|
After using Crystal for almost 10 years I am able to do the most simplest tasks with it. I don't know why so many people cut it 
Crystal is easy once you learn its quirks. http://www.devexpress.com/Products/NET/WinForms/XtraReports/[^]
Is also a popular option these days.
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway
|
|
|
|
|
hi
help me how to change the color of a readonly textbox and a Disabled combobox contrl to look like a normal one.
<br />
comboBox1.Enabled = false;<br />
comboBox1.BackColor = System.Drawing.Color.Yellow;<br />
senthil
|
|
|
|
|
First of all, why? The point behind making a control appear disabled is to stop the users from interacting with it.
Anyways.
You can't do it directly. It will always be gray. However, you can create your own control that inherits from the combobox and you can change that any way you please.
Post back if you need more help or vote if this answers your question.
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rick Cook
"There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance." Ali ibn Abi Talib
"Animadvertistine, ubicumque stes, fumum recta in faciem ferri?"
|
|
|
|
|
hi mustafa
assalamu alaikum
my need is even though its a disabled contrl it should look like normal.
i am beginner , can u tell me in detail
thanku
ssk
ssk
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] has a way of doing it at the bottom of the page. The code is VB but should be easy enough to translate to C#.
|
|
|
|
|
Wa Alaikum Al Salam
This Walkthrough will cover how to create the inherited control.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5h0k2e6x(VS.80).aspx[^]
Then, you'll have to handle the OnEnabledChanged event in your inherited control and take it from there. What you'll need is to either maintain the look and feel of the control or make it so that it is read only.
[edit]
Or read Davey's response, he gave you the whole she-bang!
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rick Cook
"There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance." Ali ibn Abi Talib
"Animadvertistine, ubicumque stes, fumum recta in faciem ferri?"
|
|
|
|
|
This is a guess, but I think you can do it by overriding the OnPaint method.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello experts,
I'm making a matching program that will match the customer name. For that
I have a datatable with all customer names. I want to make them upper before matching how i can do that...?
I'm using
foundCustomerRows = Datatable.Select("CustomerFullName = '" + strCustomerToPost.ToString().Toupper() + "'");
Is there any property to make Select ( ucase(CustomerFullName) =....?
Or there is any other way to make all the column upper in a data table when you match the data...?
Please help...
Regards
Pankaj Joshi
If you want to shape your dreams into reality, please wake-up...
|
|
|
|
|
I've never used it but I believe you need UPPER(CustomerFullName)
|
|
|
|
|
Use the database for that query and not the dataset. Some databases have the option to enable case sensitive or insensitive searches. Also the ability to do the choice in the where clause.
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway
|
|
|
|
|
I have created a C# application with a main window which does not have a frame and - consequently - no system menu (no menu at all). I managed to have a taskbar button displayed which shows the application's main window title.
The bad part is that this taskbar button does not show any menu. To my knowlegde, that is because the main window does not have a system menu. But -- is there a way to create a popup menu in the taskbar button?
Thanks in advance.
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
iam having an aspx page with a text box and a button(link)for search.if i click that button a pop up window (which is supposed to be another aspx page which is made like a pop up window)will open which consists of a textbox and find button.when i type any text in that textbox and click that find button ,i want that value to be displayed in the previous page textbox.
can anyone help me in this regard.
pintoo
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
How is it possible to populate a .csv file with the data inside a DataGridView?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Open .csv for writing
loop for each row
loop for each column-1
write column value+"," to .csv file
write last column value +"\r\n"
close file
enjoy
Have a nice time! 
Regards,
Adeel
Do rate the reply, if it helps or even if it doesnot, because it helps the members to know, what solved the issue. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Will this be as same as excel where each datagrid column goes into one cssv column?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly!
Example:
.csv file
x,y,z
d,f,g
t,y,u
in Excel it will open as:
<code>
A B C <-- Columns in Excel
Rows in excel--> 1 x y z
2 d f g
3 t y u
</code>
Do rate the reply, if it helps or even if it doesnot, because it helps the members to know, what solved the issue. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys!
I'm a bit at a loss regarding the scalability of a client-server-application, perhaps someone can give me some tips...
In this application, I have a .NET Remoting server running as a windows service. This server is using an SQLServer database and a file storage to perform the services it offers.
All clients communicate with this single service via remoting (usually with TCP binary formatters for performance reasons).
The problem is that I have no idea how many clients can be handled by the service (how could I test what's happening when 100 clients call methods on the server in parallel? How about 1000 or more?) and, what's worse, what to do once the maximum capacity has been reached.
Each client has to know exactly one URI with server machine and port to contact for remoting to work, so how can I distribute the requests to different servers?
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
mav.northwind wrote: Each client has to know exactly one URI with server machine and port to contact for remoting to work, so how can I distribute the requests to different servers?
Could this point of contact act simply as a gateway and hand off the actual work requests to other servers?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your suggestion!
That's one of the changes I had in mind, but I'm not sure how to actually do this or which architectural implications this yields.
How would you "hand off" a request to a different server when the initial request is a method call to a server object? And, the initial server would stay the bottleneck unless there's a way to hand off the request in a way so that the result doesn't have to pass through the initial server, wouldn't it?
Another way I thought of was a kind of broker that's assigning a server to a client, but that would require some changes at the client side and I'd rather have a scalable server architecture the clients don't have to know about.
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
mav.northwind wrote: How would you "hand off" a request to a different server when the initial request is a method call to a server object?
Hmmm. Here's how I think it would work: when the client calls a method on the server object it's only aware of the data (if any) required by the method and the result (if any) returned by the method, but it doesn't know how the method is implemented.
In this case, then as long as the contract between the client and the server is honoured, then you can change the implementation as much as you want. For example given a server method like List<user> GetAllUsers() you could have this method contact a database directly and return a result, or it could asynchronously call a method on another server (the hand off) and when it gets the result back return that to the client.
mav.northwind wrote: And, the initial server would stay the bottleneck unless there's a way to hand off the request in a way so that the result doesn't have to pass through the initial server, wouldn't it?
In a way yes I guess it is, but in another way no I guess it isn't. I've been doing a fair bit of research/implementation on web services lately (not that this makes me an expert), and by far the biggest win for me is having this well defined single point of contact for clients to connect to*, which means I can make changes at the server and never need touch the clients. If at some point in the future I introduce a webmethod that taxes the current hardware, I can do what I described above and have the actual meat of that method execute on another machine. The clients won't be aware that this is what's happening, so I can make this switch pretty much seamlessly.
There is another consideration in that I needed to guarantee that the web service box could handle all the requests and traffic. I set up a little test with a webmethod that simply returned about 10Kb of text to the client. Overall I found that the server could easily deal with huge numbers of this type of request per minute - it didn't even break a sweat! But should the need ever arise I can add more bandwidth, more ram, a faster cpu, more cpu's etc etc. Along with the failover backup and the ability to hand intensive tasks off to another server without the client being aware of this I *think* what I've got is a fairly scalable, robust and predominantly "up" architecture (although time will tell).
From an architectural (software, hardware and infrastructure) point-of-view this sounds like a really interesting project you've got ahead of you. Like I say I'm not an expert - so take everything I say with a good pinch of salt and a shot of caution! - and my web services project was extremely well funded (and a good job too, as it was extremely expensive), but if I had any sage words of advice to offer at all it would be these: Budget, test and test again!
*this of course introduces some fragility if the server goes down - so what I did was to replicate completely the web service on another box as a failover. If the first server goes down, or for whatever reason the clients can't connect to it, the clients are configured to connect to the second server after a pre-determined amount of retries/time outs.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm developing a WinForm program in english.
Now I have clients that need the program to be translated into several languages. I have A LOT of MessageBoxes and so on that needs to be translated and now I wonder which techniques there is to solve my problem.
_____________________________
...and justice for all
APe
|
|
|
|
|
How about maintaing a separate xml file for language version like this
<root><br />
<row><br />
<name><br />
<en>test name en</en> <br />
<fr>test name fr</fr><br />
</name><br />
</row><br />
</root>
and maintain the desired language for the win app in app.config file. When the app starts it will load the XML document with the desired language version as selected in the app config.
label1.Text = xDoc.DocumentElement.SelectSingleNode("/root/row/name/" + System.Configuration.ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings["lang"]).InnerText;
hope this helps!!
Sathy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya that article sounds intersting!!!
How should be your app working ? Like the user can change the language at any point of time is it ??
Sathy
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
