|
How to Remove Default Column indicating cursor position in Datagridview in C#.
I'm getting data in datatable from SQL Server
|
|
|
|
|
If you mean the column on the LHS, then just set the RowHeadersVisible property[^] to false
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
With all the open web libraries out there... we find that we can create some very nice MVC projects (quickly) using them! WPF is my personal favorite Desktop framework but sometimes I find myself wishing I could use some of the open source web stuff in the WPF projects.
Conceptually if a WPF project could easily bypass IIS but provide similar web services (gets and posts) then we know that MVC would be happy as it doesn't care who does the service. Assume now that we could use the controller model of MVC inside of a WPF project, host a browser and use ViewModels just like we do today in WPF. The project template would then look very similar to the MVC template but would be for desktop applications. We could easily combine WPF controls with the WebBrowser or many instances of the web browser (one for each control) and use the Controller model on them for the post backs.
The first hurdle would be bypassing IIS and containing the equivalent HTTP support in a WPF project.... The second would be how to implement the controller base class as we know from MVC that it is a pretty intense component. Of course they always say start simple right?
Thoughts? Or am I just going crazy?
|
|
|
|
|
Using a webbrowser to create desktop apps sounds a bit like over-architecting.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I read that and my head exploded due to the over-complicating of things.
Considering the limitations of HTML and the Web Browser control, the question that comes to mind is "why would you want to handicap yourself like that?"
|
|
|
|
|
No question that the concept is mind-blowing... however consider this:
WPF never integrated (fully) the charting control, it's only available via some outdated toolkit. If you search for open charting tools there are zillions of them in browser world. But who wants to force a desktop application to also have a WebSite that hosts those charts?
WPF is mostly in what I feel is a Sunset mode, there appears to be no further development happening from Microsoft.
WPF has overcomplicated things too, just look at the DataGrid and compart that to JQUERY's DataTable, there's no comparison JQUERY is agile, WPF DataGrid is not.
The web side is exploding with new frameworks that were inspired from the MVVM pattern. Just look into Angular.
If there were a Hybrid WPF solution implementing MVC where the web site is hosted within the application, then we have the best of both worlds with everything being bindable to a single ViewModel on what MVC calls the "Server Side".
We as WPF people don't loose anything but we gain everything "Web".
This idea is not that different than those saying that there is a coming convergance of C# and Javascript!
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Javaman wrote: This idea is not that different than those saying that there is a coming convergance of C# and Javascript!
Introduce them to the thing called "WinForms", or "Rich GUI". It would be a step back to send all over TCP/IP and use scripting, without adding any value.
It's a change what you propose, yes, but not an improvement.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You may have forgotten that Rich GUI was one of the tenants of Silverlight, of course WPF being the superior cousin in many respects, never had RIA! WPF is not Rich GUI, it has too many gaps.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh but nothing has to fly over the intranet for these things. Look at Node or Express, host your own WebServer in your solution. None of this requires IIS.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Javaman wrote: Oh but nothing has to fly over the intranet for these things.
Aw, goody.
You're still running in a limited environment, where the known and documented path would be the natural choice.
Mr. Javaman wrote: host your own WebServer in your solution.
And this webserver would work without TCP/IP? 'Cause that is what I was referring to, wasn't it?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
As if Pipes, and IPC were any better? c'mon give me a break bastard programmer from hell.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Javaman wrote:
As if Pipes, and IPC were any better? |
If it is a single native process, you do not need IPC.
There is no argumentation to justify a redundant layer.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh Pete, you die-hard WPF lover, are you telling me that's a bonifide release?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I am. I know the people working on it and I know how committed to it they are.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok bud what ever you say is true. I'm thinking it's a skeletal team doing skeletal things. Only time will truly tell us where WPF will go...
|
|
|
|
|
Huh? Microsoft announced a couple of months ago or so that they were back on the WPF band wagon and making "a lot" of changes to .NET 4.6 or whatever its called. Also, big enhancements to Visual Studio 2015 in terms of WPF.
Why would you want to run a "desktop app" inside of a browser? The browser environment is too limiting and performance sucks.
Of course there is a lot more web stuff. New desktop apps are a drop in the bucket compared to web.
The charting control? Come on man... that was a random side project that somebody at Microsoft did and it was never supported to begin with. If you want to do charts in WPF, get a WPF charting library. Yeah, there are a lot more web based ones obviously, and you have to pay for the good WPF ones, but they exist.
People do desktop apps to AVOID all the web issues... we don't want no stinkin' web garbage in WPF  .
|
|
|
|
|
It does sound like he has found a gun and decided to shoot himself in the foot, because I can.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
No, I don't play with guns.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh geez Sledge give me a break... I saw their list of "new features"... Tell me which one is your fav?
I never said I wanted to run a desktop app inside of a web browser. What I was alluding to is hosting web browsers with better control inside of WPF applications. In addition, seeing that MVC is a far easier framework wondering why WPF hasn't gone that route.
The Charting control? Yes... I mean even TFS 2013 shows charts all over the place. Want to impress some exec? Show them a graph, oh yeah, I forgot, just don't show it to them in WPF.
Hey Sledge; "how come" you never have provided any articles here on CP?
|
|
|
|
|
Performance and all the enhancements to the debugger.
MVVM is simple once you understand it. I admit it is kind of hard to understand at first, but once you do, its simple.
You are going to impress execs with the charting control? The charts it makes looks ugly. You have to pay for the good charting libraries. 2D charts are fairly easy to whip out in WPF. I built a bunch of spark line charts in a couple of weeks.
Nice production quality 3D web charts aren't free either.
|
|
|
|
|
No, it's not possible to impress execs with WPF charting. That's my point. System.Windows.Forms does a better job, but not the upscale "better" big brother. BTW, there are so many free charting solutions for web pages out there it's really not possible to figure it all out.
I agree MVVM is simple.
3D charting is free... again my point on the missing parts of WPF.
|
|
|
|
|
*shrug* ChartFX is pretty impressive:
http://www.softwarefx.com/sfxnetproducts/chartfx/wpf/features.aspx[^]
It's not free though. If you're trying to impress execs, whats $1300?
Regardless... I haven't seen free web charts that look that nice, but I haven't looked since I'm anti-web.
2D charts are easy to whip up in WPF. 3D charts... yeah, I'd spend the $1300... even as a "Mr. Smarty Pants"  , I don't get the 3D APIs. I've tried a few times, but gave up. You really need to understand 3D programming to use them.
The great Sacha posted a few 3D chart articles on here though, but they are just starting points. Not fully fleshed out and polished like ChartFx.
modified 25-Mar-15 14:17pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I checked it out. Looks OK for the 2D charts. Google does have a 3D pie chart. Doesn't look "bad" or anything... just the 3D pie chart from ChartFX looks way cooler IMO. Better angle on the pie (which I'm sure you can maybe adjust in the Google API), but I like the "shine" on the ChartFX one, gives it pop -- impresses execs LOL. Also, they have a lot of other 3D charts that Google doesn't have. If I was "told" to use the google charts, I would LOL, but I'd push for something better. I'm just going off the pics of course. If I was evaluating ChartFX, I'd have to download the trial and mess around with it. Some libs look cool in screenshots, but its very difficult to reproduce in code or performance is bad, etc.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
