|
Hi Mark, that's sort of what I do now as a workaround with the switch statement, I want to do this without a switch statement. I've updated my original post to include a sample class of exactly what I mean.
|
|
|
|
|
Without using reflection that is an interesting question. Sorry I can't think of anything at the moment.
only two letters away from being an asset
|
|
|
|
|
Well I guess on the bright side I feel better that it wasn't something simple and obvious.
Thank you for looking at it, I appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
You mean like a List of delegates?
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
No I don't think so, delegates would be used with methods, not properties within the same class.
Maybe what I'm looking for is just not possible without resorting to reflection and string comparison of property names which is not much better than the giant switch statement way of doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
You seem to be eluding to introspection that does exist without all these limitations. Perhaps if you post some code or a link where we could see what you are referring to it might help.
led mike
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Mike I've updated my original post to include a sample class illustrating exactly the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
John Cardinal wrote: //Perhaps what I'm after is storing a list of pointers to the properties in the List or
//Array or whatever collection
I think your switch statement approach is fine; it's the way I'd do it. If you wanted to get fancy, you could initialize an array with anonymous methods that delegate to the propery:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Text;
namespace PropertyTest
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Example e = new Example();
e[0] = 42;
e[1] = 3;
Console.WriteLine(e[0]);
Console.WriteLine(e[1]);
Console.Read();
}
}
public class Example
{
delegate int PropertyGetter();
delegate void PropertySetter(int value);
private int prop1 = 0;
private int prop2 = 0;
private List<PropertyGetter> getters = new List<PropertyGetter>();
private List<PropertySetter> setters = new List<PropertySetter>();
public Example()
{
getters.Add(delegate()
{
return Property1;
});
getters.Add(delegate()
{
return Property2;
});
setters.Add(delegate(int value)
{
Property1 = value;
});
setters.Add(delegate(int value)
{
Property2 = value;
});
}
public int this[int index]
{
get
{
return getters[index]();
}
set
{
setters[index](value);
}
}
public int Property1
{
get
{
return prop1;
}
set
{
prop1 = value;
}
}
public int Property2
{
get
{
return prop2;
}
set
{
prop2 = value;
}
}
}
}
I'm not sure if there's any real advantage of this approach over a switch statement. It may mean just as much work if not more.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting, I think this is what I envisioned, but as you say it's probably not any better in the long run. I spent some time a while ago profiling a method that uses a big switch with simple assigments in each case and it was surprisingly slow so I've been avoiding them, but for this code simpler is probably better.
Cheers and thanks for looking at it.
|
|
|
|
|
In 2003 you can have regions automatically expand by settiong Tools->Options Text Editor->C#->Formatting uncheck Collapse Region when files open.
How can I do this in 2005? I can't seem to find the option anywhere I have looked.
File Not Found
|
|
|
|
|
I tend to right click then go to outlining.
Then toggle all outlining
Hope that helps.
Ben
|
|
|
|
|
That will do it; Not as good as the check box but a lot better than clicking on all of those region markers.
File Not Found
|
|
|
|
|
I happen to run across a key stroke combination:
Ctrl + M, O
Ben
|
|
|
|
|
That is more quicker too.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know the answer to that, but I did find that ctrl-m will toggle a region when you are at the bottom of it on #endregion which I've found very useful.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I have a program that in it i used a thread to make some rectangles on line (simulation for packets moving in stream) and i make button that supposed to stop packets
when i click it as i abort the thread in button_clicked code but this doesnot work
so i ask if any one knows the reason of this or any suggestions
thanx in advance
Generator
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried search for article here?
only two letters away from being an asset
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
I am soory but i think nothing is interested to me
from these articles
Generator
|
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
no i click a button that create thread to do some thing
that is still working until i click another button that is supposed to abort it but it is not working
Generator
|
|
|
|
|
The page I linked you to contains all the information you need to accomplish that. After reading it and trying it out if you still have a question reply to this message.
|
|
|
|
|
thanx it seems to be my goal but there is a problem
when run a run time error occurs
"Cross thread operation not valid: Control 'my_form name'
accessed from thread other than the thread it was created on"
!!
Generator
|
|
|
|
|
You can not access any controls on your form from a thread you create.
That is the whole point of the backgroundworker object, it has a set of events that allow you to update controls on your form and to respond to and initiate events such as reporting progress or cancelling an operation in progress.
If you have read that article you will note that UI controls are only accessed in the events of the backgroundworker object, not in the work that is performed by the new thread.
Generally speaking, the code called in the "DoWork" event of BackGroundWorkder must never attempt to access any UI objects.
The controls on your form are created in the main UI thread when the program starts. They are not thread safe, you will either get an error or a crash if you attempt to access them from another thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
ok i use in the do_work method i made called movePacket();
this method call Invalidate(); in it so
Is this that may be made this conflict and if it
what can i do
thanx to help me
Generator
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you are understanding the basic problem: You can not make any GUI related calls within the do work method. Calling Invalidate is a GUI method.
You should not need to at all. Any update of the GUI should take place only within the ProgressChanged event. Please look at the sample again, in fact I recommend you copy and paste it into a new project and experiment with it until you understand it. If you are calling Invalidate in the dowork method you are accessing the GUI from a different thread than it is working in which will lead to errors and possibly crashes.
|
|
|
|