|
hello people,
forgive me for my ignorance but I am not able to get the right words to describe this thing being done on the messages in codeproject.com:
We see the Subject (as a hyperlink). When we click on it we remain on the same page but the text / comments opens up allowing the reader to view.
Please let me know what do we call this? Also I would really appreciate it if you'all could cite any good articles on this.
Regards,
Tiruvan
|
|
|
|
|
Its javaScript. In IE select View-->Source and search for "DynMessLink" You'll notice that the anchor elements for the posts have this id.
--Colin Mackay--
EuroCPian Spring 2004 Get Together[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar
|
|
|
|
|
Colin,
Thank you for responding. But can you be a little more specific. I do see the DynMessLink but what does it mean and is it the same in .NET as it is in ASP (since this site was built on ASP)
Regards,
Tiruvan
|
|
|
|
|
Tiruvan wrote:
is it the same in .NET as it is in ASP
It is in javaScript not ASP nor .NET. You could use it on any HTML page regardless of the server engine.
--Colin Mackay--
EuroCPian Spring 2004 Get Together[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar
|
|
|
|
|
Is "DynMessLink" the same as:
http://javascript.internet.com/bgeffects/write-layer.html
http://javascript.internet.com/page-details/division-control.html
Regards,
Tiruvan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link.
Is it really tough to create something like it?
Is known as the collapsible panel?
Regards,
Tiruvan
|
|
|
|
|
I found a good article on the same subject:
http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/ExpandingDiv.asp?target=collapsible
Regards,
Tiruvan
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have just converted a Console application to a class library. When I tested it out, it does not seem to find the configuration I have specified in the App.Config. It reads the configuration file fine when it is an console app.
How do I specify the configuration file that goes with the class library?
Thanks.
Sue
|
|
|
|
|
A configuration file is associated with an application by the loader. For applications executed from the shell, the app loader creates an unmanaged _AppDomain which creates an AppDomain , set the AppDomain.SetupInformation.ConfigurationFile to the path of the application file plus ".config", and executes the entry point. The .config file must therefore be named "MyApp.exe.config" and be in the application path. For a smart client, the same rules apply or the IEExec.exe application will also read the <link ref="configuration" href="path/to.config"> in your HTML document's header. There is nothing like this documented for a CCW (COM-Callable Wrapper) but last time I tried creating a .config file for the application that uses your COM object using the naming convention discussed above (even though the application used java.exe) the CCW was able to read it (the AppDomain setup by mscoree.dll in which, by default, your CCW is hosted) apparently uses the executable name still).
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Heath,
I guess I do not understand which name it is looking for...
I have a class library, xyz.dll, which I export a class MyNamespace.MySubNamespace.xyz via System.Runtime.InteropServices. What configuration filename will mscoree.dll look for? xyz.dll.config or xyz.config or MyNamespace.MySubnamespace.xyz.config.
I think I have tried them all.. it does not seem to work.
Can I setup something in mscoree.dll?
Thanks.
Sue
|
|
|
|
|
You have to name the .config file according to the executable (.exe) naming convention for whatever application instantiates your control. For instance, lets say you want to test you control in the ActiveX Control Test Container (tstcon32.exe). You would put a txtcon32.exe.config file in the same directory as txtcon32.exe. Last time I tried this (some time back) it worked. Give it a try now. The ActiveX Control Test Container would be a good test without having to write a new COM client, too.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
Great! Thanks! It works. Yes, as soon as I rename the config as the COM client as the prefix, the config file is read.
Best regards,
Sue
|
|
|
|
|
Hello All,
I am trying to use remoting to allow a client access to an object that has already been instantiated on a remote server. My thought was that I could create an object that would be offered up by remoting to clients which would have a reference to this already instantiated object, that way clients would be able to get at this variable which contains state information about the program running server-side. However, after reading about remoting from several different sources I am unable to figure out how to actually pass this reference to an existing object into the object that will be offered to the client over remoting.
If anyone can provide me any insight into this subject, I would be greately appreciative.
Thanks,
- Brian
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest you to go to www.ingorammer.com[^].
To publish an specific instance of an object via Remoting, you need to add something like this on your server application...
Remoting.RemotingServices.Marshal(yourObject,"YourObject.rem);
The config file on the server will have something like...
On the Client...
YourObject vobject = (YourObject )Activator.GetObject(GetType(YourObject),"tcp://server:5020/YourObject.rem")
Also you need to load Remoting configuration for both applications...
Free your mind...
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
There is what I want to do. I worked on the problem since 6 hours but I had a problem (probably stupid) and I dont know how to resolve it.
I need to have an Mouse Event Click when I click on the frame of a window form ( like the title bar of a window).
If I handle the mousee events with my window's forme instance, i only can handle it on the ClientSize area.
After, I tryed to handle the messages with WndProc and DefWndProc. The problem is that this is the same messages.
What I what, it's only be notified when I click on the title bar of my my application's window. The problem is how to handle this with C# becose in old Win32 this is not a problem.
Any hints?
Tahnk for you help!
Salutations,
|
|
|
|
|
The window frame is not part of the form and has to be handled differently. In the case of the frame for you main form, you can use an IMessageFilter implementation to get notification of a click:
using System;
using System.Windows.Forms;
public class Test : Form, IMessageFilter
{
public static void Main()
{
Test t = new Test();
Application.AddMessageFilter(t);
Application.Run(t);
Application.RemoveMessageFilter(t);
}
public Test()
{
this.Text = "Test";
}
bool IMessageFilter.PreFilterMessage(ref Message m)
{
if (m.Msg == WM_NCLBUTTONDOWN)
MessageBox.Show("You clicked the Window frame");
return false;
}
private const int WM_NCLBUTTONDOWN = 0x00a1;
} See documentation for the WM_NC* messages for more information about non-client notification messages that you can handle in an IMessageFilter implementation.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
I'm curious as to what kind of market penetration C# has achieved in the freeware/shareware/hobby-ware application segment. It seems that virtually everything that you see on sites like Download.com are still written in Visual C++ or VB. Am I wrong about that, or has C# been embraced by developers and users of this classification of applications and utilities?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not too surprised, honestly. I see the same thing. The main reason, I believe (based on feedback and community involvement), is that .NET application require the 20+ MB runtime to be installed in order to run (and sometimes even install if Installer derivatives are used as Custom Actions in an MSI). For free/shareware, this is too much of a burden on would-be users (after all, why download crap...er, helpful utilities when it requires such a heft download or such large prereq's).
Another reason - though this is greatly generalized and is not even based on a stereotype - is that some free/shareware developers aren't what you'd call "up-to-date" and can't find tech jobs, so they use what (little) they know. I might get flamed for this (and remember to those who are considering flaming me that I said some), but after looking at betanews.com every once in a while I see a lot of examples that support what I said (butdon't get me wrong, there are a lot of good programs posted there, including some from Microsoft and other large companies).
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
Has CP done any polls on how many CP'rs are using C# on actual projects that are intended to go to market?
It would be nice to get an idea on how many projects, large cos, one-man shops, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Suggest[^] it!
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
There are a few examples of that around (SharpReader is a good example of a non-programming-oriented program), but it is true that the size and hassle of downloading the CLR makes it less convenient for the end user. And there is inertia, both in programmers and in their existing code.
On the other hand, it's generally much easier to write a windows program in C# than it was in C++.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Gunnerson (msft) wrote:
On the other hand, it's generally much easier to write a windows program in C# than it was in C++.
Yeah, that's why I'm surprised more people haven't flocked to C# as the language of choice for hobby-development. I'd guess that given the number of people with broadband these days, most people probably have the CLR installed, don't they?
|
|
|
|
|
I think one thing that is increasing the inertia of ".NET" is that it is becoming more and more of a buzzword for program managers on up in larger corporations that want to move in this "new" direction. My CEO decided on it even before he knew exactly what it was (good thing he hired me to architect it since I had about a year of experience starting with the 1.0 betas). Of course, this is extreme (and extremely stupid) but I see it happening more and more.
We do, as you can easily tell, have a .NET application and bootstrapping the CLR has been a problem, especially since the bootstrapper that Wise uses for the MSI product doesn't force the selected runtime (if a newer one is installed, it doesn't bootstrap the .NET installer). When I get time (someday it won't be hard writing a new one, but we have had complaints from people trying our software out that the .NET runtime is just too much of a hastle. This is an Internet-deployed smart client, so they have to take the time to download and cache (ala Fusion) our application as well.
I do forsee this picking up when Longhorn reaches fruition, but wide-spread adoption of that I'm sure will take time (especially since it requires a much beefier machine).
So long as people keep up-to-date with Windows Update (and I know that has been a problem Microsoft has been trying to address and push...and I agree they should), they should have it. Perhaps when more free/shareware developers take note of this they will reconsider.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
Allot of the programs on those sites is made for more than
Windows. I hardly think saying that these people are not
smart enough to figure out yet another new language is
what people need to be doing? Just because someone wants
to use a language that is not proprietary and make there
programs portable does not mean that they know very little.
I think that people need to consider the source when reading
things like this. Most of the time it comes from people that
doesn’t even have a job and if they do it is not much of one
considering that he spends all day every day answering peoples
questions in this forum. Always bad mouthing people, calling
those people names and saying that they are dumb because they don’t
jump on Microsoft's next big thing, forget about the fact that
they have all this old code that has been written and tested.
They call them dumb and out of date in one line and in the next
say that not all are like that. Please give me a break.
Wouldn't it be better to say that .Net is new and as with
anything new, if it's good enough then it will catch on.
I done that and didn't call anyone a name or insult there
Intelligence, wow that was real hard.
Thank You
Bo Hunter
|
|
|
|