|
One of the constructors for a string takes a char[].
|
|
|
|
|
you can try:
string s = new string(mycharArray);
|
|
|
|
|
For generic purpose type converting there's a static class "Convert". There you have a "ToString([param])" method
Visit my blog at http://dotnetforeveryone.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
I think the best way to do that is to use a generic list
List<char> chars = new List<char>();
chars.Add('t');
Console.WriteLine(chars[0].ToString());
Lester
http://www.lestersconyers.com
|
|
|
|
|
lsconyer wrote: the best way
The best way to fail a code review maybe!
|
|
|
|
|
That's a bad idea, lester. First of all, it only returns the first character as a string, not the whole character array. Secondly, adding the chars to a list does nothing to help converting the whole thing to a string.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you look at the earlier replies at all ?
your "best way" is plain wrong, it does not address the problem, it needs at least .NET 2.0,
it creates more than one object, and it is in no way better than a simple string constructor.
Life is study.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
this weeks tips:
- make Visual display line numbers: Tools/Options/TextEditor/AllLanguages/General
- show exceptions with ToString() to see all information
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
|
|
|
|
|
My, my, my. I didn't know programmers could be so sassy. Excuse me experts. I guess I didn't understand the problem. Please forgive me.
Lester
http://www.lestersconyers.com
|
|
|
|
|
lsconyer wrote: Please forgive me
No problem.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
this weeks tips:
- make Visual display line numbers: Tools/Options/TextEditor/...
- show exceptions with ToString() to see all information
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
|
|
|
|
|
We don't mean to be sassy, just wanted to correct a wrong answer. No harm meant.
|
|
|
|
|
string str = new string(char[] value);
Toby Russell
|
|
|
|
|
Dear all,
i would like to know is it possible to use function with optional parameter or is there any better way of doing so.
thnk you
imaran khan
|
|
|
|
|
There are no "default" parameters like there are in C++.
However, you can achieve the same thing with a simple overload.
public void myFunction(int requiredArg){
myFunction(requiredArg, false);
}
public void myFunction(int requiredArg, bool optionalArg){
}
|
|
|
|
|
thank for reply
Actually i have one to fifteen parameter and fuction must take one parameter and rest depending on user choice program will pass.
how to do that
please help
thanks
imaran khan
|
|
|
|
|
Could you explain it a bit more please?
You could cast all the parameters to an object[] and then cast them back inside of the function, giving default values to the ones that the user didn't specify.
|
|
|
|
|
thnks for reply.
let me explaine the scenario. there is 15 field say suppose
customer , category ,subcategory etc ..
User select category or subcategory or customer or any thing
depending on selection ,value from corresponding master is populated. now i select values from dropdownlistbox and pass to fuction.
Now my problem is user may select only customer or category or subcategory. may select combination or all.
please guide.
thanks
imran khan
|
|
|
|
|
Might be worth using Nullable Types and simply leaving all non selected values as Null. Then check for the values that aren't null and proceed accordingly. That way you keep your function footprint and it's strongly typed.
Alternatively, you could use an argument object / struct containing the parameters so you only have to change your object, rather than breaking the function footrpint with each change, just watch for mapping breaks.
T
-------------------------------
Carrier Bags - 21st Century Tumbleweed.
|
|
|
|
|
If the parameters are of the same type, you can use the params keyword:
public void SomeMethod(string firstParameter, params int[] theOtherParameters)
This method can be called with any number of parameters following the first parameter:
SomeMethod("count", 1, 2, 3);<br />
SomeMethod("answer", 42);
If you want an upper limit, you have to check the lenght of the params array in the method.
---
single minded; short sighted; long gone;
|
|
|
|
|
As Guffa mentioned, if the parameters are all of the same type you can use the params keyword. (You could also use params object[], but you loose the type safety.)
Another option is to use either an enum to specify related groups of options or create a class that holds the arguments (parameters) and pass that class. The enum is similar to the
String.Compare(String, String, StringComparison)[^] method while the args class is how the .NET event handling does things (through the EventArgs[^](or derived) class.)
|
|
|
|
|
hi there,
I'm currently building a webservice and I've got three questions: is there anything special i need to know about the returned xml? right now, I just return an object (for expample an instance of my Vehicle class) from the WebMethod and this looks fine to me.
The second question is, if I use the automated xml serialization with a class which is derived from a base class I defined (e.g. I've got a Car class which derives from the Vehicle class), the properties of the baseclass are not serialized. Properties of the derived class look fine. Why is that?
Last but not least: What is the correct way to return an error from a WebMethod if, for example the expected parameters are invalid or an exception occured.
thanks a lot!
/matthias
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.
[Douglas Adams]
|
|
|
|
|
The answer to question 1 is that you don't pass the object. Whenever you pass something back from a web-service, you are passing based on a contract. This is important. Basically, you say that your data will look like this, and the SOAP message will contain a representation of that object.
2. Is the base class marked as Serializable as well?
3. It really depends on what you want to achieve. It is perfectly legitimate to throw an exception back from a web-service, but be aware that the exception you get back will not be the exception you threw. (Go on, try it - you'll get a SOAP exception back).
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
hey pete,
thanks for your reply. as for 1: i understand that my object makes up the contract you've mentioned (the structure of the returned xml). So I believe I as long as I don't change my returned object, everything should work fine for my clients. how would you do it? whats the best practise. in the article of chris (http://www.codeproject.com/cs/webservices/myservice.asp[^]), he's doing the same and the documentation doesn't really give me any useful information.
as for 2: yes, it has the SerializableAttribute.
3: I'd like to tell my clients, well, if you have no permission, you'll get this type of response, if you passed in invalid arguments, you'll get that type of exception. my english is not so good, I hope you understand what I mean.
/matthias
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.
[Douglas Adams]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a textbox control whose character (actually a number) length should be 11. I desire to enter a number with a number of digits equalling 11 only.
Can the MaxLength Property implement this? I'll need the code if it can.
Thanks.
Obinna from Nigeria.
Obinnaaj545
|
|
|
|
|
Obinna from Nigeria,
If you set the Max length property of the text box, then you will be prevented from entering more than 11 characters. This does no validation on the data that is being entered into the form. If you are looking at the validation of the data, you should play with the KeyUp event.
Hogan
|
|
|
|
|
Nope - you're going to have to put some code in to check the length of the textbox.
if (txtMyText.Text.Trim().Length != 0)
...
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
