Search Results

Search found 8330 results on 334 pages for 'template inheritance'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 78/334 | < Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >

  • Add Method to Built In Class

    - by Evorlor
    I am pretty sure this is not doable, but I will go ahead and cross my fingers and ask. I am trying to add a method to a built in class. I want this method to be callable by all of the built in class's subclasses. Specifically: I have a JButton, a JTextPane, and other JComponents. I want to be able to pass in a JDom Element instead of a Rectangle to setBounds(). My current solution is to extend each JComponent subclass with the desired methods, but that is a LOT of duplicate code. Is there a way I can write the following method just one time, and have it callable on all JComponent objects? Or is it required that I extend each subclass individually, and copy and paste the method below? public void setBounds(Element element) { this.setBounds(Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute( "x").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element .getAttribute("y").toString()), Integer .parseInt(element.getAttribute("width").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute("height") .toString())); }

    Read the article

  • Missing Test Settings template in VS2010 Ultimate

    - by JustLoren
    I'm attempting to add a Test Settings file to my Unit Tests project in VS2010. All websites seem to simply say "Go to Add New Item Installed Templates Test Settings". However, I don't have Test Settings as an option in my Installed Templates (nor does searching for them online turn up any results). Can someone point me in the right direction for what I need to do?

    Read the article

  • How can one enforce calling a base class function after derived class constructor?

    - by Mike Elkins
    I'm looking for a clean C++ idiom for the following situation: class SomeLibraryClass { public: SomeLibraryClass() { /* start initialization */ } void addFoo() { /* we are a collection of foos */ } void funcToCallAfterAllAddFoos() { /* Making sure this is called is the issue */ } }; class SomeUserClass : public SomeLibraryClass { public: SomeUserClass() { addFoo(); addFoo(); addFoo(); // SomeUserClass has three foos. } }; class SomeUserDerrivedClass : public SomeUserClass { public: SomeUserDerrivedClass() { addFoo(); // This one has four foos. } }; So, what I really want is for SomeLibraryClass to enforce the calling of funcToCallAfterAllAddFoos at the end of the construction process. The user can't put it at the end of SomeUserClass::SomeUserClass(), that would mess up SomeUserDerrivedClass. If he puts it at the end of SomeUserDerrivedClass, then it never gets called for SomeUserClass. To further clarify what I need, imagine that /* start initialization */ acquires a lock, and funcToCallAfterAllAddFoos() releases a lock. The compiler knows when all the initializations for an object are done, but can I get at that information by some nice trick?

    Read the article

  • Using Django.test.client to check template vars

    - by scott
    I've got a view that I'm trying to test with the Client object. Can I get to the variables I injected into the render_to_response of my view? Example View: def myView(request): if request.method == "POST": # do the search return render_to_response('search.html',{'results':results},context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: return render_to_response('search.html',context_instance=RequestContext(request) Test: c = Client() response = c.post('/school/search/', {'keyword':'beagles'}) # how do I get to the 'results' variable??

    Read the article

  • Calling base class constructor

    - by The Void
    In the program below, is the line Derived(double y): Base(), y_(y) correct/allowed? That is, does it follow ANSI rules? #include <iostream> class Base { public: Base(): x_(0) { std::cout << "Base default constructor called" << std::endl; } Base(int x): x_(x) { std::cout << "Base constructor called with x = " << x << std::endl; } void display() const { std::cout << x_ << std::endl; } protected: int x_; }; class Derived: public Base { public: Derived(): Base(1), y_(1.2) { std::cout << "Derived default constructor called" << std::endl; } Derived(double y): Base(), y_(y) { std::cout << "Derived constructor called with y = " << y << std::endl; } void display() const { std::cout << Base::x_ << ", " << y_ << std::endl; } private: double y_; }; int main() { Base b1; b1.display(); Derived d1; d1.display(); std::cout << std::endl; Base b2(-9); b2.display(); Derived d2(-8.7); d2.display(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Having troubles inheriting base class

    - by Nick
    When I inherit the base class, it's telling me there is no such class This is enhanced.h: class enhanced: public changeDispenser // <--------where error is occuring { public: void changeStatus(); // Function: Lets the user know how much of each coin is in the machine enhanced(int); // Constructor // Sets the Dollar amount to what the User wants void changeLoad(int); // Function: Loads what change the user requests into the Coin Machine int dispenseChange(int); // Function: Takes the users amount of cents requests and dispenses it to the user private: int dollar; }; This is enhanced.cpp: #include "enhanced.h" #include <iostream> using namespace std; enhanced::enhanced(int dol) { dollar = dol; } void enhanced::changeStatus() { cout << dollar << " dollars, "; changeDispenser::changeStatus(); } void enhanced::changeLoad(int d) { dollar = dollar + d; //changeDispenser::changeLoad; } This is changeDispenser.h: class changeDispenser { public: void changeStatus(); // Function: Lets the user know how much of each coin is in the machine changeDispenser(int, int, int, int); // Constructor // Sets the Quarters, Dimes, Nickels, and Pennies to what the User wants void changeLoad(int, int, int, int); // Function: Loads what change the user requests into the Coin Machine int dispenseChange(int); // Function: Takes the users amount of cents requests and dispenses it to the user private: int quarter; int dime; int nickel; int penny; }; I didn't include the driver file or the changeDispenser imp file, but in the driver, these are included #include "changeDispenser.h" #include "enhanced.h"

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to specify a return type of "Derivative(of T)" for a MustOverride sub in VB.NET?

    - by Casey
    VB.NET 2008 .NET 3.5 I have two base classes that are MustInherit (partial). Let's call one class OrderBase and the other OrderItemBase. A specific type of order and order item would inherit from these classes. Let's call these WebOrder (inherits from OrderBase) and WebOrderItem (inherits from OrderItemBase). Now, in the grand scheme of things WebOrder is a composite class containing a WebOrderItem, like so: Public Class WebOrder Inherits OrderBase Public Property OrderItem() as WebOrderItem End Property End Class Public Class WebOrderItem Inherits OrderItemBase End Class In order to make sure any class that derives from OrderBase has the OrderItem property, I would like to do something like this in the OrderBase class: Public MustInherit Class OrderBase Public MustOverride Property OrderItem() as Derivative(Of OrderItemBase) End Class In other words, I want the derived class to be forced to contain a property that returns a derivative of OrderItemBase. Is this possible, or should I be using an entirely different approach?

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't C++ allow you to request a pointer to the most derived class?

    - by Matthew Lowe
    (This question should probably be answered with a reference to Stroustrup.) It seems extremely useful to be able to request a pointer to the most derived class, as in the following: class Base { ... }; class DerivedA { ... }; class DerivedB { ... }; class Processor { public: void Do(Base* b) {...} void Do(DerivedA* d) {...} void Do(DerivedB* d) {...} }; list<Base*> things; Processor p; for(list<Base*>::iterator i=things.begin(), e=things.end(); i!=e; ++i) { p.Do(CAST_TO_MOST_DERIVED_CLASS(*i)); } But this mechanism isn't provided in c++. Why?

    Read the article

  • What's an elegant solution to get the property values from two classes (that have the same property

    - by SlipToFall
    Essentially I have to deal with a poorly implemented web service. They have two classes that don't derive from a parent class, but have the same properties (Ughh...). So it looks like this in my web service proxy class file: public partial class Product1 { public int Quantity; public int Price; } public partial class Product2 { public int Quantity; public int Price; } So what's the best way to grab the values from known properties without duplicating the code and casting to their respective classes? I know I probably could use reflection, but that can get ugly. If there is an easier less crazier way to do it (maybe in the new c# features?) please let me know.

    Read the article

  • C++ Problem: Class Promotion using derived class

    - by Michael Fitzpatrick
    I have a class for Float32 that is derived from Float32_base class Float32_base { public: // Constructors Float32_base(float x) : value(x) {}; Float32_base(void) : value(0) {}; operator float32(void) {return value;}; Float32_base operator =(float x) {value = x; return *this;}; Float32_base operator +(float x) const { return value + x;}; protected: float value; } class Float32 : public Float32_base { public: float Tad() { return value + .01; } } int main() { Float32 x, y, z; x = 1; y = 2; // WILL NOT COMPILE! z = (x + y).Tad(); // COMPILES OK z = ((Float32)(x + y)).Tad(); } The issue is that the + operator returns a Float32_base and Tad() is not in that class. But 'x' and 'y' are Float32's. Is there a way that I can get the code in the first line to compile without having to resort to a typecast like I did on the next line?

    Read the article

  • Make sure base method gets called in C#

    - by Fnatte
    Can I somehow force a derived class to always call the overridden methods base? public class BaseClass { public virtual void Update() { if(condition) { throw new Exception("..."); // Prevent derived method to be called } } } And then in a derived class : public override void Update() { base.Update(); // Forced call // Do any work } I've searched and found a suggestion to use a non-virtual Update() but also a protected virtual UpdateEx(). It just doesn't feel very neat, isn't there any better way? I hope you get the question and I am sorry for any bad English.

    Read the article

  • Reading a Text file in xcode

    - by Nicolaj Zefting
    First off, I'm a complete beginner. This might be a stupid question, but here it goes: I'm currently working on an App than contains Latin texts that the users can view and read. I'm using Xcode 4 with the storybord function. Theway the app is built: user selects author - then the book - then app shows the text. I am kind of confused because i need to have various text files, depending on the users choice.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Object Not Creating for Privately Inherited Class.

    - by mahesh
    Hi, What is the reason for the following code that does not let me to create object. class base { public: void foo() { cout << "base::foo()"; } }; class derived : private base { public: void foo() { cout << "deived::foo()"; } }; void main() { base *d = new derived(); d->foo(); } It Gives me error : " 'type cast' : conversion from 'derived *' to 'base *' exists, but is inaccessible" Thanks in advance :)

    Read the article

  • Calling base Text method on custom TextBox

    - by The Demigeek
    I'm trying to create a CurrencyTextBox that inherits from TextBox. I'm seeing some really weird behavior that I just don't understand. After lots of testing, I think I can summarize as follows: In the class code, when I access base.Text (to get the textbox's text), I'm actually getting the return value of my overridden Text property. I thought the base keyword would ensure that the underlying object's methods get called. To demonstrate: public class cTestTextBox : System.Windows.Forms.TextBox { string strText = ""; public cTestTextBox() { SetVal("AAA"); base.Text = "TEST"; } public override string Text { get { string s = strText; s = "++" + s + "++"; return s; } } public void SetVal(string val) { strText = val; } } Place this control on a form and set a breakpoint on the constructor. Run the app. Hover your mouse over the base.Text expression. Note that the tooltip shows you the value of the overridden property, not the base property. Execute the SetVal() statement and again hover your mouse over the base.Text expression. Note that the tooltop shows you the value of the overridden property, not the base property. How do I reliably access the Text property of the textbox from which I'm inheriting?

    Read the article

  • Base form controls not visible in child form

    - by Kildareflare
    Hello I'm using C#.Net and have a base form that is inherited by several forms. Until yesterday, when the child (derived) form was opened in the designer the base forms controls would be displayed and shown as locked. Now, however the form is simply blank. None of the base forms controls are visible in the designer. Everything compiles, builds and runs OK. Has anyone else seen this? I've tried placing a call to the base forms InitializeComponent method in the derived forms OnLoad method but to no avail.

    Read the article

  • calling a function from a set of overloads depending on the dynamic type of an object

    - by Jasper
    I feel like the answer to this question is really simple, but I really am having trouble finding it. So here goes: Suppose you have the following classes: class Base; class Child : public Base; class Displayer { public: Displayer(Base* element); Displayer(Child* element); } Additionally, I have a Base* object which might point to either an instance of the class Base or an instance of the class Child. Now I want to create a Displayer based on the element pointed to by object, however, I want to pick the right version of the constructor. As I currently have it, this would accomplish just that (I am being a bit fuzzy with my C++ here, but I think this the clearest way) object->createDisplayer(); virtual void Base::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } virtual void Child::createDisplayer() { new Displayer(this); } This works, however, there is a problem with this: Base and Child are part of the application system, while Displayer is part of the GUI system. I want to build the GUI system independently of the Application system, so that it is easy to replace the GUI. This means that Base and Child should not know about Displayer. However, I do not know how I can achieve this without letting the Application classes know about the GUI. Am I missing something very obvious or am I trying something that is not possible?

    Read the article

  • Does string inherits from Object in Javascript?

    - by Morgan Cheng
    Is Object the base class of all objects in Javascript, just like other language such as Java & C#? I tried below code in Firefox with Firebug installed. var t = new Object(); var s1 = new String('str'); var s2 = 'str'; console.log(typeof t); console.log(typeof s1); console.log(typeof s2); The console output is object object string So, s1 and s2 are of diffeent type?

    Read the article

  • Gridview item template refresh

    - by morsanu
    <asp:TemplateField HeaderText="Quantity" ItemStyle-HorizontalAlign="Left" HeaderStyle-HorizontalAlign="Left"> <ItemTemplate> <%#GetQuantityRemaining((int) Eval("Id")) %> </ItemTemplate> <HeaderStyle HorizontalAlign="Left"></HeaderStyle> <ItemStyle HorizontalAlign="Left"></ItemStyle> </asp:TemplateField> Every time the user clicks on some buttons or modifies some fields, I need to update this field, calling the GetQuantityRemaining method again. Is there a way to do that?

    Read the article

  • Ignoring all line feeds in a FreeMarker template

    - by Will
    I'm trying out FreeMarker, not for a web application but to generate text within a desktop application. I'd like to get the text without any linefeeds, however it always appends a linefeed. For example, this would produce "blah blah\n" <#if docType=1> blah blah <#if docType=2> more blah <#/if> Any ideas? Bunching it all into one line works, but is horrible. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • django filefield return filename only in template

    - by John
    I've got a field in my model of type FileField. This gives me an object of type type File, which has the following method: File.name: The name of the file including the relative path from MEDIA_ROOT. What I want is something like .filename that will only give me the filename and not the path as well something like: {% for download in downloads %} <div class="download"> <div class="title">{{download.file.filename}}</div> </div> {% endfor %} which would give something like myfile.jpg thanks

    Read the article

  • Why can a public class not inherit from a less visible one?

    - by Dan Tao
    I apologize if this question has been asked before. I've searched SO somewhat and wasn't able to find it. I'm just curious what the rationale behind this design was/is. Obviously I understand that private/internal members of a base type cannot, nor should they, be exposed through a derived public type. But it seems to my naive thinking that the "hidden" parts could easily remain hidden while some base functionality is still shared and a new interface is exposed publicly. I'm thinking of something along these lines: Assembly X internal class InternalClass { protected virtual void DoSomethingProtected() { // Let's say this method provides some useful functionality. // Its visibility is quite limited (only to derived types in // the same assembly), but at least it's there. } } public class PublicClass : InternalClass { public void DoSomethingPublic() { // Now let's say this method is useful enough that this type // should be public. What's keeping us from leveraging the // base functionality laid out in InternalClass's implementation, // without exposing anything that shouldn't be exposed? } } Assembly Y public class OtherPublicClass : PublicClass { // It seems (again, to my naive mind) that this could work. This class // simply wouldn't be able to "see" any of the methods of InternalClass // from AssemblyX directly. But it could still access the public and // protected members of PublicClass that weren't inherited from // InternalClass. Does this make sense? What am I missing? }

    Read the article

  • "Overriding" instance variables in subtype: Possible risks?

    - by sebastiangeiger
    Say I had a class SuperClass and two subclasses SubClassA and SubClassB that inherit from SuperClass. abstract class SuperClass{ ... List someList; ... } class SubClassA extends SuperClass{ ... List<String> someList; ... } class SubClassB extends SuperClass{ ... List<Integer> someList; ... } That way it is convenient because I can get someList.size() in Superclass and have Typesafety in the Subclasses. The problem is that it does not "feel" right, can you think of potential hazards this apporach has that I am not aware of?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >