|
"That way, you can play all you want safely without screwing up your production environment."
Why??? Is .NET 3.0 not RTM'ed yet? It is RTM!!!!!! I would be worried only if it was a RCs or Betas, but with RTM release, MS should ensure that it does not screw up any production environment, especially the .NET 2.0 system. If they cannot assure that, they should not be releasing .NET 3.0 as RTM at all. They should keep it as Beta if the developer community will have to be cautious to use it in production machines running 2.0 framework (or use it via Vistual PC etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
While .NET 3 is release, some of the Visual Studio extensions are CTP.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh! That explains the fear! Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
Glad to help.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not so much fear. It's also the fact that you can easily screw up writing code that works fine under .NET 3.0, but will screw over his .NET 2.0 project if needs to make updates to it.
If you still have to maintain that .NET 2.0 codebase you're better off dedicating one development environment to developing for .NET 2.0 and another for .NET 3.0.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP
Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Strange problem with my visual studio.
I have typed datasets in the designer. I have table adapters that i have dragged from the server explorer. I have used these for the last couple of month. I have added queries, stored procedures, added and deleted fields in the table adapters.
Now, I added an extra column to one of my tables in sql server 2005. I right clicked the relevant table adapter and clicked configure, and included the extra column.
I build the program, but the changes to the table adapter does not reflect in the code. When I do the following: tableAdapter.insert() the extra column has not been included.
I tried this with another table adapter in the dataset designer by adding a new field. The same problem.
I used rebuild, i have deleted the table adapter and added a new one. I have restarted VS, and also restarted the computer. I have also opened the project on another machine. I have deleted the table adapter from the form designer and added a new one from the components tab. And still the same problem.
When I preview the data, the extra column is there. But not when I use it in code.
Can anyone please tell if they know about this problem and is there a way to solve it.
Many thanks if you can.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
You required to reconfigure the Typed dataset, I had faced same problem what I did was I had regenerated the designer class from the tool. The problem here is you will have the old designer which not getting regenerated.
So either try to regenerate it or recreate the complete typeddataset which will have tableadaptor etc
Regards,
Jaiprakash M Bankolli
jaiprakash.bankolli@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
hi..
how to draw a line on image
can any one answer to this query..
its very urgent
thanks & regards
|
|
|
|
|
Take a look at DrawLine.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
What exactly is the requirement? Do you want to underline the image or border it etc ?
Regards,
Jaiprakash M Bankolli
jaiprakash.bankolli@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I am trying to use the LB_GETTEXT method to get the contents of a listbox in Visual Basic .NET 2005 (.NET Compact Framework 1.0)
So far I have tried:
Dim iItems, iCount As Integer<br />
<br />
Dim Line As String<br />
Dim LineHandle As GCHandle = GCHandle.Alloc(Line, GCHandleType.Pinned)<br />
Dim ptr As Integer = LineHandle.AddrOfPinnedObject.ToInt32()<br />
<br />
iItems = SendMessage(handle, LB_GETCOUNT, 0, 0) <br />
For iCount = 0 To iItems - 1<br />
SendMessage(handle, LB_GETTEXT, iCount, ptr)<br />
Next<br />
<br />
LineHandle.Free()
However Line is always empty.
What on earth am I doing wrong?? Is it something to do with the way I pass the pointer to the string??
Many thanks,
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
I have VS 2003/2005 "concole application" project written in C++.
Is it possible to convert that project to VB.NET concole application project?
Regards Arthur S.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure. All you have to do is completely rewrite the application from scratch.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP
Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible to make automatic conversation with MS Visual Studio 2005?
Regards Arthur S.
|
|
|
|
|
Was there something ambiguous about my previous reply?
No, there is nothing that will convert VC++ to VB.NET.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP
Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a newbie. Please, take it easy on me if my question is too low of a level.
I've got this C-code that works fine. I want to bring it into MFC and I decided to enclose most of the functions inside a class. There are functions that take in as arguments pointers to other functions, and I have no problems understanding how it works in C although I am not the savvy programmer.
When I try to use those functions inside the class I gett errors.
For example, I have one function (called "danger") which I put inside the class and what it does it simply takes in a double and returns a "corrected" double. Then I have another member function in the same class that takes in as the first argument the pointer to the member function mentioned above (that is to "danger"). So, the first argument for the latter function is a *double.
When i compile the compiler (.NET Visual C++) tells me that it cannot convert a double (which is basically what "danger" returns) to a (__cdecl*)(double). I sort of see why the compiler tells me that, but I wonder how do I "fool" the compiler to see that it is a pointer to a function and not just a variable of type double.
please help me. I've looked through all the threads on pointers to member functions and I could not quite figure it out. Most of the threads talk about how to use the pointers to member functions when passing them as arguments to non-member functions. Or else, I am not that savvy yet.
Thanks beforehand.
Dig
|
|
|
|
|
Hi to everybody,
I've been asked to assist with designs for a large enterprise scale accounting project. So far I have decided upon a n-tier design with remotable objects and webservices at the server end. I'd like to gauge the responses from everybody as to when you believe the middle and even UI layers should be split up into their own assemblies.
I am aware of the performance penalties associated with reflection vs. native object calls, but am also firmly believe that a large scale application will sooner or later use reflection in some way, shape or form. Based on this, my initial thoughts are to split the application into logical functional units.
So following these lines of thought (and these are rough thoughts), an assembly for business objects (BO), interfaces (I), data components (DC) and user interface (UI). Each of the BO, I, DC and UI will then be replicated for each logical unit: ie. debtors, creditors, stock, general ledger, system, etc.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this and any suggestions and/or recommendations you've got.
Thanks in advance.
Edward Steward
edwardsteward@optusnet.com.au
|
|
|
|
|
Edward Steward wrote: I have decided upon a n-tier design
What a lot of people don't realise is that all designs are n-tier. I presume you mean n-tier where n >= 3
Edward Steward wrote: when you believe the middle and even UI layers should be split up into their own assemblies
Yes, they should. Unless it is for a very small application. You've already mentioned this is an enterprise application so they should be separated out.
Edward Steward wrote: Based on this, my initial thoughts are to split the application into logical functional units.
"logical functional units" is a very overloaded term. No two people seem to use it the same way. What do you mean by that?
|
|
|
|
|
Colin,
> I presume you mean n-tier where n >= 3
Yes this is true.
> "logical functional units" is a very overloaded term. No two people seem to use it the same way. What do you mean by that?
By "logical functional units" I refer to debtors, creditors, stock, general ledger, system, etc.
> Will you really have only one UI to allow the user to interface with the enterprise application
No this will be accessible from a variety of platforms
> Don't force them into starting one UI for half their task and then switch to another UI in order for them to complete it
No intention of it.
As you can probably see from the above points you have raised my thoughts aren't altogether clear on the topic, so I think it best to elaborate on some of the finer points of the "current design".
· Main application (EXE). Minimal code and almost a "stub" making reference to various UI assemblies.
· A common UI assembly to be used as a control library as well as base forms
· A common interface assembly handling some of the typical/common CRUD operations
· A common BO assembly for common validation code, error checking, "business base" objects, etc.
· A dedicated DAL assembly which all DC assemblies can hook to. The chosen DAL model I have used previously on a smaller project with much success. This has plenty of support for ALL sql db operations.
· A business rules assembly to be used for custom attributes. Again have used something very similar before with much success.
· Debtors - DC, I, BO, UI
· Creditors - DC, I, BO, UI
· Stock - etc, etc.
I hope this paints a clearer picture for you and I do appreciate your input.
Thanks
Edward Steward
edwardsteward@optusnet.com.au
|
|
|
|
|
Edward Steward wrote: A common UI assembly to be used as a control library as well as base forms
You might want to split that out further based on platform (e.g. win forms assembly and webforms assembly). You might also want to separate the controls out - I find that useful as it puts up an additional barrier to stop me accidentally creating circular references between forms and controls. Forms should know about their controls. Controls should know nothing about the form. Separating the controls into their own assembly means that if you find yourself needing to reference the assembly with the forms then you know you've got part of the design wrong.
Edward Steward wrote: DC assemblies
Sorry, I don't see a definition for "DC". Data Controller/Connector?
Edward Steward wrote: The chosen DAL model I have used previously on a smaller project with much success. This has plenty of support for ALL sql db operations.
Fair enough - but be careful about scalability. It might scale well, or you might need to alter the design to allow it to scale well.
Edward Steward wrote: · Debtors - DC, I, BO, UI
· Creditors - DC, I, BO, UI
· Stock - etc, etc.
This can work well, but if you have circular dependencies it can start to become difficult to maintain. e.g. What happens if you have an entity that is both a Creditor and Debtor?
The only thing I'm not so sure about is the fact that you have all those pillars with the UI sitting on top of each - Are they just controls? I would imaging that the UI (the forms) would make a roof to fit on top of the pillars.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin,
> Common UI
Point taken
> "DC". Data Controller/Connector
Data components
> DAL
Noted.
> Circular references
My thoughts on this is to try and loosely reference varying projects/assemblies as required by using [Assembly].Load instead of "hard" referencing the projects at design time.
> UI as roof
Yes the UI for the pillars would consist of a series of forms that are specific to the type of pillar - debtors, creditors, etc.
Edward
Edward Steward
edwardsteward@optusnet.com.au
|
|
|
|
|
Edward Steward wrote: My thoughts on this is to try and loosely reference varying projects/assemblies as required by using [Assembly].Load instead of "hard" referencing the projects at design time.
As you noted earlier, there are performance hits against using reflection here. If you want your application to scale efficiently, then you have to be very careful how and when you use Assembly.Load.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Oops... I hit post instead of "Quote Selected Text"
Edward Steward wrote: an assembly for business objects (BO), interfaces (I), data components (DC) and user interface (UI).
Or even multiple assemblies for each part. For exampe. Will you really have only one UI to allow the user to interface with the enterprise application? Or will they access it via a web application, or windows application or mobile application depending on the scenario?
Edward Steward wrote: Each of the BO, I, DC and UI will then be replicated for each logical unit: ie. debtors, creditors, stock, general ledger, system, etc.
Is that really the best way? When thinking about the UI you should be thinking along the lines of what tasks the user has to complete. What is the goal of the users? Don't force them into starting one UI for half their task and then switch to another UI in order for them to complete it.
|
|
|
|
|
hi...
my query is ...
i have GPS data of one track map and now
i want to display that data on google earth track map..is it possible using vb.net
thanks & regards
-- modified at 0:44 Saturday 31st March, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Don't know much about bringing in the data into Google earth but you should look at KML. Also, you might want to actually google it... a place to start would be here:
http://earth.google.com/userguide/v4/ug_gps.html[^].
_____________________________________________________________________
Our developers never release
code. Rather, it tends to escape, pillaging the countryside all around.
The Enlightenment Project (paraphrased comment)
Visit Me at GISDevCafe
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
