|
Once you have read all the file data you just need to write it out to the place where it is to be saved:
using (var documentReader = new StreamReader(fileContent.InputStream))
{
var readDoc = documentReader.ReadToEnd();
StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(saveasfilename);
writer.Write(readDoc);
writer.Close();
}
This is an over simplification, and could cause problems for Word document type files, as they are not text streams. A better solution would be to read and write byte arrays so the actual format of the file's content is copied verbatim.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Richard -
Yes this indeed is a Word document, which is the problem.
I get the Word document from the user via a popup modal, via the statement
HttpPostedFileBase filecontent = Request.Files[0];
it's when I try to do the save
filecontent.SaveAs(fullpath);
where it fails, as it writes out a blank document.
Could you give me an idea or example of your read and write bytes proposed solution? I'm not familiar.
Thanks, appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's not correct. There's already a concrete class in the framework which inherits from HttpPostedFileBase. It's recommended to use the HttpPostedFileBase class in MVC so that it's easier to test.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
My bad, but I couldn't see that in the documentation anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
fileContent.SaveAs should work fine. Are you reading the posted file multiple times?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I've been Googling this but I can't seem to find an answer. How can I get a list of foregin keys for a table ini SQL using C#?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
For SQL Server, select from the sys.foreign_keys view:
sys.foreign_keys (Transact-SQL) - SQL Server | Microsoft Docs[^]
SELECT name, OBJECT_NAME(referenced_object_id) As ForeignTable
FROM sys.foreign_keys
WHERE parent_object_id = OBJECT_ID('TableName')
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I want to do it using C#
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
It's no different from executing a SELECT on any other database tables.
You can use a normal SqlConnection and SqlCommand objects and execute a reader, or just use a SqlDataAdapter and just fill a DataTable.
|
|
|
|
|
True. Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks!
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
So just package that as an SqlCommand object, and use it with a DataAdapter.Fill method call to fill a DataTable.
What part of that is giving you a problem?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
True. Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Let's assume I have a simple class:
public class StringAndInt
{
public string myString;
public int myInt;
public StringAndInt(string myString, int myInt)
{
this.myString = myString;
this.myInt = myInt;
}
}If I want to create an array of this class, then the code pretty quickly becomes hard to read:
StringAndInt[] myArray = new StringAndInt[] { new StringAndInt("String", 0), new StringAndInt("String", 1), new StringAndInt("String", 2) };I think in C-programming the corresponding code is much easier to read:
StringAndInt myArray[] = {{"String", 0}, {"String", 1}, {"String", 2}};What's the most readable way I can accomplish this in C#? Please note that I need to be able to create arrays of different sizes, but in practice it would be ok to set an upper limit of 1000 elements. I could create lots of methods like below, but then I would like to be able to tell the compiler to optimize away unused methods (I'm not using reflection and I don't export the code as a dll to anybody so it would be safe to optimize away uncalled methods):
StringAndInt[] constructArray(string myString, int myInt)
{
return new StringAndInt[] { new StringAndInt(myString, myInt) };
}
StringAndInt[] constructArray(string myString0, int myInt0, string myString1, int myInt1)
{
return new StringAndInt[] { new StringAndInt(myString0, myInt0), new StringAndInt(myString1, myInt1) };
}
StringAndInt[] constructArray(string myString0, int myInt0, string myString1, int myInt1, string myString2, int myInt2)
{
return new StringAndInt[] { new StringAndInt(myString0, myInt0), new StringAndInt(myString1, myInt1), new StringAndInt(myString2, myInt2) };
}
.
.
.
StringAndInt[] myArray = constructArray("String", 0, "String", 1, "String", 2);
|
|
|
|
|
One way to do it would be to use the params keyword in a static method:
public class StringAndInt
{
public string myString;
public int myInt;
public StringAndInt(string myString, int myInt)
{
this.myString = myString;
this.myInt = myInt;
}
public static StringAndInt[] MakeArray(params object[] data)
{
if (data.Length % 1 == 1) throw new ArgumentException("Initialization data must be provided in pairs");
int elements = data.Length / 2;
StringAndInt[] arr = new StringAndInt[elements];
for (int index = 0; index < elements; index++)
{
object a1 = data[index * 2];
object a2 = data[index * 2 + 1];
if (!(a1 is string s && a2 is int i)) throw new ArgumentException($"Invalid argument pair ({a1},{a2}");
arr[i] = new StringAndInt(s, i);
}
return arr;
}
}
Then to use it is clear:
StringAndInt[] myArray = StringAndInt.MakeArray("String", 0, "String", 1, "String", 2);
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tricky with an array, but for a List<T> you can use an extension method:
public static class StringAndIntExtensions
{
public static void Add(this ICollection<StringAndInt> list, string myString, int myInt)
{
list.Add(new StringAndInt(myString, myInt));
}
} to let you write:
var myList = new List<StringAndInt>
{
{ "String", 0 },
{ "String", 1 },
{ "String", 2 }
}; The Magical Methods in C# · Cezary Piątek Blog[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Tricky with an array, but for a List<T> you can use an extension method:
Not really tricky: Couldn't you just add .ToArray() on the end?
But, I admit that I concur with the original questioner. There have been many times when I would have liked to have used exactly the same syntax as suggested in the question. There is no doubt that the current method is clunky. As was stated, even plain C has been able to do it for donkey's years. It would also be nice to have initialiser expressions in assignments and as function parameters as well as in initialisations without explicit new type at the beginning.
|
|
|
|
|
Dictionary<string, int> dic = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "AAA", 1 }, { "BBB", 2 }, { "CCC", 3 } };
KeyValuePair<string, int>[] array = dic.ToArray();
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
I'd use Tuples:
private List<(string str, int i)> TPLs = new List<(string , int)>
{
("hello", 0), ("goodbye", 1)
};
var item0 = TPLs[0];
string str = item0.str;
int igr = item0.i;
var index1 = TPLs.IndexOf(("goodbye", 1));
TPLs.Add((str: "whatever", i: 6));There is an OrderedDictionary Class that allows access by key or index: [^]
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
modified 28-Jul-20 2:35am.
|
|
|
|
|
Is there are way to covert Visual C++ 2005 project to 2016?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why have you posted a question about C++ in the C# forum? They are completely different languages.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
public class ConnectionDB
{
public OleDbConnection sql_con;
public void CONNECTER()
{
try
{
string connetionString = null;
connetionString = @"Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0;Data source=" + Application.StartupPath + @"\DB_CaisseEnregistreuse.mdb;Persist Security Info=True;Jet OLEDB:Database Password=B@sta08091987";
sql_con = new OleDbConnection(connetionString);
sql_con.Open();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Erreur de connexion à la base donnée" + ex.ToString());
}
}
public void DECONNECTER()
{
try
{
if (sql_con.State == ConnectionState.Open)
{
sql_con.Close();
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Erreur de deconnexion à la base donnée" + ex.ToString());
}
}
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
ConnectionDB d = new ConnectionDB();
using (OleDbCommand cmbox = d.sql_con.CreateCommand())
{
cmbox.CommandText = "SELECT Code_article FROM Catalogue";
d.sql_con.Open();
d.DR = cmbox.ExecuteReader();
try
{
while (d.DR.Read())
{
CmbRef_Produit.Items.Add(d.DR["Code_article"]).ToString();
}
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(CmbRef_Produit.Text ))
{
Lbl_affich_TxtQteStock.Text = "";
Lbl_Affich_Designation.Text = "";
Lbl_Affich_PrixUnitaire.Text = "";
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show(ex.ToString());
d.sql_con.Close();
}
}
}
}
Quote: I created a ConnectionDB class and 2 CONNECT and DISCONNECT methods.
I needed to open the database so I called the CONNECT method but I have an error telling me that my database is still closed so I change to sql-con.open and it works.
So my question is: Why and what is the difference.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
