i have a class named fdetails and i do not want any other class to inherit from this classCan i set it to not being inherited by another class. I would like to get the things done in the following 3 languages
View 6 Repliesi have a class named fdetails and i do not want any other class to inherit from this classCan i set it to not being inherited by another class. I would like to get the things done in the following 3 languages
Suppose I have piece of code like this:
Public Interface ISomething
....
End Interface
[code]....
I suspect I am being very silly here but I have the following setup
Class MustInherit myBaseClass
'some stuff
End Class
Class myInheritedClassA
[code]....
Running this results in the following error
Unhandled Exception: System.InvalidOperationException:
There was an error generating the XML document. --->
System.InvalidOperationException:
[code]....
is there any way of 'Widening' the inherited class to the base class so this would work?
EDIT:regarding XmlInclude(typeof inheritedClass), currently this method could potentially return a number of types of inherited class (i.e myInheritedClassA and myInheritedClassB) is it case of simply having to add each of the inheritedTypes in this tag?
I understand that inherited classes can't be converted from base classes. But is there any way to write a conversion sub, so that the base class gets assigned to MyBase, then extra properties are added?[code]...
View 7 RepliesI'm trying to force an inherited class to use a custom attribute. I'm creating a class library where the user who wants to create an item will do so, but be forced to add an attribute (or visual studio will automatically add the default attribute) to their inherited class. Here is what I'm hoping to achieve:
BaseClass.vb:
<CustomAttribute(10)> _
Public Class BaseClass
End Class
MyClass.vb:
[Code]...
bare with me during this silly example. :-) Let's say I have a class like this:
Public Class Animal
Public iLegs as int32 ' Number of legs
Public bWings as Boolean ' Wings? Yes/No
End Class
And another class that inherits the "Animal" class and adds one more property:
Public Class ScaryAnimal
Inherits Animal
Public iScariness as int32 ' 0-100, how scary is it?
End Class
Now, if I have an instance of "Animal" with some values in it, and I decide I want to cast it to a ScaryAnimal for some reason, how do I do that without having to create a new instance of "ScaryAnimal" and copy each property value?Basically I'm looking for a way to do this, without having to write the lines marked with '*** below:
[Code]...
I have two classes[code]...
How can I modify class1 in a sub in class2?
The program below trhows an error in the line "mTable2 = mTable.Copy". The error is: "Unable to cast object of type 'System.Data.DataTable' to type InherintanceQuestion.InheritedTable". This is because mTables is an instance of the InheritedTable class which inherits a DataTable and mTable is a DataTable. So, is there any way I can create the mTable2 to the mTable.copy to the mTable.
Public Class Form1
Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button1.Click
[code].....
I'm having trouble with the definition of an inherited generic class. I have two base classes that are defined like this:[code]
View 2 RepliesIs there a way to hide a method of a base class that has been inherited?Lets say the base class has the properties:
x
y
Height
Width
and the method
sub SpecialInstructions()
Now this class is inherited by some classes that either use the SpecialInstructions method or override it. But one class inherits it but cant make use of the method and therefore wants to hide it. I tried shadowing but it still seems that the method is visible ex
Private Shadows Sub SpecialInstructions()
I have a class which inherits a form class, and just recently it's started acting strange. All of the controls on the form are locked, and I don't understand why. I can't edit the properties of any controls, or anything.
View 4 RepliesBelow is example code of what I want to do:
Public Class Test
Sub New()
Dim cool As New B
cool.Doit()
[code]....
When I transfer my project to a server, I now get this error message. What does it mean and how do I fix it?
Server Error in '/HD' Application.
Parser Error
Description: An error occurred during the parsing of a resource required to service this request. Please review the following specific parse error details and modify your source file appropriately.
Parser Error Message: Could not load type 'HD._Default'.
Source Error:
Line 1: <%@ Page Language="vb" AutoEventWireup="false" CodeBehind="Default.aspx.vb" Inherits="HD._Default" %>
Line 2:
[Code]....
I am wishing to emulate the auto code generation that happens when you derive from a class, such as Form, and declare the Public Sub New() constructor. When this happens the constructor will auto-generate code like the following:
Public Class MyInheritedForm
Inherits Form
Public Sub New()
[Code].....
I have an issue with FxCop and the warning: Abstract types should not have constructors.This is being displayed for a number of abstract classes (possibly all, I haven't checked). When I look most of them have no new method so I assume it's the complier adding a default one. So to remove it I add a private default constuctor (Private Sub New()), this then means all the inherting classes fail to build with the error: Class 'InheritingClass' has no accessible 'Sub New' and cannot be inherited.This seems odd as FxCop requests no public constructor, but when I remove it the build fails.
View 1 RepliesIs there a way to have a class collection of inherited types be initialized? For example, here is my code:
Public Class CamryCar
Property Name As String = "Camry"
Property Color As String
End Class
Public Class RedCamry
[Code] .....
I prefer this one as I don't have an extra property to deal with. But I can find a way to initialize that that list with objects of RedCamry and BlueCamry. Is it impossible or is there another way to do this?
I am trying to override a property of a subclass of an inherited base class. I've tried to simplify this code as much as possible but am not comfortable enough with my own abilities to simplify anything else without loosing the ability to understand an answer.The property propertyName in the otherClass is currently incorrect. I want to be able to override propertyName in baseClass with the propertyName in otherClass. Is this possible to accomplish?
Public Interface interfaceName
Interface iInterfacePropertyName
Enum enumName
[code].....
[Code]...
Is there an explanation for this limitation? I mean, it's still in the constructor for the object, and the base class constructor is still executed first.
I am making some changes to a fairly old project.It has a DataGrid with an Inherited Class
Public Class CustomDataGridTextBox
Inherits DataGridTextBoxColumn
and a Override Sub Protected Overloads Overrides Sub Paint (.......What it was doing was alternating the Data Grid Line colours New Requirement is to break up some items in the DataGrid By categories So I have added new lines to the data and sorted so they show up ad category headers (Production Stations) And they would like the Category Header to be a different colour and then the alternating line colours to restart.This did not sound too difficult but that has proven a trap Setting the category header is no problem but restarting the alternating colours is Previously the row was determined to be odd or even to set the colour.Now I am intending to use an Integer to define what colour is used but it persists only for that text box.
How can I get it to extend its life so each call can refer to it and update it and set the desired colour?All I need to do is have an integer variable that will hold its value for the next call?
i've finally got round to learning about classes and inheritance, but i'm not sure how to proceed. i have a base class Employee, which is inherited by 2 derived classes. how do i use the same Employee class in both derived classes? obviously if i write a sub new for both of them + declare a new Employee class, they won't be using the same class. heres my Employee class:
[Code]....
I have a class that exposes an auto implemented property Enabled
[Code]...
But If I had not use an auto implemented property and declared my own backing-field as follows this is accessible from the subclass: Private _Enabled as Boolean ---- EDIT ----
The abve line is incorrect - this is not possible, it was in fact Protected in the original code which allowed access from the sub class See @JonSkeet answer ---- EDIT Of course I can just access Enabled from the sub class to work around this but can someone explain why this is the behaviour?
I have a parent class that is also a factory. For example:
Public Class Factory
Public Function clone() as Factory
' Some logic here
[code].....
In re-engineering a windows forms application, I find that a lot of code-behind in the various form classes is duplicative and I'm trying to centralize as many procedures as possible into a base class which can be inherited and used by the subclassed forms.
This process seems to be going well and is making the code in my subclasses much simpler and hopefully easier to maintain, but I'm not sure where to draw the line between leaving code in the subclasses and engineering for generic resusability and moving it to the base class.
Specifically, in some subclasses I have code which manipulates variables and objects specific to the subclass, and although I could move the code-behind into the base class, the base class code references specific objects which are needed to compile. For example, each subclass manipulates a databound datagridview and form detail controls which allows the user to select between multi-record and detailed single-record views of a datatable.
In Visual Basic 2008 do I need to declare dummy data objects in the base class so that the base class will compile? Or is there a way to indicate that the data objects will be provided by the subclass?
If Class X is within the scope of Class Y, is X a subclass of Y?If Class A is a sub Class of B, then is Class B considered a super class of A?if Class C inherits Class D is Class D a superclass or parent of Class C?if Class E extends Class F then we can consider Class E a child of F?if Class G inherits Class H and is within the scope of Class I then who is the parent of Class G? Classes that inherits Class J and classes that are within Class J are all sub classes of Class J?
View 1 RepliesI am making a class that will behave like a collection class. I want to prevent the end-user from creating a new class of this. For example, the following should give error:
[Code]...
I have put this code in the global form Inherits System.Windows.Forms.Form. And then in the form that will inherit this from the global Inherits MenuStrip. "MenuStrip" is what the global form is called. But keep getting this error: Error1Base class 'MenuStrip' specified for class 'Lesson2' cannot be different from the base class 'System.Windows.Forms.Form' of one of its other partial types.
View 5 RepliesIs there any way that I can prevent a designer class from being rebuilt when running my project? The designer class is a webservice reference with over 30000 lines of code and appears to be being rebuilt almost every time I run my project. (Which obviously takes quite some time)
Is there some explicit way I can prevent Visual Studio 2010 from rebuilding this class each time I run the project?
I have a class (see below)
Imports Microsoft.VisualBasic
Imports System.Data.SqlClient
Public Class ClientProfile
#Region "Variables"
[CODE]...
It is in the file ClientProfile I have placed in both App_Code and also App_Code/Models
In my code behind I have the following
[CODE]...
The last word, "ClientProfile" has the scary squiggly red line below it. It is not recognizing my class.Even the Intellisense is not picking up te class. Do I have to register the class file in any way?
Is it possible for a class of exposing a type for function returns, without allowing users of that class to create variables of that type? A couple usage scenarios:A Fluent interface on a large class; a statement like "foo=bar.WithX(5).WithY(9).WithZ(19);" would be inefficient if it had to create three new instances of the class, but could be much more efficient if the WithX could create one instance, and the other statements could simply use it.A class may wish to support a statement like "foo[19].x = 9;" even when foo itself isn't an array, and does not hold the data in class instances that can be exposed to the public; one way to do that is to have foo[19] return a struct which holds a reference to 'foo' and the value '19', and has a member property 'x' which could call "foo.SetXValue(19, 9);" Such a struct could have a conversion operator to convert itself to the "apparent" type of foo[19].In both of these scenarios, storing the value returned by a method or property into a variable and then using it more than once would cause strange behavior. It would be desirable if the designer of the class exposing such methods or properties could ensure that callers wouldn't be able to use them more than once. Is there any practical way to accomplish that?In formulating a question, it's difficult sometimes to draw the line between complicated usage cases, and simpler usage cases which aren't quite so important. Here's another usage case, and one closer to the one I'd be most interested in (though I'm also interested in Fluent chaining; being able to have something behave like a C++ reference to a value type would be nice, but probably too much work to bother with).I have a type which is somewhat like the Windows registry, in that it is a hierarchical collection of items, each of which may have a string value, an integer value, and/or a nested collection of items. I wish to be able to support the following types of usage:[code]As for the Fluent interface, my thought would be to have the WithXXX properties return a new instance of a derived class which shadows (not overrides!) the WithXXX properties with versions that simply modify the current instance. The return object from WithXXX would be known to be of the derived class, and would thus use the shadowed WithXXX methods, but once it was assigned to a variable, it would be regarded as an instance of the base class, so the next WithXXX would create a new instance.
C++ a stronger concept of value types than C# or vb.net, including the very useful concept of references to value types; it ensures that references to value types cannot be persisted outside the scope of the type in question. Unsafe code in C# can use pointers to value types, but they don't have the protections offered by C++ references.