Search Results

Search found 1824 results on 73 pages for 'weakly typed'.

Page 8/73 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • saving a records containing a member of type string to a file (Delphi, Windows)

    - by wonderer
    I have a record that looks similar to: type TNote = record Title : string; Note : string; Index : integer; end; Simple. The reason I chose to set the variables as string (as opposed to an array of chars) is that I have no idea how long those strings are going to be. They can be 1 char long, 200 or 2000. Of course when I try to save the record to a type file (file of...) the compiler complains that I have to give a size to string. Is there a way to overcome this? or a way to save those records to an untyped file and still maintain a sort of searchable way? Please do not point me to possible solutions, if you know the solution please post code. Thank you

    Read the article

  • Which statically typed languages support intersection types for function return values?

    - by stakx
    Initial note: This question got closed after several edits because I lacked the proper terminology to state accurately what I was looking for. Sam Tobin-Hochstadt then posted a comment which made me recognise exactly what that was: programming languages that support intersection types for function return values. Now that the question has been re-opened, I've decided to improve it by rewriting it in a (hopefully) more precise manner. Therefore, some answers and comments below might no longer make sense because they refer to previous edits. (Please see the question's edit history in such cases.) Are there any popular statically & strongly typed programming languages (such as Haskell, generic Java, C#, F#, etc.) that support intersection types for function return values? If so, which, and how? (If I'm honest, I would really love to see someone demonstrate a way how to express intersection types in a mainstream language such as C# or Java.) I'll give a quick example of what intersection types might look like, using some pseudocode similar to C#: interface IX { … } interface IY { … } interface IB { … } class A : IX, IY { … } class B : IX, IY, IB { … } T fn() where T : IX, IY { return … ? new A() : new B(); } That is, the function fn returns an instance of some type T, of which the caller knows only that it implements interfaces IX and IY. (That is, unlike with generics, the caller doesn't get to choose the concrete type of T — the function does. From this I would suppose that T is in fact not a universal type, but an existential type.) P.S.: I'm aware that one could simply define a interface IXY : IX, IY and change the return type of fn to IXY. However, that is not really the same thing, because often you cannot bolt on an additional interface IXY to a previously defined type A which only implements IX and IY separately. Footnote: Some resources about intersection types: Wikipedia article for "Type system" has a subsection about intersection types. Report by Benjamin C. Pierce (1991), "Programming With Intersection Types, Union Types, and Polymorphism" David P. Cunningham (2005), "Intersection types in practice", which contains a case study about the Forsythe language, which is mentioned in the Wikipedia article. A Stack Overflow question, "Union types and intersection types" which got several good answers, among them this one which gives a pseudocode example of intersection types similar to mine above.

    Read the article

  • How do you preserve the viewstate while using strongly typed views in asp MVC 2?

    - by Mark Kadlec
    I have an ActionResult returning from a strongly typed view where I manually validate some conditions, pass in an error message, but would like to preserve the users responses. Since my View is strongly typed, I am calling it like this: return View("PrincipalInvestigatorForm", new SmartFormViewModel(sections, questions)); My problem though, is that the error message is displayed but all the users data is wiped. How do I preserve the "ViewState" in MVC? Is there an easy way?

    Read the article

  • Capture text typed by user on website and allow user to email a link to someone else so that they can view the message [on hold]

    - by Dano007
    Using the following html, css,jquery, js, what would be the best approach to achieving this. A visitor hits the website. The website page is displaying html and a css3 animation. The visitor is given the option to enter text freely into a text box, they enter an email address and hit send. The person receiving the message gets an email with a link, when they click the link it takes them to the webpage with the animation and the custom message their friend entered. Is this easy to achieve, what would be the best approach? anyone know of existing code I could use? Thanks

    Read the article

  • when i merge a data table with a typed dataset, one single field on a single row is DBNull sometimes

    - by benj007
    Hi everybody, I have a strange problem sometimes when I try to merge a data table with a typed dataset my data table is filled in with a stored procedure and when I checked the content of this table it is ok, everything is in there straight after I merge it with my core typed dataset like this : MyTypedDataSet.TheTable.Clear(); MyTypedDataSet.TheTable.Merge(MyDataTable); and now if i check the table in the dataset everything is ok except only one single field on one single row which is DBNull, that makes no sense because the source data table contains the good integer vaue. Thanks a lot in advance guys :)

    Read the article

  • iPhone SDK: How to store the time each word was typed?

    - by Harkonian
    My problem is twofold: 1) I'm trying to determine an eloquent way to allow the user to type into a UITextView and store the time each word was typed into an array. The time will be a float which starts at 0 when the user begins to type. 2) Conversely, I'd like the user to be able to tap on a word in the UITextView and display the time that word was typed (displaying in an NSLog() is fine). Considerations that may throw a wrench into a possible approach -- what if the user goes back to the top of the text and starts typing or to the middle of the text? Even a suggested approach without code would be appreciated, because right now I'm drawing a blank.

    Read the article

  • Typed DataSet connection - required to have one in the .xsd file?

    - by Kyralessa
    In the .xsd file for a typed DataSet in .NET, there's a <Connections> section that contains a list of any data connections I've used to set up the DataTables and TableAdapters. There are times when I'd prefer not to have those there. For instance, sometimes I prefer to pass in a connection string to a custom constructor and use that rather than look for one in settings, .config, etc. But it seems like if I remove the connection strings from that section (leaving it empty), or remove the section entirely, the DataSet code-generation tool freaks out. Whereas if I don't remove them, the DataSet gripes when I put it in a different project because it can't find the settings for those connection strings. Is there any way I can tell a typed DataSet not to worry about any connections? (Obviously I'll have to give it a connection if I change any TableAdapter SQL or stored procs, but that should be my problem.)

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 - How do I use an Interface as the Type for a Strongly Typed View

    - by Rake36
    I'd like to keep my concrete classes separate from my views. Without using strongly typed views, I'm fine. I just use a big parameter list in the controller method signatures and then use my service layer factory methods to create my concrete objects. This is actually just fine with me, but it got me thinking and after a little playing, I realized it was literally impossible for a controller method to accept an interface as a method parameter - because it has no way of instantiating it. Can't create a strongly-typed view using an interface through the IDE either (which makes sense actually). So my question. Is there some way to tell the controller how to instantiate the interface parameter using my service layer factory methods? I'd like to convert from: [Authorize] [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] [UrlRoute(Path = "Application/Edit/{id}")] public ActionResult Edit(String id, String TypeCode, String TimeCode, String[] SelectedSchoolSystems, String PositionChoice1, String PositionChoice2, String PositionChoice3, String Reason, String LocationPreference, String AvailableDate, String RecipientsNotSelected, String RecipientsSelected) { //New blank app IApplication _application = ApplicationService.GetById(id); to something like [Authorize] [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] [UrlRoute(Path = "Application/Edit/{id}")] public ActionResult Edit(String id, IApplication app) { //Don't need to do this anymore //IApplication _application = ApplicationService.GetById(id);

    Read the article

  • Is this way of storing typed objects in memory good?

    - by Pindatjuh
    This is an "is this okay, or can it be done better" question. Topic: Storing typed objects in memory. Background information: I'm building a compiler for the x86-32 platform for my language. My goal includes typed objects. Idea: Every primitive is a semi-class (it can be used as if it was a normal class, but it's stored more compact). Every class is represented by primitives and some meta-data (containing class-properties, inheritance stuff, etc.). The meta-data is complex: it doesn't use fields but instead context-switches. For primitives, the meta-data is very small, compared to a "real" class, which is alot bigger. This enables another idea that "primitives are objects", in my language, which I found nessecairy. Example: If I have an array of 32 booleans, then the pure content of this array is exactly 4 byte (32 bits of booleans). The meta-data will contain flags that the type is an array of booleans, which contains 32 entries. The meta-data is very compacted, on bit-level: using a sort of "packing" mechanism, which is read by a FSM at runtime, when doing inspection of the type (like when passing the object to methods for checking, etc.) For instance (read from left to right, top to bottom, remember vertical possition when going to the right, and check nearest column header for meaning of switch): Primitive? Array? Type-Meta 1 Byte? || Size (1 byte) 1 1 [...] 1 [...] done 0 2 Bytes? || Size (2 bytes) 1 [...] done || Size (4 bytes) 0 [...] done Integer? 1 Byte? 2 Bytes? 0 1 0 1 done 1 done 0 done Boolean? Byte? 0 1 0 done 1 done More-Primitives 0 .... Class-Stuff (Huge) 0 ... (After reaching done the data is inserted. || = byte alignement. [...] is variable sized. ... is not described here, for simplicity. And let's call them cost-based-data-structures.) For an array of 32 booleans containing all true values, the memory for this type would be (read top-down): 1 Primitive 1 Array 1 ArrayType: Primitive 0 Not-Array 0 Not-Integer 1 Boolean 0 Not-Byte (thus bit) 1 Integer Size: 1 Byte 00100000 Array size 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 Data Thus, 8 bytes represent 32 booleans in an array: 11100101 00100000 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 Is this okay, or can it be done better?

    Read the article

  • Vim: how to make the text I've just typed uppercase?

    - by Pavel Shved
    Use case: I've just entered insert mode, and typed some text. Now I want to make it uppercase. It can be done via gUmotion. However, I can't find the motion over the text entered in the recent input session. It's somewhat strange and the concept of such motion is buggy (where to move if you've deleted text, for example?), but it may solve my problem. Or, are there other ways of making uppercase the text you've recently inputted?

    Read the article

  • Can this way of storing typed objects be improved?

    - by Pindatjuh
    This is an "can it be improved"-question. Topic: Storing typed objects in memory. Background information: I'm building a compiler for the x86-32 Windows platform for my language. My goal includes typed objects. Idea: Every primitive is a semi-class (it can be used as if it was a normal class, but it's stored more compact). Every class is represented by primitives and some meta-data (containing class-properties, inheritance stuff, etc.). The meta-data is complex: it doesn't use fields but instead context-switches. For primitives, the meta-data is very small, compared to a "real" class, which is alot bigger. This enables another idea that "primitives are objects", in my language, which I found nessecairy. Example: If I have an array of 32 booleans, then the pure content of this array is exactly 4 byte (32 bits of booleans). The meta-data will contain flags that the type is an array of booleans, which contains 32 entries. The meta-data is very compacted, on bit-level: using a sort of "packing" mechanism, which is read by a FSM at runtime, when doing inspection of the type (like when passing the object to methods for checking, etc.) For instance (read from left to right, top to bottom, remember vertical position when going to the right, and check nearest column header for meaning of switch): Primitive? Array? Type-Meta 1 Byte? || Size (1 byte) 1 1 [...] 1 [...] done 0 2 Bytes? || Size (2 bytes) 1 [...] done || Size (4 bytes) 0 [...] done Integer? 1 Byte? 2 Bytes? 0 1 0 1 done 1 done 0 done Boolean? Byte? 0 1 0 done 1 done More-Primitives 0 .... Class-Stuff (Huge) 0 ... (After reaching done the data is inserted. || = byte alignment. [...] is variable sized. ... is not described here, for simplicity. And let's call them cost-based-data-structures.) For an array of 32 booleans containing all true values, the memory for this type would be (read top-down): 1 Primitive 1 Array 1 ArrayType: Primitive 0 Not-Array 0 Not-Integer 1 Boolean 0 Not-Byte (thus bit) 1 Integer Size: 1 Byte 00100000 Array size 01010101 01010101 01010101 01010101 Data (user defined) Thus, 8 bytes represent 32 booleans in an array: 11100101 00100000 01010101 01010101 01010101 01010101 How can I improve this? (Both performance- and memory-consumption wise)

    Read the article

  • Typed Arrays in Gecko 2: Float32Array concatenation and expansion.

    - by janesconference
    Hi all, I'm a bit confused with Javascript Typed Arrays. What I have several *Float32Array*s, that have no concat method. I'd like to concatenate them all inside another Float32Array, but: as I said before, there is no concatenation method if I try to write past the array length, the array is not expanded (aka this won't work - please note that event.frameBuffer and buffer are both Float32Array and that I don't know what the final length of my buffer will be): var length_now = buffer.length; for (var i = 0; i < event.frameBuffer.length; i += 1) { buffer [length_now + i] = event.frameBuffer[i]; } The only solution I found is to copy the Float32Array in a regular array, that's definitely not what I want. How would you do, stackoverflowers?

    Read the article

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