|
pr.WaitForExit() is waiting for cmd.exe to end, not waiting for the application.exe which is run from command line (cmd.exe). application.exe is started from cmd.exe, but runs in a seperate process.
Sheng
|
|
|
|
|
If you start cmd with the arguments /C application.exe, then the cmd process itself will run your app then exit, so you can wait on your proc (cmd) to terminate.
Open a command prompt and enter cmd /? to see other options.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't you do
proc.StartInfo.FileName = "application.exe";
...
proc.Start();
proc.WaitForExit();
int hResult = proc.ExitCode;
|
|
|
|
|
application.exe is a command-line application. It can run only in command line.
"
proc.StartInfo.FileName = "application.exe"
proc.Start()
"
will not start the program.
Sheng
|
|
|
|
|
You should be shelling application.exe, not cmd.exe, unless there's a good reason to do that (I can't think of one).
You can either use WaitForExit, if you want to wait synchronously for a short process, or you can use the Exited event to be notified when a longer process finishes. You need to set EnableRaisingEvents[^] to do it that way (but you probably already have that if you're listening for stdout).
|
|
|
|
|
I tested Peter-in-2780's answer. It works.
Sheng
|
|
|
|
|
Why are you running cmd.exe just to run application.exe. Since your code didn't start the application.exe process, you can't know when it terminates unless you enumerate running processes on the system. The best approach is to skip cmd.exe altogether, and simply run application.exe instead, and make all of the appropriate property settings in the Process object to determine when application.exe actually terminates.
".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
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that application.exe is a command-line program. It is unable to run directly by Process.StartInfo.FileName = "application.exe". It has to have command line first and then start to run from command line. Peter-in-2780's answer works. Thanks!
Sheng
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
Repository[^] pattern with Unit of Work[^] and Dependency Injection, seem to be a universaly accepted solution for ASP.NET + EF applications. There are still some minor questions that I would like to ask here.
Consider the following method from a generic IRepository interface:
public IQueryable<T> Get<T>() where T : class
{
return Set<T>();
}
I wonder, is it a good practice in reveling IQueryable interface to the callers. This means that the calling method can add filters/paggin/sorting, but at the same time the repository itself becomes not unit testable (you cant rely anymore on what the repository will actually return). The caller can even add a non-translatable predicate that will break at runtime. So, is it a good practice in hiding IQueryable interface from the caller, and defining IEnumerable interface instead?
Also, I wonder how do you perform integration tests on repositories? Do you use SQL CE4, full SQL Server, or just Fake objects on DbContext?
Appreciate your response,
With regards
modified 1-Mar-12 17:45pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I have no idea, but...
Did you forget to encode your < and > ? He's fixed it.
modified 1-Mar-12 19:34pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a program that uses WIA to take and transfer images off of my Nikon D40x. Now I want to add the ability to check battery status on the camera. But have not found a way to do it or if it is even possible. Does anyone have any advise on this?
|
|
|
|
|
Not through WIA it's not.
You'd have to get the Nikon SDK to talk to the camera. I believe you can get that from here[^].
|
|
|
|
|
There has got to be a way. I know there is cont set in WIA for battery status level. Not sure how to use them. And when I plug the camera into the computer, windows uses WIA to communicate with the camera and shows the battery status on the device window.
Have been doing Google searches for hours without any results. How do you pull the properties of the camera through WIA. Such as ISO, shutter speed, etc?
|
|
|
|
|
Icarii wrote: There has got to be a way.
Well, I suppose you don't HAVE to believe Dave...
".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
|
|
|
|
|
By the way I already have the Nikon SDK and it is horrible. Has not been update since 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, well I've used the Canon SDK and it was easier to get that kind of stuff using that than trying to figure out WIA's generic for everything way to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave, thank for your replies.
I got it to work using C# and WIA. Here is the code.
private void BatteryWIAStatus()
{
if (camera != null)
{
camera.ExecuteCommand(WIA.CommandID.wiaCommandSynchronize);
try
{
foreach (WIA.Property i in camera.Properties)
{
if (i.Name == "Battery Status")
{
string bStat = i.get_Value().ToString();
lblBattery.Text = "Battery " + bStat + "%";
}
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show(ex.Message, "Error has occurred!", MessageBoxButtons.OK, MessageBoxIcon.Error);
}
}
}
I put the Synchronize command in to update the status as it appears the battery status is cached. Still testing that part.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello All,
I want to find the query for Total Mail Box Size in Exchange Server 2007. I have implemented this earlier in Exchange Server 2003 with WMI using following Query. select Size from Exchange_Mailbox where Size >= 0. I have googled for it and saw lot of scripts, But I hope I can implement it in a single line query like this using powershell. Can someone shed some light for an easier solution?
Thanks in advance...
Regards
Sebastian
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, there is no single query. You have to enumerate through the folders of the mailbox and get the total size for each, then add them all up.
|
|
|
|
|
I have this base class:
public abstract class _ViewModelBase : ViewModelBase
{
public _ViewModelBase()
{
RegisterMessaging();
SetupViewModel();
}
protected abstract void RegisterMessaging();
protected abstract void SetupViewModel();
}
It is subclassed into
public abstract class _DataViewModelBase : _ViewModelBase
{
public _EntityBase DataEntity { get; set; }
public _DataViewModelBase(_EntityBase Entity)
: base()
{
DataEntity = Entity;
}
}
In _DataViewModelBase how do I store the DataEntity parameter value to the DataEntity field before :base is called?
Everything makes sense in someone's mind
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't make sense what you are asking. Also none of these constructors will be called anyway as the classes are both abstract.
You could change the constructors accessor to protected so the code can be executed but there is still no assurance the inheriting class will even call the constructor.
To do what you want, refactor the ViewModelBase constructor code into another protected method called say Init() and then call that method instead of base().
public _DataViewModelBase(_EntityBase Entity)
{
DataEntity = Entity;
base.Init();
}
BTW: prefixing classes with underscore is considered bad form by some developers.
"You get that on the big jobs."
|
|
|
|
|
RobCroll wrote: It doesn't make sense what you are asking. Also none of these constructors will be called anyway as the classes are both abstract.
Say what with the who now? What about derived classes calling the constructor as demonstrated in this very question?
Or, to illustate with a basic example
public abstract class MyAbstractClass
{
public MyAbstractClass()
{
}
}
public class MyConcreteClass : MyAbstractClass
{
public MyConcreteClass()
: base()
{
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, i would be asking why I wanted to do this.
I assume that the SetupViewModel method requires the DataEntity property to be set.
What, immediately becomes apparent is that you have a method, whose body is declared in the subclass, acting on data, declared in the subclass after all logic in the base class constructor has been performed .. Is it really necessary to have SetupViewModel as an abstract in the base as it is entirely specific to the subclass?
If you need to ensure setup functionality has occurred before other logic in the base class is run you could consider a protected _isInitialized boolean field alongside the abstract SetupViewModel method. Then check _isInitialized before performing logic and if it is false, call SetupViewModel (which, since the subclass constructor will have run by this point, will be able to access DataEntity )
An alternative is to consider whether all subclasses would ahve a common base for their data entity, in which case the base class could have a field of this type (or a collection of this type) and the field could be passed into the base constructor.
A further alternative is to make _ViewModelBase generic (_ViewModelBase<t> ) with a DataEntity of type T and, again, pass this to the base class
Pedis ex oris
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur
|
|
|
|
|
You can't. Very annoying it is too, in certain circumstances. (Particularly if the constructor calls some virtual methods, in which case DataEntity won't be available in those either.) In a simple case like this (where a view model wants to store a 'something') I'd make _ViewModelBase (that underscore makes me feel ill, by the way) generic and have it store the data object in its constructor.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
