16,012,025 members
Sign in
Sign in
Email
Password
Forgot your password?
Sign in with
home
articles
Browse Topics
>
Latest Articles
Top Articles
Posting/Update Guidelines
Article Help Forum
Submit an article or tip
Import GitHub Project
Import your Blog
quick answers
Q&A
Ask a Question
View Unanswered Questions
View All Questions
View C# questions
View C++ questions
View Javascript questions
View Visual Basic questions
View .NET questions
discussions
forums
CodeProject.AI Server
All Message Boards...
Application Lifecycle
>
Running a Business
Sales / Marketing
Collaboration / Beta Testing
Work Issues
Design and Architecture
Artificial Intelligence
ASP.NET
JavaScript
Internet of Things
C / C++ / MFC
>
ATL / WTL / STL
Managed C++/CLI
C#
Free Tools
Objective-C and Swift
Database
Hardware & Devices
>
System Admin
Hosting and Servers
Java
Linux Programming
Python
.NET (Core and Framework)
Android
iOS
Mobile
WPF
Visual Basic
Web Development
Site Bugs / Suggestions
Spam and Abuse Watch
features
features
Competitions
News
The Insider Newsletter
The Daily Build Newsletter
Newsletter archive
Surveys
CodeProject Stuff
community
lounge
Who's Who
Most Valuable Professionals
The Lounge
The CodeProject Blog
Where I Am: Member Photos
The Insider News
The Weird & The Wonderful
help
?
What is 'CodeProject'?
General FAQ
Ask a Question
Bugs and Suggestions
Article Help Forum
About Us
Search within:
Articles
Quick Answers
Messages
Comments by It's Eddie! (Top 14 by date)
It's Eddie!
18-May-17 13:19pm
View
Thanks for the links Rick. The problem is that these assume that the contained control is too big - however, my TilePanel is always smaller than the containment panel. The reason the TilePanel can autoscroll is because it contains a button that's always on the edge of the size (it's a TileControl, so it has a really big grid inside of it.)
It looks pretty ugly with the tiny scroll bars inside of it, so that's why I'm trying to get a way to put new scroll bars on the containing panel instead of the TilePanel (think of it like in photoshop, where the scroll bars are on the side, as opposed to on the picturebox/image/editing field.)
It's Eddie!
4-May-17 16:41pm
View
Very helpful links, thank you.
It's Eddie!
4-May-17 16:38pm
View
Excellent, exactly what I was asking for. Thank you a lot.
It's Eddie!
16-May-16 6:07am
View
Thank you. I thought that was the problem. I replaced it with devision but I realized it has to be on the grid, and can't be more than the ColumnCount - just didn't realize modulo would be the trick.
Cheers Staffan!
It's Eddie!
16-May-16 5:40am
View
Hey Staffan,
Thanks for once again taking the time to read my problem. I've updated the code as you've shown, and the grid Y is doing fine. However, the GridX is still resulting very odd numbers.
Here are the results after debugging:
In the for loop of 9 different entities going to the same given point.
i = 0 - GridX: 0
i = 1 - GridX: 0
i = 2 - GridX: 0
i = 3 - GridX: 4
i = 4 - GridX: 4
i = 5 - GridX: 4
i = 6 - GridX: 4
i = 7 - GridX: 0
i = 8 - GridX: 0
Perhaps there's something wrong with my code implimenting what you've given me. I'd like to send you a pastebin, if it's not too much trouble.
Also, could I have clarification on what "&" means within a mathematical sum in programming?
http://pastebin.com/LJYvPAau
It's Eddie!
14-May-16 9:25am
View
I just tried implimenting it the only issue seems to when there's less than four units all of them stack with a partner - not all in one position. If there's more or equal to six they formate correctly.
Any ideas?
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 18:55pm
View
" Denying to provide a solution is still a kind of help"
I guess it's more of a personal taste or it depends how you look at it. To me it's a waste of time, and any time wasted is useless.
"When you try to judge experience, do you take into account your own level of experience? And so on..."
Very good point.
"But so far your criticism is, frankly, reduced to the advice "talk less". I don't see any rational grain in it."
Yeah, that would really depend on how much you'd like to spend your time telling other people they're not making any sense if you could just ignore them.
It's been a pleasure talking to you - thanks for sharing your views too.
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 10:04am
View
Thank you so much Staffan for taking the time. I think I finally understand ".Max(e=>e.Size.X)" now. This is perfect!
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 9:59am
View
Ofcourse a switch statement is advised when there's only a few cases, but from OPs post I have no idea how many cases - I just assumed he meant either something specific or nothing.
Edit: Turns out I misread some of the stuff he wrote - tried to answer it the best I could.
Great example I'll add it to my post.
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 9:58am
View
Oh definitely, that's not what I was implying. What I was implying that if he specifies what he needs but people on here do not appreciate the way he's doing it then it's best to either answer, give a better method, or just not reply.
I tend to see a lot of "experienced" "professional" programmers on here who like to complain that people do stuff in a bad way but are too lazy to actually show how to "actually" do it.
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 7:27am
View
I'm going to be honest here. If this is what he has to do or wants to do all you can do is tell him how, and or offer any better alternatives.
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 7:19am
View
Have you tried taking a look at
this
page?
It's Eddie!
13-May-16 7:10am
View
Alright lad, I know exactly how you feel, well for me it's not just a developer - it's a friend to develope with. Except I do not have a lot of skill in PHP - didn't start learning it yet.
The best to you.
- Eddie
It's Eddie!
6-May-16 10:15am
View
Just updated a bit of my code that had an error.
"Blocked[(int)GridPosition.X, (int)GridPosition.Y] = false;" is now " Blocked[(int)GridPosition.X, (int)GridPosition.Y] = true;"
Show More