I like to use the "this" keyword when referencing auto-implemented properties and when calling methods inside my class. How do I change the CodeRush templates for "Convert to auto-implemented property" and "Extract Method" to append the "this" keyword to the refactored references?
This is not possible at the moment. But, most likely, this ability will appear in the near future.
Related
So the following code snippet
Set mySet = {1,2,3};
is an instance of type Set which is permissible, however what would the class of the set literal be. I have tried to search for this, however I have found no answer in the dart documentation.
A literal exists only in your source code. Asking for its "class" doesn't make a lot of sense.
Using a Set, Map, or List literal is just syntactic sugar for invoking a corresponding constructor. The Set factory constructor constructs a LinkedHashSet.
However, you'll see that LinkedHashSet is also abstract. Its factory constructor returns an instance of a private, internal class. You can see its typename via print(Set().runtimeType); the actual type might be different for different platforms and is unlikely to be useful to you.
I was looking through the docs for instance_variable_set and saw that the sample code given does this:
obj.instance_variable_set(:#instnc_var, "value for the instance variable")
which then allows you to access the variable as #instnc_var in any of the class's instance methods.
I'm wondering why there needs to be a colon : before the #instnc_var. What does the colon do?
My first instinct is to tell you not to use instance_variable_set unless you really know what you are using it for. It's essentially a tool for metaprogramming or a hack to bypass visibility of the instance variable.
That is, if there is no setter for that variable, you can use instance_variable_set to set it anyway. It's far better if you control the code to just create a setter.
Try looking at accessors for the vast majority of your instance variable setting needs. They are an idiomatic way to have getters and setters for your instance variables "for free" without you having to write those functions.
If you really do need instance_variable_set, it allows the first argument to be a symbol which is the name of the instance variable to set. A colon is part of the Ruby language that is like a "symbol literal": when you type :foo, you've created a symbol with value foo, just like when you type "bar" directly into your code, you create a string literal with value "bar".
I'm wondering if its possible to reference a class definition directly for purpose of using it in conjunction to RTTI (map a property to TRttiProperty, etc).
E.g.
I would like to use TMyClass.MyProperty as a TRttiProperty, without having to resolve it via a name/ string, this will keep my code and compiler integrity intact, as string variables may be misspelled, etc.
Thanks
Assuming which you want do something like this
P:=TRttiProperty(TMyClass.MyProperty);
or write a function like so
function GetPropertyInfo(P: reference to property):TRttiProperty;
This is not possible, to do this possible you will require which delphi has support to property references. So the only current way to access (reference) an class property is using his name via an string.
I'm trying to do some XNA development with IronRuby but are struggling with both generics (Load) and accessing some of the base-class properties such as Content.
Any hints?
Regarding Generics - if you want to create a generic object, use square brackets in order to define the generic type. For example:
list = System::Collections::Generic::List[System::String].new
Regarding base class properties, there is no "base" keyword in Ruby so you can use "self" or just call the method or property directly. You might also try to mangle the property name (for instance, HelloWorld is mangled to hello_world). I suggest that in order to access the Content propery, just call it this way:
self.content
Hope it helps,
Shay.
There's this dichotomy in the way we can create classes in f# which really bothers me. I can create classes using either an implicit format or an explicit one. But some of the features that I want are only available for use with the implicit format and some are only available for use with the explicit format.
For example:
I can't use let inline* (or let alone) inside an explicitly defined class.
The only way (that I know) to define immutable public fields (not properties*) inside an implicitly defined class is the val bla : bla syntax.
But there's a redundancy here. Since I'll end up with two copy of the same immutable data, one private, one public (because in the implicit mode the constructor parameters persist throughout the class existence)
(Not so relevant) The need to use attributes for method overloading and for field's defaults is rather off putting.
Is there anyway I can work around this?
*For performance reasons
EDIT: Turns out I'm wrong about both points (Thanks Ganesh Sittampalam & MichaelGG).
While I can't use let inline in both implicit & explicit class definition, I can use member inline just fine, which I assume does the same thing.
Apparently with the latest F# there's no longer any redundancy since any parameters not used in the class body are local to the constructor.
Will be gone in the next F# release.
This might not help, but you can make members inline. "member inline private" works fine.
For let inline, you can work around by moving it outside the class and explicitly passing any values you need from inside the scope of the class when calling it. Since it'll be inlined, there'll be no performance penalty for doing this.