Search Results

Search found 12953 results on 519 pages for 'abstract methods'.

Page 88/519 | < Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >

• Asynchronous connectToServer

  - by Pavel Bucek

  Users of JSR-356 – Java API for WebSocket are probably familiar with WebSocketContainer#connectToServer method. This article will be about its usage and improvement which was introduce in recent Tyrus release. WebSocketContainer#connectToServer does what is says, it connects to WebSocketServerEndpoint deployed on some compliant container. It has two or three parameters (depends on which representation of client endpoint are you providing) and returns aSession. Returned Session represents WebSocket connection and you are instantly able to send messages, register MessageHandlers, etc. An issue might appear when you are trying to create responsive user interface and use this method – its execution blocks until Session is created which usually means some container needs to be started, DNS queried, connection created (it’s even more complicated when there is some proxy on the way), etc., so nothing which might be really considered as responsive. Trivial and correct solution is to do this in another thread and monitor the result, but.. why should users do that? :-) Tyrus now provides async* versions of all connectToServer methods, which performs only simple (=fast) check in the same thread and then fires a new one and performs all other tasks there. Return type of these methods is Future<Session>. List of added methods: public Future<Session> asyncConnectToServer(Class<?> annotatedEndpointClass, URI path) public Future<Session> asyncConnectToServer(Class<? extends Endpoint>  endpointClass, ClientEndpointConfig cec, URI path) public Future<Session> asyncConnectToServer(Endpoint endpointInstance, ClientEndpointConfig cec, URI path) public Future<Session> asyncConnectToServer(Object obj, URI path) As you can see, all connectToServer variants have its async* alternative. All these methods do throw DeploymentException, same as synchronous variants, but some of these errors cannot be thrown as a result of the first method call, so you might get it as the cause ofExecutionException thrown when Future<Session>.get() is called. Please let us know if you find these newly added methods useful or if you would like to change something (signature, functionality, …) – you can send us a comment to [email protected] or ping me personally. Related links: https://tyrus.java.net https://java.net/jira/browse/TYRUS/ https://github.com/tyrus-project/tyrus

  Read the article

• What are the alternatives to "overriding a method" when using composition instead of inheritance?

  - by Sebastien Diot

  If we should favor composition over inheritance, the data part of it is clear, at least for me. What I don't have a clear solution to is how overwriting methods, or simply implementing them if they are defined in a pure virtual form, should be implemented. An obvious way is to wrap the instance representing the base-class into the instance representing the sub-class. But the major downsides of this are that if you have say 10 methods, and you want to override a single one, you still have to delegate every other methods anyway. And if there were several layers of inheritance, you have now several layers of wrapping, which becomes less and less efficient. Also, this only solve the problem of the object "client"; when another object calls the top wrapper, things happen like in inheritance. But when a method of the deepest instance, the base class, calls it's own methods that have been wrapped and modified, the wrapping has no effect: the call is performed by it's own method, instead of by the highest wrapper. One extreme alternative that would solve those problems would be to have one instance per method. You only wrap methods that you want to overwrite, so there is no pointless delegation. But now you end up with an incredible amount of classes and object instance, which will have a negative effect on memory usage, and this will require a lot more coding too. So, are there alternatives (preferably alternatives that can be used in Java), that: Do not result in many levels of pointless delegation without any changes. Make sure that not only the client of an object, but also all the code of the object itself, is aware of which implementation of method should be called. Does not result in an explosion of classes and instances. Ideally puts the extra memory overhead that is required at the "class"/"particular composition" level (static if you will), rather than having every object pay the memory overhead of composition. My feeling tells me that the instance representing the base class should be at the "top" of the stack/layers so it receives calls directly, and can process them directly too if they are not overwritten. But I don't know how to do it that way.

  Read the article

• Java Dynamic Binding

  - by Chris Okyen

  I am having trouble understanding the OOP Polymorphic principl of Dynamic Binding ( Late Binding ) in Java. I looked for question pertaining to java, and wasn't sure if a overall answer to how dynamic binding works would pertain to Java Dynamic Binding, I wrote this question. Given: class Person { private String name; Person(intitialName) { name = initialName; } // irrelevant methods is here. // Overides Objects method public void writeOutput() { println(name); } } class Student extends Person { private int studentNumber; Student(String intitialName, int initialStudentNumber) { super(intitialName); studentNumber = initialStudentNumber; } // irrellevant methods here... // overides Person, Student and Objects method public void writeOutput() { super.writeOutput(); println(studentNumber); } } class Undergaraduate extends Student { private int level; Undergraduate(String intitialName, int initialStudentNumber,int initialLevel) { super(intitialName,initialStudentNumber); level = initialLevel; } // irrelevant methods is here. // overides Person, Student and Objects method public void writeOutput() { super.writeOutput(); println(level); } } I am wondering. if I had an array called person declared to contain objects of type Person: Person[] people = new Person[2]; person[0] = new Undergraduate("Cotty, Manny",4910,1); person[1] = new Student("DeBanque, Robin", 8812); Given that person[] is declared to be of type Person, you would expect, for example, in the third line where person[0] is initialized to a new Undergraduate object,to only gain the instance variable from Person and Persons Methods since doesn't the assignment to a new Undergraduate to it's ancestor denote the Undergraduate object to access Person - it's Ancestors, methods and isntance variables... Thus ...with the following code I would expect person[0].writeOutput(); // calls Undergraduate::writeOutput() person[1].writeOutput(); // calls Student::writeOutput() person[0] to not have Undergraduate's writeOutput() overidden method, nor have person[1] to have Student's overidden method - writeOutput(). If I had Person mikeJones = new Student("Who?,MikeJones",44,4); mikeJones.writeOutput(); The Person::writeOutput() method would be called. Why is this not so? Does it have to do with something I don't understand about relating to arrays? Does the declaration Person[] people = new Person[2] not bind the method like the previous code would?

  Read the article

• Profiling Startup Of VS2012 &ndash; Ants Profiler

  - by Alois Kraus

  I just downloaded ANTS Profiler 7.4 to check how fast it is and how deep I can analyze the startup of Visual Studio 2012. The Pro version which is useful does cost 445€ which is ok. To measure a complex system I decided to simply profile VS2012 (Update 1) on my older Intel 6600 2,4GHz with 3 GB RAM and a 32 bit Windows 7. Ants Profiler is really easy to use. So lets try it out. The Ants Profiler does want to start the profiled application by its own which seems to be rather common. I did choose Method Level timing of all managed methods. In the configuration menu I did want to get all call stacks to get full details. Once this is configured you are ready to go.   After that you can select the Method Grid to view Wall Clock Time in ms. I hate percentages which are on by default because I do want to look where absolute time is spent and not something else.   From the Method Grid I can drill down to see where time is spent in a nice and I can look at the decompiled methods where the time is spent. This does really look nice. But did you see the size of the scroll bar in the method grid? Although I wanted all call stacks I do get only about 4 pages of methods to drill down. From the scroll bar count I would guess that the profiler does show me about 150 methods for the complete VS startup. This is nonsense. I will never find a bottleneck in VS when I am presented only a fraction of the methods that were actually executed. I have also tried in the configuration window to also profile the extremely trivial functions but there was no noticeable difference. It seems that the Ants Profiler does filter away way too many details to be useful for bigger systems. If you want to optimize a CPU bound operation inside NUnit then Ants Profiler is with its line level timings a very nice tool to work with. But for bigger stuff it is certainly not usable. I also do not like that I must start the profiled application from the profiler UI. This makes it hard to profile processes which are started by some other process. Next: JetBrains dotTrace

  Read the article

• What is the most appropriate testing method in this scenario?

  - by Daniel Bruce

  I'm writing some Objective-C apps (for OS X/iOS) and I'm currently implementing a service to be shared across them. The service is intended to be fairly self-contained. For the current functionality I'm envisioning there will be only one method that clients will call to do a fairly complicated series of steps both using private methods on the class, and passing data through a bunch of "data mangling classes" to arrive at an end result. The gist of the code is to fetch a log of changes, stored in a service-internal data store, that has occurred since a particular time, simplify the log to only include the last applicable change for each object, attach the serialized values for the affected objects and return this all to the client. My question then is, how do I unit-test this entry point method? Obviously, each class would have thorough unit tests to ensure that their functionality works as expected, but the entry point seems harder to "disconnect" from the rest of the world. I would rather not send in each of these internal classes IoC-style, because they're small and are only made classes to satisfy the single-responsibility principle. I see a couple possibilities: Create a "private" interface header for the tests with methods that call the internal classes and test each of these methods separately. Then, to test the entry point, make a partial mock of the service class with these private methods mocked out and just test that the methods are called with the right arguments. Write a series of fatter tests for the entry point without mocking out anything, testing the entire functionality in one go. This looks, to me, more like "integration testing" and seems brittle, but it does satisfy the "only test via the public interface" principle. Write a factory that returns these internal services and take that in the initializer, then write a factory that returns mocked versions of them to use in tests. This has the downside of making the construction of the service annoying, and leaks internal details to the client. Write a "private" initializer that take these services as extra parameters, use that to provide mocked services, and have the public initializer back-end to this one. This would ensure that the client code still sees the easy/pretty initializer and no internals are leaked. I'm sure there's more ways to solve this problem that I haven't thought of yet, but my question is: what's the most appropriate approach according to unit testing best practices? Especially considering I would prefer to write this test-first, meaning I should preferably only create these services as the code indicates a need for them.

  Read the article

• Why default constructor does not appear for value types?

  - by Arun

  The below snippet gives me a list of constructors and methods of a type. static void ReflectOnType(Type type) { Console.WriteLine(type.FullName); Console.WriteLine("------------"); List<ConstructorInfo> constructors = type.GetConstructors(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.NonPublic |BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Default).ToList(); List<MethodInfo> methods = type.GetMethods().ToList(); Type baseType = type.BaseType; while (baseType != null) { constructors.AddRange(baseType.GetConstructors(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Default)); methods.AddRange(baseType.GetMethods()); baseType = baseType.BaseType; } Console.WriteLine("Reflection on {0} type", type.Name); for (int i = 0; i < constructors.Count; i++) { Console.Write("Constructor: {0}.{1}", constructors[i].DeclaringType.Name, constructors[i].Name); Console.Write("("); ParameterInfo[] parameterInfos = constructors[i].GetParameters(); if (parameterInfos.Length > 0) { for (int j = 0; j < parameterInfos.Length; j++) { if (j > 0) { Console.Write(", "); } Console.Write("{0} {1}", parameterInfos[j].ParameterType, parameterInfos[j].Name); } } Console.Write(")"); if (constructors[i].IsSpecialName) { Console.Write(" has 'SpecialName' attribute"); } Console.WriteLine(); } Console.WriteLine(); for (int i = 0; i < methods.Count; i++) { Console.Write("Method: {0}.{1}", methods[i].DeclaringType.Name, methods[i].Name); // Determine whether or not each field is a special name. if (methods[i].IsSpecialName) { Console.Write(" has 'SpecialName' attribute"); } Console.WriteLine(); } } But when I pass an ‘int’ type to this method, why don’t I see the implicit constructor in the output? Or, how do I modify the above code to list the default constructor as well (in case I’m missing something in my code).

  Read the article

• Drupal 7: File field causes error with Dependable Dropdowns

  - by LoneWolfPR

  I'm building a Form in a module using the Form API. I've had a couple of dependent dropdowns that have been working just fine. The code is as follows: $types = db_query('SELECT * FROM {touchpoints_metric_types}') -> fetchAllKeyed(0, 1); $types = array('0' => '- Select -') + $types; $selectedType = isset($form_state['values']['metrictype']) ? $form_state['values']['metrictype'] : 0; $methods = _get_methods($selectedType); $selectedMethod = isset($form_state['values']['measurementmethod']) ? $form_state['values']['measurementmethod'] : 0; $form['metrictype'] = array( '#type' => 'select', '#title' => t('Metric Type'), '#options' => $types, '#default_value' => $selectedType, '#ajax' => array( 'event' => 'change', 'wrapper' => 'method-wrapper', 'callback' => 'touchpoints_method_callback' ) ); $form['measurementmethod'] = array( '#type' => 'select', '#title' => t('Measurement Method'), '#prefix' => '<div id="method-wrapper">', '#suffix' => '</div>', '#options' => $methods, '#default_value' => $selectedMethod, ); Here are the _get_methods and touchpoints_method_callback functions: function _get_methods($selected) { if ($selected) { $methods = db_query("SELECT * FROM {touchpoints_m_methods} WHERE mt_id=$selected") -> fetchAllKeyed(0, 2); } else { $methods = array(); } $methods = array('0' => "- Select -") + $methods; return $methods; } function touchpoints_method_callback($form, &$form_state) { return $form['measurementmethod']; } This all worked fine until I added a file field to the form. Here is the code I used for that: $form['metricfile'] = array( '#type' => 'file', '#title' => 'Attach a File', ); Now that the file is added if I change the first dropdown it hangs with the 'Please wait' message next to it without ever loading the contents of the second dropdown. I also get the following error in my JavaScript console: "Uncaught TypeError: Object function (a,b){return new p.fn.init(a,b,c)} has no method 'handleError'" What am I doing wrong here?

  Read the article

• Returning different data types C#

  - by user1810659

  i have create a class library (DLL) with many different methods. and the return different types of data(string string[] double double[]). Therefore i have created one class i called CustomDataType for all the methods containing different data types so each method in the Library can return object of the custom class and this way be able to return multiple data types I have done it like this: public class CustomDataType { public double Value; public string Timestamp; public string Description; public string Unit; // special for GetparamterInfo public string OpcItemUrl; public string Source; public double Gain; public double Offset; public string ParameterName; public int ParameterID; public double[] arrayOfValue; public string[] arrayOfTimestamp; // public string[] arrayOfParameterName; public string[] arrayOfUnit; public string[] arrayOfDescription; public int[] arrayOfParameterID; public string[] arrayOfItemUrl; public string[] arrayOfSource; public string[] arrayOfModBusRegister; public string[] arrayOfGain; public string[] arrayOfOffset; } The Library contains methods like these: public CustomDataType GetDeviceParameters(string deviceName) { ...................... code getDeviceParametersObj.arrayOfParameterName; return getDeviceParametersObj; } public CustomDataType GetMaxMin(string parameterName, string period, string maxMin) { .....................................code getMaxMingObj.Value = (double)reader["MaxMinValue"]; getMaxMingObj.Timestamp = reader["MeasurementDateTime"].ToString(); getMaxMingObj.Unit = reader["Unit"].ToString(); getMaxMingObj.Description = reader["Description"].ToString(); return getMaxMingObj; } public CustomDataType GetSelectedMaxMinData(string[] parameterName, string period, string mode) {................................code selectedMaxMinObj.arrayOfValue = MaxMinvalueList.ToArray(); selectedMaxMinObj.arrayOfTimestamp = MaxMintimeStampList.ToArray(); selectedMaxMinObj.arrayOfDescription = MaxMindescriptionList.ToArray(); selectedMaxMinObj.arrayOfUnit = MaxMinunitList.ToArray(); return selectedMaxMinObj; } As illustrated thi different methods returns different data types,and it works fine for me but when i import the DLL and want to use the methods Visual studio shwos all the data types in the CustomDataType class as suggestion for all the methods even though the return different data.This is illusrtated in the picture below. As we can see from the picture with the suggestion of all the different return data the user can get confused and choose wrong return data for some of the methods. So my question is how can i improve this. so Visual studio suggest just the belonging return data type for each method.

  Read the article

• creating TAGS for Ruby and emacs

  - by hortitude

  I ran the following from my top level Ruby on Rails directory find . -name "*.rb" | etags - Then within emacs I visited that tag file. This works reasonably well to find some of the methods and most of the files, however it is having trouble finding some of the extra methods/classes that I use in my helpers directory. e.g. I have a file in my helpers dir called my_foo_helper.rb If I search my tags for that file, it finds it. However, if I try to find a tag for one of the methods within that module it doesn't find it at all. If I use Aptana or something like that it seems to be able to locate those methods. Any thoughts? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Foolishness Check: PHP Class finds Class file but not Class in the file.

  - by Daniel Bingham

  I'm at a loss here. I've defined an abstract superclass in one file and a subclass in another. I have required the super-classes file and the stack trace reports to find an include it. However, it then returns an error when it hits the 'extends' line: Fatal error: Class 'HTMLBuilder' not found in View/Markup/HTML/HTML4.01/HTML4_01Builder.php on line 7. I had this working with another class tree that uses factories a moment ago. I just added the builder layer in between the factories and the consumer. The factory layer looked almost exactly the same in terms of includes and dependencies. So that makes me think I must have done something silly that's causes the HTMLBuilder.php file to not be included correctly or interpreted correctly or some such. Here's the full stack trace (paths slightly altered): # Time Memory Function Location 1 0.0001 53904 {main}( ) ../index.php:0 2 0.0002 67600 require_once( 'View/Page.php' ) ../index.php:3 3 0.0003 75444 require_once( 'View/Sections/SectionFactory.php' ) ../Page.php:4 4 0.0003 81152 require_once( 'View/Sections/HTML/HTMLSectionFactory.php' ) ../SectionFactory.php:3 5 0.0004 92108 require_once( 'View/Sections/HTML/HTMLTitlebarSection.php' ) ../HTMLSectionFactory.php:5 6 0.0005 99716 require_once( 'View/Markup/HTML/HTMLBuilder.php' ) ../HTMLTitlebarSection.php:3 7 0.0005 103580 require_once( 'View/Markup/MarkupBuilder.php' ) ../HTMLBuilder.php:3 8 0.0006 124120 require_once( 'View/Markup/HTML/HTML4.01/HTML4_01Builder.php' ) ../MarkupBuilder.php:3 Here's the code in question: Parent class (View/Markup/HTML/HTMLBuilder.php): <?php require_once('View/Markup/MarkupBuilder.php'); abstract class HTMLBuilder extends MarkupBuilder { public abstract function getLink($text, $href); public abstract function getImage($src, $alt); public abstract function getDivision($id, array $classes=NULL, array $children=NULL); public abstract function getParagraph($text, array $classes=NULL, $id=NULL); } ?> Child Class, (View/Markup/HTML/HTML4.01/HTML4_01Builder.php): <?php require_once('HTML4_01Factory.php'); require_once('View/Markup/HTML/HTMLBuilder.php'); class HTML4_01Builder extends HTMLBuilder { private $factory; public function __construct() { $this->factory = new HTML4_01Factory(); } public function getLink($href, $text) { $link = $this->factory->getA(); $link->addAttribute('href', $href); $link->addChild($this->factory->getText($text)); return $link; } public function getImage($src, $alt) { $image = $this->factory->getImg(); $image->addAttribute('src', $src); $image->addAttribute('alt', $alt); return $image; } public function getDivision($id, array $classes=NULL, array $children=NULL) { $div = $this->factory->getDiv(); $div->setID($id); if(!empty($classes)) { $div->addClasses($classes); } if(!empty($children)) { $div->addChildren($children); } return $div; } public function getParagraph($text, array $classes=NULL, $id=NULL) { $p = $this->factory->getP(); $p->addChild($this->factory->getText($text)); if(!empty($classes)) { $p->addClasses($classes); } if(!empty($id)) { $p->setID($id); } return $p; } } ?> I would appreciate any and all ideas. I'm at a complete loss here as to what is going wrong. I'm sure it's something stupid I just can't see...

  Read the article

• CodePlex Daily Summary for Thursday, February 18, 2010

  CodePlex Daily Summary for Thursday, February 18, 2010New ProjectsASP .NET MVC CMS (Content Management System): Open source Content management system based on ASP.NET MVC platform.AutoFolders: AutoFolders package for Umbraco CMS This package auto creates folder structures for new and existing pages. The folders structures can be date bas...AutoPex: This project combines CCI with Pex by allowing the developer to run Pex on methods based on differences between two assemblies. Canvas VSDOC Intellisense: JavaScript VSDOC documentation for HTML5 Canvas element and 2d Context interface.CSUDH: California State University, Domguiez Hills Game projectsD-AMPS: System for Analysis of Microelectronic and Photonic StructuresDispX: Disease PredictorEmployee Info Starter Kit: This is a starter kit, which includes very simple user requirements, where we can create, read, update and delete (crud) the employee info of a com...Enhanced Discussion Board for SharePoint: Provide later... publishing project to share with Malaysians firstFlowPad: Flowpad is a light, fast and easy to use flow diagram editor. It helps you quickly pour your algorithms from your mind to 'paper'. It is written us...Henge3D Physics Library for XNA: Henge3D is a 3D physics library written in C# for XNA. It is implemented entirely in managed code and is compatible with the XBOX 360.Hybrid Windows Service: Abstracted design pattern for running a windows service interactively. Implemented as a base class to replace ServiceBase it will automatically pro...Image Cropper datatype for Umbraco: Stand alone version of the Image Cropper datatype in Umbraco. Listinator: A social wishlist application done in asp.net MVCMicrosoft Dynamics Ax User Group (AXUG) Code Repository: The goal of this project is to make it easier for customers of Microsoft Dynamics Ax to be able to share relevant source code. Code base should inc...Mobil Trials: Sebuah game sederhana yang dibuat di atas Silverlight 3.0 dengan bantuan Physics Helper 3.0 Demo : http://gameagam.co.cc/default.html Mirror link...NavigateTo Providers: This project is a collection of NavigateTo providers for Visual Studio 2010. NExtLib: NExtLib is a general-purpose extension library for .NET, which adds some useful features and addresses some alleged omissions.Nom - .NET object-mapper: Nom is a light-weight, storage-type agnostic persistence framework which is intended to provide an abstraction over both relational and non-relatio...Numerical Methods on Silverlight: Numerical Methods, Silverlight, Math Parser, Simple, EulerOpenGLViewController for Visual Basic .NET 2008: A single class in pure VB.NET code to create and control an OpenGL window by calling opengl32.dll directly without use of additional wrapper librar...RestaurantMIS: RestaurantMIS is a simple Restaurant management system developed in Visual C# 2008 with Chinese language.SmartKonnect: <project name>A WPF application for windows with shoutcast, twitter, facebook and etc.SSRS Excel file Sheet rename: SSRS wont support renaming excel reports sheet rename. This program support to generate the report and change the excel sheet nameSWENTRIZ.NET: SWENTRIZ.NET allows to build graphics of implicit functions via .NET functionality.TFT: Tropical forecast tracker is a web application. It will measure the error of the National Hurricane Center's forecast as compared to the actual tr...WCF Dynamic Client Proxy: A WCF Dynamic Client Proxy so you don't have to inherit from ClientBase all the time. The proxy also has fault tolerance so you don't have to dispo...Web.Config Role Provider: Stores ASP.NET Roles in web.config. Easy to set up and deploy. Works great for simple websites with authentication. The projects includes support ...WPF Line of Business App: Example WPF patterns for line of business applications. Includes navigation, animation, and visualization.YuBiS Framework: Silverlight and WF based a workflow RAD framework. New ReleasesASP .NET MVC CMS (Content Management System): AtomicCms 1.0: This is the first public release of AtomicCms. To get more information about this content management system, visit website http://atomiccms.com/Blogsprajeesh.Blogspot samples: Designing Modular Smart Clients using CAL: This whitepaper provides architectural guidance for designing and implementing enterprise WPF/ silverlight client applications based on the Composi...DB Ghost Build Tools: 1.0.2: Made a change to the datetime format per dewee.DotNetNuke® Community Edition: 05.02.03: Major HighlightsFixed the issue where LinkClick.aspx links were incorrect for child portals Fixed the issue with the PayPal URL settings. Fixed...Employee Directory webpart for sharepoint 2007 user profiles: Employee Directory Source V2.0: Features: 1. Displays a complete list of all Active Directory profiles imported by the SSP into SharePoint 2007. 2. Displays the following fields ...Enhanced Discussion Board for SharePoint: Alpha Release: Meant for those who attended my presentation. Not cleaned upESPEHA: Espeha 9 PFR: Some small issues fixedFlowPad: FlowPad 0.1: FlowPad 0.1 build. Run it to get fammiliar with major concepts of easy diagramming :)Fluent Ribbon Control Suite: Fluent Ribbon Control Suite BETA2: Fluent Ribbon Control Suite BETA2 Includes: - Fluent.dll (with .pdb and .xml) - Demo Application - Samples - Foundation (Tabs, Groups, Contextu...Henge3D Physics Library for XNA: Henge3D Source (2010-02): This is the initial 2010-02 release.Highlight: Highlight 2.5: This release is primarily a maintenance release of the library and is functionally equivalent to version 2.3 that was released in 2004.Magiq: Magiq 0.3.0: Magiq 0.3.0 contains: Magiq-to-objects: Full support to Linq-to-objects Magiq-to-sql: Full support to Linq-to-sql New features: Plugin model Bu...Microsoft Points Converter: Pre-Alpha ClickOnce Installer v0.03: This release builds on the 0.02 release by adding more thorough validation checks for the amount to convert from as well as adding several currency...Mobil Trials: Mobil Trials Source Code: Sebuah game sederhana yang dibuat di atas Silverlight 3.0 dengan bantuan Physics Helper 3.0 Game ini masih perlu dikembangkan lebih jauh lagi! Si...Numerical Methods on Silverlight: Numerical Methods on Silverlight 1.00: This a new version of Numerical Methods on Silverlight.OAuthLib: OAuthLib (1.5.0.0): Changed point is as next. 7037 Fix spell miss of RequestFactoryMedthodSharePoint Outlook Connector: Version 1.0.1.0: Now it supports simply attaching SharePoint documents feature.Sharpy: Sharpy 1.1 Alpha: This is the second Sharpy release. Only a single change has been made - the foreach function now uses IEnumerable as a source instead of IList. Th...SkinDroidCreator: SkinDroidCreator ALPHA 1: Primera releaseTan solo carga mapas, ya sea de un zip o de un directorio. Para probarlo se pueden cargar temas Metamorph o temas flasheables, ya se...SkyDrive .Net API Client: SkyDrive .Net API Client 0.8.9: SkyDrive .Net API Client assembly version 0.8.9. Changes/improvements: - Added Web Proxy support - Introduced WebDriveInfo - Introduced DownloadUrl...spikes: Salient.Web.Administration 1.0: WebAdmin is simply the built in ASP.NetWebAdministrationFiles application cleaned up with codebehinds to make customization and refactoring possibl...SSRS Excel file Sheet rename: Change SSRS excel file sheet name: Create stored procedure from the attached file in sql server 2005/2008SWENTRIZ.NET: Approach 1: First approachTortoiseSVN Addin for Visual Studio: TortoiseSVN Addin 1.0.4: Visual Studio 2005 support Custom working root bug fixingTotal Commander SkyDrive File System Plugin (.wfx): Total Commander SkyDrive File System Plugin 0.8.4: Total Commander SkyDrive File System Plugin version 0.8.4. Bug fixes: - Upgraded SkyDriveWebClient to version 0.8.9 Please do not forget to expres...UnOfficial AW Wrapper dot Net: UAWW.Net 0.1.5.85 Béta 2: Fixed and Added SomethingVr30 OS: Space Brick Break 1.1: A brick breaker. ADD Level 3, 4, 5Web.Config Role Provider: First release: Three downloads are available: A compiled dll ready to use. The schema to enable intellisense The complete source (zipped)WI Assistant: WI Assistant 2.1: This release improves the work item selection functionality. These selection methods are now supported (some require at least one item selected): ...WI Assistant: WI Assistant 2.2: Improved error handling and fix for linking several times in a row. DISCLAIMER: While I have tested this app on my TFS Server, by downloading and...ZipStorer - A Pure C# Class to Store Files in Zip: ZipStorer 2.30: Added stream-oriented methods Improved support for ePUB & Open Container Format specification (OCF) Automatic switch from Deflate to Store algo...Most Popular ProjectsRawrDotNetNuke® Community EditionASP.NET Ajax LibraryFacebook Developer ToolkitWindows 7 USB/DVD Download ToolWSPBuilder (SharePoint WSP tool)Virtual Router - Wifi Hot Spot for Windows 7 / 2008 R2Json.NETPerformance Analysis of Logs (PAL) ToolQuickGraph, Graph Data Structures And Algorithms for .NetMost Active ProjectsDinnerNow.netRawrSharpyBlogEngine.NETSimple SavantjQuery Library for SharePoint Web ServicesNB_Store - Free DotNetNuke Ecommerce Catalog Modulepatterns & practices – Enterprise LibraryPHPExcelFacebook Developer Toolkit

  Read the article

• Do Repeat Yourself in Unit Tests

  - by João Angelo

  Don’t get me wrong I’m a big supporter of the DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself) Principle except however when it comes to unit tests. Why? Well, in my opinion a unit test should be a self-contained group of actions with the intent to test a very specific piece of code and should not depend on externals shared with other unit tests. In a typical unit test we can divide its code in two major groups: Preparation of preconditions for the code under test; Invocation of the code under test. It’s in the first group that you are tempted to refactor common code in several unit tests into helper methods that can then be called in each one of them. Another way to not duplicate code is to use the built-in infrastructure of some unit test frameworks such as SetUp/TearDown methods that automatically run before and after each unit test. I must admit that in the past I was guilty of both charges but what at first seemed a good idea since I was removing code duplication turnout to offer no added value and even complicate the process when a given test fails. We love unit tests because of their rapid feedback when something goes wrong. However, this feedback requires most of the times reading the code for the failed test. Given this, what do you prefer? To read a single method or wander through several methods like SetUp/TearDown and private common methods. I say it again, do repeat yourself in unit tests. It may feel wrong at first but I bet you won’t regret it later.

  Read the article

• Is there a way communicate or measure levels of abstraction?

  - by hydroparadise

  I'll be the first to say that this question is a bit... out there. But here are a couple questions I bear in mind : Is abstraction continuous or discrete? Is there a single unit of abstraction? But I'm not sure those questions are truly answerable or even really makes sence. My naive answer would be something along the lines of abitrarily discrete but not necescarily having a single unit measure. Here's what I mean... Take a Black Labrador; an abstraction that could be made is that a Black Lab is a type of animal. [Animal]<--[Black Lab] A Black Lab is also a type of Dog. [Dog]<--[Black Lab] One way to establish a degree of abstraction is by comparing the two the abstractions. We could say that [Animal] is more abstract than [Dog] in respect to a Black Lab. It just so happens [Animal] can also be used as an abstraction of [Dog] So, we might end up with something like [Animal]<--[Dog]<--[Black Lab] With the model above, one might be inclined to say that there's two hops of abstraction to get from [Black Lab] to [Animal]. But you can't exactly tell somebody they need one level abstraction and reasonalby expect they will come up with [Dog] given they aren't explicity given the options above. If I needed to tell someobody in a single email that they needed an abstract class with out knowing what that abstract class is, is there a way to communaticate a degree of abstraction such that they might end up on Dog instead of Animal? As a side note, what area of study might this type of analysis fall under?

  Read the article

• Advantages of Singleton Class over Static Class?

  Point 1)Singleton We can get the object of singleton and then pass to other methods.Static Class We can not pass static class to other methods as we pass objectsPoint 2) Singleton In future, it is easy to change the logic of of creating objects to some pooling mechanism. Static Class Very difficult to implement some pooling logic in case of static class. We would need to make that class as non-static and then make all the methods non-static methods, So entire your code needs to be changed.Point3:) Singleton Can Singletone class be inherited to subclass? Singleton class does not say any restriction of Inheritence. So we should be able to do this as long as subclass is also inheritence.There's nothing fundamentally wrong with subclassing a class that is intended to be a singleton. There are many reasons you might want to do it. and there are many ways to accomplish it. It depends on language you use.Static Class We can not inherit Static class to another Static class in C#. Think about it this way: you access static members via type name, like this: MyStaticType.MyStaticMember(); Were you to inherit from that class, you would have to access it via the new type name: MyNewType.MyStaticMember(); Thus, the new item bears no relationships to the original when used in code. There would be no way to take advantage of any inheritance relationship for things like polymorphism. span.fullpost {display:none;}

  Read the article

• Meaningful concise method naming guidelines

  - by Sam

  Recently I started releasing an open source project, while I was the only user of the library I did not care about the names, but know I want to assign clever names to each methods to make it easier to learn, but I also need to use concise names so they are easy to write as well. I was thinking about some guidelines about the naming, I am aware of lots of guidelines that only care about letters casing or some simple notes. Here, I am looking after guidelines for meaningful concise naming. For example, this could be part of the guidelines I am looking after: Use Add when an existing item is going to be added to a target, Use Create when a new item is being created and added to a target. Use Remove when an existing item is going to be removed from a target, Use delete when an item is going to be removed permanently. Pair AddXXX methods with RemoveXXX and Pair CreateXXX methods with DeleteXXX methods, but do not mix them. The above guidance may be intuitive for native English speakers, but for me that English is my second language I need to be told about things like this.

  Read the article

• Advantages of Singleton Class over Static Class?

  Point 1) Singleton We can get the object of singleton and then pass to other methods. Static Class We can not pass static class to other methods as we pass objects Point 2) Singleton In future, it is easy to change the logic of of creating objects to some pooling mechanism. Static Class Very difficult to implement some pooling logic in case of static class. We would need to make that class as non-static and then make all the methods non-static methods, So entire your code needs to be changed. Point3:) Singleton Can Singletone class be inherited to subclass? Singleton class does not say any restriction of Inheritence. So we should be able to do this as long as subclass is also inheritence.There's nothing fundamentally wrong with subclassing a class that is intended to be a singleton. There are many reasons you might want to do it. and there are many ways to accomplish it. It depends on language you use. Static Class We can not inherit Static class to another Static class in C#. Think about it this way: you access static members via type name, like this: MyStaticType.MyStaticMember(); Were you to inherit from that class, you would have to access it via the new type name: MyNewType.MyStaticMember(); Thus, the new item bears no relationships to the original when used in code. There would be no way to take advantage of any inheritance relationship for things like polymorphism. span.fullpost {display:none;}

  Read the article

• Understanding Visitor Pattern

  - by Nezreli

  I have a hierarchy of classes that represents GUI controls. Something like this: Control-ContainerControl-Form I have to implement a series of algoritms that work with objects doing various stuff and I'm thinking that Visitor pattern would be the cleanest solution. Let take for example an algorithm which creates a Xml representaion of a hierarchy of objects. Using 'classic' approach I would do this: public abstract class Control { public virtual XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = document.CreateElement(this.GetType().Name); // Create element, fill it with attributes declared with control return xml; } } public abstract class ContainerControl : Control { public override XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = base.ToXML(document); // Use forech to fill XmlElement with child XmlElements return xml; } } public class Form : ContainerControl { public override XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = base.ToXML(document); // Fill remaining elements declared in Form class return xml; } } But I'm not sure how to do this with visitor pattern. This is the basic implementation: public class ToXmlVisitor : IVisitor { public void Visit(Form form) { } } Since even the abstract classes help with implementation I'm not sure how to do that properly in ToXmlVisitor. Perhaps there is a better solution to this problem. The reason that I'm considering Visitor pattern is that some algorithms will need references not available in project where the classes are implemented and there is a number of different algorithms so I'm avoiding large classes. Any thoughts are welcome.

  Read the article

• Mutating Programming Language?

  - by MattiasK

  For fun I was thinking about how one could build a programming language that differs from OOP and came up with this concept. I don't have a strong foundation in computer science so it might be common place without me knowing it (more likely it's just a stupid idea :) I apologize in advance for this somewhat rambling question :) Anyways here goes: In normal OOP methods and classes are variant only upon parameters, meaning if two different classes/methods call the same method they get the same output. My, perhaps crazy idea, is that the calling method and class could be an "invisible" part of it's signature and the response could vary depending on who call's an method. Say that we have a Window object with a Break() method, now anyone (who has access) could call this method on Window with the same result. Now say that we have two different objects, Hammer and SledgeHammer. If Break need to produce different results based on these we'd pass them as parameters Break(IBluntObject bluntObject) With a mutating programming language (mpl) the operating objects on the method would be visible to the Break Method without begin explicitly defined and it could adopt itself based on them). So if SledgeHammer calls Window.Break() it would generate vastly different results than if Hammer did so. If OOP classes are black boxes then MPL are black boxes that knows who's (trying) to push it's buttons and can adapt accordingly. You could also have different permission sets on methods depending who's calling them rather than having absolute permissions like public and private. Does this have any advantage over OOP? Or perhaps I should say, would it add anything to it since you should be able to simply add this aspect to methods (just give access to a CallingMethod and CallingClass variable in context) I'm not sure, might be to hard to wrap one's head around, it would be kinda interesting to have classes that adopted themselves to who uses them though. Still it's an interesting concept, what do you think, is it viable?

  Read the article

• Self-referencing anonymous closures: is JavaScript incomplete?

  - by Tom Auger

  Does the fact that anonymous self-referencing function closures are so prevelant in JavaScript suggest that JavaScript is an incomplete specification? We see so much of this: (function () { /* do cool stuff */ })(); and I suppose everything is a matter of taste, but does this not look like a kludge, when all you want is a private namespace? Couldn't JavaScript implement packages and proper classes? Compare to ActionScript 3, also based on EMACScript, where you get package com.tomauger { import bar; class Foo { public function Foo(){ // etc... } public function show(){ // show stuff } public function hide(){ // hide stuff } // etc... } } Contrast to the convolutions we perform in JavaScript (this, from the jQuery plugin authoring documentation): (function( $ ){ var methods = { init : function( options ) { // THIS }, show : function( ) { // IS }, hide : function( ) { // GOOD }, update : function( content ) { // !!! } }; $.fn.tooltip = function( method ) { // Method calling logic if ( methods[method] ) { return methods[ method ].apply( this, Array.prototype.slice.call( arguments, 1 )); } else if ( typeof method === 'object' || ! method ) { return methods.init.apply( this, arguments ); } else { $.error( 'Method ' + method + ' does not exist on jQuery.tooltip' ); } }; })( jQuery ); I appreciate that this question could easily degenerate into a rant about preferences and programming styles, but I'm actually very curious to hear how you seasoned programmers feel about this and whether it feels natural, like learning different idiosyncrasies of a new language, or kludgy, like a workaround to some basic programming language components that are just not implemented?

  Read the article

• When to use each user research method

  - by user12277104

  There are a lot of user research methods out there, but sometimes we get stuck in a rut, conducting all formative usability testing before coding, or running surveys to gather satisfaction data. I'll be the first to admit that it happens to me, but to get out of a rut, it just takes a minute to look at where I am in the design & development cycle, what kind(s) of data I need, and what methods are available to me. We need reminders, or refreshers, every once in a while. One tool I've found useful is a graphic organizer that I created many years ago. It's been through several revisions, as I've adapted it to the product cycles of the places I've worked, changed my mind about how to categorize it, and added methods that I've used or created over time. I shared a version of this table at the 2012 International UPA conference, and I was contacted by someone yesterday who wanted to use it in a university course on user-center design. I was flattered at the the thought, but embarrassed, because I was sure it needed updating -- that was a year ago, after all. But I opened it today, and really, there's not much I'd change -- sure, I could add some nuance regarding what types of formative testing, such as modality (remote, unmoderated remote, or in-person) or flavor of testing (RITE, RITE-Krug, comparative, performance), but I think it's pretty much ok as is. Click on the image below, to get the full-size PDF. And whether it's entirely "right" or "wrong" isn't the whole value of looking at these methods across the product lifecycle. The real value lies in the reminder that I have options. And what those options are change as the field changes, so while I don't expect this graphic to have an eternal shelf life, it's still ok a year after I last updated it. That said, if you find something missing or out of place, let me know :) 

  Read the article

• Should I modify an entity with many parameters or with the entity itself?

  - by Saeed Neamati

  We have a SOA-based system. The service methods are like: UpdateEntity(Entity entity) For small entities, it's all fine. However, when entities get bigger and bigger, to update one property we should follow this pattern in UI: Get parameters from UI (user) Create an instance of the Entity, using those parameters Get the entity from service Write code to fill the unchanged properties Give the result entity to the service Another option that I've experienced in previous experiences is to create semantic update methods for each update scenario. In other words instead of having one global all-encompasing update method, we had many ad-hoc parametric methods. For example, for the User entity, instead of having UpdateUser (User user) method, we had these methods: ChangeUserPassword(int userId, string newPassword) AddEmailToUserAccount(int userId, string email) ChangeProfilePicture(int userId, Image image) ... Now, I don't know which method is truly better, and for each approach, we encounter problems. I mean, I'm going to design the infrastructure for a new system, and I don't have enough reasons to pick any of these approaches. I couldn't find good resources on the Internet, because of the lack of keywords I could provide. What approach is better? What pitfalls each has? What benefits can we get from each one?

  Read the article

• An alternative to multiple inheritance when creating an abstraction layer?

  - by sebf

  In my project I am creating an abstraction layer for some APIs. The purpose of the layer is to make multi-platform easier, and also to simplify the APIs to the feature set that I need while also providing some functionality, the implementation of which will be unique to each platform. At the moment, I have implemented it by defining and abstract class, which has methods which creates objects that implement interfaces. The abstract class and these interfaces define the capabilities of my abstraction layer. The implementation of these in my layer should of course be arbitrary from the POV view of my application, but I have done it, for my first API, by creating chains of subclasses which add more specific functionality as the features of the APIs they expose become less generic. An example would probably demonstrate this better: //The interface as seen by the application interface IGenericResource { byte[] GetSomeData(); } interface ISpecificResourceOne : IGenericResource { int SomePropertyOfResourceOne {get;} } interface ISpecificResourceTwo : IGenericResource { string SomePropertyOfResourceTwo {get;} } public abstract class MyLayer { ISpecificResourceOne CreateResourceOne(); ISpecificResourceTwo CreateResourceTwo(); void UseResourceOne(ISpecificResourceOne one); void UseResourceTwo(ISpecificResourceTwo two); } //The layer as created in my library public class LowLevelResource : IGenericResource { byte[] GetSomeData() {} } public class ResourceOne : LowLevelResource, ISpecificResourceOne { int SomePropertyOfResourceOne {get{}} } public class ResourceTwo : ResourceOne, ISpecificResourceTwo { string SomePropertyOfResourceTwo {get {}} } public partial class Implementation : MyLayer { override UseResourceOne(ISpecificResourceOne one) { DoStuff((ResourceOne)one); } } As can be seen, I am essentially trying to have two inheritance chains on the same object, but of course I can't do this so I simulate the second version with interfaces. The thing is though, I don't like using interfaces for this; it seems wrong, in my mind an interface defines a contract, any class that implements that interface should be able to be used where that interface is used but here that is clearly not the case because the interfaces are being used to allow an object from the layer to masquerade as something else, without the application needing to have access to its definition. What technique would allow me to define a comprehensive, intuitive collection of objects for an abstraction layer, while their implementation remains independent? (Language is C#)

  Read the article

• Do you leverage the benefits of the open-closed principle?

  - by Kaleb Pederson

  The open-closed principle (OCP) states that an object should be open for extension but closed for modification. I believe I understand it and use it in conjunction with SRP to create classes that do only one thing. And, I try to create many small methods that make it possible to extract out all the behavior controls into methods that may be extended or overridden in some subclass. Thus, I end up with classes that have many extension points, be it through: dependency injection and composition, events, delegation, etc. Consider the following a simple, extendable class: class PaycheckCalculator { // ... protected decimal GetOvertimeFactor() { return 2.0M; } } Now say, for example, that the OvertimeFactor changes to 1.5. Since the above class was designed to be extended, I can easily subclass and return a different OvertimeFactor. But... despite the class being designed for extension and adhering to OCP, I'll modify the single method in question, rather than subclassing and overridding the method in question and then re-wiring my objects in my IoC container. As a result I've violated part of what OCP attempts to accomplish. It feels like I'm just being lazy because the above is a bit easier. Am I misunderstanding OCP? Should I really be doing something different? Do you leverage the benefits of OCP differently? Update: based on the answers it looks like this contrived example is a poor one for a number of different reasons. The main intent of the example was to demonstrate that the class was designed to be extended by providing methods that when overridden would alter the behavior of public methods without the need for changing internal or private code. Still, I definitely misunderstood OCP.

  Read the article

• What is a good way to share internal helpers?

  - by toplel32

  All my projects share the same base library that I have build up over quite some time. It contains utilities and static helper classes to assist them where .NET doesn't exactly offer what I want. Originally all the helpers were written mainly to serve an internal purpose and it has to stay that way, but sometimes they prove very useful to other assemblies. Now making them public in a reliable way is more complicated than most would think, for example all methods that assume nullable types must now contain argument checking while not charging internal utilities with the price of doing so. The price might be negligible, but it is far from right. While refactoring, I have revised this case multiple times and I've come up with the following solutions so far: Have an internal and public class for each helper The internal class contains the actual code while the public class serves as an access point which does argument checking. Cons: The internal class requires a prefix to avoid ambiguity (the best presentation should be reserved for public types) It isn't possible to discriminate methods that don't need argument checking   Have one class that contains both internal and public members (as conventionally implemented in .NET framework). At first, this might sound like the best possible solution, but it has the same first unpleasant con as solution 1. Cons: Internal methods require a prefix to avoid ambiguity   Have an internal class which is implemented by the public class that overrides any members that require argument checking. Cons: Is non-static, atleast one instantiation is required. This doesn't really fit into the helper class idea, since it generally consists of independent fragments of code, it should not require instantiation. Non-static methods are also slower by a negligible degree, which doesn't really justify this option either. There is one general and unavoidable consequence, alot of maintenance is necessary because every internal member will require a public counterpart. A note on solution 1: The first consequence can be avoided by putting both classes in different namespaces, for example you can have the real helper in the root namespace and the public helper in a namespace called "Helpers".

  Read the article

• @staticmethod vs module-level function

  - by darkfeline

  This is not about @staticmethod and @classmethod! I know how staticmethod works. What I want to know is the proper use cases for @staticmethod vs. a module-level function. I've googled this question, and it seems there's some general agreement that module-level functions are preferred over static methods because it's more pythonic. Static methods have the advantage of being bound to its class, which may make sense if only that class uses it. However, in Python functionality is usually organized by module not class, so usually making it a module function makes sense too. Static methods can also be overridden by subclasses, which is an advantage or disadvantage depending on how you look at it. Although, static methods are usually "functionally pure" so overriding it may not be smart, but it may be convenient sometimes (though this may be one of those "convenient, but NEVER DO IT" kind of things only experience can teach you). Are there any general rule-of-thumbs for using either staticmethod or module-level functions? What concrete advantages or disadvantages do they have (e.g. future extension, external extension, readability)? If possible, also provide a case example.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >