|
I think I know what the answer is going to be here, but I'm desperate...
I need to use an object wrapper (quite a complex one for a complex reason) in my Silverlight 3 (not using RIA services) solution so I thought a Generic approach would be best, until I saw how Silverlight serializes my object, for example:
public class Customer
{
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class Wrapper<T>
{
}
If I have a method in my WCF service that returns a wrapped Customer ( public Wrapper<Customer> Get()) the proxy class generated is:
a) Not a generic implementation (Wrapper<Customer> )
b) Has a very strange class name, something like WrapperOfCustomerUyenbzx
Am I doing something wrong or will I have to get used to it?
____________________________________________________________
Be brave little warrior, be VERY brave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Mark, just what i expected...
____________________________________________________________
Be brave little warrior, be VERY brave
|
|
|
|
|
I am attempting to save new data to a database when a user closes their browser. I have tried to put the submitchanges command in the app_exit event but I get an error that says:
Reference to a non-shared member requires an object reference.
I need to save changes on closing without requiring user input. Is there any way to achieve this from within the VB code?
any help would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that anyone who asks in this WPF programming forum, how to be invited to a completely different mailing list that most of us have not heard of, is instantly accepted as a result.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am sorry, but I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. If you wrote to them and they did not get back, one has to assume that you've been rejected. The alternative is to find out who is on this list, and ask them directly.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
The Disciples are a group of WPF enthusiasts who actively blog, write articles, give talks, and generally shout out about WPF and related technologies, as well as point out its deficiencies and where things need to be improved. This is a google groups list consisting of people like Josh Smith, Sacha Barber, Marlon Grech, Karl Shifflett (and me), and it's invitation only. The threads are available for anybody to view, but the discussions are limited to the members - basically those who've shown they have the inclination and experience in WPF.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
OK - they get to complain about WPF and Josh stays an MVP ? I got kicked out for complaining about stuff in public when no-one at MS would listen to me.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
It's all right - they won't even look at me for MVP status.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
*grin* I am glad to hear that WPF is an area where they are listening to criticism. I am far from the guru status that such a list would imply, but I use it daily and there's some big holes in it. And the bug I reported while it was in beta, whereby WPF cannot render images it has to resize without destroying them, is still in there. That after the bugs they ignored or insisted were features in VS2008, is when I realised that the MVP program had become a bit of a joke, at least in my neck of the woods.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen your complaints about WPF destroying images when resizing. As far as I can determine from your posts about this, you've only demonstrated it with one image. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I can only report my own experience. I've used WPF to resize thousands of images with all kinds of different camera exposures, and never once ran into anything less than accurate results.
I agree there are some "big holes" in WPF, but in my experience, resizing images is not one of them. The biggest holes I've found are related to preserving metadata through image transforms (including of course, resizing). There are other holes, often related to features of previous technologies that the WPF architects had philosophical reasons for not implementing in WPF. Developers just get around them through PInvoke, and hopefully Microsoft will find ways of delivering this missing functionality somehow in future versions of WPF that still stay within its guiding principles.
|
|
|
|
|
fjparisIII wrote: As far as I can determine from your posts about this, you've only demonstrated it with one image. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Wrong. We have an image library, and it destroyed all the photos, which were all jpgs. The illustrations, which were all pngs, were fine. So I dunno which of those was the issue. Our code reloads images at the requested size, and it only destroys them for some sizes, which is what makes it intermittent, but my sample code, using a known bad size, destroyed the image every time.
We resize the images because WPF is so terrible at resource management.
fjparisIII wrote: I've used WPF to resize thousands of images with all kinds of different camera exposures, and never once ran into anything less than accurate results.
I suspect the difference is that we resize to arbitrary sizes ( although we always maintain aspect ratio ) and I expect most people would just resize to obvious steps, like 800x600, 1600x1200, etc.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote: I suspect the difference is that we resize to arbitrary sizes ( although we always maintain aspect ratio ) and I expect most people would just resize to obvious steps, like 800x600, 1600x1200, etc.
I just got through resizing 250 TIFF images from full sizes images (max size was 3504x2336, but about 3/4 of them were cropped in various ways) from a Canon EOS-1 Mark II to JPEGs into a box 628x471, which is a pretty off the wall, non-standard size, and every image was as perfect as you would want. Come on. I challenge you to tell me what "arbitrary sizes" don't work and I'll be perfectly willing test those sizes. I would jump for joy to see failures as you've described, but I have little hope that I will.
|
|
|
|
|
fjparisIII wrote: I challenge you to tell me what "arbitrary sizes" don't work and I'll be perfectly willing test those sizes.
Well, like I said, we have two sets of images, one are photos and the other are illustrations. One are jpegs and the other are pngs. Our code lets you drag out a zoom box, and the image is resized to fit. For some sizes, the images failed. I don't even know if the sizes were always the same, I just took the time to work out a size that always failed for one specific image, and submitted that to MS. The image I use in my blog, was definitely the one that looked the worst, but you could see the degradation across a whole range of images, as I said. I have proven that it's a bug, MS accepted it was a bug, although they never fixed it, I've blogged about it, I have zero interest in getting in an argument with you about it. If every image got destroyed, at any unusual size, MS would plainly have found it and fixed it prior to release. But, the bug is real and reproducible, for the images we have ( clinical photos and radiographs ). I could care less if you believe me, and if it's never affected you, I am glad for you.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Please do let me know about how to disable the maximize button in a WPF application.
Thanks in Advance,
Ashwath.
|
|
|
|
|
Surely there's a MaximizeButton property on the form, just like there is in winforms ?
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow - that's not insane at all.......
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah gotta wonder why it was left out.
But who wants to use the OS windows in WPF anyway 
Mark Salsbery
Microsoft MVP - Visual C++
![Java | [Coffee]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
True - we always generate a fake title bar so we can style it. Another weird oversight, IMO.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
In design u set the code like ResizeMode="CanMinimize"
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a WPF image viewing program that I thought for sure was automatically using ICC color profiles imbedded in bitmap images. I thought this for two reasons: (1) I never found any properties in classes like Image, JpegBitmapDecoder, or TiffBitmapDecoder that let you specify whether color profiles are used, so I thought it just did it by default; (2) None of my beta testers ever complained. In fact I had one raving about the high quality of image rendering my app had on his high gamut monitor, and I also have a high gamut monitor where the images just knock your socks off. But I now suspect that the colors look accurate only because the images use the sRGB color space.
In a previous app using GDI+, I had to explicitly tell GDI+ to use ICC color profiles by passing true for the icm parameter of various Bitmap constructor overloads, and it was obvious that this was working, because when I used Adobe RGB for my TIFF files and sRGB for my JPEG files and I A/B'd them, there was no perceptable color difference. If they were not used, the TIFF files would appear washed out because sRGB is used by default if you don't explicitly tell GDI+ to use ICC color profiles. They appear washed out because Adobe RGB has a wider color gamut than sRGB.
But when I specifically A/B'd the same under my WPF application, I was appalled to see that the ICC color profiles built into the images were not being used! My sRGB images looked great and my Adobe RGB imaes looked washed out, whereas in Photoshop they looked the same. Now WPF is touted to be an outstanding replacement for GDI+ applications that Windows Forms and C++/MFC applications were forced to use.
What is really surprising is that the BitmapFrame class (the class I use to display images) has a ColorContexts property that has the ICC color profiles! So why wouldn't it be using them??? This is a read-only property and there doesn't seem to be any other property that would tap the BitmapFrame class on the shoulder and say, "Hey, use your ColorContexts property to display the bitmap, dummy."
Since it has the ICC color profiles right there in front of it, I find it impossible to believe that WPF does not have a way of telling its visual layer to use them. If it doesn't, this would be an application killer of a defect and I'm just sunk: nine months of development down the drain! Please tell me I'm just blind and have somehow missed the property that I must set to get WPF to use ICC color profiles! What is it that I have to do?
modified on Friday, October 2, 2009 9:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
