language-features

I've begun to notice at times when I'm making method calls in C# that the names of the parameters for the method I'm calling will show up in the intellisense list appended with a colon, and that I can then format the method call thusly: MethodCall(parameter1:value1, parameter2:value2); Is this a new language feature? It reminds me of the way you can call stored procedures in SQL and specify parameter names like so: spDoSomeStuff @param1 = 1, @param2 = 'other param' Is this a similar feature? If so, to what end? If not, what is it and what is it to be used for. It's a new feature. See here:

For instance String s = "Hello" + " World"; I know there are two strings in the pool "Hello" and "World" but, does: "Hello World" go into the string pool? If so, what about? String s2 = new String("Hola") + new String(" Mundo"); How many strings are there in the pool in each case? Yes, if a String is formed by concatenating two String literals it will also be interned. From the JLS: Thus, the test program consisting of the compilation unit (§7.3): package testPackage; class Test { public static void main(String[] args) { String hello = "Hello", lo = "lo"; System.out.print((hello == "Hello") +

I am new to Swift and just came across this in the documentation: Computed properties are provided by classes, structures, and enumerations. Stored properties are provided only by classes and structures. Why is that? Do associated values for enum work like stored properties? It seems like they had stored properties initially - Why no stored type properties for classes in swift? enum s do have stored type properties - i.e., static properties. They don't have stored instance properties. I don't know if there is a technical reason why stored instance properties are not available for enum s. You

This question already has an answer here: Why can I add named properties to an array as if it were an object? 7 answers I just found out that Arrays inherit directly from Object in javascript. I'm finding the difference between an array and an object is fairly minuscule. How do i know when to use one over the other? When you need to depend on the order of the elements in the collection, use Arrays, when order is not important, use objects. Order is not guaranteed in objects, but they provide for fast key-value pair lookups. I'd use an Array [] when I'm dealing with a list of objects the same

In php, if you have the following code: $map = array( "first" => 1, "second" => 2 ); $map["third"] = 3; foreach($map as $key => $value) { // code } You know the entries will be listed in the order they have been added to the array. Now, can I assume the same rule applies to the Javascript equivalent below? map = { "first": 1, "second": 2 }; map["third"] = 3; for (key in map) { // code } This is a duplicate of: Elements order - for (… in …) loop in javascript Most browsers will loop through the properties in the order they were added to the object, but the Javascript standard says the order is

This question already has an answer here: C# - Can publicly inherited methods be hidden (e.g. made private to derived class) 10 answers The essence of the problem is, given a class hierarchy like this: class A { protected void MethodToExpose() {} protected void MethodToHide(object param) {} } class B : A { new private void MethodToHide(object param) {} protected void NewMethodInB() {} } class C : B { public void DoSomething() { base.MethodToHide("the parameter"); // This still calls A.MethodToHide() base.MethodToExpose(); // This calls A.MethodToExpose(), but that's ok base.NewMethodInB(); } }

Assuming you have a string containing the name of a method, an object that supports that method and some arguments, is there some language feature that allows you to call that dynamically? Kind of like Ruby's send parameter. You can do this with reflection in Java: class A { def cat(s1: String, s2: String) = s1 + " " + s2 } val a = new A val hi = "Hello" val all = "World" val method = a.getClass.getMethod("cat",hi.getClass,all.getClass) method.invoke(a,hi,all) And if you want it to be easy in Scala you can make a class that does this for you, plus an implicit for conversion: case class Caller