|
I don't think you can do in .NET
Remote Desktop that comes with XP uses Mirror Driver[^] while realvnc uses VNC[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe this[^] article will help.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello...
I have a C# project that must call Com+ objects from a server. In the past with VB6 we could create and ObjectStub for applications server that we would make a reference to like this...
dim ObjStub as object, oObject as object
Set ObjStub = CreateObject("ObjectStub" & gblServerName & ".ManagerNot", gblServerName)
Call ObjStub.GetObjectReference(Trim(sRespObject), ObjResponse, ErrorAry)
Call ObjResponse.FromService(gblFromService)
Call ObjResponse.RespFileAuditID(CStr(gblRespFileAuditID))
vOK = ObjResponse.ProcessFile("")
Something very similar to this can be done in VB.net by turning having 'Option Strict Off' like this...
Dim oDcom, oStub, aReturn As New Object
oStub = CreateObject("ObjectStub" & gblAppServer & ".ManagerNot", gblAppServer)
Call oStub.GetObjectReference("Utility.FileSup", oDcom, ErrorAry)
aReturn = oDcom.GetSharedFileInfo("DataDirectory", CType(gblInteropConString, System.Object), ErrorAry)
aReturn = oDcom.GetSharedFileInfo("FTPDirectory", CType(gblInteropConString, System.Object), ErrorAry)
I want to do something similar to this in C#, but not having any luck finding any good solutions.
Thanks For Your Help..
|
|
|
|
|
Will a program written using Visual Studio 2005 use .Net 2.0 sp1 even if both .Net 2.0 sp1 and .Net 3.0 sp1 are both installed on the PC?
The reason I ask is that a client has installed my program written in Visual Studio 2005 (and distributed with .Net 2.0 sp1) but it crashes as soon as it starts. The program runs successfully on many other client PCs. I have sent him a simple VS2005 Hello World test program and that also crashes.
He tells me he has .Net 2.0 sp1 and .Net 3.0 sp1 installed and that another program targetted at .Net3.0 sp1 works fine.
Thanks for any help...
|
|
|
|
|
.NET 3 builds upon .NET 2, so programs written for .NET 2 should continue to work with .NET 3 installed. The assemblies that you are using should be OK, because you are still using .NET 2 assemblies. I suspect that he has other issues.
What I would do is create a setup program, and include a dependency on the .NET 2 SP1 runtime, and let him run that. Then, let him run your program. Also, I would log any exceptions (even thread exceptions), and see what that tells you.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am considering using CLR Addin framework in my application and I have couple of questions which can help me in reaching the decision:
1. Are plugins written in CLR Addin framework compatible with plugins written for Visual Studio Shell ?
2. Is it possible to embed plugins which support ActiveX controls using CLR Addin library? how ?
3. Are there other plugin standards framework supports ?
Thanks,
Dmitry
|
|
|
|
|
dima5000 wrote: Are plugins written in CLR Addin framework compatible with plugins written for Visual Studio Shell ?
No. Currently if you want to write an add-in for Visual Studio you must use the Visual Studio Extensibility SDK.
dima5000 wrote: Is it possible to embed plugins which support ActiveX controls using CLR Addin library? how ?
I'm not sure about this, but if you can do so in .NET now you should be able to using System.AddIn.
dima5000 wrote: Are there other plugin standards framework supports
Currently this is the only thing supported but take a look at the Managed Extensibility Framework (MEF)[^].
Scott Dorman Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA
[ Blog][ Articles][ Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
please check http://www.golsinc.com/app7/
i need to make it in such way that when user moves his pointer inside the image, it generates coordinated inside the textbox. after one click it stores the value the when again user moves his pointer then movement looks inside 2nd textbox.
likewise he does for 3rd textbox.
Currently in this application i am not able to show changing values on mouse move. all 3 types of clicks creates rectsngle, square and tringle.
Help me please. I am making this application in Asp.net. You may help me with Javascript code also.
Thankx
Any Movie, Software, Song, Game and many more.... Only at Developer's Solution
http://www.devsol.co.nr
Search Any Torrent You Want
A Software for Torrent search only....
Must check it
...VAIBHAV SARAN
vikysaran@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
Vaibhav Saran wrote: You may help me with Javascript code also
That's bloody kind of you. There was me thinking I was going to go today without doing somebody elses javascript for them.
Now - to the crux of the matter. Presumably when you posted this question, you made a conscious effort to pick a forum. You didn't just randomly click your mouse somewhere and hope for the best. So why did you think that this forum was more appropriate than the ASP.NET[^] forum which is the very first entry in the Message Boards menu?
|
|
|
|
|
you bloody idiot, need not to post instructions if you dont know the answer. The person like are called "BEVKOOF" in india.
Any Movie, Software, Song, Game and many more.... Only at Developer's Solution
http://www.devsol.co.nr
Search Any Torrent You Want
A Software for Torrent search only....
Must check it
...VAIBHAV SARAN
vikysaran@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
Vaibhav Saran wrote: you bloody idiot, need not to post instructions if you dont know the answer.
I do know how to use the forums, which is more than you do. There are rules and guidelines for using the forums, and you don't seem to be aware of them. The first rule is post a question in the right forum - this is the .NET forum, not the ASP.NET forum.
If you have ASP.NET issues, then post them in the ASP.NET forum - that way your post will be seen by people who possibly have the answer for you. There is a reason, and as you seem to be a complete noob I'll explain it to you - the forums are searchable, so people are expected to search them for the answer to questions they have before posting a new question. This way, you can see the answer without having to post it and wait for others to answer. Now, suppose that a moron like you comes along and posts a question in the wrong forum - all of a sudden you can't get the answer you want in the forum you expect it in. You've got to start searching different forums, and that becomes wasteful. So you see, this is why you are expected to post into the right forum - and not to become abusive when you are pointed to the correct forum.
Still, if you want to trade insults sonny jim, you'll find that in a battle of wits, you're fighting unarmed.
|
|
|
|
|
Vaibhav Saran wrote: The person like are called "BEVKOOF" in india.
You could have looked to his profile before saying this.
He is a well respected MVP here in CP. Consider reading the forum guidelines before you post messages and try to respect others. People like you are spoling the name of indians.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry about it. I don't judge a nation based on the mewlings of an infant. I've worked with a lot of very smart, very talented Indians so I don't think he's representative. I'll just put it down to a misunderstanding.
|
|
|
|
|
So I am declaring a new event for a class and I get to the point where I need to define the event args. All I really need to pass through is a text string.
Now I usually follow some diligent best practice guide that I remember reading awhile ago that says you should define a new class to hold your event args instead of just passing the event data along in the class like so:
Public Event EventName (sender As Object, message As String)
So I do it like so:
Public Class EventNameEventArgs : Inherits EventArgs
Public Property Message() as String
End Class
Public Event EventName (sender as Object, e As EventNameEventArgs)
The problem is, I have the feeling that I am the only person on the face of the planet doing this  , but I have not seen any code form others that does NOT do this. I just want to get a general consensus for the group here...
I tend to think that yes, it is a good idea because it allows for the addition of new arguments latter on without breaking the existing code that references the event but...
Comments? Flames?
Please, no remarks about VB either...
|
|
|
|
|
Ray Cassick wrote: I have the feeling that I am the only person on the face of the planet doing this
You are not alone.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
i am just begginer, or intermediate.. I use user-defined events just like you, but i also create my own EventHandler to force using specific EventArgs
|
|
|
|
|
Ray Cassick wrote: The problem is, I have the feeling that I am the only person on the face of the planet doing this
No, you're not. The downside to NOT passing in a custom EventArgs is if you change the number and type of arguments that you send. If just passed, say, a String as an EventArg, then you needed to add another argument or change that String to an Integer, you'd have to rewrite the code for all instances of supplying the event args and all instances of a receiver of the event args.
When you create your own custom EventArgs, you just need to modify the EventArgs object, then update sections of code where you need to send and receive the changed/extra fields.
|
|
|
|
|
Good to know that I am not out of my mind
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a really good article.
Thanks.
I really just wanted to make sure that I was not just following some standard that most other people thought was a waste of time.
|
|
|
|
|
You are welcome
|
|
|
|
|
This is the right way to pass information to an event handler. There are a lot of benefits to this approach, but the biggest ones are that if you need to add/change the data passed to the event you can do so without changing the event interface (which would break existing code). The only time this doesn't work well is when you change from using System.EventArgs to a custom event args class, but even that is a minor change.
Scott Dorman Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA
[ Blog][ Articles][ Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I know 
It's just a lot of repetitive work creating simple inherited eventargs classes just to send a simple text message back
Don't get me wrong, I always do it that way and see the value in it. I just recently have had to go through and create a bunch of classes that used really simple event arguments and was having a little 'crisis of faith' over seeing a ton of really simple EventAargs classes, one for each event.
I initially thought about just creating a simple BasicMessageTypeEventArgs class and using that on multiple events but tossed that out the window as a bad idea just in case I ever needed to extend one event over the others...
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
You could always create a generic event args class EventArgs<T> where T is the single data element you want. This does tend to break down a bit when you want multiple data elements, but it's good for a single one without needing to create a bunch of classes that are duplicates of each other except for the property name.
Scott Dorman Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA
[ Blog][ Articles][ Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
|
|
|
|
|
As the others said, that's the "correct" way.
Along with the benefits already mentioned, is that the custom class can/should implement its own ToString which can add more detail than the string it contains.
I'd give an example, but I won't degrade myself by writing VB. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
