|
There is a custom cap, maybe that will help you out.
Otherwise, it'll be pretty easy to derive from Line and automatically draw an arrow (of your choice) at the end of it.
Cheers,
Simon
"The day I swan around in expensive suits is the day I hope someone puts a bullet in my head.", Chris Carter.
animation mechanics in SVG (latest pic 1) (latest pic 2)
|
|
|
|
|
Hello
well i m having problems updating my tables. please have a look at the piece of code i m using
dataSet11.Tables["BPS"].Rows[index][1] = Int32.Parse(tBBPSVal.Text);//db field is int
dataSet11.Tables["BPS"].Rows[index][2] = Int32.Parse(tBInc.Text);//db field is int
sqlDataAdapter1.Update(dataSet11, "BPS");
MessageBox.Show("Record has been updated");
sqlDataAdapter1.Fill(dataSet11, "BPS");
i call this code behind update button but it doesnot work. wen i get the values of dataset they r changed but database remains same and does not reflect any change.
please help
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Try to check what is in datatable after modifing the fields - before update and after update - including original and current values. You can use
dataset.WriteXml(filename,XmlWriteMode.DiffGram)
method. If Your dataset is too big - use
dataset.GetChanges()
method before WriteXml().
See help.
Hi,
AW
|
|
|
|
|
I have an MDI app which has a few different children forms.
When they load i can see the controls all being drawn it looks unprofessional. Is there a way to display the form after all it's controls are loaded? Any info on this would be awesome... Thanks very much!
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering if a person wanted to display something similar to a wizard setup form with a next button that showed a different set of controls on the form depending on how many times the next button was pressed how would it be done.
I am using panels right now and flipping back and forth but I am intersted in just doing it with multiple forms. I find panels messy to develope with.
Thanks,
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several ways to go about it. One is to use panels like you are now, as you noted it is clumsy to work with. Another way is to base your wizard on the TabControl, then you can create each of your steps as a tab on the control.
Yet another way (and the way *plug plug* my wizard framework[^] uses) is based on User Controls, where each step is a separate User Control. I have a specialized form that handles all of the work of switching in and out, you just need to handle a few events to tell it how it should work.
James
"It is self repeating, of unknown pattern"
Data - Star Trek: The Next Generation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi.
im am a newbie with c#. i had created an object in one form (e.g. Form1) and i need its values from Form2. i also need the possibility to change my object's values from Form2.
how do i do that ???
Thank ....
Bob.
|
|
|
|
|
That would depend entirely on exactly what you are trying to do. If the Object is a Control you have added to the form and you know the objects name. You can access the Controls properties and methods via
for(int i = 0; i == this.ParentForm.Controls.Count-1;i += 1){
if(this.ParentForm.Controls[i].Name == "ControlName"){
}
}
However, if you need to access varibles only, you should create a static class similar to this.
using System;
namespace staticTest
{
public class Setting{
public static String[] test = new String[10];
public static int[] testInt = new int[10];
static Setting(){
}
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
That depends on how you are using the datagrid. A universal way is to change the ColumnStyle for the correct column. This may not be obvious if you are letting the DataGrid auto-generate the columns for you, but should work.
A couple specific cases:
If you are binding to a DataSet/DataTable then you can set the ReadOnly property on the column in the DataTable.
If you bind to a custom class, columns for properties without a set method will default to ReadOnly (probably not able to change it either...I would hope not anyway  )
James
"It is self repeating, of unknown pattern"
Data - Star Trek: The Next Generation
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I've got a class that holds lots of different public string members:
public class AuthorData
{
public string Name;
public string Addr1;
public string Addr2;
}I'd like to be able to add references to these strings to a member string[] variable, so that I can perform operations on all of them at once with a foreach loop:
public class AuthorData
{
public string Name;
public string Addr1;
public string Addr2;
public string[] allStringMembers;
}Problem is, I can't figure out how to construct the array so that it references the string variables, rather than a copy of them. All of my attempts so far lead to an array where changes to the array contents /don't/ affect the original string members. What I need is the equivelant of a 'pointer' to the string members, but I can't figure out how to get one. I've tried messing around with String::Clone(), and String.Intern(), but can't seem to get a reference.
As a side-issue, it would be nice to add another layer of indirection to the array (in effect an array of pointers to pointers to the string members), as this would allow me to initialise the array in AuthorData's constructor. A single layer of indirection wouldn't allow this, as the string[] would simply contain null's - the member string vars are assigned null initially. If I can't do this, I think I'd have to make allStringMembers a readonly property that dynamically creates the array every time it is accessed.
I hope that all makes sense, if examples of my (failed) attempts would be helpful, please say so.
TIA,
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
I believe I would expose the string members via properties that return an array element:
public class AuthorData{
public string[] allStringMembers;
...
public string Name
{
get{
return allStringMembers[Name];
}
}
}
Instead of exposing an array, consider implementing IEnumerable, then iterate on the object itself:
public class AuthorData : IEnumerable{
private string[] allStringMembers;
...
public string Name
{
get{
return allStringMembers[Name];
}
}
...
public IEnumerator GetEnumerator(){
...
}
}
And use it thus:
AuthorData aData = new AuthorData;
foreach (string s in aData)
{
...
}
As an aside, it would be interesting to know what kind of process you wish to perform on all members (if you don't mind sharing).
α.γεεκ Fortune passes everywhere.
Duke Leto Atreides
|
|
|
|
|
Using properties instead of string vars seems sensible to me. Unfortunately it could be tricky, this class is being XML Serialised/Deserialed as part of a Web Service method. I'll have to do some experimentation.
Although IEnumerable is a nice idea I think it's a little over-kill for this class, it's just a simple way for me to hold data supplied by a Web Service consumer. The processing is simply Trim()ing the strings, and setting them to null if they're empty, prior to storing them in a database.
Thanks for the help Jim, I'll keep you informed on my progress....
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
May I suggest then moving the string manipulation code into the class and scrubbing the enumeration idea. The Get property methods could perform this process.
α.γεεκ Fortune passes everywhere.
Duke Leto Atreides
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, yeah that seems sensible.
I'd still like to have the array though, as I may add more string members at a later stage and I like the idea that this would only break one bit of code...
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm,
Well I've encountered my first problem - compiler error CS0206: A property or indexer may not be passed as an out or ref parameter
Some of the methods that work on the member strings need a ref string parameter, so that they can modify the actual string rather than a copy.
I think I should be able to design my way around this though...
|
|
|
|
|
OK, that's fixed.
I'm very impressed that changing the members to properties had no effect on the XML Serialisation (at least, none that I can tell - all my tests still run 100%).
So it should be pretty simple now to move the processing functionality into the class (actually i'll probably make a generic DataInterface class that Trim()s it's string members and inherit from that).
Thanks for the help!
|
|
|
|
|
moredip wrote:
I'd like to be able to add references to these strings to a member string[] variable, so that I can perform operations on all of them at once with a foreach loop:
Let the class implement IEnumerable. Arged wrote all the code, it doesnt work!!!
New option HashTable make those fields rather properties referencing objects in a hashtable with the method name as the key. Use reflection to get /set the value.
MyDUMeter: a .NET DUMeter clone
"Thats like saying "hahahaha he doesnt know the difference between a cyberneticradioactivenuclothermolopticdimswitch and a biocontainingspherogramotron", but with words you have really never heard of."
|
|
|
|
|
Again, although those are both sensible ideas, they are a bit heavy-weight for my little class. I don't really need that much functionality, at least not right now.
Being a lazy developer I like to do the least amount of work possible 
|
|
|
|
|
moredip wrote:
they are a bit heavy-weight for my little class
Not heavy at all, you can provided a base class that does the enumeration, indexing etc, all via reflection. Meaning every single class have this behaviour. If this is something in SQL your are doing, I have some neat code.
moredip wrote:
Being a lazy developer I like to do the least amount of work possible
You are obviously not "economizing" (my personal word for laziness) enough. I have used the same approach to make persistant object classes. All hidden to the user. Have a look at my DBHelper article for real "lean" code.  Its astonishing what can be done with so little (or just putting the pieces correctly in place).
Cheers
MyDUMeter: a .NET DUMeter clone
"Thats like saying "hahahaha he doesnt know the difference between a cyberneticradioactivenuclothermolopticdimswitch and a biocontainingspherogramotron", but with words you have really never heard of."
|
|
|
|
|
Just had a look at your article, that's a nice tool. It's not really needed for what I'm doing (trying to avoid SPs), but thanks anyway.
When I said 'heavy-weight' I was kind of referring to functionality that was superfluous, rather than a lot of extra coding - although that was a factor
The classes I'm talking about are really just a handy way for me to exchange data with consumers without having to mess with DataSets, and I want to keep them as simple as possible (KISS).
Again, thanks for the help,
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
moredip wrote:
The classes I'm talking about are really just a handy way for me to exchange data with consumers without having to mess with DataSets, and I want to keep them as simple as possible (KISS).
In that case, why not just make a wrapper class to handle those "extra" functions?
MyDUMeter: a .NET DUMeter clone
"Thats like saying "hahahaha he doesnt know the difference between a cyberneticradioactivenuclothermolopticdimswitch and a biocontainingspherogramotron", but with words you have really never heard of."
|
|
|
|
|
That's pretty much what this class is, a wrapper around the raw data. It does just enough for my purposes - which at the moment is just some simple pre-processing of supplied strings.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
