Static field should be accessed in a static way

I am getting the following warning message: static field should be accessed in a static way. What does it mean?
thanks.

Below is the code. I'm getting the "warning" in the Waiter class on the statement: this.r = r;
public class Threads {
     public Threads() {
          super();
          System.out.println("==> Threads.constructor");
     public static void main(String args[]){
          System.out.println("==> main");
          Threads t = new Threads();
          Rendezvous r = new Rendezvous();
          Waiter w1 = new Waiter(r);w1.start();
          Waiter w2 = new Waiter(r);w2.start();
          Waiter w3 = new Waiter(r);w3.start();
          new Waiter(r).start();
          new Waiter(r).start();
          new Waiter(r).start();
          new Waiter(r).start();
          Waiter w4 = new Waiter(r);w4.start();
          Waiter w5 = new Waiter(r);w5.start();
          Waiter w6 = new Waiter(r);w6.start();
          System.out.println("==> main done");
     static class Rendezvous{
          private static int ri = -1;
          public synchronized void doWait(Waiter w){  
               System.out.println("==> doWait - sNum="+w.serialNum+",tries="+w.numTries+" name="+Thread.currentThread().getName());
               while (w.numTries < 5){
                    notifyAll();
                    w.numTries++;
                    System.out.println("==> before wait()- sNum="+w.serialNum+",tries="+w.numTries);
                    try {wait();} catch (InterruptedException e){}
                    System.out.println("==> after wait() - sNum="+w.serialNum+",tries="+w.numTries);
               } //end-while
          } //end-doWait()
          public void doNotify(){
               notify();
     } //end-Rendezvous-class
     static class Waiter extends Thread{
          private static int counter = 1000;
          private static Rendezvous r;
          public int serialNum;
          public int numTries = 0;
          public Waiter(Rendezvous r){
               this.r = r;
               serialNum = counter++;
               System.out.println("==> Waiter.counstructor:sNnum="+serialNum+" name="+Thread.currentThread().getName());
          public void run(){
               System.out.println("==> Waiter.run():" + serialNum+" name="+Thread.currentThread().getName());
               r.doWait(this);

Similar Messages

  • The static field should be accessed in a static way

    Hello,
    I am developing a java app in eclipse and I am getting the error message:
    The static field Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK should be accessed in a static way
    I am trying to get the first day of the first week in the current month, here is my code:
    GregorianCalendar firstDayOfThisMonthCalendar = new GregorianCalendar(Calendar.YEAR, Calendar.MONTH, 1);
    int firstDayOfThisMonth = firstDayOfThisMonthCalendar.DAY_OF_WEEK;I though the problem was that I'm supposed to write the code like this:
    firstDayOfThisMonthCalendar.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK); but then I get the wrong value back

    That's what I critice about u people, always ready to
    complain, It's not complaining. It's pointing out problems with your code. You should thank him.
    but do u put the code in here the way that
    someone could read it ? Easy to say 'use
    simpleDateFormat. Oh, careful, January returns 0, not
    1'.Using SimpleDateFormat is an easier and more correct way to do it. Trying to use the numerical value of the month constants is incorrect coding. You should thank him for educating you.
    Why can't u write the code in here so there's no
    chance that somebody will ask again.Such code is not possible. No matter what code you write, somebody can misunderstand it.
    If you write the code correctly--using SimpleDateFormat--then the code will be correct (which is the most important criteria) and clear (which is important, but not as important as correctness).
    But if you prefer to think that your way is always perfect and are afraid to admit your mistakes and learn from them, that's your prerogative.

  • Static fields ARE being serialized

    Hi there,
    I wrote a small test class that serializes an object, writes the serialized object to file, read the serialized object from the file and then deserialize the object. The object being serialized contains normal fields, a transient field, and a few 4 static fields with varying access modifiers. For some reason the static variables ARE being serialized. From what I've read this should not happen, and for very good reasons.
    Here is the object being serialized:
    package serialization;
    import java.io.Serializable;
    import java.util.Formatter;
    public class MySerializableObject implements Serializable {
         private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
         private int a = 1;
         private int b = 2;
         private transient int c = 3;
         static public int d = 4;
         static protected int e = 5;
         static private int f = 6;
         static int g = 7;
         @Override
         public String toString() {
              Formatter formatter = new Formatter();
              formatter.format("a=%1$s b=%2$s c=%3$s d=%4$s e=%5$s f=%6$s g=%7$s", a,b,c,d,e,f,g);
              return formatter.toString();
         public void setNewD(int newVal) {
              d = newVal;
    }And here is the code that does the serialization:
    package serialization;
    import java.io.File;
    import java.io.FileInputStream;
    import java.io.FileOutputStream;
    import java.io.IOException;
    import java.io.ObjectInputStream;
    import java.io.ObjectOutputStream;
    public class FileContentsObjectSerializer {
         File file;
         public FileContentsObjectSerializer(String name) {
              this.file = new File(name);
              if (this.file.exists()) {
                   this.file.delete();
              try {
                   this.file.createNewFile();
              } catch (IOException e) {
                   e.printStackTrace();
         public void serialize(Object o) throws IOException {
              FileOutputStream fos = new FileOutputStream(this.file);
              ObjectOutputStream oos = new ObjectOutputStream(fos);
              oos.writeObject(o);
              oos.close();
              fos.close();
         public Object deserialize() throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException {
              FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(this.file);
              ObjectInputStream ois = new ObjectInputStream(fis);
              Object o = ois.readObject();
              fis.close();
              ois.close();
              return o;
         public static void main(String args[]) {
              MySerializableObject mso = new MySerializableObject();
              mso.setNewD(100);
              System.out.println("Object being serialized:"+mso.toString());
              FileContentsObjectSerializer ofs = new FileContentsObjectSerializer("c:/temptest.txt");
              try {
                   ofs.serialize(mso);
                   MySerializableObject result = (MySerializableObject) ofs.deserialize();
                   System.out.println("Deserialized Object:    "+result.toString());
              } catch (Exception e) {
                   e.printStackTrace();
    }And here is the results I get:
    Object being serialized:a=1 b=2 c=3 d=100 e=5 f=6 g=7
    Deserialized Object:    a=1 b=2 c=0 d=100 e=5 f=6 g=7As you can see, both results are exactly the same, even though the setNewD value is not called on the deserialized object.
    Any ideas?

    You are misinterpreting the result. Try this main instead:
        public static void main(String args[]) {
            MySerializableObject mso = new MySerializableObject();
            mso.setNewD(100);
            System.out.println("Object being serialized:"+mso.toString());
            FileContentsObjectSerializer ofs = new FileContentsObjectSerializer("c:/temptest.txt");
            try {
                ofs.serialize(mso);
                mso.setNewD(-100); //a-oogah!
                MySerializableObject result = (MySerializableObject) ofs.deserialize();
                System.out.println("Deserialized Object:    "+result.toString());
            } catch (Exception e) {
                e.printStackTrace();
        }

  • Generics in static fields

    Hi, I am trying to make a class which has some generic fields. I understand that it would not work just like that as the compiler has no way what the generic fields should actually be in a static context.
    I want to use the generic class as an abstract class which would be extended, so that way the generics should be resolvable. Is there any way to make this work this way or should I not use generics and go type unsafe?
    This is what I want to do in code:
    abstract class ClassToBeExtended<A>
         static A a;
    class UsingTheOther extends ClassToBeExtended<String> {}

    It is supposed to be a class that adds relations between other classes:
    // Simplified
    class RelationBetweenAandB extends TheClass<A, B> {}
    class SomeOtherClass
      void foo()
        A a = new A();
        B b1 = new B();
        B b2 = new B();
        RelationBetweenAandB.add(a, b1);
        RelationBetweenAandB.add(a, b2);
        new YetAnotherClass().listRelationsOf(a);
    class YetAnotherClass
      public void listRelationsOf(A a)
          for (B b : RelationBetweenAandB.allRhs(a))
          ; // Iterate through b1 and b2
    }Having static fields will make the relation useful from anywhere in the application, if it is not static then all the objects that are going to be used in a relation have to instantiate the class which wlll probably introduce a lot of overhead.
    abstract class SomeClass<A extends OtherClass>
      static OtherClass a;
    } Would require me to have Object in stead of OtherClass because I want all types of object to be in a relation, which is what I meant by going type unsafe :)
    Message was edited by:
    SavageNLD
    Added some more reasoning about why I want static fields

  • StreamTokenizer static fields

    Maybe this is a stupid question but why does this compile without problems:
    Reader r = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
    StreamTokenizer tok = new StreamTokenizer(r);
              // StreamTokenizer tok = new StreamTokenizer(System.in);
              try{
                   while (tok.nextToken() != StreamTokenizer.TT_EOF){
                        switch (tok.ttype) {        // ttype is token type
                             case StreamTokenizer.TT_NUMBER: 
                                  System.out.println("number " + tok.nval);
                                  break;
         ....But this:
    Reader r = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
    StreamTokenizer tok = new StreamTokenizer(r);
              // StreamTokenizer tok = new StreamTokenizer(System.in);
              try{
                   while (tok.nextToken() != StreamTokenizer.TT_EOF){
                        switch (tok.ttype) {        
                             case tok.TT_NUMBER:  // nval is numeric value
                                  System.out.println("number " + tok.nval);
                                  break;
         ....                    gives the following compiling error:
    constant expression required
        case tok.TT_NUMBER:  value
               ^
    1 errorI thought static fields can be access both through the name of the class and objects of it.
    The version that doesn't compile comes from a book which makes it slightly more confusing.

    excuse my wording. I have been using >= mostly, though
    I do know that > exists. If I replace the >
    with >= and compile there are no errors. But I also
    get the following errors with the >
    # javac TestLight.java
    TestLight.java:13: ')' expected
    if (a.KWH_PRICE > 0)
    ^
    TestLight.java:13: not a statement
    if (a.KWH_PRICE > 0)
    ^
    TestLight.java:13: ';' expected
    if (a.KWH_PRICE > 0)
    ^
    TestLight.java:13: cannot resolve symbol
    symbol : variable gt
    location: class TestLight
    if (a.KWH_PRICE > 0)
    ^
    4 errorsYou really get errors then ?
    Very strange, I don't get any.....

  • Non-static variable cant accessed from the static context..your suggestion

    Once again stuck in my own thinking, As per my knowledge there is a general error in java.
    i.e. 'Non-static variable cant accessed from static context....'
    Now the thing is that, When we are declaring any variables(non-static) and trying to access it within the same method, Its working perfectly fine.
    i.e.
    public class trial{
    ���������� public static void main(String ar[]){      ////static context
    ������������ int counter=0; ///Non static variable
    ������������ for(;counter<10;) {
    �������������� counter++;
    �������������� System.out.println("Value of counter = " + counter) ; ///working fine
    �������������� }
    ���������� }
    Now the question is that if we are trying to declare a variable out-side the method (Non-static) , Then we defenately face the error' Non-static varialble can't accessed from the static context', BUT here within the static context we declared the non-static variable and accessed it perfectly.
    Please give your valuable suggestions.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    Once again stuck in my own thinking, As per my
    knowledge there is a general error in java.
    i.e. 'Non-static variable cant accessed from static
    context....'
    Now the thing is that, When we are declaring any
    variables(non-static) and trying to access it within
    the same method, Its working perfectly fine.
    i.e.
    public class trial{
    ���������� public static void
    main(String ar[]){      ////static context
    ������������ int counter=0; ///Non
    static variable
    ������������ for(;counter<10;) {
    �������������� counter++;
    ��������������
    System.out.println("Value
    of counter = " + counter) ; ///working fine
    �������������� }
    ���������� }
    w the question is that if we are trying to declare a
    variable out-side the method (Non-static) , Then we
    defenately face the error' Non-static varialble can't
    accessed from the static context', BUT here within
    the static context we declared the non-static
    variable and accessed it perfectly.
    Please give your valuable suggestions.
    Thanks,
    JeffHi,
    You are declaring a variable inside a static method,
    that means you are opening a static scope... i.e. static block internally...
    whatever the variable you declare inside a static block... will be static by default, even if you didn't add static while declaring...
    But if you put ... it will be considered as redundant by compiler.
    More over, static context does not get "this" pointer...
    that's the reason we refer to any non-static variables declared outside of any methods... by creating an object... this gives "this" pointer to static method controller.

  • Should I create setters for static fields ?

    Hi all,
    I don't know if here is the right forum for this question, but I'd like to know if is recommended to create setters for static fields of a class or if I can directly assign a value to those fields.
    Thanks.

    No question, you can assign to static fields, it's more a question of style and thoughts about future requirements. At some point in the future maybe you'll want such setting to have side effects. Personally I think using getters and setters everywhere (even on isntance fields) can be a bit obsessive.
    On the whole, there's not that many occasions where accessing static fields that directly from outside the class makes sense. It's usually better, to my mind, to use a singleton pattern for global values. For me, static variables are more likely to either be constants, or things like instance lists more likely to be accessed through an Iterable interface.

  • Is read-only access to a static field correct without volatile/locking?

    Hello,
    I wonder wether the following code is safe:
    static UnicomServerCentral instance;
         public static void setInstance(UnicomServerCentral central)
              synchronized (UnicomServerCentral.class)
                   instance = central;
         public static UnicomServerCentral getInstance()
              UnicomServerCentral central = thisinstance;
              if (central == null)
                   synchronized (UnicomServerCentral.class)
                        central = this.instance;
              return central;
         }The static field instance is already guaranteed to be set. Is this safe?
    Thank you in advance, lg Clemens

    It might be safe in a particular context if there is
    additional synchronization involving the construction
    of the the "central" object and the execution of any
    threads that might call getInstance.Well if getInstance() returns null I simply spin as long as I get a non-null value back - so the only circumstance I could get here null is initialization.
    Since this example is a perfect does-not-work-dcl example I'll search the net for exmplanations.
    Thanks a lot, lg Clemens

  • Avoid assigning to servlet static fields without using a shared lock??

    Hi
    i received the following warning on my code, does anyone give me a help on this? Thanks
    "Avoid assigning to servlet static fields from javax.servlet.Service.service () without using a shared lock."
    And my code are as follow:
    public class MyDataSource {
        private static DataSource ds = null;
        public static DataSource getDataSource() throws NamingException, Exception
            if (ds==null){
                   InitialContext ctx = new InitialContext();
                try{
                    synchronized(getDataSource()){
                    if(ds==null){
                        ds = (DataSource) ctx.lookup(SysProperties.ds);
                } catch (Exception ex) {
                    throw new Exception("DBConnection Exception: " +ex.toString());
                }finally{
                        if(ctx !=null){
                            ctx.close();
            return ds;       
    }

    The service method of a servlet is multi-threaded to handle multiple requests. Hence,any static or public fields accessed by the service method should be restricted to a single thread access (for example using synchronized keyword) to make it thread-safe. That is why you are getting the warning message.

  • Static field initialization

    Ok, I know this was a good practices issue in C++, where order of initializing static fields from different source files was unknown, but I'm not sure if Java is smart enough to figure it out.
    So, say you have in one file
    public class A{
       public static B b = new B();
    }And in the other:
    public class C{
       private static D  d = A.b.getD();
    }Will this always work? Or does it depend on the order in wich classes A and C are loaded.

    jschell wrote:
    In multiple threads on some systems (potentially) the construction of B() is not guaranted before access to 'b' is allowed.Class initialization is synchronized, so the construction of B() should be fully visible to other threads without explicit synchronization or making the field final.
    From JLS 12.4.3:
    Code generators need to preserve the points of possible initialization of a class or interface, inserting an invocation of the initialization procedure just described. If this initialization procedure completes normally and the Class object is fully initialized and ready for use, then the invocation of the initialization procedure is no longer necessary and it may be eliminated from the code-for example, by patching it out or otherwise regenerating the code.So class initialization is attempted whenever the code generator feels it might be the first use of a class.
    And from 12.4.2:
    The procedure for initializing a class or interface is then as follows:
    1. Synchronize (§14.19) on the Class object that represents the class or interface to be initialized. This involves waiting until the current thread can obtain the lock for that object (§17.1).
    2. If initialization is in progress for the class or interface by some other thread, then wait on this Class object (which temporarily releases the lock). When the current thread awakens from the wait, repeat this step.So the class is synchronized on until initialization (which includes all static initializers) finishes. This makes possible the class holder idiom for singletons.

  • Using Objects to Initialize Static Fields: Good or Bad

    I have a Command interface and a bunch of Commands that implement it (i.e. CmdJoin,CmdQuit). These Commands' settings change at runtime (i.e. required access levels, String identifiers). I don't want to have to store an instance of each Command in a database to save their settings , so instead I'm using the obvious solution: making static fields in these commands for these settings. This way, I can use a Simple Factory to return a Command, change its settings, execute it, and forget it, and still have the settings for that Command apply to all Commands. Yet I want to be able to modify and access fields of different Commands polymorphically. How can I have these commands' settings-related fields be static while modifying and accessing these fields polymorphically?
    Here's what I have though of. First of all, interfaces can't have static methods. Secondly, neither can abstract classes. I also can't extend a base class which implements these settings-related fields and their interface, because then the fields would belong to all child classes of this base class, whereas I just want it to belong to a certain child class of the base class (i.e. all instances of CmdJoin or CmdQuit).
    I've thought of two solutions.
    The first is implementing a concrete interface in an abstract base class (getting rid of the Command interface) and overriding it in child classes, so that I can use the interface of the base class and the fields of the child classes.
    The second is having no base class, and just a bunch of Commands implementing the interface with their own static fields. I would initialize these fields by passing arguments to their constructors.
    These solutions seem very sloppy though! Are there any better ways?

    To clarify, I want all objects of type A to be able to respond to a static method declared in type A yet still remember their implementation of this static method. I provided two solutions that I have thought of, and I find them sloppy, so I'm asking if there's a better way.

  • Static field component in virtual machine spec

    Hello.
    I can&#8217;t understand some point in JavaCard Virtual Machine Specification v2.2.2.
    Section: 6.10 Static Field Component. See table 6-14. segment 4 &#8211; it describe &#8220;primitive types initialized to non-default values&#8221;. It is describes by two parameters : non_default_value_count, non_default_values[].non_default_values &#8211; is image of all static primitive fields independence of it type &#8211; byte, short, int. This image consist from data in big-endian order.
    How I can use it at architecture with little-endian order?
    I can&#8217;t parse where short or int &#8211; I can&#8217;t convert it. How I can do it?

    As you pointed out it is not known from the CAP file format where single short or int values begin. At access time you know where the value starts and of which type it is. Therefore it looks like you have no choice but to convert the value at every access from or to big endian.
    This is from a design perspective definitely not nice regarding the VM design but I don't think the performance penalty is too costly.

  • Assembly Insert brings static field error, but I have no fields

    Hallo,
    I have a signed test-dll with only 1 class:
    Public Class cTable
      Inherits DataTable
    End Class
    When Importing the Assembly to Database in SQLServer 2012,  Managementstudio shows the Message below.
    I have no static Fields to set as Readonly Properties.
    What must I do?
    Thanks - torsten
    Fehler bei CREATE ASSEMBLY, weil der TB_Test.cTable-Typ in der safe-Assembly 'TB_Test' das statische Feld '__ENCList' aufweist. Attribute von statischen Feldern in safe-Assemblys müssen in Visual C# als 'readonly', in Visual Basic als ReadOnly oder in Visual
    C++ und Intermediate Language als 'initonly' gekennzeichnet werden. (Microsoft SQL Server, Fehler: 6211)

    Hi Bob,
    yes, the cTable inherits from System.Data.DataTable.
    The error comes when trying to insert then dll as 'saved' and also as 'external access'.
    When inserting as 'unsaved' Comes then error below, although the assembly is signed and a login for this key exists.
    Are the some Options for the Compiler in vs2013, so no static fields are created?
    Thanks - torsten
    Fehler bei CREATE ASSEMBLY für die TB_Test-Assembly, weil die TB_Test-Assembly für PERMISSION_SET = UNSAFE nicht autorisiert ist. Die Assembly ist autorisiert, wenn eine der folgenden Bedingungen zutrifft: Der Datenbankbesitzer (DBO) hat die UNSAFE ASSEMBLY-Berechtigung,
    und für die Datenbank ist die TRUSTWORTHY-Datenbankeigenschaft aktiviert; oder die Assembly ist mit einem Zertifikat oder einem asymmetrischen Schlüssel signiert, das bzw. der einen entsprechenden Anmeldenamen mit der UNSAFE ASSEMBLY-Berechtigung aufweist
    . (Microsoft SQL Server, Fehler: 10327)

  • Session Bean-static field or ejbCreate/Activate

    Hi,
    I have a stateful session bean whose methods use JDBC. I need to load the
    JDBC driver.
    Where is the best place to do this? static field, or one of the ejb
    callbacks such as ejbCreate or ejbActivate.
    Another way to put the question is, when a bean has been passivated and then
    reactivated, do the static fields in bean class get initialized?
    Thanx,
    Mark

    You should not be loading the JDBC driver explictly at all, but rather using
    JNDI to get a connection from a managed connection pool. If you do the JDBC
    directly, you're bypassing the transaction control for which you in all
    likelihood have the appserver in the first place.
    "mark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:3uhp8.60950$[email protected]..
    Hi,
    I have a stateful session bean whose methods use JDBC. I need to load the
    JDBC driver.
    Where is the best place to do this? static field, or one of the ejb
    callbacks such as ejbCreate or ejbActivate.
    Another way to put the question is, when a bean has been passivated andthen
    reactivated, do the static fields in bean class get initialized?
    Thanx,
    Mark

  • How can I share a static field between 2 class loaders?

    Hi,
    I've been googling for 2 days and it now seems I'm not understanding something because nobody seems to have my problem. Please, somebody tell me if I'm crazy.
    The system's architecture:
    I've got a web application running in a SunOne server. The app uses Struts for the MVC part and Spring to deal with business services and DAOs.
    Beside the web app, beyond the application context, but in the same physical server, there are some processes, kind of batch processes that update tables and that kind of stuff, that run once a day. Theese processes are plain Java classes, with a main method, that are executed from ".sh" scripts with the "java" command.
    What do I need to do?
    "Simple". I need one of those Java processes to use one of the web app's service. This service has some DAOs injected by Spring. And the service itself is a bean defined in the Spring configuration file.
    The solution is made-up of 2 parts:
    1. I created a class, in the web app, with a static method that returns any bean defined in the Spring configuration file, or in other words, any bean in the application context. In my case, this method returns the service I need.
    public class SpringApplicationContext implements ApplicationContextAware {
         private static ApplicationContext appContext;
         public void setApplicationContext(ApplicationContext context) throws BeansException {
              appContext = context;
         public static Object getBean(String nombreBean) {
              return appContext.getBean(nombreBean);
    }The ApplicationContext is injected to the class by Spring through the setApplicationContext method. This is set in the Spring configuration file.
    Well, this works fine if I call the getBean method from any class in the web app. But that's not what I need. I need to get a bean from outside the web app. From the "Java batch process".
    2. Why doesn't it work from outside the web app? Because when I call getBean from the process outside the web app, a different class loader is executed to load the SpringApplicationContext class. Thus, the static field appContext is null. Am I right?
    So, the question I need you to please answer me, the question I didn't find in Google:
    How can I share the static field between the 2 class loaders?
    If I can't, how can I load the SpringApplicationContext class, from the "Java batch process", with the same class loader my web app was started?
    Or, do I need to load the SpringApplicationContext class again? Can't I use, from the process, the class already loaded by my web app?
    I' sorry about my so extensive post...
    Thank you very much!

    zibilico wrote:
    But maybe, if the web service stuff gets to complicated or it doesn't fulfill my needs, I'll set up a separate Spring context, that gets loaded everytime I run the "Java batch process". It'll have it's own Spring configuration files (these will be a fragment of the web app's config files), where I'll define only the beans I need to use, say the service and the 2 DAOs, and also the DB connection. Additionally, I'll set the classpath to use the beans classes of the web app. Thus, if the service and DAOs were modified in the app server, the process would load the modified classes in the following execution.You'll almost certainly have to do that even if you do use RMI, Web services etc. to connect.
    What I suggest is that you split your web project into two source trees, the stuff that relates strictly to the web front end and the code which will be shared with the batch. The latter can then be treated as a library used by both the batch and web projects. That can include splitting Spring configuration files into common and specific, the common beans file can be retrieved from the classpath with an include. I regularly split web projects this way anyway, it helps impose decoupling between View/Controller and Model layers.
    On the other hand, you might consider running these batch processes inside the web server on background threads.

Maybe you are looking for

  • "Invalid Expression " Error with Refreshing variable

    Hi When ever i try to validata following query in Refreshing tab of a variable, I am getting invalid expression error select USER_NAME from SNP_SESSION where SESS_NO = <%=odiRef.getSession()%> if i use following Query select STEP_MESS from <%=snpRef.

  • Why can i only print 1 copy in print in CS5 even when I type more than 1?

    Why can i only print 1 copy in print in CS5 even when I type more than 1?

  • How to use SANE / USB scanners on Solaris 10?

    I would like to use a SANE-enabled USB scanner (Mustek BearPaw 1200F) on Solaris 10, but haven't yet managed to make it work. I gather that on Solaris 10, there's a "libusb" library in "/opt/sfw/lib" and a "sane-find-scanner" program in "/opt/sfw/bin

  • User exit for mb02

    Hi friends,   For MB02 Trans i need a user exit. I found out that the following exit can be used. Mainly MBCF0002 as for MB01 Trans.But,when I placed a breakpoint in this exit.It is not triggering. I tried other exits also.But none of the exit is tri

  • Desktop Loading Very Slowly

    Over the last four days my iMac boots up, then once the screen saver shows up on the desktop it takes almost two mins for everything to load on. First the dock appears after about 30 secs, then it takes like another 1-1 1/2 mins for the HD and other