|
Hi all ! I have that code below:
How can i connect the graph and IBasicVideo to NullRenderer ? I have it already working but with IVideoWindow, how to use NullRenderer instead of IVideoWindow and get the same results ?
Thanks in advance!
BTW: Sorry for my english 
private void BuildGraph(){
int hr = 0;
this.graphBuilder = (IGraphBuilder)new FilterGraph();
hr = this.graphBuilder.RenderFile(filename, null);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
this.mediaControl = (IMediaControl)this.graphBuilder;
this.mediaEventEx = (IMediaEventEx)this.graphBuilder;
this.mediaSeeking = (IMediaSeeking)this.graphBuilder;
this.mediaPosition = (IMediaPosition)this.graphBuilder;
this.videoWindow = this.graphBuilder as IVideoWindow;
this.basicVideo = this.graphBuilder as IBasicVideo;
hr = this.mediaEventEx.SetNotifyWindow(myOwnerPanelHandle.Handle, WMGraphNotify, IntPtr.Zero);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = this.videoWindow.put_Owner(myOwnerPanelHandle.Handle);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
this.videoWindow.put_AutoShow(OABool.False);
hr = this.videoWindow.put_WindowStyle(WindowStyle.Child | WindowStyle.ClipSiblings | WindowStyle.ClipChildren);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = InitVideoWindow(1, 1);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
#if DEBUG
rot = new DsROTEntry(this.graphBuilder);
#endif
hr = this.mediaControl.Run();
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = this.mediaControl.Pause();
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = mediaPosition.get_Duration(out Duration);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = basicVideo.get_VideoHeight(out pVideoHeight);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
hr = basicVideo.get_VideoWidth(out pVideoWidth);
DsError.ThrowExceptionForHR(hr);
}
|
|
|
|
|
What is not working? A null renderer just discards all the input it receives (so nothing is drawn to the screen).
|
|
|
|
|
It's drawn into ActiveMovie window how to hide this window ?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not the best person to help you with this, I'm afraid, but:
You're going to have to replace the video renderer with the null renderer.
Maybe this article can help you? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd407299(v=vs.85).aspx[^]
It implies that if you first create an instance of the null renderer, add it to the graph and then call RenderFile that the graph builder will use the null renderer instead of the default one.
Otherwise, you are going to have to examine the built graph and search for the video renderer and replace that.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you so much for your help !! It's working now !
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I've started working on a new project which uses PRISM to create all of the modules. We also use Castle as the container. My question is I want to be able to deep link between views in the same module. All the examples on the web only show how to deep link between modules I.e. implement INavigationAware, register the view with the region manager and then if the IsNavigationTarget returns true then your pretty much done.
But when I try to do this in the same module it doesn't work as the region manager wants to look in the module catalog for a specific view which obviously doesn't exist as its just a list of modules.
In my example the module is called Search which is registered in the Bootstrapper with a ModuleInfo. ModuleName is set to "Search". I then register all of the Views/ViewModels with the container in the IWindsorInstaller implementation. In my Initialize method I then register the root view and the subsequent results view (which is were I want to navigate to) with the RegionManager.
Then I think I should be set to go, only thing is I haven't set a URI anywhere for the results view unless its the view name (tried that didn't work). So I guess I need to do that somewhere but not sure were? Then once this is done I think I should be all set to go aslong as the Results view implements INavigationAware which it does but at the moment it never gets this far!
Any help/pointers appreciated!
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
So I recently began experimenting with Entity Framework. And one of the bigger specific topics I have encountered is the Repository pattern. In which case(s) is it appropriate to implement the Repository pattern? Is it generally a good practice to use it in every situation? Or are there only certain scenarios in which it will be beneficial and others in which it is a waste of time?
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
When you have an entity in your framework that needs to repose I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
All of the data I work with almost ALWAYS gets retrieved from a database and the connection is no longer needed, until data is retrieved again which is not too often. So would this benefit from a repository?
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have thought that the database was the repository, but what do I know?
|
|
|
|
|
They are useful when the data is:
- For a reading repository:
- Non volatile, i.e. they don't change very often. A cache that has to refresh every request is no use.
- Large. You still have to check whether there's been a change (usually involves adding more to the data source and a small amount of overhead), so the cached data needs to be large enough that the request for 'has it changed' isn't as much effort as just getting the data would be. Note that this generally means that you can't cache at the single entity (i.e. one row) level, as finding out if a row changed is as heavy as just returning the row, unless the row is very large and bandwidth to the database is an issue. (If you don't care if your information is out of date, you don't need to ask the DB and you can ignore this. But usually you do care.)
- For a writable repository:
- Not shared between processes, or not synchronisation-critical. There's no point having a write-back cache if you have to invalidate it immediately to synchronise the data with another process. However, if you are updating things frequently, and don't need every change to commit to the database immediately, you can save a lot of database updates.
They're also useful if database access is expensive, and your client is the only consumer (so you don't need to worry about synchronisation and changes occuring from elsewhere while you're running). In that case you can use a repository as a local cache of the database and only ever have to read any particular item once.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the explanation. If someone can comment and verify this as an acceptable and valid explanation then I will go with it. It makes plenty of sense to me. Thanks.
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a list of KeyValuePairs:
List<KeyValuePair<Guid, string>> someList;
(And it is populated with several hundred KeyValuePairs of Guids and strings.)
I want to determine if this list of KeyValuePairs contains a certain string value as part of its values. One way to do this is to loop through each KeyValuePair as follows:
bool onList = false;
foreach (KeyValuePair<Guid, string> kvp in someList)
{
if (kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue))
{
onList = true;
break;
}
}
if (onList)
{
}
However, this seems like a clunky way to perform this check. It seems to me that there must be a way to use the ‘Contains’ method of the List object or Linq to perform this check, but I can’t seem to get the semantics right.
Perhaps something like:
var someValue = someList.Where(kvp => kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue));
Any suggestions?
-NP
Never underestimate the creativity of the end-user.
|
|
|
|
|
In essence you are mirroring a Dictionary here. Why not just use that instead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ennis, Please see my comment on this thread. thanks, Bill
"Is it a fact - or have I dreamt it - that, by means of electricity, the world of matter has become a great nerve, vibrating thousands of miles in a breathless point of time? Rather, the round globe is a vast head, a brain, instinct with intelligence!" - Nathanial Hawthorne, House of the Seven Gables
|
|
|
|
|
NickPace wrote: var someValue = someList.Where(kvp => kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue)); // which doesn’t work
Not sure if it is a typo but you don't select anything in the line below
var someValue = someList.Where(kvp => kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue));
It should be something like:
var someValue = someList.Where(kvp => kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue)).Select(kvp=>kvp).FirstOrDefault();
Than you could check if it exits simply by comparing someValue.Value with string.Empty.
If not found the FirstOrDefault() method will initialize it with the default values witch is string.Empty for strings.
But there are more speedier approaches to this such as Dictionary, HashTable...
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
That works good, except I had to compare to null instead of a string because it returns a KeyValuePair object. But you got me on the right track. I guess I need to buy a good book on LINQ as I still struggle with it.
And I agree that a Dictionary or HashTable would be better, but I'm stuck with the List that is passed to my method.
Thanks again for your reply. It was very helpful.
-NP
Never underestimate the creativity of the end-user.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure I understand entirely. Why is it that you are stuck with the List?
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
Short version: The company I work for, in their infinite wisdom, decided to outsource some of our code. The 'List' comes from the Data Access Layer that they coded and is used primarily as a datasource for comboboxes. And even though I have access to their code, I am not allowed to touch it...something about licensing, intellectual property, and the infinite wisdom of my company and some other political BS which I just don't care about anymore. I could ask them to code a Dictionary or HashTable for me, but I don't feel like it. So I basically do my best to work around the crap that is sent to me (which probably sounds familiar to most coders out there).
The long version includes several pages of expletives. Use your imagination...
-NP
Never underestimate the creativity of the end-user.
|
|
|
|
|
Haha, that sheds a whole new light on the situation. I though at first that you simply were not sure how to go about using a Dictionary, in which case I could have been of help. My apologies. Good luck with those non-coding, outsourced geniuses. 
djj55: Nice but may have a permission problem
Pete O'Hanlon: He has my permission to run it.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, might be a stupid question here, but ... Why doesn't the first line work? The someList.Where returns IEnumerable<t> right? So, shouldn't someValue just be enumerable?
I'm not sure what Select is doing there either. It transforms a kvp to a kvp, so doesn't that mean the entire Select is just removable?
|
|
|
|
|
You can always use LINQ.
If you want to search by the GUID (key) make your search criteria GUID.
IEnumerable result = someList.Where(y=>y.Key.Contains(searchGUID));<br />
You can always search on the value as below.
IEnumerable result = someList.Where(y=>y.Value.Contains(searchString));
In both cases, result will contain the final search result.
Note that performance may or may not be better than using a loop.
LINQ makes it easier to write code, performance is generally better (but not always).
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
If you want a replacement for Contains(), you don't need to use Where()... Any() means "If any member of the list satisfies this condition" (Opposite would be !All())
bool onList = someList.Any(kvp => kvp.Value.Equals(someStringValue));
|
|
|
|
|
If you have to do that frequently, you should probably reengineer the whole thing.
Another way would be to define a specific class to hold the data and implement the Equals method.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
