|
With the WebClient class, it's far from simple. There's an example of how to do it here:
Multipart Form Post in C# - Brian Grinstead[^]
If you can use the HttpClient class[^] instead, things are much easier:
var client = new HttpClient();
using (var content = new MultipartFormDataContent())
{
content.Add(new StringContent("pswd"), "password");
content.Add(new StringContent("usr"), "username");
content.Add(new StreamContent(File.OpenRead("C:\\data_stats.txt"), "textfile");
using (var response = await client.PostAsync("https://www.website.com", content))
{
response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode();
string data = await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
...
}
}
Or, as Brian's blog suggests, you could use RestSharp[^] instead.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I have an application which starts with:
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
form = this;
}
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
textBox2.Text = "Initialising.....";
this.Show();
Refresh();
When I run it from within VS the form appears as expected.
When I publish the app, install it and then run I never see the form.
Changing this.Show() to Form1.Show() gives error CS0120.
Can anyone help?
|
|
|
|
|
Why on earth are you doing a Show and a Refresh in Form_Load? The form is drawn for the first time AFTER your Form_Load event handler returns. There's nothing to show yet and there's nothing to refresh!
Remove those two lines of code:
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
textBox2.Text = "Initialising.....";
}
You also spelled "Initializing" wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello All:
I'm building a C# Windows app using VS 2013. In it, we need to create invoices. These invoices have disparate data and there are comparison decisions to be made to know what data to display and what not to display.
In detail, we show the customer info in the header so that has to be part of the data set. In the body, we show a list of products with their prices, grouped by product categories using a table. So far so good. I've got two data tables in the data set, one for the "static" data in the header and one for the dynamic data in the body.
Where I'm getting hung up is the last part of the invoice where everything is totaled up. Part of the decision is that if there is a minimum fee assigned to the customer that has to be compared to the totaled fee and then whichever is greater needs to be displayed.
I'm sure the best way to do that is not in the report itself but in the data set building process. So far I'm using data tables for each "section" of the report and adding those to the data set.
My question is, is there a better way? Should I create and use an "Invoice" object instead? If so, that object would have to have a few properties of the List<dictionary<string, object="">> type. Would the report be able to interpret that?
I'm just wondering what the best way to go about this is.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
Put a "total" field in the "header" (table), and use that for summing the details (before reporting).
Copy the "old" table to a new table / datatable that has the required fields if that's what's required (using SQL or whatever).
The "total" / summary calculations from the header (table) then go in the header or "footer" of the report.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks very much for taking the time Gerry.
What I ended up doing was creating a method in my utility class that returns a dataset. Inside that method it does all of the calculations and decision making. That dataset is then used as the data source for the report. So far it works well but there is more to be done so we'll see.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm having trouble getting a textBox to accept a string from within a method.
Start with:-
private static Form1 form = null;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
form = this;
}
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
textBox2.Text = "Initialising.....";
this.Show();
Refresh();
textBox2 shows up OK. However
form.UpDateText("Checking validity of " + FileName);
and
public void UpDateText(string ThisText)
{
using (StreamWriter logfile = new StreamWriter("D:\\TeklaZipping.log", true))
{
logfile.WriteLine(ThisText);
logfile.Close();
}
Form1 frm1 = new Form1();
frm1.textBox1.Text += ThisText + System.Environment.NewLine;
frm1.Refresh();
}
runs, and writes to logfile, but doesn't update textBox1.
Any help appreciated.
ormonds
|
|
|
|
|
It is updating textBox1 in a new instance of frm1. Try something like below;
this.textBox1.Text += ThisText + System.Environment.NewLine;
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
ormonds wrote: Form1 frm1 = new Form1();
This creates a new instance of Form1 and updates the textbox on the new instance. Remove the line and change frm1.textbox1 to this.textbox1 (this is not required but will help you to identify the source of the control).
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read the daily CodeProject news, and came this article:
tps:
It is about C# finally getting multiple inheritance, kind of like C++, albeit through interfaces
I am very excited for this.
But when will this come out for say VS2017?
And I am referring to something like an official patch or update and/or maybe the next Visual Studio.
The article goes int details that this feature will only be for CoreCLR, which I've not tried yet.
Is there any news on it going to regular .NET Framework?
Also, how will custom attributes work with default interface methods?
This is something I've wanted since C#'s inception. It will greatly improve code STABILITY, re-useability and sharing, even more so than extension methods. I only wish C# would go full bore multiple inheritance so we can have multiple constructors getting launched.
But before going, I really want to just harp on my statement about STABILITY.
I can truly say that for 20+ years of C++ development, with multiple inheritance, I never ONCE even slightly encountered the "Diamond of Death". It was never an issue. C++ multiple inheritance allowed code to be re-used, over and over and over again, which meant, code got more and more tested as time progressed. that translated to better and more STABLE code.
When C# prevented multiple inheritance, and especially in the few years before entension methods, code in C# was cut/copy/pasted over and over and over again, causing old code with problems, to get cloned in their BAD-STATE, and then re-used for all time, until someone came out and hunted each and every instance of the clones down, and got rid of them. This cloning syndrome went on until extension methods came out, which was pretty much from 2001 till 2010.
But even after 2010, in my experience, there were so many people still harping about the "Diamond of Death", that they actually gimped development companies, to not allow extension methods. These ~people~ forced all development to have to cut/copy/paste code, over and over again, even if it was known to not be optimal and/or maybe even out right have BUGS.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10474771 wrote: It is about C# finally getting multiple inheritance, kind of like C++, albeit through interfaces
I am very excited for this.
No, it is not. You can already assign multiple interfaces to a class.
It is about duck-typing interfaces, and how this creates a multiple-inheritence problem.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
WHAT?? Did you really read the article or just skim it?
No, we're NOT getting the ability to inherit from multiple classes.
We're getting default implementations of interfaces so you don't have to copy the same method implementation into all of the classes that use the interface.
It DOES NOT SOLVE the "Diamond of Death" problem, but, instead, will INTRODUCE IT into interface inheritance.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy is right: it doesn't do any such thing. Read it more carefully, and you will notice this bit:
Quote: It means that a class doesn’t inherit members from the interfaces it implements
It just allows a default implementation so interfaces can be expanded without breaking the existing codebase: those default methods cannot be referenced on implementing classes unless they are either specifically implemented, or the instance is cast as the interface type.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
I know I am going to be embarassed when I see the answer, but here goes. I have a simple app which looks like this:-
namespace ThisProg
{
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
form = this;
}
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
textBox2.Text = "Initialising.....";
Refresh();
button1.Enabled= false;
}
public static void FinishOff(int ErrorLevel)
{
button1.Enabled = true;
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
}
}
I've tried enabling the button using this.button1, Form1.button1, same error. Help much appreciated.
modified 21-Feb-19 3:45am.
|
|
|
|
|
Get rid of the "static" in your FinishOff method header.
|
|
|
|
|
There are two types of "elements" that a class can have: static elements, and instance elements (where an element is a field, property, method, event, or delegate)
A static element is shared by all instances, and is accessed via the class name.
An instance element is unique to each different instance of the class and is accessed via the variable holding the instance reference.
Think about cars for a moment: all cars have a colour - but which colour it is depends on which specific car you are talking about. My car is black; your car is red; this car is green; that car is blue. Colour is an instance property of the Car class because you need to have a specific instance of a Car in order to ask the question "what colour is it?" - you can't say "what colour is a car?" because it's meaningless without saying which car you mean.
But cars have static properties as well: you can ask "how many wheels has a car?" because all cars have four wheels. (If it had two, it would be a motorbike, not a car)
And that's important, because if you want to affect a Car (start the engine for example) you have to be referring to a specific vehicle - and inside a static method you are not talking about any particular Car, you are talking about all cars, and it's just not going to work to sat "start the engine" and expect all cars engines to run.
So when you declare a static method, it can't access anything in your class that isn't also static.
You want to access a instance button, so you need to use a instance method by removing the keyword static from it;'s declaration, as Dave has said.
Does that make sense?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you both, excellent explanation. You should write a book.
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome!
ormonds wrote: You should write a book.
Who buys books any more? 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Have you not read "The Cruel C"? 
|
|
|
|
|
I am working with OpenXML SDK 2.5.
And I want to get all comment in a sheet of worksheet.
I can get text of shape, but I can not get properties of shape: position, width, height..
Please help me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am writing a little utility class, using PrincipalContext, UserPrincipal APIs that do some common Active Directory operation that we need.
I am testing with a console app at the moment.
My problem is, even though I create my PrincipalContext with admin user name and password, like this:
new PrincipalContext(ContextType.Domain, Server, Admin, Password)
My test console app only successfully works when run in Administrator mode console.
Do I really need that?
Or am I missing something?
[EDIT]
Never mind, when I run it remotely (i.e from my own machine instead of on the AD server) it works fine and doesn't require admin console.
Kinda strange....
modified 18-Feb-19 19:40pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I am trying to override the OnPaint and OnPaintBackground methods for my Application's main form. For some reason neither of the methods are being called EVER. They are completely ignored. What am I doing wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
