composition

I have a scene composed of many objects. Most of the objects are static, but some objects move. When a move happens it seems like I have to redraw the whole scene. It is possible for me to express some kind of compositing of the scene and redraw only some of the components of the scene? Render the static parts to a FBO, blit that as needed to the framebuffer, and render dynamic objects on top. 来源： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21763661/can-i-redraw-only-part-of-a-scene-in-opengl

I have set up an assembly catalog: private CompositionContainer GetContainer() { // initialize directory info ExtensionDirectory = new DirectoryInfo(settings.ExtensionsPath); // directory catalog var dirCatalog = new DirectoryCatalog(ExtensionDirectory.FullName); return new CompositionContainer(dirCatalog); } The contents of the container will load up all the assemblies in the directory as expected. I do not want to actually compose anything yet because I have constructors that will be injected with dependencies. What I want to do is use the AssemblyCatalog as a repository; query for a

So i'm not too sure how to phrase this properly, but say I wanted to get the sum of all odd numbers in a list, do I have two functions (sumList and getOddNumbers) and combine them into sumOddList or is there a way to put these two together in a single function? If there isnt a better function, how exactly would I combine them into sumOddList? getOddNumbers :: [Integer] -> [Integer] getOddNumbers [] = [] getOddNumbers (x:xs) |odd x = x:getOddNumbers xs |otherwise = getOddNumbers xs sumList :: [Integer] -> Integer sumList list = case list of [] -> 0 (x:xs) -> x + (sumList xs) I also ask mainly

The inner class is always inside the outer class. If we removed the outer class, the inner class would also be destroyed. I'm not concerned about memory release, I am only thinking about the concept. And this is the same concept as composition. IIn this case, the inner class must be the example of a composition relationship of objects in the real world. In short, how can I relate inner classes to object orientation in real life? By this, I mean a non-technical example; perhaps a metaphor related to animals or video games? If constructors are a good example of composition, then what is the

For example, suppose we had the functions double(x) = 2 * x , square(x) = x ^ 2 and sum(x,y) = x + y . What is a function compose such as compose(compose(sum, square), double) = x^2 + 2*x ? Notice that I'm asking a function that can be used for functions of any arity. For example, you could compose f(x,y,z) with g(x) , h(x) , i(x) into f(g(x), h(x), i(x)) . This is a common Haskell idiom, applicative functors : composed = f <$> g1 <*> g2 <*> ... <*> gn (A nicer introduction can be found here ). This looks very clean because of automatic partial application, and works like this: (<*>) f g x = f

I made a panel for my program. It consists of RadioButtons only. When a radiobutton is selected, I want to set a boolean in other code. This panel will be used as a component of a bigger panel or frame which should also be able to listen to the events happening inside this panel. So, which of the following options should I choose for listening to events - 1 - RadioButtonPanel extends JPanel implements ActionListener{ public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e){} //code to add the action listener to the radio buttons oneRadioButton.addActionListener(this); } 2 - RadioButtonPanel extends JPanel{

When building a Django application, we were exposed to (forms) MultiValueField and MultiWidget . They seem like an interesting approach to compose their respective base classes, giving more modularity. Yet, now it seems to us that the actual piece that would make those two shine bright would be a db.models.MultiField . Here is the reasoning: It seems that, when using a ModelForm, Django is enforcing a strict 1-to-1 association between a models.Field and a forms.Field. Now, with forms.MultiValueField , despite this strict 1-to-1 association, you can have a single models.Field actually

First a little back story on what I am trying to accomplish. I am in the process of creating a custom HTTP Module whose purposes is to intercept messages to multiple (15+) different ArcGIS REST web services. The intercepted requests and/or responses will be stripped of any restricted information based on the current user. For instance, a call that returns multiple layers might have certain layers stripped out. Unmodified Response: "layers" : [ { "id" : 0, "name" : "Facilities", "parentLayerId" : -1, "defaultVisibility" : true, "subLayerIds" : [1, 2, 3] }, { "id" : 1, "name" : "Hazardous Sites"