|
Can you pls send code to me. I don't say I will solve the problem but I want to give it a try
Sandeep Naik
sandeep_n75@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
hi
i add you on my msn messenger ... and i am waiting for you to come online and have a chat with you on it ...
Maz
Mazhar Hussain
|
|
|
|
|
I'm making a program to schedule my programs and to shut down my computer in a choosen time but this way my processor is 100 percent, logicaly. How can i change this.
while (!(System.DateTime.Now.Equals(shut.getDateTime())))
{
}
this.Computer_Shutdown();
Please help me. Thank you. 
|
|
|
|
|
Add a Thread.Sleep(1) into your while loop and cpu usage will drop 
Otherwise you could use a timer to periodically process the following:
if (System.DateTime.Now.Equals(shut.getDateTime()))
this.Computer_Shutdown();
www.troschuetz.de
|
|
|
|
|
Using such a busy wait is _really_ bad style.
I'd suggest the following:
Create a new timer and set it's interval to the amount of milliseconds from now to the desired shutdown time:
Timer shutTimer = new Timer();
shutTimer.Tick += new EventHandler(shutTimer_Tick);
TimeSpan waitDuration = shut.GetDateTime().Subtract(DateTime.Now);
shutTimer.Interval = (int)waitDuration.TotalMilliseconds;
shutTimer.Start();
[...].private void shutTimer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
this.Computer_Shutdown();
}
Regards,
mav
|
|
|
|
|
But I can't use a timer because I'm using a thread to do this, i tried and did not work. The idea is great. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's why there are several different types of timers in .NET.
If you can't use a System.Windows.Forms.Timer (because you don't have a GUI) then a System.Timers.Timer should work fine. The events differ a little, but the concept stays the same: Calculate how long until the desired shutdown time and wind up the timer...
Regards,
mav
|
|
|
|
|
I want to create a single setup project that:
1. Upgrades to Windows Installer 2.0
2. installs a C# setup project MSI
Do u think i would be needing to upgrade through the redistributable package of SP2 or is there another way?
I have previously used a similar setup project(available on the microsoft website) that installs a .NET Framework Application and Dotnetfx.exe (the redistributable package of dotnet framework + upgrades to Windows Installer 2.0). This time i dont need the dotnetframework, only need to upgrade the Windows installer to 2.0, so that my MSI runs (it requires Windows Istaller 2.0)
Please help me out here.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's a C# project, the user must have the .NET Framework. All versions of the framework, IIRC, use Windows Installer 2.0. If the user already has the framework, they should already have Windows Installer 2.0.
If you're using VS.NET to create the MSI, in Project Properties you can set the Bootstrapper to 'Windows Installer Bootstrapper'. This copies InstMsiA.exe and InstMsiW.exe (the Windows Installer redistributables) and a Setup.exe to the output folder, and generates a Setup.ini which tells Setup.exe to launch your MSI. If you want to ship that as a single EXE, you should look into something like IExpress[^].
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Is there a simple method to place two single quotes anywhere there is a single quote so that single quotes can be inserted into a database? Currently I have been searching through each string (textbox, or what ever it may be) and manually (looking at each character in the string) replacing the single quote with two single quotes. I have also tried the Replace function but that does not appear to change the single quotes. If any one has experinced this please pass on your knowledge or point me in the right direction.
Thanks
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
If you use parametarised queries you can get around this problem. Also, parameterised queries are more secure as they are less suseptable to injection attacks.
"If a man empties his purse into his head, no man can take it away from him, for an investment in knowledge pays the best interest." -- Joseph E. O'Donnell
Not getting the response you want from a question asked in an online forum: How to Ask Questions the Smart Way!
|
|
|
|
|
And they are much faster too, since the SQL (which has to be compiled) can be cached for every request.
There's simply no excuse for not using them!
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo Hallman wrote:
they are much faster too
Good point! I keep forgetting that. I still have this mind set that you have to make a stored procedure for to have the SQL cached in a pre-compiled state.
"If a man empties his purse into his head, no man can take it away from him, for an investment in knowledge pays the best interest." -- Joseph E. O'Donnell
Not getting the response you want from a question asked in an online forum: How to Ask Questions the Smart Way!
|
|
|
|
|
I use replace() for this all the time...
Replace("'", "''")
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
how to send msg to remote host queue using ip address(using System.Messaging.MessageQueue).
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to check if any specific program, e.g. Excel, running.
Can anyone here help me?
Same effect as when upgrading IE, it will check if there is any IE running, if yes, it will warn the user to close all IE before continue.
Thank You!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Process.GetProcessesByName
(System.Diagnostics)
|
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
Why there is a split between IEnumerator and IEnumerable. I mean, why did the designers of .NET decide it was necessary to implement 2 interfaces in order to support enumeration?
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
You have to implement every methods of any interface you implement... (stupid sentence, i know)
So, if you just need to be "enumberable", you can simply implement that interface.
Cheers
Sebastian
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
My question is Why Framework Designers kept two interface for achiving one idea. That is cusom Enumeration through a custum collection.
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
sreejith ss nair wrote:
why did the designers of .NET decide it was necessary to implement 2 interfaces in order to support enumeration?
Because you might want to have two separate threads enumerate over the same collection at the same time. Because the iteration model used in .NET does not permit alterations to a collection during enumeration this is completely safe.
The IEnumerator interface allows you to get the current state of a particular enumeration. While the IEnumerable interface allows you to retrieve a (normally new) IEnumerator object.
So, if you have two threads they can both get separate objects with an IEnumerator interface to the same collection - and both threads can iterate over the collection at their own speed without coliding with one another.
Also, it allows you to provide sevaral different ways to enumerate over one collection. A collection, through the IEnumerable interface, can expose a default enumeration, while it can also expose more object with the IEnumerator interface for other non-default enumerations. For instance, the default enumerator could just iterate through the collection in the order in which the data appears. While a second IEnumerator could expose the contents of the collection in a particular sort order, or with some filter.
Does this help?
"If a man empties his purse into his head, no man can take it away from him, for an investment in knowledge pays the best interest." -- Joseph E. O'Donnell
Not getting the response you want from a question asked in an online forum: How to Ask Questions the Smart Way!
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
Thanks for this information. Yesterday i wrote an article discussing IEnumerable, IEnumerator. And i got a suggection which ask "why microsoft desided like that ?". I can't able to help him out. Now i can and i will do it.
Url. http://www.codeproject.com/csharp/sssienumerable.asp
thanks
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
See also my artice on the same subject: http://www.codeproject.com/csharp/csenumerators.asp[^]
Although I have to admit that I didn't really think about it all that much until you mentioned it here - Maybe it is time to update my article too.
"If a man empties his purse into his head, no man can take it away from him, for an investment in knowledge pays the best interest." -- Joseph E. O'Donnell
Not getting the response you want from a question asked in an online forum: How to Ask Questions the Smart Way!
|
|
|
|
|
So then the question changes to why didn't they call them "IThreadSafeEnumerator" and "IAmNotAThreadSafeEnumerator" or something more self-explanatory like that.
Matt Gerrans
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
