|
|
Hi!
I'm just learning c# and the .Net stuff and for fun I'm implementing an Explorer fake.
What I would need is the typical flow of calls when doing a drag/drop operation, for example when dragging a node (folder) in the treeview to another node.
I was going through the archive but couldn't find an article. Somebody there with some spare time? 
Thanks in advance.
Matthias
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however, there is.
(unknown author)
|
|
|
|
|
how to develop a class diagram in .NET FRAMEWORK.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I've got a general question concerning .Net development. Say I've written a really cool class library which I use from my application. How can I ensure that a.) the library is not going to be used by somebody different than me? and b.) the code is not going to be decompiled and recompiled into a new library and then sold.
I've heard rumors that the only way to actually avoid decompilation is to scrample the IL Code. But that seems insufficient. Are we back in VB4 ages where everybody could actually take your app and make a new one out of it?
Any hints are greatly appreceated.
regards,
Matthias
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however, there is.
(unknown author)
|
|
|
|
|
Matthias Steinbart wrote:
a.) the library is not going to be used by somebody different than me?
Don't distribute it
Matthias Steinbart wrote:
b.) the code is not going to be decompiled and recompiled into a new library and then sold
Don't distribute it
You can use an obfuscator but there are truely no guarantees that will prevent decompiling and reverse engineering. Anyone determined enough will break your code.
|
|
|
|
|
No offense, but I guess a lot of people are not going to be happy about this feature. I'm working for a bank where this seems to be the showstopper for a change to the .Net world.
I think those people at MS are smart enough to understand that this problem might cause problems to a lot of people. Why did they do it the way they did?
regards,
Matthias
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however, there is.
(unknown author)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm looking for a decent and cheap class library (if possible clean .Net code, no COM interop) for simple image processing. My requirements:
Must support most of the common image formats.
Should support simple image manipulation routines such as Greyscaling, Resizing, Rotating, Adjusting Brightness, Saturation, etc.
Should support printing.
If anybody can provide a hint. Thanks a lot in advance.
Matthias
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however, there is.
(unknown author)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I have compiled my first .NET programme and need to deploy it to users machine. I know i need to install the .NET framework on each users pc in order to run my programme.
Does anyone know if there are any negative side effects of installing the .NET framework? I have installed the framework on four pcs and with each of them I have experienced some sort of complication after the install.
It seems the framework is interfering with other programmes on the computers. In two of the pcs, our users couldn't use any of their microsoft office applications and we had to uninstall the framework and re-load MS office. In the other two pcs our SW accounting package didn't work anymore.
If anyone knows of any known problems with the framework or can point me to some links or documentation of known problems I would really appreciate it.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
There are problems with VB.NET apps due to misleading PIAs. Hopefully, this will be solved in next releases.
Other than that, don't trust MS when they say the .NET run-time is only 20MB+. There are additional pieces of run-time needed in practice depending on the app. For instance, latest MDAC is required if you use ADO.NET for instance, let aside .NET database drivers.
|
|
|
|
|
.S.Rod. wrote:
Other than that, don't trust MS when they say the .NET run-time is only 20MB+.
So it'll be less then? 
James
- out of order -
|
|
|
|
|
.S.Rod. wrote:
don't trust MS when they say the .NET run-time is only 20MB+. There are additional pieces of run-time needed in practice depending on the app.
Ah, another problem with someone in marketing. 
Nick Parker
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I`m having a lot of trouble linking in a standard (or COM based) DLL in the framework (written in C#), has anyone got any ideas to help?
|
|
|
|
|
One of the most important disadvantages of .NET Framework is youth of it. Hence there is not enough open source complementary classes and sources. One of the most important complementary frameworks which .NET needs to have is an OR Mapping tool for mapping persistence data in to classes. Reflection and Attributes in .NET framework make it easier to write such a framework (I’ve written a simple OR mapping framework and it only take 3,000 lines of code!!). Another important issue is distributing persistent objects in multi tire programs. I think it is a good idea to write a flexible framework for publishing persistent data in Object oriented way. Lots of OR mapping tools are available for java (like hibernate and OJB). Hence, I lunched a project in sourceForge for writing such an OR mapping in C# with distribution and remoting support and named the project dotDORM(Distributed OR Mapping). Although the project is not approved , yet I call for arm from any experienced C# developer’s to contribute in this project. If any one wants to know more about the project send an email to me. My email address is Behrang_j@yahoo.co.uk
Regards
Behrang
|
|
|
|
|
Hi..
If I write my program in .NET (such as C# or VB .NET), will it runt on the Mac Platform? or do I have to install extra software?
Thanks in Advance
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
Although the CLI has been released for OS X I wouldn't count on anything working right on a Mac. Naturally you would need this installed before any app could attempt to run.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
any idea when a .NET Framework will be available on UNIX/LINUX platform?
Bye,
Orbital^
...the night is long ... but not long enought to do some real coding ...
|
|
|
|
|
You've got to distinguish between which portion of the .NET framework you are talking about. I know it sounds weird, but that's the way it goes.
- CLR + CLI + CTS + core class libraries (non windows forms) ==> Rotor[^] (also known as shared source cli)
- Windows forms ==> Mono[^] (even if mono has decided to rely on a third-party WIN32 lib for all native calls)
- C# compiler ==> not sure about it, but I think Mono covers it too.
|
|
|
|
|
What about an oficial MS release ?
Bye,
Orbital^
...the night is long ... but not long enought to do some real coding ...
|
|
|
|
|
The only "official" release, if you want to call it that, is the shared source reference implementation, Rotor: The Shared Source CLI Beta Refresh [^] (also available at Corel[^].) Yes, it was jointly developed.
It targets WinXP and FreeBSD.
|
|
|
|
|
.S.Rod. wrote:
not sure about it, but I think Mono covers it too.
Yep, Mono has the C# compiler. The sources to JScript .NET and C# compiler are available in Rotor as well.
James
- out of order -
|
|
|
|
|
If an application makes use of assemblies (what ones don’t). and both the assembly and the application need to pull some configuration values form a file, do I need one .config file for the app and individual ones for each assembly?
…Or do the assemblies use the applications .config file because they are running inside of it?
I am kind of hoping that they can all share a file….
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
|
|
|
|
|
They use the same .config file.
James
- out of order -
|
|
|
|
|
I have a component that we need to move out of the .NET world and expose to a VB6 application. In the IDE, I checked the box to register for COM and I tried to follow the advice given in the popup box.
So I strong named the assembly. That, with the checkbox, gave me the dll and the tbl file after compilation. I seem to still be missing the metadata file for the component and that is stopping the VB6 code from seeing the methods and properties. Is this something I must build manually? If so, how do I know the format of the metadata file???? If not, what am I missing that is preventing the metadata file from being built when I compile?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
_____________________________________________
The world is a dangerous place.
Not because of those that do evil,
but because of those who look on and do nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you already have the 2 pieces needed to use your COM objects. Part of the process is that the type-lib and assembly files (tlb & dll) need to be registered using regasm.exe. That utility can be found wherever the .Net Framework is installed - typically in the folder "C:\WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705" on Windows NT & 2K.
I've found that I don't need to register the tlb file since when I regasm the dll, it also does the embedded tlb as well (it also MAKES a tlb file for you too).
I should think that this is being done for you when you compile your project. However, this is a project setting and may not be set/active/non-existent in your project.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi John.
Here is all that we have done so far.
I added COM Visible(true) for all of my public properties and methods.
I added a [ClassInterface(ClassInterfaceType.AutoDual)] at the head of my class library.
I compiled it and sent the DLL and TBL file to the developer.
He did run RegAsm (he has been doing it every time)
This last attempt he did a
regasm myclass.DLL /codebase /tlb:myclass.tlb /verbose
When he creates reference to the DLL and looks in the object viewer, he is not seeing anything inside the class library. The constructor is visible (obviously) but no public accessors or methods.
_____________________________________________
The world is a dangerous place.
Not because of those that do evil,
but because of those who look on and do nothing.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
