an example of using inheritance to define two report objects:   class Report { name: string; constructor (name: string) { this.name = name; } print() { alert("Report: " + this.name); } } class FinanceReport extends Report { constructor (name: string) { super(name); } print() { alert("Finance Report: " + this.name); } getLineItems() { alert("5 line items"); } } var report = new FinanceReport("Month's Sales"); report.print(); report.getLineItems();   In this example a base Report class is defined that has a variable (name), a constructor that accepts a name parameter of type string, and a function named print(). The FinanceReport class inherits from Report by using TypeScript’s extends keyword. As a result, it automatically has access to the print() function in the base class. In this example the FinanceReport overrides the base class’s print() method and adds its own. The FinanceReport class also forwards the name value it receives in the constructor to the base class using the super() call. TypeScript also supports the creation of custom interfaces when you need to provide consistency across a set of objects. The following code shows an example of an interface named Thing (from the TypeScript samples) and a class named Plane that implements the interface to drive consistency across the app. Notice that the Plane class includes intersect and normal as a result of implementing the interface.   interface Thing { intersect: (ray: Ray) => Intersection; normal: (pos: Vector) => Vector; surface: Surface; } class Plane implements Thing { normal: (pos: Vector) =>Vector; intersect: (ray: Ray) =>Intersection; constructor (norm: Vector, offset: number, public surface: Surface) { this.normal = function (pos: Vector) { return norm; } this.intersect = function (ray: Ray): Intersection { var denom = Vector.dot(norm, ray.dir); if (denom > 0) { return null; } else { var dist = (Vector.dot(norm, ray.start) + offset) / (-denom); return { thing: this, ray: ray, dist: dist }; } } } }   At first glance it doesn’t appear that the surface member is implemented in Plane but it’s actually included automatically due to the public surface: Surface parameter in the constructor. Adding public varName: Type to a constructor automatically adds a typed variable into the class without having to explicitly write the code as with normal and intersect. TypeScript has additional language features but defining static types and creating classes, modules, and interfaces are some of the key features it offers. So is TypeScript right for you and your applications? That’s a not a question that I or anyone else can answer for you. You’ll need to give it a spin to see what you think. In future posts I’ll discuss additional details about TypeScript and how it can be used with enterprise-scale JavaScript applications. In the meantime, I’m in the process of working with John Papa on a new Typescript course for Pluralsight that we hope to have out in December of 2012.

    Read the article

  • Is there any reason to use "container" classes?

    - by Michael
    I realize the term "container" is misleading in this context - if anyone can think of a better term please edit it in. In legacy code I occasionally see classes that are nothing but wrappers for data. something like: class Bottle { int height; int diameter; Cap capType; getters/setters, maybe a constructor } My understanding of OO is that classes are structures for data and the methods of operating on that data. This seems to preclude objects of this type. To me they are nothing more than structs and kind of defeat the purpose of OO. I don't think it's necessarily evil, though it may be a code smell. Is there a case where such objects would be necessary? If this is used often, does it make the design suspect?

    Read the article

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