|
Yep, I've hard coded the user name and the password and made sure that the user has all needed permissions.
|
|
|
|
|
Environment:
Windows XP, SP2
Crystal Report 11 R2
Excel 2007
Problem:
I have added an excel file(.xls) in crystal report as an OLE object. This excel file contains tables as well as chart. In the Crystal report designer this excel file don't show the chart and only display the table of excel file.
is there any work around or patch available to fix this ?
Thank you for the help and support..
|
|
|
|
|
I've never known Crystal to be able to show a chart in the way you are trying to display it. If you have the data that created the chart, could you create a subreport and recreate the chart using Crystal's chart tools?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
This may be kind of a strange question, but I'd like to know what the so-called "UtilityLibrary" is and how to get hold of it. Even though Google seems to know nothing about the library, people are using it (here, here, or here).
Can anybody tell me what's the secret behind this library? Who created it? Can I download it somewhere? What does it include? Any tips would be greatly appreciated...
Thanks
berntie
|
|
|
|
|
IMO UtilityLibrary is just a name.
The CP article you linked to has a download link, the zip contains all that is needed to build that particular UtilityLibrary.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Show formatted code inside PRE tags, and give clear symptoms when describing a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I didn't look into the ZIP file. I thought this "Wizard Control" thing used the library, but obviously it is. Didn't get that from the introduction. Probably my fault...
Sorry and thanks for your help; I'll have a look at it.
|
|
|
|
|
why we need recursion, only for calling method repeatedly ? well there is a factorial problem , we can get the factorial of any number by any loop,so why we need recursion? please don't give formal reason.
what is multiple recursion? any example
|
|
|
|
|
waqarnaeem2@hotmail.com wrote: why we need recursion
We need recursion for the things it kills to grow in... sorry, I went all Ah Pook for a minute there 
We need recursion because some things are just too messy to do with iteration. Most common recursive algorithms can easily be converted to iterative versions, but will need extra state tracking, like stacks, and then become more complex to write, read and debug.
Recursion might have a slight performance penalty in some cases, but the clarity of code usually outweighs that.
As the dictionary says Recursion : see Recursion 
There are three kinds of people in the world - those who can count and those who can't...
|
|
|
|
|
I have wrote a program to get the file system with folders and files up to leaf nodes without using recursion. If you are interested you can send a mail to kanagarajmk@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
waqarnaeem2@hotmail.com wrote: please don't give formal reason.
What?
Man who stand on hill with mouth open wait long time for roast duck to drop in
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
we need recursion to model things that are inherently recursive, such as a hierarchical file system, where each folder (including the root) can contain files and folders.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Show formatted code inside PRE tags, and give clear symptoms when describing a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Any recursive algorithm can be implemented using non-recursive code if one maintains one's own stack to hold intermediate results. In many cases, however, recursive code can be more efficient and readable. For example, if one has a tree structure which represents an expression (each either holds a value, or else an operation and up to two operands which will yield a value) one may very easily define something like (ignoring the constructor and various other things):
Class Plus
Inherits OpNode
Dim LeftOp, RightOp as OpNode
Function Eval as Double
Return LeftOp.Eval + RightOp.Eval
End Function
End Class
While there would be ways to handle such things non-recursively, they would be decidedly awkward. Recursion allows things to be handled very smoothly. If one would be worried about stack overflow, one could do something like:
Class Plus
Inherits OpNode
Dim LeftOp, RightOp as OpNode
Function Eval(MaxDepth as Integer) as Double
If MaxDepth < 0 then Throw New WhateverException("Expression too complicated")
Return LeftOp.Eval(MaxDepth-1) + RightOp.Eval(MaxDepth-1)
End Function
End Class
Still much nicer than maintaining a "to-do list" manually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a number of problems where a recursive algorithm is both simpler and faster than an loop.
For example QuickSort[^]
is one of the fastest sorting algorithm that have been found and it is using recursion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Hanoi[^] is another example where recursion is really paying.
There are many more situation where recursion is needed.
It makes sense each time you can solve a problem by applying the same methods on its bits.
One of the typical example is a function that copy a folder somewhere else.
If you were to program it without recursion you would have to write:
function copyfolder(folder)
for each file in folder
copy file
next
for each subfolder in folder
for each file in subfolder
copy file
next
for each subsubfolder in subfolder
for each file in subsubfolder
copy file
next
... what if there is some subsubsubfolders?
next
next
end function
Using a recursive algorithm you would have less code
function copyfolder(folder)
for each file in folder
copy file
next
for each subfolder in folder
copyfolder(subfolder) ... this line is where the recursion happen
next
end function
Signature
Seen in CodeProject forums :
Is it a sort of male dominance thing? You know, who can be the most witty? Who considers themselves the clown at the party?
Is it a follow the leader thing? One can't be seen not to have an elaborate signature, it's just no right, after all, all the other people have one.
(Is that long enough?)
|
|
|
|
|
What are the tools of black box testing & white box testing,,?/plz names
|
|
|
|
|
Are these your homework questions by any chance? Stop being so lazy and go do some research yourself. Google and Wikipeida will answer all of these for you.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
waqarnaeem2@hotmail.com wrote: What are the tools of black box testing & white box testing
A French nuclear submarine and the Brazilian Navy.
Man who stand on hill with mouth open wait long time for roast duck to drop in
|
|
|
|
|
waqarnaeem2@hotmail.com wrote: tools of black box testing & white box testing
Look for a natural blonde, as opposed to a bleached blonde.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
There isn't a de facto app for testing. You can use ANY product that records keystrokes/mouse-events and plays them back for blackbox-testing. For white-box testing, I'd recommend the Visual Studio debugger.
You might want to dive into TDD[^].
I are troll
|
|
|
|
|
why Interface supports multiple inheritance ? & why abstract class don't?what is the reason?
|
|
|
|
|
It was a decision taken in the original design on C#. Multiple inheritance is deemed to complex, without enough benefits.
Inheritance is often described as an "is-a" relationship. I.e. a Car is-a vehicle so the car class inherits from vehicle. Usually, when people try and do things with multiple inheritance, what they are doing is forming a "has-a" relationship, which would be better represented as a class that contains the other class, rather than inherits from it. There aren't many cases where you have an object that is two separate types of sub objects. A Car is-a vehicle and a car also is-a ManMadeItem, but this forms a hierarchy (Car->Vehicle-ManMadeItem) so multiple inheritance isn't needed. If you look at your design, I think you'll find in almost all cases where you have multiple inheritance you can either change it to a hierarchy or a composition instead.
Even in languages that support it, it is general discouraged.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_inheritance#Criticisms[^].
There's an article here[^] about a possible way to achieve it in C#, but I don't recommend it for anything beyond academic interest.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
Simon Stevens wrote: A Car is-a vehicle and a car also is-a ManMadeItem, but this forms a hierarchy (Car->Vehicle-ManMadeItem) so multiple inheritance isn't needed
I don't think I'd regard that as a hierarchy, because a horse could also be regarded as a Vehicle even though it is not a ManMadeItem.
I think the simplest way to look at the issues of inheritance versus interface is that an inherited base class can supply default fields and methods which are then usable by child classes; an interface not only does not provide default storage for fields and code for methods, but it can't even bind them by default. If an object inherited from Class1 and Class2, both of which provided a Smile method, it would be unclear whether TheObject.Smile was supposed invoke Class1.Smile or Class2.Smile. With interfaces, however, there is no problem. TheObject must have an "implements" line for every interface method it supports, indicating what method should be used for Interface1.Smile and which one should be used for Interface2.Smile. Further, to actually use either of those methods on an object, the object must first be cast to Interface1 or Interface2. Thus, there is no ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
|
Because interface doesn't contain any definitions to any declarations but abstract class does.
|
|
|
|
|
waqarnaeem2@hotmail.com wrote: why Interface supports multiple inheritance ?
It doesn't. Interfaces define an implementation contract. You don't inherit anything from an interface, it just forces you to implement the interface.
Man who stand on hill with mouth open wait long time for roast duck to drop in
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm really hoping for an easy answer to this issue. I have a client device that uses a hardwired connection to communicate with its server if it is in a docking station. If lifted from the docking station the hardwired connection is disabled and it switches to its wireless connection. This is where remoting stops working on the serverside.
The client device has 2 network cards with different IPs, one for the hardwired connection and one for the wireless connection. When switching to wireless/hardwired the client is still able to send messages to the server, but apparently the server is still trying to reach the client on the connection it initially used so the return messages fail.
How is this fixed? Where is this fixed? I've tried to call RemotingServices.Configure again but it seems you can only call that once. Unregistering and re-Registering channels doesn't seem to work either. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated! Solutions even more!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
