|
Clickety police is a funny name a lot of Cpians refer to when they make a url cliquable, with that top hat. 
In fact, Chris has been handed a javascript code that automatically translates urls to full cliquable links, and it's expected to be used in the message board. But it isn't wired yet, obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
I am actually working on ASP. I wanted to learn/start with .NET. And the questions arises... where and how to start .net??
Any help...
I was born intelligent
Education ruined me!.
|
|
|
|
|
asp.net[^].
Currently, the best ROI with .NET *is* ASP.NET
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a LOT
I was born intelligent
Education ruined me!.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so what do I need to do, security wise, to allow this. I found that if you use the .net Wizards, you can manually add each assembly to the trusted assemblies collection, but I'd like to know how to do this via command line. Or, how do you get the .NET Setup Project created by Visual Studio to not include files, but rather, links to those files, and then have the setup program do the trusting to the users machine???? 
Thanks in advance.
Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan
Portland, Oregon, USA
|
|
|
|
|
Take a look here:
MSDN Clickety[^]
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
|
|
|
|
|
Yup, figured it out about 5 minutes ago:
caspol -pp off -m -ag 1 -url "file://J:\Systems\Released\TimeLog.NET Beta\*" FullTrust -exclusive on -name "TimeLog.NET"
^^^ This thing's gross! ^^^
Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan
Portland, Oregon, USA
|
|
|
|
|
I'm trying (in a nutshell) to generate the following code:
using System;
namespace Foo
{
namespace Bar
{
public class Class1
{
}
}
}
My problem is that I can't find a way to add the CodeNamespace object for the Bar namespace to the CodeNamespace object for the Foo namespace. None of the collections available through the properties on CodeNamespace allow another CodeNamespace. Any ideas?
erik
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, it is not supported. Have a look at this article[^]. Unfortunately, current CodeDom implementation looks more like a fun stuff, it has too many limitations.
Вагиф Абилов
MCP (Visual C++)
Oslo, Norway
Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros.
Tomasz Sowinski
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know about this. However, what I'm really doing is generating source code and for asthetic reasons I want the 'using' statements and some banner comments outside the namespace which is used for the class, e.g.
using System;
using System.Xml;
namespace Bookstore.Model
{
public Class Author
{
The easiest way to achieve this would have been to nest the Bookstore.Model namespace into the default namespace, i.e. a namespace without a name, and add the commets and usings to that.
See what I mean?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I'm not quite sure what you mean but this defines a class called Foo.Bar.Class1 so maybe you can just have a namespace of Foo.Bar
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everybody,
I'm a beginner with C#.NET and I've a problem with a winform.
I can't undersatand why sometimes when I click the windows form close button
the event it's not handled.
I have to put a special button to close the form because the cross window
button doesn't work properly. No event.
Could you help me?
Thanks,
Carlos.
|
|
|
|
|
What would be the best way to do IPC between processes in .NET
There will be up to 200 exchanges per second required.
viva AMIGA
|
|
|
|
|
I want to run a program as a specified user. I've used
System.Diagnostics.Process.Open() befor but it hasn't any
feature to specify the user to run the process.
Please help me.
|
|
|
|
|
How do I "emit" code for the "Select Case" statement using CodeDom object? I am trying to generated code for the Select Case statement (in VB) and the Switch statement (in C#)..
Any ideas how to accomplish the above using CodeDom object?
Munish
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I was wonder how these "access" Attributes (from Method/FieldInfo/etc) work.
If the class is marked Private and Family and Public, etc the result is Private as it seems that "overrides" all other access. What are the order that they get applied in and which access methods have "precedence" over the others.
EG: (type string)
Family FamORAssem Public MemberAccessMask Virtual HideBySig for Finalize()
Private Assembly FamORAssem MemberAccessMask HideBySig for InternalGetType()
FamANDAssem Assembly Family FamORAssem Public MemberAccessMask HideBySig for GetType()
See my confusion?
Also, calling this gives me several duplicate methods:
myobject.GetType().GetMethods(
BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Static);
I have tried passing BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly as well with the same effect. Any ideas? [edit] my bad, was calling it a few times "unknowningly"  [edit]
WebBoxes - Yet another collapsable control, but it relies on a "graphics server" for dynamic pretty rounded corners, cool arrows and unlimited font support.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, so I finally installed .net and am starting to get into the whole managed extensions thing... But I'm reading this book in Barnes & Noble talking about the whole CLR and "Just-In-Time" compilation stuff and couldn't help but think about security. It's like compiled .net stuff is still source code, just a level lower than VB, C# or whatever .net language you want, but still above assembly or binary. Am I reading into this correctly? If I release a .net app, it is still in readable source and can be easily modified? Remember, I just installed VS7 yesterday, so don't flame me if I am totally off...
- Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
>Net "compiles" to IL (Intermediate Language), basically a very simple (in the RISC sense) assembly language with meta-data (dependancies, versioning,license and more). Although in this state it CAN be decompiled (even back to c# source), it cannot easily be modified if the assembly is "signed" (public/private key embedded in the assemby). Also there are "Obfuscators" available that can scramble the IL so it can't be decompiled. The IL is compiled to machine code when the assembly runs, allowing it to take advantage of any chip specific instructions, and theoretically, to run on a non-intel platform. The platform includes a viewer for the IL (ildasm.exe), which is handy if you want to compare implementations, and you can even code in IL if needed. a public domain decompiler is - Anakrino - available here[^]
It is also possible to "pre-JIT" your stuff, but you could run into probems with machine specific optimizations...
Have fun! .Net rocks
Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Graham wrote:
It is also possible to "pre-JIT" your stuff
I don't know how the other pre-JITters work (IIRC it was Salamander software that has one out). But the ngen tool that comes with .NET is machine specific, in fact the pre-JITted assemblies get placed in the GAC to curb people from trying to copy them around.
Rob Graham wrote:
Also there are "Obfuscators" available that can scramble the IL so it can't be decompiled
There are different levels of obfuscators that are on the market now, there are some like Dotfuscator Community Edition[^] which renames objects; or if you move up to their profession version will do much more. Dotfuscator Community Edition will be shipping with VS.NET 2003 (aka Everett)
Another obfuscator is Wise Owl's Demeanor[^].
After being on various .NET mailing lists[^] (hosted by DevelopMentor), I've come to respect Brent Rector's knowledge of the .NET Framework and how it works so with the two products almost evenly priced I would give Brent the advantage if I were to purchase one of them. This is just my personal opinion, others may place more value in being able to try the product out first with less features.
James
"The elastic retreat rings the close of play as the last wave uncovers
the newfangled way.
But your new shoes are worn at the heels and
your suntan does rapidly peel and
your wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick."
"Thick as a Brick" from Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
|
James T. Johnson wrote:
Rob Graham wrote:
Also there are "Obfuscators" available that can scramble the IL so it can't be decompiled
So do these obfuscators impact any efficency of the code or allow for any optimizations?
- Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Nitron wrote:
So do these obfuscators impact any efficency of the code or allow for any optimizations?
That depends on which one you use and the options you enable. I think the high versions of both obfuscators I linked to claim to provide optimizations by altering control flow.
Both of them make the resulting assembly smaller (even the free version of the one) because all identifiers get reduced to small strings.
James
"The elastic retreat rings the close of play as the last wave uncovers
the newfangled way.
But your new shoes are worn at the heels and
your suntan does rapidly peel and
your wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick."
"Thick as a Brick" from Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'd like to programatically display a dropdown menu from a toolbar. To be specific, I'm developing an Explorer bar, and I'd like to give it a menu. As far as I know, the only way to do that is to use a toolbar. So I have a couple buttons (File, Edit), and they both have dropdown menus. When a user clicks on the File button, I want it to popup the File dropdown menu, just as it might if the user clicked on the dropdown arrow.
I don't see a natural way to do it within the API yet. I tried using Show(), but the only problem is that I'd need to calculate the correct location for the dropdown menu to popup. Any better solutions?
Thanks,
Arun
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
