base-class

I have a number of Controllers in my project that all inherit from a controller I've named BaseController. I wrote a custom attribute that I applied to the entire BaseController class, so that each time an action runs in any of my controllers, that attribute will run first. The problem is that I have a couple of controller actions that I'd like to ignore that attribute, but I don't know how to do it. Can anyone help? I'm using MVC 1. Thanks. I had a similar need for something like this and found that by creating an authorization filter (implementing/deriving from FilterAttribute,

I understand why this is happening, but I'm stuck trying to resolve it...here is what my code is doing when the error is generated (thus, leading to a crash) when my program exits... pure virtual method called SomeClass::~SomeClass() { BaseClassObject->SomePureVirtualMethod(this); } void DerivedClass::SomePureVirtualMethod(SomeClass* obj) { //Do stuff to remove obj from a collection } I never have a call to new SomeClass but I have a QList<SomeClass*> which I append SomeClass* objects to. The purpose of this destructor in SomeClass is to tell DerivedClass to remove a specific instance of

I have a situation, where two classes (one deriving from the other) both implement the same interface explicitly: interface I { int M(); } class A : I { int I.M() { return 1; } } class B : A, I { int I.M() { return 2; } } From the derived class' implementation of I.M() , I'd like to call the implementation of the base class, but I don't see how to do it. What I tried so far is this (in class B): int I.M() { return (base as I).M() + 2; } // this gives a compile-time error //error CS0175: Use of keyword 'base' is not valid in this context int I.M() { return ((this as A) as I).M() + 2; } // this

What is the recommended approach to naming base classes? Is it prefixing the type name with " Base " or " Abstract " or would we just suffix it with "Base"? Consider the following: type: ViewModel e.g. MainViewModel , ReportViewModel base class: BaseViewModel or ViewModelBase or AbstractViewModel Also consider: type: Product e.g. VirtualProduct , ExpiringProduct base class: BaseProduct or ProductBase or AbstractProduct Which do you think is more standard? class Entity : EntityBase { } or class Entity : BaseEntity { } Joe There are examples in the Framework with the Base suffix, e.g. System

Consider the following C++ code, template <typename Derived> struct A { bool usable_; }; template <typename Derived> struct B : A< B<Derived> > { void foo() { usable_ = false; } }; struct C : B<C> { void foo() { usable_ = true; } }; int main() { C c; } I got compilation error: In member function void B<Derived>::foo() : template_inherit.cpp:12: error: 'usable_' was not declared in this scope. Why is that ? Any good fix ? That's because usable_ is a non-dependent name, so it is looked up at the time the template is parsed, instead of being looked up at instantiation (when the base class is

class Person { public int age; public Person() { age = 1; } } class Customer : Person { public Customer() { age += 1; } } Customer customer = new Customer(); Would the age of customer be 2? It seems like the base class's constructor will be called no matter what. If so, why do we need to call base at the end sometimes? public Customer() : base() { ............. } This is simply how C# is going to work. The constructors for each type in the type hierarchy will be called in the order of Most Base -> Most Derived. So in your particular instance, it calls Person() , and then Customer() in the

struct B { int b1, b2; B(int, int); }; struct D : B { int d1, d2; // which is technically better ? D (int i, int j, int k, int l) : B(i,j), d1(k), d2(l) {} // 1st Base // or D (int i, int j, int k, int l) : d1(k), d2(l), B(i,j) {} // last Base }; Above is just pseudo code. In actual I wanted to know that does the order of calling base constructor matter ? Are there any bad behaviors (especially corner cases ) caused by any of the cases ? My question is on more technical aspect and not on coding styles. AnT The order you refer in your question is not the "order of calling base constructor". In