Click here to Skip to main content
14,209,923 members
Click here to Skip to main content
Article
Posted 11 Apr 2016

Tagged as

Stats

39K views
492 downloads
73 bookmarked

The Nuances of Loading and Unloading Assemblies with AppDomain

,
Rate this:
4.96 (66 votes)
Please Sign up or sign in to vote.
4.96 (66 votes)
11 Apr 2016     CPOL    
Things you should know when considering writing an application with hot-swappable modules.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Getting Started
   Defining the Interface Shared Between the Application and the Assembly Being Loaded
   The Assembly to be Loaded
   The Application that Loads the Assembly
     CreateAppDomain
     InstantiatePlugin
     TestIfUnloaded
     Running this Simple Test
Why...
   ...Do we add the Serializable Attribute?
     What about WCF?
   ...Do we derive from MarshalByRefObject?
More Nuances of MarshalByRefObject
   References or Value
   What Happens if the Plug-in Changes An Object that Derives from MarshalByRefObject
   Dynamically Loading Assemblies in a Separate AppDomain
In Practical Use
   Are all the classes, their member classes, their member member classes, etc, attributed with Serializable?
   Are you sure that any third party class (.NET, etc) is designated as Serializable?
   Do you want to pass by value or by reference?
   Can you pass by reference?
   What if you can't derive from MarshalByRefObject?
   One_Application_Domain_Per_Assembly
   What about Performance?
Conclusion

Introduction

There's a lot of posts and articles out there about using AppDomain to load and unload assemblies, but I haven't found one place that puts it all together into something that makes sense as well as exploring the nuances of working with application domains, hence the reason for this article.

For myself, the purpose for loading and unloading assemblies at runtime is so that I can hot-swap one assembly with another one without shutting down the whole application.  This is important when running applications like a web server or an ATM, or you want to preserve application state without having to persist everything, restart the application, and then restore the state.  Even if it means that the application is momentarily (for a few hundred milliseconds) unresponsive, this is far better than having to tear down the entire application, return to the Windows screen, and restart it.

Getting Started

Getting a working example up and running isn't that difficult.  The main tricks are:

  • Using the Serializable attribute on classes that you want to expose in the assembly being runtime loaded.
  • Deriving exposed classes from MarshalByRefObject (this can cause some interesting pain points).
  • Using a separate assembly that is shared between your application and the runtime loaded assembly to define an interface through which your application calls methods and properties in the exposed runtime loaded classes.

The nuances occur primarily in the use of MarshalByRefObject with regards to how instance parameters are passed, as this determines whether the instance is passed by value or by reference.  More on this later.

To demonstrate loading / unloading assemblies in their own application domain, we need three projects:

  1. A project defining the interface shared between the first two projects.
  2. A project for the assembly to be loaded.
  3. The main application project.

Defining the Interface Shared Between the Application and the Assembly Being Loaded

We'll start with a very simple interface:

using System;

namespace CommonInterface
{
  public interface IPlugIn
  {
    string Name { get; }
    void Initialize();
  }
}

Here we'll demonstrate calling a method and reading a property.

The Assembly to be Loaded

The second project, the assembly to be loaded, contains one class that implements the plug-in interface:

using System;
using CommonInterface;

namespace PlugIn1
{
  [Serializable]
  public class PlugIn : MarshalByRefObject, IPlugIn
  {
    private string name;

    public string Name { get { return name; } }

    public void Initialize()
    {
      name = "PlugIn 1";
    }
  }
}

Note that the class is marked as Serializable and derives from MarshalByRefObject.  More on this later.

The Application that Loads the Assembly

The third project is the application itself.  Here's the core piece:

using System;
using System.Reflection;

using CommonInterface;

namespace AppDomainTests
{
  class Program
  {
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
      AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
      IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);

      plugin1.Initialize();
      Console.WriteLine(plugin1.Name+"\r\n");

      UnloadPlugin(appDomain1);

      TestIfUnloaded(plugin1);
    }
  }
}

This code:

  1. Loads the plug-in assembly into an application domain separate from the main application domain.
  2. Instantiates the class implementing IPlugIn
  3. Initializes the class
  4. Reads the value of the Name property
  5. Unloads the assembly
  6. Verifies that after the assembly is unloaded, an AppDomainUnloadedException is thrown.

Three helper methods are used:

CreateAppDomain

static AppDomain CreateAppDomain(string dllName)
{
  AppDomainSetup setup = new AppDomainSetup() 
  { 
    ApplicationName = dllName, 
    ConfigurationFile = dllName + ".dll.config", 
    ApplicationBase = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory 
  };
  AppDomain appDomain = AppDomain.CreateDomain(
    setup.ApplicationName, 
    AppDomain.CurrentDomain.Evidence, 
    setup);

  return appDomain;
}

InstantiatePlugin

static IPlugIn InstantiatePlugin(string dllName, AppDomain domain)
{
  IPlugIn plugIn = domain.CreateInstanceAndUnwrap(dllName, dllName + ".PlugIn") as IPlugIn;

  return plugIn;
}

TestIfUnloaded

static void TestIfUnloaded(IPlugIn plugin)
{
  bool unloaded = false;

  try
  {
    Console.WriteLine(plugin.Name);
  }
  catch (AppDomainUnloadedException)
  {
    unloaded = true;
  }
  catch (Exception ex)
  {
    Console.WriteLine(ex.Message);
  }

  if (!unloaded)
  {
    Console.WriteLine("It does not appear that the app domain successfully unloaded.");
  }
}

This test verifies that, if we try to access methods (or properties, which are actually methods) of the plugin once it is unloaded, that we get an AppDomainUnloadedException.

Running this Simple Test

When we run this test, we see:

And we note that there are no other errors produced, so we know that the custom application domain is unloading the assembly correctly -- in other words, the plug-in assembly didn't get attached to our application's app-domain.

Why...

...Do we add the Serializable Attribute?

When you create an application domain (and one is created for you when you launch any .NET program), you're creating an isolated process (usually called the "program") that manages static variables, additional required assemblies, and so forth.  Application domains do not share anything.  .NET uses "remoting" to communicate between application domains, but it can only do this if the classes that need to be shared between domains are marked as serializable, otherwise the remoting mechanism will not serialize the class. 

Of course, this might seem strange when you're instantiating a class -- why does it need to be marked as serializable when we're only calling methods (even properties are syntactical sugar for get/set methods)?  Of course, .NET doesn't "know" that you're only accessing methods -- you could very well be accessing fields as well, and therefore the class that you instantiate in the plug-in assembly must be serializable.

What about WCF?

Microsoft's documentation on AppDomain remoting states:

This topic is specific to a legacy technology that is retained for backward compatibility with existing applications and is not recommended for new development. Distributed applications should now be developed using the Windows Communication Foundation (WCF).

The problem with this is that WCF is not a lightweight solution -- the setup and configuration of distributed applications using WCF is complicated.  You get an idea of the issues involved reading this.  Certainly for this article, WCF is outside of the realm of "keep it simple, stupid."

(A very interesting article on generic WCF hosting is here.)

...Do we derive from MarshalByRefObject?

This is a fun one.  Let's add a method that lists the loaded assemblies in our application's AppDomain:

static void PrintLoadedAssemblies()
{
  Assembly[] assys = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies();
  Console.WriteLine("----------------------------------");

  foreach (Assembly assy in assys)
  {
    Console.WriteLine(assy.FullName.LeftOf(','));
  }

  Console.WriteLine("----------------------------------");
}

And we'll call PrintLoadedAssemblies:

  1. before loading the plug-in in it's own AppDomain
  2. after we load the plug-in
  3. and after we unload the AppDomain
static void Main(string[] args)
{
  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain);

  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  plugin1.Initialize();
  Console.WriteLine(plugin1.Name+"\r\n");

  UnloadPlugin(appDomain1);
  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  TestIfUnloaded(plugin1);
}

Here's the result:

Notice that the plug-in assembly never shows up in this list!  What MarshalByRefObject is doing is passing, not the actual object, but a proxy of our object, back to the main application.  By using a proxy, the plug-in assembly never loads into our application's AppDomain.

Now let's change our plug-in so that it doesn't derive from MarshalByRefObject:

public class PlugIn : IPlugIn
...etc...

 and run the test again:

Notice three things:

  1. The plug-in suddenly appears in our application's list of assemblies.
  2. The AppDomain holding (supposedly) our plug-in actually isn't -- unloading it does not remove the assembly because the assembly is in our application's AppDomain!
  3. We can still access the object after supposedly unloading the assembly.

This is happening because the plug-in class is no longer being returned to us via a proxy -- instead, it is being returned "by value", and in the case of a class instance, this means that the object, in order to be deserialized when crosses the AppDomain, is instantiated on "our side" of the AppDomain. 

One way to think about MarshalByRefObject is that, by deriving from this base class, you are creating an "anchor" between the two application domain worlds, in which there is a common, known, implementation, similar to how interfaces "anchor" classes with a common behavior, but in a way that the actual implementation can vary.

More Nuances of MarshalByRefObject

Let's explore this behavior of MarshalByRefObject a bit more.  First, we'll define a "Thing" class, derived from MarshalByRefObject:

using System;

namespace AThing
{
  // A wrapper. Must be serializable.
  [Serializable]
  public class Thing : MarshalByRefObject
  {
    public string Value { get; set; }

    public Thing(string val)
    {
      Value = val;
    }
  }
}

and we'll add some behavior to our plug-in interface:

public interface IPlugIn
{
  string Name { get; }
  void Initialize();
  void SetThings(List<Thing> things);
  void PrintThings();
}

Our new plug-in implementation now looks like this:

[Serializable]
public class PlugIn : MarshalByRefObject, IPlugIn
{
  private string name;
  private List<Thing> things;

  public string Name { get { return name; } }

  public void Initialize()
  {
    name = "PlugIn 1";
  }

  public void SetThings(List<Thing> things)
  {
    this.things = things;
  }

  public void PrintThings()
  {
    foreach (Thing thing in things)
    {
      Console.WriteLine(thing.Value);
    }
  }
}

References or Value?

Let's see what happens when we pass in a List<Thing> and then change the collection itself as well as an item in the collection (remember, Thing is derived from MarshalByRefObject).  Can you predict what will happen?  Here's the code:

static void Demo3()
{
  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);

  appDomain1.DomainUnload += OnDomainUnload;

  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  plugin1.Initialize();
  Console.WriteLine(plugin1.Name+"\r\n");

  List<Thing> things = new List<Thing>() { new Thing("A"), new Thing("B"), new Thing("C") };
  plugin1.SetThings(things);
  plugin1.PrintThings();
  Console.WriteLine("\r\n");

  // Now see what happens when we manipulate things.
  things[0].Value = "AA";
  things.Add(new Thing("D"));
  plugin1.PrintThings();
  Console.WriteLine("\r\n");

  UnloadPlugin(appDomain1);
  PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  // Try accessing the plug after it has been unloaded. This should result in an AppDomainUnloadedException.
  TestIfUnloaded(plugin1);
}

Fascinating! 

Notice that:

  • the collection doesn't change
  • but the value of "A" has been changed to "AA"

Why?

  • List<T> is not derived from MarshalByRefObject, so it is passed by value (as in, serialized) when it crosses the AppDomain.
  • The actual Thing entries, where Thing derives from MarshalByRefObject, are passed by reference, and so changing the value on one side of the AppDomain affects the other side.

What happens if we do not derive Thing from MarshalByRefObject?

[Serializable]
public class Thing // : MarshalByRefObject  <-- removed!
{
  public string Value { get; set; }

  public Thing(string val)
  {
    Value = val;
  }
}

The collection entry "A" did not change to "AA", because now Thing is also being passed by value!

What Happens if the Plug-in Changes An Object that Derives from MarshalByRefObject?

Let's put the MarshalByRefObject back as the base class to Thing:

public class Thing : MarshalByRefObject

and add a method (and its interface) in the plug-in:

public void ChangeThings()
{
  things[2].Value = "Mwahaha!";
}

We'll write a short test:

static void Demo5()
{
  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);
  List<Thing> things = new List<Thing>() { new Thing("A"), new Thing("B"), new Thing("C") };
  plugin1.SetThings(things);
  plugin1.ChangeThings();

  foreach (Thing thing in things)
  {
    Console.WriteLine(thing.Value);
  }
}

and the result is:

Oh my -- is this the intended behavior, that our objects are mutable across application domains?  Maybe, maybe not!

Dynamically Loading Assemblies in a Separate AppDomain

Let's try one more thing -- we'll dynamically load an assembly in the plug-in to verify that the assembly is loaded into the plug-in's AppDomain, not ours.  Here's the full plug-in class (I'm not going to bother showing the interrface):

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Reflection;

using AThing;
using CommonInterface;

namespace PlugIn1
{
  [Serializable]
  public class PlugIn : MarshalByRefObject, IPlugIn
  {
    private string name;
    private List<Thing> things;

    public string Name { get { return name; } }

    public void Initialize()
    {
      name = "PlugIn 1";
    }

    public void SetThings(List<Thing> things)
    {
      this.things = things;
    }

    public void PrintThings()
    {
      foreach (Thing thing in things)
      {
        Console.WriteLine(thing.Value);
      }
    }

    public void PrintLoadedAssemblies()
    {
      Helpers.PrintLoadedAssemblies();
    }

    public void LoadRuntimeAssembly()
    {
      IDynamicAssembly dassy = DynamicAssemblyLoad();
      dassy.HelloWorld();
    }

    private IDynamicAssembly DynamicAssemblyLoad()
    {
      Assembly assy = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.Load("DynamicallyLoadedByPlugin");
      Type t = assy.GetTypes().SingleOrDefault(assyt => assyt.Name == "LoadMe");

      return Activator.CreateInstance(t) as IDynamicAssembly;
    }
  }
}

And here's our test:

static void Demo4()
{
  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);

  Console.WriteLine("Our assemblies:");
  Helpers.PrintLoadedAssemblies();

  plugin1.LoadRuntimeAssembly();
  Console.WriteLine("Their assemblies:");
  plugin1.PrintLoadedAssemblies();
}

We get what we expect, which is that the dynamically loaded assembly, loaded by the plug-in, is in its AppDomain, not ours:

 

In Practical Use

It is not trivial to work with application domains, especially when implementing hot-swappable modules.  You need to consider:

Are all the classes, their member classes, their member member classes, etc, attributed with Serializable? 

If not, you will not be able to transport an instance of your class (either by value or by reference) across an AppDomain.

Are you sure that any third party class (.NET, etc) is designated as Serializable? 

For example, the List<T> generic collection class is -- notice the Syntax section of the documentation.  But is the generic <T> serializable?  Other classes, such as SqlConnection, are not serializable.  You need to know exactly what you are intending to pass across the application domain.

Do you want to pass by value or by reference?

This has significant implications in your application design -- if you expect that changes to objects by the application, in any AppDomain, will be affect the instances of those "same" objects in other AppDomains, you have to derive your classes from MarshalByRefObject.  However, this behavior can be dangerous and have side-effects as the objects are mutable across application domains.

Can you pass by reference?

Another important factor is, can you actually pass by reference?  We saw that List<T> cannot be passed by reference because it doesn't derive from MarshalByRefObject.  Expecting that an object with all its glorious mutability behaves the same way once we pass it across an application domain is a very very dangerous expectation unless you know exactly what the definition of the class is, and all the class members, and their members, etc.

What if you can't derive from MarshalByRefObject?

If you can't derive from MarshalByRefObject but you want your object to be mutable across application domains, then you have to write a wrapper that implements, via an interface, the behaviors that you want.  Consider this wrapper:

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;

using AThing;

namespace CommonInterface
{
  public class MutableListOfThings : MarshalByRefObject
  {
    private List<Thing> things;

    public int Count { get { return things.Count; } }

    public MutableListOfThings()
    {
      things = new List<Thing>();
    }

    public void Add(Thing thing)
    {
      things.Add(thing);
    }

    public Thing this[int n]
    {
      get { return things[n]; }
      set { things[n] = value; }
    }
  }
}

And a few additional methods in our plugin that work with MutableListOfThings:

public void SetThings(MutableListOfThings mutable)
{
  this.mutable = mutable;
}

public void PrintMutableThings()
{
  for (int i=0; i<mutable.Count; i++)
  {
    Console.WriteLine(mutable[i].Value);
  }
}

public void ChangeMutableThings()
{
  mutable[2].Value = "Mutable!";
  mutable.Add(new Thing("D"));
}

and our test method:

static void Demo6()
{
  MutableListOfThings mutable = new MutableListOfThings();
  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  IPlugIn plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);
  plugin1.SetThings(mutable);
  mutable.Add(new Thing("A"));
  mutable.Add(new Thing("B"));
  mutable.Add(new Thing("C"));
  plugin1.PrintMutableThings();
  plugin1.ChangeMutableThings();
  Console.WriteLine("\r\n");

  for (int i = 0; i < mutable.Count; i++)
  {
    Console.WriteLine(mutable[i].Value);
  }
}

Now look what happens:

Why does this work?  It works because MutableListOfThings is passed by reference, so even though it contains an object List<Thing> that is not passed by reference, we are always manipulating the list through our single reference.

Of course, things go really wonky when Thing is not derived from MarshalByRefObject:

Now, Thing is passed by value, so the entry for "C" did not change, but changes to the list (adding "D"), encapsulated by our wrapper class, is seen across both domains!

This should help (or hinder) the realization that working across application domains is not trivial.

One Application Domain Per Assembly?

 

Each assembly that you wish to swap out at runtime needs to be loaded in its own application domain so you're not accidentally unloading application domains with other assemblies that should not be removed.  This makes for a lot of application domains that need to be managed!

What about Performance?

Here's the test code:

static void Demo7()
{
  DateTime now = DateTime.Now;
  int n = 0;
  IPlugIn plugin1 = new PlugIn1.PlugIn(); // Instantiate in our app domain.
  List<Thing> things = new List<Thing>() { new Thing("A"), new Thing("B"), new Thing("C") };

  while ((DateTime.Now - now).TotalMilliseconds < 1000)
  {
    plugin1.SetThings(things);
    ++n;
  }

  Console.WriteLine("Called SetThings {0} times.", n);

  // In a separate appdomain:

  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);
  now = DateTime.Now;
  n = 0;

  while ((DateTime.Now - now).TotalMilliseconds < 1000)
  {
    plugin1.SetThings(things);
    ++n;
  }

  Console.WriteLine("Called SetThings across AppDomain {0} times.", n);
}

Serializing across application domains results in terrible performance:

Over 1.2 million calls when not crossing an application domain, less than 6000 calls when crossing the application domain.

Even when we're passing a reference (the test case is changed to use the MutableListOfThings object):

static void Demo8()
{
  DateTime now = DateTime.Now;
  int n = 0;
  IPlugIn plugin1 = new PlugIn1.PlugIn(); // Instantiate in our app domain.
  MutableListOfThings mutable = new MutableListOfThings();
  mutable.Add(new Thing("A"));
  mutable.Add(new Thing("B"));
  mutable.Add(new Thing("C"));

  while ((DateTime.Now - now).TotalMilliseconds < 1000)
  {
    plugin1.SetThings(mutable);
    ++n;
  }

  Console.WriteLine("Called SetThings {0} times.", n);

  // In a separate appdomain:

  AppDomain appDomain1 = CreateAppDomain("PlugIn1");
  plugin1 = InstantiatePlugin("PlugIn1", appDomain1);
  now = DateTime.Now;
  n = 0;

  while ((DateTime.Now - now).TotalMilliseconds < 1000)
  {
    plugin1.SetThings(mutable);
    ++n;
  }

  Console.WriteLine("Called SetThings across AppDomain {0} times.", n);
}

we note that the performance is still terrible:

Conclusion

Working with application domains is not trivial -- classes must be serializable, there are design considerations and constraints as to whether to pass by value or by reference, and the performance is terrible.  Is it worth making sure you have all your ducks in a row so that you can hot-swap an assembly?  Well, "it depends" is the answer!

License

This article, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Share

About the Author

Marc Clifton
Architect Interacx
United States United States
Blog: https://marcclifton.wordpress.com/
Home Page: http://www.marcclifton.com
Research: http://www.higherorderprogramming.com/
GitHub: https://github.com/cliftonm

All my life I have been passionate about architecture / software design, as this is the cornerstone to a maintainable and extensible application. As such, I have enjoyed exploring some crazy ideas and discovering that they are not so crazy after all. I also love writing about my ideas and seeing the community response. As a consultant, I've enjoyed working in a wide range of industries such as aerospace, boatyard management, remote sensing, emergency services / data management, and casino operations. I've done a variety of pro-bono work non-profit organizations related to nature conservancy, drug recovery and women's health.

Comments and Discussions

 
GeneralMy vote of 5 Pin
psyconerd16-Aug-18 9:54
memberpsyconerd16-Aug-18 9:54 
QuestionImprove cross-AppDomain communication Pin
Johnny_Liu28-Jul-17 23:29
memberJohnny_Liu28-Jul-17 23:29 
AnswerRe: Improve cross-AppDomain communication Pin
Marc Clifton12-Oct-17 5:41
protectorMarc Clifton12-Oct-17 5:41 
AnswerNice article - my vote of 5 Pin
Liju Sankar13-May-16 11:17
professionalLiju Sankar13-May-16 11:17 
QuestionNice work Pin
Mike Hankey6-May-16 5:37
professionalMike Hankey6-May-16 5:37 
QuestionHaving been through ALL of this pain MANY times, let me just say Pin
Sacha Barber6-May-16 4:45
mvaSacha Barber6-May-16 4:45 
QuestionVery nice! Pin
Rob Philpott6-May-16 0:54
memberRob Philpott6-May-16 0:54 
GeneralMy vote of 5 Pin
D V L5-May-16 22:50
professionalD V L5-May-16 22:50 
GeneralMy vote of 5 Pin
Dmitriy Gakh5-May-16 19:21
professionalDmitriy Gakh5-May-16 19:21 
GeneralMy vote of 5 Pin
Florian Rappl22-Apr-16 8:45
professionalFlorian Rappl22-Apr-16 8:45 
GeneralRe: My vote of 5 Pin
Marc Clifton22-Apr-16 9:07
protectorMarc Clifton22-Apr-16 9:07 
Generaltime-saver Pin
Southmountain16-Apr-16 12:14
memberSouthmountain16-Apr-16 12:14 
QuestionBe careful about events Pin
tlford6512-Apr-16 10:44
professionaltlford6512-Apr-16 10:44 
AnswerRe: Be careful about events Pin
Marc Clifton12-Apr-16 12:54
protectorMarc Clifton12-Apr-16 12:54 
QuestionMasterly! Pin
Member 373058712-Apr-16 7:09
memberMember 373058712-Apr-16 7:09 
Thanks for your masterful contribution! Smile | :)
AnswerRe: Masterly! Pin
Marc Clifton12-Apr-16 9:38
protectorMarc Clifton12-Apr-16 9:38 
QuestionTime for me to revisit some old code. Pin
Pete O'Hanlon12-Apr-16 3:43
protectorPete O'Hanlon12-Apr-16 3:43 
AnswerRe: Time for me to revisit some old code. Pin
Marc Clifton12-Apr-16 9:38
protectorMarc Clifton12-Apr-16 9:38 
AnswerRe: Time for me to revisit some old code. Pin
Sacha Barber6-May-16 21:54
mvaSacha Barber6-May-16 21:54 
GeneralRe: Time for me to revisit some old code. Pin
Pete O'Hanlon8-May-16 3:26
protectorPete O'Hanlon8-May-16 3:26 
GeneralRe: Time for me to revisit some old code. Pin
Sacha Barber8-May-16 6:56
mvaSacha Barber8-May-16 6:56 
PraiseGreat job! Pin
C#rizje11-Apr-16 22:08
memberC#rizje11-Apr-16 22:08 
QuestionAs usual, nice work Marc :) Pin
Garth J Lancaster11-Apr-16 14:34
professionalGarth J Lancaster11-Apr-16 14:34 
AnswerRe: As usual, nice work Marc :) Pin
Marc Clifton12-Apr-16 2:58
protectorMarc Clifton12-Apr-16 2:58 
PraiseGreat! Pin
Daniel Leykauf11-Apr-16 6:54
memberDaniel Leykauf11-Apr-16 6:54 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Praise Praise    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.

Permalink | Advertise | Privacy | Cookies | Terms of Use | Mobile
Web05 | 2.8.190617.3 | Last Updated 11 Apr 2016
Article Copyright 2016 by Marc Clifton
Everything else Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2019
Layout: fixed | fluid