Discussions

Maybe I'm stating the obvious... did you enable SQL security on your SQLServer?

Well, probably I'm being silly, but the original app was written with .NET 1.0 and I'd rather not have that around on my machine.

Similarly, if I'm not mistaken, the clients would then have to install both the versions of .NET which would be rather uncomfortable and is going to get more than one eyebrow to lift.

I'd go to great lengths just to keep the solution "straight 2.0". Anyway thanks for the advice.

--m

 

Hello,
I was asked to revamp an application with VS2005. For some reason the original app (written with .NET 1.0), stores an ArrayList of ArrayLists of Image objects via binary serialization. (Don't shoot, it wasn't me!)
I must keep producing exactly the same files as these will be consumed by other apps I cannot change.
What I found seems to indicate that this is simply impossible out of the box, and I would be willing to write the file myself if this is the only way to go... yet I couldn't even find a detailed explaination about how the binary serialization works.
Any clue?

Thanks in advance
--m

Great article. Thanks
--m

Hei, I didn't know now we can really get rid of assemblies! Great!Unfortunately the bottom line of the article seems to be: "yes, now you could, but you still better not". Too bad.

Thanks a lot, footballism.
--m

Edit: I didn't see your question.
The task at hand consists of updating cross references in a document base whenever one of the documents is changed.
Each document describes a sub-assembly (in the mechanical sense), each composed of several parts. In a certain sections of the document structure, I am to find the part number and update some info.
90% of the entire expression deals with the document structure, so it never changes. The only part that changes each time is the part number affected.

If you really want, I can post the expression, but it would be worthless without a description of the document structure.

--m

Hello,
I'm using RegEx for some file processing. All's well except that the expression is large, with a small portion that needs to change at each call. This means that the expression can no longer be compiled, at least from my understanding of the documentation.
Two questions...
1) is there a workaround to compile a regular expression on the fly AND be able to unload the assembly afterwards?
2) is there any rough figure about the performance advantage between a compiled expression and one that is not?

Thanks in advance
--m

Don't get me wrong... nothing against regular expressions. It's just that having been bitten by subtle bugs in the past I tend to be cautious. Not that I would trust myself on anything on an empty stomach...

Seriously, I have a couple of questions on RegEx, but I won't hijack this thread any further.

--m

Maurits wrote:

Blue Ink wrote: With .NET 1.x you are out of luck

Well, you can use Regex.Split(...)

Right. I was under the impression that the alternative version was to get rid of RegEx. Re-read the whole thing and, yes, it was just my impression. I stand corrected.

--m

As a rule I never do RegEx's on an empty stomach... so I'll leave solutions 1 and 3 alone. I just want to signal a bug in solution 2:

Input.Split(chrDelimiter) will split the Input string on every occurrence of any of the characters in the array:
{ '#', 'A', 'B', 'E', 'G' , 'K', 'M', 'P', 'R', 'S', '_' } . Your test case is rather lucky, as the page content never contains any of the delimiters, but at the very least you should notice a huge number of empty elements in the resulting string[] (and you'll miss the 'P' of "Page" in the titles).

Knowing you as a black belt web-coder, you might have been thinking of the split() method of javascript. With .NET 1.x you are out of luck, but .NET 2.0 provides a similar functionality with the overload:
String.Split(String[])

Hope this helps.
--m

This is probably far too simple for what you need to do, and it's aimed at a vintage version of .NET (the article says 2002). Yet it supports rotations, handles and, as far as I remember, isn't that bad, at least as a starting point.

DesignSurface

Hope it helps.
--m