Comments by Trajan McGill

Trajan McGill 27-Jun-14 11:36am View

As the other solution points out, it is also possible that you meant to have the "];" *before* the AmCharts.ready() call, which is actually probably more likely, but I don't have any idea what AmCharts.ready() does or whether you mean to stick the results in the array you're creating or to call it after creating the array.

Trajan McGill 31-Mar-14 10:42am View

Of course you can get the source code of an HTML file, because that's what is sent to the browser. The reason you can't get source for PHP or some other executable has nothing to do with ajax or jquery. It is because the server doesn't send the code, it sends the output from running the code, which is (usually) HTML.

Trajan McGill 27-Mar-14 10:18am View

I'm not sure what you are trying to do with this:
image_path :'',slides : [ {image:'picture/1.jpg', title:<Script> showdate()</Script>,thumb:''}
those script tags are unnecessary, you're already in a script block. simply setting the title value to showdate() should work. Are you sure showdate() is working and returning a string successfully? You say it "does not work," but you don't say how it is failing.

Trajan McGill 24-Mar-14 11:18am View

Actually, if the error is while setting job.RecruiterReference.UserName, an object reference not set error can't be for job.RecruiterReference.UserName-- he's setting the reference in that very line. It would have to be for job or for job.RecruiterReference. The former has been set in the line before, so the conclusion must be that just creating a new job() does not automatically set its RecruiterReference to anything, and therefore there setting the (missing) RecruiterReference's UserName property will fail.

Trajan McGill 24-Mar-14 11:07am View

At what line is the error found?

Trajan McGill 24-Mar-14 11:06am View

On what line are you encountering the error?

Trajan McGill 20-Mar-14 11:28am View

What is the data type of that column in the database? You are trying to cast dr[3] into a DateTime, but perhaps you need to parse it into a DateTime instead.

Trajan McGill 18-Mar-14 12:32pm View

The visibility style passes through just fine for me. I agree with RyanDev, the first step is to check the "trace" view (along with the regular style view) to see what styles are being applied and where they are coming from. You may have a CSS rule for #trIADMem that sets the display style to "block". And the visibility rule is disappearing altogether? Or you just didn't type it into the example? I suppose you could be messing around with the element's style attribute in the code-behind code in a way that removes that.

Trajan McGill 18-Mar-14 11:27am View

Unsure what you are looking for. Can you explain how this is different than what you expect?

Trajan McGill 4-Mar-14 16:40pm View

Sorry, wasn't looking closely enough before and failed to notice this was a web method.

Here's where we should really look. This line:
var date = new Date(parseInt(dataValues[i].Date.substr(6),10));

Can you do an alert box or something right there, something like:
alert(dataValues[i].Date);

That would tell us what the JavaScript is attempting (and failing) to parse properly.

Trajan McGill 4-Mar-14 11:21am View

It would be helpful to know exactly how the dataList is being output. I assume there must be ASP.NET code that uses this dataList as a data source. Since that step of the process could well include formatting the output, it would be necessary to see that as well. Or, at least an example of a few lines of HTML output that the JavaScript is reading from. There are three places your problem could be arising: 1) the output is not formatted well to be parsed by the JavaScript; 2) the JavaScript isn't parsing the right thing or isn't parsing it the way you expect; or 3) the date is in fact being fully parsed but that google.visualization.DataTable object, whatever it is, is only showing the year portion and you need to mess around with configuring that to display the whole date and time.

Trajan McGill 18-Feb-14 9:49am View

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to accomplish, or what the GPDetails class or structure looks like, but I can tell you for one thing that the string you're putting in the jsonstring variable doesn't define an array. An array in Javascript looks like this:
"[1, 2, 3]".

You are building a string that looks like this:
"{'PostalCode':'12345', 'PostalCode':'23456', 'PostalCode':'34567'}"
and that is the definition of an object with the same property ("PostalCode") defined over and over again.

You may be intending to build a JSON string more like this:
"{'PostalCodes':['12345', '23456', '34567']}"
or possibly like this:
"{'PostalCodes':[{'PostalCode':'12345'}, {'PostalCode':'23456'}, {'PostalCode':'34567']}"
depending on what you're trying to do with the resulting array.

Trajan McGill 22-Aug-13 12:23pm View

Reason for my vote of 3 \n This is a good thing to be aware of, but I disagree with your assessment that the C#/Java behavior is "insane". It is exactly what you'd expect if you think through the order of execution.

See, the fact that this is a virtual function doesn't really make any difference. Consider if the first line in your constructor is to call a (regular, non-virtual) method that relies on objects initialized by the second line in your constructor. Obviously that won't work. And because, in your example, the first line in the derived constructor is (implicitly) to call the base constructor, anything the base constructor does can't rely on things that are done later in the derived constructor.

Note that (assuming your Java behavior is correctly depicted) there's also one very big difference between Java and C# that has some bearing on this: member variable initializations that are part of the variable's declaration in C# happen before any other constructor code is run at all (and that includes the implicit call to the base constructor), which means that variables initialized this way are fully set up before a single line of constructor code (or any code called from a constructor) runs. In other words, your second, more involved example won't exhibit the same behavior if you translate it to C#.

Comments by Trajan McGill (Top 13 by date)