|
Hi
You have two Windows Forms from one project.
One calls the other and closes itself.
But before the first Windows Form closes itself,
it must send some data to the second Windows Form
so that when it is created, it formats itself
accordingly to the data passed.
Now, pray tell, what is the best, non-obstrusive way
of doing that without creating ugly dependencies between
those two?
Thanks
Antoine
This by our hands that dream,
"I shall find a way or make one!" great quote heh? 
|
|
|
|
|
Make the second form's constructor have some parameters that receive it?
|
|
|
|
|
You may need an independant storage mechanism. Essentially a container for global data. Alternatively, the native API call supports passing user-defined data to the window create command, I believe. Besides, there isn't anything wrong with global data--it just needs to be managed. Finally, I'm not exactly too sure what the problem is--can't you just pass the data as part of the constructor call to the other form?
Marc
STL, a liability factory - Anonymously
A doable project is one that is small enough to be done quickly and big enough to be interesting - Ken Orr
Latest AAL Article
My blog
|
|
|
|
|
Orlanda Ramos wrote:
Now, pray tell, what is the best, non-obstrusive way
of doing that without creating ugly dependencies between
those two?
As pssing properties in the constructor could be perceived as creating a dependency, the other way to do this would be to provide public or internal accessors for the properties you want to pass in form 2.
public class Form2 : Form<br />
{<br />
private int myInt;<br />
private string myString;<br />
<br />
public int MyInt { set { myInt = value; } }<br />
public string MyString { set { myString = value; } }<br />
<br />
public Form2()<br />
{<br />
}<br />
}
public class Form1 : Form<br />
{<br />
public Form1()<br />
{<br />
}<br />
<br />
private void OpenForm2(int myInt, string myString)<br />
{<br />
Form2 form2 = new Form2();<br />
form2.MyInt = myInt;<br />
form2.MyString = myString;<br />
form2.Show();<br />
}<br />
}
|
|
|
|
|
This is the way I would do it, just because it is more flexible.
If you use either method I would say that you aren't creating a dependency between the two forms, but a dependency on the data required for Form2 to work correctly.
James
"I despise the city and much prefer being where a traffic jam means a line-up at McDonald's"
Me when telling a friend why I wouldn't want to live with him
|
|
|
|
|
That wraps it up preaty niely 
Thanks everyone, Furty!
Antoine
This by our hands that dream,
"I shall find a way or make one!" great quote heh?
|
|
|
|
|
You can build a class which is called GlobalVars
NameSpace GlobalVars
{
public class GlobalVars
{
public static string stringVars;
public class GlobalVars()
{}
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
whoops, in this example the constructor will never be called automatically - to make this a fully static class the constructor line should be:
static GlobalVars()
not
public class GlobalVars()
The advantage of using a static constructor is that it allows you to dynamically set values/execute code before any properties are sent to the requesting class. Note that you cannot control exactly when a static constructor is initiated, but you can rest assured that it will happen before any values are passed in or out of your static class.
|
|
|
|
|
How can I top/detop (TopMost property) and show/hide a window without activating it?
In C, there was the SetWindowPos() function that had an activate flag, but I don't see any such thing in .Net.
|
|
|
|
|
There's an always on top window in my app, but I have an annoying problem with it.
The window is just a normal window with TopMost set to true.
Now this works fine, but I want the window to dissappear if another app gets focus.
I tried pussing topwindow.Visible = true; in the Activate event and topwindow.Visible = false; in the Deactivate event, but these events get called even when another window in my app gets actiavted, so whenever I click on the topmost window, it dissappears because the main window gets deactivated.
Is there a way to prevent the topmost window from getting focus at all? (But still use it as normal, just no focus. By normal I mean still have it receive mouse clicks.)
Or some way to determine what window is getting focus in the Deactivate event?
Or some other way to fix this?
|
|
|
|
|
Nice to meet you here.
I hope I will do help you .
First Create a class with a namespace test
namespace test
{
public class GlobalVars
{
public static bool blVisible;
public GlobalVars()
{}
}
}
In topwindows ,set a Timer Component which watch the test.GlobalVars.blVisi
ble , When it is true , Ignore it , when it is false , set Visible to false
In the other Window , Set the blVisible to control the Global Variables;
I hope it will help you
|
|
|
|
|
No, that's not what I need. What I need is to know what window is getting activated, so I don't turn the topmost window invisible when I click on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all
I have some question/problem using Lock{...} keyword. Suppose two differnt objects: A & B, each of which includes for example 5 references to 5 another objects. Now, I have two threads(ThreadA and ThreadB) that work on A and B and their including referenced objects. Now suppose that 3 of 5 references in A and B are the same(are referencing 3 same objects). I want lock these 3 shared referenced objects while one of mentioned threads is working on A or B.
Alos suppose that including references are stored in ArrayLists named al_A and al_B.
I think below code will only lock the arraylist object but not all including referenced objects:
<code>Lock</code>(al_A){
.....
.....
}
When working on al_A or al_B, how can I lock all corresponding included objects?
Don't forget, that's Persian Gulf not Arabian gulf!
|
|
|
|
|
|
is below one of solutions?
<code>foreach</code>(<code>Object </code>o in al_A)
<code>Monitor.Enter</code>(o);
...
...
<code>foreach</code>(<code>Object </code>o in al_A)
<code>Monitor.Exit</code>(o);
Don't forget, that's Persian Gulf not Arabian gulf!
|
|
|
|
|
Meisi wrote:
When working on al_A or al_B, how can I lock all corresponding included objects?
You have to lock each object as you attempt to work on it.
You should also be using lock on the ArrayList's SyncRoot object, this ensures that if you use either the Synchronized or ReadOnly wrappers you will be locking on the same object.
lock(al_A.SyncRoot)
{
foreach(object a in al_A)
{
lock(a)
{
}
}
}
James
"I despise the city and much prefer being where a traffic jam means a line-up at McDonald's"
Me when telling a friend why I wouldn't want to live with him
|
|
|
|
|
James T. Johnson wrote:
lock(al_A.SyncRoot){ foreach(object a in al_A) { lock(a) { // use a } }}
But by using above code, as I understand, every object in ArrayList al_A is locked and released one after another. What I want is locking all of them at the same time. Is below code the solution for me?
foreach(<code>Object </code>o in al_A)
Monitor.Enter(<code>o</code>);
...
foreach(<code>Object </code>o in al_A)
Monitor.Exit(<code>o</code>);
Don't forget, that's Persian Gulf not Arabian gulf!
|
|
|
|
|
Meisi wrote:
But by using above code, as I understand, every object in ArrayList al_A is locked and released one after another.
Correct
Meisi wrote:
What I want is locking all of them at the same time. Is below code the solution for me?
Yes, that would do it.
James
"I despise the city and much prefer being where a traffic jam means a line-up at McDonald's"
Me when telling a friend why I wouldn't want to live with him
|
|
|
|
|
I've hit a brick wall with this one..
I'm trying to perform a HttpWebRequest that posts form data to the target server - the problem is that the request *always* contains an Expect: 100-continue header, which on HTTP 1.0 servers results in a 500 error.
None of these seemingly obvious fixes work:
Set the HttpWebRequest.Expect property to null or String.Empty
Set the HttpWebRequest.ProtocolVersion to HttpVersion.Version10
Note that my class works perfectly with HTTP 1.1 servers, so I doubt there's anything I've done incorrectly in code. Also note that the problem only surfaces when you POST data to the server with the request, no post data = no problem.
Searching google for this problem has given me a couple of people that have hit the same problem, but not one valid workaround.
Help!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Howto I can read and write section in .INF file with C#?
Please help me.
Thanks.
H.Dung.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there. I need some help here.
I am trying to convert a sample application for learning purposes. But i am stuck to see this:
Select Case ShipPitchSM
Case Is > 0
ShipPitchSM = ShipPitchSM - Friction
If ShipPitchSM < 0 Then ShipPitchSM = 0
If ShipPitchSM > 0.03 Then ShipPitchSM = 0.03
Case Is < 0
ShipPitchSM = ShipPitchSM + Friction
If ShipPitchSM > 0 Then ShipPitchSM = 0
If ShipPitchSM < -0.03 Then ShipPitchSM = -0.03
End Select
Select Case ShipYawSM
Case Is > 0
ShipYawSM = ShipYawSM - Friction
If ShipYawSM < 0 Then ShipYawSM = 0
If ShipYawSM > 0.03 Then ShipYawSM = 0.03
Case Is < 0
ShipYawSM = ShipYawSM + Friction
If ShipYawSM > 0 Then ShipYawSM = 0
If ShipYawSM < -0.03 Then ShipYawSM = -0.03
End Select
Select Case ShipRollSM
Case Is > 0
ShipRollSM = ShipRollSM - Friction
If ShipRollSM < 0 Then ShipRollSM = 0
If ShipRollSM > 0.03 Then ShipRollSM = 0.03
Case Is < 0
ShipRollSM = ShipRollSM + Friction
If ShipRollSM > 0 Then ShipRollSM = 0
If ShipRollSM < -0.03 Then ShipRollSM = -0.03
End Select
Any help?
How do you code that in c#? I try my best to place conditions in case statements, but compile errors.
Thanks.
Regards,
Chua Wen Ching :p
|
|
|
|
|
if (ShipPtchSM < 0)
{
...
}
else if (ShipPtchSM > 0)
{
...
}
etc...
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
A doable project is one that is small enough to be done quickly and big enough to be interesting - Ken Orr
Latest AAL Article
My blog
|
|
|
|
|
You have to use if, elseif, and else.
if(ShipPitchSM>0)
{
ShipPitchSM-= Friction;
ShipPitchSM = Math.Max(0,ShipPitchSM);
ShipPitchSM = Math.Min(ShipPitchSM,0.03);
}else
{
ShipPitchSM += Friction;
ShipPitchSM = Math.Min(0,ShipPitchSM);
ShipPitchSM = Math.Max(-0.03,ShipPitchSM);
}
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, even better than my example. Very nice.
Marc
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
A doable project is one that is small enough to be done quickly and big enough to be interesting - Ken Orr
Latest AAL Article
My blog
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
