Search Results

Search found 597 results on 24 pages for 'constructors'.

Page 9/24 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • Weak hashmap with weak references to the values?

    - by Razor Storm
    I am building an android app where each entity has a bitmap that represents its sprite. However, each entity can be be duplicated (there might be 3 copies of entity asdf for example). One approach is to load all the sprites upfront, and then put the correct sprite in the constructors of the entities. However, I want to decode the bitmaps lazily, so that the constructors of the entities will decode the bitmaps. The only problem with this is that duplicated entities will load the same bitmap twice, using 2x the memory (Or n times if the entity is created n times). To fix this, I built a SingularBitmapFactory that will store a decoded Bitmap into a hash, and if the same bitmap is asked for again, will simply return the previously hashed one instead of building a new one. Problem with this, though, is that the factory holds a copy of all bitmaps, and so won't ever get garbage collected. What's the best way to switch the hashmap to one with weakly referenced values? In otherwords, I want a structure where the values won't be GC'd if any other object holds a reference to it, but as long as no other objects refers it, then it can be GC'd.

    Read the article

  • Program to find the result of primitive recursive functions

    - by alphomega
    I'm writing a program to solve the result of primitive recursive functions: 1 --Basic functions------------------------------ 2 3 --Zero function 4 z :: Int -> Int 5 z = \_ -> 0 6 7 --Successor function 8 s :: Int -> Int 9 s = \x -> (x + 1) 10 11 --Identity/Projection function generator 12 idnm :: Int -> Int -> ([Int] -> Int) 13 idnm n m = \(x:xs) -> ((x:xs) !! (m-1)) 14 15 --Constructors-------------------------------- 16 17 --Composition constructor 18 cn :: ([Int] -> Int) -> [([Int] -> Int)] -> ([Int] -> Int) 19 cn f [] = \(x:xs) -> f 20 cn f (g:gs) = \(x:xs) -> (cn (f (g (x:xs))) gs) these functions and constructors are defined here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_recursive_function The issue is with my attempt to create the compositon constructor, cn. When it gets to the base case, f is no longer a partial application, but a result of the function. Yet the function expects a function as the first argument. How can I deal with this problem? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Freestanding ARM C++ Code - empty .ctors section

    - by Matthew Iselin
    I'm writing C++ code to run in a freestanding environment (basically an ARM board). It's been going well except I've run into a stumbling block - global static constructors. To my understanding the .ctors section contains a list of addresses to each static constructor, and my code simply needs to iterate this list and make calls to each function as it goes. However, I've found that this section in my binary is in fact completely empty! Google pointed towards using ".init_array" instead of ".ctors" (an EABI thing), but that has not changed anything. Any ideas as to why my static constructors don't exist? Relevant linker script and objdump output follows: .ctors : { . = ALIGN(4096); start_ctors = .; *(.init_array); *(.ctors); end_ctors = .; } .dtors : { . = ALIGN(4096); start_dtors = .; *(.fini_array); *(.dtors); end_dtors = .; } -- 2 .ctors 00001000 8014c000 8014c000 00054000 2**2 CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA <snip> 8014d000 g O .ctors 00000004 start_ctors <snip> 8014d000 g O .ctors 00000004 end_ctors I'm using an arm-elf targeted GCC compiler (4.4.1).

    Read the article

  • Should a C++ constructor do real work?

    - by Wade Williams
    I'm strugging with some advice I have in the back of my mind but for which I can't remember the reasoning. I seem to remember at some point reading some advice (can't remember the source) that C++ constructors should not do real work. Rather, they should initialize variables only. The advice when on to explain that real work should be done in some sort of init() method, to be called separately after the instance was created. The situation is I have a class that represents a hardware device. It makes logical sense to me for the constructor to call the routines that query the device in order to build up the instance variables that describe the device. In other words, once new instantiates the object, the developer receives an object which is ready to be used, no separate call to object-init() required. Is there a good reason why constructors shouldn't do real work? Obviously it could slow allocation time, but that wouldn't be any different if calling a separate method immediately after allocation. Just trying to figure out what gotchas I not currently considering that might have lead to such advice.

    Read the article

  • C++: Construction and initialization order guarantees

    - by Helltone
    Hi, I have some doubts about construction and initialization order guarantees in C++. For instance, the following code has four classes X, Y, Z and W. The main function instantiates an object of class X. X contains an object of class Y, and derives from class Z, so both constructors will be called. Additionally, the const char* parameter passed to X's constructor will be implicitly converted to W, so W's constructor must also be called. What are the guarantees the C++ standard gives on the order of the calls to the copy constructors? Or, equivalently, this program is allowed to print? #include <iostream> class Z { public: Z() { std::cout << "Z" << std::endl; } }; class Y { public: Y() { std::cout << "Y" << std::endl; } }; class W { public: W(const char*) { std::cout << "W" << std::endl; } }; class X : public Z { public: X(const W&) { std::cout << "X" << std::endl; } private: Y y; }; int main(int, char*[]) { X x("x"); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Predicate usually used for array/list how about here?

    - by amit kohan
    In following code (Josh Smith's article on MVVM), can somebody give me some insight about return _canExecute == null ? true : _canExecute(parameter); ? it is a normal if/else statement but I'm not getting the last part of it. public class RelayCommand : ICommand { #region Fields readonly Action<object> _execute; readonly Predicate<object> _canExecute; #endregion // Fields #region Constructors public RelayCommand(Action<object> execute) : this(execute, null) { } public RelayCommand(Action<object> execute, Predicate<object> canExecute) { if (execute == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("execute"); _execute = execute; _canExecute = canExecute; } #endregion // Constructors #region ICommand Members [DebuggerStepThrough] public bool CanExecute(object parameter) { return _canExecute == null ? true : _canExecute(parameter); } public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged { add { CommandManager.RequerySuggested += value; } remove { CommandManager.RequerySuggested -= value; } } public void Execute(object parameter) { _execute(parameter); } #endregion // ICommand Members } Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do I access abstract private data from derived class without friend or 'getter' functions in C++?

    - by John
    So, I am caught up in a dilemma right now. How am I suppose to access a pure abstract base class private member variable from a derived class? I have heard from a friend that it is possible to access it through the base constructor, but he didn't explain. How is it possible? There are some inherited classes from base class. Is there any way to gain access to the private variables ? class Base_button { private: bool is_vis; Rect rButton; public: // Constructors Base_button(); Base_button( const Point &corner, double height, double width ); // Destructor virtual ~ Base_button(); // Accessors virtual void draw() const = 0; bool clicked( const Point &click ) const; bool is_visible() const; // Mutators virtual void show(); virtual void hide(); void move( const Point &loc ); }; class Button : public Base_button { private: Message mButton; public: // Constructors Button(); Button( const Point &corner, const string &label ); // Acessors virtual void draw() const; // Mutators virtual void show(); virtual void hide(); }; I want to be able access Rect and bool in the base class from the subclass

    Read the article

  • destructor being called by subclass

    - by zero
    I'm currently learning more about php objects and constructors/destructors, but i've noticed in my code that the parent class's destructor is being called twice, I thought it was because i was extending the first class to my second class and that the second class was calling it, but this is what the php docs say about that: Like constructors, parent destructors will not be called implicitly by the engine. In order to run a parent destructor, one would have to explicitly call parent::__destruct() in the destructor body. so if it is not being called by the subclass then is it because by extended the first class that i've made a reference to the parent class making it call itself twice or I'm I way off base here? the code: <?php class test{ public $test1 = "this is a test of a pulic property"; private $test2 = "this is a test of a private property"; protected $test3 = "this is a test of a protected property"; const hello = 900000; function __construct($h){ //echo 'this is the constructor test '.$h; } function x($x2){ echo ' this is fn x'.$x2; } function y(){ print "this is fn y"; } } $obj = new test("this is an \"arg\" sent to instance of test"); class hey extends test{ function hey(){ $this->x('<br>from the host with the most'); echo ' <br>from hey class'.$this->test3; } } $obj2 = new hey(); echo $obj2::hello; ?>

    Read the article

  • Reworking my singly linked list

    - by Stradigos
    Hello everyone, thanks for taking the time to stop by my question. Below you will find my working SLL, but I want to make more use of C# and, instead of having two classes, SLL and Node, I want to use Node's constructors to do all the work (To where if you pass a string through the node, the constructor will chop it up into char nodes). The problem is, after an a few hours of tinkering, I'm not really getting anywhere... using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Text; using System.IO; namespace PalindromeTester { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { SLL mySLL = new SLL(); mySLL.add('a'); mySLL.add('b'); mySLL.add('c'); mySLL.add('d'); mySLL.add('e'); mySLL.add('f'); Console.Out.WriteLine("Node count = " + mySLL.count); mySLL.reverse(); mySLL.traverse(); Console.Out.WriteLine("\n The header is: " + mySLL.gethead); Console.In.ReadLine(); } class Node { private char letter; private Node next; public Node() { next = null; } public Node(char c) { this.data = c; } public Node(string s) { } public char data { get { return letter; } set { letter = value; } } public Node nextNode { get { return next; } set { next = value; } } } class SLL { private Node head; private int totalNode; public SLL() { head = null; totalNode = 0; } public void add(char s) { if (head == null) { head = new Node(); head.data = s; } else { Node temp; temp = new Node(); temp.data = s; temp.nextNode = head; head = temp; } totalNode++; } public int count { get { return totalNode; } } public char gethead { get { return head.data; } } public void traverse() { Node temp = head; while(temp != null) { Console.Write(temp.data + " "); temp = temp.nextNode; } } public void reverse() { Node q = null; Node p = this.head; while(p!=null) { Node r=p; p=p.nextNode; r.nextNode=q; q=r; } this.head = q; } } } } Here's what I have so far in trying to work it into Node's constructors: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Text; using System.IO; namespace PalindromeTester { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { //Node myList = new Node(); //TextReader tr = new StreamReader("data.txt"); //string line; //while ((line = tr.ReadLine()) != null) //{ // Console.WriteLine(line); //} //tr.Close(); Node myNode = new Node("hello"); Console.Out.WriteLine(myNode.count); myNode.reverse(); myNode.traverse(); // Console.Out.WriteLine(myNode.gethead); Console.In.ReadLine(); } class Node { private char letter; private Node next; private Node head; private int totalNode; public Node() { head = null; totalNode = 0; } public Node(char c) { if (head == null) { head = new Node(); head.data = c; } else { Node temp; temp = new Node(); temp.data = c; temp.nextNode = head; head = temp; } totalNode++; } public Node(string s) { foreach (char x in s) { new Node(x); } } public char data { get { return letter; } set { letter = value; } } public Node nextNode { get { return next; } set { next = value; } } public void reverse() { Node q = null; Node p = this.head; while (p != null) { Node r = p; p = p.nextNode; r.nextNode = q; q = r; } this.head = q; } public void traverse() { Node temp = head; while (temp != null) { Console.Write(temp.data + " "); temp = temp.nextNode; } } public int count { get { return totalNode; } } } } } Ideally, the only constructors and methods I would be left with are Node(), Node(char c), Node(string s), Node reserve() and I'll be reworking traverse into a ToString overload. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • C#: System.Lazy&lt;T&gt; and the Singleton Design Pattern

    - by James Michael Hare
    So we've all coded a Singleton at one time or another.  It's a really simple pattern and can be a slightly more elegant alternative to global variables.  Make no mistake, Singletons can be abused and are often over-used -- but occasionally you find a Singleton is the most elegant solution. For those of you not familiar with a Singleton, the basic Design Pattern is that a Singleton class is one where there is only ever one instance of the class created.  This means that constructors must be private to avoid users creating their own instances, and a static property (or method in languages without properties) is defined that returns a single static instance. 1: public class Singleton 2: { 3: // the single instance is defined in a static field 4: private static readonly Singleton _instance = new Singleton(); 5:  6: // constructor private so users can't instantiate on their own 7: private Singleton() 8: { 9: } 10:  11: // read-only property that returns the static field 12: public static Singleton Instance 13: { 14: get 15: { 16: return _instance; 17: } 18: } 19: } This is the most basic singleton, notice the key features: Static readonly field that contains the one and only instance. Constructor is private so it can only be called by the class itself. Static property that returns the single instance. Looks like it satisfies, right?  There's just one (potential) problem.  C# gives you no guarantee of when the static field _instance will be created.  This is because the C# standard simply states that classes (which are marked in the IL as BeforeFieldInit) can have their static fields initialized any time before the field is accessed.  This means that they may be initialized on first use, they may be initialized at some other time before, you can't be sure when. So what if you want to guarantee your instance is truly lazy.  That is, that it is only created on first call to Instance?  Well, there's a few ways to do this.  First we'll show the old ways, and then talk about how .Net 4.0's new System.Lazy<T> type can help make the lazy-Singleton cleaner. Obviously, we could take on the lazy construction ourselves, but being that our Singleton may be accessed by many different threads, we'd need to lock it down. 1: public class LazySingleton1 2: { 3: // lock for thread-safety laziness 4: private static readonly object _mutex = new object(); 5:  6: // static field to hold single instance 7: private static LazySingleton1 _instance = null; 8:  9: // property that does some locking and then creates on first call 10: public static LazySingleton1 Instance 11: { 12: get 13: { 14: if (_instance == null) 15: { 16: lock (_mutex) 17: { 18: if (_instance == null) 19: { 20: _instance = new LazySingleton1(); 21: } 22: } 23: } 24:  25: return _instance; 26: } 27: } 28:  29: private LazySingleton1() 30: { 31: } 32: } This is a standard double-check algorithm so that you don't lock if the instance has already been created.  However, because it's possible two threads can go through the first if at the same time the first time back in, you need to check again after the lock is acquired to avoid creating two instances. Pretty straightforward, but ugly as all heck.  Well, you could also take advantage of the C# standard's BeforeFieldInit and define your class with a static constructor.  It need not have a body, just the presence of the static constructor will remove the BeforeFieldInit attribute on the class and guarantee that no fields are initialized until the first static field, property, or method is called.   1: public class LazySingleton2 2: { 3: // because of the static constructor, this won't get created until first use 4: private static readonly LazySingleton2 _instance = new LazySingleton2(); 5:  6: // Returns the singleton instance using lazy-instantiation 7: public static LazySingleton2 Instance 8: { 9: get { return _instance; } 10: } 11:  12: // private to prevent direct instantiation 13: private LazySingleton2() 14: { 15: } 16:  17: // removes BeforeFieldInit on class so static fields not 18: // initialized before they are used 19: static LazySingleton2() 20: { 21: } 22: } Now, while this works perfectly, I hate it.  Why?  Because it's relying on a non-obvious trick of the IL to guarantee laziness.  Just looking at this code, you'd have no idea that it's doing what it's doing.  Worse yet, you may decide that the empty static constructor serves no purpose and delete it (which removes your lazy guarantee).  Worse-worse yet, they may alter the rules around BeforeFieldInit in the future which could change this. So, what do I propose instead?  .Net 4.0 adds the System.Lazy type which guarantees thread-safe lazy-construction.  Using System.Lazy<T>, we get: 1: public class LazySingleton3 2: { 3: // static holder for instance, need to use lambda to construct since constructor private 4: private static readonly Lazy<LazySingleton3> _instance 5: = new Lazy<LazySingleton3>(() => new LazySingleton3()); 6:  7: // private to prevent direct instantiation. 8: private LazySingleton3() 9: { 10: } 11:  12: // accessor for instance 13: public static LazySingleton3 Instance 14: { 15: get 16: { 17: return _instance.Value; 18: } 19: } 20: } Note, you need your lambda to call the private constructor as Lazy's default constructor can only call public constructors of the type passed in (which we can't have by definition of a Singleton).  But, because the lambda is defined inside our type, it has access to the private members so it's perfect. Note how the Lazy<T> makes it obvious what you're doing (lazy construction), instead of relying on an IL generation side-effect.  This way, it's more maintainable.  Lazy<T> has many other uses as well, obviously, but I really love how elegant and readable it makes the lazy Singleton.

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: A Redux

    - by James Michael Hare
    I gave my Little Wonders presentation to the Topeka Dot Net Users' Group today, so re-posting the links to all the previous posts for them. The Presentation: C#/.NET Little Wonders: A Presentation The Original Trilogy: C#/.NET Five Little Wonders (part 1) C#/.NET Five More Little Wonders (part 2) C#/.NET Five Final Little Wonders (part 3) The Subsequent Sequels: C#/.NET Little Wonders: ToDictionary() and ToList() C#/.NET Little Wonders: DateTime is Packed With Goodies C#/.NET Little Wonders: Fun With Enum Methods C#/.NET Little Wonders: Cross-Calling Constructors C#/.NET Little Wonders: Constraining Generics With Where Clause C#/.NET Little Wonders: Comparer<T>.Default C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Useful (But Overlooked) Sets The Concurrent Wonders: C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Concurrent Collections (1 of 3) - ConcurrentQueue and ConcurrentStack C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Concurrent Collections (2 of 3) - ConcurrentDictionary Tweet   Technorati Tags: .NET,C#,Little Wonders

    Read the article

  • Setter Validation can affect performance?

    - by TiagoBrenck
    Whitin a scenario where you use an ORM to map your entities to the DB, and you have setter validations (nullable, date lower than today validation, etc) every time the ORM get a result, it will pass into the setter to instance the object. If I have a grid that usually returns 500 records, I assume that for each record it passes on all validations. If my entity has 5 setter validations, than I have passed in 2.500 validations. Does those 2.500 validations will affect the performance? If was 15.000 validation, it will be different? In my opinion, and according to this answer (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4893558/calling-setters-from-a-constructor/4893604#4893604), setter validation is usefull than constructors validation. Is there a way to avoid unecessary validation, since I am safe that the values I send to DB when saving the entity wont change until I edit it on my system?

    Read the article

  • What are tangible advantages to proper Unit Tests over Functional Test called unit tests

    - by Jackie
    A project I am working on has a bunch of legacy tests that were not properly mocked out. Because of this the only dependency it has is EasyMock, which doesn't support statics, constructors with arguments, etc. The tests instead rely on database connections and such to "run" the tests. Adding powermock to handle these cases is being shot down as cost prohibitive due to the need to upgrade the existing project to support it (Another discussion). My questions are, what are the REAL world tangible benifits of proper unit testing I can use to push back? Are there any? Am I just being a stickler by saying that bad unit tests (even if they work) are bad? Is code coverage just as effective?

    Read the article

  • Liskov substitution and abstract classes / strategy pattern

    - by Kolyunya
    I'm trying to follow LSP in practical programming. And I wonder if different constructors of subclasses violate it. It would be great to hear an explanation instead of just yes/no. Thanks much! P.S. If the answer is no, how do I make different strategies with different input without violating LSP? class IStrategy { public: virtual void use() = 0; }; class FooStrategy : public IStrategy { public: FooStrategy(A a, B b) { c = /* some operations with a, b */ } virtual void use() { std::cout << c; } private: C c; }; class BarStrategy : public IStrategy { public: BarStrategy(D d, E e) { f = /* some operations with d, e */ } virtual void use() { std::cout << f; } private: F f; };

    Read the article

  • How can you become a real programming polyglot?

    - by Yob
    I work as a Java programmer, but C and C++ were always my favourite languages during studies. Unfortunatelly I don't have an opportunity to work with them as often as I would like to. As a result I sometimes get realized that I don't remember something quite important (today example: inherited protected members cannot be accessed in derived class constructors). The other example could be Python and Haskell which I enjoy using but don't use everyday. I got an idea to write my own wiki with easy to forget things (e.g. bash tricks & tips) but I find no sense in writing there everything I can forget about coolest programming languages. I know that the best way would be having a side projects (I want to start working on some C/C++ open source project after graduation), but currently I have to write my graduation thesis and work so I merely don't have time to do this. How do you stay sharp in languages that you don't use everyday?

    Read the article

  • Why is JavaScript not used for classical application development (compiled software)?

    - by Jose Faeti
    During my years of web development with JavaScript, I come to the conclusion that it's an incredible powerful language, and you can do amazing things with it. It offers a rich set of features, like: Dynamic typing First-class functions Nested functions Closures Functions as methods Functions as Object constructors Prototype-based Objects-based (almost everything is an object) Regex Array and Object literals It seems to me that almost everything can be achieved with this kind of language, you can also emulate OO programming, since it provides great freedom and many different coding styles. With more software-oriented custom functionalities (I/O, FileSystem, Input devices, etc.) I think it will be great to develop applications with. Though, as far as I know, it's only used in web development or in existing softwares as a scripting language only. Only recently, maybe thanks to the V8 Engine, it's been used more for other kind of tasks (see node.js for example). Why until now it's only be relegated only to web development? What is keeping it away from software development?

    Read the article

  • is 'protected' ever reasonable outside of virtual methods and destructors?

    - by notallama
    so, suppose you have some fields and methods marked protected (non-virtual). presumably, you did this because you didn't mark them public because you don't want some nincompoop to accidentally call them in the wrong order or pass in invalid parameters, or you don't want people to rely on behaviour that you're going to change later. so, why is it okay for that nincompoop to use those fields and methods from a subclass? as far as i can tell, they can still screw up in the same ways, and the same compatibility issues still exist if you change the implementation. the cases for protected i can think of are: non-virtual destructors, so you can't break things by deleting the base class. virtual methods, so you can override 'private' methods called by the base class. constructors in c++. in java/c# marking the class as abstract will do basically the same. any other use cases?

    Read the article

  • best practice for initializing class members in php

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

    Read the article

  • Getting information of a class structure at runtime using Java reflection

    - by Eliza Sahoo
    A simple way to get the class structure information of the Class we are using in our application. Step1: Create the Class object of the class we want to explore at run time or the class which is getting added at runtime. Step2: As we are looking for the structure of the class, get all Constructors, Fields and methods by invoking respective functions of the Class. Step3: print them in java console or use them as required. Eliza

    Read the article

  • Constructor overloading in Java - best practice

    - by errr
    There are a few topics similar to this, but I couldn't find one with a sufficient answer. I would like to know what is the best practice for constructor overloading in Java. I already have my own thoughts on the subject, but I'd like to hear more advice. I'm referring to both constructor overloading in a simple class and constructor overloading while inheriting an already overloaded class (meaning the base class has overloaded constructors). Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • How do you override the WCF AuthenticationService IsLoggedIn() method?

    - by Ryan Riley
    I have three current thoughts on how to do this: re-implement AuthenticationService, which uses lots of internal constructors and internal helpers, implement custom IIdentity and IPrincipal types and somehow hook these into FormsAuthentication. give up and roll my own. The problem is that we've got web apps and fat client apps using authentication and storing cookies. However, logging out of a web app does not log out of a fat client app, and we have now way of forcing a refreshed cookie, atm.

    Read the article

  • Custom Control Not Playing Nice With PropertyGrid

    - by lumberjack4
    I have a class that is implementing a custom ToolStripItem. Everything seems to work great until I try to add the item to a ContextMenuStrip at design time. If I try to add my custom control straight from the ContextMenuStrip the PropertyGrid freezes up and will not let me modify my Checked or Text properties. But if I go into the ContextMenuStrip PropertyGrid and add my custom control through the Items(...) property, I can modify the custom control just fine within that dialog. I'm not sure if I'm missing an attribute somewhere of if its a problem with the underlying code. Here is a copy of the CustomToolStripItem class. As you can see, its a very simple class. [ToolStripItemDesignerAvailability(ToolStripItemDesignerAvailability.ContextMenuStrip)] public class CustomToolStripItem : ToolStripControlHost { #region Public Properties [Description("Gets or sets a value indicating whether the object is in the checked state")] [ReadOnly(false)] public bool Checked { get { return checkBox.Checked; } set { checkBox.Checked = value; } } [Description("Gets or sets the object's text")] [ReadOnly(false)] public override string Text { get { return checkBox.Text; } set { checkBox.Text = value; } } #endregion Public Properties #region Public Events public event EventHandler CheckedChanged; #endregion Public Events #region Constructors public CustomToolStripItem() : base(new FlowLayoutPanel()) { // Setup the FlowLayoutPanel. controlPanel = (FlowLayoutPanel)base.Control; controlPanel.BackColor = Color.Transparent; // Add the child controls. checkBox.AutoSize = true; controlPanel.Controls.Add(checkBox); ContextMenuStrip strip = new ContextMenuStrip(); } #endregion Constructors #region Protected Methods protected override void OnSubscribeControlEvents(Control control) { base.OnSubscribeControlEvents(control); checkBox.CheckedChanged += new EventHandler(CheckChanged); } protected override void OnUnsubscribeControlEvents(Control control) { base.OnUnsubscribeControlEvents(control); checkBox.CheckedChanged -= new EventHandler(CheckChanged); } #endregion Protected Methods #region Private Methods private void CheckChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Throw the CustomToolStripItem's CheckedChanged event EventHandler handler = CheckedChanged; if (handler != null) { handler(sender, e); } } #endregion Private Methods #region Private Fields private FlowLayoutPanel controlPanel; private CheckBox checkBox = new CheckBox(); #endregion Private Fields }

    Read the article

  • Ruby tutorial for experienced programmers

    - by Skillwired
    I'm looking for a Ruby tutorial which would be usable for Java programmers with 8+ years of experience. I don't need another tutorial which explains basic programing/OOP/OOD concepts (inheritance, polymorphism, encapsulation, classes, constructors, hashes, etc.), just a fast-track tutorial (or even a reference?) which could tell us how to do specific things in Ruby.

    Read the article

  • Convert Byte Array into Bitset

    - by Unknown
    I have a byte array generated by a random number generator. I want to put this into the STL bitset. Unfortunately, it looks like Bitset only supports the following constructors: A string of 1's and 0's like "10101011" An unsigned long. (my byte array will be longer) The only solution I can think of now is to read the byte array bit by bit and make a string of 1's and 0's. Does anyone have a more efficient solution?

    Read the article

  • Can a stack have an exception safe method for returning and removing the top element with move seman

    - by Motti
    In an answer to a question about std::stack::pop() I claimed that the reason pop does not return the value is for exception safety reason (what happens if the copy constructor throws). @Konrad commented that now with move semantics this is no longer relevant. Is this true? AFAIK, move constructors can throw, but perhaps with noexcept it can still be achieved. For bonus points what thread safety guarantees can this operation supply?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >