|
Nothing like picking up a book on VB.Net and learning using examples in that book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good one  Take my 5
Maulik Dusara
Sr. Sofware Engineer
I love it when a plan comes together
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should post the same general post about two days apart. Follow the suggestions from the other posters with the books, as the books suggested are really good. There are plenty of quality articles on this site that can help out. I will leave that as a learning exercise for you to find them. Start off with simple applications, exploring and learning what you are trying to achieve, one step at a time, and work your way up. Good luck, and people will try their best to answer any questions you might have with your application, design, etc.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
|
i dont know how to use vb.net very well especially the coding aspect. and i need to build a window application for collecting data from user and retrieving from the database. i don't know the database to use either sql or Access. i need the coding procedures for building an window application and the way to connect it to the database. thanks
|
|
|
|
|
You could start here 3-tier architecture in C#[^] it's in C# but the concepts should be very much the same.
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Individuality is fine, as long as we do it together - F. Burns
|
|
|
|
|
If I were you, I'd seriously consider using something like Lightswitch[^] to ease the burden of developing your application.
|
|
|
|
|
There are quite a few ways to achieve your goal, which includes the use of ODBC (Which other people still consider, My advice stay away), have a look at ADO EF Tutorial
|
|
|
|
|
similar question as above.
please read thatraja's answer[^]
Maulik Dusara
Sr. Sofware Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just bringing this idea up to see if it might hold any merit to developers or just plain crazy. I've realized for a long time now that no matter how many CPU's you have you are still limited by the Software developers incorporating multi-threading for whatever number of cores.
My Question is. What if we were to have the OS, which already knows how many Cores are present distribute the operating processes on different clock cycles to the multiple cores in a serial type effect. Everyone know data is streamed to the processor serially every clock cycle. if the OS were to know the number of CPU's and integrate a method of switching between them distributing data to each one every clock cycle, it seems to me the more cores you had the faster the information could be processed no matter whether the programs were written to optimize multi-core or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Alisaunder wrote: plain crazy
it is.
each thread executing on a core has state (in the CPU registers, in the stack, etc), instructions from one thread have to remain on the same core to work with that state; switching a thread to another core is a rather expensive kernel operation, one would typically like to avoid (that is what "thread affinity" is about).
Furthermore cores have caches to vastly improve performance; and these caches most often are local to the core, so having the data in one core's cache isn't going to help the thread when executing on a different core.
And finally, CPU performance isn't the only bottleneck, there are other limitations, such as memory bandwidth, and disk and network performance. Therefore, adding a few threads to an app may be good, adding a large number generally is counterproductive.
In all a very bad idea.
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Fed up by FireFox memory leaks I switched to Opera and now CP doesn't perform its paste magic, so links will not be offered. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
ok I'm not a CPU engineer so I just have a basic understanding of their functionality, but aren't we seeing similar functionality being used on Video cards using SLI to distribute screen information between 2,3 and 4 videocards tied together. Instead of CPU's they are GPU's which are basically the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
By the way this is a hypothetical discussion I wasn't referring to current threading technology I was referring to a new way of trying to implement and utilize the extra cores inside a processor using the OS sort of like SLI does with a device driver and GPU's.
|
|
|
|
|
in a GPU things are quite different: it is dealing with streaming data, performing "simple" operations on a sequence of pixels, without much state involved, with tailored memory ports, and highly predictable. More cores means a smaller screen area per core, hence faster. Video processing is inherently a candidate for parallel processing; your average web browser, spreadsheet, whatever, isn't.
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Fed up by FireFox memory leaks I switched to Opera and now CP doesn't perform its paste magic, so links will not be offered. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
.Net 3.5 / VB 2008...
I'm using a ListView in Details view with 2 columns and FullRowSelect. Image in the left column and text in the right. When I select an item, the right column behaves as expected (blue bkgnd and white text). But the image in the left column becomes invisible and the background is white.
How does one correct this? I'm probably missing something obvious but I've yet to find a solution.
XAlan Burkhart
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I may go back and try to figure this out but for now I've switched to a DataGridView. At least the images stay put when I click a row. But I'd still appreciate it if anyone knows why the ListView might behave so oddly.
XAlan Burkhart
|
|
|
|
|
I believe there is a SelectedImage property in the ListViewItem class that will do the trick. Just straight out of head, didn't try though.
|
|
|
|
|
I tried asking about this annoyance on some more user-oriented forums but did not get any good responses, so maybe you software developers can field it. (I am an retired VAX/VMS programmer BTW.)
I want to know why, in Windows 7, when an application exits, application focus always reverts to the desktop instead of the most recently visited and still open app?
I am a recent convert from Windows 2000, which didn't have this problem. When did this focus policy change? XP? Vista?
In Windows 7, an app can dominate the screen --completely maximized, and yet the desktop has the focus. How is this EVER useful? It is blatantly counter-intuitive.
The only time I want the desktop to have focus is when all apps are minimized or there are no apps running. Is there a way to tweak this behavior (with something like the old TweakUI) to the way I want, or do I have to do it the hard way and write an event monitoring utility? Or maybe some third party has already adressed this?
|
|
|
|
|
After some more investigation I've found that only legacy apps make the desktop behave this way. For instance if I try this with AutoCAD 2000 or EMACS, both of which I use all the time, my complaint stands. If I try it with say, Notepad and a command prompt they behave OK. So what is at the bottom of this?
|
|
|
|
|
my mdicontainer controls and child controls overlap.............tried the opacity property with no use
Any help is appreciated
|
|
|
|
|
Without a lot more detail I don't think anyone can guess what your code is doing.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
i have a mdicontainer on which there are some controls ...i also have a child form with some controls...when i run the app and open my mdicontainer and child form.....the controls of both overlap... I am able to move the child form freely but as soon as it reaches the mdicontainer form control both overlap..its like the child form becomes transparent and i can see the mdicontainer controls even though the child form is covering it
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
