|
I'd use it for VS2013. 
Jack of all trades, master of none, though often times better than master of one.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Ron
Did it work with you on VS 2013?
As per Matt U, you are supposed to just update the project references to use the Visual Studio 2013 SDK.
Please, keep me updated to update the article accordingly
Thanks for your cooperation 
foreach(Minute m in MyLife)
myExperience++;
|
|
|
|
|
Muhammad,
Yes it worked fine. I now have it in 2013 and 2010. And working fine in both. Sorry for the late reply, I got busy. Go figure. 
Jack of all trades, master of none, though often times better than master of one.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a lot Ron for your help
I have updated the article based on your valued input
Check it here[^]
foreach(Minute m in MyLife)
myExperience++;
modified 28-Apr-14 4:57am.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice idea,
I which I had time to update it .. keep me notified when it is don
I hope my code is readable and easy to extend
foreach(Minute m in MyLife)
myExperience++;
|
|
|
|
|
I completed it on Friday, but the project is at work, not at home. All I did was update the project references to use the Visual Studio 2012 SDK. I don't recall the need to make any code changes. I tested it with my VS2012 at work and it seemed to function properly.
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent
I will update the article soon with your point
foreach(Minute m in MyLife)
myExperience++;
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome! All I did was install the Visual Studio 2012 SDK, load and upgrade the project from VS2010 to VS2012, remove VS2010 SDK references, and add the ones for VS2012. If you have anymore questions you can message me on here or something. I'll gladly help out.
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a lot Matt U for your help
I have updated the article based on your valued input
Check it here[^]
foreach(Minute m in MyLife)
myExperience++;
modified 28-Apr-14 4:57am.
|
|
|
|
|
Great, glad I could help!
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you not create the region first if it doesn't exist and then create the properties inside or simply open the region and create them inside?
Am I missing something?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
Those who seek perfection will only find imperfection
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
me, in pictures
|
|
|
|
|
The guy I watched created the properties used the Ctrl+R, Ctrl+E shortcut chord. It places it directly under the field in the code. He didn't manually type out the properties.
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
IPoAC, or IP over Avian Carriers[^], was put forth by the Internet Engineering Task Force in 1990 as RFC 1149[^]. Version 2 was proposed in 1999 as RFC 2549[^]. Version 3, adapted to include IPv6, was made in 2011 as RFC 6214[^]. Basically, the protocol describes the use of carrier pigeon or similar bird to which a portable storage device has been attached as a way of transporting digital information.
Yes, the three proposals were made as April Fools jokes, but the protocols have been tested, and the results have been interesting. For large transfers of data, avian carriers actually outperform the Internet: the size of thumb drives has decreased greatly, while the storage density has greatly increased, since RFC 1149, meaning that bandwidth on an avian carrier has increased three times faster than bandwidth on the Internet. Latency is a problem, of course, with benchmarks showing response times ranging between 3000 seconds (about 54 minutes) to over 6000 seconds. Even so, the potential is impressive, especially for non-industrialized countries and rural areas that are poorly served by traditional Internet services. For example, if 16 homing pigeons are given eight 32 GB SD cards each, and they take an hour to reach their destination, the throughput amounts to about 9102 MB/s, excluding transfer to and from the cards, which is far superior to anything that is otherwise available.
That is what I call thinking outside the box.
Edit: Not sure what happened, but I've fixed the links.
modified 7-Feb-14 16:47pm.
|
|
|
|
|
But, in areas where the avian carriers may be mistaken for drones... Well... let's just say the message may not make it to the intended target...
|
|
|
|
|
Google call it FedExNet[^] but it's also known as SneakerNet.
For huge amounts of data, it's a lot more efficient in time terms due to the massive bandwidth required otherwise.
I do an equivalent from time to time, and load a USB3 HDD and drive it across town, rather than upload it to Dropbox because my upload speed is a paltry 1Mb/s.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway."
Andrew S. Tanenbaum[^]
modified 7-Feb-14 18:53pm.
|
|
|
|
|
CHOMP!
You just got bit by the underscore in link bug!
<voice type="Ebeneezer Scrooge"> Bah. dumb bugs </voice>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if it tastes like chicken?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think I want to find out.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps they wanted to get a leg up on the competition.
|
|
|
|
|
No, they were trying to help others to get ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like they may got cold feet.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
