explicit

I have compileSdkVersion and targetSdkVersion 23 and testing on Samsung galaxy s3. But whenever i open any third party app (explicit intent) like camera/gallery app or share intent (gmail, email) or dialer app and comeback to my app by pressing back button or (in case of camera/gallery app by selecting picture). App restarts from MainAcitivty (maybe it is getting crashed but it does not show any exception in logcat). Here is how i open intents: Call/Dial: Intent callIntent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_DIAL); callIntent.setData(Uri.parse("tel:" + phone)); context.startActivity(callIntent);

i'm wondering why linkers can not do their job simply by consulting the information in the actual .dll files that got the actual implementation code ? i mean why linkers still need .lib files to do implicit linking ? are not the export and relative address tables enough for such linking ? is there anyway by which one can do implicit linking using only the .dll without the .lib stub/proxy files ? i thought the windows executable loader would simply do LoadLibrary/LoadLibraryEx calls on behalf of the program (hence the name implicit linking) which is the main difference to explicit linking. if

I recently came across some weird looking class that had three constructors: class Class { public: explicit Class(int ); Class(AnotherClass ); explicit Class(YetAnotherClass, AnotherClass ); // ... } This doesn't really make sense to me - I thought the explicit keyword is to protect compiler chosen construction from a foreign type. Is this allowed? If it it, what does it mean? Roger Lipscombe In C++11 multi-parameter constructors can be implicitly converted to with brace initialization. However, before C++11 explicit only applied to single-argument constructors. For multiple-argument

My XAML: <DataGridTemplateColumn Header=" Student ID" Width="Auto"> <DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate> <DataTemplate> <TextBox x:Name="StudentIdTextBox" Text="{Binding Path=StudentID, UpdateSourceTrigger=Explicit, Mode=TwoWay}" PreviewTextInput="ID_OnPreviewTextInput" /> </DataTemplate> </DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate> </DataGridTemplateColumn> My StudentManagementClass: public class StudentManagement:INotifyPropertyChanged { private string StudId; public bool Check { get; set; } public int ID { get; set; } public string StudentID { get { return StudId; } set { StudId = value;

I recently noticed a class in C++0x that calls for an explicit default constructor. However, I'm failing to come up with a scenario in which a default constructor can be called implicitly. It seems like a rather pointless specifier. I thought maybe it would disallow Class c; in favor of Class c = Class(); but that does not appear to be the case. Some relevant quotes from the C++0x FCD, since it is easier for me to navigate [similar text exists in C++03, if not in the same places] 12.3.1.3 [class.conv.ctor] A default constructor may be an explicit constructor; such a constructor will be used to

I'm new to C# and learning new words. I find it difficult to understand what's the meaning of these two words when it comes to programming c#. I looked in the dictionary for the meaning and here's what I got: Implicit "Something that is implicit is expressed in an indirect way." "If a quality or element is implicit in something, it is involved in it or is shown by it;" Explicit "Something that is explicit is expressed or shown clearly and openly, without any attempt to hide anything" "If you are explicit about something, you speak about it very openly and clearly." I would like to understand

Here's the story. I created an interface, IVehicle . I explicitly implemented the interface in my class, Vehicle.cs . Here is my interface: Interface IVehicle { int getWheel(); } here is my class: class Vehicle: IVehicle { public int IVehicle.getWheel() { return wheel; } public void printWheel() { Console.WriteLine(getWheel()); } } Notice that getWheel() is explicitly implemented. Now, when I try to call that method within my Vehicle class, I receive an error indicating that getWheel() does not exist in the current context. Can someone help me understand what I am doing wrong? tvanfosson When

I know you can use C++ keyword 'explicit' for constructors of classes to prevent an automatic conversion of type. Can you use this same command to prevent the conversion of parameters for a class method? I have two class members, one which takes a bool as a param, the other an unsigned int. When I called the function with an int, the compiler converted the param to a bool and called the wrong method. I know eventually I'll replace the bool, but for now don't want to break the other routines as this new routine is developed. No, you can't use explicit, but you can do this instead: class