Search Results

Search found 14034 results on 562 pages for 'interface inheritance'.

Page 75/562 | < Previous Page | 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to make a subclass of NSObject which support subnodes in IB for iPhone project?

    - by Eonil
    I'm making a custom UI element class for iPhone. It'll cool to edit my class on Interface Builder with hierarchy. Some of my class is management class like UINavigationController, but they're not one of them, subclasses from NSObject. Of course, I can place a NSObject instance on IB, but it cannot have a child node. Is there a way to enable adding child node to subclass of NSObject?

    Read the article

  • UITableView section footer multiple UIButtons

    - by joec
    In the section footer of my UITableView, i have one UIButton, this button is 320 pixels wide (i.e. takes up full width of view). I would like two buttons in the section footer, but when i try and add another button, Interface Builder just puts it on top of the existing button. If i try to change the size in the inspector from 320 to say 50 pixels, it always reverts to 320. What am i doing wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Programmatically remove the header of UITableView and automatically resizes the content to fill in the removed area.

    - by code007
    Hello all, I have added a UIButton in the header section of the UITableView via the interface builder and would like to remove the access to the button in certain cases. I have tried to use the '.hidden = TRUE' property but it just hides the button from the view, leaving a white space behind. How do I programmatically remove the header of UITableView and have the table's content automatically resizes to fill in the removed header area?

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to call an IBAction from within code?

    - by Rob
    Say for instance I have an IBAction that is hooked up to a button in interface builder. - (IBAction)functionToBeCalled:(id)sender { // do something here } Within my code, say for instance in another method, what is the best way to call that IBAction? If I try to call it like this, I receive an error: [self functionToBeCalled:]; But, if I try to call it like this (cheating a bit, I think), it works fine: [self functionToBeCalled:0]; What is the proper way to call it though?

    Read the article

  • +(void) initialize in objecive c class static variables construstor

    - by sugar
    I found some sample code from here. static UIImage *backgroundImageDepressed; /** * */ @implementation DecimalPointButton + (void) initialize { backgroundImageDepressed = [[UIImage imageNamed:@"decimalKeyDownBackground.png"] retain]; } is it something like this - +(void) initialize method initialize static variables of a class ( interface ) in objective c ? I have never seen this before. Please need your guidance on it. Thanks in advance for sharing your great knowledge. Sagar

    Read the article

  • iOS: how to understand the role of rootviewcontroller and its relationship with other objects

    - by Anthony Kong
    I have created a UISplitViewController based iOS app in XCode 3.2.5 Below is a screen shot of Interface builder showing the rootviewcontroller and how it is linked to other objects. Being a beginner myself, I do not understand: 1) What is the role of the rootviewcontroller? Searched the documentation but what I found did not answer this question. 2) I thought a IBOutlet should only link to one corresponding object. Why in this case the rootviewcontroller is linked to two?

    Read the article

  • How to insert a WebView into a cocoa app?

    - by spamoom
    I'm rather new with the whole OSX programming, I wanted to stick a WebView into an empty app. Apparently it isn't as simple as sticking a WebView on a window in interface builder and creating an outlet. IBOutlet WebView *webView; It gives me a expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'WebView' and when I don't use an outlet, it terminates due to uncaught exception. I'm not too sure what these error messages mean. Seems it isn't that simple!

    Read the article

  • How does one create an elegant iPhone GUI?

    - by jrtc27
    This is just one of those things where you feel like your own design is utterly terrible, and that all of the other apps have a beautiful design. This question is just about how you would go about creating a user interface that a user would actually want to use?

    Read the article

  • creating a shared library from c++ source file

    - by navinbecse
    when I tried to create a shared library file using the "cl" command in the vc++ command prompt, it shows a error saying "Can't open include file "jni.h": No such file or directory"... the jni.h is tried to be included in the machine generated header file from java class... i am using this for java navite interface operations... can any one help me...

    Read the article

  • IList<T> and IReadOnlyList<T>

    - by Safak Gür
    My problem is that I have a method that can take a collection as parameter that, Has a Count property Has an integer indexer (get-only) And I don't know what type should this parameter be. I would choose IList<T> before .NET 4.5 since there is no other indexable collection interface for this and arrays implement it, which is a big plus. But .NET 4.5 introduces the new IReadOnlyList<T> interface and I want my method to support that, too. How can I write this method to support both IList<T> and IReadOnlyList<T> without violating the basic principles like DRY? Can I convert IList<T> to IReadOnlyList<T> somehow in an overload? What is the way to go here? Edit: Daniel's answer gave me some pretty ideas, I guess I'll go with this: public void Do<T>(IList<T> collection) { DoInternal(collection, collection.Count, i => collection[i]); } public void Do<T>(IReadOnlyList<T> collection) { DoInternal(collection, collection.Count, i => collection[i]); } private void DoInternal<T>(IEnumerable<T> collection, int count, Func<int, T> indexer) { // Stuff } Or I could just accept a ReadOnlyList<T> and provide an helper like this: public static class CollectionEx { public static IReadOnlyList<T> AsReadOnly<T>(this IList<T> collection) { if (collection == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("collection"); return new ReadOnlyWrapper<T>(collection); } private sealed class ReadOnlyWrapper<T> : IReadOnlyList<T> { private readonly IList<T> _Source; public int Count { get { return _Source.Count; } } public T this[int index] { get { return _Source[index]; } } public ReadOnlyWrapper(IList<T> source) { _Source = source; } public IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator() { return _Source.GetEnumerator(); } IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); } } } Then I could call Do(array.AsReadOnly())

    Read the article

  • IBOutlets are always nil

    - by Jonas
    Hi, In IB I have subclassed the File Owner and the subclass loads my .nib. The subclass itself doesn't need access to the IBOutlets so they're instance variables in another class, which I added as a subclass of NSObject in the .nib. Then I connected the interface elements to that object. But somehow, in the class that "owns" the IBOutlets, they show up as nil. What am I doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • What common interface would be appropriate for these game object classes?

    - by Jefffrey
    Question A component based system's goal is to solve the problems that derives from inheritance: for example the fact that some parts of the code (that are called components) are reused by very different classes that, hypothetically, would lie in a very different branch of the inheritance tree. That's a very nice concept, but I've found out that CBS is often hard to accomplish without using ugly hacks. Implementations of this system are often far from clean. But I don't want to discuss this any further. My question is: how can I solve the same problems a CBS try to solve with a very clean interface? (possibly with examples, there are a lot of abstract talks about the "perfect" design already). Context Here's an example I was going for before realizing I was just reinventing inheritance again: class Human { public: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other human specific components }; class Zombie { Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other zombie specific components }; After writing that I realized I needed an interface, otherwise I would have needed N containers for N different types of objects (or to use boost::variant to gather them all together). So I've thought of polymorphism (move what systems do in a CBS design into class specific functions): class Entity { public: virtual void on_event(Event) {} // not pure virtual on purpose virtual void on_update(World) {} virtual void on_draw(Window) {} }; class Human : public Entity { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; class Zombie : public Entity { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; Which was nice, except for the fact that now the outside world would not even be able to know where a Human is positioned (it does not have access to its position member). That would be useful to track the player position for collision detection or if on_update the Zombie would want to track down its nearest human to move towards him. So I added const Position& get_position() const; to both the Zombie and Human classes. And then I realized that both functionality were shared, so it should have gone to the common base class: Entity. Do you notice anything? Yes, with that methodology I would have a god Entity class full of common functionality (which is the thing I was trying to avoid in the first place). Meaning of "hacks" in the implementation I'm referring to I'm talking about the implementations that defines Entities as simple IDs to which components are dynamically attached. Their implementation can vary from C-stylish: int last_id; Position* positions[MAX_ENTITIES]; Movement* movements[MAX_ENTITIES]; Where positions[i], movements[i], component[i], ... make up the entity. Or to more C++-style: int last_id; std::map<int, Position> positions; std::map<int, Movement> movements; From which systems can detect if an entity/id can have attached components.

    Read the article

  • Polymorphism problem: How to check type of derived class?

    - by malymato
    Hi, this is my first question here :) I know that I should not check for object type but instead use dynamic_cast, but that would not solve my problem. I have class called Extension and interfaces called IExtendable and IInitializable, IUpdatable, ILoadable, IDrawable (the last four are basicly the same). If Extension implements IExtendable interface, it can extend itself with different Extension objects. The problem is that I want to allow the Extension which implements IExtendable to extend only with Extension that implements the same interfaces as the original Extension. You probably don't unerstand that mess so I try to explain it with code: class IExtendable { public: IExtendable(void); void AddExtension(Extension*); void RemoveExtensionByID(unsigned int); vector<Extension*>* GetExtensionPtr(){return &extensions;}; private: vector<Extension*> extensions; }; class IUpdatable { public: IUpdatable(void); ~IUpdatable(void); virtual void Update(); }; class Extension { public: Extension(void); virtual ~Extension(void); void Enable(){enabled=true;}; void Disable(){enabled=false;}; unsigned int GetIndex(){return ID;}; private: bool enabled; unsigned int ID; static unsigned int _indexID; }; Now imagine the case that I create Extension like this: class MyExtension : public Extension, public IExtendable, public IUpdatable, public IDrawable { public: MyExtension(void); virtual ~MyExtension(void); virtual void AddExtension(Extension*); virtual void Update(); virtual void Draw(); }; And I want to allow this class to extend itself only with Extensions that implements the same interfaces (or less). For example I want it to be able to take Extension which implements IUpdatable; or both IUpdatable and IDrawable; but e.g. not Extension which implements ILoadable. I want to do this because when e.g. Update() will be called on some Extension which implements IExtendable and IUpdateable, it will be also called on these Extensions which extends this Extension. So when I'm adding some Extension to Extension which implements IExtendable and some of the IUpdatable, ILoadable... I'm forced to check if Extension that is going to be add implements these interfaces too. So In the IExtendable::AddExtension(Extension*) I would need to do something like this: void IExtendable::AddExtension(Extension* pEx) { bool ok = true; // check wheather this extension can take pEx // do this with every interface if ((*pEx is IUpdatable) && (*this is_not IUpdatable)) ok = false; if (ok) this->extensions.push_back(pEx); } But how? Any ideas what would be the best solution? I don't want to use dynamic_cast and see if it returns null... thanks

    Read the article

  • The application called an interface that was marshalled for a different thread

    - by X-Ray
    i'm writing a delphi app that communicates with excel. one thing i noticed is that if i call the Save method on the Excel workbook object, it can appear to hang because excel has a dialog box open for the user. i'm using the late binding. i'd like for my app to be able to notice when Save takes several seconds and then take some kind of action like show a dialog box telling this is what's happening. i figured this'd be fairly easy. all i'd need to do is create a thread that calls Save and have that thread call Excel's Save routine. if it takes too long, i can take some action. procedure TOfficeConnect.Save; var Thread:TOfficeHangThread; begin // spin off as thread so we can control timeout Thread:=TOfficeSaveThread.Create(m_vExcelWorkbook); if WaitForSingleObject(Thread.Handle, 5 {s} * 1000 {ms/s})=WAIT_TIMEOUT then begin Thread.FreeOnTerminate:=true; raise Exception.Create(_('The Office spreadsheet program seems to be busy.')); end; Thread.Free; end; TOfficeSaveThread = class(TThread) private { Private declarations } m_vExcelWorkbook:variant; protected procedure Execute; override; procedure DoSave; public constructor Create(vExcelWorkbook:variant); end; { TOfficeSaveThread } constructor TOfficeSaveThread.Create(vExcelWorkbook:variant); begin inherited Create(true); m_vExcelWorkbook:=vExcelWorkbook; Resume; end; procedure TOfficeSaveThread.Execute; begin m_vExcelWorkbook.Save; end; i understand this problem happens because the OLE object was created from another thread (absolutely). how can i get around this problem? most likely i'll need to "re-marshall" for this call somehow... any ideas? thank you!

    Read the article

  • Subclassed django models with integrated querysets

    - by outofculture
    Like in this question, except I want to be able to have querysets that return a mixed body of objects: >>> Product.objects.all() [<SimpleProduct: ...>, <OtherProduct: ...>, <BlueProduct: ...>, ...] I figured out that I can't just set Product.Meta.abstract to true or otherwise just OR together querysets of differing objects. Fine, but these are all subclasses of a common class, so if I leave their superclass as non-abstract I should be happy, so long as I can get its manager to return objects of the proper class. The query code in django does its thing, and just makes calls to Product(). Sounds easy enough, except it blows up when I override Product.__new__, I'm guessing because of the __metaclass__ in Model... Here's non-django code that behaves pretty much how I want it: class Top(object): _counter = 0 def __init__(self, arg): Top._counter += 1 print "Top#__init__(%s) called %d times" % (arg, Top._counter) class A(Top): def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs): if cls is A and len(args) > 0: if args[0] is B.fav: return B(*args, **kwargs) elif args[0] is C.fav: return C(*args, **kwargs) else: print "PRETENDING TO BE ABSTRACT" return None # or raise? else: return super(A).__new__(cls, *args, **kwargs) class B(A): fav = 1 class C(A): fav = 2 A(0) # => None A(1) # => <B object> A(2) # => <C object> But that fails if I inherit from django.db.models.Model instead of object: File "/home/martin/beehive/apps/hello_world/models.py", line 50, in <module> A(0) TypeError: unbound method __new__() must be called with A instance as first argument (got ModelBase instance instead) Which is a notably crappy backtrace; I can't step into the frame of my __new__ code in the debugger, either. I have variously tried super(A, cls), Top, super(A, A), and all of the above in combination with passing cls in as the first argument to __new__, all to no avail. Why is this kicking me so hard? Do I have to figure out django's metaclasses to be able to fix this or is there a better way to accomplish my ends?

    Read the article

  • Best way to re-use the same django models and admin for multiple apps

    - by kepioo
    Given a reference app ( called guide), how can I create additional apps that will reuse the same model/admin/views than guide - the motivation behind is to be able to individually control each subapp. guide guideApp1 exact same models/admin/views than guide guideApp2 exact same models/admin/views than guide in the Admin site, I should have : 1 section for guideApp1 with all the tables defined in guide, that applies to guideApp1 1 section for guideApp12 with all the tables defined in guide, that applies to guideApp2

    Read the article

  • problem with tabbed interface as mentioned in the article of josh smith

    - by Egi
    hello guys, i ve got a problem with my programm. here is the link: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2734432/TabbedInterface.7z once u have opened both tabs, u ll start loosing the references to other collections of the current item in the view. that is because these ids are nullable and once you switch over to the other tab they ll become null. my question is why and how can i corrent that behavoir? if you change the int? to int there are no more problem, but i need them to be nullable!

    Read the article

  • C# Instantiate class which implements generic interface

    - by Martijn B
    Hi there, I have some business classes which implements IBusinessRequest for example: public class PersonBusiness : IBusinessRequest<Person> { } Besides this I have a function: TypeHelper.CreateBusinessInstance(Type businessType, Type businessRequestType) A requirement of a business class is that they must have a parameterless constructor, which I check in the TypeHelper.CreateBusinessInstance function. I want to create a instance of type businessType (which is i.e PersonBusiness) with the generic value businessRequestType for IBusinessRequest<. How can I get this done? Thanks in Advance. Gr Martijn

    Read the article

  • mongo mapper with STI with more than one type?

    - by holden
    I have a series of models all which inherit from a base model Properties For example Bars, Restaurants, Cafes, etc. class Property include MongoMapper::Document key :name, String key :_type, String end class Bar < Property What I'm wondering is what to do with the case when a record happens to be both a Bar & a Restaurant? Is there a way for a single object to inherit the attributes of both models? And how would it work with the key :_type?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82  | Next Page >