Search Results

Search found 3766 results on 151 pages for 'singleton scope'.

Page 7/151 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • how do you make a "concurrent queue safe" lazy loader (singleton manager) in objective-c

    - by Rich
    Hi, I made this class that turns any object into a singleton, but I know that it's not "concurrent queue safe." Could someone please explain to me how to do this, or better yet, show me the code. To be clear I want to know how to use this with operation queues and dispatch queues (NSOperationQueue and Grand Central Dispatch) on iOS. Thanks in advance, Rich EDIT: I had an idea for how to do it. If someone could confirm it for me I'll do it and post the code. The idea is that proxies make queues all on their own. So if I make a mutable proxy (like Apple does in key-value coding/observing) for any object that it's supposed to return, and always return the same proxy for the same object/identifier pair (using the same kind of lazy loading technique as I used to create the singletons), the proxies would automatically queue up the any messages to the singletons, and make it totally thread safe. IMHO this seems like a lot of work to do, so I don't want to do it if it's not gonna work, or if it's gonna slow my apps down to a crawl. Here's my non-thread safe code: RMSingletonCollector.h // // RMSingletonCollector.h // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/11/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> #import "RMWeakObjectRef.h" struct RMInitializerData { // The method may take one argument. // required SEL designatedInitializer; // data to pass to the initializer or nil. id data; }; typedef struct RMInitializerData RMInitializerData; RMInitializerData RMInitializerDataMake(SEL initializer, id data); @interface NSObject (SingletonCollector) // Returns the selector and data to pass to it (if the selector takes an argument) for use when initializing the singleton. // If you override this DO NOT call super. + (RMInitializerData)designatedInitializerForIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier; @end @interface RMSingletonCollector : NSObject { } + (id)collectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; + (id<RMWeakObjectReference>)referenceForObjectOfType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; + (void)destroyCollection; + (void)destroyCollectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; @end // ==--==--==--==--==Notifications==--==--==--==--== extern NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollection; extern NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollectionObject; RMSingletonCollector.m // // RMSingletonCollector.m // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/11/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import "RMSingletonCollector.h" #import <objc/objc-runtime.h> NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollection = @"willDestroySingletonCollection"; NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollectionObject = @"willDestroySingletonCollectionObject"; RMInitializerData RMInitializerDataMake(SEL initializer, id data) { RMInitializerData newData; newData.designatedInitializer = initializer; newData.data = data; return newData; } @implementation NSObject (SingletonCollector) + (RMInitializerData)designatedInitializerForIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier { return RMInitializerDataMake(@selector(init), nil); } @end @interface RMSingletonCollector () + (NSMutableDictionary *)singletonCollection; + (void)setSingletonCollection:(NSMutableDictionary *)newSingletonCollection; @end @implementation RMSingletonCollector static NSMutableDictionary *singletonCollection = nil; + (NSMutableDictionary *)singletonCollection { if (singletonCollection != nil) { return singletonCollection; } NSMutableDictionary *collection = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] initWithCapacity:1]; [self setSingletonCollection:collection]; [collection release]; return singletonCollection; } + (void)setSingletonCollection:(NSMutableDictionary *)newSingletonCollection { if (newSingletonCollection != singletonCollection) { [singletonCollection release]; singletonCollection = [newSingletonCollection retain]; } } + (id)collectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { id obj; NSString *key; if (identifier) { key = [className stringByAppendingFormat:@".%@", identifier]; } else { key = className; } if (obj = [[self singletonCollection] objectForKey:key]) { return obj; } // dynamic creation. // get a class for Class classForName = NSClassFromString(className); if (classForName) { obj = objc_msgSend(classForName, @selector(alloc)); // if the initializer takes an argument... RMInitializerData initializerData = [classForName designatedInitializerForIdentifier:identifier]; if (initializerData.data) { // pass it. obj = objc_msgSend(obj, initializerData.designatedInitializer, initializerData.data); } else { obj = objc_msgSend(obj, initializerData.designatedInitializer); } [singletonCollection setObject:obj forKey:key]; [obj release]; } else { // raise an exception if there is no class for the specified name. NSException *exception = [NSException exceptionWithName:@"com.RMDev.RMSingletonCollector.failed_to_find_class" reason:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"SingletonCollector couldn't find class for name: %@", [className description]] userInfo:nil]; [exception raise]; [exception release]; } return obj; } + (id<RMWeakObjectReference>)referenceForObjectOfType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { id obj = [self collectionObjectForType:className identifier:identifier]; RMWeakObjectRef *objectRef = [[RMWeakObjectRef alloc] initWithObject:obj identifier:identifier]; return [objectRef autorelease]; } + (void)destroyCollection { NSDictionary *userInfo = [singletonCollection copy]; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:willDestroySingletonCollection object:self userInfo:userInfo]; [userInfo release]; // release the collection and set it to nil. [self setSingletonCollection:nil]; } + (void)destroyCollectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { NSString *key; if (identifier) { key = [className stringByAppendingFormat:@".%@", identifier]; } else { key = className; } [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:willDestroySingletonCollectionObject object:[singletonCollection objectForKey:key] userInfo:nil]; [singletonCollection removeObjectForKey:key]; } @end RMWeakObjectRef.h // // RMWeakObjectRef.h // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/12/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // // In order to offset the performance loss from always having to search the dictionary, I made a retainable, weak object reference class. #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> @protocol RMWeakObjectReference <NSObject> @property (nonatomic, assign, readonly) id objectRef; @property (nonatomic, retain, readonly) NSString *className; @property (nonatomic, retain, readonly) NSString *objectIdentifier; @end @interface RMWeakObjectRef : NSObject <RMWeakObjectReference> { id objectRef; NSString *className; NSString *objectIdentifier; } - (RMWeakObjectRef *)initWithObject:(id)object identifier:(NSString *)identifier; - (void)objectWillBeDestroyed:(NSNotification *)notification; @end RMWeakObjectRef.m // // RMWeakObjectRef.m // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/12/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import "RMWeakObjectRef.h" #import "RMSingletonCollector.h" @implementation RMWeakObjectRef @dynamic objectRef; @synthesize className, objectIdentifier; - (RMWeakObjectRef *)initWithObject:(id)object identifier:(NSString *)identifier { if (self = [super init]) { NSString *classNameForObject = NSStringFromClass([object class]); className = classNameForObject; objectIdentifier = identifier; objectRef = object; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self selector:@selector(objectWillBeDestroyed:) name:willDestroySingletonCollectionObject object:object]; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self selector:@selector(objectWillBeDestroyed:) name:willDestroySingletonCollection object:[RMSingletonCollector class]]; } return self; } - (id)objectRef { if (objectRef) { return objectRef; } objectRef = [RMSingletonCollector collectionObjectForType:className identifier:objectIdentifier]; return objectRef; } - (void)objectWillBeDestroyed:(NSNotification *)notification { objectRef = nil; } - (void)dealloc { [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver:self]; [className release]; [super dealloc]; } @end

    Read the article

  • In languages which create a new scope each time in a loop block, a new local copy of the local loop

    - by Jian Lin
    It seems that in language like C, Java, and Ruby (as opposed to Javascript), a new scope is created for each iteration of a loop block, and the local variable defined for the loop is actually made into a local variable every single time and recorded in this new scope? For example, in Ruby: p RUBY_VERSION $foo = [] (1..5).each do |i| $foo[i] = lambda { p i } end (1..5).each do |j| $foo[j].call() end the print out is: [MacBook01:~] $ ruby scope.rb "1.8.6" 1 2 3 4 5 [MacBook01:~] $ So, it looks like when a new scope is created, a new local copy of i is also created and recorded in this new scope, so that when the function is executed at a later time, the "i" is found in those scope chains as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 respectively. Is this true? (It sounds like a heavy operation). Contrast that with p RUBY_VERSION $foo = [] i = 0 (1..5).each do |i| $foo[i] = lambda { p i } end (1..5).each do |j| $foo[j].call() end This time, the i is defined before entering the loop, so Ruby 1.8.6 will not put this i in the new scope created for the loop block, and therefore when the i is looked up in the scope chain, it always refer to the i that was in the outside scope, and give 5 every time: [MacBook01:~] $ ruby scope2.rb "1.8.6" 5 5 5 5 5 [MacBook01:~] $ I heard that in Ruby 1.9, i will be treated as a local defined for the loop even when there is an i defined earlier? The operation of creating a new scope, creating a new local copy of i each time through the loop seems heavy, as it seems it wouldn't have matter if we are not invoking the functions at a later time. So when the functions don't need to be invoked at a later time, could the interpreter and the compiler to C / Java try to optimize it so that there is not local copy of i each time?

    Read the article

  • singleton factory connection pdo

    - by Scarface
    Hey guys I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand this and I was just wondering if someone could help me with some questions. I found some code that is supposed to create a connection with pdo. The problem I was having was having my connection defined within functions. Someone suggested globals but then pointed to a 'better' solution http://stackoverflow.com/questions/130878/global-or-singleton-for-database-connection. My questions with this code are. PS I cannot format this code on this page so see the link if you cannot read What is the point of the connection factory? What goes inside new ConnectionFactory(...) When the connection is defined $db = new PDO(...); why is there no try or catch (I use those for error handling)? Does this then mean I have to use try and catch for every subsequent query? class ConnectionFactory { private static $factory; public static function getFactory() { if (!self::$factory) self::$factory = new ConnectionFactory(...); return self::$factory; } private $db; public function getConnection() { if (!$db) $db = new PDO(...); return $db; } } function getSomething() { $conn = ConnectionFactory::getFactory()-getConnection(); . . . }

    Read the article

  • javascript plugin - singleton pattern?

    - by Adam Kiss
    intro Hello, I'm trying to develop some plugin or/*and* object in javascript, which will control some properties over some object. It will also use jQuery, to ease development. idea This is in pseudocode to give you an idea, since I can't really describe it in english with the right words, it's impossible to go and use google to find out what I want to use (and learn). I will have plugin (maybe object?) with some variables and methods: plugin hideshow(startupconfig){ var c, //collection add: function(what){ c += what; }, do: function(){ c.show().hide().stop(); //example code } } and I will use it this way (or sort-of): var p = new Plugin(); p .add($('p#simple')) .add($('p#simple2')) .do(); note I'm not really looking for jQuery plugin tutorials - it's more like usage of singleton pattern in document in javascript, jQuery is mentione only because it will be used to modify dom and simplify selectors, jQuery plugin maybe just for that one little function add. I'm looking for something, that will sit on top of my document and call functions from itselft based on timer, or user actions, or whatever. problems I don't really know where to start with construction of this object/plugin I'm not really sure how to maintain one variable, which is collection of jQuery objects (something like $('#simple, #simple2');) I would maybe like to extedn jQuery with $.fn.addToPlugin to use chaining of objects, but that should be simple (really just each( p.add($(this)); )) I hope I make any sense, ideas, links or advices appreciated.

    Read the article

  • java singleton instantiation

    - by jurchiks
    I've found three ways of instantiating a Singleton, but I have doubts as to whether any of them is the best there is. I'm using them in a multi-threaded environment and prefer lazy instantiation. Sample 1: private static final ClassName INSTANCE = new ClassName(); public static ClassName getInstance() { return INSTANCE; } Sample 2: private static class SingletonHolder { public static final ClassName INSTANCE = new ClassName(); } public static ClassName getInstance() { return SingletonHolder.INSTANCE; } Sample 3: private static ClassName INSTANCE; public static synchronized ClassName getInstance() { if (INSTANCE == null) INSTANCE = new ClassName(); return INSTANCE; } The project I'm using ATM uses Sample 2 everywhere, but I kind of like Sample 3 more. There is also the Enum version, but I just don't get it. The question here is - in which cases I should/shouldn't use any of these variations? I'm not looking for lengthy explanations though (there's plenty of other topics about that, but they all eventually turn into arguing IMO), I'd like it to be understandable with few words.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection into your Singleton

    - by Langali
    I have a singleton that has a spring injected Dao (simplified below): public class MyService<T> implements Service<T> { private final Map<String, T> objects; private static MyService instance; MyDao myDao; public void set MyDao(MyDao myDao) { this. myDao = myDao; } private MyService() { this.objects = Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap<String, T>()); // start a background thread that runs for ever } public static synchronized MyService getInstance() { if(instance == null) { instance = new MyService(); } return instance; } public void doSomething() { myDao.persist(objects); } } My spring config will probably look like this: <bean id="service" class="MyService" factory-method="getInstance"/> But this will instantiate the MyService during startup. Is there a programmatic way to do a dependency injection of MyDao into MyService, but not have spring manage the MyService? Basically I want to be able to do this from my code: MyService.getInstance().doSomething(); while having spring inject the MyDao for me.

    Read the article

  • PHP OOP singleton doesn't return object

    - by Misiur
    Weird trouble. I've used singleton multiple times but this particular case just doesn't want to work. Dump says that instance is null. define('ROOT', "/"); define('INC', 'includes/'); define('CLS', 'classes/'); require_once(CLS.'Core/Core.class.php'); $core = Core::getInstance(); var_dump($core->instance); $core->settings(INC.'config.php'); $core->go(); Core class class Core { static $instance; public $db; public $created = false; private function __construct() { $this->created = true; } static function getInstance() { if(!self::$instance) { self::$instance = new Core(); } else { return self::$instance; } } public function settings($path = null) { ... } public function go() { ... } } Error code Fatal error: Call to a member function settings() on a non-object in path It's possibly some stupid typo, but I don't have any errors in my editor. Thanks for the fast responses as always.

    Read the article

  • Using block around a static/singleton resource reference

    - by byte
    This is interesting (to me anyway), and I'd like to see if anyone has a good answer and explanation for this behavior. Say you have a singleton database object (or static database object), and you have it stored in a class Foo. public class Foo { public static SqlConnection DBConn = new SqlConnection(ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["BAR"].ConnectionString); } Then, lets say that you are cognizant of the usefulness of calling and disposing your connection (pretend for this example that its a one-time use for purposes of illustration). So you decide to use a 'using' block to take care of the Dispose() call. using (SqlConnection conn = Foo.DBConn) { conn.Open(); using (SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand()) { cmd.Connection = conn; cmd.CommandType = System.Data.CommandType.StoredProcedure; cmd.CommandText = "SP_YOUR_PROC"; cmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); } conn.Close(); } This fails, with an error stating that the "ConnectionString property is not initialized". It's not an issue with pulling the connection string from the app.config/web.config. When you investigate in a debug session you see that Foo.DBConn is not null, but contains empty properties. Why is this?

    Read the article

  • efficient thread-safe singleton in C++

    - by user168715
    The usual pattern for a singleton class is something like static Foo &getInst() { static Foo *inst = NULL; if(inst == NULL) inst = new Foo(...); return *inst; } However, it's my understanding that this solution is not thread-safe, since 1) Foo's constructor might be called more than once (which may or may not matter) and 2) inst may not be fully constructed before it is returned to a different thread. One solution is to wrap a mutex around the whole method, but then I'm paying for synchronization overhead long after I actually need it. An alternative is something like static Foo &getInst() { static Foo *inst = NULL; if(inst == NULL) { pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex); if(inst == NULL) inst = new Foo(...); pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex); } return *inst; } Is this the right way to do it, or are there any pitfalls I should be aware of? For instance, are there any static initialization order problems that might occur, i.e. is inst always guaranteed to be NULL the first time getInst is called?

    Read the article

  • Using a Data Management Singleton

    - by Dan Ray
    Here's my singleton code (pretty much boilerplate): @interface DataManager : NSObject { NSMutableArray *eventList; } @property (nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *eventList; +(DataManager*)sharedDataManager; @end And then the .m: #import "DataManager.h" static DataManager *singletonDataManager = nil; @implementation DataManager @synthesize eventList; +(DataManager*)sharedDataManager { @synchronized(self) { if (!singletonDataManager) { singletonDataManager = [[DataManager alloc] init]; } } NSLog(@"Pulling a copy of shared manager."); return singletonDataManager; } So then in my AppDelegate, I load some stuff before launching my first view: NSMutableArray *eventList = [DataManager sharedDataManager].eventList; .... NSLog(@"Adding event %@ to eventList", event.title); [eventList addObject:event]; NSLog(@"eventList now has %d members", [eventList count]); [event release]; As you can see, I've peppered the code with NSLog love notes to myself. The output to the Log reads like: 2010-05-10 09:08:53.355 MyApp[2037:207] Adding event Woofstock Music Festival to eventList 2010-05-10 09:08:53.355 MyApp[2037:207] eventList now has 0 members 2010-05-10 09:08:53.411 MyApp[2037:207] Adding event Test Event for Staging to eventList 2010-05-10 09:08:53.411 MyApp[2037:207] eventList now has 0 members 2010-05-10 09:08:53.467 MyApp[2037:207] Adding event Montgomery Event to eventList 2010-05-10 09:08:53.467 MyApp[2037:207] eventList now has 0 members 2010-05-10 09:08:53.524 MyApp[2037:207] Adding event Alamance County Event For June to eventList 2010-05-10 09:08:53.524 MyApp[2037:207] eventList now has 0 members ... What gives? I have no errors getting to my eventList NSMutableArray. But I addObject: fails silently?

    Read the article

  • Create table class as a singleton

    - by Mark
    I got a class that I use as a table. This class got an array of 16 row classes. These row classes all have 6 double variables. The values of these rows are set once and never change. Would it be a good practice to make this table a singleton? The advantage is that it cost less memory, but the table will be called from multiple threads so I have to synchronize my code which way cause a bit slower application. However lookups in this table are probably a very small portion of the total code that is executed. EDIT: This is my code, are there better ways to do this or is this a good practice? Removed synchronized keyword according to recommendations in this question. final class HalfTimeTable { private HalfTimeRow[] table = new HalfTimeRow[16]; private static final HalfTimeTable instance = new HalfTimeTable(); private HalfTimeTable() { if (instance != null) { throw new IllegalStateException("Already instantiated"); } table[0] = new HalfTimeRow(4.0, 1.2599, 0.5050, 1.5, 1.7435, 0.1911); table[1] = new HalfTimeRow(8.0, 1.0000, 0.6514, 3.0, 1.3838, 0.4295); //etc } @Override @Deprecated public Object clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException { throw new CloneNotSupportedException(); } public static HalfTimeTable getInstance() { return instance; } public HalfTimeRow getRow(int rownumber) { return table[rownumber]; } }

    Read the article

  • Rails nested models and data separation by scope

    - by jobrahms
    I have Teacher, Student, and Parent models that all belong to User. This is so that a Teacher can create Students and Parents that can or cannot log into the app depending on the teacher's preference. Student and Parent both accept nested attributes for User so a Student and User object can be created in the same form. All four models also belong to Studio so I can do data separation by scope. The current studio is set in application_controller.rb by looking up the current subdomain. In my students controller (all of my controllers, actually) I'm using @studio.students.new instead of Student.new, etc, to scope the new student to the correct studio, and therefore the correct subdomain. However, the nested User does not pick up the studio from its parent - it gets set to nil. I was thinking that I could do something like params[:student][:user_attributes][:studio_id] = @student.studio.id in the controller, but that would require doing attr_accessible :studio_id in User, which would be bad. How can I make sure that the nested User picks up the same scope that the Student model gets when it's created? student.rb class Student < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :studio belongs_to :user, :dependent => :destroy attr_accessible :user_attributes accepts_nested_attributes_for :user, :reject_if => :all_blank end students_controller.rb def create @student = @studio.students.new @student.attributes = params[:student] if @student.save redirect_to @student, :notice => "Successfully created student." else render :action => 'new' end end user.rb class User < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :studio accepts_nested_attributes_for :studio attr_accessible :email, :password, :password_confirmation, :remember_me, :studio_attributes devise :invitable, :database_authenticatable, :recoverable, :rememberable, :trackable end

    Read the article

  • VB.NET looping through XML to store in singleton

    - by rockinthesixstring
    I'm having a problem with looping through an XML file and storing the value in a singleton My XML looks like this <values> <value></value> <value>$1</value> <value>$5,000</value> <value>$10,000</value> <value>$15,000</value> <value>$25,000</value> <value>$50,000</value> <value>$75,000</value> <value>$100,000</value> <value>$250,000</value> <value>$500,000</value> <value>$750,000</value> <value>$1,000,000</value> <value>$1,250,000</value> <value>$1,500,000</value> <value>$1,750,000</value> <value>$2,000,000</value> <value>$2,500,000</value> <value>$3,000,000</value> <value>$4,000,000</value> <value>$5,000,000</value> <value>$7,500,000</value> <value>$10,000,000</value> <value>$15,000,000</value> <value>$25,000,000</value> <value>$50,000,000</value> <value>$100,000,000</value> <value>$100,000,000+</value> </values> And my function looks like this Public Class LoadValues Private Shared SearchValuesInstance As List(Of SearchValues) = Nothing Public Shared ReadOnly Property LoadSearchValues As List(Of SearchValues) Get Dim sv As New List(Of SearchValues) If SearchValuesInstance Is Nothing Then Dim objDoc As XmlDocument = New XmlDataDocument Dim objRdr As XmlTextReader = New XmlTextReader(HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath("~/App_Data/Search-Values.xml")) objRdr.Read() objDoc.Load(objRdr) Dim root As XmlElement = objDoc.DocumentElement Dim itemNodes As XmlNodeList = root.SelectNodes("/values") For Each n As XmlNode In itemNodes sv.Add(New SearchValues(n("@value").InnerText, n("@value").InnerText)) Next SearchValuesInstance = sv Else : sv = SearchValuesInstance End If Return sv End Get End Property End Class My problem is that I'm getting an object not set to an instance of an object on the sv.Add(New SearchValues(n("@value").InnerText, n("@value").InnerText)) line.

    Read the article

  • Should I create protected constructor for my singleton classes?

    - by Vijay Shanker
    By design, in Singleton pattern the constructor should be marked private and provide a creational method retuning the private static member of the same type instance. I have created my singleton classes like this only. public class SingletonPattern {// singleton class private static SingletonPattern pattern = new SingletonPattern(); private SingletonPattern() { } public static SingletonPattern getInstance() { return pattern; } } Now, I have got to extend a singleton class to add new behaviors. But the private constructor is not letting be define the child class. I was thinking to change the default constructor to protected constructor for the singleton base class. What can be problems, if I define my constructors to be protected? Looking for expert views....

    Read the article

  • Problem with SIngleton Class

    - by zp26
    Hi, I have a prblem with my code. I have a viewController and a singleton class. When i call the method readXml and run a for my program update the UITextView. When i call the clearTextView method the program exit with EXC_BAD_ACCESS. The prblem it's the name of the variable position. This is invalid but i don't change anything between the two methods. You have an idea? My code: #import "PositionIdentifierViewController.h" #import "WriterXML.h" #import "ParserXML.h" #define timeToScan 0.1 @implementation PositionIdentifierViewController @synthesize accelerometer; @synthesize actualPosition; @synthesize actualX; @synthesize actualY; @synthesize actualZ; -(void)updateTextView:(NSString*)nomePosizione { NSString *string = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"%@",nomePosizione]; textEvent.text = [textEvent.text stringByAppendingString:@"\n"]; textEvent.text = [textEvent.text stringByAppendingString:string]; } -(IBAction)clearTextEvent{ textEvent.text = @""; //with this for my program exit for(int i=0; i<[[sharedController arrayPosition]count]; i++){ NSLog(@"sononelfor"); Position *tempPosition = [[Position alloc]init]; tempPosition = [[sharedController arrayPosition]objectAtIndex:i]; [self updateTextView:(NSString*)[tempPosition name]]; } } -(void)readXml{ if([sharedController readXml]){ UIAlertView *alert = [[UIAlertView alloc] initWithTitle:@"Caricamento Posizioni" message:@"Caricamento effettuato con successo" delegate:self cancelButtonTitle:@"Cancel" otherButtonTitles:nil]; [alert show]; [alert release]; NSString *string = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"%d", [[sharedController arrayPosition]count]]; [self updateTextView:(NSString*)string]; //with only this the program is ok for(int i=0; i<[[sharedController arrayPosition]count]; i++){ NSLog(@"sononelfor"); Position *tempPosition = [[Position alloc]init]; tempPosition = [[sharedController arrayPosition]objectAtIndex:i]; [self updateTextView:(NSString*)[tempPosition name]]; } } else{ UIAlertView *alert = [[UIAlertView alloc] initWithTitle:@"Caricamento Posizioni" message:@"Caricamento non riuscito" delegate:self cancelButtonTitle:@"Cancel" otherButtonTitles:nil]; [alert show]; [alert release]; } } // Implement viewDidLoad to do additional setup after loading the view, typically from a nib. - (void)viewDidLoad { [super viewDidLoad]; sharedController = [SingletonController sharedSingletonController]; actualPosition = [[Position alloc]init]; self.accelerometer = [UIAccelerometer sharedAccelerometer]; self.accelerometer.updateInterval = timeToScan; self.accelerometer.delegate = self; actualX=0; actualY=0; actualZ=0; [self readXml]; } - (void)dealloc { [super dealloc]; [actualPosition dealloc]; [super dealloc]; } @end #import "SingletonController.h" #import "Position.h" #import "WriterXML.h" #import "ParserXML.h" #define standardSensibility 2 #define timeToScan .1 @implementation SingletonController @synthesize arrayPosition; @synthesize arrayMovement; @synthesize actualPosition; @synthesize actualMove; @synthesize stopThread; +(SingletonController*)sharedSingletonController{ static SingletonController *sharedSingletonController; @synchronized(self) { if(!sharedSingletonController){ sharedSingletonController = [[SingletonController alloc]init]; } } return sharedSingletonController; } -(BOOL)readXml{ ParserXML *newParser = [[ParserXML alloc]init]; if([newParser startParsing:(NSString*)@"filePosizioni.xml"]){ [arrayPosition addObjectsFromArray:[newParser arrayPosition]]; return TRUE; } else return FALSE; } -(id)init{ self = [super init]; if (self != nil) { arrayPosition = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; arrayMovement = [[NSMutableArray alloc]init]; actualPosition = [[Position alloc]init]; actualMove = [[Movement alloc]init]; stopThread = FALSE; } return self; } -(void) dealloc { [super dealloc]; } @end

    Read the article

  • JS Anonymous Scope...

    - by Simon
    this Application.EventManager.on('Click', function(args) { // event listener, args is JSON TestAction.getContents(args.node.id, function(result, e) { console.log(result); this.add({ title: args.node.id, html: result }).show(); }); }); I'm really struggling with scope and anonymous functions... I want this (on the 1st line) to be the same object as this (on the 5th line)... .call() and .apply() seemed to be the right sort of idea but I don't want to trigger the event... just change it's scope.... For a bit of contexts... the this in question is a TabContainer and TestAction is a RPC that returns content... Thanks....

    Read the article

  • Scope of the Pages in a Silverlight application

    - by AngryHacker
    I have an app built with the Silverlight Navigation Application Template. I have a main form (e.g. MainPage.xaml) and a bunch of Silverlight Pages, which are swapped in and out of the main content area. In the MainPage.xaml, I have a DispatcherTimer which hits some Uri resources, regardless of which page I am on. Every now and then, it will inexplicably stop firing. I have an inkling that it has to do with the scope of various pages. Can pages inside the MainPage.xaml take away the scope from its parent? Or is this something much simpler?

    Read the article

  • validates_uniqueness_of...limiting scope - How do I restrict someone from creating a certain number

    - by bgadoci
    I have the following code: class Like < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :site validates_uniqueness_of :ip_address, :scope => [:site_id] end Which limits a person from "liking" a site more than one time based on a remote ip request. Essentially when someone "likes" a site, a record is created in the Likes table and I use a hidden field to request and pass their ip address to the :ip_address column in the like table. With the above code I am limiting the user to one "like" per their ip address. I would like to limit this to a certain number for instance 10. My initial thought was do something like this: validates_uniqueness_of :ip_address, :scope => [:site_id, :limit => 10] But that doesn't seem to work. Is there a simple syntax here that will allow me to do such a thing?

    Read the article

  • What did programmers do before variable scope, where everything is global?

    - by hydroparadise
    So, I am having to deal with seemingly archiac language (called PowerOn) where I have a main method, a few datatypes to define variables with, and has the ability to have sub-procedures (essentially void methods) that does not return a type nor accepts any arguements. The problem here is that EVERYTHING is global. I've read of these type of languages, but most books take the aproach "Ok, we use to use a horse and cariage, but now, here's a car so let's learn how to work on THAT!" We will NEVER relive those days". I have to admit, the mind is struggling to think outside of scope and extent. Well here I am. I am trying to figure out how to best manage nothing but global variables across several open methods. Yep, even iterators for for loops have to be defined globaly, which I find myself recycling in different parts of my code. My Question: for those that have this type experience, how did programmers deal with a large amount of variables in a global playing field? I have feeling it just became a mental juggling trick, but I would be interested to know if there were any known aproaches.

    Read the article

  • Getting around IBActions limited scope

    - by Septih
    Hello, I have an NSCollectionView and the view is an NSBox with a label and an NSButton. I want a double click or a click of the NSButton to tell the controller to perform an action with the represented object of the NSCollectionViewItem. The Item View is has been subclassed, the code is as follows: #import <Cocoa/Cocoa.h> #import "WizardItem.h" @interface WizardItemView : NSBox { id delegate; IBOutlet NSCollectionViewItem * viewItem; WizardItem * wizardItem; } @property(readwrite,retain) WizardItem * wizardItem; @property(readwrite,retain) id delegate; -(IBAction)start:(id)sender; @end #import "WizardItemView.h" @implementation WizardItemView @synthesize wizardItem, delegate; -(void)awakeFromNib { [self bind:@"wizardItem" toObject:viewItem withKeyPath:@"representedObject" options:nil]; } -(void)mouseDown:(NSEvent *)event { [super mouseDown:event]; if([event clickCount] > 1) { [delegate performAction:[wizardItem action]]; } } -(IBAction)start:(id)sender { [delegate performAction:[wizardItem action]]; } @end The problem I've run into is that as an IBAction, the only things in the scope of -start are the things that have been bound in IB, so delegate and viewItem. This means that I cannot get at the represented object to send it to the delegate. Is there a way around this limited scope or a better way or getting hold of the represented object? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How To Create Per-Request Singleton in Pylons?

    - by dave mankoff
    In our Pylons based web-app, we're creating a class that essentially provides some logging functionality. We need a new instance of this class for each http request that comes in, but only one per request. What is the proper way to go about this? Should we just create the object in middleware and store in in request.environ? Is there a more appropriate way to go about this?

    Read the article

  • What is design principle behind Servlets being Singleton

    - by Sandeep Jindal
    A servlet container "generally" create one instance of a servlet and different threads of the same instance to serve multiple requests. (I know this can be changed using deprecated SingleThreadModel and other features, but this is the usual way). I thought, the simple reason behind this is performance gain, as creating threads is better than creating instances. But it seems this is not the reason. On the other hand, creating instances have little advantage that developers never have to worry about thread safety. I am trying to understand the reason for this decision over the trade-off of thread-safety.

    Read the article

  • PDO using singleton stored as class properity

    - by Misiur
    Hi again. OOP drives me crazy. I can't move PDO to work. Here's my DB class: class DB extends PDO { public function &instance($dsn, $username = null, $password = null, $driver_options = array()) { static $instance = null; if($instance === null) { try { $instance = new self($dsn, $username, $password, $driver_options); } catch(PDOException $e) { throw new DBException($e->getMessage()); } } return $instance; } } It's okay when i do something like this: try { $db = new DB(DB_TYPE.':host='.DB_HOST.';dbname='.DB_NAME, DB_USER, DB_PASS); } catch(DBException $e) { echo $e->getMessage(); } But this: try { $db = DB::instance(DB_TYPE.':host='.DB_HOST.';dbname='.DB_NAME, DB_USER, DB_PASS); } catch(DBException $e) { echo $e->getMessage(); } Does nothing. I mean, even when I use wrong password/username, I don't get any exception. Second thing - I have class which is "heart" of my site: class Core { static private $instance; public $db; public function __construct() { if(!self::$instance) { $this->db = DB::instance(DB_TYPE.':hpost='.DB_HOST.';dbname='.DB_NAME, DB_USER, DB_PASS); } return self::$instance; } private function __clone() { } } I've tried to use "new DB" inside class, but this: $r = $core->db->query("SELECT * FROM me_config"); print_r($r->fetch()); Return nothing. $sql = "SELECT * FROM me_config"; print_r($core->db->query($sql)); I get: PDOStatement Object ( [queryString] => SELECT * FROM me_config ) I'm really confused, what am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

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