|
Thank you for your reply.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi ,
I started to learn LINQ but I have some questions to be clear.
1- In ADO.NET we have Connected Model and Disconnected Model ( LINQ TO DataSet ) So What is the same in Linq for Connected Model ?
2- LINQ to sql deal only with sql server and I'm try to work with other providers with LINQ to Entity but when I drag and Drop access table it said that it's not support type ?
|
|
|
|
|
This might be a really dumb question, but why didn't you post this in the LINQ forum?
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, i am doing some kind of simulation for a fuzzy logic controller, so i created the ".fis" file using MATLAB, and i want to use it in my c# project is there any way to do it.
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Check if Matlab has a managed interface, a COM interface or a DLL interop that you can use from C#. You can press Search in Google as well as the next person.
|
|
|
|
|
hi
i made C# program that open and show xml files.
how to make (on my program installation) that all *.xml files
that in my computer will opened with my program ?
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
You really want to do that?
You have to find all files on your hard drive (google the DirectoryInfo object), and then use XDocument to open them (google the XDocument object). Once you've done that, displaying them all at once could be more than your system could take.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
I think he/she means change the file association so *.xml opens with their app instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Take a look at this article[^] on msdn. The Optional Deployment Capabilities region shows you how to associate an extension with your program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So I have a program that creates a playlist on the grid, it can play the playlist and mix the songs together.
I am trying to find a library/code that will either stream or record the entire playlist and mixes to mp3
I was thinking of capturing the audio playback and recording it?
|
|
|
|
|
I am running an application after my .NET solution is built to check for uniqueness of a parameter to a common method call in my solution.
What I want that application to do is step through the code looking for the method call, then inspect 1 parameter of the method call to ensure it has a unique value from all other invocations of that method.
Ex.
class TheClassThatContainsTheMethod
{
public void TheMethod(int iSomeValue)
{
...
}
}
I want to check all the places in code that invoke TheMethod(), inspect the value of iSomeValue and determine whether or not it is unique from all other TheMethod() invocations.
Note: Literal numbers will be passed into TheMethod(), not variables. So, I will know the value at compile time.
Anyone know if this possible and, if so, a rough outline of how to pull if off in C#?
|
|
|
|
|
Since you want this to happen after the build my first thought would be create a Visual Studio extension to handle this. This would give you easy access to all of the code artifacts to search through.
You can find a good starting point here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/ff718165[^]
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
You would either need to do it on the source code itself using the C# parser or do it after the fact on the binary using reflection, etc.
In reality though, its impossible to cover all the cases. There are lots of different ways to call a method that you would be hard pressed to pick up on using either the C# parser or reflection. I.e., I can call it directly, through a delegate, through reflection, through expression trees, through a lamba expression, etc.
Your best bet to be completely fool proof is to have a check in the method itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the response.
I am curious as to how I could do this in the method iself. Can you explain this?
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm to understand, you want to do something like:
SomeMethod(5);
and then never let anybody call SomeMethod(5) again right? Only SomeMethod(4), SomeMethod(6), etc?
So you can just maintain a static list or dictionary or tree with the values that have been passed in and reject dupes.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah...that's the gist of it, with one more wrinkle; there will be intermediate calls that accept a variable for the error number.
EX:
class M
{
public void TheMethod(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber)
{
...
}
}
public class T
{
public void ErrorOccurred(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber, int iCallerID, ...)
{
M.TheMethod(sMessage, iTheUniqueErrorNumber);
...
}
public void DoSomeWork()
{
...
...
// Some error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2345, this.ThreadID, ...);
...
...
...
...
// Some other error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2346, this.ThreadID, ...);
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
You can do a Global Find using regular expressions from within Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
|
One problem I would run into is that there may be intermediate method calls of various signatures before the call is finally made to my method. If I want to go the regular expression route, I would need to know all those signatures as well, which are added, edited or removed throughout the project.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure there is an easy way to do that, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Here is one way to go about it.
You'll need to create a post-build event to call your code that inspects the assembly.
The code to inspect the assembly will first have to load up the just-built assembly. You can then get a list of all the types in that assembly (see here).
Next, you'll need to inspect the methods on each of those types:
public void InspectMethod(MethodInfo mi)
{
var body = mi.GetMethodBody();
var ilBytes = body.GetILAsByteArray();
}
The only way I can see to check calls to your method would be to manually inspect the IL. That's the part that I don't think will be easy, but it should be doable. You can read about that here: "Parsing the IL of a Method Body".
This sounds like a big pain in the rear, and I can think of very few scenarios where this would be necessary or even useful. Perhaps if you let us know what you're trying to accomplish by doing this, we could suggest another way.
Fixign now. | But who's fixing the fixign? |
|
|
|
|
|
For a one parameter method with static arguments it's pretty easy, it will be two adjacent IL calls. But I would do this on the source, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for the response.
We are supplying and error code (a unique number) to each error message in our system.
I want to create a process that ensures the numbers are unique.
|
|
|
|
|
Your question isn't clear to me; do you want uniqueness statically or dynamically?
I trust
TheMethod(1);
TheMethod(2);
is OK.
What about
for(int i=0; i<10; i++) TheMethod(3);
as this will call TheMethod ten times (unless an exception emerges).
And what about
if (someBool) {
a=a+1;
TheMethod(4);
} else {
TheMethod(4);
b=b+2;
}
as now only one of them will be executed?
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
The idea is to statically assign a unique error number to each error log in our system.
Thank you for the response,
Dale
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
