|
I don't think such a thing exist cause as I told you you can get all those informations with simple queries. You can show Contstranit or any object in database with getting information from INFORMATION_SCHEMA,then you can show and handle it in a way you want. I don't know about any integrated tool.
Mazy
No sig. available now.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for that information.
I'm trying to do this!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am having a new requirement of converting my existing Web site code (Developed using Microsoft.NET and Microsoft Commerce Server 2002) to full-fledged Modular Approach implemented code. Does any one come across in this path, pls do drop your messages over here. Thanks in advance.
Always I am here to share all my pleasures with Code
|
|
|
|
|
I am experimenting with the ArrayList class in the .NET Framework and I am having a problem retreiving an object stored in it to call/use its members.
For example:
If I have a class named MyObject and I add three (or more) instances of them to the ArrayList instance named testArray like:
Dim obj As New MyObject
Dim obj1 As New MyObject
Dim obj2 As New MyObject
testArray.Add(obj)
testArray.Add(obj1)
testArray.Add(obj2)
How would I be able to index one of the instances to use/access its members. I would expect to do it like this (assuming that MyObject has a Name property):
' Accessing the first item in the ArrayList.
testArray.Item(0).Name = "New Name"
This doesn't seem to want to work. Intellisense, instead of showing the members of the class stored, it shows the GetType() function only. Anybody have any ideas? 
Thanks in advance.
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
bneacetp wrote:
' Accessing the first item in the ArrayList.
testArray.Item(0).Name = "New Name"
I figured it out. It compiles and runs well. Intellisense just doesn't show the members of the class. 
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
Alternatively:
CType(testArray.Item(0), MyObject).Name It's a good idea to cast if you're performing a lot of operations on the same object, because there's overhead involved in System.Object's late binding. Prefer to early-bind if you can.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the information. 
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
What are the prospects for a low pause-time garbage collector being added to .NET?
(I have a server that is written in .NET, and low latency is important for this server. The server can tolerate many garbage collections, but each garbage collection must be quick. Latencies as long as about 1/3 of a second would be OK; longer is problematic. A garbage collector with pause times of less than .1 second would be great.)
|
|
|
|
|
I am using Windows Server 2003. I installed VC#.NET Enterprise Edition like this:
1. Insert disk-5 to update Windows Component;
2. Insert disk-6 to install VC#.NET;
3. Insert disk-2, disk-3, and disk-4 to install MSDN;
4. Install .NET Framework 1.1 SDK, MSDE, MDAC 2.8 with downloaded packets.
Now I get a problem that the version of .NET Framework displayed in VC# help is not 1.1 but 1.0.3705. And two shortcuts of both ".NET Framework Configuration" and ".NET Framework Wizard" are added into the "Administration Tools" menu. But the same shortcuts as them are added when the Windows Server 2003 installation finished. Then I run the ".NET Framework Configuration", the version of .NET Framework returned is still 1.0.3705.
So I download the packet of .NET Framework 1.1 and install it. But the system show a message that the .NET Framework is installed with installation of operation system.
Later, I uninstalled the .NET Framework 1.1 SDK and VC#.NET, then the two shortcuts is removed too. But the version of .NET Framework is still 1.0.3705.
How can I do? I need the support from .NET Framework 1.1 to develop an application about IP Multicast.
I enjoy programming...
|
|
|
|
|
I have a sub in my VB.Net that is loading a plugin into my Host Application.
I have a method in the system that allows a specific plugin to be unloaded. But I cannot get the assembly to allow me to delete/replace the DLL in the system. I've extracted this out to as simple as I can.
Am I missing something in this code that would allow me to do it.
<br />
Imports System.Reflection<br />
Private Sub Form1_Load(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load<br />
<br />
Dim objDLL As [Assembly]<br />
objDLL = [Assembly].LoadFrom("Z:\broker\plugins\EODStoretoXML.dll")<br />
objDLL = Nothing<br />
System.GC.Collect()<br />
System.GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers()<br />
System.GC.Collect()<br />
end Sub<br />
|
|
|
|
|
If you need unload assembly, load it in an another domain and then unload domain.
No way for unloading only assembly 
P.S. sorry for the my dirty English
|
|
|
|
|
Did anybody implement the IEnumUnknown interface in .NET? I found the Next() method is difficult to implement.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to change the font style of the text progerty of a TabPage control under certain conditions. can anyone help me with the code?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
What is stopping someone from writing a tool that would convert IL to x86 assembly? Do certain IL instructions not compile to assembly properly?
Please note, I am aware of ngen. While it does compile to a native image, it still requires the .Net framework (it uses mscorlib, CAS, GC, etc.). I'm thinking further than that; compiling IL to pure assembly, no CAS, garbage collection, or any other .Net service required to run the application.
My thought is, compiling a C# app to IL, then to assembly would be ideal for standalone, fully trusted apps that don't require CAS or garbage collection. Obviously, there'd have to be some post-build code creation that will clean up objects (the coder could just use some extern statements that would be replaced upon post-build with object disposal).
What are the issues one would run into? Am I going down a dead end road here?
The graveyards are filled with indispensible men.
|
|
|
|
|
Salamander Protector allow you to do this, but you still need the framework.
What stops you? The whole framework may needed to be called from your code.
As an alternative approach, I would suggest you to make a translator from C# to C++. The generated C++ code would then use some free garbage collection library (there are good ones out there for C++).
Then, you would run your translator on the entire free .NET Framework from Mono and build a static library to link with your application.
Seems feasible (forgeting some .NET niceties, like reflection), but a damn huge work.
This has the side-effect to make your application portable to environments that don't have a .NET framework yet, but have a modern C++ compiler.
Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet.
-- Bruce Schneier
By the way, dog_spawn isn't a nickname - it is my name with an underscore instead of a space. -- dog_spawn
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I figured I could compile the .Net library (either Rotor or Mono) into a static library and use that from applications as a portable dll.
Of course, compiling the whole FCL would probably introduce a huge dll requirement, almost as large as .Net itself, thereby nullifying one of the purposes of this whole idea.
The other option would be interesting - translate C# statement to equivalent assembly or C++ statements (ie Console.Write would become printf). This way, you could write a C# app as usual, compile, and it would run anywhere a C++ Windows app would run. Intriguing.
Well, it's an interesting thought at least. Thanks for the information, Daniel.
The graveyards are filled with indispensible men.
|
|
|
|
|
Judah H. wrote:
Yes I figured I could compile the .Net library (either Rotor or Mono) into a static library and use that from applications as a portable dll.
Of course, compiling the whole FCL would probably introduce a huge dll requirement, almost as large as .Net itself, thereby nullifying one of the purposes of this whole idea.
You misunderstood me: when I said 'a static library', I meant a .lib, and the linker would remove (most) unused code from the final .exe, thus generating, for small applications, small executables. I agree that for big applications it potentially will have the size of the application + the size of the framework.
A DLL is a dinamic library, and will be linked at runtime, and so needs to have the whole framework.
Judah H. wrote:
The other option would be interesting - translate C# statement to equivalent assembly or C++ statements (ie Console.Write would become printf). This way, you could write a C# app as usual, compile, and it would run anywhere a C++ Windows app would run. Intriguing.
This is why I mentioned building a library with the framework. Linking a .lib from C++ is a breeze. And, by running your own conversor on the .NET framework, you'll have the whole framework available (well, most of it). This has the same end effect of converting from C# to equivalent C++.
Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet.
-- Bruce Schneier
By the way, dog_spawn isn't a nickname - it is my name with an underscore instead of a space. -- dog_spawn
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
what is the defference between Application domain and a process in .NET ?
|
|
|
|
|
An application domain is a managed application boundary in .NET. You can only cause data to cross domain boundaries using some communication mechanism - you cannot directly call into another application domain (IIRC).
Many application domains can be hosted within a single process. They share the same user-mode address space, which reduces some of the load for the operating system. Different domains in the same process can have their own configurations. ASP.NET takes advantage of this, hosting every site within its own AppDomain, all within the same worker process (aspnet_wp.exe on Windows 2000 and Windows XP; w3wp.exe on Windows Server 2003).
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for this reply
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I'm working on a project where we need to keep track of user's action. We're developing our project in .NET and Windows environment. User's action here means everything that user did. For example, user creates/saves/opens a document or a webpage, sends an email to a recipient, user changes the focus window (by clicking on another window), etc.
We're using automation to trap these events of MS Office and IE. We query for the top most window every second to see if user changed the focus window or not. Other than those applications, we haven't yet figured out a way to do them.
However, the events of MS Office and IE are not very sufficient. For example, Word/Excel/PP object does not provide SaveAs event. Detecting the change in focus is unstable.
I'm just wondering if there is generic way to capture events for all of Windows application. Is there anyway to screen out the underlying messages of the application and then figure out what happened?
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
This question is directed towards MSMQ in .NET (System.Messaging.MessageQueue, etc), but is relevant to messaging in general.
Suppose I have a lot of messages coming through some queue (~1000 msgs/sec),
and some function ProcessMessage(Message msg) that I want to invoke to process each message.
There are two ways to read these messages asynchronously (MSMQ/.NET):
1. Begin a thread (or Timer thread) that periodically polls the queue (MessageQueue.Receive()), retrieves a new message, calls ProcessMessage().
2. Call the asynchronous MessageQueue.BeginReceive() to which you pass your callback function (as delegate). Then when a new message comes, the MessageQueue will automatically call your callback function.
The difference in performance is unclear to me. In the second case, it seem you have to do less work, since you get notified automatically when a message arrives instead of having to write a thread that checks this; however, there is more flexibility in the first approach, because you control exactly how the check for new messages is performed, how often, etc. But I am really only interested in performance, and though I am going to write some simple examples to test this, I am not sure that they will be representative of what happens under a real load.
Does anybody have thoughts on this? Thanks!
-Vlad
|
|
|
|
|
I am building a .NET compiler so I want some info on MSIL.Can anyone help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I tried to pass a TransportObject to my web service. This object has two properties, Method and State. Both are string fields, and I serialize a business object using a SoapFormatter for the state field. When I use the following serialization code, the web services bombs:
Dim ms as New MemoryStream
Dim soap as New SoapFormatter
soap.Serialize(ms, object)
Dim state as String = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(ms.GetBuffer())
WebService.Process(New TransportObject(state, "Save")
But when I use the following code, it works:
Dim ms as New MemoryStream
Dim soap as New SoapFormatter
soap.Serialize(ms, object)
Dim state as String = Convert.ToBase64String(ms.ToArray())
WebService.Process(New TransportObject(state, "Save")
Memes don't exist = tell your friends
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
