Re: Validating a property on Set - C# Discussion Boards

Re: Disabled keyboard and mouse

3-Jun-08 18:46

, rew w rt wt w w wtr utw wt wre wer erw trwh sa uaedfu tu t434u44 4wuhutqwu wquqwttwqeut wqututwt

Shree3-Jun-08 19:46

Shree

3-Jun-08 19:46

It's really tough, which algorithm did you use to encrypt?

Re: Disabled keyboard and mouse

Nouman Bhatti3-Jun-08 19:44

Nouman Bhatti

3-Jun-08 19:44

Following link will help u out.
http://forums.msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/csharpgeneral/thread/81a99ac0-1bf3-40b7-a800-58f0ca6b2a26/[^]

Validating a property on Set

martin_hughes3-Jun-08 9:35

martin_hughes

3-Jun-08 9:35

My ability to google and comprehend things today appears to be not what it should - I've been up since 4am so go easy on me Smile | :)

Anyway, suppose I have a very simple class with a single property:

public string SiteName { 
       get{return siteName;} 
       set{siteName = value;} 
}

Now SiteName has some very specific format requirements (ie not longer than 12 characters, first 4 chars are alpha only for example). Within the setter I can do some validation with a regex or whatever, and for validating this single property everything is great. It also seems to make sense to me that this is where the validation should take place.

However, it occurs to me that I might want to do a similar kind of validation on another property, perhaps even within in a separate class - or even multiple classes, and could get very messy with the same (or very similar) logic appearing all over the place. This looks to me like an ideal candidate for re-factoring... and this is where my googling has come unstuck!

What I'm really after is an insight on to tried an trusted techniques for validating properties, and also whether my intent is actually going to cause bigger problems than they're worth. I had a quick read about Custom Attributes, but I was not particularly clear on how to hook these up to know when a property is being modified, or how they interact with the property in question...

As always, any help greatly appreciated.

***The collected future Mrs. Martin Hughes***

Pete O'Hanlon3-Jun-08 9:44

Pete O'Hanlon

3-Jun-08 9:44

Martin - take a look at using INotifyPropertyChanged and something like this[^] article.

Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

My blog | My articles

***The collected future Mrs. Martin Hughes***

martin_hughes3-Jun-08 10:11

martin_hughes

3-Jun-08 10:11

From the article: "Take note – in the screens above, the code that triggers the error to be shown is in the business object, not in the GUI. I didn't have to write a single line of GUI code – it's already done by data binding and IDataErrorInfo."

Today's epiphany sorted Smile | :)

Pete O'Hanlon3-Jun-08 10:25

Pete O'Hanlon

3-Jun-08 10:25

Yup - binding's so cool - and so bloody useful.

Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

My blog | My articles

anujarya_20013-Jun-08 18:21

handle javaScript errors ?

3-Jun-08 18:21

ou install the utility and navigate to any url in CP from where you can post a message, the signature field is automatically filled with one of the quotes from an XML file. All you need to do is to write some quotes in an XML file either manually or using the CodePr

Rami Shareef3-Jun-08 7:12

Rami Shareef

3-Jun-08 7:12

Hi I'm working on some kind of html&javascript editor
Now I stopped at point that I cant get over it !!
When I set the script to DocumentText Property of webBrowser control And if the script has an error the webBrowser control would handled the errors internaly and shows a dialog with some text about the error.
How can I get the error with my code and handle it by my self
Thank !

Scott Dorman3-Jun-08 7:16

3-Jun-08 7:16

You might have better luck posting this in either the Web Development or ASP.NET forums.

Scott Dorman

Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA

Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai

Rami Shareef3-Jun-08 7:19

Rami Shareef

3-Jun-08 7:19

Sorry
what I have to do now !

Scott Dorman3-Jun-08 7:27

3-Jun-08 7:27

No worries. The best thing to do is decide which forum you want to post in, create the new post in that forum, and then modify your original post to include a link to the new one.

Scott Dorman

Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA

Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai

anujarya_20013-Jun-08 18:20

3-Jun-08 18:20

serrgreregtretgreregg

anujarya_20013-Jun-08 18:32

3-Jun-08 18:32

wsy r4er reyresertre trhh th trtt swr erswtt retr swtrtf rertr reerr sersr r

Web Service, I am missing something

Shree3-Jun-08 19:50

Shree

3-Jun-08 19:50

Alien Signal!!! SETI!!

zaboboa3-Jun-08 6:59

zaboboa

3-Jun-08 6:59

Hi,

I am trying to publish the web service. I created a new web service in VS2005, by default it has one web method HelloWorld, that returns a string. If I run the web service, and then try to add the web reference from windows application, by using http://localhost:2205/etc... Everything works fine.

Now, If I create a virtual directory in IIS, and then use the Publish Web Service option from VS2005, now by trying even to open the web in the browser gives me the error. This is the path that I put into the browser window: http://my_pc_name/ISS_Virtual_Folder_Name/Service_Name.asmx

Is there something that I am missing?

Thank you!

Re: Web Service, I am missing something

zaboboa3-Jun-08 7:44

zaboboa

3-Jun-08 7:44

Ok Solved the problem.
Just in case if anyone will run into the same thing.

In command line navigate to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727

and run: aspnet_regiis.exe -i

Smile | :)

Is there a way to document overloaded methods

Clive D. Pottinger3-Jun-08 6:40

Clive D. Pottinger

3-Jun-08 6:40

/// <summary>
/// Great big long multiline explanation of foo()
/// </summary>
public void foo() {...}

/// <summary>
/// same great big long explanation again
/// </summary>
/// <parm name="x">Put a number here</param>
public void foo(int x) {...}


/// <summary>
/// same great big long explanation yet again
/// </summary>
/// <parm name="x">Put a number here</param>
/// <parm name="y">Put a second number here</param>
public void foo(int x, int y) {...}
...

There has to be a better way...
anyone?

Clive Pottinger
Victoria, BC

Whats wrong with that method

Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr.3-Jun-08 6:50

Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr.

3-Jun-08 6:50

It shows up in intellisense. I suppose the only better way is to put it in the design document.

Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.

Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway

Clive D. Pottinger3-Jun-08 7:14

Clive D. Pottinger

3-Jun-08 7:14

Well, not only does the current method mean having the same description entered over and over, but it is also prone to errors.

I have a number of these kind of functions where foo() and foo(int x) both end up calling foo(int x, int y). If I make a change to foo(int x, int y) and alter its documentation, I have to make sure that I go back and alter the documentation for the other two - which, sometimes I miss, or do incorrectly.

I was hoping for something more along the lines of

/// <summary>
/// Great big long multiline explanation of foo()
/// </summary>
public void foo() {...}

/// <summary autodoc=foo()/>
/// <parm name="x">Put a number here</param>
public void foo(int x) {...}


/// <summary autodoc=foo()/>
/// <parm name="x">Put a number here</param>
/// <parm name="y">Put a second number here</param>
public void foo(int x, int y) {...}
...

Something that would save typing the same function description over and over. And while I'm in pie-in-the-sky-land,

/// <summary autodoc=foo()>
/// but, unlike foo(), this method does not accept negative values.
/// </summary/>
/// <parm name="x">Put a number here</param>
/// <parm name="y">Put a second number here</param>
public void goo(int x, int y) {...}
...

Clive Pottinger
Victoria, BC

Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr.3-Jun-08 7:18

Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr.

3-Jun-08 7:18

Updating documentation is an expensive and time consuming process. Considering the bad results I have seen from automated tools causing developers to use inferred documentation I am a big fan of the manual process.

Also, in general, an overloaded method should do the same thing as all of the other methods but with different parameters. Causing special handling is asking for disaster.

Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.

Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway

Vikram A Punathambekar3-Jun-08 7:22

Vikram A Punathambekar

3-Jun-08 7:22

I know this doesn't help you with the problem at hand, but I think you'll do just fine - you already use and think about documentation FAR more than most people I know. Smile | :)

Cheers,
Vikram.

The hands that help are holier than the lips that pray.

Scott Dorman3-Jun-08 7:25

3-Jun-08 7:25

You might want to look at the <include>[^] tag.

Scott Dorman

Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA

Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai

Re: Is there a way to document overloaded methods

Scott Dorman3-Jun-08 7:08

3-Jun-08 7:08

NDoc supports an "<overloads>" XML comment, but I'm not sure if SandCastle also supports it. There really isn't any other way currently.

Scott Dorman

Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA

Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai