Comments by RajeshRaushan

RajeshRaushan 1-Apr-13 9:04am View

This is correct: You can do something like following using CAST function - assuming RS is an integer column.

CAST(RS as varchar(10)) LIKE '%{0}%'

RajeshRaushan 28-Mar-13 10:49am View

Hey Ram, your point is correct. i am forwarding a link here - hope it is useful for you.

http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2004/09/01/how-can-i-create-a-folder-on-a-remote-computer.aspx

RajeshRaushan 26-Mar-13 1:21am View

Ok - agreed! ContainsKey optimizes the performance and it would make more sense when you are dealing with large collections;

RajeshRaushan 25-Mar-13 9:21am View

Which page? If you do it from client side then the postback will not happen for the first-page. The 2nd page you are redirecting - so that is expected to load anyway.
The question isn't very clear in that sense - let me know if it is asking for something else.

RajeshRaushan 25-Mar-13 8:26am View

why are you clearing the columns just after adding them - i believe you want to clear the rows instead; but that also would not be required here.

dt.Columns.Clear();

RajeshRaushan 25-Mar-13 3:04am View

RajeshRaushan - 1 sec ago
Hey Matt. I feel both are in Order(M * N)
In the Solution 2 also if you see - the statement
!Dict2.ContainsKey(l1.ID) is actually in Order of N
then,
Lst1.Where is in Order of M
so when it runs then for each of M the N will be applicable
so it is also of O(M*N)
The same applies to
var r = from t in lst1 where !lst2.Exists(i => i.ID == t.ID) select t;
also. Here just instead of ContainsKey i have used Exists.
There is no difference otherwise.

RajeshRaushan 25-Mar-13 3:03am View

Deleted

Hey Matt. I feel both are in Order(M * N)
In the Solution 2 also if you see - the statement
!Dict2.ContainsKey(l1.ID) is actually in Order of N
then,
Lst1.Where is in Order of M
so when it runs then for each of M the N will be applicable
so it is also of O(M*N)
The same applies to
var r = from t in lst1 where !lst2.Exists(i => i.ID == t.ID) select t;
also. Here just instead of ContainsKey i have used Exists.
There is no difference otherwise.

RajeshRaushan 4-Mar-13 2:38am View

Can you provide what exactly you have written?

RajeshRaushan 22-Feb-13 10:22am View

Can you try following once -

System.Type[] arr = { };

Pass the arr.

RajeshRaushan 19-Feb-13 4:29am View

You are creating dynamic type on your own. The problem here is with the creation. Every time you create an Instance it creates a code snippet and compile - all these just to get a proper function definition for the supplied T type.

Just maintain the private Func<T,T,T> as static. In the Instance constructor see if it is null.
If so do what you are doing - otherwise no need to create and compile that once again. the function would be there already for the supplied type.

This way for a given type T - you will not end-up creating function dynamically every time.

C# generics are different from C++ templates. It doesn't provide the exact thing here - but this kind of usage in real world example is extremely rare. Also this isn't best way how we should work with Generics.
It will work for numeric types - but if somebody starts using like ParallelNumber<string> or ParallelNumber<employee>.

It will throw a runtime exception and that is not c# way of programming for sure. C++ is a language for intelligent developers - where a lot depend upon intelligence of the programmer - where as C# is a intelligent language in itself. It puts best effort to make sure things doesn't get wrong and surprises are not travelling directly to end-user.

Comments by RajeshRaushan (Top 10 by date)