ASP.NET PDF Viewer using C#, VB/NET

For example, if AREA is an operator that can be invoked on an ellipse e, then we can always substitute a circle c for e in such an invocation, because circles are ellipses (at least, such is my claim). As I recall, it was Nelson Mattos of IBM who introduced me to the idea of substitutability, way back in 1993; certainly I was already writing about it no later than May of that year, when I was working on the 6th edition of my book An Introduction to Database Systems (published by Addison-Wesley in 1994, though with a copyright date of 1995). And I have subsequently studied it in considerable depth in connection with my work with Hugh Darwen on the inheritance model we describe in our book on The Third Manifesto. In view of the criticisms I received, however, it clearly seemed to be incumbent on me to take a closer look at LSP per se. So I did ... What follows is the result. Note: I wrote to Dr. Liskov (twice, in fact) offering to let her see and comment on this material before it was published, but received no reply.

ssrs code 128 barcode font, ssrs code 39, ssrs fixed data matrix, winforms pdf 417 reader, winforms qr code reader, winforms upc-a reader, itextsharp remove text from pdf c#, c# replace text in pdf, winforms ean 13 reader, c# remove text from pdf,

< xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" > <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009" xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark" xmlns:mx="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/halo" xmlns:as3rpclib="com.ak33m.rpc.jsonrpc.*" minWidth="1024" minHeight="768"> <s:creationComplete> <![CDATA[ callFunction(); ]]> </s:creationComplete> <fx:Script> <![CDATA[ import mx.controls.Alert; var firstString:String; var secondString:String; var output:String; function callFunction () { output = jsonrpctojava.joinString(firstString,secondString); trace(output); output = jsonrpctojava.reverseString(firstString); trace(output); } ]]> </fx:Script> <fx:Declarations> <!-- Place non-visual elements (e.g., services, value objects) here --> <as3rpclib:JSONRPCObject id="jsonrpctojava" endpoint="http:// 127.0.0.1:8080/jsonrpc" destination="jsonrpcendpoint" fault="Alert.show(event. fault.faultString,event.fault.faultCode)"> </as3rpclib:JSONRPCObject > </fx:Declarations> </s:Application>

1. So perhaps I owe Barbara Liskov an apology, if the concept truly is due to her and I haven t acknowledged that fact in previous writings.

The example reuses the same string manipulation class used in the XML-RPC example. The only difference is that JSON-RPC is the communication protocol instead of XML-RPC and thus uses a different server infrastructure. JSONRPCObject is similar to XMLRPCObject and also indirectly extends mx.rpc.AbstractService. XML-RPC and JSON-RPC are both popular protocols for communication between disparate systems. They are based on open standards and offer alternatives to SOAP and REST web services. Although more popular in the JavaScript-driven Ajax world, they have a place in the realm of Flex applications as well. All the communication mechanisms discussed so far involve text-based messaging and have their own limitations related to latency, high volume, and complex structure transmission. Flex brings the efficiency of binary communication with AMF. In the next chapter, which covers remoting to a Java server, we focus on this and show you how the data services infrastructure provides effective integration between Flex and Java. However, before we get to that, let s take a quick look at Hessian, a binary web services protocol developed by Caucho Technologies. Hessian can be used to integrate Flex and Java, and it provides an alternative binary communication to AMF.

Click the Preview button in the lower-right corner, and the Preview window appears (see Figure 522). Because your animation isn t complicated and lasts only 120 frames, you shouldn t have to wait more than a few seconds for it to be rendered. Next, click the orange right-pointing arrow button at lower left in the Preview window; your animation starts. You can also click and drag the slider under the preview area to inspect a specific part of the action.

My major concern was naturally to discover whether there were any significant differences between substitutability as I understood it and LSP I began my attempt to answer this question by taking a look at a short article by Stephen R Tockey titled What is LSP (http://www otug@rationalcom, January 14th, 1998) That article starts by asserting that LSP is described in detail in a paper titled A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping, by Barbara Liskov and Jeannette Wing (ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 16, No 6, November 1994), and it goes on to quote from the abstract to that paper as follows (In fact, the extract quoted consists of the first half of the abstract in its entirety) The use of hierarchy is an important component of object-oriented design.

Hessian is a binary web services protocol that is open source under the Apache 2.0 license. It has language-specific implementations for many popular languages, including Java, Python, Flash/Flex, Ruby, C# .NET, and PHP. We re interested in the Java and Flash/Flex implementations. For this discussion, we ll skip over Hessian support and configuration on the Java server side. We will assume it s ready to use. It comes preconfigured in Resin, the application server from Caucho Technologies, the creators of Hessian. In others, it can be configured fairly easily. The only part we ll discuss (briefly) here are the methods exposed on the remote service. Once again, implement the same mundane yet useful service that exposes two methods, one that joins two strings and the other that reverses a String. This time, separate the server-side class into an interface and an implementation. The interface will look like this:

Hierarchy allows the use of type families, in which higher level supertypes capture the behavior that all of their subtypes have in common For this methodology to be effective, it is necessary to have a clear understanding of how subtypes and supertypes are related This paper takes the position that the relationship should ensure that any property proved about supertype objects also holds for subtype objects The wording of this extract put me on my guard right away I believe strongly and I ve said as much, in many places and on many occasions that if you want to make precise and formal statements about data and data management in general, then it s a bad idea to try and do so in terms of objects Object terminology almost always seems to be fuzzy.