|
Yes just him... That after fighting longer time on this subject
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Ick.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
It's clunky, I tried to use async but gave up, just too much trouble too implement.
And await ... surprise, does not wait !
I prefer working with Tasks and Task.Factory.
|
|
|
|
|
RickZeeland wrote: I prefer working with Tasks and Task.Factory.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you really asking a programming question here, under the guise of a public opinion question? hmm.
Edit: just checking to make sure this is being done correctly. Why are you returning a new result object?
c# - How does Task<int> become a int? - Stack Overflow[^]
modified 10-May-18 12:47pm.
|
|
|
|
|
public IEnumerable<int> TheAnswer()
{
yield return 42;
}
Signature says IEnumerable<int> , but the value after return is an int .
OK, it's not quite the same thing: you're using yield return instead of just return . But it's similar.
Would you have preferred another contextual keyword for async methods?
public async Task<Result> LoadData()
{
...
async return result;
return async result;
}
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Would you have preferred another contextual keyword for async methods?
public async Task<Result> LoadData()
{
...
async return result;
return async result;
}
Now that's horrifying.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Minier wrote: Now that's horrifying.
You're not wrong. I just wanted to see if Chris thought it would have been less "weird" to have a modifier on the return , like you do in an iterator method.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Get that var out of there.
|
|
|
|
|
Why? you don't need to. the "new" instantiation tells you what it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Kids these days, they don't have time to define what's the actual variable they're using. "The compiler will figure it out".
|
|
|
|
|
At first glance, it feels weird: the actual weirdness it is just awaiting your full consideration.
|
|
|
|
|
await/async is cool, but it's a bit of a minefield as well. Especially in UI code, where deadlocks are easy to create.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft: "Look, we now have this async/await construction which makes asynchronous programming super easy."
Random dev: *Implements async/await, but it's still asynchronous programming which just isn't easy, ever, so gets deadlocks and race conditions*
Microsoft: "Also, we want you to use it everywhere, all the time."
Random dev: "Ths fineis i[^]"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attempting to do an iisreset...
Who writes these errors?
C:\windows\system32>iisreset
Attempting stop...
Internet services successfully stopped
Attempting start...
Restart attempt failed.
The IIS Admin Service or the World Wide Web Publishing Service, or a service dep
endent on them failed to start. The service, or dependent services, may had an
error during its startup or may be disabled.
snapshot of console : https://i.stack.imgur.com/FK3WP.png^
|
|
|
|
|
have you tried calling/emailing the helpful people at ms support,
or just gone ahead and reinstalled windows without getting their advice to do so?
Signature ready for installation. Please Reboot now.
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: or just gone ahead and reinstalled windows without getting their advice to do so?
Reinstall is in process...
|
|
|
|
|
If that's your biggest IIS gripe, they've really improved over the last time I've used it...
|
|
|
|
|
Grammar, sir (ma'am), is SERIOUS bidness!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Did you try switching it off and on again ?
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
abmv wrote: Did you try switching it off and on again ?
I turned it off and that seemed to work.
No need to power it up again and waste all that energy.
|
|
|
|
|
It's probably written something like:
Error %ld:
The %s or the %s, or a service dependent on them failed to %s.
The %s, or %s, may had an %s during its %s or may be %s.
So nobody has seen how stupid the error message looks until it fails.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Randor wrote: So nobody has seen how stupid the error message looks until it fails.
So I guess I'm the genius who is the first person ever to make that error occur.
I knew I'd be amazing one day.
|
|
|
|
|