Search Results

Search found 1356 results on 55 pages for 'asynchronous challenged'.

Page 8/55 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • What's the best way to cancel an asynchronous WCF request?

    - by Pwninstein
    (Assuming a WCF method called "MyFunction") Currently, to support canceling a WCF request, I'm using the BeginMyFunction/EndMyFunction methods generated by svcutil (and handling an isCanceled flag when dispatching the results to the main thread). I'd like to use the MyFunctionAsync method (and hooking into MyFunctionAsyncCompleted event instead) for async calls instead of Begin/End. What is the best/supported way to handle canceling WCF requests if using MyFunctionAsyncCompleted, and still ensuring that the event doesn't get fired on a page that's no longer loaded (i.e. page navigation within a frame). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What happens if an asynchronous delegate call never returns?

    - by RichardHowells
    I found a decent looking example of how to call a delegate asynchronously with a timeout... http://www.eggheadcafe.com/tutorials/aspnet/847c94bf-4b8d-4a66-9ae5-5b61f049019f/basics-make-any-method-c.aspx. In summary it uses WaitOne with a timeout to determine if the call does not return before the timeout expires. I also know that you should have an EndInvoke to match each BeginInvoke. So what happens if the wait timeout expires? We (presumably) DON'T want to call EndInvoke as that will block. The code can go on to do 'other things', but have we leaked anything? Is there some poor thread someplace blocked waiting for a return that's never going to happen? Have we leaked some memory where the result-that-will-never-return was going to be placed?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for client/server sessions?

    - by nonot1
    Are there any common patterns or general guidance I can learn from for how to design a client/server system where the both the client and server must maintain some kind per-client session state? I've found any number of libraries that can help with some of the plumbing, but it's the overall design I'm wondering about. Open issues in my mind: How to structure the client/server communication so that bidirectional synchronous and asynchronous requests are possible? The server side needs to spawn a couple of per-connected-client session-long helper process. How to manage that? How to manage the mapping from a given client (and any of it's requests) to server state and helper process instances in the face of multiple clients and intermittent network connectivity. Most communication can be simple blocking request/reply, but some will be long running processing tasks that the client will want to keep tabs on. To the extent that it matters, the platform is Linux/C/C++. Not web based. Just an existing thick-client software app being modified to talk to backend servers for some tasks.

    Read the article

  • Navigate with location.href during XMLHttpRequest asynchronous call

    - by OlduwanSteve
    I have a web page containing something like this: <div onclick="location.href = 'AnotherPage';"> This page also uses asynchronous XMLHttpRequests for some ajax updating. I have found that while an asynchronous XMLHttpRequest is in progress, clicking on this div does not load the new page. If I cancel my request first then it works fine. This seems wrong, but I cannot find any documentation that describes what should happen. So the question is: what should happen to asynchronous XMLHttpRequests in progress when a new page is loaded using location.href?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server connection string Asynchronous Processing=true

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am using .Net 2.0 + SQL Server 2005 Enterprise + VSTS 2008 + C# + ADO.Net to develop ASP.Net Web application. My question is, if I am using Asynchronous Processing=true with SQL Server authentication mode (not Windows authentication mode, i.e. using sa account and password in connection string in web.config), I am wondering whether Asynchronous Processing=true will impact performance of my web application (or depends on my ADO.Net code implementation pattern/scenario)? And why? thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • Why would Java app make RPC call to itself?

    - by amphibient
    I am working with a multithreaded homegrown multi-module app in my new job. We use the the Thrift protocol to communicate RPC calls between different stand-alone applications in a distributed system. One of them listens on multiple ports and I just noticed that it actually makes an RPC call to itself from one thread invoked from one socket it listens to (web service call) to another port within the same app. I verified that it could accomplish the same thing if it just went and directly called the method that the remote procedure ultimately invokes as it is all within the same application, same JVM. To make it even more mysterious, the call is completely synchronous, i.e. no callbacks involved. The first thread totally sits and waits until it makes a call across the wire to itself and comes back. Now, I am perplexed why anybody would do it this way. It seems like calling somebody on the phone that sits in the same room as you do. Can anybody provide an explanation why the developer before me would come up with the above mentioned model? Maybe there is a reason and I am missing something.

    Read the article

  • Is there any way to optimize my search blob program?

    - by Vicky
    I written this code to search the blob items (text files) on the basis of there content. For ex : if I search for "Good", then the files that contains "Good or good" word the name of that files should appear in search result. My code is working but i want to optimize it. class BlobSearch { public static int num = 1; static void Main(string[] args) { string accountName = "accountName"; string accessKey = "accesskey"; string azureConString = "DefaultEndpointsProtocol=https;AccountName=" + accountName + ";AccountKey=" + accessKey; string blob = "MyBlobContainer"; string searchText = string.Empty; Console.WriteLine("Type and enter to search : "); searchText = Console.ReadLine(); CloudStorageAccount account = CloudStorageAccount.Parse(azureConString); CloudBlobClient blobClient = account.CreateCloudBlobClient(); CloudBlobContainer blobContainer = blobClient.GetContainerReference(blob); blobContainer.FetchAttributes(); var blobItemList = blobContainer.ListBlobs(); GetBlobList(searchText, blobContainer, blobItemList); Console.ReadLine(); } private static async void GetBlobList(string searchText, CloudBlobContainer blobContainer, IEnumerable<IListBlobItem> blobItemList) { foreach (var item in blobItemList) { string line = string.Empty; CloudBlockBlob blockBlob = blobContainer.GetBlockBlobReference(item.Uri.ToString()); if (blockBlob.Name.Contains(".txt")) { await Search(searchText, blockBlob); } } } private async static Task Search(string searchText, CloudBlockBlob blockBlob) { string text = await blockBlob.DownloadTextAsync(); if (text.ToLower().IndexOf(searchText.ToLower()) != -1) { Console.WriteLine("Result : " + num + " => " + blockBlob.Name.Substring(blockBlob.Name.LastIndexOf('/') + 1)); num++; } } } I think blobContainer.ListBlobs(); is blocking code because search will not work until all the blob items loaded. Is there anyway to optimize it or anywhere else in my code. Thanks

    Read the article

  • NFSv3 Asynchronous Write Depends on Block Size?

    - by Joe Swanson
    I am trying to figure out if my NFSv3 deployment is performing SAFE asynchronous writes. I suspect that it is doing strictly synchronous writes, as I am getting poor performance in general. I used Wireshark to look at the 'stable' flag in write calls, and look for 'commit' calls. I noticed that, with especially large block sizes, writes to appear to be performed asynchronously: dd if=/dev/zero of=/proj/re3/0/zero bs=2097152 count=512 However, smaller block sizes appear to be performed strictly synchronously: dd if=/dev/zero of=/proj/re3/0/zero bs=8192 count=655360 What gives? How does the client decide whether to tell the server to perform writes synchronously or asynchronously? Is there any way I can get smaller block sizes to be performed asynchronously?

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous daemon processing / ORM interaction with Django

    - by perrierism
    I'm looking for a way to do asynchronous data processing with a daemon that uses Django ORM. However, the ORM isn't thread-safe; it's not thread-safe to try to retrieve / modify django objects from within threads. So I'm wondering what the correct way to achieve asynchrony is? Basically what I need to accomplish is taking a list of users in the db, querying a third party api and then making updates to user-profile rows for those users. As a daemon or background process. Doing this in series per user is easy, but it takes too long to be at all scalable. If the daemon is retrieving and updating the users through the ORM, how do I achieve processing 10-20 users at a time? I would use a standard threading / queue system for this but you can't thread interactions like models.User.objects.get(id=foo) ... Django itself is an asynchronous processing system which makes asynchronous ORM calls(?) for each request, so there should be a way to do it? I haven't found anything in the documentation so far. Cheers

    Read the article

  • Google Web Toolkit Asynchronous Call from a Service Implementation

    - by Thor Thurn
    I'm writing a simple Google Web Toolkit service which acts as a proxy, which will basically exist to allow the client to make a POST to a different server. The client essentially uses this service to request an HTTP call. The service has only one asynchronous method call, called ajax(), which should just forward the server response. My code for implementing the call looks like this: class ProxyServiceImpl extends RemoteServiceServlet implements ProxyService { @Override public Response ajax(String data) { RequestBuilder rb = /*make a request builder*/ RequestCallback rc = new RequestCallback() { @Override public void onResponseReceived(Response response) { /* Forward this response back to the client as the return value of the ajax method... somehow... */ } }; rb.sendRequest(data, requestCallback); return /* The response above... except I can't */; } } You can see the basic form of my problem, of course. The ajax() method is used asynchronously, but GWT decides to be smart and hide that from the dumb old developer, so they can just write normal Java code without callbacks. GWT services basically just do magic instead of accepting a callback parameter. The trouble arises, then, because GWT is hiding the callback object from me. I'm trying to make my own asynchronous call from the service implementation, but I can't, because GWT services assume that you behave synchronously in service implementations. How can I work around this and make an asynchronous call from my service method implementation?

    Read the article

  • Designing a persistent asynchronous TCP protocol

    - by dogglebones
    I have got a collection of web sites that need to send time-sensitive messages to host machines all over my metro area, each on its own generally dynamic IP. Until now, I have been doing this the way of the script kiddie: Each host machine runs an (s)FTP server, or an HTTP(s) server, and correspondingly has a certain port opened up by its gateway. Each host machine runs a program that watches a certain folder and automatically opens or prints or exec()s when a new file of a given extension shows up. Dynamic IP addresses are accommodated using a dynamic DNS service. Each web site does cURL or fsockopen or whatever and communicates directly with its recipient as-needed. This approach has been suprisingly reliable, however obvious issues have come up and the situation needs to be addressed. As stated, these messages are time-sensitive and failures need to be detected within minutes of submission by end-users. What I'm doing is building a messaging protocol. It will run on a machine and connection in my control. As far as the service is concerned, there is no distinction between web site and host machine -- there is only one device sending a message to another device. So that's where I'm at right now. I've got a skeleton server and a skeleton client. They can negotiate high-quality authentication and encryption. The (TCP) connection is persistent and asynchronous, and can handle delimited (i.e., read until \r\n or whatever) as well as length-prefixed (i.e., read exactly n bytes) messages. Unless somebody gives me a better idea, I think I'll handle messages as byte arrays. So I'm looking for suggestions on how to model the protocol itself -- at the application level. I'll mostly be transferring XML and DLM type files, as well as control messages for things like "handshake" and "is so-and-so online?" and so forth. Is there anything really stupid in my train of thought? Or anything I should read about before I get started? Stuff like that -- please and thanks.

    Read the article

  • Designing a fluid Javascript interface to hide callback asynchrony

    - by Anurag
    How would I design an API to hide the asynchronous nature of AJAX and HTTP requests, or basically delay it to provide a fluid interface. To show an example from Twitter's new Anywhere API: // get @ded's first 20 statuses, filter only the tweets that // mention photography, and render each into an HTML element T.User.find('ded').timeline().first(20).filter(filterer).each(function(status) { $('div#tweets').append('<p>' + status.text + '</p>'); }); function filterer(status) { return status.text.match(/photography/); } vs this (asynchronous nature of each call is clearly visible) T.User.find('ded', function(user) { user.timeline(function(statuses) { statuses.first(20).filter(filterer).each(function(status) { $('div#tweets').append('<p>' + status.text + '</p>'); }); }); }); It finds the user, gets their tweet timeline, filters only the first 20 tweets, applies a custom filter, and ultimately uses the callback function to process each tweet. I am guessing that a well designed API like this should work like a query builder (think ORMs) where each function call builds the query (HTTP URL in this case), until it hits a looping function such as each/map/etc., the HTTP call is made and the passed in function becomes the callback. An easy development route would be to make each AJAX call synchronous, but that's probably not the best solution. I am interested in figuring out a way to make it asynchronous, and still hide the asynchronous nature of AJAX.

    Read the article

  • help me reason about F# threads

    - by Kevin Cantu
    In goofing around with some F# (via MonoDevelop), I have written a routine which lists files in a directory with one thread: let rec loop (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( path |> Directory.GetDirectories |> Array.map loop |> Array.concat ) And then an asynchronous version of it: let rec loopPar (path:string) = Array.append ( path |> Directory.GetFiles ) ( let paths = path |> Directory.GetDirectories if paths <> [||] then [| for p in paths -> async { return (loopPar p) } |] |> Async.Parallel |> Async.RunSynchronously |> Array.concat else [||] ) On small directories, the asynchronous version works fine. On bigger directories (e.g. many thousands of directories and files), the asynchronous version seems to hang. What am I missing? I know that creating thousands of threads is never going to be the most efficient solution -- I only have 8 CPUs -- but I am baffled that for larger directories the asynchronous function just doesn't respond (even after a half hour). It doesn't visibly fail, though, which baffles me. Is there a thread pool which is exhausted? How do these threads actually work?

    Read the article

  • Examples of when to use PageAsyncTask (Asynchronous asp.net pages)

    - by Tony_Henrich
    From my understanding from reading about ASP.NET asynchronous pages, the method which executes when the asynchronous task begins ALWAYS EXECUTES between the prerender and the pre-render Complete events. So because the page's controls' events run between the page's load and prerender events, is it true that whatever the begin task handler (handler for BeginAsync below) produces, it can't be used in the controls' events? So for example, if the handler gets data from a database, the data can't be used in any of the controls' postback events? Would you bind data to a data control after prerender? PageAsyncTask pat = new PageAsyncTask(BeginAsync, EndAsync, null, null, true); this.RegisterAsyncTask(pat);

    Read the article

  • Ordering the calling of asynchronous methods in c#

    - by Peter Kelly
    Hi, Say I have 4 classes ControllerClass MethodClass1 MethodClass2 MethodClass3 and each MethodClass has an asynchronous method DoStuff() and each has a CompletedEvent. The ControllerClass is responsible for invoking the 3 asynchronous methods on the 3 MethodClasses in a particular order. So ControllerClass invokes MethodClass1.DoStuff() and subscribes to MethodClass1.CompletedEvent. When that event is fired, ControllerClass invokes MethodClass2.DoStuff() and subscribes to MethodClass2.CompletedEvent. When that event is fired, the ControllerClass invokes MethodClass3.DoStuff() Is there a best practice for a situation like this? Is this bad design? I believe it is because I am finding it hard to unit test (a sure sign) It is not easy to change the order I have an uneasy, code-smell feeling about it What are the alternatives in a situation like this?

    Read the article

  • asynchronous sockets

    - by user158182
    i need to receive an acknowledgement from server when receives a data for confirming that data has received the server and how to use GetSocketOption() in asynchronous method

    Read the article

  • Examples of when to use PageAsyncTask (Asynchronous asp.net pages)

    - by Tony_Henrich
    From my understanding from reading about ASP.NET asynchronous pages, the method which executes when the asynchronous task begins ALWAYS EXECUTES between the prerender and the pre-render Complete events. So because the page's controls' events run between the page's load and prerender events, is it true that whatever the begin task handler (handler for BeginAsync below) produces, it can't be used in the controls' events? So for example, if the handler gets data from a database, the data can't be used in any of the controls' postback events? Would you bind data to a data control after prerender? PageAsyncTask pat = new PageAsyncTask(BeginAsync, EndAsync, null, null, true); this.RegisterAsyncTask(pat);

    Read the article

  • Render an asynchronous report, wider than the screen, without extra scrollbars

    - by Dubs
    I have an asynchronous local SSRS 2005 report that is of variable height and width, but routinely is bigger than the screen. I want to render it full size so that some of the report renders off screen and the only scrollbars the user sees are the ones on the browser window. What is the best way to accomplish this? The only method that I've found that even comes remotely close to what I want is to set static width/height values that are much larger than the report will ever be. But, this is undesirable since it leaves so much extra whitespace in the browser window. Has anyone had success rendering asynchronous reports without the extra scrollbars?

    Read the article

  • Calling asynchronous methods from wcf service

    - by hima
    In my asp.net application, I am using wcf service to get all the business logic. I am using that service reference in my application to work with that. Now adding that service reference is giving another option Update service reference is giving Generate asynchronous operations. If I check the option and add the service will it generate asynchronous methods for my existing service. If so how do I use the metohd. Let me know the way for that. Thanks, Hima.

    Read the article

  • C# 5 Async, Part 1: Simplifying Asynchrony – That for which we await

    - by Reed
    Today’s announcement at PDC of the future directions C# is taking excite me greatly.  The new Visual Studio Async CTP is amazing.  Asynchronous code – code which frustrates and demoralizes even the most advanced of developers, is taking a huge leap forward in terms of usability.  This is handled by building on the Task functionality in .NET 4, as well as the addition of two new keywords being added to the C# language: async and await. This core of the new asynchronous functionality is built upon three key features.  First is the Task functionality in .NET 4, and based on Task and Task<TResult>.  While Task was intended to be the primary means of asynchronous programming with .NET 4, the .NET Framework was still based mainly on the Asynchronous Pattern and the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern. The .NET Framework added functionality and guidance for wrapping existing APIs into a Task based API, but the framework itself didn’t really adopt Task or Task<TResult> in any meaningful way.  The CTP shows that, going forward, this is changing. One of the three key new features coming in C# is actually a .NET Framework feature.  Nearly every asynchronous API in the .NET Framework has been wrapped into a new, Task-based method calls.  In the CTP, this is done via as external assembly (AsyncCtpLibrary.dll) which uses Extension Methods to wrap the existing APIs.  However, going forward, this will be handled directly within the Framework.  This will have a unifying effect throughout the .NET Framework.  This is the first building block of the new features for asynchronous programming: Going forward, all asynchronous operations will work via a method that returns Task or Task<TResult> The second key feature is the new async contextual keyword being added to the language.  The async keyword is used to declare an asynchronous function, which is a method that either returns void, a Task, or a Task<T>. Inside the asynchronous function, there must be at least one await expression.  This is a new C# keyword (await) that is used to automatically take a series of statements and break it up to potentially use discontinuous evaluation.  This is done by using await on any expression that evaluates to a Task or Task<T>. For example, suppose we want to download a webpage as a string.  There is a new method added to WebClient: Task<string> WebClient.DownloadStringTaskAsync(Uri).  Since this returns a Task<string> we can use it within an asynchronous function.  Suppose, for example, that we wanted to do something similar to my asynchronous Task example – download a web page asynchronously and check to see if it supports XHTML 1.0, then report this into a TextBox.  This could be done like so: private async void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { string url = "http://reedcopsey.com"; string content = await new WebClient().DownloadStringTaskAsync(url); this.textBox1.Text = string.Format("Page {0} supports XHTML 1.0: {1}", url, content.Contains("XHTML 1.0")); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Let’s walk through what’s happening here, step by step.  By adding the async contextual keyword to the method definition, we are able to use the await keyword on our WebClient.DownloadStringTaskAsync method call. When the user clicks this button, the new method (Task<string> WebClient.DownloadStringTaskAsync(string)) is called, which returns a Task<string>.  By adding the await keyword, the runtime will call this method that returns Task<string>, and execution will return to the caller at this point.  This means that our UI is not blocked while the webpage is downloaded.  Instead, the UI thread will “await” at this point, and let the WebClient do it’s thing asynchronously. When the WebClient finishes downloading the string, the user interface’s synchronization context will automatically be used to “pick up” where it left off, and the Task<string> returned from DownloadStringTaskAsync is automatically unwrapped and set into the content variable.  At this point, we can use that and set our text box content. There are a couple of key points here: Asynchronous functions are declared with the async keyword, and contain one or more await expressions In addition to the obvious benefits of shorter, simpler code – there are some subtle but tremendous benefits in this approach.  When the execution of this asynchronous function continues after the first await statement, the initial synchronization context is used to continue the execution of this function.  That means that we don’t have to explicitly marshal the call that sets textbox1.Text back to the UI thread – it’s handled automatically by the language and framework!  Exception handling around asynchronous method calls also just works. I’d recommend every C# developer take a look at the documentation on the new Asynchronous Programming for C# and Visual Basic page, download the Visual Studio Async CTP, and try it out.

    Read the article

  • C# 5 Async, Part 2: Asynchrony Today

    - by Reed
    The .NET Framework has always supported asynchronous operations.  However, different mechanisms for supporting exist throughout the framework.  While there are at least three separate asynchronous patterns used through the framework, only the latest is directly usable with the new Visual Studio Async CTP.  Before delving into details on the new features, I will talk about existing asynchronous code, and demonstrate how to adapt it for use with the new pattern. The first asynchronous pattern used in the .NET framework was the Asynchronous Programming Model (APM).  This pattern was based around callbacks.  A method is used to start the operation.  It typically is named as BeginSomeOperation.  This method is passed a callback defined as an AsyncCallback, and returns an object that implements IAsyncResult.  Later, the IAsyncResult is used in a call to a method named EndSomeOperation, which blocks until completion and returns the value normally directly returned from the synchronous version of the operation.  Often, the EndSomeOperation call would be called from the callback function passed, which allows you to write code that never blocks. While this pattern works perfectly to prevent blocking, it can make quite confusing code, and be difficult to implement.  For example, the sample code provided for FileStream’s BeginRead/EndRead methods is not simple to understand.  In addition, implementing your own asynchronous methods requires creating an entire class just to implement the IAsyncResult. Given the complexity of the APM, other options have been introduced in later versions of the framework.  The next major pattern introduced was the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern (EAP).  This provides a simpler pattern for asynchronous operations.  It works by providing a method typically named SomeOperationAsync, which signals its completion via an event typically named SomeOperationCompleted. The EAP provides a simpler model for asynchronous programming.  It is much easier to understand and use, and far simpler to implement.  Instead of requiring a custom class and callbacks, the standard event mechanism in C# is used directly.  For example, the WebClient class uses this extensively.  A method is used, such as DownloadDataAsync, and the results are returned via the DownloadDataCompleted event. While the EAP is far simpler to understand and use than the APM, it is still not ideal.  By separating your code into method calls and event handlers, the logic of your program gets more complex.  It also typically loses the ability to block until the result is received, which is often useful.  Blocking often requires writing the code to block by hand, which is error prone and adds complexity. As a result, .NET 4 introduced a third major pattern for asynchronous programming.  The Task<T> class introduced a new, simpler concept for asynchrony.  Task and Task<T> effectively represent an operation that will complete at some point in the future.  This is a perfect model for thinking about asynchronous code, and is the preferred model for all new code going forward.  Task and Task<T> provide all of the advantages of both the APM and the EAP models – you have the ability to block on results (via Task.Wait() or Task<T>.Result), and you can stay completely asynchronous via the use of Task Continuations.  In addition, the Task class provides a new model for task composition and error and cancelation handling.  This is a far superior option to the previous asynchronous patterns. The Visual Studio Async CTP extends the Task based asynchronous model, allowing it to be used in a much simpler manner.  However, it requires the use of Task and Task<T> for all operations.

    Read the article

  • Asynchronous HTTP Client for Java

    - by helifreak
    As a relative newbie in the Java world, I am finding many things frustratingly obtuse to accomplish that are relatively trivial in many other frameworks. A primary example is a simple solution for asynchronous http requests. Seeing as one doesn't seem to already exist, what is the best approach? Creating my own threads using a blocking type lib like httpclient or the built-in java http stuff, or should I use the newer non-blocking io java stuff - it seems particularly complex for something which should be simple. What I am looking for is something easy to use from a developer point of view - something similar to URLLoader in AS3 - where you simply create a URLRequest - attach a bunch of event handlers to handle the completion, errors, progress, etc, and call a method to fire it off. If you are not familiar with URLLoader in AS3, its so super easy and looks something like this: private void getURL(String url) { URLLoader loader = new URLLoader(); loader.addEventListener(Event.Complete, completeHandler); loader.addEventListener(HTTPStatusEvent.HTTP_STATUS, httpStatusHandler); loader.addEventListener(IOErrorEvent.IO_ERROR, ioErrorHandler); URLRequest request = new URLRequest(url); // fire it off - this is asynchronous so we handle // completion with event handlers loader.load(request); } private void completeHandler(Event event) { URLLoader loader = (URLLoader)event.target; Object results = loader.data; // process results } private void httpStatusHandler(Event event) { // check status code } private void ioErrorHandler(Event event) { // handle errors }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >