|
There are two solutions given here[^]. One of them might help you.
|
|
|
|
|
maine kunjvihar se vada pav liya lekin usne chatni kam di aur bola k kande ka price jyada ho gaya hai kar k tereko chatni milni hi nahi chahiye thi ehsan maan maine de diya
|
|
|
|
|
This is an English speaking site. It really helps to posted your question in English if you expect an answer.
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. And I want two of them. With mayonnaise.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Sir/Mam
I'm trying connect sql server 2000 in windows service with other system on same network.
there are 4 system connected without any problem. But on other 4 system, it is giving error
on connection open while starting windows service. The error is: "the service on local computer started and then stopped some services stop automatically" etc. Same Connection string working in web service
without any error. But giving problem in Window Service. Is there any Configuration setting of that server or sql server 2000. Any help will be highly appreciated.........
|
|
|
|
|
Are you, by any chance, using a trusted connection? When you install a service it, by default, is installed using a specific account - and that account might not be trusted by your database.
|
|
|
|
|
Could be that, could be a firewall, could be something else.
Before trying to fix it though I'd introduce a minimum of logging in the service so in future you don't have to stare blindly at that nearly information-free message: "the service started, and then stopped unexpectedly".
It's also nice to have the ability to debug service initialization. To do this, introduce a config setting and put a method like this into your service class:
static void AwaitDebugger()
{
string s = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["debug"];
if (s == null || s.ToLower() != "true") return;
DateTime until = DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(30);
while (DateTime.Now < until && !Debugger.IsAttached)
Thread.Sleep(50);
if (Debugger.IsAttached)
Debugger.Break();
}
Now in the service main thread, just insert a call to this method before doing anything else. (Not in the start method that probably simply starts the main thread; you want this method to return immediately as before. But in the thread it starts, you want to wait for a debugger to attach if so configured.) Build, deploy, and debug!
|
|
|
|
|
You might want to tell the OP this. I already know how to do this.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Docking is quite useful in creating UI's, but when you Dock something: the "Margin" property settings of what you Dock are ignored.
In the past, I've created several types of UI's where an "outer" Panel's ControlCollection consists solely of identical "inner" Panels, all of the same type.
Setting all these "inner Panels" to Dock = Top, or whatever is very useful, but they will all be "jammed together" visually: Any Margin.Top or Margin.Top settings of these inner Panels will be ignored.
So far, my strategy for creating a better visual experience has been to use UserControls, not "raw" Panels, for the inner things-that-act-like-Panels:
Each UserControl has an "inner" Panel inside an "outer" Panel. Both these have Dock set to 'Fill. By setting the background color of the outer Panel to the same color as its outermost Panel, "the host," and then setting the Padding property of the outer Panel in the UserControl to offset the differently colored inner Panel of the UC:
Then, when they get all "jammed together" by docking, you can at least simulate a nice visual effect of space between the Docked inner Panels.
A logical question for you to be asking right now is: why not just set the UserControl BackColor to the same color as its host container, and have only one Panel in the UC: while I have done this, the simple answer is that I prefer the more fine-grained control possible (I can create fancier visual effects), by having outer/inner Panels in the UC.
I wonder if there is a simpler way to approach this ?
I guess in an ideal world ... hah ... we could have an over-load of the Dock mechanism, that you would pass a bool into with a name like "respectMarginSettings" 
Should I add some links to "before" and "after" small .jpg screen-shots to this question, to make crystal-clear the visual results I am talking about ?
best, Bill
"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real." Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
I find your question confusing, because I can't recall having seen a single Windows Forms control where the Margin settings actually produce any effect. I've always had to reach for Padding instead. But this does lead to just a quick suggestion: try to use padding instead, and let us know if that works.
|
|
|
|
|
This maybe academic but here goes anyway...
I'm drawing custom borders for a datagridview in the datagridview's paint event, the one in a Windows form. That works fine until I edit a cell.
When I edit a cell, the top and left grid borders (which are drawn by me in the grid's paint event) are over-layed by the EditingPanel control of the datagridview class.
So the borders disappears and the cell looks like it has only two borders...bottom...and right.
I subsequently created a custom column and cell template for the grid but no matter what I've tried so far, I can't get to the event that's overwriting my borders to either have it paint the missing borders themselves, or stop it from overwriting the ones that I'm drawing.
It would seem that this type of task needs to be accomplished all the time and I just don't know how...so I'm totally missing the boat on this one.
Would someone please let me in on the secret of how to (the proper procedures) for painting custom borders around the datagridview cell I'm editing?
The borders should be in alignment with the grid's boarders and have the ability to be drawn in different colors.
Please advise and thanks!!!
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
I guess a few hours of sleep help sometimes...I think that this is the way...
Private Sub Grid_CellPainting(sender As Object, e As System.Windows.Forms.DataGridViewCellPaintingEventArgs) Handles Grid.CellPainting
Try
'Paint the cell if the edit control is visible
If Grid.EditingControl IsNot Nothing Then
Dim g As Graphics = Graphics.FromHwnd(Grid.EditingPanel.Handle)
g.DrawRectangle(Pens.Red, Grid.EditingPanel.ClientRectangle)
g.Dispose()
End If
Catch ex As Exception
Debug.print(ex.Message)
End Try
End Sub
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I am trying to create a folder under CommonAppDataFolder during install. It works fine for my Windows7 x64 computer, but the folder does not get created for WindowsXP x86 computer.
In Windows7 I get a folder "C:\ProgramData\MyCompany\MyProgram"
In Windows XP I would have expected a folder "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\MyCompany\MyProgram", but that folder does not get created. On both computers I can manually create the folder with the user I am logged into, so I don't think its a permission thing.
In VS Setup Project I create a custom folder using "add special folder" saying that the DefaultLocation is: [CommonAppDataFolder][Manufacturer]\[ProductName], then I set the Property property to "COMMONAPPDATAFOLDER".
Is there something I am missing? Something specific to Windows XP?
|
|
|
|
|
It's under C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\MyCompany\MyProgram.
The Application Data folder is hidden so it won't show up in Explorer unless you turn on "View hidden files and folders". You can still get to it by typing the path in the address bar in an Explorer window.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent. That was it. I focused so much attention on Visual Studio, instead of digging deeper into the operating system. Thank You!
|
|
|
|
|
you can use inno setup to create your install programme, this little app can do anything if you write a pascal-like script. just find that if the folder is exist and do the sub prog to do the next work.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, how to wrap DataGrid View column?Even though I set the WrapMode in DefaultCellStyle property of DataGridView to True,still wrapping is not happening.How to wrap the text in grid view column?
modified 6-Aug-12 3:51am.
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't wrap until you move to a new cell and thus complete the edit.
|
|
|
|
|
How to create parent form and child form usin c#.
I want to create a parent form and two or three radio buttons should be on parent form, when user click on 1st radio button then a child form should be opened related to 1st radio button and another radio button vice-versa.......
Please reply Quickly.........
DSPNEO
|
|
|
|
|
Put a button on there, doubleclick;
public void Form1_Button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
using(var myForm = new FormChildWithCoolName())
{
myForm.ShowDialog(this);
}
}
DSPNEOqqq wrote: Please reply Quickly.........
Quickly, quickly Zathras..
Bastard Programmer from Hell
if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Quickly, quickly Zathras..
Babylon 5?
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Yup
|
|
|
|
|
Create your forms, set the parent form as Owner of the child. May be MDI forms can helps too.
That's all.
Christian Amado
MCITP | MCTS | MOS | MTA
Olimpia ☆ ★★★
Please mark as answer, if it helps.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
First, I believe that Child Forms should never be used, that they lead to awkward user-interfaces, and the old MDI-architecture, which supported MDIChildForms with "special features," deserves the status of a "dinosaur" skeleton: to be looked at, but not re-animated
I think you can get better responses to this scenario if you describe what the function of your proposed use of "Child Forms" are, in relation to their "Parent" Form.
Is it possible a Dialog can fit your needs here ?
Consider that you create a "Child Form" with code like this in response to some event:
Form form2 = new Form();
form2.TopLevel = false;
form2.ShowInTaskbar = false;
form2.Parent = this;
form2.Name = "form2";
form2.Text = "form2";
form2.Size = new Size(300, 200);
form2.Show();
form2.BringToFront();
You now have a Form that is in front of your MainForm, and that, depending on FormBorderStyle, can be moved around so parts of it are invisible, as they extend beyond the DisplayRectangle of the MainForm. Depending on its z-order within the Form ... that is if some other control on the Form has been brought-to-the-front: it could appear "behind" other Controls on the Form.
Consider that you create a Form which is not a ChildForm: like this:
Form form2 = new Form();
form2.ShowInTaskbar = false;
form2.Name = "form2";
form2.Text = "form2";
form2.Size = new Size(300, 200);
form2.Show();
form2.BringToFront();
Now you have a Form you can move anywhere on the screen, depending on the setting of FormBorderStyle, and it will always be visible ... unless you activate the MainForm and bring it to the front, and the MainForm covers part of the second Form.
If you wanted this new Form to always remain on top, no matter whether the MainForm was activated, or not: just set the new Form's TopMost property to 'true, while making the sure the MainForm's TopMost property is set to 'false.
Another area to investigate, if you are concerned with your new Form always appearing on top, is the use of 'ShowModal(), in contrast to 'Show().
Keep in mind that: if your WinForms project opens in the rather standard way by creating an instance of the MainForm in the Program.cs class: that closing the MainForm will always automatically close any secondary Forms created.
In either case, if you need to exchange information between the MainForm and ChildForm, or MainForm and/or new, "independent" Form, the issues will be exactly the same: you'll need to keep a reference to the newly created Form in the MainForm ... assuming that's where you'll always create this new Form, whether Child, or "independent;" so: make sure that outside the method that creates the Form (i.e., at Form level scope) you create a reference you can access, like:
private Form form2;
private void SomeButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
form2 = new Form();
form2.ShowInTaskbar = false;
form2.TopMost = true;
form2.Name = "form2";
form2.Text = "form2 within Form class scope";
form2.Size = new Size(300, 200);
form2.Show();
form2.BringToFront();
}
If you do need access to whatever in the MainForm to whatever in new Form, or vice-versa (data, contents, position, state, etc.): then there are plenty of solutions for how to do that here on CP in the QA forum (it's one of the most frequent questions asked). Hint: expose public properties.
... edit 1 ...
For example:
In the MainForm, create a Public Property that will "expose" the instance of the MainForm you create:
public static MainForm TheMainForm { get; set; }
ThisMainForm = this;Once you have done this, you can access anything declared Public on the MainForm, from outside the MainForm, by simply using: "MainForm.ThisMainForm."
Warning: this technique should only be used on Forms where you create one instance only ! Why: because a Form-level public static Property is always going to point to one, and only one, instance: if you had multiple instances (heaven help you) of your MainForm, changing some public variable's value there would also change it "globally:" so in all other instances: it would have the same value !
For your secondary Forms, you do not wish to use this same technique of a static Form-level Property to enable access to their "public stuff:" because, after all, each instance of a secondary Form is going to have the same controls, the same Public Form-scoped variables, etc., and, at run-time these may take on unique values.
But, your MainForm can access every instance of a secondary Form it creates (and everything scoped Public on it) by simply putting it in a unique public variable when it is created.
Finally, note there are other "models" for passing information between Forms, including using custom Events, and EventArg data structures: you'll find examples of other approaches, and lots of debate about the different ways of enabling Form to Form interaction in the QA section here on CP.
... end edit 1 ...
best, Bill
"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real." Niels Bohr
modified 12-Aug-12 23:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: First, I believe that Child Forms should never be used, that they lead to awkward user-interfaces, and the old MDI-architecture
..I'd like to see a version of Visual Studio with an SDI-interface. MDI isn't dead, it's merely abused a lot. We'll say the same thing about that Ribbon on a few years
BillWoodruff wrote: I think you can get better responses to this scenario if you describe what the function of your proposed use of "Child Forms" are, in relation to their "Parent" Form.
Good point; when an apparant beginner talks about child-forms, I usually assume (I know, we should check, not assume) that they need to display a dialog, and that they forgot to specify the owner of the form (often confused with the parent).
+5 for giving a very elaborate answer that does not only benefit the TS.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
