Search Results

Search found 14034 results on 562 pages for 'interface inheritance'.

Page 91/562 | < Previous Page | 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98  | Next Page >

  • Visual Studio code generated when choosing to explicitly implement interface

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    Sorry for the vague title, but I'm not sure what this is called. Say I add IDisposable to my class, Visual Studio can create the method stub for me. But it creates the stub like: void IDisposable.Dispose() I don't follow what this syntax is doing. Why do it like this instead of public void Dispose()? And with the first syntax, I couldn't work out how to call Dispose() from within my class (in my destructor).

    Read the article

  • javascript function object's inheritFrom method

    - by gawpertron
    I've come across this.inheritFrom that enables you to inherit from a super class. var superClass = function() { this.foo = 'foo'; this.bar = 'bar'; } var subClass = function() { this.inheritFrom = superClass; this.inheritFrom(); this.myFunction = function() { return this.foo; }; } I've looked in Mozilla and MSDN, but I can't seem to find it documented any where. As far as I can see it works in IE6 and Firefox 3. Any reason why it wouldn't be documented?

    Read the article

  • C++ - Error: expected unqualified-id before ‘using’

    - by Francisco P.
    Hello, everyone. I am having some trouble on a project I'm working on. Here's the header file for the calor class: #ifndef _CALOR_ #define _CALOR_ #include "gradiente.h" using namespace std; class Calor : public Gradiente { public: Calor(); Calor(int a); ~Calor(); int getTemp(); int getMinTemp(); void setTemp(int a); void setMinTemp(int a); void mostraSensor(); }; #endif When I try to compile it: calor.h|6|error: expected unqualified-id before ‘using’| Why does this happen? I've been searching online and learned this error occurs mostly due to corrupted included files. Makes no sense to me, though. This class inherits from gradiente: #ifndef _GRADIENTE_ #define _GRADIENTE_ #include "sensor.h" using namespace std; class Gradiente : public Sensor { protected: int vActual, vMin; public: Gradiente(); ~Gradiente(); } #endif Which in turn inherits from sensor #ifndef _SENSOR_ #define _SENSOR_ #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <string> #include "definicoes.h" using namespace std; class Sensor { protected: int tipo; int IDsensor; bool estadoAlerta; bool estadoActivo; static int numSensores; public: Sensor(/*PARAMETROS*/); Sensor(ifstream &); ~Sensor(); int getIDsensor(); bool getEstadoAlerta(); bool getEstadoActivo(); void setEstadoAlerta(int a); void setEstadoActivo(int a); virtual void guardaSensor(ofstream &); virtual void mostraSensor(); // FUNÇÃO COMUM /* virtual int funcaoComum() = 0; virtual int funcaoComum(){return 0;};*/ }; #endif For completeness' sake, here's definicoes.h #ifndef _DEFINICOES_ #define _DEFINICOES_ const unsigned int SENSOR_MOVIMENTO = 0; const unsigned int SENSOR_SOM = 1; const unsigned int SENSOR_PRESSAO = 2; const unsigned int SENSOR_CALOR = 3; const unsigned int SENSOR_CONTACTO = 4; const unsigned int MIN_MOVIMENTO = 10; const unsigned int MIN_SOM = 10; const unsigned int MIN_PRESSAO = 10; const unsigned int MIN_CALOR = 35; #endif Any help'd be much appreciated. Thank you for your time. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • When inheriting a control in Silverlight, how to find out if its template has been applied?

    - by herzmeister der welten
    When inheriting a control in Silverlight, how do I find out if its template has already been applied? I.e., can I reliably get rid of my cumbersome _hasTemplateBeenApplied field? public class AwesomeControl : Control { private bool _hasTemplateBeenApplied = false; public override void OnApplyTemplate() { base.OnApplyTemplate(); this._hasTemplateBeenApplied = true; // Stuff } private bool DoStuff() { if (this._hasTemplateBeenApplied) { // Do Stuff } } }

    Read the article

  • C++ Problem: Class Promotion using derived class

    - by Michael Fitzpatrick
    I have a class for Float32 that is derived from Float32_base class Float32_base { public: // Constructors Float32_base(float x) : value(x) {}; Float32_base(void) : value(0) {}; operator float32(void) {return value;}; Float32_base operator =(float x) {value = x; return *this;}; Float32_base operator +(float x) const { return value + x;}; protected: float value; } class Float32 : public Float32_base { public: float Tad() { return value + .01; } } int main() { Float32 x, y, z; x = 1; y = 2; // WILL NOT COMPILE! z = (x + y).Tad(); // COMPILES OK z = ((Float32)(x + y)).Tad(); } The issue is that the + operator returns a Float32_base and Tad() is not in that class. But 'x' and 'y' are Float32's. Is there a way that I can get the code in the first line to compile without having to resort to a typecast like I did on the next line?

    Read the article

  • About calling an subclass' overriding method when casted to its superclass

    - by Omega
    #include <iostream> class Vehicle { public: void greet() { std::cout << "Hello, I'm a vehicle"; } }; class Car : public Vehicle { public: void greet() { std::cout << "Hello, I'm a car"; } }; class Bike : public Vehicle { public: void greet() { std::cout << "Hello, I'm a bike"; } }; void receiveVehicle(Vehicle vehicle) { vehicle.greet(); } int main() { receiveVehicle(Car()); return 0; } As you can see, I'm trying to send a parameter of type Vehicle to a function, which calls greet(). Car and Bike are subclasses of Vehicle. They overwrite greet(). However, I'm getting "Hello, I'm a vehicle". I suppose that this is because receiveVehicle receives a parameter of type Vehicle instead of a specific subclass like Car or Bike. But that's what I want: I want this function to work with any subclass of Vehicle. Why am I not getting the expected output?

    Read the article

  • C++ parent class alignment

    - by aaa
    hello. Is it possible to specify alignment of parent class? for example something like (which does not compiled): template<size_t n> class Vector : public boost::array<double,n> __attribute__ ((aligned(16))) { thanks

    Read the article

  • Calling an Overridden Method from a Parent-Class Constructor

    - by Vaibhav Bajpai
    I tried calling an overridden method from a constructor of a parent class and noticed different behavior across languages. C++ - echoes A.foo() class A{ public: A(){foo();} virtual void foo(){cout<<"A.foo()";} }; class B : public A{ public: B(){} void foo(){cout<<"B.foo()";} }; int main(){ B *b = new B(); } Java - echoes B.foo() class A{ public A(){foo();} public void foo(){System.out.println("A.foo()");} } class B extends A{ public void foo(){System.out.println("B.foo()");} } class Demo{ public static void main(String args[]){ B b = new B(); } } C# - echoes B.foo() class A{ public A(){foo();} public virtual void foo(){Console.WriteLine("A.foo()");} } class B : A{ public override void foo(){Console.WriteLine("B.foo()");} } class MainClass { public static void Main (string[] args) { B b = new B(); } } I realize that in C++ objects are created from top-most parent going down the hierarchy, so when the constructor calls the overridden method, B does not even exist, so it calls the A' version of the method. However, I am not sure why I am getting different behavior in Java and C#.

    Read the article

  • Comparator interface

    - by 1ace1
    ok I was going to edit my previous question but i wasnt sure if it was the right way to do it so i'll just give another question about Comparator, now i want to be able to sort with different ways. I have a bank checks and i want to sort with checkNumber then checkAmount i managed to do it with checkNumber but couldnt figure out how with checkAmount here is how i did it for checkNumber: import java.util.Comparator; public class Check implements Comparator { private int checkNumber; private String description; private double checkAmount; public Check() { } public Check(int newCheckNumber, double newAmountNumber) { setCheckNumber(newCheckNumber); setAmountNumber(newAmountNumber); } public String toString() { return checkNumber + "\t\t" + checkAmount; } public void setCheckNumber(int checkNumber) { this.checkNumber = checkNumber; } public int getCheckNumber() { return checkNumber; } public void setAmountNumber(double amountNumber) { this.checkAmount = amountNumber; } public double getAmountNumber() { return checkAmount; } @Override public int compare(Object obj1, Object obj2) { int value1 = ((Check) obj1).getCheckNumber(); int value2 = ((Check) obj2).getCheckNumber(); int result = 0; if (value1 > value2){ result = 1; } else if(value1 < value2){ result = -1; } return result; } } import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.Collections; import test.CheckValue; public class TestCheck { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList List = new ArrayList(); List.add(new Check(445, 55.0)); List.add(new Check(101,43.12)); List.add(new Check(110,101.0)); List.add(new Check(553,300.21)); List.add(new Check(123,32.1)); Collections.sort(List, new Check()); System.out.println("Check Number - Check Amount"); for (int i = 0; i < List.size(); i++){ System.out.println(List.get(i)); } } } thank you very much in advance and please tell me if im submiting things in the wrong way.

    Read the article

  • Reason for .Net UI Element Thread-restriction

    - by Charles Bretana
    We know that it is not possible to execute code that manipulates the properties of any UI element from any thread other than the thread the element was instantiated on... My question is why? I remember that when we used COM user interface elements, (in COM/VB6 days), that all UI elements were created using COM classes and co-classes that stored their resources using a memory model referred to as Thread-Local-Storage (TLS) , but as I recall, this was required because of something relaetd to the way COM components were constructed, and should not be relevant to .Net UI elements. Wha's the underlying reason why this restriction still exists? Is it because the underlying Operating System still uses COM-based Win32 API classes for all UI elements, even the ones manipulated in a managed .Net application ??

    Read the article

  • Inheriting a Base Form but Paste/Cut Commands Not Captured

    - by ohu812
    I created a base form that has a specific size and an icon as a base for all forms created in my project (to be consistent in looks). The problem is, for some reason if I add a Text box to the Child form, I can no longer execute shortcuts like Copy (CTRL+C) etc into the Textbox. What should I do to handle this OTHER THAN writing code to capture those on the KeyUp control? This is also the case for RichTextBox control as well. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to override "inherited" z-indexes?

    - by Earlz
    I am needing to override the notion of inherited z-indexes. For instance in this code <style> div{ background-color:white; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; left: 0px; right: 0px; } </style> <div style="position: fixed; z-index: 2;"> div 1 <div style="position: fixed; z-index: 3;"> div 2 </div> </div> <div style="position: fixed; z-index: 2;"> div 3 </div> http://jsbin.com/epoqo3/3 I want for div 2 to be displayed, but instead div 3 is displayed. How can I change this behavior without changing my structure.

    Read the article

  • Generics in a bidirectional association

    - by Verhoevenv
    Let's say I have two classes A and B, with B a subtype of A. This is only part of a richer type hierarchy, obviously, but I don't think that's relevant. Assume A is the root of the hierarchy. There is a collection class C that keeps track of a list of A's. However, I want to make C generic, so that it is possible to make an instance that only keeps B's and won't accept A's. class A(val c: C[A]) { c.addEntry(this) } class B(c: C[A]) extends A(c) class C[T <: A]{ val entries = new ArrayBuffer[T]() def addEntry(e: T) { entries += e } } object Generic { def main(args : Array[String]) { val c = new C[B]() new B(c) } } The code above obviously give the error 'type mismatch: found C[B], required C[A]' on the new B(c) line. I'm not sure how this can be fixed. It's not possible to make C covariant in T (like C[+T <: A]) because the ArrayBuffer is non-variantly typed in T. It's not possible to make the constructor of B require a C[B] because C can't be covariant. Am I barking up the wrong tree here? I'm a complete Scala newbie, so any ideas and tips might be helpful. Thank you! EDIT: Basically, what I'd like to have is that the compiler accepts both val c = new C[B]() new B(c) and val c = new C[A]() new B(c) but would reject val c = new C[B]() new A(c) It's probably possible to relax the typing of the ArrayBuffer in C to be A instead of T, and thus in the addEntry method as well, if that helps.

    Read the article

  • How to link more than one object at a time in Xcode 4.2?

    - by Beppe
    I'm probably missing the basics here... Is there a way to link more than one object to a method at a time using Interface Builder in Xcode 4.2? I set tons of UIButtons in my UIView. All of them call just one method (let's say - (IBAction)buttonPushed:(UIButton *)aButton) that should do something different depending on the sender. I can't figure out a way to link them all with my method at a time. Any advice will be very appreciated... N.B. I'm using Xcode 4.2 on Snow Leopard, without storyboard.

    Read the article

  • C++ - How to call a member function for an inherited object.

    - by Francisco P.
    Hello! I have a few classes (heat, gas, contact, pressure) inheriting from a main one (sensor). I have a need to store them in a vector<Sensor *> (part of the specification). At some point in time, I need to call a function that indiscriminately stores those Sensor *. (also part of the specification, not open for discussion) Something like this: for(size_t i = 0; i < Sensors.size(); ++i) Sensors[i]->storeSensor(os) //os is an ofstream kind of object, passed onwards by reference Where and how shall storeSensor be defined? Is there any simple way to do this or will I need to disregard the specification? Mind you, I'm a beginner! Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • Passing derived objects in a constructure

    - by Clarence Klopfstein
    This is a bit of a convoluted question, hopefully I can make it clear. I am finding that this may not be possible, but am trying to see if anybody has a solution. I have four classes, two are core classes and two are those core classes extended: extUser Extends coreUser extSecurity Extends coreSecurity In the constructor for coreUser you have this: public coreUser(string id, ref coreSecurity cs) When trying to extend coreUser you would have this: public extUser(string id ref extSecurity es) : base(id, ref es) This fails because es is of type, extSecurity and the base class expects a type of coreSecurity. I've not found anyway to cast this to allow for me to override this base class in C#. In VB it works just fine. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Add Method to Built In Class

    - by Evorlor
    I am pretty sure this is not doable, but I will go ahead and cross my fingers and ask. I am trying to add a method to a built in class. I want this method to be callable by all of the built in class's subclasses. Specifically: I have a JButton, a JTextPane, and other JComponents. I want to be able to pass in a JDom Element instead of a Rectangle to setBounds(). My current solution is to extend each JComponent subclass with the desired methods, but that is a LOT of duplicate code. Is there a way I can write the following method just one time, and have it callable on all JComponent objects? Or is it required that I extend each subclass individually, and copy and paste the method below? public void setBounds(Element element) { this.setBounds(Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute( "x").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element .getAttribute("y").toString()), Integer .parseInt(element.getAttribute("width").toString()), Integer.parseInt(element.getAttribute("height") .toString())); }

    Read the article

  • Friendness and derived class

    - by ereOn
    Hi, Let's say I have the following class hierarchy: class Base { protected: virtual void foo() = 0; friend class Other; }; class Derived : public Base { protected: void foo() { /* Some implementation */ }; }; class Other { public: void bar() { Derived* a = new Derived(); a->foo(); // Compiler error: foo() is protected within this context }; }; I guess I could change it too a->Base::foo() but since foo() is pure virtual in the Base class, the call will result in calling Derived::foo() anyway. However, the compiler seems to refuse a->foo(). I guess it is logical, but I can't really understand why. Am I missing something ? Can't (shouldn't) it handle this special case ? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Extending a Java Swing class in Clojure

    - by mikera
    I'm trying to extend a Java Swing component in Clojure, i.e. I want to extend a javax.swing.JComponent and add some custom methods implemented in pure Clojure in addition to all the standard inherited methods. I've tried using "proxy" which works great if I just want a single instance (in the same way as an anonymous inner class). However I'd really like a named class so that I can generate an arbitrary number of instances. What's the recommended way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • C# - are private members inherited?

    - by Petr
    Hi, Just seen one tutorial saying that: Class Dog { private string Name; } Class SuperDog:Dog { private string Mood; } Then there was an UML displaying that SuperDog will inherit Name as well. I have tried but to me it seems that only public members are inherited. At least I could not access Name unless it was declared as public. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Setting the type of a field in a superclass from a subclass (Java)

    - by Ibolit
    Hi. I am writing a project on Google App Engine, within it I have a number of abstract classes that I hope I will be able to use in my future projects, and a number of concrete classes inheriting from them. Among other abstract classes I have an abstract servlet that does user management, and I hava an abstract user. The AbstractUser has all the necessary fields and methods for storing it in the datastore and telling whether the user is registered with my service or not. It does not implement any project specific functionality. The abstract servlet that manages users, refers only to the methods declared in the AbstractUser class, which allows it to generate links for logging in, logging out and registering (for unregistered users). In order to implement the project-specific user functionality I need to subclass the Abstract user. The servlets I use in my project are all indirect descendants from that abstract user management servlet, and the user is a protected field in it, so the descendant servlets can use it as their own field. However, whenever i want to access any project specific method of the concrete user, i need to cast it to that type. i.e. (abstract user managing servlet) ... AbstractUser user = getUser(); ... abstract protected AbstractUser getUser(); (project-specific abstract servlet) @Override protected AbstractUser getUser() { return MyUserFactory.getUser(); } any other project specific servlet: int a = ((ConcreteUser) user).getA(); Well, what i'd like to do is to somehow make the type of “user” in the superclass depend on something in the project-specific abstract class. Is it at all possible? And i don't want to move all the user-management stuff into a project-specific layer, for i would like to have it for my future projects already written :) Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • Need to interface to a C++ DLL

    - by Pedro
    Hi, I need to call a C++ API from C#. I have been able to call the API, but the char[] parameters do not seem to be marshalling correctly. Here's the C++ signature: Create2ptModel(double modelPowers[2], double modelDacs[2], int pclRange[2], double targetPowers[32], double *dacAdjustFactor, unsigned short powerRampFactors[32], BOOL bPCLDacAdjusted[32], char calibrationModel[32], char errMsg[1024]) and this is how I am trying to call it from C# [DllImport("AlgorithmsLib.dll", EntryPoint = "_Create2ptModel@36", ExactSpelling = true, CallingConvention = CallingConvention.StdCall, CharSet = CharSet.Auto)] private static extern AlgorithmStatus Create2ptModel( double[] modelPowers, double[] modelDacs, int[] pclRange, double[] targetPowers, ref double dacAdjustFactor, ushort[] powerRampFactors, bool[] bPCLDacAdjusted, /**/char[] calibrationModel, char[] errMsg/**/); Any idea of how I can marshall it correctly? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Java - How to pass a Generic parameter as Class<T> to a constructor

    - by Joe Almore
    I have a problem here that still cannot solve, the thing is I have this abstract class: public abstract class AbstractBean<T> { private Class<T> entityClass; public AbstractBean(Class<T> entityClass) { this.entityClass = entityClass; }... Now I have another class that inherits this abstract: @Stateless @LocalBean public class BasicUserBean<T extends BasicUser> extends AbstractBean<T> { private Class<T> user; public BasicUserBean() { super(user); // Error: cannot reference user before supertype contructor has been called. } My question is how can I make this to work?, I am trying to make the class BasicUserBean inheritable, so if I have class PersonBean which inherits BasicUserBean then I could set in the Generic the entity Person which also inherits the entity BasicUser. And it will end up being: @Stateless @LocalBean public class PersonBean extends BasicUserBean<Person> { public PersonBean() { super(Person.class); } ... I just want to inherit the basic functionality from BasicUserBean to all descendants, so I do not have to repeat the same code among all descendants. Thanks!.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98  | Next Page >