Queue  View Store: .net  
  Advanced
Main -  My Queue -  My Data Stores  -  New Entry -  Settings -  Downloads -  Logout -  Help!

iframes are OFF to turn them ON click here
Data Store Entry   Created  Actions  
CodeXchange.net Addin for Visual Studio.NET:

A snippet-sharing tool for .NET developers

7/9/2005 6:37 PM  
kevinlsw  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
ASP.NET.4GuysFromRolla.com: Getting the Most Out of Visual Studio .NET:

The steps for creating a Web Form Wizard in both Visual Basic .NET and C# can be found at: Building a Custom Web Form Wizard in Visual Studio .NET. Brendan Tompkins also offers up a discussion on customizing Visual Studio .NET templates in his blog entry Visual Studio .NET Templates - Modifying Your Default Templates.

7/8/2005 2:50 PM  
nick  
(Modified 7/8/2005 3:23 PM)  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
C++: The Most Powerful Language for .NET Framework Programming:

What would also be nice is if you could allow code outside of your assembly to read the property value, but only allow code inside of your assembly to write it. You can use an access specifier inside the curly braces following the property name to achieve this.

property String^ Name { public: String^ get(); private public: void set(String^); }

One last thing worth noting about the property support is that it supports a shorthand syntax for those cases where you do not need any special processing for getting and setting a property.

property String^ Name;

Again, the compiler will generate the get_Name and set_Name methods, but this time will also provide a default implementation backed by a private String^ member variable. The advantage of this, of course, is that in the future you can replace the simple property with a more interesting property implementation and it will not break the interface contract of the class. You get the simplicity of a field with the flexibility of a property.

5/24/2005 1:04 AM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
C# -> Java converter... that works?:

Mainsoft's tool is a Visual Studio add-on which compiles C# to Java byte code instead of to IL. They include a class library that provides support for .NET Framework stuff.

I was ultra-skeptical, but in practice, this tool is working surprisingly well. We had to make very few changes to the OpsLib code, all fairly minor. The resulting Java version of OpsLib passes our suite of regression tests, and that speaks volumes about the quality of work Mainsoft has done. Those tests are truly sadistic.

4/29/2005 10:05 AM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
BOO:

Boo is a new object oriented statically typed programming language for the Common Language Infrastructure with a python inspired syntax and a special focus on language and compiler extensibility.

4/6/2005 1:06 PM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
ILMerge:

ILMerge is a utility for merging multiple .NET assemblies into a single .NET assembly. It works on executables and dlls alike. It comes with several options for controlling the processing and format of the output, see the accompanying documentation for details.

3/28/2005 2:38 PM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
LibCheck:

This tool allows you to compare two versions of an assembly, and determine the differences. The tool reports the differences as a combination of 'removed' and 'added' APIs.

3/28/2005 2:37 PM  
nick  
(Modified 3/28/2005 2:39 PM)  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
devAdvantage - static rules application:

Nice tool that can apply simple static rules for .NET compliance and some error checking.

Has the ability to "auto-fix" most things which saves some time.

It was crashing on me initially but support was fast.

There's a free version that does some nice things. You then pay for certain rule add-on packs.

2/3/2005 2:19 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Thinstall:

Microsoft .NET developers can use Thinstall to link the needed portions of the .NET Framework into a single EXE that runs without any installation. Programs can even run directly from CDROM.

1/6/2005 12:40 PM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
Simplified Database Unit testing using Enterprise Services:

This is an interesting technique. I have been just deleting and recreating a test database, and all the test data before each unit test. Performance has been tolerable thus far, but I can see how it might not scale. -Nick

What we want is to be able to achieve the transaction functionality without all the overhead of writing our own custom Transaction manager class as prescribed in James? book. How do we do that? With COM+ Enterprise services.

6/23/2004 11:36 AM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
Google Search: uploading large files with .net:

There is a solution for large uploads with ASP.NET. You can use SoftArtisans FileUp v4.0, or the soon-to-be-released FileUpEE (Enterprise Edition). Both come with a custom ISAPI filter that you install in IIS. When you upload in .NET, the FileUp ISAPI filter handles the files and prevents memory from being swamped by the file. The Enterprise Edition can do multi-step client-to-webserver-to-fileserver transfers with SOAP.

4/24/2004 12:44 AM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
C# 2.0:

Spec changes for C# 2.0. They seem to be adding a lot of things that take C# back towards the organization of C++ rather than that of Java.

They are now allowing anonymous classes for delegates like in Java. That?s not so bad.

They are adding ?generics? meaning C++ templates. As usual this is a mixed bag.

They are adding ?iterators? that generate sequences. I suppose that?s OK, but I don?t see much benefit.

The worst part is ?partial classes.? This means that the definition of a single class can now span any number of files. The scary part is this quote from the spec: ?Partial types allow classes, structs, and interfaces to be broken into multiple pieces stored in different source files for easier development and maintenance.? Easier maintenance? Yikes.

They?ve done some other things that muddy the language. For example, in this new spec they added 3 new keywords. However they didn?t want to break existing code, so these keywords can also be used as normal identifiers. How?s that for confusing?

If they keep on like this it will be C++ all over again. Maybe it?s there already!

-Jason

11/5/2003 6:27 PM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
System.CodeDom:

The System.CodeDom namespace contains classes that can be used to represent the elements and structure of a source code document. These elements may be used to model the structure of a source code document that may be output as source code in a supported language using the functionality provided by the System.CodeDom.Compiler namespace
3/9/2003 1:29 AM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Full Text  
.NET Framework: Building, Packaging, Deploying, and Administering Applications and Types -- MSDN Magazine, February 2001:

.NET Framework: Building, Packaging, Deploying, and Administering Applications and Types -- MSDN Magazine, February 2001

Part II

2/11/2003 12:35 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
How to serialize in .NET:

For a long time I couldn't serialize objects in .NET because I kept getting an error upon Unserialize which said that it couldn't find the assembly that saved this object, even though it was the executing assembly!

There is a flag on both binary and XML serializers (but curiously it is not present on their shared parent object) which lets you set whether the full path to the assembly or just the short name will be stored.

Then when you deserialize you need a custom assembly loader. You only want it installed when you load one of your objects.

I now provide sample code that works properly in my own project. It's quite general and should work for serializing any object in binary form. If you want XML form, just change the Formatter type. Of course you need to change the "CodeHistorian" string in the assembly resolver routine. You could make this routine completely general by extracting that string from the executing assembly object, but I didn't bother with this. ///

/// serialize object into a binary stream /// public static void SerializeBinary(object obj, Stream binaryStream) { System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.Binary.BinaryFormatter formatter = new System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.Binary.BinaryFormatter(); formatter.AssemblyFormat = System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.FormatterAssemblyStyle.Simple; formatter.Serialize(binaryStream,obj); } /// /// unserialize object from a binary stream /// public static object UnserializeBinary(Stream binaryStream) { object result; ResolveEventHandler reHandler = new ResolveEventHandler(ResolveCurrentAssembly); System.AppDomain.CurrentDomain.AssemblyResolve += reHandler; try { System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.Binary.BinaryFormatter formatter = new System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.Binary.BinaryFormatter(); result = formatter.Deserialize(binaryStream); } finally { System.AppDomain.CurrentDomain.AssemblyResolve -= reHandler; } return result; } private static System.Reflection.Assembly ResolveCurrentAssembly(object sender, ResolveEventArgs e) { if (e.Name == "CodeHistorian") return System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly(); return null; }
2/7/2003 11:19 AM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
COM+ and MTS, DCOM and MSMQ, Serialization in .NET:

One of the underlying considerations when using COM Interop is the overhead incurred. .NET and COM use different execution methods (.NET uses the Common Language Runtime; COM does not) and .NET assemblies and COM components are implemented differently (.NET uses a type standard while COM uses a binary standard). Calling from one environment to the other adds some amount of overhead, so only do it when necessary. In fact, there are approximately 20 to 30 CPU instructions executed for each Interop operation. When you call a method on a class that is hosted in COM+, this overhead is incurred during each call.
If you absolutely must have features that COM+ or MTS provide, then host your component in COM+ or MTS and make sure you need all that functionality. If your component is performing transactions on a single database and will always work against only one database, then you don't necessarily need COM+ to implement those transactions; you can implement them with ADO.NET. However, if you need object pooling or transaction support for multiple databases, then use COM+ or MTS.
2/6/2003 6:46 PM  
nick  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Windows Forms FAQ:

Windows Forms FAQ
1/17/2003 3:43 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
C# Corner: C# and .NET Developer's Network:

C# Corner: C# and .NET Developer's Network
1/17/2003 3:42 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Regular Expression Library -- presented by ASPSmith.com Training:

Regular Expression Library -- presented by ASPSmith.com Training
1/17/2003 3:42 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
Windows Forms FAQ:

Welcome to the Windows Forms FAQ. Questions & Answers in this FAQ are from newsgroup posts, various mailing lists and the employees of Syncfusion. I have tried to mention the source wherever I could. If you think that you should be credited for an answer, please send me a note and I will be happy to add a credit mention.

If you have a FAQ or any other good Windows Forms resource, please send me a note. You can also access the Windows Forms FAQ forum for more information.

1/16/2003 4:45 PM  
jcohen  
Detail View  
New Window  
Move/Edit  
More


Main -  My Queue -  My Data Stores  -  New Entry -  Settings -  Downloads -  Logout -  Help!

©2008 IronDust, LLC - admin@irondust.com - IronDust, LLC Home