Managed C++/CLI

#pragma once

namespace NSA
{
	namespace NSB
	{
		public ref class test1{};
	}
	namespace NSC
	{
		ref class test2{};
		ref class test3{};
	}
}

#include "stdafx.h"
#include "test.h" // This is where is my namepsace nested classes
using namespace NSA; //this need to be after include of our class,
using namespace NSA::NSB; //and need to be before of include statment.
using namespace NSA::NSC; //any file included afther this will use same namespace

#include "Form1.h"
using namespace tes;

[STAThreadAttribute]
int main(array<System::String ^> ^args)
{
	// Enabling Windows XP visual effects before any controls are created
	Application::EnableVisualStyles();
	Application::SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false); 

	// Create the main window and run it
	Application::Run(gcnew Form1());
	return 0;
}

private: System::Void Form1_Load(System::Object^  sender, System::EventArgs^  e) 
{
	 test1 ^t1 = gcnew test1;
	 test2 ^t2 = gcnew test2;
	 test3 ^t3 = gcnew test3;
}

IlanTal wrote:

Turning off security isn’t exactly a great idea, so I turned it back on again

IlanTal wrote:

I already bought your idea from the previous post. When you suggested it for the compiled help, I immediately realized it would work here as well.

IlanTal wrote:

This implies that EVERY program which uses managed extensions in even the most trivial way will have problems. This seems to me to be absolutely crazy. How can anyone get any work done? There has to be a more general solution. Maybe it is a problem of version numbers between my Visual Studio 2003 and my latest version of XP?

IlanTal wrote:

As they say "KISS" - keep it simple, stupid.

IlanTal wrote:

Still I don’t know what to do to fix the problem.

IlanTal wrote:

I don't know what directory is used for my application.

IlanTal wrote:

I put the second app in the target directory I would know to load to that directory on the local drive.

IlanTal wrote:

if the launching app is on the network drive

IlanTal wrote:

I think I basically misunderstood you when I thought you meant it to be on the network drive.

IlanTal wrote:

Thanks for all your comments.

IlanTal wrote:

It just goes to show that sometimes the solution comes from an unexpected direction.