I was looking on the interweb to see if there were any good examples on how to initialize shared members within a class while still initializing instance variables. I did find an expression that might fit to the answer:
[code]...
How do I initialize both instance and shared members without re-initializing the shared members every time an object is created from a class? Thanks!
I was looking on the interweb to see if there were any good examples on how to initialize shared members within a class while still initializing instance variables.[code]How do I initialize both instance and shared members without re-initializing the shared members every time an object is created from a class?
View 1 RepliesWhen it comes to constructors in a Structure type ,it is fact that we can not explicitly provide the default constructor .It is provided by the runtime. Ok, another point that is applicable to C# language is that if we are defining a parametrized constructor then it is compulsory to initialize all fields . We can not leave any field uninitialized , since the runtime will not call default constructor if we are calling parametrized constructor .Its logically right , but in VB.NET language , actually you are free to leave any of the fields uninitialized in your parametrized constructor.
[Code]...
ok this is annoying, i've got a structure RInteger.
Private VAR_Value As Integer
Private VAR_Max As Integer
Private VAR_Min As Integer
[code]......
I can access a module from code behind but not from the aspx page in inline VB code <% ... %>.
View 2 RepliesGiven in the following language specification, for me at least, calling Db.Foobar() [In the following code] does not indeed call off to the Shared Constructors of the base classes. I am curious as to a) is this my own fault for doing something wrong or b) is this an error in the language specification[code]...
View 2 RepliesI have an abstract class which requires a delegate to function. I pass the delegate into the constructor. Now that I have a non default constructor I need to call the abstract class's constructors from the concrete class which means that I need to use MyBase.New(...). I have included a quick example below.
Public MustInherit Class BaseClass
Public Delegate Sub WorkMethod()
Private _Work As WorkMethod
[code]....
I have tried to do this but I keep getting the following error: "Implicit reference to object under construction is not valid when calling another constructor".Can I not do what I am trying to do above? I initially had the delegate setup in its own setter method. But then I am creating a deceptive API because it does require a point to a method to work properly.
After debugging a particularly tricky issue in VB.NET involving the order in which instance variables are initialized, I discovered that there is a breaking discrepancy between the behavior that I expected from C# and the actual behavior in VB.NET.Nota bene: This question concerns a slight discrepancy in the behaviors of VB.NET and C#. If you're a language bigot that is unable to provide an answer other than "that's why you should use C#, noob", there is nothing for you to see here; kindly move along.Specifically, I expected the behavior outlined by the C# Language Specification (emphasis added):
When an instance constructor has no constructor initializer, or it has a constructor initializer of the form base(...), that constructor implicitly performs the initializations specified by the variable-initializers of the instance fields declared in its class. This corresponds to a sequence of assignments that are executed immediately upon entry to the constructor and before the implicit invocation of the direct base class constructor. The variable initializers are executed in the textual order in which they appear in the class declaration.
Contrast that with the portion of the VB.NET Language Specification concerning Instance Constructors, which says (emphasis added): When a constructor's first statement is of the form MyBase.New(...), the constructor implicitly performs the initializations specified by the variable initializers of the instance variables declared in the type. This corresponds to a sequence of assignments that are executed immediately after invoking the direct base type constructor. Such ordering ensures that all base instance variables are initialized by their variable initializers before any statements that have access to the instance are executed.
The discrepancy here is immediately obvious. C# initializes class-level variables before calling the base constructor. VB.NET does exactly the reverse, apparently preferring to call the base constructor before setting the values of instance fields.If you want to see some code, this related question provides a more concrete example of the divergent behavior. Unfortunately, it does not provide any hints as to how one might coerce VB.NET into following the model established by C#.
I'm less interested in why the designers of the two languages chose such divergent approaches than I am in possible workarounds for the problem. Ultimately, my question is as follows: Is there any way that I can write or structure my code in VB.NET to force instance variables to be initialized before the base type's constructor is called, as is the standard behavior in C#?
I am trying to add shared members in derived classes and use that values in base classes...
I have base
class DBLayer
public shared function GetDetail(byval UIN as integer)
dim StrSql = string.format("select * from {0} where uin = {1}", tablename, uin)
end function
end class
[Code]..
currently there is error using the tablename variable of derived class in base class but i want to use it i dun know other techniques if other solutions are better then u can post it or u can say how can i make it work? confused...
Why does intellesense show shared members? e.g:Dim x as doublex.epsi 'Epsilon will show up as a valid member in intellesenseIs there a way to change this behavior?
View 1 RepliesI have faced with a situation in VB.NET and C# (.NET2) with the visibility of the static/shared members. It seems to me a little strange in VB.NET:
public class A {
private static A instance;
public static A Instance {
get { return instance; }
} public string Name { get { } }}
[Code] .....
Shared member behaves like a class public one I can repeat it to infinite..
I'm writing a WCF-Service and I split up my service class to multiple partial class files, so every ServiceContract-Implementation gets its own file. I have one file however that should contain e.g. members that are used by every partial class file such as a logger. The service is hosted with IIS 7 if this matters in any way.
[Code]....
The code compiles fine, but at runtime I get an BC30451: The name m_Log is not declared Error (Don't know the exact words for it. I get a german message ;) ). I don't think it has something to do with the type of m_Log or a depending assembly because I get the same error if i try this with a String. What am I doing wrong? How can I make this work? Edit: I was trying the same thing in a simple console application without any problems. :(
I took over an ASP.NET application and have found this throughout several classes in the application. The programmers before defined several shared/static variables that act as "complex enums" throughout the application. As a fairly new programmer, it doesn't look like best practice.
Here is an example:
Public Shared SecureCommentsWrite As New Task("Secure Comments Write")
Public Shared SecureCommentsRead As New Task("Secure Comments Read")
Public Shared EditEmergencyContact As New Task("Edit Emergency Contact")
Public Shared DisplayPersonalReferences As New Task("Display Personal References")
Public Shared EditPersonalReferences As New Task("Edit Personal References")
The constructor takes the description, then loads the ID key from the database using a stored procedure (the database is SQL Server.) This seems like a good idea since we deploy this application to multiple databases and want to ensure that we load the ID key that's in that database in case it changes. However, since there are literally hundreds of these in the application, the first load takes a while.
So I did tons and tons of work trying to make an interface for a common set of classes. The idea was to make an interface that each class could use within the set, but ultimately each class is different. Turns out interfaces do not like shared members. What I tried:
Public Interface ISomeInterface
Shared Property Meta() as Object
End Interface
Public Class A
Implements ISomeInterface
[Code]...
Obviously, had I done my homework on this, I would have known that shared members can't be use in interfaces. Should I just leave the individual classes completely responsible for handling its shared members? Is there another way to keep coupling down to a minimum with shared members? Theres about 20 something or so classes that will implement a single interface.
I have a structure written in vb.net with all shared members. I need to override 'Equals', '==' and '!=' to avoid a warning.
View 4 RepliesI've read that modules are basically shared classes. For a module though, you can call a method directly without prefixing the module name. So I can do this: methodTest("abc", mod1Enum.enum2)But for a class with shared members I have to fully qualify the method call, and in this case fully qualify the enum:[code]In our conversion from VB6 to .NET the need to fully qualify all calls like this might be an argument for us to bring our VB6 modules over as modules instead of converting them to classes.
View 7 RepliesHow do I get using reflection the most generic type from a shared constructor in the base class :
Public Class Foo()
Shared Sub New()
'Here we have code to get the type[code]....
I expect the result to be Bar type and not the Foo. Is it possible?
I've been trying implement Constructor method in passing variable between two forms.Just a rough user interface guide - issue Invoice. User would type in all the Customer Name, Document Number. Once he reached Item Details, a Child Form would pop-up for the User to select/search the Invoice's Item; Once selected, the selected item would showed in the primary Form.
What I had tried is, the Constructor method worked perfectly when it is self-contain in a new project, yet to be implement in my application.But when I implemented, there is an error: Reference to a non-shared member requires an object reference.
[Code]...
This is a bit of a continuation from a previous post for which AtmaWeapon was very informative.
Problem:
A parent class has a sub class with various properties. A property of the parent class is a List(of T) with T = the sub class The issue is how to store data in the sub class of the instantiated parent
Some example code (hopefully formatted correctly):
Code:
'=========== Class Definitions =============
Public Class courseClass
Public Class timeTableClass
[Code].....
I have some classes, BsfciFile and StudyFlashCard. Bsfci is the extension to which I save my set of flashcards in an INI format. I am currently working to transform my code from using Windows API calls to access the INI to using a IniFile class that I found on the internet. I would like the BsfciFile to have a Array of StudyFlashCard objects, but I would like the StudyFlashCard class to use the IniFile class object contained in the BsfciFile class. I can pass the IniFile from the BsfciFile class to the constructor for the StudyFlashCard class, but I want it to modify the same IniFile as the BsfciFile class has later on.
[Code]...
At the moment I'm trying to create a kind of model in vb.net which can be used to create/fetch database entrys.
I created a main class Model with a shared function to fetch the datasets, e.g. Model.find(). Now I'd like to create Classes which inherit the main Model-Class, e.g. a separate one for users: UserModel.find() => "SELECT * FROM users".
What I need now is to find a way to tell the Class which table it should use. I thought about an abstract String "table" which is a constant in each "child-model", but how could this be implemented as it's not possible to override shared members?
Edit: Maybe this will make it a little clearer what I mean:
Public Class Model
Public Shared _controller As Controller
Public Shared table As String
[Code].....
So I want a shared method which finds all database entries and gives back an array of instances of its own type, e.g. Model(). That's why I wanted to keep the find-method shared and not bound to an instance.
I usually use which is free, works a little too well, it's obfuscating the code that passes between my scripting class and the other classes, so after obfuscating the app, the scripting functions no longer work.However I found another obfuscator called Skater lite which is a free edition, it will only obfuscate private classes and members, so what I would like to do if possible is make most of my classes private and their members (except for the scripting class, which should allow it to work properly after being obfuscated), and somehow still use them globally, declaring an instance of the class doesn't seem to work, I'm not even sure it's possible and I know little about the scope of private classes, so anyone got any ideas or workarounds?
View 14 RepliesI'm going to do my best to describe what I'm trying to do. I have a class that has an enum in it.[code]...
View 2 RepliesI have a Data class whichs hold 70 class members to save me a hole lot time and effort not having to type all the properties for hand I'm wondering if there is a simple tool i VS2010 that I can use to auotgenerat the "property stubbs"
[Code]...
I have an application that reads data from a SQL query into a list corresponding to the rows of the query. So, I have something like this:[code]What I'd like to know is if I should be using a class (as above) or a structure, and what the difference may be in terms of memory or runtime, if any.
View 3 RepliesI seem to be drawing a blank. I'd like to create a "shared" variable that is shared with all instances of a class but not classes that inherit from it. For example.Class A: Shared list As New List(Of String): list.Add("A")
Class B Inherits A: list.Add("B")Class C Inherits B: list.Add("C")The end result I'd like is that any instance of A has just A in the list. Any instance of B has A and B in the list. Any instance of C has A, B, and C in the list. I can accomplish it by creating Instance variables, but I have to construct the list for each instance of a class. I'd like to construct it once for a specific point in the Hierarchy and then share it accross other instances of that class.
This is another one of my "I think it's not possible but I need confirmation" questions.I have a base class for a bunch of child classes. Right now, this base class has a few common properties the children use, like Name. The base is an abstract class (MustInherit)Technically, this means that everytime a child class is instantiated, it lugs around, in memory, its own copy of Name. The thing is, Name is going to be a fixed value for all instances of a given child. I.e., Child1.Name will return "child_object1", and Child2.Name will return "child_object2".
View 1 RepliesThis might seem like a silly question, even for a newbie but I can't access the members of a class from a user control. I am developing a shopping cart application in vb 2008. inside the app_data folder i have a folder name BusinessObjects which contains a class called Catalog. This is the code for this class:
[Code].....
I am attempting to share a sub menu among several different parts of an application so that it is consistent (not wanting to copy/paste.) I thought it would be simple. I am doing something like this:
[Code]...
I just would like to know how to implement class constructor in this language.
View 2 Replies