|
This is how you would do it:
myComboBox.Items.AddRange(System.DayOfWeek.GetNames()); This'll get the names in a string[]. The Items property of the ComboBox is an ObjectCollection, so it has the AddRange method. Which has a signature of:
public void AddRange(object[] items);
Because string is an object, you will be able to add the items to the combobox.
The problem with what you were trying to do is that you defined I as IEnumerable. A class implements IEnumerable to let it's consumer know that it can enumerate through it's collection. You can't loop through an object's IEnumerables because that doesn't exist. 
Hope I helped.
David Stone
But Clinton wasn't a predictable, boring, aging, lying, eloquent, maintainer-of-the-status-quo. He was a predictable, boring-but-trying-to-look-hip, aging-and-fat-but-seemingly-oblivious-to-it, lying-but-in-sadly-blatant-ways, not-eloquent-but-trying-to-make-up-for-it-by-talking-even-more, bringer-in-of-scary-and-potentially-dangerous-new-policies. And there was also Al Gore. It just wasn't *right*.
Shog9
|
|
|
|
|
Hey David, thanks for the reply! I know I can't use IEnumerable; I just stuck it in there to demonstrate basically what I was trying to do; I never tried to compile that. I had completely forgotten that the GetNames member was there, because my Intellisense doesn't show it unless I type System.Enum.GetNames. It also doesn't show things like Page.RegisterClientScriptBlock, despite that being a perfectly valid method. Oh well.
Again, thanks a ton.
Jamie Nordmeyer
Portland, Oregon, USA
|
|
|
|
|
Right, you should actually define I as IEnumerator, thorugh David's code is a better way to accomplish what you're wanting.
"Well, I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob." - Peter Gibbons
|
|
|
|
|
hi
it seems there is a new step accomplished on the road of generic implementation: it's called Gyro
see @
http://research.microsoft.com/projects/clrgen/
it looks cool
what do you thinks about it?
NB: it seems this guy deliver upgrade every 4 monthes since last year and this it beta .. perhabs a proposal at the end of the year??
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link 
Generics for me it's a great piece of extra flexibility and a must for .Net 2.
Cheers,Joao Vaz
And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9
|
|
|
|
|
Hello cpians
I was working my way through the System.Windows.Forms namesapce and couldn't find an essential class.
in MFC you could turn a CPropertySheet into a wizard with just one line of code. I couldn't find a way to create a wizard with the .NET FCL.
does anyone know of such a way, or do I hve to create a collection of Panels, and "next" and "back" buttons and do it myself?
thanks
Noam
Noam Ben Haim
Web Developer
Intel
noam.ben.chaim@intel.com
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly it is one of those major holes in the .NET experience. You have to roll your own Wizards.
Have a look at http://www.sellsbrothers.com/tools/Genghis/[^] for one already done.
Michael
Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
|
|
|
|
|
This is agrivating and I thought about posting it in the Soapbox forum because this is more of a rant; but the standard Web Controls don't generate proper XHTML and this sux. I guess, you're asking how should it, you never told it you wanted XHTML. But that is just the point. Some of us take pride in producing very specific code even if it is HTML. And the use of Web Controls is limiting this a bit.
Case in point for those who are intrested: DataGrid, HeaderStyle has an attribute horizontalalign which I would like to set to center. It changes it to Center. Not much I understand but there is a difference. It's not to spec.
They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety.
--Benjamin Franklin
|
|
|
|
|
Talk to Paul Watson about this - it's a pet peeve of his as well.
IMO the HTML generated by the Web Controls is appalling.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Menefee wrote:
And the use of Web Controls is limiting this a bit.
As Chris said, a pet peeve of mine. In fact I have yet to use a single .NET Web Control for a public web site project. I use them for back-end admin suites etc. where code purity is not such an issue, but even there I cringe when I see the crap .NET generates.
I do not actually know what MS was thinking. They could have even have just generated good HTML 4.01 and I would have been happy (at least then it would have been simple to change it to XHTML compliant.)
I still have not tried but you can "re-write" the HTML that web controls generate. So I am sure in the near future someone is going to release a slew of XHTML compliant .NET Web Controls.
Even so, web controls IMO are not ready for prime time. They require too much server round-tripping and many of their great features means allowing wads of hidden elements on your page filled with paragraphs of data, hardly condusive to fast web applications.
And don't get me started on VS.NET and it's "helpful" HTML features. I still do not know how to turn off that annoying "feature" where when you paste some HTML it inserts IDs into all the elements.
I use ASP.NET solely for the access to "proper" languages, not for the web controls or postback features etc.
|
|
|
|
|
I've written an interface in C# which I've marked as a dual COM-interface.
The interface:
[
InterfaceType(ComInterfaceType.InterfaceIsDual),
Guid("5ECF7F7A-974D-4e5d-9329-679C0D2D3F99")
]
public interface ICodeColorizer {
string Colorize(string strOrgCode);
}
My questions are:
- How do I implement a COM-class using this interface in native C++?
- How do I use this COM-class in the .NET application?
1. I have no idea about this one.
2. I guess it's just enough to add the COM-reference.. right?
I tried adding the interface with the same GUID in the COM-project and use that. But .NET had second thoughts on type-equality. According to .NET the original interface as written in C# was not the same interface as the one specified in my COM-idl file.
|
|
|
|
|
1. You got to use regasm.exe first (or tlbexp.exe) to produce a .tlb and register the object.
2. Provide implementation for this interface in your class. I believe at this point you've got to use special attributes such like ComSource.
MS quote (http://www.microsoft.com/ddk) : As of September 30, 2002, the Microsoft® Windows® 2000 DDK, the Microsoft Windows 98 DDK, and the Microsoft Windows NT® 4.0 DDK will no longer be available for purchase or download on this site. Support for development will ship at the same time as the Windows XP Service Pack 1 (SP1) release.
|
|
|
|
|
There's a thread in the lounge that talks about what to use to start a new project for .NET; most says that C# is the way to go, over Managed C++.
Why ? isn't it the same ? isn't the same .net framework ? the syntax is different, but that's no biggies, I can live with it, so what's the difference ?
I have the Visual C++.net box and doesn't come with support for C#, but there's a csc.exe ( C# compiler ) somewhere on my machine, is it the same compiler that would come if I bought the C#.net box (or the full visual studio )? I tries to compile a simple "hello world" program with that csc.exe compiler and it looks ok!
Thanks.
Max.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed C++ can do a few things that C# can't, firstly you can produce regular unmanaged applications as well as .NET applications (which you can't with C#). You can also mix and match managed and unmanaged code in the same application, so from a regular MFC app you can make .NET calls.
Not to mention that you already have the VC++.NET box, so you have the IDE to make it easier. There's nothing to stop you using the csc compiler, but it'll get really tough once you start to do anything more than a simple program.
If you've not used VC++ 6 (or any other version of VC++) then you should be in a good position to get on with the VC++.NET IDE.
I personally would recommend going with MC++ (despite its messyness) since if you get on with that you open yourself up to being able to produce almost anything.
--
Paul
"I need the secure packaging of Jockeys. My boys need a house!"
- Kramer, in "The Chinese Woman" episode of Seinfeld
MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk
Sonork: 100.22446
|
|
|
|
|
Does any one know where to get hold of the .NET My Services SDK, specifically the HsSoapExtension project?
Phil Harding
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
There was a special site (i found it from MSDN hailstorm) devoted to this where SDK could be download with subscription but it seems subs close on may 
|
|
|
|
|
i cant add a tree control to a web form in ASP.Net..please if any body has any idea about this ...do let me know
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
How do I go about creating a plugin architecture for my .NET application? The plugins should be able to access the object model (receiving events and performing validation) and to extend the UI.
First of all, do I have to create a new AppDomain? If yes, one for each plugin or one for all?
Second, if I've loaded a plugin Assembly, what do I do then??? How do I connect it to my application?
Or am I on the wrong track and need a completely different approach?
Are there any samples, walk-throughs, guidelines etc.?
Thanks in advance for any help you might provide.
Regards,
Andreas
|
|
|
|
|
Plugins are now old fashioned when you regard that System.Reflection allows you to create classes, compile them, and add them to your code while it's running.
You may of course end up loading custom user Assemblies after your program has been released, but that's not there the true power lies : custom user Assemblies must export functions whose signatures are already known by you BEFORE you have released the program.
Good luck!
And I swallow a small raisin.
|
|
|
|
|
And this means practically...?
I did have a brief look at the .NET documentation on dynamic assemblies, but I figured out that, this way or the other, I ended up getting a System.Reflection.Assembly, right?
The idea is, that users should be able to extend the basic functionality of the app. Is this an old-fashioned concept? I see this as a critical point for the success of my (freeware) program in order to compete with products already on the market.
There are certain regional validation criteria that need to be taken into account, but I cannot code them into the main program because I simply don't know all of them and never will. So therefore I am looking for a way of letting the program be extended through some kind of addin modules. I don't insist on using precompiled assemblies, they could be compiled JIT.
But my problem remains: How do I make them interact with my app?
An addin would have to consist of one or more classes derived from a predefined abstract addin class, wouldn't it? Then, the constructor could receive as a parameter a reference to one of the necessary objects.
But how do I get to such a class if I don't know the name of the class? That I would need for Assembly.CreateInstance().
And if I somehow managed to create an instance of such a class, wouldn't I run into problems with the GC sooner or later, like with .NET Remoting?
And do I need one or more private AppDomains or would I load it into the AppDomain of my app. Are there any requirements and advantages/disadvantages?
Regards,
Andreas
|
|
|
|
|
Answering your question in full extent requires more than a textarea.
May be it's me, but you seem to explain things as a true callback C-style programmer.
Java and C# have a different paradigm.
In this paradigm, a plugin for instance subscribes for predefined events you expose in the program. Doing this, nor your program, nor the plugin are not stuck with predefined method signatures, useless marshalling and stuff.
As for freeware and competition, I just would like to tell you that you should balance the usefulness of a .Net application instead of a standard C/C++/MFC/VB or even Java app. In other words, users of your freeware will have to download 21MB of run-time (+6MB for SP2), just to run your .exe. As long as they don't, they'll get a nasty "missing mscoree.dll", and chances are they spit on you and throw the freeware to hell. 
And I swallow a small raisin.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, but I am not a C programmer. I'm not that old!  I do know Java, C++/MFC, C#/.NET, say OOP in general. And I was definitely not thinking of callbacks, that is not even possible in this case. My problem is that, until now, I have only written (non-extensible) standalone programs and am not familiar with any kind of plugin/addin/othernameforextension architecture programming, neither C-style nor C#-/Java-style.
I have an *object model* (object-oriented) with what I would see as "predefined events". And I didn't intend to call plugin functions *from* that OM in any callback style, I did want the *plugin* to register for the events it needs. The question is: How?
I do not feel bound to any specific programming paradigm, I was just asking for *any* way to have an extensibility mechanism ... I am open for any OOP approach to this problem!
Regards,
Andreas
P.S. I do "need" the .NET Framework for this programming task, regardless of its download size.
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous wrote:
The question is: How?
Short answers :
- declared events are made public in the assembly, so that the plugin assembly can register one or more of these events by adding a reference to the main assembly, and creating new event instances.
- assemblies can be dynamically emitted or loaded with a .config file, a separate file from the main assembly.
- that said, assemblies may communicate explicitely, not explicitely, synchronously, asynchrounously, use a message queue, etc. that's up to you and your requirements. In fact, that's your specific use of the .Net framework.
Long answer : answering the question is as broad as answering the question : "I want two programs to communicate, how ?"
Now good luck! I am not an interested party here, but from what I see on the MSDN samples for instance, you have plenty of code to begin with.
And I swallow a small raisin.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for that hint! Such an easy solution using the appSettings...
I know how to register for events, but that did require access to an *instance* of my class first, not just setting a reference.
I have now managed to get a simple sample running, merci beaucoup.
Andreas
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
