Search Results

Search found 11048 results on 442 pages for 'concrete syntax tree'.

Page 90/442 | < Previous Page | 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97  | Next Page >

  • Can I turn off inline syntax checking in the Office 2003 VBA editor?

    - by ChristianLinnell
    As anybody who uses VBA in Office 2003 will know, it has the extremely frustrating tendency to do a syntax check every time you click off a line. For example, if I start writing a line of code, I might go > For Each application In And then think "crap, what's the application collection called?" So I'll hit "page up" to find it, and get (in this case) a "Compile Error". Can I turn this off?

    Read the article

  • Can I use Linq-to-xml to persist my object state without having to use/know Xpath & XSD Syntax?

    - by Greg
    Hi, Can I use Linq-to-xml to persist my object state without having to use/know Xpath & XSD Syntax? ie. really looking for simple but flexible way to persist a graph of object data (e.g. have say 2 or 3 classes with associations) - if Linq-to-xml were as simple as saying "persist this graph to XML", and then you could also query it via Linq, or load it into memory again/change/then re-save to the xml file.

    Read the article

  • Msg 102, Level 15, State 1, Line 1 Incorrect syntax near ' '.

    - by sajad
    i am trying to query from a temp table,and i keep getting the message Msg 102, Level 15, State 1, Line 1 Incorrect syntax near ' '. can somebody tell me wats the problem..is it due to convert.. plz help The query is select compid,2, convert(datetime, '01/01/' + CONVERT(char(4),cal_yr) ,101) ,0,  Update_dt, th1, th2, th3_pc , Update_id, Update_dt,1 from #tmp_CTF

    Read the article

  • Can't get syntax correct for dynam. create onclick the ie way.

    - by Max
    I was hoping to keep cross-browser compatibility and afaik this is the only issue so far. .setAttribute("onclick", "return showRapidText("+itemnum+");"); This works PERFECT but I'd like to make it IE compatible by putting it in this syntax .onclick = new Function("fnDisplay_Computers('" + alines[i] + "')"); so... I tried .onclick = new Function("showRapidText('" + itemnum + "')"); and .onclick = new Function("return showRapidText('" + itemnum + "')"); and about 40 other ways but nothing works

    Read the article

  • javadoc and overloaded methods

    - by skrebbel
    Hi all, I'm developing an API with many identically named methods that just differ by signature, which I guess is fairly common. They all do the same thing, except that they initialize various values by defaults if the user does not want to specify. As a digestible example, consider public interface Forest { public Tree addTree(); public Tree addTree(int amountOfLeaves); public Tree addTree(int amountOfLeaves, Fruit fruitType); public Tree addTree(int amountOfLeaves, int height); public Tree addTree(int amountOfLeaves, Fruit fruitType, int height); } The essential action performed by all of these methods is the same; a tree is planted in the forest. Many important things users of my API need to know about adding trees hold for all these methods. Ideally, I would like to write one Javadoc block that is used by all methods: /** * Plants a new tree in the forest. Please note that it may take * up to 30 years for the tree to be fully grown. * * @param amountOfLeaves desired amount of leaves. Actual amount of * leaves at maturity may differ by up to 10%. * @param fruitType the desired type of fruit to be grown. No warranties * are given with respect to flavour. * @param height desired hight in centimeters. Actual hight may differ by * up to 15%. */ In my imagination, a tool could magically choose which of the @params apply to each of the methods, and thus generate good docs for all methods at once. With Javadoc, if I understand it correctly, all I can do is essentially copy&paste the same javadoc block five times, with only a slightly differing parameter list for each method. This sounds cumbersome to me, and is also difficult to maintain. Is there any way around that? Some extension to javadoc that has this kind of support? Or is there a good reason why this is not supported that I missed?

    Read the article

  • Dynamically loading sub-trees into YUI Treeview

    - by user319399
    When you create a YUI TreeView instance, you can pass in an object that represents an entire tree, and it will automatically build up the TextNodes for you. I'd like to send in a partial tree, such that the tree only goes, say, 2 levels deep, and anything deeper than that will invoke dynamic loading. I've got that much working. Now for the interesting part. In the dynamic loading callback I give to my tree instance, I want to again be able to just give YUI a big object representing more of the tree. I want to do something like this: // data is a array of objects organized into a tree, with some nodes requiring dynamic loading when they are navigated to tree = new YAHOO.widget.TreeView("treeDiv1", data); tree.setDynamicLoad(loadDataForNode); function loadDataForNode(node, onCompleteCallback) { if(node.children.length==0) { var subTree = { "label":"Cars", isLeaf:false, children:[ { "label":"Chevy", isLeaf:true }, { "label":"Ford", isLeaf:true }, ] }; // doesn't work, even though it has the required "label" field var tempNode = new YAHOO.widget.TextNode(subTree, node, true); } onCompleteCallback(); } Is this possible? Or do I have to iterate over all the nodes in my subtree and construct individual TextNodes for each one? Thanks much...

    Read the article

  • How to define trees with more than one type in ML programing language

    - by user550413
    Well, I am asked to do the next thing: To define a binary tree which can contain 2 different types: ('a,'b) abtree and these are the requirements: Any inner vertex (not a leaf) must be of the type 'a or 'b and the leafs have no value. For every path in the tree all 'a values must appear before the 'b value: examples of paths: 'a->'a->'a-'b (legal) 'a->'b->'b (legal) 'a->'a->'a (legal) 'b->'b->'b (legal) 'a->'b->'a (ILLEGAL) and also I need to define another tree which is like the one described above but now I have got also 'c and in the second requirement it says that for every path I 'a values appear before the 'b values and all the 'b values appear before the 'c values. First, I am not sure how to define binary trees to have more than 1 type in them. I mean the simplest binary tree is: datatype 'a tree = leaf | br of 'a * 'a tree * 'a tree; And also how I can define a tree to have these requirements. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Applying a function to a custom type in F#

    - by Frederik Wordenskjold
    On my journey to learning F#, I've run into a problem I cant solve. I have defined a custom type: type BinTree = | Node of int * BinTree * BinTree | Empty I have made a function which takes a tree, traverses it, and adds the elements it visits to a list, and returns it: let rec inOrder tree = seq{ match tree with | Node (data, left, right) -> yield! inOrder left yield data; yield! inOrder right | Empty -> () } |> Seq.to_list; Now I want to create a function, similar to this, which takes a tree and a function, traverses it and applies a function to each node, then returns the tree: mapInOrder : ('a -> 'b) -> 'a BinTree -> 'b BinTree This seems easy, and it probably is! But I'm not sure how to return the tree. I've tried this: let rec mapInOrder f tree = match tree with | Node(data, left, right) -> mapInOrder f left Node(f(data), left, right) mapInOrder f right | Empty -> () but this returns a unit. I havent worked with custom types before, so I'm probably missing something there!

    Read the article

  • How does Haskell do pattern matching without us defining an Eq on our data types?

    - by devoured elysium
    I have defined a binary tree: data Tree = Null | Node Tree Int Tree and have implemented a function that'll yield the sum of the values of all its nodes: sumOfValues :: Tree -> Int sumOfValues Null = 0 sumOfValues (Node Null v Null) = v sumOfValues (Node Null v t2) = v + (sumOfValues t2) sumOfValues (Node t1 v Null) = v + (sumOfValues t1) sumOfValues (Node t1 v t2) = v + (sumOfValues t1) + (sumOfValues t2) It works as expected. I had the idea of also trying to implement it using guards: sumOfValues2 :: Tree -> Int sumOfValues2 Null = 0 sumOfValues2 (Node t1 v t2) | t1 == Null && t2 == Null = v | t1 == Null = v + (sumOfValues2 t2) | t2 == Null = v + (sumOfValues2 t1) | otherwise = v + (sumOfValues2 t1) + (sumOfValues2 t2) but this one doesn't work because I haven't implemented Eq, I believe: No instance for (Eq Tree) arising from a use of `==' at zzz3.hs:13:3-12 Possible fix: add an instance declaration for (Eq Tree) In the first argument of `(&&)', namely `t1 == Null' In the expression: t1 == Null && t2 == Null In a stmt of a pattern guard for the definition of `sumOfValues2': t1 == Null && t2 == Null The question that has to be made, then, is how can Haskell make pattern matching without knowing when a passed argument matches, without resorting to Eq?

    Read the article

  • Java ORM related question - SQL Vs Google DB (Big Table?) GAE

    - by StackerFlow
    I was wondering about the following two options when one is not using SQL tables but ORM based DBs (Example - when you are using GAE) Would the second option be less efficient? Requirement: There is an object. The object has a collection of similar items. I need to store this object. Example, say the object is a tree and it has a collection of leaves. Option 1: Traditional SQL type structure: Table for the Tree (with TreeId as the identifier for a row in the Table.) Table for the Leaves (where each leaf has a TreeId and to show the leaves of a tree, I query all leaves where the TreeId is the Id of the tree.) Here, the Tree structure DOES NOT have a field with leaves. Option 2: ORM / GAE Tables: Using the same example above, I have an object for Tree where the object has a collection (Set/List in Java/C++) of leaves. I store and retrieve the Tree together with the leaves (as the leaves are implemented as a Set in the Tree object) My question is, will the second one be less efficient that the first option? If so, why? Are there other alternatives? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • how to change a while sql query loop into an array loop

    - by Mac Taylor
    hey guys i record number of queries of my website and in page the below script runs , 40 extra queries added to page . how can I change this sql connection into a propper and light one function tree_set($index) { //global $menu; Remove this. $q=mysql_query("select id,name,parent from cats where parent='$index'"); if(mysql_num_rows($q) === 0) { return; } // User $tree instead of the $menu global as this way there shouldn't be any data duplication $tree = $index > 0 ? '<ul>' : ''; // If we are on index 0 then we don't need the enclosing ul while($arr=mysql_fetch_assoc($q)) { $subFileCount=mysql_query("select id,name,parent from cats where parent='{$arr['id']}'"); if(mysql_num_rows($subFileCount) > 0) { $class = 'folder'; } else { $class = 'file'; } $tree .= '<li>'; $tree .= '<span class="'.$class.'">'.$arr['name'].'</span>'; $tree .=tree_set("".$arr['id'].""); $tree .= '</li>'."\n"; } $tree .= $index > 0 ? '</ul>' : ''; // If we are on index 0 then we don't need the enclosing ul return $tree; } i heard , this can be done by changing it into an array , but i don't know how to do so thanks in advance

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97  | Next Page >