Search Results

Search found 499 results on 20 pages for 'getters setters'.

Page 8/20 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • When to use identity comparison instead of equals?

    - by maaartinus
    I wonder why would anybody want to use identity comparison for fields in equals, like here (Java syntax): class C { private A a; public boolean equals(Object other) { // standard boring prelude if (other==this) return true; if (other==null) return false; if (other.getClass() != this.getClass()) return false; C c = (C) other; // the relevant part if (c.a != this.a) return false; // more tests... and then return true; } // getter, setters, hashCode, ... } Using == is a bit faster than equals and a bit shorter (due to no need for null tests), too, but in what cases (if any) you'd say it's really better to use == for fields inside equals?

    Read the article

  • Simplifier le code de vos beans Java à l'aide de Commons Lang, Guava et Lombok, par Thierry Leriche-Dessirier

    Bonjour à tous, Je vous propose un article intitulé "Simplifier le code de vos beans Java à l'aide de Commons Lang, Guava et Lombok". Synopsis : Un bean classique, représentant un chien par exemple, peut vite peser des centaines de lignes quand on l'équipe avec les méthodes classiques et indispensables (constructeurs, getters, setters, equals, hashCode, toString, compareTo), même s'il possède peu d'attributs. Dans cet article, nous verrons comment mettre un tel cabot au régime et lui faire une beauté à l'aide de Commons Lang, Guava et Lombok. Nous en profiterons pour comparer ces bibliothèques entre elles et avec le code Java habituel, sans oublier celui qu'Eclipse génère. L'article est disponible ici :

    Read the article

  • Using dot To Access Object Attribute and Proper abstraction

    - by cobie
    I have been programming in python and java for quite a number of years and one thing i find myself doing is using the setters and getters from java in python but a number of blogs seem to think using the dot notation for access is the pythonic way. What I would like to know is if using dot to access methods does not violate abstraction principle. If for example I implement an attribute as a single object and use dot notation to access, if I wanted to change the code later so that the attribute is represented by a list of objects, that would require quite some heavy lifting which violates abstraction principle.

    Read the article

  • Should you document everything or just most?

    - by TheLQ
    It seems a bit of a controversial subject to document everything, including the "JavaBean" syntax of getters and setters for fields: People say its needlessly long and repetitive breaking DRY (don't repeat yourself), that the naming convention should explain everything, and it clutters code/documentation. Sometimes those arguments work. But other times, you end up with this: Above is common to open source projects that do boldly follow those principles. Your left with entirely useless documentation. That doesn't explain anything about whats going on underneath, the possible effects, or even what the expected value is (could it be null or never null? I don't know, the Javadoc doesn't tell me). So when should I document? Do I document everything even if it occasionally clutters code? Or do I document nothing since in my eyes its "obvious"?

    Read the article

  • initial Class design: access modifiers and no-arg constructors

    - by yas
    Context: Student working through Class design in personal/side project for Summer. I've never written anything implemented by others or had to maintain code. Trying to maximize encapsulation and imagining what would make code easy to maintain. Concept: Tight/Loose Class design where Tight and Loose refer to access modifiers and constructors. Tight: initially, everything, including setters, is private and a no-arg constructor is not provided (only a full constructor). Loose: not Tight Exceptions: the obvious like toString Reasoning: If code, at the very beginning, is tight, then it should be guaranteed that changes, with respect to access/creation, should never damage existing implementations. The loosening of code happens incrementally and must be thought through, justified, and safe (validated). Benefit: Existing implementing code should not break if changes are made later. Cost: Takes more time to create. Since this is my own thinking, I hope to get feedback as to whether I should push to work this way. Good idea or bad idea?

    Read the article

  • How to name setter that does data conversion?

    - by IAdapter
    I'm struggling with how to name this method, I don't like the "set" prefix, because I feel it should be reserved for normal "dumb" setters and some tools might not like it (i did not check it in checkstyle, pmd, etc., but I got a feeling they won't like it.) for example (in java, but I feel its language agnostic) public void setActionListenerClicked(boolean actionListenerClicked) { this.actionListenerClicked = actionListenerClicked ? "1" : "0"; } The only purpose of this method is ONLY to set, this method is needed and cannot be joined with any other (because of framework used). P.S. I DO know that question is similar to How to name multi-setter?, but I feel its not the same question.

    Read the article

  • If a variable has getter and setter, should it be public?

    - by Oni
    I am an about to graduate Computer Science student so probably this is a stupid question. If I have a class with a variable that is private and the class have getter and setter for that variable. Why don't make that variable public? The only case I think you have to use getters and setters is if you need to do some operation besides the set or the get. Example: void my_class::set_variable(int x){ /* Some operation like updating a log */ this->variable = x; } Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How to name multi-setter?

    - by IAdapter
    I'm struggling with how to name this method, I don't like the "set" prefix, because I feel it should be reserved for normal "dumb" setters and some tools might not like it (i did not check it in checkstyle, pmd, etc., but I got a feeling they won't like it.) for example (in java, but I feel its language agnostic) public void setField1Field2(String field1, String field2) { this.field1 = field1; this.field2 = field2; } The only purpose of this method is ONLY to set, this method is needed and cannot be joined with any other (because of framework used).

    Read the article

  • best practice for initializing class members in php

    - by rgvcorley
    I have lots of code like this in my constructors:- function __construct($params) { $this->property = isset($params['property']) ? $params['property'] : default_val; } Is it better to do this rather than specify the default value in the property definition? i.e. public $property = default_val? Sometimes there is logic for the default value, and some default values are taken from other properties, which was why I was doing this in the constructor. Should I be using setters so all the logic for default values is separated?

    Read the article

  • Java Extends value not updating

    - by James116
    I am currently working on a hibernate project(EJB and JSF), and i have multiple java classes. The data of parent is being change in the front end with JSF, however, it is not updating in the child class. Any idea as to what could be causing this? This is what i was doing. public class parent{ private String x = "UNKNOWN"; //Getters and setters public getX(){ } } public class child extends parent{ public string y{ //this is return UNKNOWN //instead of the new value being change by the user System.out.print(getX()); } } Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • WPF DataGrid binding to UserControl

    - by Trindaz
    I have a DataGrid with one column using a UserControl via a styled DataGridTemplateColumn. I can't seem to get the UserControl to 'see' the object that is in it's containing DataGridCell though. What kind of bindings can I create on the TextBox in my UserControl so that it can look up and see that object?! My UserControl and TemplateColumn Style are defined as: <Window.Resources> <local:UCTest x:Key="UCTest" /> <Style x:Key="TestStyle" TargetType="{x:Type WpfToolkit:DataGridCell}"> <Style.Setters> <Setter Property="Template"> <Setter.Value> <ControlTemplate TargetType="{x:Type WpfToolkit:DataGridCell}"> <Grid Background="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource TemplatedParent}, Converter={StaticResource drc}, Path=DataContext}"> <Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <ColumnDefinition/> <ColumnDefinition/> </Grid.ColumnDefinitions> <local:UCTest /> </Grid> </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> </Setter> </Style.Setters> </Style> </Window.Resources> and my sample DataGrid is defined as: <WpfToolkit:DataGrid Name="dgSampleData" ItemsSource="{Binding}" AutoGenerateColumns="True" Margin="0,75,0,0"> <WpfToolkit:DataGrid.Columns> <WpfToolkit:DataGridTemplateColumn Header="Col2" CellStyle="{StaticResource TestStyle}" /> </WpfToolkit:DataGrid.Columns> </WpfToolkit:DataGrid> and my User Control is defined in a separate file as: <UserControl x:Class="UCTest" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:local="clr-namespace:WpfApplication1" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" Width="104" Height="51"> <UserControl.Resources> <local:DataRowConverter x:Key="drc" /> </UserControl.Resources> <Grid> <TextBox Margin="12,12,-155,16" Name="TextBox1" Text="" /> </Grid> EDIT: My implementation of TestClass, which has the Test Property, which I want UCTest.TextBox1 to bind do: Public Class TestClass Private _Test As String = "Hello World Property!" Public Property Test() As String Get Return _Test End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _Test = value End Set End Property End Class Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • OData EndPoint/DataService Using IEnumerable<IQueryable>

    - by Elijah Glover
    I am using NHibernate with NHibernate.Linq, and have a bunch of dynamically loading modules each with their own POCO's and Mappings (ClassMap<POCO). I have created OData services before, but normally with a datacontext and IQueryable as Properties/Getters. What I want is to create the service by passing in IEnumerable, into the constructor IEnumerable<IQueryable>> queryableObjects; var dataService = new DataService(queryableObjects); Is this at all possible?

    Read the article

  • WPF Styles Button MouseOver Question.

    - by SO give me back my rep
    Hi, I am trying to make a simple mouseover effect on a button, It does change the color when mouse is over but the color is immediately changed to the default button background... how can I override this behavior? this is my code: Style myBtnStyle = new Style(); Trigger bla = new Trigger() { Property = IsMouseOverProperty, Value = true }; bla.Setters.Add(new Setter(Control.BackgroundProperty, Brushes.Black)); myBtnStyle.Triggers.Add(bla); button2.Style = myBtnStyle;

    Read the article

  • JavaBeans and DSLs

    - by Aaron Digulla
    It's 2009 and we still all hold on the JavaBeans despite all their flaws, mostly because of the tooling support which we wrote in our own blood. But now we have method chaining and internal DSLs and some pressure to replace or extend JavaBeans with DSL classes. Has anyone an implementation that implements PropertyDescriptor for a DSL (where the getters and setter use the exact same name as the property) and a way to hook that into the Java RT so I don't need to create them all by myself?

    Read the article

  • Best way to define an immutable class in Objective C

    - by Patrick Marty
    Hi, I am a newbie in Objective C and I was wondering what is the best way to define an immutable class in Objective-C (like NSString for example). I want to know what are the basic rules one has to follow to make a class immutable. I think that : setters shouldn't be provided if properties are used, they should be readonly accessInstanceVariablesDirectly must be override and return NO Did I forget something ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • What are the disadvantages to declaring Scala case classes?

    - by Graham Lea
    If you're writing code that's using lots of beautiful, immutable data structures, case classes appear to be a godsend, giving you all of the following for free with just one keyword: Everything immutable by default Getters automatically defined Decent toString() implementation Compliant equals() and hashCode() Companion object with unapply() method for matching But what are the disadvantages of defining an immutable data structure as a case class? What restrictions does it place on the class or its clients? Are there situations where you should prefer a non-case class?

    Read the article

  • programming logic and design pleas friends i need a flowcharts or pseudocode

    - by alex
    ***the midvile park maintains records containing info about players on it's soccer teams . each record contain a players first name,last name,and team number . the team are team number team name 1 goal getters 2 the force 3 top gun 4 shooting stars 5 midfield monsters design a proggram that accept player data and creates a report that lists each** player a long with his or her team number and team name**

    Read the article

  • Can't override a global WPF style that is set by TargetType on a single specific control

    - by Matt H.
    I have a style applied to all my textboxes, defined in a resource dictionary.. <Style TargetType="TextBlock"> <Setter Property="TextBlock.FontSize" Value="{Binding Source={StaticResource ApplicationUserSettings}, Path=fontSize, Mode=OneWay}" /> <Setter Property="TextBlock.TextWrapping" Value="Wrap" /> <Setter Property="TextBlock.VerticalAlignment" Value="Center"/> <Setter Property="Background" Value="Transparent"/> <Setter Property="TextBox.FontFamily" Value="{Binding Source={StaticResource ApplicationUserSettings}, Path=fontName, Mode=OneWay}"/> </Style>\ The fontsize and fontstyle properties are bound to a special user settings class that implements iNotifyPropertyChanged, which allows changes to font size and fontfamily to immediately propogate throughout my application. However, in a UserControl I've created (Ironically, the screen that allows the user to customize their font settings), I want the font size and fontfamily to remain static. No matter what I try, my global font settings override what I set in my user control: <UserControl x:Class="ctlUserSettings" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:local="clr-namespace:R2D2" Height="400" Width="600"> <Grid> <Grid.Resources> <Style x:Key="tbxStyle" TargetType="TextBox"> <Style.Setters> <Setter Property="FontSize" Value="14"/> <Setter Property="FontFamily" Value="Tahoma"/> </Style.Setters> </Style> ... etc... <StackPanel Margin="139,122.943,41,0" Orientation="Horizontal" Height="33" VerticalAlignment="Top"> <TextBox Style="{x:Null}" FontSize="13" FontFamily="Tahoma" HorizontalAlignment="Left" MaxWidth="500" MinWidth="350" Name="txtReaderPath" Height="Auto" VerticalAlignment="Top" /> <TextBox Style="{x:tbxStyle}" Margin="15,0,0,0" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Name="txtPath" Width="43" Height="23" VerticalAlignment="Top">(some text)</Button> </StackPanel> I've tried setting Style to {x:Null}, setting custom font sizes inline, and setting a style in the resources of this control. None take precedence over the styles in my resource dictionary. As you can see, I show a sprinkling of all the things I've tried in the XAML sample above... What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • eclemma - how to ignore source

    - by hba
    Hi, I'm using junit/eclemma; it works great, except I'd like to instruct eclemma to ignore certain methods or classes. For example, how would i instruct eclemma to ignore getters/setters. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Spring validation errors not displayed

    - by Art Vandelay
    I have the following situation. I have a validator to validate my command object and set the errors on a Errors object to be displayed in my form. The validator is invoked as expected and works okay, but the errors i set on the Errors objects are not displayed, when i am sent back to my form because of the validation errors. Validator: public void validate(Object obj, Errors err) { MyCommand myCommand = (MyCommand) obj; int index = 0; for (Field field : myCommand.getFields()) { if (field.isChecked()) { if ((field.getValue() == null) || (field.getValue().equals(""))) { err.rejectValue("fields[" + index + "].value", "errors.missing"); } } index++; } if (myCommand.getLimit() < 0) { err.rejectValue("limit", "errors.invalid"); } } Command: public class MyCommand { private List<Field> fields; private int limit; //getters and setters } public class Field { private boolean checked; private String name; private String value; //getters and setters } Form: <form:form id="myForm" method="POST" action="${url}" commandName="myCommand"> <c:forEach items="${myCommand.fields}" var="field" varStatus="status"> <form:checkbox path="fields[${status.index}].checked" value="${field.checked}" /> <c:out value="${field.name}" /> <form:input path="fields[${status.index}].value" /> <form:errors path="fields[${status.index}].value" cssClass="error" /></td> <form:hidden path="fields[${status.index}].name" /> </c:forEach> <fmt:message key="label.limit" /> <form:input path="limit" /> <form:errors path="limit" cssClass="error" /> </form:form> Controller: @RequestMapping(value = REQ_MAPPING, method = RequestMethod.POST) public String onSubmit(Model model, MyCommand myCommand, BindingResult result) { // validate myCommandValidator.validate(myCommand, result); if (result.hasErrors()) { model.addAttribute("myCommand", myCommand); return VIEW; } // form is okay, do stuff and redirect } Could it be that the paths i give in the validator and tag are not correct? The validator validates a command object containing a list of objects, so that's why i give a index on the list in the command object when registering an error message (for example: "fields["+index+"]".value). Or is it that the Errors object containing the errors is not available to my view? Any help is welcome and appreciated, it might give me a hint or point me in right direction.

    Read the article

  • Passing pointer position to an object in Java.

    - by Gabriel A. Zorrilla
    I've got a JPanel class called Board with a static subclass, MouseHanlder, which tracks the mouse position along the appropriate listener in Board. My Board class has fields pointerX and pointerY. How do i pass the e.getX() and e.getY() from the MouseHandler subclass to its super class JPanel? I tried with getters, setters, super, and cant get the data transfer between subclass and parent class. I'm certain it's a concept issue, but im stuck. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • .NET WinForms INotifyPropertyChanged updates all bindings when one is changed. Better way?

    - by Dave Welling
    In a windows forms application, a property change that triggers INotifyPropertyChanged, will result in the form reading EVERY property from my bound object, not just the property changed. (See example code below) This seems absurdly wasteful since the interface requires the name of the changing property. It is causing a lot of clocking in my app because some of the property getters require calculations to be performed. I'll likely need to implement some sort of logic in my getters to discard the unnecessary reads if there is no better way to do this. Am I missing something? Is there a better way? Don't say to use a different presentation technology please -- I am doing this on Windows Mobile (although the behavior happens on the full framework as well). Here's some toy code to demonstrate the problem. Clicking the button will result in BOTH textboxes being populated even though one property has changed. using System; using System.ComponentModel; using System.Drawing; using System.Windows.Forms; namespace Example { public class ExView : Form { private Presenter _presenter = new Presenter(); public ExView() { this.MinimizeBox = false; TextBox txt1 = new TextBox(); txt1.Parent = this; txt1.Location = new Point(1, 1); txt1.Width = this.ClientSize.Width - 10; txt1.DataBindings.Add("Text", _presenter, "SomeText1"); TextBox txt2 = new TextBox(); txt2.Parent = this; txt2.Location = new Point(1, 40); txt2.Width = this.ClientSize.Width - 10; txt2.DataBindings.Add("Text", _presenter, "SomeText2"); Button but = new Button(); but.Parent = this; but.Location = new Point(1, 80); but.Click +=new EventHandler(but_Click); } void but_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { _presenter.SomeText1 = "some text 1"; } } public class Presenter : INotifyPropertyChanged { public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged; private string _SomeText1 = string.Empty; public string SomeText1 { get { return _SomeText1; } set { _SomeText1 = value; _SomeText2 = value; // <-- To demonstrate that both properties are read OnPropertyChanged("SomeText1"); } } private string _SomeText2 = string.Empty; public string SomeText2 { get { return _SomeText2; } set { _SomeText2 = value; OnPropertyChanged("SomeText2"); } } private void OnPropertyChanged(string PropertyName) { PropertyChangedEventHandler temp = PropertyChanged; if (temp != null) { temp(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(PropertyName)); } } } }

    Read the article

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