|
Wow! It works! Thank you very much! The name looks odd. What does the number mean? Will MS change it?
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I'm aware, it refers to "Windows 32-bit on Windows 64-bit". The name hasn't changed since 64-bit support was added to Windows, and is unlikely to change in the future.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WoW64[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I have a table with a status column
The data is inserted with the status "treaty" and inserted again the status input,
I would make sure that the number of treated equals the number of input and forbid the insertion if the number exceeds the treaty.
Thank you in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
Your question is not very clear, but it suggests that you should select all the records with each status and get the counts. Then compare the counts and insert or not as you need.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I need to send mail (not receive) from my application running on Windows Embedded Compact 7 (Compact Framework 3.5).
After a lot of googling and some test with EaSendMail, mailcf, cslmail... I found OpenNETCF that looks very promising but I'm not able to use it...
I can use other component of OpenNETCF but not the one I need: OpenNETCF.Net.Mail.
Simply my application doesn't compile when I add to the project a reference to OpenNETCF.Net.Mail.dll.
To get this problem it is enough to create a new SmartDevice project (VS2008, VB.NET, CF3.5) and in the property of the project to add a reference to OpenNETCF.Net.Mail.dll: the project doesn't compile any more. I just get a warning about a version conflict and no error:
Consider app.config remapping of assembly "System, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=969db8053d3322ac, Retargetable=Yes" from Version "2.0.0.0" [] to Version "3.5.0.0" [C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft.NET\SDK\CompactFramework\v3.5\WindowsCE\System.dll] to solve conflict and get rid of warning.<br />
C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\Microsoft.Common.targets : warning MSB3247: Found conflicts between different versions of the same dependent assembly.
Searching info about that warning I found that it is "safe" to ignore it because the OpenNETCF version that I'm using (2.3.12004.0) is compatible with CF3.5.
If I remove the reference to OpenNETCF.Net.Mail.dll and I add a reference to OpenNETCF.Windows.Forms.dll I get 5 warnings about remapping but the project compiles.
I have already posted this question in another forum without getting any answer, I hope here someone could help me.
Any suggestion is appreciated, also about other free component to send mail.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
it seems that this topic is not very interesting but I've found the solution and I want to share it.
I contacted OpenNETCF support and Chris Tacke answered very kindly.
The solution is to remove from project references System.Xml.Linq that for some reason sometimes generates this kind of problem in VB.NET CF 3.5 projects.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
my application is a SmartDevice application and it runs on a device with Windows Embedded Compact 7 OS, so it relies on Compact Framwork 3.5.
Here is my problem (simplified): I have two forms, in the first form there is a Textbox and when it gets focus the second form pops up (I use form2.ShowDialog()).
The second form is a little numeric keypad that I use to write numbers in the textbox of the first form. This second form has also an OK button that close the form.
Is there a way to rise the TextChanged event of the textbox in the first form from the click event of the OK button in the second form (the OK button click doesn't write anything in the textbox)?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
No, because the OK button Click code should not know ANYTHING about the form that created and showed it.
Since you're using ShowDialog in the parent form, you could just call the method that does whatever you have in the TextChanged event handler.
You DID move your TextChanged event code to a seperate method, correct? Don't put your work code in the event handler. Put it in its own seperate method and call that from the TextChanged event handler code. That way you can call it fdrom anywhere else you need to in your code without having to worry about how you're needlessly going to trigger events.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Dave,
you have answered my question: I can't do what I wanted to do...
I have not moved my TextChanged event code to a seperate method, but I have an alibi!
In my application there are many textbox in different pages (UserControls) that call the same numeric keypad, so in the code in the keypad there is no reference to a specific method.
The keypad just knows which textbox is the caller and it writes in it.
It works but I wanted to improve it because the TextChanged event is raised anytime I write a digit from the keypad and not when I close the keypad clicking the OK button.
I wanted to do the opposite.
I can avoid the TextChanged event with a flag but to rise it by the OK button I have to use also this button to write something, for example I could write and delete a space.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
steve_9496613 wrote: I have not moved my TextChanged event code to a seperate method, but I have an alibi!
No you don't. It doesn't matter at all what the situation is. Moving the code to a separate method is always better than leaving it the event handler method. The sole exception being events that expect a return value in the form of a modified event argument, such as FormClosing.
If the keypad knows which control it's "typing" in that's OK and even useful in this case. The keypad doesn't necessarily need its own TextBox to type into, but does need some way of display the entered text without showing it in the target textbox. When OK is hit, the control then copies the text into the target TextBox thereby raising the TextChanged event in the target control only once.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: No you don't. It doesn't matter at all what the situation is. Moving the code to a separate method is always better than leaving it the event handler method. The sole exception being events that expect a return value in the form of a modified event argument, such as FormClosing.
...you make me feel guilty...! 
I will keep in mind this rule but, please, can you explain me why it is always better?
In my specific situation the code in the event handler is executed only when the event raises, I mean I don't need to execute that code in any other place (and I think this is a common situation). I could create a new method, cut the code in the event handler and past it in the method and then call the method in the event handler but what is the benefit?
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: The keypad doesn't necessarily need its own TextBox to type into, but does need some way of display the entered text without showing it in the target textbox. When OK is hit, the control then copies the text into the target TextBox thereby raising the TextChanged event in the target control only once.
You are right, this could be a good idea.
I use this approach in a full alphanumeric keyboard that is too big to let the user see the field in witch he is typing but I had not thought of adopting this method for the numeric keypad.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
steve_9496613 wrote: what is the benefit?
The benefit is code reuse. Both in this project and in future ones. It's far easier to just call a method passing in the data it needs instead of trying to figure out how to call it, with the data it needs, and you have to bundle that into the two parameters that an event handler needs, sender and eventargs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
mmm I think you can do what you need if:
TextBoxOnFocus()
{
if (NumericPadDialog.ShowDialog() == Response.OK)
{
TextBoxOnOK();
}
}
and in your NumericPadDialog you must make the OK button work as close (or hide) and return the Response.OK, probably this button already does the exit or hide, you just need to add the Response, just notice how to play with dialog Modal mode. Well that is the idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply.
I use the TextBox OnFocus event to call a function that sets some variables used by the NumericPad to know who is the caller and then shows the NumericPad.
This function is used by all the textbox in the application so it has no reference with the specific code executed in the TextChanged event of each textbox (that is different one from the other).
For this reason I think that your solution is not suitable to my problem but thank you anyway for your efforts.
|
|
|
|
|
Cool, I see...
Then I think you must use a Delegate, then in your onFocus you assign the current delegate to the action of you textBox OK, and in the OK event of the NumericPad you call the delegate... of course in your delegate method you will need to handle the release of the Delegate after a click (be sure to release it, you don't want to have a different textbox to trigger the OK of another textbox)
At this moment can not give you a code snipe, will try later...
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you.
I'm not sure I understood well what you mean.
I try to explain in more detail what I do.
In a form, call it FormA, I have four TextBox and in the Load event of the form I assign a delegate to the GotFocus event of the TextBoxes:
AddHandler (AutoIncTB.GotFocus), AddressOf FormMain.TB_GotFocus_1_MAX_RIP
AddHandler (RipTB.GotFocus), AddressOf FormMain.TB_GotFocus_1_MAX_RIP
AddHandler (DuratFinaleHTB.GotFocus), AddressOf FormMain.TB_GotFocus_0_23
AddHandler (DuratFinaleMTB.GotFocus), AddressOf FormMain.TB_GotFocus_0_59
In FormMain there are some functions TB_GotFocus_XXXX that assign different values to some variables and then show the NumericPad.
Public Sub TB_GotFocus_0_23(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs)
CGlobali.ValoreCambiato = False
Ctrl(0) = sender
Ctrl(1) = 0
Ctrl(2) = 23
PhBt.Focus()
Tastiera.ShowDialog()
End Sub
The NumericPad "reads" the variables and understands what is the TextBox from which it was called and other things.
Using the NumericPad I can write in the TextBox.
Each TextBox has its own TextChanged event that is fired any time I write a digit, not when I push the OK button unless I write something also with the OK button (and this is what I do in this moment... but I could also use a flag... mmmm....).
You talk about textbox OK, did you mean the TextChanged event?
I hope this can explain better what I'm doing.
|
|
|
|
|
function GetEqrDataUploadFiles()
{
var upload=$("#files").data("KendoUpload");
var s = upload.wrapper[0].childNodes[2].childNodes.length;
var a = new Array();
for (i = 0; i < s; i++)
{
if (document.all) {
a.push(upload.wrapper[0].childNodes[2].childNodes[i].innerText);
}
else {
a.push(upload.wrapper[0].childNodes[2].childNodes[i].textContent);
}
}
return a;
}
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken that looks more like Javascript.
If so then I think you will get a better answer in this forum Javascript[^]
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
As the previous reply indicated -- this is Javascript -- and it is using -- most likely jQuery.
I am responding because -- this snippet is accessing the DOM and making assumptions that are causing it to fail -- without grace and without any real way to provide much information, but -- the exception seems to indicate that the node being accessed is not present.
This is not a good way to find the element in question and the code has been written in an odd manner because the author has not taken the time to understand nodes -- if you do not do this, your only options moving forward are to write code like this and hope for the best, or abdicate the responsibility by using a 3rd party client side library for that.
To make matters worse, this issue of textContent vs. innerText -- is a well known difference between browsers and how they view whitespace in documents -- particularly XML documents.
It behooves a developer to take the responsibility of learning how to walk the DOM themselves and to check for null -- at least once. How do you know where you are in the DOM otherwise?
This script -- needs a lot of work to be robust --
|
|
|
|
|
I'm looking for architectural advice for rewriting a small-business point of sale app that accesses both a remote SQL database and a local MySQL database. My biggest point of indecision lies in deciding what to use to access the remote database. I've been doing research, and have learned that I can use WCF, Web API, or simply use a good old fashioned .Net web service which is what is being used today via COM interop. I could simply remove the interop layer, and rewrite the service on the newer framework. This sounds good to me since I have experience with web services. Also, I do not need the ability to access the service from multiple platforms, as all of our stores will be operating on Windows 7 machines and I can install whatever I want on them. Performance is important but we only have in the neighborhood of 150 to 200 users accessing the SQL server at any given time. I want to do this right (I've been a developer for many years but not an architect!) and I have as much time as I need. I don't want the finished product to be obsolete as soon as its written. Oh, and one more thing...LINQ or not? Lots of complex queries in our app covering many tables per query and the local store database table names are dynamic - prepended with the current date. The remote database tables have fixed names. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. 
|
|
|
|
|
Make sure you write ~90% code coverage of the code in unit tests and your solution is unlikely to become obsolete.
Don't create dynamically named database table names. Not even locally. You will drive yourself insane trying to verify what should be happening at any point in time. Perhaps what you really need is a message queuing system instead? Look into MSMQ, SQL Server Service broker, or similar.
|
|
|
|
|
Little late maybe.
I use the good old adodb connection and recordset in .NET to access a remote MySQL database (Using IP-address as server).
Fast enough for me.
|
|
|
|
|
how to import .dat file into database table
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
