|
Thanks
That is what I am doing now. Displaying a part of page that I want to print on a new page and then printing.
|
|
|
|
|
I can create a pointer array, such as:
IntPtr[] openWindows = new IntPtr[100];
But i am unable to store windows hWnds. When i do the following:
openWindows[0] = hWndOfSomeWindow;
And read it back:
Debug.WriteLine(openWindows[0]);
All i get is '0', not the window handle ID. Can someone point our my wrongness here?
|
|
|
|
|
From the deaf silence to my post i assumed that i was doing something foolishly wrong and so i started doing more tests. I finally found that the problem was the incorrect use of an index variable for the IntPtr array. It was not incrementing and so the pointers were all being saved to a single array location. Common error.
|
|
|
|
|
I am trying to read a PDF file so I can convert its data to a readable format that I can then load into a SQL data table. I am not remoting, and I am getting the following error....
Additional information: BinaryFormatter Version incompatibility. Expected Version 1.0. Received Version 825309752.540554042.
My code looks like this....
using System;
using System.IO;
using System.Collections;
using System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.Binary;
using System.Runtime.Serialization;
public class App
{
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
Deserialize();
}
static void Deserialize()
{
// Declare the hashtable reference.
Hashtable myPDFdata= null;
// Open the file containing the data that you want to deserialize.
FileStream fs = new FileStream("MyPDF.pdf", FileMode.Open);
try
{
BinaryFormatter formatter = new BinaryFormatter();
// Deserialize the hashtable from the file and
// assign the reference to the local variable.
myPDFdata = (Hashtable) formatter.Deserialize(fs);
}
catch (SerializationException e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to deserialize. Reason: " + e.Message);
throw;
}
finally
{
fs.Close();
}
// To prove that the table deserialized correctly,
// display the key/value pairs.
foreach (DictionaryEntry de in myPDFdata)
{
Console.WriteLine("{0}myPDFdata.", de.Key, de.Value); }
}
}
Or is there a better way of doing this????
Thanks!
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
Guys I'm at a loss!
I don't want wait cursor to be displayed in my app at all. How can I suppress it totally or change the picture of the WaitCursor to Arrow (default) cursor - so that anytime wait cursor is invoked it would show the arrow, hence show no change.
And why doesn't Cursor.Current = Cursors.Arrow; work. It's supposed to set the current cursor, but it does nothing!
Any help is appreciated!
|
|
|
|
|
That all depends on what's causing the wait cursor. If it's a web browser control on your form, then no, you can't stop the wait cursor from happening. The browser control is what' setting the cursor to Busy. So long as the cursor is over that control, it'll show up Busy.
Changing the image of the cursor, as in your workaround, would require changing the image system-wide. A practice I greatly discourage.
RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome
|
|
|
|
|
"Changing the image of the cursor, as in your workaround, would require changing the image system-wide. A practice I greatly discourage."
I agree. That would be sloppy.
Yes, the WebBrowser control is causing it to fire the cursor change, so how can I prevent that. Can I derive from the WebBrowser control and change it there? There's got to be a way to do this!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
peshkunta wrote: Yes, the WebBrowser control is causing it to fire the cursor change, so how can I prevent that.
There's no way to prevent it. You could create you own class from the WebBrowser class, but you still wouldn't be able to prevent the cursor from changing because it's not the class code that's changing the cursor. It's the Internet Explorer object code that's doing it, and there's no way you can change that.
RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome
|
|
|
|
|
The WebBrowser object is a control. Why couldn't I make a custom web browser control???
|
|
|
|
|
peshkunta wrote: The WebBrowser object is a control. Why couldn't I make a custom web browser control???
You could, but doing so would require writing your own browser. You could largely bypass doing so by using the firefox codebase, but would inject the GPL into your code as a result.
|
|
|
|
|
The WebBrowser class in .NET is a WRAPPER for the IE COM object.
In order to supply this functionality, you'd have to write your own web browser class, supplying all the HTML rendering code, but does not wrap the IE COM control, which is entirely possible.
Just creating a new class, inheriting from the existing WebBrowser class, will not allow you to do what you want, since you're inheriting from the WebBrowser class, you're also inheriting the COM object that it wraps.
RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome
|
|
|
|
|
Hi ! I have a Context Menu associated with my datagrid and I want to remove it or disable some menu option depending on which column the user Right Click (to show the context menu).
Thank you !
Danny Gilbert
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
Newly starting on C# I am attempting to use the TreeView to show a set of heirarchically related data items. In VisualC++ I would simply add to each node a pointer to the relevant data structure. I could then dereference the pointer and be directly at the relevant data item.
Is there an equivalent function or alternative method of connecting a treeNode to a class containing the data being displayed?
Your guidance would be much appreciated.
Craig Sheppard
|
|
|
|
|
There are two ways you can achieve what I think you are asking.
The fast and easy way is to use the TreeNode.Tag property to store a reference to whatever the TreeNode is supposed to represent. The Tag property is of type Object so it can hold a reference to anything, that can be good or bad because you can have nodes holding references to different types of objects. It also means you have to cast the reference back to whatever type it's suppose to be when you want to use that object.
The slightly harder way is to derive your own class from TreeNode and add an extra property that holds a reference to the object that the node is supposed to represent. This way allows you to ensure that only the right type of object is represented and saves you the hassle of having to cast everytime you want to access it.
|
|
|
|
|
Thats just the thing I needed to know. Many thanks for that.
craig
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I understand the code below. The question is indicated by ////???? ?????////// further down.
Thanks
public class clsName
{
public static string CardId
{
...
}
}
///////???????Please explain why static may be used with the private access modifier??????////////////////
public class clsName
{
private static string CardId
{
...
}
}
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Other (static) methods in the class can still access the private static variables, but you can't access them from outside. I.e. clsName.CardId is not accessible from outside the class.
regards
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I understand that, but what is the benefit of having static private for the method?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
That's from the Levenshtein distance I programmed recently:
class Levenshtein
{
static private int Minimum(int a, int b, int c)
{
...
}
static public int Difference(string s, string t)
{
array[i, j] = Levenshtein.Minimum ...
}
}
Difference is the only method accessible from outside. Since it's so simple there's no need to create a class instance, so I made it static. But Distance needs a Minimum-method to retrieve a value. This must also be static, but I don't want it to be accessible from outside the class.
regards
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess my question in your case is that why minimum is static?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
fmardani wrote: I guess my question in your case is that why minimum is static?
Because it doesnt need or use instance data. There will be marginally less overhead on calling the static method/member repeatedly. You could have omitted static.
It's also common for private helper methods.
xacc.ide-0.1.1.4 - now with LSharp integration and scripting :)
|
|
|
|
|
Any method that doesn't use any data from an instance of the class, should be static. That way, you can always tell if a method is using data from the instance or not.
---
b { font-weight: normal; }
|
|
|
|
|
Because static methods like "Difference" can't access non-static methods.
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
To reduce memory consumption should all instances of a particular class need read-only access to the same value. If they also need write, then you need to synchronize access to the member.
"we must lose precision to make significant statements about complex systems."
-deKorvin on uncertainty
|
|
|
|
|
fmardani wrote: ///////???????Please explain why static may be used with the private access modifier??????////////////////
The simple answer is: because it doesn't need be more visible than that.
As a general rule, you should make your methods/properties no more public than they need to be. This makes it easier to refactor the class later if you choose to.
Regards,
Alvaro
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
