|
You can get the ip address(es) from an host name with the following code:
System.Net.Dns.GetHostEntry(hostname).AddressList;
This method will retrieve all the ip addresses corresponding to a given host, documentation here.
For example, if hostname is "www.google.com" you will get:
{System.Net.IPAddress[6]}
[0]: {74.125.39.105}
[1]: {74.125.39.106}
[2]: {74.125.39.103}
[3]: {74.125.39.104}
[4]: {74.125.39.99}
[5]: {74.125.39.147}
|
|
|
|
|
Except that if you use it on yourself, you will get your LAN address.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if he passes the external dns address of the server, I think he will get the external ip address, or am I wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Only if he can get the external dns address in the first place, which might not even exist
Btw, I didn't 1-vote you, it didn't seem that bad - just "not exactly what he asked for", his question sortof half implies that it's all a local thing
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, I was not arguing with you, only clarifying what I had in mind while answering to the OP.
I was more concentrated on his second question (getting the IP address from the browser url) that might imply he knows the external address.
|
|
|
|
|
Hm yea, you got a point
Well he's not saying anything yet, but I guess we'll find out 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, normally I wouldn't recommend it, but please check my article - it gives you the information you need to get your public IP address with C# (and just C#) without cheats (not using external websites that may disappear at any moment)
The second thing, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all.
I've spent 3 days searching for this and trying different alternatives, but nothing works.
I have an app which works perfectly on Windows XP:
1) Monitorizes some windows.
2) When one of them reaches a certain state, my app brings it to the foreground.
3) Then, does something with it (moves the mouse, clicks something...).
4) Finally, my app brings to the foreground the window that was visible before step 2, so the user can resume his work where he was before.
My problem is that, when I execute this app on Windows Vista, the step 4) seems not to work. I've been reading a lot these days, and I've found that the "SetForegroundWindow()" method I was using works differently on Vista, so I started using "AttachThreadInput()" following an example that I found somewhere:
private void activateWindow(IntPtr hWnd)
{
if (IsIconic(hWnd))
ShowWindowAsync(hWnd, SW_RESTORE);
ShowWindowAsync(hWnd, SW_SHOW);
SetForegroundWindow(hWnd);
IntPtr foregroundWindow = GetForegroundWindow();
IntPtr Dummy = IntPtr.Zero;
uint foregroundThreadId = GetWindowThreadProcessId(foregroundWindow, Dummy);
uint thisThreadId = GetWindowThreadProcessId(hWnd, Dummy);
if (AttachThreadInput(thisThreadId, foregroundThreadId, true))
{
BringWindowToTop(hWnd);
SetForegroundWindow(hWnd);
AttachThreadInput(thisThreadId, foregroundThreadId, false);
}
if (GetForegroundWindow() != hWnd)
{
IntPtr Timeout = IntPtr.Zero;
SystemParametersInfo(SPI_GETFOREGROUNDLOCKTIMEOUT, 0, Timeout, 0);
SystemParametersInfo(SPI_SETFOREGROUNDLOCKTIMEOUT, 0, Dummy, SPIF_SENDCHANGE);
BringWindowToTop(hWnd);
SetForegroundWindow(hWnd);
SystemParametersInfo(SPI_SETFOREGROUNDLOCKTIMEOUT, 0, Timeout, SPIF_SENDCHANGE);
}
}
From my app, I do the following when a timer ticks and finds that one of the background windows must be activated:
IntPtr originalWHwnd = GetForegroundWindow();
activateWindow(hWnd);
activateWindow(originalWHwnd);
That code still works on Windows XP, but still doesn't work on Vista: step 4 will not bring to foreground the first window.
Please, could you enlighten me?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
So it works the first time you call it, but not the second time? hmmm... does not sound logical to me.
perhaps you have an issue elsewhere. maybe your GetForegroundWindow() is not returning the correct handle (just an example)
Life goes very fast. Tomorrow, today is already yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
You're right, could be something like that. But why would it fail only in Vista? I will debug it carefully when I can...
|
|
|
|
|
The thing you have to remember is that the user should always be in control of the PC. In the good old days of windows 95, any app could bring itself to the front to alert the user. After a while this created all kinds of problems because you would be typing away and other apps would be grabbing focus all over the place and interrupting your typing, (often catching your key presses and causing unexpected behaviour)
The powers that be realised that this was wrong and decided to fix it. So they changed things so apps couldn't bring them selves to the front, and instead just flashed the toolbar.
this is great except there are some people that still want to slam their apps to the foreground, so these people started working out ways round the restrictions (like the one you have used). Microsoft take note of these hacks and fix the problem for the next version.
The short story is that you should never be forcefully taking focus from what the user is doing. That is why vista doesn't support it. Instead you should flash the toolbar and wait for the user to respond to your app.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Simon. Yes, these days I've read some explanations like yours and I knew why Microsoft made these changes.
I don't want to bring my own app to the foreground, but windows that were already open (by the user himself) before my app run. It's just as if the user would have pressed Alt+Tab and then interacted with those windows, only that my app automates this.
And the fact is that, if I want the window to be active, I can, in a messy way. As a last resort, I could set foreground window, and then move the mouse down and click the taskbar to activate the flashing window or something. But I don't think that's the way things must be done, and Microsoft should allow programmers to easily bring windows to the front (because, if not, they will do it anyway but in the hard way).
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I did some automation to have two apps exchange some data. It used the whole range of Get/SetForeGroundWindow, SendKeys, SendInput, and what have you. It runs fine on both XP and Vista, never had any trouble with it. I did develop on Vista (my main machine runs Vista, and I like it!), and it worked on XP right away. I just don't know if the reverse would also have worked right away.
I did implement automatic retries and a range of checks, e.g. after each SetForeGroundWindow, I wait some msec, then check by reading the title of the result of GetForeGroundWindow, to make absolutely sure I wasn't sending keyboard/mouse actions to the wrong app (the user, not me, might be touching the system while this automation is running).
BTW: I did not use AttachThreadInput, I hadn't even heard of it.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Show formatted code inside PRE tags, and give clear symptoms when describing a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, I'll implement retries as well, maybe the problem can be solved with some delays here and there and SetForegroundWindow works after all...
I'll let you all know when I can test it, maybe next week. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Well, now it works. I added some delays and a retries policy (as you suggested), and now the above code works on both Windows XP and Vista.
Thank you all!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am trying to traverse all email from Inbox Folder of outlook but after 672 email I got an exception "Spacified cast is not valid" Even Inbox has more than 1600 emails.
My code is like
Microsoft.Office.Interop.Outlook.Items MyItem=mItem.Items;
MyItem.Sort("Received", false);
foreach(Microsoft.Office.Interop.Outlook.MailItem item in MyItem)
{
....
....
}
Please tell me what is the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
Chances are that you've got something in your Received folder that isn't a MailItem. When you iterate through the items, you do an implicit cast. Change the declaration of item to a base class, and check if it's a MailItem in the loop. If it is, cast and work with it as normal. If it isn't, continue iterating
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
|
|
|
|
|
Please tell me how to do that?
|
|
|
|
|
It appears that Outlook's interface isn't type safe. Yuck. Try something like this:
foreach(object item in MyItem)
{
if(item is Microsoft.Office.Interop.Outlook.MailItem)
{
...
...
}
}
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for idea but not able to traverse MyItem...
|
|
|
|
|
But the code in your original post does that. All that I changed in the foreach loop was the type of the variable. You have just replaced the foreach loop (not the first two lines of your code), right?
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much, its working
|
|
|
|
|
I have a byte[] of jpg image of size 1.5 kb, is there any method in C# to compress this byte[] further.
I tried by GZip class but actually its size has increased, i found that GZip class is unable to compress jpg image byte[].
Can anyone suggest me any more method.
This is actually needed bcoz the image has to be stored i smart card application and i have limited scope to allot space.
Thanx
|
|
|
|
|
Of course a general compression as used in ZIP can't do any better on images than the specialized JPEG compression that knows and understands what it is dealing with.
If you want a smaller file, you need to throw away some of the information; here are two ideas:
- reduce the number of colors
- reduce the image size
Yes, I know, both will reduce image quality as well.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Show formatted code inside PRE tags, and give clear symptoms when describing a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
For extreme requirements like this, it may justify splitting the byte array into chunks, and using a custom compression algorithm for each chunk.
For example, you may find a run of several hundred pixels with the same value, which would compress nicely with run-length encoding: The single pixel value plus a repetition factor.
Other chunks may have different types of regularity you can exploit, such as a repeated block pattern.
The compressed image will end up as a list of chunks, each with a byte identifier (that gives the compression type for that chunk) followed by that chunk's data. To decompress, go through the chunks, read the byte identifier, then execute the corresponding code to reconstruct that chunk.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
