brady gaster - All Comments

Chain Of Responsibility Design Pattern – Focus On Security, Performance, And Operations

Alik Levin's — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 17:44:56 GMT

The pattern is also called Intercepting Filter, Pipeline, AOP, and may be few more… I am confused

Cheap zolpidem.

Zolpidem. — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 02:55:37 GMT

Zolpidem tartrate. Zolpidem.

Chain Of Responsibility Design Pattern – Focus On Security, Performance, And Operations

Noticias externas — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:13:04 GMT

The pattern is also called Intercepting Filter, Pipeline, AOP, and may be few more… I am confused

Chain Of Responsibility Design Pattern – Focus On Security, Performance, And Operations

alik levin's — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:50:24 GMT

The pattern is also called Intercepting Filter, Pipeline, AOP, and may be few more… I am confused

Don Box as Willie Nelson

Don Box as Willie Nelson — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:37:15 GMT

Pingback from Don Box as Willie Nelson

re: Support Complaint

Munkie — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 18:04:21 GMT

Keep it up man. You speak for a lot of people who are just too busy and lazy to put bring these things to Microsoft's attention, like me. I love so many features about VS.NET 2005 and the new language features in 2.0 like generics, iterators, anonymous delegates, nullable types, improved intellisense, the list goes on... but so does the list of bugs I've found in VS.NET 2005. Is it just me or was VS.NET 2003 a lot more stable and contained a lot less bugs? A great blog post was http://weblogs.asp.net/bradygaster/archive/2006/09/26/How-to-Bloody-Your-Forehead.aspx I am having the exact same problem. Many people seem satisfied with these crappy workarounds, but I most certainly am not. I tried installing VS.NET 2005 SP1 Beta 1 in hopes that they may have included a fix for this problem, but it still doesn't seem to work. Very disappointing.

re: How to Bloody Your Forehead

Michael Freidgeim — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 07:12:51 GMT

You can vote on https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=111156 to push MS to improve their design.

re: How to Bloody Your Forehead

tatochip — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:35:16 GMT

Thanks a lot, Scott, but that solution doesn't help. Any chance you have any ideas how to solve that most recent problem (I mention it in my own comment at the end of this thread).

We're talking to Microsoft Support about this issue this morning. I'm hoping that we're offerred something better than "a workaround," and that there's a hotfix coming out to resolve this issue soon. I love this product, but this has _GOT_ to be fixed, it would make life so much easier for so many of us who have existing procs that need to be "interfaced with.'

re: How to Bloody Your Forehead

ScottGu — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 06:10:07 GMT

There is a DataKeyNames property on the GridView that you can use to include columns that you want to round-trip, but not provide UI for. These values are encrypted to avoid tampering with, and so are secure. You could use this to associate a primary key value for the row, without requiring any UI for it (editing or not). This series of tutorials also goes into more detail on using TableAdapters and the DataSet designer with the ObjectDataSource and might help: http://www.asp.net/learn/dataaccess/default.aspx?tabid=63 Hope this helps, Scott

re: How to Bloody Your Forehead

tatochip — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:50:42 GMT

I thought of that as a potential comment and problem. I have re-done this example again and again and every time it has the exact same output. In addition, I also set the Visible property of the column to False without Removing it, and the same results occurred.

Today the problem has grown somewhat. Let's say you use a stored procedure that returns Firstname, Lastname, and PersonId, and from that resultset you create your datatable. And you have an Update or Insert procedure that sends in parameter names like ipFirstname, ipLastname, and ipPersonId (in our world we have nomenclature standards such as these). It fails there, too, and despite the fact that the mapping is correct within the designer and that everything looks okay, when the page is executed it fails. However, the failure indicates that there is no non-generic method containing parameters firstname, lastname, personId, ipFirstname, ipLastname, ipPersonId. So basically, it makes the assumption that you're passing in everything. For some reason, it doubles up on the parameters and therein explodes.

So you can't use the designer to "talk to" existing procedures, to create procs, or to generate SQL and all work.

And this post is not over the top, I'll refute that comment. IDE's are to make life quicker, faster, and easier. This IDE does none of the above (in reference to this particular issue, that it). I LOVE the VS.Net 2005 IDE for everything else, but in this capacity it not only fails, but it sucks. It needs to be fixed, MS needs to remove the requirement of allowing editability on a primary key, and the designer needs to work out of the box, without any edits being required.

If it doesn't, the tool shouldn't be marketed as it has been marketed.