Search Results

Search found 2390 results on 96 pages for 'concrete inheritance'.

Page 86/96 | < Previous Page | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >

  • How to replace auto-implemented c# get body at runtime or compile time?

    - by qstarin
    I've been trying to figure this out all night, but I guess my knowledge of the .Net Framework just isn't that deep and the problem doesn't exactly Google well, but if I can get a nod in the right direction I'm sure I can implement it, one way or another. I'd like to be able to declare a property decorated with a custom attribute as such: public MyClass { [ReplaceWithExpressionFrom(typeof(SomeOtherClass))] public virtual bool MyProperty { get; } } public SomeOtherClass : IExpressionHolder<MyClass, bool> { ... } public interface IExpressionHolder<TArg, TResult> { Expression<Func<TArg, TResult>> Expression { get; } } And then somehow - this is the part I'm having trouble figuring - replace the automatically generated implementation of that getter with a piece of custom code, something like: Type expressionHolderType = LookupAttributeCtorArgTypeInDeclarationOfPropertyWereReplacing(); return ReplaceWithExpressionFromAttribute.GetCompiledExpressionFrom(expressionHolderType)(this); The main thing I'm not sure how to do is replace the automatic implementation of the get. The first thing that came to mind was PostSharp, but that's a more complicated dependency than I care for. I'd much prefer a way to code it without using post-processing attached to the build (I think that's the jist of how PostSharp sinks its hooks in anyway). The other part of this I'm not so sure about is how to retrieve the type parameter passed to the particular instantiation of the ReplaceWithExpressionFrom attribute (where it decorates the property whose body I want to replace; in other words, how do I get typeof(SomeOtherClass) where I'm coding the get body replacement). I plan to cache compiled expressions from concrete instances of IExpressionHolder, as I don't want to do that every time the property gets retrieved. I figure this has just got to be possible. At the very least I figure I should be able to search an assembly for any method decorated with the attribute and somehow proxy the class or just replace the IL or .. something? And I'd like to make the integration as smooth as possible, so if this can be done without explicitly calling a registration or initialization method somewhere that'd be super great. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • C# WCF and Object Inheritence

    - by Michael Edwards
    I have the following setup of two classes: [SerializableAttribute] public class ParentData{ [DataMember] public string Title{get;set;} } [DataContract] public class ChildData : ParentData{ [DataMember] public string Abstract{get;set;} } These two classes are served through a WCF service. However I only want the service to expose the ChildData class to the end user but pull the marked up DataMember properties from the parent. E.g. The consuming client would have a stub class that looked like: public class ChildData{ public string Title{get;set;} public string Abstract{get;set;} } If I uses the parent and child classes as above the stub class only contains the Abstract property. I have looked at using the KnownType attribute on the ChildData class like so: [DataContract] [KnownType(typeOf(ParentData)] public class ChildData : ParentData{ [DataMember] public string Abstract{get;set;} } However this didn't work. I then applied the DataContract attribute to the ParentData class, however this then creates two stub classes in the client application which I don't want. Is there any way to tell the serializer that it should flatten the inheritance to that of the sub-class i.e. ChildData

    Read the article

  • Why Is the sender type null when dealing with events

    - by ChloeRadshaw
    From C# Via CLR: Note A lot of people wonder why the event pattern requires the sender parameter to always be of type Object After all, since the MailManager will be the only type raising an event with a NewMail EventArgs object, it makes more sense for the callback method to be prototyped like this: void MethodName(Mai l Manager sender, NewMail EventArgs e); The pattern requires the sender parameter to be of type Object mostly because of inheritance What if Mai lManager were used as a base class for SmtpMailManager? In this case, the callback method should have the sender parameter prototyped as SmtpMailManager instead of Mail Manager, but this can’t happen because SmtpMai lManager just inherited the NewMai l event So the code that was expecting SmtpMail Manager to raise the event must still have to cast the sender argument to SmtpMailManager In other words, the cast is still required, so the sender parameter might as well be typed as Obj ect The next reason for typing the sender parameter as Obj ect is just fexibility It allows the delegate to be used by multiple types that offer an event that passes a NewMail EventArgs object For example, a PopMai lManager class could use the delegate even if this class were not derived from Mail Manager I just simply cannot understand why the sender is an object - Why can it not be generified? so most of the time we do not need to do generic casts

    Read the article

  • Need help mocking a ASP.NET Controller in RhinoMocks

    - by Pure.Krome
    Hi folks, I'm trying to mock up a fake ASP.NET Controller. I don't have any concrete controllers, so I was hoping to just mock a Controller and it will work. This is what I have, currently. _fakeRequestBase = MockRepository.GenerateMock<HttpRequestBase>(); _fakeRequestBase.Stub(x => x.HttpMethod).Return("GET"); _fakeContextBase = MockRepository.GenerateMock<HttpContextBase>(); _fakeContextBase.Stub(x => x.Request).Return(_fakeRequestBase); var controllerContext = new ControllerContext(_fakeContextBase, new RouteData(), MockRepository.GenerateMock<ControllerBase>()); _fakeController = MockRepository.GenerateMock<Controller>(); _fakeController.Stub(x => x.ControllerContext).Return(controllerContext); Everything works except the last line, which throws a runtime error and is asking me for some Rhino.Mocks source code or something (which I don't have). See how I'm trying to mock up an abstract Controller - is that allowed? Can someone help me?

    Read the article

  • multiple models in Rails with a shared interface

    - by dfondente
    I'm not sure of the best structure for a particular situation in Rails. We have several types of workshops. The administration of the workshops is the same regardless of workshop type, so the data for the workshops is in a single model. We collect feedback from participants about the workshops, and the questionnaire is different for each type of workshop. I want to access the feedback about the workshop from the workshop model, but the class of the associated model will depend on the type of workshop. If I was doing this in something other than Rails, I would set up an abstract class for WorkshopFeedback, and then have subclasses for each type of workshop: WorkshopFeedbackOne, WorkshopFeedbackTwo, WorkshopFeedbackThree. I'm unsure how to best handle this with Rails. I currently have: class Workshop < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :workshop_feedbacks end class Feedback < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :workshop has_many :feedback_ones has_many :feedback_twos has_many :feedback_threes end class FeedbackOne < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end class FeedbackTwo < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end class FeedbackThree < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :feedback end This doesn't seem like to the cleanest way to access the feedback from the workshop model, as accessing the correct feedback will require logic investigating the Workshop type and then choosing, for instance, @workshop.feedback.feedback_one. Is there a better way to handle this situation? Would it be better to use a polymorphic association for feedback? Or maybe using a Module or Mixin for the shared Feedback interface? Note: I am avoiding using Single Table Inheritance here because the FeedbackOne, FeedbackTwo, FeedbackThree models do not share much common data, so I would end up with a large sparsely populated table with STI.

    Read the article

  • Writing my own implementation of stl-like Iterator in C++.

    - by Negai
    Good evening everybody, I'm currently trying to understand the intrinsics of iterators in various languages i.e. the way they are implemented. For example, there is the following class exposing the list interface. template<class T> class List { public: virtual void Insert( int beforeIndex, const T item ) throw( ListException ) =0 ; virtual void Append( const T item ) =0; virtual T Get( int position ) const throw( ListException ) =0; virtual int GetLength() const =0; virtual void Remove( int position ) throw( ListException ) =0; virtual ~List() =0 {}; }; According to GoF, the best way to implement an iterator that can support different kinds of traversal is to create the base Iterator class (friend of List) with protected methods that can access List's members. The concrete implementations of Iterator will handle the job in different ways and access List's private and protected data through the base interface. From here forth things are getting confusing. Say, I have class LinkedList and ArrayList, both derived from List, and there are also corresponding iterators, each of the classes returns. How can I implement LinkedListIterator? I'm absolutely out of ideas. And what kind of data can the base iterator class retrieve from the List (which is a mere interface, while the implementations of all the derived classes differ significantly) ? Sorry for so much clutter. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Interfaces in Python

    - by Nicholas Mancuso
    I am currently learning python in preperation for a class over the summer and have gotten started by implementing different types of heaps and priority based data structures. I began to write a unit test suite for the project but ran into difficulties into creating a generic unit test that only tests the interface and is oblivious of the actual implementation. I am wondering if it is possible to do something like this.. suite = HeapTestSuite(BinaryHeap()) suite.run() suite = HeapTestSuite(BinomialHeap()) suite.run() What I am currently doing just feels... wrong (multiple inheritance? ACK!).. class TestHeap: def reset_heap(self): self.heap = None def test_insert(self): self.reset_heap() #test that insert doesnt throw an exception... for x in self.inseq: self.heap.insert(x) def test_delete(self): #assert we get the first value we put in self.reset_heap() self.heap.insert(5) self.assertEquals(5, self.heap.delete_min()) #harder test. put in sequence in and check that it comes out right self.reset_heap() for x in self.inseq: self.heap.insert(x) for x in xrange(len(self.inseq)): val = self.heap.delete_min() self.assertEquals(val, x) class BinaryHeapTest(TestHeap, unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.inseq = range(99, -1, -1) self.heap = BinaryHeap() def reset_heap(self): self.heap = BinaryHeap() class BinomialHeapTest(TestHeap, unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.inseq = range(99, -1, -1) self.heap = BinomialHeap() def reset_heap(self): self.heap = BinomialHeap() if __name__ == '__main__': unittest.main()

    Read the article

  • Need some advice on MVC separation..

    - by Zenph
    I should note I am using Zend Framework. Although this shouldn't affect the concrete answer, it does mean there are several places I can implement my following method (action helper, controller etc). The issue is I have buildOptions() and parseOptions() method which takes $_GET/$_POST variables based on a 'tag' and builds rules which are then used in a select query. An example would be ?modelSort=id&modelOrder=asc The 'model' in the above obviously relates to the particular model, and it used as a 'tag' so that I can for example also have model2Sort and model2Order so there is no conflict between parameters. However, the trouble I am having now is where should these methods go? They are generally dealing with request params. I have been reading a lot about fat model, thin controller. Should this be in an abstract model. My thinking was that if it were, I would do something like: (note, I know I wouldn't call directly like this. Method would be used by child classes) $abstractModel-buildOptions($params); Where 'params' could be anything, like the request parameters $_GET or $_POST: $abstractModel-buildOptions($_GET); Now from what I can see the model is not inherintly dealing with request variables but rather parameters passed to the method. Advice? Where does this method belong? Model, Controller? Specifically on Zend, should it be an action helper, plugin, within an abstract model? Appreciate any advice.

    Read the article

  • Can I pass a non-generic type where a generic type is expected?

    - by Water Cooler v2
    I want to define a set of classes that collect and persist data. I want to call them either on-demand basis, or in a chain-of-responsibility fashion, as the caller pleases. To support the chaining, I have declared my interface like so: interface IDataManager<T, K> { T GetData(K args); void WriteData(Stream stream); void WriteData(T data, Stream stream); IDataCollectionPolicy Policy; IDataManager<T, K> NextDataManager; } But the T's and K's for each concrete types will be different. If I give it like this: IDataManager<T, K> NextDataManager; I assume that the calling code will only be able to chain types that have the same T's and K's. Is there a way I can have it chain any type of IDataManager? One thing that occurs to me is to have IDataManager inherit from a non-generic IDataManager like so: interface IDataManager { } interface IDataManager<T, K>: IDataManager { T GetData(K args); void WriteData(Stream stream); void WriteData(T data, Stream stream); IDataCollectionPolicy Policy; IDataManager NextDataManager; } Is this going to work?

    Read the article

  • C++ Design Question on template types

    - by user231536
    I have a templated class template <typename T> class MyContainerClass For types to be substituted for T, it has to satisfy many requirements: for example, get_id(), int data(), etc. Obviously none of the fundamental types (PODs) are substitutable. One way I can provide this is via wrappers for the PODs that provide these functions. Is this an acceptable way? Another way would be to change the template to: template < typename T, typename C=traits<T> > class MyContainerClass and inside MyContainerClass, call traits::data() instead of data() on T objects. I will specialize traits<int>, traits<const char *> etc. Is this good design ? How do I design such a traits class (completely static methods or allow for inheritance) ? Or are the wrapper classes a good solution? What other alternatives are there?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for loading multiple message types

    - by lukem00
    As I was looking through SO I came across a question about handling multiple message types. My concern is - how do I load such a message in a neat way? I decided to have a separate class with a method which loads one message each time it's invoked. This method should create a new instance of a concrete message type (say AlphaMessage, BetaMessage, GammaMessage, etc.) and return it as a Message. class MessageLoader { public Message Load() { // ... } } The code inside the method is something which looks really awful to me and I would very much like to refactor it/get rid of it: Message msg = Message.Load(...); // load yourself from whatever source if (msg.Type == MessageType.Alpha) return new AlphaMessage(msg); if (msg.Type == MessageType.Beta) return new BetaMessage(msg); // ... In fact, if the whole design looks just too messy and you guys have a better solution, I'm ready to restructure the whole thing. If my description is too chaotic, please let me know what it's missing and I shall edit the question. Thank you all.

    Read the article

  • How to make 2 incompatible types, but with the same members, interchangeable?

    - by Quigrim
    Yesterday 2 of the guys on our team came to me with an uncommon problem. We are using a third-party component in one of our winforms applications. All the code has already been written against it. They then wanted to incorporate another third-party component, by the same vender, into our application. To their delight they found that the second component had the exact same public members as the first. But to their dismay, the 2 components have completely separate inheritance hierarchies, and implement no common interfaces. Makes you wonder... Well, makes me wonder. An example of the problem: public class ThirdPartyClass1 { public string Name { get { return "ThirdPartyClass1"; } } public void DoThirdPartyStuff () { Console.WriteLine ("ThirdPartyClass1 is doing its thing."); } } public class ThirdPartyClass2 { public string Name { get { return "ThirdPartyClass2"; } } public void DoThirdPartyStuff () { Console.WriteLine ("ThirdPartyClass2 is doing its thing."); } } Gladly they felt copying and pasting the code they wrote for the first component was not the correct answer. So they were thinking of assigning the component instant into an object reference and then modifying the code to do conditional casts after checking what type it was. But that is arguably even uglier than the copy and paste approach. So they then asked me if I can write some reflection code to access the properties and call the methods off the two different object types since we know what they are, and they are exactly the same. But my first thought was that there goes the elegance. I figure there has to be a better, graceful solution to this problem.

    Read the article

  • C++ reinterpret cast ?

    - by Ian
    I would like to cast one object of the class PointsList to another object Points3DList (and vice versa) where: template <class T> class PointsList { protected: std::vector <Point <T> *> points; //Only illustration, not possible with templaes }; and template <class T> class Points3DList { protected: std::vector <Point3D<T> *> points; //Only illustration, not possible with templaes }; Between Point and Point3D there is no relationship (inheritance nor composition)... template <class T> class Point { protected: T x; T y; }; template <class T> class Point3D { protected: T x; T y; T z; }; What do you think about conversion Points3DList <T> *pl3D = new Points3DList <T> (); ... PointsList <T> *pl = reinterpret_cast < PointList <T> * > ( pl3D ); where pl3D represents pointer to Points3DList object.. Can reinterpret_cast be used in this case or it is better to create a conversion function? Data model in this case can not be changed...

    Read the article

  • How to handle single Ajax Error for Entire page using jquery

    - by Thiyagarajan
    In My page i am sending data to server side using 8 ajax call... I don't want to handle ajax error for each and every ajax call...... Single ajax error handle all the ajax error in entire page.... is their any inheritance is possible for the entire page.. function SendConfirmationEmail(ShipmentID, ChannelOrderReference) { var Url = '<%=Url.Action("SendShipmentEmail","Shipments") %>'; $.ajax({ cache: false, type: "POST", data: 'strOrderShipmentId=' + ShipmentID + '&channelOrderReference=' + ChannelOrderReference, url: Url, datatype: "HTML", success: function (data) { if (data == "1") { SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'Email is successfully sent for Order#' + ChannelOrderReference + ''); } if (data == "-2") { SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'Email Template is not Choosen for this Store'); } if (data == "-1") { SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'Problem in Sending Email for Order#' + ChannelOrderReference + ''); } if (data == "0") { SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'Connection Failed to Send Email for Order# ' + ChannelOrderReference + ''); } if (data == "-3") { SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'ShipTo Email Address is Not Given for Order# ' + ChannelOrderReference + ''); } // SucessErrorMessageDisplay('DivStatus', 'lblStatus', 'imgStatus', 0, 'Order# :' + ChannelOrderReference + ' is voided successfully'); }, error: function (xhr, ajaxOptions, thrownError) { if (xhr.status == 403) { window.location.href = '<%: Url.Action( "SessionExpire", "Home" ) %>'; } } }); }

    Read the article

  • Why is Attributes.IsDefined() missing overloads?

    - by Hans Passant
    Inspired by an SO question. The Attribute class has several overloads for the IsDefined() method. Covered are attributes applied to Assembly, Module, MemberInfo, ParameterInfo. The MemberInfo overload covers PropertyInfo, FieldInfo, EventInfo, MethodInfo, ConstructorInfo. That takes care of most of the AttributeTargets. Except for one biggy: there is no overload for Attribute.IsDefined(Type, Type) so that you could check if an attribute is defined on a class. Or a struct, delegate or enum for that matter. Not that this is a real problem, Type.GetCustomAttributes() can fix that. But all of the BlahInfo types have this too. I wonder at the lack of symmetry. I can't put a finger on why this would be problem for Type. Guessing at an inheritance problem doesn't explain it to me. Having ValueType in the mix might be a lead, still doesn't make sense. I don't buy "they forgot", they never do. Why is this overload missing?

    Read the article

  • STLifying C++ classes

    - by shambulator
    I'm trying to write a class which contains several std::vectors as data members, and provides a subset of vector's interface to access them: class Mesh { public: private: std::vector<Vector3> positions; std::vector<Vector3> normals; // Several other members along the same lines }; The main thing you can do with a mesh is add positions, normals and other stuff to it. In order to allow an STL-like way of accessing a Mesh (add from arrays, other containers, etc.), I'm toying with the idea of adding methods like this: public: template<class InIter> void AddNormals(InIter first, InIter last); Problem is, from what I understand of templates, these methods will have to be defined in the header file (seems to make sense; without a concrete iterator type, the compiler doesn't know how to generate object code for the obvious implementation of this method). Is this actually a problem? My gut reaction is not to go around sticking huge chunks of code in header files, but my C++ is a little rusty with not much STL experience outside toy examples, and I'm not sure what "acceptable" C++ coding practice is on this. Is there a better way to expose this functionality while retaining an STL-like generic programming flavour? One way would be something like this: (end list) class RestrictedVector<T> { public: RestrictedVector(std::vector<T> wrapped) : wrapped(wrapped) {} template <class InIter> void Add(InIter first, InIter last) { std::copy(first, last, std::back_insert_iterator(wrapped)); } private: std::vector<T> wrapped; }; and then expose instances of these on Mesh instead, but that's starting to reek a little of overengineering :P Any advice is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Using abstract base to implement private parts of a template class?

    - by StackedCrooked
    When using templates to implement mix-ins (as an alternative to multiple inheritance) there is the problem that all code must be in the header file. I'm thinking of using an abstract base class to get around that problem. Here's a code sample: class Widget { public: virtual ~Widget() {} }; // Abstract base class allows to put code in .cpp file. class AbstractDrawable { public: virtual ~AbstractDrawable() = 0; virtual void draw(); virtual int getMinimumSize() const; }; // Drawable mix-in template<class T> class Drawable : public T, public AbstractDrawable { public: virtual ~Drawable() {} virtual void draw() { AbstractDrawable::draw(); } virtual int getMinimumSize() const { return AbstractDrawable::getMinimumSize(); } }; class Image : public Drawable< Widget > { }; int main() { Image i; i.draw(); return 0; } Has anyone walked that road before? Are there any pitfalls that I should be aware of?

    Read the article

  • Storing C++ templated objects as same type

    - by JaredC
    I have a class that is a core component of a performance sensitive code path, so I am trying to optimize it as much as possible. The class used to be: class Widget { Widget(int n) : N(n) {} .... member functions that use the constant value N .... const int N; // just initialized, will never change } The arguments to the constructor are known at compile time, so I have changed this class to a template, so that N can be compiled into the functions: template<int N> class Widget { .... member functions that use N .... } I have another class with a method: Widget & GetWidget(int index); However, after templating Widget, each widget has a different type so I cannot define the function like this anymore. I considered different inheritance options, but I'm not sure that the performance gain from the template would outweigh the cost of inherited function invocations. SO, my question is this: I am pretty sure I want the best of both worlds (compile-time / run-time), and it may not be possible. But, is there a way to gain the performance of knowing N at compile time, but still being able to return Widgets as the same type? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Action on each method's return value

    - by RobGlynn
    What I'd like to do is take some action using the value returned by every method in a class. So for instance, if I have a class Order which has a method public Customer GetCustomer() { Customer CustomerInstance = // get customer return CustomerInstance; } Let's say I want to log the creation of these - Log(CustomerInstance); My options (AFAIK) are: Call Log() in each of these methods before returning the object. I'm not a fan of this because it gets unwieldy if used on a lot of classes with a lot of methods. It also is not an intrinsic part of the method's purpose. Use composition or inheritance to layer the log callon the Order class similar to: public Customer GetCustomer() { Customer CustomerInstance = this.originalCustomer.GetCustomer(); Log(CustomerInstance); return CustomerInstance; } I don't think this buys me anything over #1. Create extension methods on each of the returned types: Customer CustomerInstance = Order.GetCustomer().Log(); which has just as many downsides. I'm looking to do this for every (or almost every) object returned, automatically if possible, without having to write double the amount of code. I feel like I'm either trying to bend the language into doing something it's not supposed to, or failing to recognize some language feature that would enable this. Possible solutions would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What's the difference between UI development and front-end development?

    - by Nick Lowman
    I'm a front-end developer and really enjoy jQuery and JavaScript. I've built a lot a websites, done some good jQuery work and built a few JavaScript based applications and would really like to get in UI development. Or so I thought. I guessed it would be pretty similar to what I already do except maybe a little more JavaScript heavy but when I looked into it all the job specs said I needed to know about Scrum or Agile development, knowledge of testing frameworks and a good knowledge of JavaScript frameworks and custom events. So, from the specs I get the idea that a UI developer is actually a dedicated JavaScript developer. Is that the case? I understand (with much help from the users on stackoverflow), about JavaScript OO, inheritance, closures, custom events, debugging in Firefox or Aptana etc, and the people I work with seem to think I pretty OK at what I do but clearly my knowledge is not good enough to go for UI jobs. If anyone could tell me a little more about UI development and if there are any good resources for learning about it I would be most grateful as I couldn't find much on the internet.

    Read the article

  • Python "callable" attribute (pseudo-property)

    - by mgilson
    In python, I can alter the state of an instance by directly assigning to attributes, or by making method calls which alter the state of the attributes: foo.thing = 'baz' or: foo.thing('baz') Is there a nice way to create a class which would accept both of the above forms which scales to large numbers of attributes that behave this way? (Shortly, I'll show an example of an implementation that I don't particularly like.) If you're thinking that this is a stupid API, let me know, but perhaps a more concrete example is in order. Say I have a Document class. Document could have an attribute title. However, title may want to have some state as well (font,fontsize,justification,...), but the average user might be happy enough just setting the title to a string and being done with it ... One way to accomplish this would be to: class Title(object): def __init__(self,text,font='times',size=12): self.text = text self.font = font self.size = size def __call__(self,*text,**kwargs): if(text): self.text = text[0] for k,v in kwargs.items(): setattr(self,k,v) def __str__(self): return '<title font={font}, size={size}>{text}</title>'.format(text=self.text,size=self.size,font=self.font) class Document(object): _special_attr = set(['title']) def __setattr__(self,k,v): if k in self._special_attr and hasattr(self,k): getattr(self,k)(v) else: object.__setattr__(self,k,v) def __init__(self,text="",title=""): self.title = Title(title) self.text = text def __str__(self): return str(self.title)+'<body>'+self.text+'</body>' Now I can use this as follows: doc = Document() doc.title = "Hello World" print (str(doc)) doc.title("Goodbye World",font="Helvetica") print (str(doc)) This implementation seems a little messy though (with __special_attr). Maybe that's because this is a messed up API. I'm not sure. Is there a better way to do this? Or did I leave the beaten path a little too far on this one? I realize I could use @property for this as well, but that wouldn't scale well at all if I had more than just one attribute which is to behave this way -- I'd need to write a getter and setter for each, yuck.

    Read the article

  • NHibernate: Using value tables for optimization AND dynamic join

    - by Kostya
    Hi all, My situation is next: there are to entities with many-to-many relation, f.e. Products and Categories. Also, categories has hierachial structure, like a tree. There is need to select all products that depends to some concrete category with all its childs (branch). So, I use following sql statement to do that: SELECT * FROM Products p WHERE p.ID IN ( SELECT DISTINCT pc.ProductID FROM ProductsCategories pc INNER JOIN Categories c ON c.ID = pc.CategoryID WHERE c.TLeft >= 1 AND c.TRight <= 33378 ) But with big set of data this query executes very long and I found some solution to optimize it, look at here: DECLARE @CatProducts TABLE ( ProductID int NOT NULL ) INSERT INTO @CatProducts SELECT DISTINCT pc.ProductID FROM ProductsCategories pc INNER JOIN Categories c ON c.ID = pc.CategoryID WHERE c.TLeft >= 1 AND c.TRight <= 33378 SELECT * FROM Products p INNER JOIN @CatProducts cp ON cp.ProductID = p.ID This query executes very fast but I don't know how to do that with NHIbernate. Note, that I need use only ICriteria because of dynamic filtering\ordering. If some one knows a solution for that, it will be fantastic. But I'll pleasure to any suggestions of course. Thank you ahead, Kostya

    Read the article

  • Value types of variable size

    - by YellPika
    I'm trying to code a small math library in C#. I wanted to create a generic vector structure where the user could define the element type (int, long, float, double, etc.) and dimensions. My first attempt was something like this... public struct Vector<T> { public readonly int Dimensions; public readonly T[] Elements; // etc... } Unfortunately, Elements, being an array, is also a reference type. Thus, doing this, Vector<int> a = ...; Vector<int> b = a; a[0] = 1; b[0] = 2; would result in both a[0] and b[0] equaling 2. My second attempt was to define an interface IVector<T>, and then use Reflection.Emit to automatically generate the appropriate type at runtime. The resulting classes would look roughly like this: public struct Int32Vector3 : IVector<T> { public int Element0; public int Element1; public int Element2; public int Dimensions { get { return 3; } } // etc... } This seemed fine until I found out that interfaces seem to act like references to the underlying object. If I passed an IVector to a function, and changes to the elements in the function would be reflected in the original vector. What I think is my problem here is that I need to be able to create classes that have a user specified number of fields. I can't use arrays, and I can't use inheritance. Does anyone have a solution? EDIT: This library is going to be used in performance critical situations, so reference types are not an option.

    Read the article

  • Suggestions on Working with this Inherited Generic Method

    - by blu
    We have inherited a project that is a wrapper around a section of the core business model. There is one method that takes a generic, finds items matching that type from a member and then returns a list of that type. public List<T> GetFoos<T>() { List<IFoo> matches = Foos.FindAll( f => f.GetType() == typeof(T) ); List<T> resultList = new List<T>(); foreach (var match in matches) { resultList.Add((T)obj); } } Foos can hold the same object cast into various classes in inheritance hierarchy to aggregate totals differently for different UI presentations. There are 20+ different types of descendants that can be returned by GetFoos. The existing code basically has a big switch statement copied and pasted throughout the code. The code in each section calls GetFoos with its corresponding type. We are currently refactoring that into one consolidated area, but as we are doing that we are looking at other ways to work with this method. One thought was to use reflection to pass in the type, and that worked great until we realized the Invoke returned an object, and that it needed to be cast somehow to the List <T>. Another was to just use the switch statement until 4.0 and then use the dynamic language options. We welcome any alternate thoughts on how we can work with this method. I have left the code pretty brief, but if you'd like to know any additional details please just ask.

    Read the article

  • Color difference between vista and Win7

    - by MSGrimpeur
    Have an indicator in the form of an image which is displayed in a graphics viewport. The indicator can be any colour the user selects so we created a single image with a pallette and change a specific color in the pallette to the one the user picks using the following code. /// <summary> /// Copies the image and sets transparency and fill colour of the copy. The image is intended to be a simple filled shape such as a square /// with the inside all in one colour. /// </summary> /// <remarks>Assumes the fill colour to be changed is Red, /// black is the boundary colour and off white (RGB 233,233,233) is the colour to be made transparent</remarks> /// <param name="image"></param> /// <param name="fillColour"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected Bitmap CopyWithStyle(Bitmap image, Color fillColour) { ColorPalette selectionIndicatorPalette = image.Palette; int fillColourIndex = selectionIndicatorPalette.IndexOf(Color.Red); selectionIndicatorPalette.Entries[fillColourIndex] = fillColour; image.Palette = selectionIndicatorPalette; Bitmap tempImage = image; tempImage.MakeTransparent(transparentColour); return tempImage; } To be honest I'm not sure if this is a bit cludgy and there is some smarter approach or not, so any thoughts there would help. However the main issue is that this appears to work fine on Win7 but in vista and XP the color does not change. Has any one seen this before. I've found one or two articles that suggest there are some differences in ARGB between them but nothing particularly concrete. Any help greatfully accepted.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >