Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations derfloh on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
-
Faster .Compute()
Indeed, the db server will most certainly beat .Compute(). Setting this up will require a significant re-tooling of the library (which of course is not out of the question - I think I'm looking at a rewrite either way), so I'm still hoping that someone else out there has an idea on how to...- link9
- Post #5
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Faster .Compute()
I do not show the user the entire resultset, no. The temp database idea had crossed my mind. In fact, to keep it all in the same camp (the db server is SQL Server), I could even use SQL Express. That would take some amount of doing, but perhaps I could use something like sync services to...- link9
- Post #3
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Faster .Compute()
I have a class library that does calculations (usually AVERAGE) on (sometimes) large sets of data. The nature of the application is that it normally does several calculations (5-50 or more depending on user requests) on the same set of data, so the basic implementation is that I grab all the...- link9
- Thread
- Replies: 6
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Generic interface & implementation issue
<smack> The solution, of course, is to simply make the method return a List<IStateSaver> if that's what you want, rather than the generic T. </smack> The reason that this doesn't work is because of a well documented gotcha of Generics, which is Implicit Type Conversion (or a lack thereof...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Generic interface & implementation issue
Hello all - I am having an issue trying to implement a generic interface. Essentially, I have several objects in my library that I need to be able to save their state. So, I created an interface to carry this out. The pertinent bits look like this: public interface IStateSaver { ...- link9
- Thread
- Replies: 1
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Multiple Interface Question
I generally prefer the safe querying. The syntax is cleaner, and if you always code this way, you're much more flexible in what you can do. In this case, the assertion is there to ensure that things are properly in order. The answer to getting answered -- faq855-2992- link9
- Post #7
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Multiple Interface Question
Ah. I think I see what you're getting at now. So then I could do this: IDataUploader m_Uploader; IStatusReporter m_StatusReporter; void someMethod() { m_Uploader = Factory.GetInstance("Type"); m_StatusReporter = m_Uploader as IStatusReporter; Debug.Assert(m_StatusReporter != null)...- link9
- Post #5
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Multiple Interface Question
That also crossed my mind. But now, the Instanciator is programming against a class and not an Interface, which means that every time I have a new Implementer, I have to rewrite the Instanciator. That defeats the purpose of doing an Interface in the first place. The Instanciator should only...- link9
- Post #3
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Multiple Interface Question
Hello all - So I'm setting up some boilerplate code to be used internally for a common type of application. The applications will take a file and upload the data to a database. This factors out into two interfaces: public interface IDataUploader { void Upload(string p_Path...- link9
- Thread
- Replies: 6
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
DataTable.Compute() Syntax Help
Did you try using != on that last condition, instead of the NOT keyword? so: ORDER_TYPE = 'Sale' AND ORDER_TYPE = 'Charge' AND ORDER_TYPE != 'None' Otherwise, everything looks OK to me (I'm surprised it didn't work your way, too, though), so I would give that a shot. The answer to getting...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
How to know that thread is ended.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=using+callback+delegates+c%23&btnG=Google+Search The answer to getting answered -- faq855-2992- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
Invalid Cast Exception when checkbox value is null
How are you "running" it the first time when it works? Is it a PostBack/!PostBack issue? What line of code is the error being thrown on? What value from the database? Not enough information to help you here. The answer to getting answered -- faq855-2992- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
ASP 2.0 Editing GridView problem
It doesn't work because the text is not in the cell. It's in the textbox, which is in the cell. (There's a hooole, there's a hole... ahem). So first, you need to grab a reference to the textbox, and then you can access the .Text property of it. I also suggest that you use a TemplateColumn...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
Validation/Authentication Techniques
What you have there is pretty much the meat of it. You can then access the user's identity on other pages in the site by accessing: HttpContext.Current.User.Identity Are you having a specific problem with the code you posted? -paul The answer to getting answered -- faq855-2992- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
Gridview edit with hidden, readonly or both Primary Key
Either set the field as the pk on your GridView (by setting it as the sole member of the DataKeyNames array property) or hide it in a label or something in one of your other visible columns. <!-- Set it as the datakeyname --> <asp:gridview id="MyGridView" datakeynames="PkFieldName" ...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
cheecked change event not loading
The function has a logic error in it. If you were compiling this in C#, the error would be "Not all code paths return a value.". Try this: .... protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { CheckBox1.Attributes.Add("onclick", "OnCheckedChanged(this);"); }...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
ViewState and user controls
No, the ViewState is not shared. Assuming you don't need a persistent variable, then I would suggest using the HttpContext.Current.Items collection as an alternative to Session. It works like Session, but the vars only persist during a single request, so it's easier on server resources...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
Databinding to a Textbox
Hello everyone, I am using VS2005 and .NET 2.0, and I have a simple databinding question. I have a textbox on a winform w/ the id, txtSampleSize1. I also have a protected class variable of type, double, w/ the name: m_SampleSize1 I try to setup the binding between these two using the...- link9
- Thread
- Replies: 3
- Forum: C# (C sharp): Microsoft
-
security and web.config
No, the subfolder's web.config should look something like this: <configuration> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*" /> </authorization> </system.web> </configuration> Each application can only have one type of authentication, so declaring it again in a sub folder...- link9
- Post #2
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
-
impossible to update database
Updateable query error w/ access is an NTFS permissions error. some info on how to set permissions: http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=set+ntfs+permissions+on+a+folder+windows+xp&btnG=Google+Search The answer to getting answered --...- link9
- Post #6
- Forum: Microsoft: ASP.NET
