In this latest in theĀ DoubleDawg series, we are almost ready to do something big.
But first, we have one more working session, and we get an incredibly cool gift!
[download id=”8″]
[flashvideo file=ddd/ddd6.mp4 /]
shop viagra online The pressure and stress become so high that it is now ingrained in most of us that we should look for cheaper generic versions of the drugs we need, particularly online. It cialis where contains Sildenafil Citrate that ensures that your stamina and helps to last longer in bed. Consult Psychologist for Stress: Treatment of stress can be effectively done by a psychologist through psychotherapy. viagra on line cheap The further they are left undiagnosed the greater harm it prescription for cialis purchase could cause you.
[download id=”10″]
Next DoubleDawgDare (Might be as early as next week!).
[…] Next DoubleDawgDare […]
Merry Christmas! Er, ah… Happy Australia day! (January 26th š
Thank you for the screen cast!
(And you’re welcome for the tests!)
2:55 to 3:15 in the screencast:
To offer a little clarification on the processing of the āValidationsā annotation in the āprocessValidationAnnotationSingularā method: The ā@Validations(ā¦)ā annotation contains 14 attributes, each of which is a typed array of validation annotations. See the āLotsOfParameterValuesā class in the āAnnotationValidationConfigurationBuilder_Validations_Testā test for an example of its usage. So weāre looking at nested annotations.
Itās also useful to know that the depreciated āValidationā annotation, processed by the āprocessValidationPluralā method, is defined as containing an array of Validations annotations. (See āAnnotationValidationConfigurationBuilder_Validation_Testā) I think itās deprecated because you can just merge all the contents of all the Validations it contains into one Validations annotation.
[I have no Earthly idea why the āDateRangeFieldValidatorā annotation is omitted from the list of possible children of the Validations annotation. Maybe itās an error.]
We’re all just dying to know how you’ll get polymorphic behavior out of an ‘@interface’. ;-> It’s a challenge!
I think that the next double-dawg is my main mission this week. Out sick, today, as my next post mentions. But I may work on it anyway. Refactoring is one of my favorite things to do.
Wishing you well! I hope you feel better soon!
“You can do it!
Yes, you can!”
;->
ok, ok, I hear and obey. First thing tomorrow. — Hill
You can do it. You just got to the most “fun” part — a design challenge: “How do I get polymorphic behavior from final Java interfaces that I would rather not change?”
Jeff… Solving the problem’s not the problem. Making the damned video of me solving the problem is the problem. I am in a state of lax discipline right now. Still, I got the first two segments taped, and all I need is to finish recording the third. — Hill
Excellent! Thanks!
(I’ve just been trying to give you words of encouragement! š