|
It's strange, because "The BringWindowToTop function brings the specified window to the top of the Z order"
"...hasn't really been well accepted ... as the ratings tell us so far  " - Nishant S
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone here used the Reflector program by Lutz Roeder? I just downloaded it yesterday and started toying around with it and found that it contains a decompiler. I wanted to know if it's actually that easy for a program written with .NET to be decompiler to it's original source. I tried it on one of my own programs and it outputs the code exactly as I typed it. I find that to be slightly disturbing.
- monrobot13
|
|
|
|
|
Well you kinda proved it to your self
This has been a big complaint about .NET in general. If you really want to make it harder for people to do this you can use some of the obfuscators out there. Alternatively, you could use MC++ to wrap native classes that you write.
-Nathan
---------------------------
Hmmm... what's a signature?
|
|
|
|
|
Since Java came in, we entered a new ERA, the Managed code ERA. At first it can look disturbing but at the end of the day you need to measure up what you can affort to be developing. I particularly like the way C++ still handling things, just look at Windows Forms and MFC, you can not compare them. MFC if far more stable  ! However how long does it take to develop an application in MFC and another in .NET, furthermore how long would you take to work out portability of Unmanaged apps instead of Managed ones.
I have embraced .NET completely but i still want to keep C++ under the belt now, just like when I was embracing Java.
<Yoda>
The shroud of the managed code has fallen...Hmmm.hmm....
</Yoda>
Cheers, 
ES
PS: Look into www.remotesoft.com, and have a look at their obfuscator and decompilers. 
|
|
|
|
|
I still think Java out does c# however
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Can anyone please tell me a link to some kind of documentation on how to use the Regex class? How to make the pattern, group names and the other stuff?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a lot. It was exactly what I needed
|
|
|
|
|
Hello, everyone.
Has anyone made an example of ListView so that user can drag item up or down in the list..
I want to make this function, however, the visual effect looks bad.
I hope when I drag an item, the item has a little effect (like window default drag effect), any body can help me? ...
Thank you !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hm... this a not bad example.
However, I hope to the effect of Drag&Drop is much clear.
is making own control the only way?
Any other good example the drag effect is much clear ?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
How can I auto gen my code into code behind when I drag and drop myWebControl in to .aspx ?? show me the way how to do it 
thanks!!!
Nho'c ti`
|
|
|
|
|
How do I turn off dynamic versioning?
/\ |_ E X E GG
|
|
|
|
|
When you say dynamic versioning, do you mean the auto increment of build and version numbers? If so you can turn this off by acessing the projects AssemblyInfo.cs file. There'll be a section that looks like:
[assembly: AssemblyVersion("1.0.*")]
Just remove the star and set it manually and your away. If you don't mean this then sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
I was about to ask a question related to this.
Right now my code looks like:
[assembly: AssemblyVersion("1.0.0.0")]
But I have versions like 1.0.1300.27939, anyway! That's fine with me, actually, since I wanted to have build numbers included, too -- it seemed like that would make sense to have some sort of subminor version. So I'm really confused where it's getting "1.0.*" from...
The funny thing is, if I set the assembly version to "1.0.*", then I build a new installer (setup.msi), and it won't install! It only installs when assembly version is set to "1.0.0.0".
And then, it's a really minor thing, but when browsing C:\Windows\Assembly, I see that the System assemblies have different Versions vs. Assembly/Product versions (which seem to be the same in the Properties dialog). And I don't see how to set that -- perhaps it's set by an Installer?
What's the reasoning behind having it be major.minor.build.revision, anyway? Doesn't it make more sense as major.minor.revision.build?
|
|
|
|
|
So I figured out the problem with my installer is that I'm using a custom installer, with included code:
Assembly VisITBarAssembly<br />
{<br />
get<br />
{<br />
return AppDomain.CurrentDomain.Load("VisIT, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=4d504ee06f99380a");<br />
}<br />
}
And so that probably fails if I use "1.0.*" in AssemblyInfo. Is there a way to get the above code to work if I set AssemblyVersion to "1.0.*"? I've tried some different attacks, and they've all been failing. I'd like to not have to change version numbers in 10 different places all the time. 
|
|
|
|
|
The question of "What's the reasoning behind having it be major.minor.build.revision, anyway? Doesn't it make more sense as major.minor.revision.build?" is one that we are puzzling over.
From various articles posted around it seems that there are some Microsoft strategies such as maj.min.d.s (elapsed days since Feb 1 1970 and elapsed seconds since midnight) and other 'private' strategies of fixing the build and /or revision numbers.
We favour using maj.min.iter.build where for every build the last digit is incremented (1.2.3.4 goes to 1.2.3.5), and 'iter' is incremented when :|we move to the next iteration (Agile / Extreme). Whenever we move up any of iteration, minor or major numbers we reset the lower numbers to 0. E.g. If we have 1.2.3.4 and update the mojor number then the next full number will be 2.0.0.0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's my final question for tonight in my series of questions, and as always, they all pertain to my particular work project, which involves visualizing Web searches, so there is a fair amount of intense parsing, and a fair amount of GDI+ usage and custom controls.
In a rewrite of my work project (from originally a Java application), we've embraced MSHTML mainly for its parsing technology (using DOM), but we also use it to download some Web pages because it can do so in a somewhat intelligent and controlled way. Also, perhaps stupidly, we think that if it works for IE, it must be good enough for us.
Possibly there's high overhead in using MSHTML for our purposes, and perhaps there are some other HTML parsing libraries which might better suit our needs. For instance, we use MSHTML to retrieve (and inherently build a DOM) Web pages so we might analyze them... but maybe we only need the first 10K of a Web document, not the entire document. As far as I can tell, MSHTML doesn't support a partial download. Maybe we could do a partial download ourselves and feed that to MSHTML, but then there are other problems, such as the URLs that it returns are incorrect. Another problem is that we might want to access the document source via a stream rather than a single string, especially if we get into Large Object problems.
Are there any suggestions for this? We used to use Java string manipulation to do the screen scraping, but it seemed fairly inefficient and not very well maintainable. But then again, it's possibly inefficient to build an entire DOM for a page and then discard it after extracting a few bits of information. Still, I don't know that it's very good for us to write our own HTML parser. It's probably not the best timesink for us.
Thanks,
Arun
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing my short series of questions to ask, and as always, they all pertain to my particular work project, which involves visualizing Web searches, so there is a fair amount of intense parsing, and a fair amount of GDI+ usage and custom controls.
My understanding is that the way the .NET CLR handles Large Objects (> 85K), it has a separate memory pool which is never garbage-collected, for performance reasons, except perhaps if the system is running extremely low on memory. This is not preferable for my client application, where it's possible that I will be parsing Web pages (and possibly storing them for a period of time in memory), and many Web pages can be longer than 85K.
It seems like there would be some handy ways to deal with the Large Objects problem. My understanding is that garbage collection for Large Objects cannot be forced like it can for ordinary garbage collection. It seems like there would be two decent solutions: 1) breaking down my large objects (mainly strings, in my case) into 84K (or smaller) chunks, or 2) using unmanaged memory which I manage myself. Presently the source of my strings is from HTMLDocument objects, which is basically COM (MSHTML), so while I might prefer to use unmanaged memory, I don't really know how I would do all this in C#, avoiding marshalling a long string through some .NET wrapper before putting it back in unmanaged memory. I guess two possible solutions then would be to either write some unmanaged code (hopefully in C#, as I think I would be doomed in Win32 C/C++!), or try to find some Stream-based access from HTMLDocument, which would allow me to store a document a series of chunks. Then there are other problems, like finding ways to deal with these chunks....
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Arun
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! I'll give it a read.
I welcome any other ideas/articles, too. I suppose I'm overdue for giving Richter's Applied Microsoft .NET Framework Programming a close read.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, I actually read that a few months ago, and I didn't see any techniques for handing large objects, just how they are handled in the CLR.
Also, I've heard 20K and 85K as two minimum sizes for Large Objects. Which is it?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
