|
I got some info that might help u guys ..remeber i said my accounting software was throwing a clr exception 80004005 and crashes ...well it happens when u execute it with the Compatability set to windows98/me or simply by executing the programm on a win9x box..I just found out that all my C# programms give the same error !!! Thats preetty confusing to me ..It means my compiler is giving me the problem ??
Might be u guys can help me out on that !!;)
|
|
|
|
|
Confuses the heck out of me also. All my c# apps crash when compatibily is set to 98
|
|
|
|
|
what i ment was the compatability option for windowsXP . When trying to run the app under the win9x/me option it crashs ..
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - i know. Exactly that.
Well it doesn't really matter much for me anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm going to release an application with multiple customized versions. When the user inserts the CD into the drive I need a .net application to be able to run automatically. Of course this is not going to work if the framework is not installed. Does anyone know of a way of running a .net application without the framework? Something like static linking in MFC?
There must be a solution to this. (Other than installing the framework)
|
|
|
|
|
You have to make a C++ program as an autorun app, not a C# application.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
I'm think i might have to, but I was really hoping i could do it my way in C#
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of months back the guys at Thinstall were discussing ways to include the .Net framework libraries needed to run a .Net app with the app itself, using their utility. The idea was to make a .Net app run independantly from the .Net framework - which seems to be what you want to do.
I'm not sure how far they got with it, or exactly what the legal ramifications would be, but you might be able to get more info from their website:
www.thinstall.com[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I took a looks at the website and it doesn't look too promising. All they have right now is have the program fail gracefully and tell the user that they need the framework instead of saying that the .net core dll is missing.
Still, thanks a bunch for the advice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
how can i edit,save and delete data in a datagrid which datasource is a datable in a dataset,whick will make it look like microsoft access
|
|
|
|
|
|
thx i ve found the solution,just to put the endcurrentedit and update for the dataset code in the (CurrentCellChanged) Event of the DataGrid.. am using a windows application dunno if it is the same as Asp.net or not
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
You have two Windows Forms from one project.
One calls the other and closes itself.
But before the first Windows Form closes itself,
it must send some data to the second Windows Form
so that when it is created, it formats itself
accordingly to the data passed.
Now, pray tell, what is the best, non-obstrusive way
of doing that without creating ugly dependencies between
those two?
Thanks
Antoine
This by our hands that dream,
"I shall find a way or make one!" great quote heh? 
|
|
|
|
|
Make the second form's constructor have some parameters that receive it?
|
|
|
|
|
You may need an independant storage mechanism. Essentially a container for global data. Alternatively, the native API call supports passing user-defined data to the window create command, I believe. Besides, there isn't anything wrong with global data--it just needs to be managed. Finally, I'm not exactly too sure what the problem is--can't you just pass the data as part of the constructor call to the other form?
Marc
STL, a liability factory - Anonymously
A doable project is one that is small enough to be done quickly and big enough to be interesting - Ken Orr
Latest AAL Article
My blog
|
|
|
|
|
Orlanda Ramos wrote:
Now, pray tell, what is the best, non-obstrusive way
of doing that without creating ugly dependencies between
those two?
As pssing properties in the constructor could be perceived as creating a dependency, the other way to do this would be to provide public or internal accessors for the properties you want to pass in form 2.
public class Form2 : Form<br />
{<br />
private int myInt;<br />
private string myString;<br />
<br />
public int MyInt { set { myInt = value; } }<br />
public string MyString { set { myString = value; } }<br />
<br />
public Form2()<br />
{<br />
}<br />
}
public class Form1 : Form<br />
{<br />
public Form1()<br />
{<br />
}<br />
<br />
private void OpenForm2(int myInt, string myString)<br />
{<br />
Form2 form2 = new Form2();<br />
form2.MyInt = myInt;<br />
form2.MyString = myString;<br />
form2.Show();<br />
}<br />
}
|
|
|
|
|
This is the way I would do it, just because it is more flexible.
If you use either method I would say that you aren't creating a dependency between the two forms, but a dependency on the data required for Form2 to work correctly.
James
"I despise the city and much prefer being where a traffic jam means a line-up at McDonald's"
Me when telling a friend why I wouldn't want to live with him
|
|
|
|
|
That wraps it up preaty niely 
Thanks everyone, Furty!
Antoine
This by our hands that dream,
"I shall find a way or make one!" great quote heh?
|
|
|
|
|
You can build a class which is called GlobalVars
NameSpace GlobalVars
{
public class GlobalVars
{
public static string stringVars;
public class GlobalVars()
{}
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
whoops, in this example the constructor will never be called automatically - to make this a fully static class the constructor line should be:
static GlobalVars()
not
public class GlobalVars()
The advantage of using a static constructor is that it allows you to dynamically set values/execute code before any properties are sent to the requesting class. Note that you cannot control exactly when a static constructor is initiated, but you can rest assured that it will happen before any values are passed in or out of your static class.
|
|
|
|
|
How can I top/detop (TopMost property) and show/hide a window without activating it?
In C, there was the SetWindowPos() function that had an activate flag, but I don't see any such thing in .Net.
|
|
|
|
|
There's an always on top window in my app, but I have an annoying problem with it.
The window is just a normal window with TopMost set to true.
Now this works fine, but I want the window to dissappear if another app gets focus.
I tried pussing topwindow.Visible = true; in the Activate event and topwindow.Visible = false; in the Deactivate event, but these events get called even when another window in my app gets actiavted, so whenever I click on the topmost window, it dissappears because the main window gets deactivated.
Is there a way to prevent the topmost window from getting focus at all? (But still use it as normal, just no focus. By normal I mean still have it receive mouse clicks.)
Or some way to determine what window is getting focus in the Deactivate event?
Or some other way to fix this?
|
|
|
|
|
Nice to meet you here.
I hope I will do help you .
First Create a class with a namespace test
namespace test
{
public class GlobalVars
{
public static bool blVisible;
public GlobalVars()
{}
}
}
In topwindows ,set a Timer Component which watch the test.GlobalVars.blVisi
ble , When it is true , Ignore it , when it is false , set Visible to false
In the other Window , Set the blVisible to control the Global Variables;
I hope it will help you
|
|
|
|
|
No, that's not what I need. What I need is to know what window is getting activated, so I don't turn the topmost window invisible when I click on it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
