Can someone explain me what the method prototype in the dalvik file does? According to Google this terminology is only C relevant and not Java, so the Question is what does it inside the dalvik?`
So is the prototype alike the method signature? Because it contains the following items: The Short Form String descriptor, the return type and the parameters...
The method_id_item contains a reference to a proto_id_item, which defines the arguments and return type for that method. So yes, it is the method signature.
Related
Try to make as described:
To convert a string to lowercase, you can call the String.ToLower()
method
let makeUpperCase s =
s.ToUpper()
Get as result
error FS0072: Lookup on object of indeterminate type based on
information prior to this program point. A type annotation may be
needed prior to this program point to constrain the type of the
object. This may allow the lookup to be resolved.
If you want to invoke members of a value that is passed as an argument to a function, you have to give F# some hint about what the type of the value is. The best way to do this is using a type annotation:
let makeUpperCase (s:string) =
s.ToUpper()
F# compiler needs this, because it cannot figure out what ToUpper method are you trying to invoke as there may be many .NET objects that have a method of this name.
Sorry to all you Groovy dudes if this is a bit of a noob question.
In SOAPUI, i can create a Groovy script where i can define an arbitrary variable to the run context to retrieve at a later time.
context.previouslyUndefinedVariable = 3
def num = context.previouslyUndefinedVariable
What feature of Groovy allows previously undefined variables to be added to an object like this? I would like to learn more about it.
Many thanks in advance!
Groovy has the ability to dynamically add methods to a class through metaprogramming.
To learn more, see:
What is Groovy's MetaClass used for?
Groovy Goodness: Add Methods Dynamically to Classes with ExpandoMetaClass
Runtime and compile-time metaprogramming
The accepted answer is a bit of a poor explanation for how SoapUI is doing it.
In this case, context is always an instance of some SoapUI library java class (such as WsdlTestRunContext), and these are all implementations of Map. You can check context.getClass() and assert context in Map.
When you look up a property on a Map, Groovy uses the getAt and putAt methods. There are various syntaxes you can use. All of these are equivalent:
context.someUndef
context.'someUndef'
context[someUndef]
context['someUndef']
context.getAt('someUndef')
And
context.someUndef = 3
context.'someUndef' = 3
context[someUndef] = 3
context['someUndef'] = 3
context.putAt('someUndef', 3)
I like to use any of the above that include quote marks, so that Groovy-Eclipse doesn't flag it as a missing property.
It's also interesting that Groovy looks for a getAt() method before it checks for a get method being referred to as a property.
For example, consider evaluating "foo".class. The String instance doesn't have a property called class and it also doesn't have a method getAt(String), so the next thing it tries is to look for a "get" method with that name, i.e. getClass(), which it finds, and we get our result: String.
But with a map, ['class':'bar'].class refers to the method call getAt('class') first, which will be 'bar'. If we want to know what type of Map it is, we have to be more specific and write in full: ['class':'bar'].getClass() which will be LinkedHashMap.
We still have to specify getClass() even if that Map doesn't have a matching key, because ['foo':'bar'].class will still mean ['foo':'bar'].getAt('class'), which will be null.
I'd like to use a single duktape/C constructor function as dispatcher for these kind of calls. When the dispatcher function is called I need to know for which class this happend to call the appropriate C++ construction function.
I guess the this binding won't help since it represents the (not yet fully initialized) JS object we are creating here.
Another option would be the current function, but from the docs I can't see how to get the class name from that. What else could I use?
Could you elaborate what you mean by "class name"? Do you mean the .name property of the Ecmascript function object which is used as a the 'new' target?
If so, you can use duk_is_constructor_call() to see if the current call is a constructor call, then use duk_push_current_function() to get access to the Ecmascript constructor function object, and then read its properties using the usual property API calls. For example, if by "class name" you mean .name of the function object, you'd just read its "name" property using duk_get_prop_string().
I want to make the return type of my method generic. The caller will decide which type it should expect.
Actually my method will be a member of interface and the class which will implement it will have a decision making block to delegate the work to other methods.
Hence I want to make the return type of the interface method as generic.
I can achieve this by using dynamic or object keyword or c# generic type.
I am not able to figure it out which will be the best option to achieve it and what are the limitations and advantages of each type.
public interface ICoreWrapper
{
Response<T> ExecuteDeviceCommand<T>(DeviceCommand deviceCommand, object param = null);
}
Please suggest me.
Thanks in advance.
If you do not know the type at compile time you could use dynamics but they will be slower because they are using runtime invocation and less safe because if the type doesn't implement the method you are attempting to invoke you will get a runtime error.
Use dynamic return type, Based on the input type return the appropriate object.
Hypothetic and academic question.
pseudo-code:
<pre><code>
class Book{
read(theReader)
}
class BookWithMemory extends Book {
read(theReader, aTimestamp = null)
}
</pre></code>
Assuming:
an interface (if supported) would prohibit it
default value for parameters are supported
Notes:
PHP triggers an strict standards error for this.
I'm not surprised that PHP strict mode complains about such an override. It's very easy for a similar situation to arise unintentionally in which part of a class hierarchy was edited to use a new signature and a one or a few classes have fallen out of sync.
To avoid the ambiguity, name the new method something different (for this example, maybe readAt?), and override read to call readAt in the new class. This makes the intent plain to the interpreter as well as anyone reading the code.
The actual behavior in such a case is language-dependent -- more specifically, it depends on how much of the signature makes up the method selector, and how parameters are passed.
If the name alone is the selector (as in PHP or Perl), then it's down to how the language handles mismatched method parameter lists. If default arguments are processed at the call site based on the static type of the receiver instead of at the callee's entry point, when called through a base class reference you'd end up with an undefined argument value instead of your specified default, similarly to what would happen if there was no default specified.
If the number of parameters (with or without their types) are part of the method selector (as in Erlang or E), as is common in dynamic languages that run on JVM or CLR, you have two different methods. Create a new overload taking additional arguments, and override the base method with one that calls the new overload with default argument values.
If I am reading the question correctly, this question seems very language specific (as in it is not applicable to all dynamic languages), as I know you can do this in ruby.
class Book
def read(book)
puts book
end
end
class BookWithMemory < Book
def read(book,aTimeStamp = nil)
super book
puts aTimeStamp
end
end
I am not sure about dynamic languages besides ruby. This seems like a pretty subjective question as well, as at least two languages were designed on either side of the issue (method overloading vs not: ruby vs php).