|
Get a new IP address.
The Master said, 'Am I indeed possessed of knowledge? I am not knowing. But if a mean person, who appears quite empty-like, ask anything of me, I set it forth from one end to the other, and exhaust it.'
― Confucian Analects
|
|
|
|
|
Member 14570843 wrote: I will wait...
You most certainly will ...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Given a choice to either work either on a Winforms or WPF for a desktop application, what should be the pointer to consider to decide which one to Choose?
|
|
|
|
|
"Which one do I know well?" is a good start.
I stick with WinForms, just because WPF never seems "finished" - there is a lot of manual editing that you just don't need with WinForms, and that makes it feel like the WPF designer / editor is still a Beta release rather than a market-ready solution.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
If you are not already an expert in WPF then stay with Winforms. WPF is very powerful but has quite a steep learning curve (i.e. it is quite difficult to learn to use it properly).
|
|
|
|
|
XAML (WPF / UWP) is designed to be declarative; while you can also use procedural code to create the UI. It has a designer that works at design time and while debugging.
Windows Forms is procedural only; almost impossible to work with without the "designer".
If you think you can create a web page using pure HTML(5), you can handle XAML at some level.
The Master said, 'Am I indeed possessed of knowledge? I am not knowing. But if a mean person, who appears quite empty-like, ask anything of me, I set it forth from one end to the other, and exhaust it.'
― Confucian Analects
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: Windows Forms is procedural only; almost impossible to work with without the "designer"
I been doing WinForms without the designer for years, and it's not that hard to create it from code.
I often go for WinForms when I want the app to run from my Ubuntu-machine 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I've worked on Windows Forms quite a bit in the past; a few commercial ones.
I once mocked WPF when it didn't have a "data grid".
With swiping, having controls that can go in 2 directions, with accuracy, becomes a challenge. You soon start making more imaginative list views; easy in WPF, even more in UWP, nearly impossible in Windows Forms. And so on.
If you're "creative", you "need" the WPF / UWP model.
The Master said, 'Am I indeed possessed of knowledge? I am not knowing. But if a mean person, who appears quite empty-like, ask anything of me, I set it forth from one end to the other, and exhaust it.'
― Confucian Analects
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: If you're "creative", you "need" the WPF / UWP model.
I heard that before; for those who are not swiping, there is no issue. If I would develop something for a tablet or phone, I'd go for a website, not a rich UI.
Again, if I had no Linux-machine, I would probably have gone the WPF-route too. Having a recognizable UI, cross-platform, with tons of documentation and an experienced workforce, does count for something 
It does sound somewhat ironic to have WinForms because part of your intended audience is on Linux, but that's life. WPF isn't supported there, and they like having a UI they recognize over the GTK-stuff.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Never saw Unix, Linux as other than a back end for "big servers".
Used to try and cover all the bases. Found a home (finally) in C#. Then WPF. Then Windows 10, UWP and the MS Surface.
Fortunately, I only have to please myself on this one and can tell what the competition looks like.
The cost of admission is also cheaper (for me).
The Master said, 'Am I indeed possessed of knowledge? I am not knowing. But if a mean person, who appears quite empty-like, ask anything of me, I set it forth from one end to the other, and exhaust it.'
― Confucian Analects
|
|
|
|
|
You have to go with the one you know best already UNLESS you wish to add the other to your skill set. Assuming you have winforms experience you will find WPF a rather steep learning curve.
Personally I love WPF despite the designer. I also like that the same XAML principles are used in Xamarin.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to eventually run you app in Linux, go with WinForms. that's the only compelling reason to use WinForms, IMHO.
As already mentioned, WPF has a steep learning curve, but IMHO, it's worth the effort.
I don't mind the designer in either framework, but in WPF, I don't drag/drop controls into forms, and instead, prefer to actually write the markup manually.
I wrote my last WinForms app way bay in 2011, and have been doing strictly WPF since.
If you want an example of WinForms vs WPF, I wrote a game using WinForms, and then wrote a WPF version of it to teach myself WPF.
Anagrams - A Word Game in C#[^]
Anagrams2 - A Simple WPF Game Application[^]
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: If you want to eventually run you app in Linux, go with WinForms. that's the only compelling reason to use WinForms, IMHO.
It is also a bit more mature than WPF; millions of eyes have seen the common controls. Also not much change expected there, so no new versions that break your application.
If you want a standarized library, with recognizable controls that have been tested to death, with tutorials for accessability-features available, you go WinForms.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Millions of eyes have been on WPF too. For all intents and purposes, I think both frameworks are equally matured (WPF is overr 10 years old).
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
That is Simple!
If you need something quick and easy: WinForm.
Else: WPF.
I prefer WPF.
But there are occasions where a WinForm application will be better.
In some cases, even a Console application can be better than WinForm. (If the UI is not important and just want something that works).
|
|
|
|
|
what is CAT programing ? can anybody help me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All I know is that it uses the mouse.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ cat mouse > /dev/man
$ man mouse > /bin
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
This is CAT programming: [^]
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
I tried to the HttpResponseHeader with iwebbrowser2,webview,webbrowser in c#,c++.
But I didn't get the httpresponseheader with those.
I want follow result...
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: nginx
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:15:13 GMT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: 53780
Connection: keep-alive
X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN
Set-Cookie: SESSION=860f2fff966caecf422fa095e52444df; path=/; secure; HttpOnly
Expires: Thu, 19 Nov 1981 08:52:00 GMT
Cache-Control: no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate
Pragma: no-cache
Set-Cookie: ua=deleted; expires=Thu, 01-Jan-1970 00:00:01 GMT; Max-Age=0; path=/
Set-Cookie: lng=en; expires=Fri, 11-Oct-2019 05:15:13 GMT; Max-Age=2592000; path=/
Set-Cookie: flaglng=en; expires=Fri, 11-Oct-2019 05:15:13 GMT; Max-Age=2592000; path=/
Set-Cookie: _glhf=1568196689; expires=Wed, 11-Sep-2019 06:15:13 GMT; Max-Age=3600; path=/
Set-Cookie: disallow_sport=deleted; expires=Thu, 01-Jan-1970 00:00:01 GMT; Max-Age=0; path=/
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Encoding: gzip
Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=15768000
Help! Help! Help!
Thank you! ^**^ 
|
|
|
|
|
Cool!
But what have you done till now?
Without seeing your code we can't help you.
|
|
|
|
|
I am using the WebBrowser class in C#.
Then, this class has not member function that get the HttpResponseHeader.
I used WebBrowser control form Toolbox.
The code is very simple.
I laied the WebBrowser control on the Form window.
And I am not getting the HttpResponseHeader...
Help!!!
|
|
|
|
|
As i mentioned...
Quote:
Without seeing your code we can't help you.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
