|
I'm not sure your marshaling is correct here...
What does the Add() function look like on the native side (it's prototype)?
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I have the code at work,I will put the signature tomorrow. Do you have the time to look at the sources? The native part is not big at all. And the managed part just calls an initialize method and the add method. I don't want to call GC.Collect(), but it will be called eventually, so I tried it manually, and the application freezes.
Please tell me if it's ok with you to send the sources. The more I dig..the more I get stuck with this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I can take a look at it. Send me an email via Code Project and I'll reply.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
System.Windows.Forms.SystemInformation.VerticalScrollBarWidth;
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
I don't mean this in a cynical way; if it's a good choice for my scenario, I'll use it.
It seems like I could make use of it if I'm writing, say, a checkout app: customer comes in, does some shopping, comes to the counter, the clerk scans all the barcodes, asks if the customer has a point card, prints a receipt, saves the transaction and marketing info to the database.
But I still can't quite put my finger on why it would be better to use Workflow Foundation than to just do all this by wiring a database to a client UI using LINQ to SQL. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Rei
|
|
|
|
|
Not all applications are "Collect data in a webform, shove in database".
When you are trying to manage collection and approval of say purchase orders, assignment of stock allocations, matching of berthing locations to ships and then booking of product transfer equipment, all with different stages of approval in some management chain with loads of business rules, then it gets a bit more complex. You want all this fairly easy to change later (When someone says any loading over 5mt needs to be approved by someone with certain qualifications, etc).
Also who wants to spend time writing their own workflow solution? :P
|
|
|
|
|
So let me get this straight: it's good when there's a really complex/volatile business process that happens to involve a lot of computer check-ins/check-outs, and you want to model your entire application in the context of the business process whilst making it maintainable in case the business process changes later on. Right?
In other words, if there isn't much logistics, skip WF.
Okay, thanks 
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. If there isn't much workflow, then skip WF 
|
|
|
|
|
I have tried to search for this answer online but my searches are not finding it.
I want to launch a program from my code and pass it args. Similar to a command line. I need to do this in my VB .net code.
Does any one know how to do this or where I can read up on it?
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
You can use Process class for your needs.
Giorgi Dalakishvili
#region signature
my articles
#endregion
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you. I have a questions though. How do I pass it a command? The full command line is
"C:\Program Files\LV8\lv.exe" /CMDM "C:\Program Files\LV8\lbl\CMD\"
I can do
myprocess.start("C:\Program Files\LV8\lv.exe")
But I can't put the command after it.
Do you know how this is done?
I found it out. It is
myprocess.start("C:\Program Files\LV8\lv.exe", "/CMDM C:\Program Files\LV8\lbl\CMD\)"
|
|
|
|
|
Cory Kimble wrote: Do you know how this is done?
No, no one knows how that is done, and if anyone did know it certainly would not be Microsoft, and they certainly would not document it.[^]
So three hours after your original post you are asking for information that is freely and almost instantly available in the documentation. Let's see, at this rate you could write an entire application in a about a gazillion years. Good luck!
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
Replace the auto-generated main procedure with: sub main (string[] args){}
However this should have been a quick google problem.
Regards,
Thomas Stockwell
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.
Visit my homepage Oracle Studios
Discounted or Free Software for Students:
DreamSpark - downloads.channel8.msdn.com
MSDN Academic Alliance - www.msdnaa.com
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I received this requirement.
- A telephone user will call a number. The number is connected to a system which will prompt for user authentication.
- It may be userid/passwrod authentical or a unique word authentication. This will be only known to the user. It can be changed via phone or through a web-interface.
- If could not authenticate in, let's say 3 times, then account is locked and user will have to request unlocking or do it online.
- If properly authenticated, then user will be redirected to a queue and next available operator will handle the user.
- System will open the default application screen for Operator. This screen will have prefernces set by the user
This seems like a regular telephone answering system but I don't have technical idea of creating such system.
I am looking for following help:
- What are the options for such needs?
- Are there any .Net based solutions to this? or any other technologies?
- What are the things I need to consider for such systems? Ofcourse security is the TOP priority.
Please advise. Thanks
Pankaj
|
|
|
|
|
can any body tell me how to add a form to a panel using C#.NET.
Thanks in advance.
Reagrds:
Biswajit
biswajit nayak
|
|
|
|
|
Surely you mean add a panel to a form?
|
|
|
|
|
"Form" is inherited from "Control", so you can use panel.Controls.Add(yourForm)
|
|
|
|
|
You could use the SetParent WinAPI command (google it). However, embedding a form in a panel makes the form immune to other general window events. You will not be able to move the window or interact with the titlebar.
Regards,
Thomas Stockwell
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.
Visit my homepage Oracle Studios
Discounted or Free Software for Students:
DreamSpark - downloads.channel8.msdn.com
MSDN Academic Alliance - www.msdnaa.com
|
|
|
|
|
I create a series of classes that inherit from a prototype class (a class with just virtual functions):
class CBlockPrototype
{
"constructor/destructor"
virtual method1,method2,... = 0;
}
class CBlock1: public CBlockPrototype [...]
class CBlock2: public CBlockPrototype [...]
[...]
I define every class in a different header file (BlockPrototype.h,Block1.h,[...]) but I find very comfortable to implement the same methods of every derived classes in the same cpp file:
method1.cpp contains
CBlock1::method1
{
}
CBlock2::method1
{
}
CBlock3::method1
{
}
[...]
method2.cpp contains
CBlock1::method2
{
}
CBlock2::method2
{
}
CBlock3::method2
{
}
[...]
I try to compile but the linker says me errors: " [...] linker error [...] CBlockX::methodY already defined in methodY.h [...]"
I hope to be clear.
Can someone help me?
Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
You should ask this in either the Visual C++ / MFC
[^] or Managed C++/CLI[^] forums (but not both). This is a .NET focused forum, not C++.
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
[ Forum Guidelines][ Articles][ Blog]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I am having some problems with .NET Socket Receive Method. I have a client application which I am sending data to a server app. The send works properly, the server receives it. I am expecting a response back from the server, but due to unforseen problems the server doesn't respond. My client application does not block at the Socket.Receive() and loops indefinately waiting for data. I would expect it to block (or wait a specified timeout) until either an exception is thrown (timeout, or closed socket), or data is received. Debugging the connection socket properties on the client reveals that the application thinks the socket is still Connected, and there is no data available.
I loaded up WireShark, and traced the connection. It appears that the server is initiating a shutdown, by sending a FIN packet. I see a lower level FIN ACK being sent back to the server from the client, however the application code doesn't seem to detect this. Could this be why the socket doesn't block at the Receive? Is there a way to detect that the server wishes to close the connection?
FYI, the client application is currently written in C# using .NET 3.5 framework.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for your help in advance.
Kind Regards,
James
|
|
|
|
|
If you are using a connection-oriented protocol, you must either call Connect to establish a remote host connection, or Accept to accept an incoming connection prior to calling Receive. The Receive method will only read data that arrives from the remote host established in the Connect or Accept method. If you are using a connectionless protocol, you can also use the ReceiveFrom method. ReceiveFrom will allow you to receive data arriving from any host.
If no data is available for reading, the Receive method will block until data is available, unless a time-out value was set by using Socket..::.ReceiveTimeout. If the time-out value was exceeded, the Receive call will throw a SocketException. If you are in non-blocking mode, and there is no data available in the in the protocol stack buffer, the Receive method will complete immediately and throw a SocketException. You can use the Available property to determine if data is available for reading. When Available is non-zero, retry the receive operation.
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the reply. I open the socket connection to the client as follows:
connectionSocket = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp);
if (traceFlag)
{
LogMessage(Severity.ER_SEVERITY_INFO_RETURN, myFilename,
"Socket.Open(): Attempting connection to {0}:{1}", hostName, port);
}
try
{
connectionSocket.Connect(hostName, port);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Close();
throw ex;
}
The portion of the receive that isn't behaving is as follows:
while (bIncoming[0] != (byte)MessageWrapper.SOM)
{
tryRead = 1;
read = connectionSocket.Receive(bIncoming, 0, tryRead, SocketFlags.None);
}
The above receive loops forever, with zero bytes received. When I debug the properties of "connectionSocket" I see Connected = true and Available is 0. I would imagine this is because the server has initiated a shutdown, however, it appears the framework is not detecting it.
Hopefully the code snippet helps. Let me know if you need more info.
Thanks for your help.
Kind Regards,
James
|
|
|
|
|
I have found that timeouts and keep-alive messages are a must when using socket connections. I know this doesn't answer your question, but did you know that if you have 3 switches in between the client and the server, then the middle switch dies, and your applications will still think the connections are fine until they try to send a message? The spec. for the keep-alive of the so called connection-oriented TCP/IP is optional.
Assert(this);
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
