.NET (Core and Framework)

Dave Kreskowiak23-Dec-05 3:57

23-Dec-05 3:57

I know it's not possible to drag and drop controls into a PictureBox in .NET. It's a frickin' PictureBox control, not a GroupBox or a Panel! If you're going to do something, use the correct control for the job, not because "it used to work in VB6".

RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

HakunaMatada23-Dec-05 17:27

23-Dec-05 17:27

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
I know it's not possible to drag and drop controls into a PictureBox in .NET. It's a frickin' PictureBox control, not a GroupBox or a Panel! If you're going to do something, use the correct control for the job, not because "it used to work in VB6".

Look sometimes situations arise wherein you wish special features existed and using the Picture Box is one of them. I wouldn't normally use a picturebox to group controls, but there are cases when you wished that it would. I guess you haven't come across one but believe me when you come across one, you would also wish the same. And I do know which controls are used for what purpose.

I was just getting an insight as to whether the PictureBox has the same functionality as it used to have in VB6. Not because I think a PictureBox is used to group controls........... Hmmm | :|

---
With best regards,
A Manchester United Fan

The Genius of a true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan!

Dave Kreskowiak26-Dec-05 6:15

26-Dec-05 6:15

Save My Soul - (SMS) wrote:
Look sometimes situations arise wherein you wish special features existed and using the Picture Box is one of them.

Not in my opinion. It's too heavy a control to be used as just a Group Box.

Save My Soul - (SMS) wrote:
I wouldn't normally use a picturebox to group controls, but there are cases when you wished that it would. I guess you haven't come across one but believe me when you come across one, you would also wish the same.

I have never and will never wish that a PitureBox control supported anything other than displaying an image, or any other control supported anything other than what it was written for.

If I need a control to support something, I either find a library that supports what I need or I write it! I never wish some other control supported what it wasn't written to do.

I've been writing code since 1976. Don't tell me "when you come acrossed ... you will". I've handled these situations hundreds of times.

RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

HakunaMatada26-Dec-05 17:20

26-Dec-05 17:20

Now this whole thing is getting outta hand. I just wanted to know if a picture box can group controls and look where this has landed me in. Dave, I am sorry if I said anything bad. I didn't mean to. And I am sure you are a great programmer. .... Smile | :)

Peace Bro... Smile | :)

---
With best regards,
A Manchester United Fan

The Genius of a true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan!

Colin Angus Mackay26-Dec-05 6:42

Colin Angus Mackay

26-Dec-05 6:42

Save My Soul - (SMS) wrote:
I wouldn't normally use a picturebox to group controls, but there are cases when you wished that it would. I guess you haven't come across one but believe me when you come across one, you would also wish the same. And I do know which controls are used for what purpose.

If I ever came across such a situation I'd create my own custom control for the purpose. A PicutreBox is designed for displaying picutres not grouping controls. If the old VB6 way allowed you to group other controls inside its PictureBox then there was a very clear violation of the OO tenant of separation of concerns, which, in my opinion, would mean that it was very badly designed.

My: Blog | Photos

"Man who stand on hill with mouth open will wait long time for roast duck to drop in." -- Confucius

HakunaMatada26-Dec-05 17:24

26-Dec-05 17:24

Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
If I ever came across such a situation I'd create my own custom control for the purpose.

I will surely keep that in mind. Thanks.. Smile | :)

---
With best regards,
A Manchester United Fan

The Genius of a true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan!

Managed RTP stack

Ray Cassick20-Dec-05 16:49

Ray Cassick

20-Dec-05 16:49

Has anyone been able to locate a managed code RTP stack?

Looking to do some VoIP work (SIP) and will need one.

... and I would rather not roll my own if I would help it.

George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
If the physicists find a universal theory describing the laws of universe, I'm sure the a**hole constant will be an integral part of that theory.

My Blog[^]

problem in creating dll

Jax_qqq20-Dec-05 16:40

Jax_qqq

20-Dec-05 16:40

create dll whose code cannot be decoded by reflector

Anuj Kamthan
Software Developer
Solversa Technologies,
Pune - 411007, India.
http://www.solversa.com

Christian Graus20-Dec-05 16:47

Christian Graus

20-Dec-05 16:47

use C++

Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++

Dave Kreskowiak21-Dec-05 2:44

21-Dec-05 2:44

Christian's right. Any of the Managed Languages, C#, VB.NET, Managed C++, ..., can all be decoded using Reflector.

RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

Robert Rohde22-Dec-05 10:11

Robert Rohde

22-Dec-05 10:11

Not 100% true. Some obfuscators generate code that Reflector just refuses to work with.
But in general every managed dll can be decompiled to IL easily (reading and understanding IL is another topic Smile | :)

Dave Kreskowiak22-Dec-05 15:14

22-Dec-05 15:14

Robert Rohde wrote:
Some obfuscators generate code that Reflector just refuses to work with.

That's why those are also to be avoided. If Reflector can't look into the assembly, neither can Reflection, which some classes in the .NET Framework absolutely rely on to work.

RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

HakunaMatada26-Dec-05 17:33

Start background job at request

26-Dec-05 17:33

From what I have read, all managed modules contain Metadata which the CLR uses to execute the managed module. It is this Metadata which keeps information about the whole Managed Module. Also , reflection uses this metadata to dig out info about the methods in a managed module or assembly. And the most important part, MetaData is not Optional. It has to be there. So, it is impossible to create an assembly in .NET which reflection cannot access. Because, if reflection cannot access the assembly's metadata, even the CLR will not be able to execute it.

Hope this helps. Smile | :)

---
With best regards,
A Manchester United Fan

The Genius of a true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan!

GoodCall20-Dec-05 8:33

20-Dec-05 8:33

Hi
I have a little problem that I need a clue on how to solve.

I have a system which hold a XMLDocument in a application variable. It's a large document, about 10-20 MB in size.

This document needs to be updated about every 5 minutes or so.

When a user request a page on the site, the system test if the XML doc needs to be updated. When it is so, then the request should somehow start the update, but not wait til it finishes, because it will stall the response time for user.

I have tried to create a new Thread, but that terminates when the request ends. So that no good.

I have tried doing response.flush, response.Close, and then update the XML document, but that gets the IE to hang never showing the request.

Please give me a new way to do it Big Grin | :-D

And a Merry Christmas to you all :->

Best regars
Brian

Daniel Turini20-Dec-05 8:54

20-Dec-05 8:54

Instead of a single large XML document, why not a bunch of small XML fragments that get recomposed at the client?

From the Churchdown Parish Magazine: "Would the Congregation please note that the bowl at the back of the Church, labelled 'For The Sick,' is for monetary donations only."

GoodCall20-Dec-05 10:10

20-Dec-05 10:10

thats not possible, because I get the XML from an extern service, and have no control over how much I can get at a time.

So I need to download the whole document at once.

It is not the clientside the XML goes to. We store it in the application, to generate lots of different pages of that XML.

the XML is a big news feed, which updates every 5 minutes. And we need to reload it, so we can generate new cached pages every 5 minutes. Smile | :)

A page request finds out that the XML doc needs an update, but uses the old one to deliver the page, while starting a an update asynchron, and returns the result asap to the user, without waiting for the XMl loading to finish.

/Brian

Dave Kreskowiak20-Dec-05 16:29

20-Dec-05 16:29

Easy. You don't rely on a page request to kick off the update process. The web site should be concerned with delivering the most recent data possible to the browser, not for checking with another service to see if it's updated.

So, write a Windows Service to get the new data and update the XML file every five minutes. Maintain two copies of the data. One will be the last updated version, "production version", of the XML file that the web site will use. The other will be the "currently being updated" version of the file. Once the update is complete, copy the file to the production version.

RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

GoodCall20-Dec-05 20:41

20-Dec-05 20:41

Hi Dave

Thank you for your answer. That sounds like the best solution to me. But again we have a limitation. We only have the posibility to run a web application, because the application it should be possible to move the application just by copying the aspx, dlls, and so to another webserver, and i should run again.

So we need a way to do it within the web application.

Best regards and merry christmas
Brian Smile | :)

Daniel Turini20-Dec-05 23:10

20-Dec-05 23:10

GoodCall wrote:
Hi DaveThank you for your answer. That sounds like the best solution to me. But again we have a limitation. We only have the posibility to run a web application, because the application it should be possible to move the application just by copying the aspx, dlls, and so to another webserver, and i should run again.So we need a way to do it within the web application.Best regards and merry christmasBrian

On your ASP.NET application, on the app start, create a timer that ticks every, e.g., 5 minutes, and does whatever you need. This way your page won't "hang" while doing its work.
Just be sure to take care of synchronization to avoid problems when a page request comes and the work is still half-done (e.g., generate a temporary file, and when it's done, rename it to its final name).

I don't see dead pixels anymore...
Yes, even I am blogging now!

GoodCall20-Dec-05 23:20

20-Dec-05 23:20

Thanks

I have just read somewhere else, that i can't besure on that the timer is called after the specified milliseconds. Because of its priority to the requests made.

I need to be sure that the XML Doc is loaded every 5 minutes precise, no mather what load the server must be experiencing.

Can I be sure of that?

/Brian

Daniel Turini21-Dec-05 0:35

21-Dec-05 0:35

GoodCall wrote:
I need to be sure that the XML Doc is loaded every 5 minutes precise, no mather what load the server must be experiencing.

What is "precise"? Will a few ms make a difference? Often, this warning is made because of multimedia applications, where a few ms would mean skipped frames and/or a poor visual experience. In your case, it seems, you can trust timers, no one would care if a timer is fired with a delay of a few ms.

From the Churchdown Parish Magazine: "Would the Congregation please note that the bowl at the back of the Church, labelled 'For The Sick,' is for monetary donations only."

GoodCall21-Dec-05 1:10

21-Dec-05 1:10

Sorry for my English Smile | :)

your right.. a few Ms will not matter at all.

I will try the timer Smile | :)

Thank you very much for your time. I wish you a merry Christmas.

/Brian

Daniel Turini21-Dec-05 1:12