|
I need RegEx for this.
Actually there is a web part (which is implemented using usercontrol) whose compiled dll is in GAC
The designer code is in file. In web part username and paasword textbox is there
There is also a login button on which the event which is in compiled assembliy in GAC get fired
I cannot write code.I know its easy using code
I am putting a regular expression validator in the designers code.So only through Regex things can be done
Please help
Thanks
Regards
THE SK
|
|
|
|
|
THE SK wrote: 2. password must contain at least two characters at any position.
Only Chuck Norris' passwords can do this.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I are Troll 
|
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone. I have been struggling with learning how to program. I live in Alaska and there are not many classes I am able to attend. I would love to find Instructor led classes in my area (Anchorage) the other alternative is Online Classes. I have been reading books and Watching Videos from VTC. I have learned some but I want to be the best I can. Any help on how I can really learn C#, .NET, PHP, XML, SQL, would be great Help. Thanks
Shannon
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't get classes, then:
1) Read books, and do the exercises.
2) Try to find someone else in your area interested in the same thing.
And above all else:
3) Practice. Try it. Try it again. Do it some more. The very best way to learn is to try it yourself. Also, when you have a little confidence, try answering some of the questions here. You don't need to post your answer, but it can help to focus your mind on a problem!
Enjoy - it's a load of fun, too! 
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand.
|
|
|
|
|
Come up with something you want to do on your computer, and write a program to do it. Google is your friend.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Google is your friend
It's not mine. Ever since I caught it having it away with the toaster, it's banned from my door.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
you're jealous of your toaster? what got into you today?
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Google
Who?
|
|
|
|
|
Google, the son of Altavista, with whom you are acquainted for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Shannon,
I am curious to ask you, given that Anchorage is not exactly a small city (300k people ?), if you have looked around Anchorage for junior colleges, or educational institutions, night courses, extension campuses ? Is there any mobility problem, or anything else, that inhibits your getting around and visiting places like these ?
Have you googled on "anchorage c#" : [^] : looks to me like a lot of local resources there. People, companies, you might contact.
One resource I have always found helpful in almost any situation is to contact a local librarian such as may be found at : [^] : librarians these days are usually really up to date on local resources, and on-line resources, not just books.
"C#, .NET, PHP, XML, SQL" is quite a whopping plate of technology ! And I think you may want to organize your approach to learning around first trying to clarify some goals about what you want to be able to do in the future. If your long-range goal is to become a fully qualified "computer scientist" with academic credentials, that's one thing; if your goal is to, within a year or so, begin to get paid for creating web-sites that talk to databases, and support e-commerce, that's another.
And by all means, if possible, explore the various computer clubs in your area ... [^]... go the meetings, bounce off people, socialize. See if you can find someone who's willing to sit down with you and discuss your goals who's familiar with local resources.
Don't hesitate to find out the open office hours of an instructor or professor at a local junior college or college in computer science and drop in, introduce yourself; most likely you'll get a friendly greeting and, possibly, some good advice.
good luck, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
|
|
|
|
|
I am learning further in C# and came across a special requirement of collections. I wonder if such implementations exists.
I need a list with a key and multiple values. After the first entry, next entries can be partial only to denote a change. Something like this:
index value1 value2 value3 Result value1 value2 value3
1 100 200 300 - 100 200 300
2 200 - 100 200 200
3 150 300 - 150 200 300
4 250 - 150 250 300
5 100 200 - 100 200 300
This can be achieved using DataTable and using select statements/compute etc. But, is there a simpler option available? Speed is the key here.
----------------------------Question Modified----------------------------------
Please understand that creating a list/dictionary/array/hashtable is not the problem here. Storing the data is easy. This could be done using numeric Key/Index (I can manage to keep indexes of the keys also).
The idea is to be able to look for the last fetched value against each key. The problem comes when I want to retrieve he value without having to loop again. Look at the same example with modified index values.
index value1 value2 value3 Result value1 value2 value3
100 100 200 300 - 100 200 300
200 200 - 100 200 200
300 150 300 - 150 200 300
400 250 - 150 250 300
500 100 200 - 100 200 300
Consider the next step. if I want to find out the value for key 250, I would want to look for 200, and then find results for it.
Is it possible without going through loops again?
Current Solution:
I created a class as:
class DataClass
{
int Value1; int Value2; int Value3
int ValueIndex1; int ValueIndex2; int ValueIndex3;
}
Then for each entry done, I need to run the loop once to find out the last index for which entry was done against the value and store it.
Dictionary<int, DataClass> entries = new Dictionary<int, DataClass>();
entries.Add(100, new DataClass(100,200,300, 100,100,100);
entries.Add(200, new DataClass( 0,150, 0, 100,200,100);
entries.Add(300, new DataClass( 0, 0,250, 100,200,300);
entries.Add(400, new DataClass(150, 0, 0, 400,200,300);
entries.Add(500, new DataClass( 0,200, 0, 400,500,300);
Now, whenever i need to look for 250, i search for closest smaller key (here that is 200). find values. whatever is available is taken as it is. For all others, find the key in the same record and get the new entries.
This solution works for the first time entries. However it creates problems when an entry is inserted in between. Another logic needs to be built in between.
Can there be something faster than this?
----------------------------------
modified on Thursday, December 17, 2009 12:58 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Have each object maintain a dictionary of values. In the samples you rpovided above:
Index 1 would contain
1,100
2,200
3,300
Index 2 would contain
3, 200
Index 3 would contain
1, 150
3, 300
Index 4 would contain
2,250
Index 5 would contain
1,100
2,200
Use google to learn how to use dictionary collections.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the attempt.
I have modified the question for all the responses. Answering the same answer to all replies was not a good idea.
Please give it a read.
|
|
|
|
|
Value1, value2 and value3 are distinct entities that you want to track? A dictionary consists of a value and a key. The key would be your index-column, the value could be a struct that holds the three columns;
System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<int, MyValues> myListOfValues;
struct MyValues
{
int value1;
int value2;
int value3;
}You could consider the generic list as your datatable, and the struct as a single row in that table. Now you can add values to your dictionary;
MyValues oneRow = new MyValues();
oneRow.value1 = 100;
oneRow.value2 = 200;
oneRow.value3 = 300;
myListOfValues.Add(1, oneRow); Now, if you want the recreate those values for index 3, you would have to search in the list for the first non-empty value for the column value2.
If speed is important, then I'd create one row outside of that list, just to mirror the current values. That wouldn't help if you need the values from the middle of the index, you'd still have to walk the list for that.
How many records will be in that list? It might just be worth to store copies of the latest value, instead of looking for them.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
I modified the question to answer all the people who replied. Please read that.
And yes. thanks for the attempt.
|
|
|
|
|
Som Shekhar wrote: Can there be something faster than this?
Yup; don't store the empty values, but do the looping on insert. Meaning that when you insert the values (null, 100, null), that you'll loop the list *at that moment* to fetch the null-values and store them at that index.
It's either a lookup on insert (fast, consumes more memory) or a lookup when you're reading (slower, less memory-pressure).
AFAIK, you can't have both (yet)
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
I prefer anything to be done at the insert stage. So, that's taken.
Storing null values depends if it is an object or a list. In case of an class object constructor may demand all values and hence the null value. It can be skipped if possible.
Doesn't any implementation exist in this format? A very practical example will be Configuration Plans which is time bound. We may only want to save the planned changes and not at every stage.
|
|
|
|
|
Som Shekhar wrote: Doesn't any implementation exist in this format?
I don't know of any in the Framework, but then again, I don't know the entire framework by heart yet.
Som Shekhar wrote: We may only want to save the planned changes and not at every stage.
Like I said, memory is cheap these days - and I doubt that you'll save a lot by inserting null values for a non-changed field. These kind of constructs are very common in SQL Server, where one would use a query to recreate the full list. The query does the lookups (over a speedy index) and you can read it as if it were the original table.
..but in-memory? Short lists should just store the values in a redundant way, and long lists shouldn't be kept in memory at all.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Like I said, memory is cheap these days
Memory is not a trouble. Speed is.
This is for a single such list. When this kind of list exist in 100s and each has to be going through a for loop with multiple calculations in between, the calculations go in 0.2-0.3 sec range. this is not too much to look at but with drag and drop, 0.2-0.3 lag is not acceptable. I am just trying to go to 0.05-0.06 sec range.
These kind of change cannot come by simply tweaking a line or two. It can only come by changing the whole method of searching records.
By the way, this whole thing is not even happening in the server/sql. its happening in the memory... hence the speed trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
Som Shekhar wrote: By the way, this whole thing is not even happening in the server/sql. its happening in the memory... hence the speed trouble.
The good news is that memory is usually faster to access then a server
Som Shekhar wrote: each has to be going through a for loop with multiple calculations in between
The only option that I'm aware of is to precalculate the missing values. That way you only have a lookup in a list, which is quite fast. So, instead of inserting the nulls for the unchanged values, insert the value.
That would move the cost for inserting from the "read from the list"-part to the "add to the list"-part of the code.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
If you read the modified question, i am saying an index along with as where to lookup again next time.
Saving values instead of null may have problems later one when more values are inserted or removed. The whole purpose of the list is to save the value where changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Som Shekhar wrote: Saving values instead of null may have problems later one when more values are inserted or removed. The whole purpose of the list is to save the value where changed.
It sounded like the main issue was to have a list with values that you can query at a high speed. If you save all the values, then you won't have the problems you mentioned when removing an item;
Col1 Col2 Col3
100 200 300
100 200 100
100 100 100 Remove the second line, all data will still be correct. On the other hand, if you store the null-values (to indicate a non-change), then you might run into trouble;
Col1 Col2 Col3
100 200 300
? ? 100
? 100 ? If you remove the second line now, you'll get this;
Col1 Col2 Col3
100 200 300
? 100 ? Which decodes to this when you try to track back the changes;
Col1 Col2 Col3
100 200 300
100 100 300 As you can see, the last item has changed. I don't see the advantage of storing only the changes in this particular structure, only more challenges 
It seems that I don't understand the question well enough to provide you with an answer.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Hey there!!!
I really appreciate your efforts.
But the question is to know if I am missing something fundamentally? If there is an implementation already present? Like we have Hashtables, List, Dictionaries for various purposes. Is there any other tool that I missed which can handle such a case?
Or, may be there could be a need to develop such a list which could only record changes, do all the calculations internally, fast enough to match those of dictionary/indexed methods.
In any case, thanks once again.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
