|
Naerling wrote: Pro's: Microsoft generates code for you, it gets the data for you, it only updates rows that are altered, even my boss can do it, it's fast.
Cons: none.
Cons:
* Unexpected bugs within the framework
* Missing hotfixes/patches
* Limited in it's uses
Yes, it could be considered a time-saver at moments. Others claim that it costs more time than it's worth. So, the best idea would be to "try", create on with the designer and one with a reader using BO's, and compare them -use them when it makes sense 
Naerling wrote: By the way, if I would build up a dataset in code and I wanted to bind, let's say 50 controls to 50 fields, do I have to bind each one of them seperately?
That depends on the inner working of those 3rd party controls. A Grid might be able to deduce columns from the meta-data, but textfields, comboboxes and radiobuttons need be bound often by hand. Either in code, or by clicking together those mappings in the IDE.
Good luck
I are Troll 
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the help. I think I know what I wanted to know.
I hope my company will soon see that the designer is not the answer to everything and that's it's no holy time-saving money maker 
For the moment it doesn't hurt to try
|
|
|
|
|
There is a bit of a learning curve to handling binding of controls but once you understand how it works, in most (not all) cases it will save you a lot of time and your company a lot of money.
At the moment go with what you know but spend the time to learn how binding works. It's very much a part of WPF and Silverlight.
Architecture is extensible, code is minimal.
|
|
|
|
|
Based on experience, binding through design is always harder to maintain - somehow I prefer to do this through programming.
But whatever you decide, make sure it is documented and followed as a standard.
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realise it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
My latest tip/trick
|
|
|
|
|
Can anyone help me basically my situation is as follow.
I used to develop in .net 3.5 sp1 using visual studio 2008
I was able to run/debug my program without any hassles whatsoever.
Then I recently upgraded my solutions to .net framework 4 on visual studio 2010
My programs still run fine but when i try to run it in debug mode i get the following exception in visual studio,
An unhandled exception of type 'System.StackOverflowException' occurred
If anyone can point me to something i can do or a hotfix for this i would be very happy.
My System a Dual CORE CPU 4 Gigs ram running on a 64 bit windows 7 operating system.
I do my development inside an XP Pro(32bit) virtual machine (VMware) 2.5 gigs of ram allocated.
Many thanks
Chona1171
Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, this is one of those situations where you're going to have to do a lot of debugging yourself. You're going to have to set breakpoints in your code at strategic locations and start refining from there. Two things:
Does this only happen in debug?
Have you changed any code when you upgraded?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes this only happens when i debug, and the code is a precise exact copy of what I had , aside from the fact that the projects are set to .net framework 4; also setting this back to 3.5 sp1 does not change anything
From what i gather this error seems to be loosely related to COM classes that i am using , the second i try to run code associated with that com interop it gives me this error , I got a loader lock warning at the beginning and I told the debugger to ignore it now i am stuck with this stack overflow.
Chona1171
Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
|
|
|
|
|
There's your problem then. The Loader Lock was introduced in VS2005. From MSDN[^]:
"The loaderLock managed debugging assistant (MDA) detects attempts to execute managed code on a thread that holds the Microsoft Windows operating system loader lock. Any such execution is illegal because it can lead to deadlocks and to use of DLLs before they have been initialized by the operating system's loader."
|
|
|
|
|
Then why was i able to debug my application in version 2008 and now in 2010 version I cant.
Is there any workarounds/hotfixes that will be able to help me ?
Chona1171
Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
|
|
|
|
|
.NET 4 is a complete overhaul of .NET rather than an upgrade path from .NET 2.
It sounds like the problem's actually in the COM part. Have a read of the link I gave you (specifically the Resolution part) and follow the links in that page.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems you are hell-bent on finding a "fix" for this. Did you consider the possibility that you've been exploiting a bug in the .NET Framework and that bug has now been fixed under .NET 4.0?
I can't find a hotfix, for either Visual Studio 2010 or .NET 4.0, for this problem anywhere, other than change your code.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope This problem only occurs when using visual studio 2010 even when setting the project back to 3.5 does not fix it. But nice theory.
Again only occurs when debugging if compiled and running outside of debug mode the program runs beautifully, i can live with it but i sure am gonna miss stepping through code
Chona1171
Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
|
|
|
|
|
You might have to do some searching on the internet.
There might be something in your code that causes this error to occur.
I found a couple of threads where such issues have been discussed.
One was this[^] and the other was with lambda expressions.
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realise it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
My latest tip/trick
|
|
|
|
|
you mentioned that you upgraded from VS 2008 .Net 3.5 to VS 2010 .Net 4.0 and that the problem is in some COM code.
Go back and check your reference assemblies. Many reference assemblies have different .dll versions for 3.5 versus 4.0. Be sure you are using the updated assembly.
Good luck.
Robert Tanenbaum
|
|
|
|
|
On many sites I have read that microsoft is not going to add new features to Linq to SQL. So is it dead? From developers point of view should one go for Linq to SQL or Entity Framework?
|
|
|
|
|
Entity framework is the way to go, I have seen many exciting developments in this field in MS Tech Ed. Also the way virtualisation in WPF and Silverlight is going it would be very handy to know.
LINQ to SQL is not completely dead there will always be a use for it, just like datasets ect
Chona1171
Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
|
|
|
|
|
Since Entity Framework uses LinqToSql I would say it is not dead. Just Microsoft has always done they are moving toward other implementations of the technology.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
Starting new projects in Linq2Sql sounds like a mistake, while converting working ones to Entity Framework sounds like a waste of time.
|
|
|
|
|
The Linq to SQL team has been absorbed by the entity Framework team in Microsoft. I use Linq to SQL in a large project that I am working on that we started years ago. Part of the reason that I have not changed it to EF yet is that we are still on VS2008. The new EF that is in .NET 4 provides alot of the functionality that we use from Linq to SQL, such as lazy loading of objects. This is not in the EF that is included in VS2008 and since our product uses that, we cannot switch over until we move up to .NET 4.
Take a look at the features. You did not say if this was using VS2008 or VS2010. For me, Linq to SQL was the better choice in VS2008, but if you are using VS2010, then EF4 is the better path.
Steve Maier
|
|
|
|
|
I love Linq to SQL for the queries, but it is an absolute dog when doing inserts or updates of very large transaction sets. For example, my application requires doing about 60,000 inserts as a single transaction. Using SqlCommand it takes 20 seconds. Using Linq to SQL it takes 200 seconds. I believe that because of all the checking for Foreign Key integrity it actually grows exponentially as new items are added to the transaction.
As for Entity Framework, I am also using VS 2008 and would not want to use Entity Framework until VS 2010 which has a more stable and mature product than the one with VS 2008. Also since ADO gives me so much better performance for my very large transaction set, I don't think the time taken to set up an experiment with Entity Framework is worth the effort.
Robert Tanenbaum
|
|
|
|
|
We have developed some .Net Windows forms.
While they run fine on the local PC, they can't be run from our fileserver (shortcut).
I recall there's a security feature to prevent apps from running on untrusted servers.
How do I tell it it's ok? I've checked IE Options.
The Admin Tools Control Panel only goes up to .Net 1.1.
I need an app that will automatically deliver a new BBBBBBBBaBB (beautiful blonde bimbo brandishing bountiful bobbing bare breasts and bodacious butt) every day.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
You're thinking of caspol. Looking it up, I think the following should work (may need a little tweaking):
CasPol.exe -m -ag 1 -url file:
|
|
|
|
|
That worked. Thanks
I need an app that will automatically deliver a new BBBBBBBBaBB (beautiful blonde bimbo brandishing bountiful bobbing bare breasts and bodacious butt) every day.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome. Glad it helped.
|
|
|
|
|
If you need to run .net applications from a server you should look at ClickOnce[^]
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
