|
Pankaj - Joshi wrote: I'm having 500 hard coded records in a database. Now I thinking about to make a XML for that..So Which one is faster...? A XML file or a database table ..?
It depends on what you are using these records for. How do you intend to query them? What do they contain?
Pankaj - Joshi wrote: If a XML is faster then what is the best way to retrieve the data from it...?
For example, if the data is a simple key/value lookup then loading it into a Hashtable may be the best thing to do. However, it really depends on what this data is.
|
|
|
|
|
XML is very faster than Database
Like a good handsome...thanking You
|
|
|
|
|
anandakumarm wrote: XML is very faster than Database
That is a very wide sweeping statement that is incorrect in most scenarios.
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
I have written a pllication using C# and asp.net which set the windows user password using WinNT protocol. It is working fine.
But before setting its password i want to check whether the account is locked or not if account is locked then unlock it.
Plz. give me help how to unlock windows user(2003 server) account using System.DirectoryServices; My code is as below
string entryString = "WinNT://" + Environment.MachineName + ",computer";
DirectoryEntry dirEntry = new DirectoryEntry(entryString);
DirectoryEntry osUser = dirEntry.Children.Find(username, "user");
if (osUser == null)
{
_ErrorMsg = "Such OS user not found.";
}
else
{
if (changepassword)
osUser.Invoke("SetPassword", newpassword);
}
osUser.CommitChanges();
|
|
|
|
|
I had a abstract base class :
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
public abstract class AbstractClass
{
abstract protected void TestFunction();
abstract internal void TestFunction2();
}
}
Now, I wanted to inherit this class as :
namespace ConsoleApplication2
{
class Client:AbstractClass
{
public Client()
{ }
protected override void TestFunction()
{}
}
}
As the namespace for the above classes are different, we can access the "abstract protected void TestFunction();" in the derived class. But we cannot access and override "abstract internal void TestFunction2();".
Because of this I am getting a compile time error.
How to deal with this problem? Since I want the internal method as it is and still want to compile the application.
|
|
|
|
|
Mukesh Choudhari wrote: we cannot access and override "abstract internal void TestFunction2();".
Internal methods can't be accessed outside the assembly. It can be accessed in the same assembly. Consider moving it to the same assembly.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it worked when I moved it to same assenbly.
But what if I had this class in a DLL and I am using this DLL in some other project. Now since the class has a "internal abstract" member in it, I won't be able to inherit this class.
Is there any other way that we can inherit this class and it will not ask for overriding the "internal abstract" method?
|
|
|
|
|
Mukesh Choudhari wrote: Is there any other way that we can inherit this class and it will not ask for overriding the "internal abstract" method?
Only method I am getting is making the second class as abstract too.
|
|
|
|
|
N a v a n e e t h wrote: Only method I am getting is making the second class as abstract too.
How would that help? Surely removing the internal qualifier would be a better solution in this case. He wants to use it outside the assembly in which it is defined, therefore qualifying the class as internal would go against this desire.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it's a bad solution, I know. But since he don't want to remove internal from the first class, I just thought in this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Mukesh Choudhari wrote: Now since the class has a "internal abstract" member in it, I won't be able to inherit this class.
If you need to access the class from outside the assembly in which it is defined then don't define it as internal .
|
|
|
|
|
hi
no there is not possibility to avoid having to override an abstract member. but if you don't mind overriding the member though you can qualify the member as protected internal . then you will be able to override it from an other assembly.
greets
m@u
|
|
|
|
|
m@u wrote: protected internal. then you will be able to override it from an other assembly.
I doubt this. Because you won't get access to the internal method defined in the assembly. So how this can be written ?
|
|
|
|
|
try this:
create assembly with this class in it:
public abstract class TestClass
{
protected internal abstract void foo();
}
and then in a seperate assembly that references the first one and create that class
public class TestImplemented
{
protected internal override void foo()
{
Console.WriteLine("Horray it works!");
}
}
theory says it'll compile and work properly
you could even override it as protected only to avoid visibility in the second assembly
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it worked. But then what would be the use of internal ? In your example, I am not getting any role for internal.
|
|
|
|
|
yes you're right in my example, the internal doesn't have any effect. but i modified (i should think longer before posting ) the post. you can override a protected internal as protected and then the member will not be accessible from the second assembly.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
i am trying to make a form that contains..
A Button and a text area
so on click of button it will show what ever in text area..
can anybody help me...
T@SU
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should read C# tutorials or buy a C# book.
1. You can add the button and textarea from Toolbox to your form.
2. In OnClick event of Button, you can get the value of textarea (e.g. TextBox1.Text)..
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Thanks alot for ur reply..
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">Abhijit Jana wrote:</div> thing you question is related to Asp.net !!! isnt it !!!</blockquote>
No this is windows based programming...
definitly it can be done easily in asp.net as u have given me the example..
but i am trying to do same in c#
like..
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// here i have to retrive the text from text area on button click
}
private void textBox1_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
}
so please help me out here in C#
i am knowing C++ well...( I GUESS ) but not c#
vikas da
|
|
|
|
|
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
string myStr = TextBox1.Text;
} Why don't you try it. TextBox1 is an object for class TextBox which has Text property returns the textbox content. I suggest you to get a book and workout the examples.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks all for ur reply... going forward i ll try thanks again....
vikas da
|
|
|
|
|
In Windows i think there is no terms like TextArea as you mention in your question !!!!!
if you talking about Textbox then
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show(Textbox1.Text.ToString());
}
And one more thing !!!. If you want TextArea like Htmlpage in Windows , just set multiline proprty as True...
Good Luck !!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Three questions here:
In my code, I do this:
In Method A,
- get a COM object from a COM server, wrapped in a RuntimeCallableWrapper (it's a Track object from iTunes)
- Cast the object from a Track object to a FileBasedTrackObject (both are iTunes objects)
- release the Track object with System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ReleaseComObject(Track)
- pass the FileBasedTrack object back to the caller
- In the calling method, Method B, I do
- If (FileBasedTrackObject is iTunesObjectType)
And I get InvalidComObjectException with the unusual message "COM object that has been separated from its underlying RCW cannot be used".
1. What would cause the COM object to lose it's RuntimeWrapper?
2. When I cast one object to another, are they still connected somehow? Is it not kosher to release the one before the other?
3. Is the cast completely controlled by the creator of the COM object? I'm doing:
(TrackObject) myTrack = GetTrackObject();
(FileTrackObject) myFileTrack = (FileTrackObject) myTrack;
When that occurs, is code being executed by the TrackObject class?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you can release the COM object until you are done with it. When you cast it, you are not increment the reference count (e.g. AddRef). So when you release it your Track and FileBasedTrack are no longer valid.
Try postponing the call to ReleaseComObject until you are completly done with the underlying COM object, regardless of how it's refer to (e.g. a TrackObject or FileTrackObject).
Take care,
Tom
-----------------------------------------------
Check out my blog at http://tjoe.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|