|
bbarnhill wrote: I figured I would get some help from here instead of a smart mouth. Ive been wrong before and looks like I was again.
You did get help. You just chose to ignore it.
If you take the time to look around this site, you will see that there is a Suggestions forum - and Chris receives notifications when anybody posts to this forum. The sheer volume of posts means that it's impractical for him to monitor every forum - hence my comment about picking the appropriate forum.
Look at it this way - would you crosspost this question if your article had been about C#, Vista and SQL Server? No - I thought not.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Just work on your presentation skills. You strike me as rude in the delivery of your "help".
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|
|
bbarnhill wrote: Just work on your presentation skills. You strike me as rude in the delivery of your "help".
Oh dear - I'm so sorry if I offended you. Listen, I answer approximately 50 calls for help a day. I don't have time to handcraft an essay for you. I give you the information, and then it's up to you to actually do some work. That's not my job - it's yours. Tell you what - if I offend you that much, I won't bother with you in the future. Then we're both happy.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
That would be great. Dont "help" me again. You make it out like I wanted you to do the work for me...which is completely retarded.
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|
|
bbarnhill wrote: completely retarded.
Errm. How did you make that out? What moronic planet are you inhabiting?
bbarnhill wrote: You make it out like I wanted you to do the work for me
No - I didn't. You asked a question and I answered it. You then started a flame because you didn't like my "tone". Geez - get over yourself. BTW - I had a look at the article in question, and while it was interesting I was going to offer a couple of helpful pointers, but I guess you don't need any help so I won't bother, but here's a hint - look at making it less monolithic.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O`Hanlon wrote: What moronic planet are you inhabiting.
Earth ... which one are you inhabiting?
Pete O`Hanlon wrote: You then started a flame
No - I started to correct you on your blunt delivery.
Help is always appreciated, even constructive criticism. Look there is no reason to argue on here its retarded. If you want to help fine if not then just ignore this conversation.
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|
|
bbarnhill wrote: your blunt delivery
Do you honestly think that people have time to be obseqious and all nicey-nice.
bbarnhill wrote: Help is always appreciated, even constructive criticism.
And help is what you got. It isn't my fault that you chose to interpret it as blunt. Having reread my post, I don't actually see anything in it that could be chosen as anything other than help. Once you posted on the correct forum, I replied civilly.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O`Hanlon wrote: I replied civilly
but only once I posted in the "right" forum.
You may not always see how you are blunt, and crude in your delivery but others may. Just because I pointed out a short-coming of yours, you dont have to get hostile.
Thanks but no thanks for your help. I am done with this conversation.
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|
|
bbarnhill wrote: You may not always see how you are blunt, and crude in your delivery but others may
That's in your opinion and your opinion only. There are reasons that people point you towards the correct forum and they have absolutely nothing to do with you. The reason that we don't have everything in one forum is so that people can easily find information on a particular topic. If you start mixing irrelevant things in, it becomes so much harder for others to separate the wheat from the chaff.
bbarnhill wrote: Just because I pointed out a short-coming of yours, you dont have to get hostile.
It ain't a shortcoming of mine that you're an oversensitive idiot.
bbarnhill wrote: I am done with this conversation.
Good night then.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a little app that i use to connect to my PC at home, upload files, download files, etc.
And it can connect just fine, but only because i put port forwarding on my router, and gave my machine a static ip.
Is there any way i can connect to a pc behind a router by knowing its MAC address, or its local IP? Or something else perhaps.
My current favourite word is: Waffle
Cheese is still good though.
|
|
|
|
|
Not directly, no, as this would represent a serious security risk.
What some applications do is use a third party server which both ends of your transfer connect to - more often than not applications of this sort tend to use one of the well known ports to avoid any firewalling issues.
Me: Can you see the "up" arrow?
User:Errr...ummm....no.
Me: Can you see an arrow that points upwards?
User: Oh yes, I see it now!
-Excerpt from a support call taken by me, 08/31/2007
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I run an application in the startup of the computer,
the application is run without a window.
Now I want to send notification to the application to terminate normally
somting like the command Application.CloseMainWindow for an application that run with window
How can I send close command to an application that has no window?
Thanks,
Meir.
|
|
|
|
|
You might be able to use SendMessage:
public const int WM_SYSCOMMAND = 0x0112;
public const int SC_CLOSE = 0xF060;
[DllImport("user32.dll")]
public static extern int SendMessage(int hWnd, uint Msg, int wParam, int lParam);
...
int result = SendMessage( handleToApp, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, IntPtr.Zero);
There's probably other ways you could do it, but i don't know any.
My current favourite word is: Waffle
Cheese is still good though.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
My application has no form it runs in a backgroud, so the Sendmessage command didn't help me, it send the command to the main form of the application but i don't have one!
There is several option to run an application without a window for example:
Putting the application in the startup of the computer
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
you could add a window (possibly invisible) to your app and have it receive messages
(if necessary, by overriding WndProc).
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
this months tips:
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
My application has a window, but when I put the application in the startup of the computer it run without a woindow
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
You could send a signal from an app to your running windowless program, e.g. by using
a named mutex.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
this months tips:
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google
|
|
|
|
|
Take a look at .NET remoting. This will allow you to communicate from one application to another, regardless as to whether or not either has a window.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
how i can understand that , which website(url) was opened in computer?
or
which website(url) is opene in computer now
maysam_mici @yahoo.com
thanks.
maysasm_mici@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
The model of communicating with a website is extremely ephemeral. The browser makes a request and opens a connection to the server and the page is sent back. Once the browser has the page the connection is closed. You could create some sort of socket that operates in promiscuous mode (but I think that kind of thing was curtailed in XP SP2) and monitor the internet traffic as it goes past.
|
|
|
|
|
HI,
i'm using this method to get the tables names
but it's seems to come back empty
how do i use this method properly?
Have Fun
Never forget it
|
|
|
|
|
First of all you create an object of DataTable, because GetSchema() returns a DataTable.
DataTable objDataTable = new DataTable();
objDataTable = dbConnection.GetSchema();
GetSchema() returns a DataTable (MetaDataCollections) that contains three columns with the following headings:
1 - CollectionName
2 - NumberOfRestrictions
3 - NumberOfIdentifierParts
This table contains 16 rows. CollectionName (Column 0) contains the following data:
MetaDataCollections
DataSourceInformation
DataTypes
Restrictions
ReservedWords
Users
Databases
Tables
Columns
Views
ViewColumns
ProcedureParameters
Procedures
ForeignKeys
IndexColumns
Indexes
If you wants to get the information of databases, you use the following code:
objDataTable = dbConnection.GetSchema("Databases");
In above code GetSchema() take one parameter CollectionName of string type.
If you wants to get the information of tables, you use the following code:
objDataTable = dbConnection.GetSchema("Tables");
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently I'm developing a C# winforms application which pulls data from an SQL server. The problem is that I have many forms (~10) and creating an instance of a dataset for every form will consume a lot of memory. So I was wondering if anyone could tell me what are pros and cons of using global dataset instance as opposed to local (where each form has its own instance).
Thank you
Niaher
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect you are experiencing a fundamental misunderstanding about application development. Unless your 10 forms are all visible at once, you won't have 10 datasets in memory at all. Most likely, your app is pulling data from a SQL Server DB that other users are accessing ? In that case, it's always best to be working on up to date data. There should be a data layer that's used globally, but not an actual global dataset that contains data.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
"I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
