|
What is the difference between the .NET Compact Framework and the .NET Framework?
Thanks
Ralph
|
|
|
|
|
.NET CF is smaller and leaner - It is designed for Windows CE devices like the Pocket PC.
Notable differences are:
* No ASP.NET support (after all who in their right mind is going to run a web server off a PocketPC device).
* Limited XML support - No XPath for instance.
* Reduced functionality on Windows Forms controls
* Changed functionality on Windows Forms controls (due to the different input methods [e.g. concept of right-click altered to hold-click] and form factor of the device)
* Many overloaded versions of methods don't exist.
* No printing support (although you can buy third party components that do printing [ScotRail use something like this for issuing tickets on the train itself - a Pocket PC based ticketing issuing device, the Pocket PC plugs into a printer and Credit Card scanner])
There are more. However MSDN indicated on each class, method & property whether it is supported.
--Colin Mackay--
EuroCPian Spring 2004 Get Together[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar
|
|
|
|
|
How would I capture the user's screen resolution using the .NET Framework?
Thanks in advance. 
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
Hello!
I'm a beginner in programming with vb.net and I have many problems!
I'm searching for an query analyzer control wich I can use in the .net framework like the MS-Query-Analyzer.
With this control I would like to show tables from an sql-database.
Only a control, not a full programm!!
Could you help me?
I can't explain it very well in english!
|
|
|
|
|
You only want to show tables? So you don't need that control,You could query from INFORMATION_SCHEMA. ANd show the result in a TreeView. Your query could be like this:
SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES
For more options see online book.
Mazy
No sig. available now.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to show tables, but I also want to show the connections or constraints between the tables and I think I can't do it with an TreeView.
My boss ment that we need a control to handle that.
He said that it could be like the MS-Query-Analyzer.
You know, you can move the tables in this program and make constraints between them.
Or do you know how I can integrate the MS-Query-Analyzer-Tool in the development environment?
Thank you for replying!
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think such a thing exist cause as I told you you can get all those informations with simple queries. You can show Contstranit or any object in database with getting information from INFORMATION_SCHEMA,then you can show and handle it in a way you want. I don't know about any integrated tool.
Mazy
No sig. available now.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for that information.
I'm trying to do this!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am having a new requirement of converting my existing Web site code (Developed using Microsoft.NET and Microsoft Commerce Server 2002) to full-fledged Modular Approach implemented code. Does any one come across in this path, pls do drop your messages over here. Thanks in advance.
Always I am here to share all my pleasures with Code
|
|
|
|
|
I am experimenting with the ArrayList class in the .NET Framework and I am having a problem retreiving an object stored in it to call/use its members.
For example:
If I have a class named MyObject and I add three (or more) instances of them to the ArrayList instance named testArray like:
Dim obj As New MyObject
Dim obj1 As New MyObject
Dim obj2 As New MyObject
testArray.Add(obj)
testArray.Add(obj1)
testArray.Add(obj2)
How would I be able to index one of the instances to use/access its members. I would expect to do it like this (assuming that MyObject has a Name property):
' Accessing the first item in the ArrayList.
testArray.Item(0).Name = "New Name"
This doesn't seem to want to work. Intellisense, instead of showing the members of the class stored, it shows the GetType() function only. Anybody have any ideas? 
Thanks in advance.
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
bneacetp wrote:
' Accessing the first item in the ArrayList.
testArray.Item(0).Name = "New Name"
I figured it out. It compiles and runs well. Intellisense just doesn't show the members of the class.
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
Alternatively:
CType(testArray.Item(0), MyObject).Name It's a good idea to cast if you're performing a lot of operations on the same object, because there's overhead involved in System.Object's late binding. Prefer to early-bind if you can.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the information.
Happy Programming!
WWW::CodeProject::BNEACETP
|
|
|
|
|
What are the prospects for a low pause-time garbage collector being added to .NET?
(I have a server that is written in .NET, and low latency is important for this server. The server can tolerate many garbage collections, but each garbage collection must be quick. Latencies as long as about 1/3 of a second would be OK; longer is problematic. A garbage collector with pause times of less than .1 second would be great.)
|
|
|
|
|
I am using Windows Server 2003. I installed VC#.NET Enterprise Edition like this:
1. Insert disk-5 to update Windows Component;
2. Insert disk-6 to install VC#.NET;
3. Insert disk-2, disk-3, and disk-4 to install MSDN;
4. Install .NET Framework 1.1 SDK, MSDE, MDAC 2.8 with downloaded packets.
Now I get a problem that the version of .NET Framework displayed in VC# help is not 1.1 but 1.0.3705. And two shortcuts of both ".NET Framework Configuration" and ".NET Framework Wizard" are added into the "Administration Tools" menu. But the same shortcuts as them are added when the Windows Server 2003 installation finished. Then I run the ".NET Framework Configuration", the version of .NET Framework returned is still 1.0.3705.
So I download the packet of .NET Framework 1.1 and install it. But the system show a message that the .NET Framework is installed with installation of operation system.
Later, I uninstalled the .NET Framework 1.1 SDK and VC#.NET, then the two shortcuts is removed too. But the version of .NET Framework is still 1.0.3705.
How can I do? I need the support from .NET Framework 1.1 to develop an application about IP Multicast.
I enjoy programming...
|
|
|
|
|
I have a sub in my VB.Net that is loading a plugin into my Host Application.
I have a method in the system that allows a specific plugin to be unloaded. But I cannot get the assembly to allow me to delete/replace the DLL in the system. I've extracted this out to as simple as I can.
Am I missing something in this code that would allow me to do it.
<br />
Imports System.Reflection<br />
Private Sub Form1_Load(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load<br />
<br />
Dim objDLL As [Assembly]<br />
objDLL = [Assembly].LoadFrom("Z:\broker\plugins\EODStoretoXML.dll")<br />
objDLL = Nothing<br />
System.GC.Collect()<br />
System.GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers()<br />
System.GC.Collect()<br />
end Sub<br />
|
|
|
|
|
If you need unload assembly, load it in an another domain and then unload domain.
No way for unloading only assembly 
P.S. sorry for the my dirty English
|
|
|
|
|
Did anybody implement the IEnumUnknown interface in .NET? I found the Next() method is difficult to implement.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to change the font style of the text progerty of a TabPage control under certain conditions. can anyone help me with the code?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
What is stopping someone from writing a tool that would convert IL to x86 assembly? Do certain IL instructions not compile to assembly properly?
Please note, I am aware of ngen. While it does compile to a native image, it still requires the .Net framework (it uses mscorlib, CAS, GC, etc.). I'm thinking further than that; compiling IL to pure assembly, no CAS, garbage collection, or any other .Net service required to run the application.
My thought is, compiling a C# app to IL, then to assembly would be ideal for standalone, fully trusted apps that don't require CAS or garbage collection. Obviously, there'd have to be some post-build code creation that will clean up objects (the coder could just use some extern statements that would be replaced upon post-build with object disposal).
What are the issues one would run into? Am I going down a dead end road here?
The graveyards are filled with indispensible men.
|
|
|
|
|
Salamander Protector allow you to do this, but you still need the framework.
What stops you? The whole framework may needed to be called from your code.
As an alternative approach, I would suggest you to make a translator from C# to C++. The generated C++ code would then use some free garbage collection library (there are good ones out there for C++).
Then, you would run your translator on the entire free .NET Framework from Mono and build a static library to link with your application.
Seems feasible (forgeting some .NET niceties, like reflection), but a damn huge work.
This has the side-effect to make your application portable to environments that don't have a .NET framework yet, but have a modern C++ compiler.
Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet.
-- Bruce Schneier
By the way, dog_spawn isn't a nickname - it is my name with an underscore instead of a space. -- dog_spawn
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I figured I could compile the .Net library (either Rotor or Mono) into a static library and use that from applications as a portable dll.
Of course, compiling the whole FCL would probably introduce a huge dll requirement, almost as large as .Net itself, thereby nullifying one of the purposes of this whole idea.
The other option would be interesting - translate C# statement to equivalent assembly or C++ statements (ie Console.Write would become printf). This way, you could write a C# app as usual, compile, and it would run anywhere a C++ Windows app would run. Intriguing.
Well, it's an interesting thought at least. Thanks for the information, Daniel.
The graveyards are filled with indispensible men.
|
|
|
|
|
Judah H. wrote:
Yes I figured I could compile the .Net library (either Rotor or Mono) into a static library and use that from applications as a portable dll.
Of course, compiling the whole FCL would probably introduce a huge dll requirement, almost as large as .Net itself, thereby nullifying one of the purposes of this whole idea.
You misunderstood me: when I said 'a static library', I meant a .lib, and the linker would remove (most) unused code from the final .exe, thus generating, for small applications, small executables. I agree that for big applications it potentially will have the size of the application + the size of the framework.
A DLL is a dinamic library, and will be linked at runtime, and so needs to have the whole framework.
Judah H. wrote:
The other option would be interesting - translate C# statement to equivalent assembly or C++ statements (ie Console.Write would become printf). This way, you could write a C# app as usual, compile, and it would run anywhere a C++ Windows app would run. Intriguing.
This is why I mentioned building a library with the framework. Linking a .lib from C++ is a breeze. And, by running your own conversor on the .NET framework, you'll have the whole framework available (well, most of it). This has the same end effect of converting from C# to equivalent C++.
Trying to make bits uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet.
-- Bruce Schneier
By the way, dog_spawn isn't a nickname - it is my name with an underscore instead of a space. -- dog_spawn
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
what is the defference between Application domain and a process in .NET ?
|
|
|
|
|
An application domain is a managed application boundary in .NET. You can only cause data to cross domain boundaries using some communication mechanism - you cannot directly call into another application domain (IIRC).
Many application domains can be hosted within a single process. They share the same user-mode address space, which reduces some of the load for the operating system. Different domains in the same process can have their own configurations. ASP.NET takes advantage of this, hosting every site within its own AppDomain, all within the same worker process (aspnet_wp.exe on Windows 2000 and Windows XP; w3wp.exe on Windows Server 2003).
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
