IRC Logs

Network: freenode Channel: #csharp

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.irclog.org

[15:49]<jyvnzs>so get this, i just removed ALL code from that block
[15:49]<jyvnzs>form closes
[15:49]<jyvnzs>i bet it closes simply because the button is named 'OK'
[15:49]<cjfmfusyjg>there is nothing else listening ot the button?
[15:50]<jyvnzs>nope
[15:50]<zyccus>Jivers: a Form can have an AcceptButton and a CancelButton
[15:50]<jyvnzs>accept button is not set
[15:50]<jyvnzs>cancel button is
[15:50]<zyccus>and is a different button?
[15:50]<jyvnzs>yes!
[15:50]<zyccus>just checking ;)
[15:50]<jyvnzs>i'm not an idiot man
[15:51]<jyvnzs>now i removed them both, no accept or cancel button, yet the two buttons STILL behave as if they were
[15:52]<sdnffdxdlld>ok, if i'm using optimistic concurrency is it better for my app to request each individual item via a t-sql stored proc or have a .net stored proc that handles it all in one bulk go?
[15:54]<sdnffdxdlld>hehe that was pretty much my thoughts on the matter too :P
[15:55]<dyguw>Yay :D
[15:55]<dyguw>I am back.
[15:55]<dyguw>Fear me.
[15:56]<dyguw>Good.
[15:58]<dyguw>Time to work, need to write a little document describing my business concept.
[15:58]<dyguw>Thank god I have Microsoft Office Word 2007 to help me with it.
[15:58]<xgzjygg>I'm working on an outlook add-in and i would like to know if it's possible to extended the contextual menu displayed by right clicking on a contact. Is there a way to add a choice in this menu ?
[16:01]<rzrprrrywr>minux: Why is MS Office 2007 so special?
[16:01]<dyguw>Arafangi1n: Because it's new User Interface is so much better than any previous versions.
[16:02]<rzrprrrywr>minux: MS has had difficulty ever since Word 97, they _have_ to change the UI, it's the only thing that differentiates the product anymore! It's merely different, not better (Though Word 2000 and XP's numbered lists were a joke)
[16:03]<dyguw>2007 UI is better than it has ever been before.
[16:03]<rzrprrrywr>minux: It's not worth $1000
[16:04]<rzrprrrywr>minux: Heck, it's not worth the $130 "Student Price".
[16:04]<dyguw>In my opinion it is. I will definitely buy the entire Office 2007 Pro suite when it is released.
[16:04]<lcs>vim has nice ui
[16:04]<rzrprrrywr>minux: You have a document, you place the cursor on the page, adn you start typing. You then change the formatting by changing fonts, sizes, and you check spelling.
[16:05]<rzrprrrywr>minux: You may also have some basic graphics and a table, what else have I forgotten?
[16:05]<lcs>Arafangi1n: office assistant
[16:05]<rzrprrrywr>minux: Oh, and I could get the whole damn computer plus OpenOffice.org for teh price of just MS Office XP
[16:05]<lcs>Arafangi1n: 2007 will have britney spears as your default assistant
[16:06]<rzrprrrywr>pks: Britney Speears?
[16:06]<rzrprrrywr>*Spears
[16:06]<lcs>:P
[16:07]<sdnffdxdlld>lo GoatCheez
[16:07]<gjrvcxnne>y00000000000
[16:07]<dnscr>2007 gui is very very good, though still in deep beta
[16:08]<rzrprrrywr>meska: Does it require the whole world to use a new proprietary format that only works in Office 2007?
[16:09]<sdnffdxdlld>is there anything wrong with this line?
[16:09]<sdnffdxdlld>"SELECT *, @Err as ReturnValue FROM T_User WHERE UserID = @UserID"
[16:10]<rzrprrrywr>smellyhippy: The '@'?
[16:10]<sdnffdxdlld>no thats not wrong
[16:10]<rzrprrrywr>smellyhippy: Depends on the context.
[16:10]<dnscr>do not use * ... rule no. 1)
[16:10]<rzrprrrywr>* is perfectly valid SQL
[16:11]<sdnffdxdlld>rule number one is onyl return what you need, I need everything otherwise i wouldnt use *
[16:11]<dnscr>yeah right ..
[16:11]<dnscr>and no changes to db schema in the future?
[16:11]<dnscr>can't believe ;-)
[16:11]<rzrprrrywr>meska: Every heard of a 3-tier approach?
[16:12]<dyguw>Arafangi1n: So, the price doesn't bother me.
[16:12]<sdnffdxdlld>well if someone has to think about schema changes they have to think about about the stored procs too :P
[16:12]<dyguw>I want it, I buy it.
[16:12]<sdnffdxdlld>and i prefere the readability of *
[16:12]<rzrprrrywr>minux: You're lucky, why should you force everyone else to purchase 2007?
[16:12]<sdnffdxdlld>it means I explicitly want everything
[16:12]<dyguw>I don't force everyone else to buy it. All I said was that it is better than previous versions and that I like it.
[16:13]<dnscr>Arafangi1n and this * also applies to that 3-tier approach
[16:13]<xgzjygg>smellyhippy: are the document produced compatible with previous versions of word ?
[16:13]<xgzjygg>minux sorry*
[16:13]<rzrprrrywr>meska: I'm used to a language that puts results into a dictionary, so using * doesn't really make any difference to databinding.
[16:14]<dyguw>heroine: Sure.
[16:14]<dyguw>heroine: If you save it as 97-2003 format.
[16:14]<rzrprrrywr>minux: By *default*
[16:14]<dyguw>Not by default.
[16:15]<rzrprrrywr>minux: Because I will guarantee that _most_ people won't change teh default file format.
[16:15]<dnscr>smellyhippy anyway, what is the problem ? some kind of error in your query?
[16:15]<lcs>minux: do you think that anyone from non it branch will ever think about file format?
[16:15]<dyguw>What's all about this anti-office-2007 thingy?
[16:15]<dyguw>pks: No.
[16:16]<lcs>minux: so they will use default one
[16:16]<dyguw>Word 2007 is better than previous versions is all I've said.
[16:16]<rzrprrrywr>minux: I just don't see how any word processor is better than Word 97, Pages, or OOo 2.0 (Though OOo's programmatic API is a tad difficult)
[16:16]<lcs>minux: whats better in it?
[16:16]<dyguw>It's UI, it's easier to find what you want.
[16:16]<lcs>minux: does it have auto updating document contents?
[16:16]<dyguw>Don't know honestly.
[16:16]<rzrprrrywr>minux: What do I want? I just want to write, edit, save, and read other people's damn documents without forking out more money.
[16:16]<dnscr>ohr .. Arafangi1n you propaply haven't use hard excel data and calculations..
[16:16]<lcs>because in 2003 i have to generate it each time change something in the document
[16:17]<lcs>minux: so why do you think its better if you do not know the basics?
[16:17]<lcs>minux: are you workd 2003 expert that knows a list of bugs present in 2003 that were fixed in 2007?
[16:17]<rzrprrrywr>meska: Ok, I'll admit, it's nearly impossible to put in a relative path in a word document link.
[16:18]<svzz[wjzc]>Hey guys, got a DataBinding problem here's a detailed description of it : http://rafb.net/paste/results/xhuDAT97.html if anybody can help me i'd be VERY VERY glad caus i'm lost, completely
[16:18]<dnscr>pks it's not about the bugs, it's about new features, and how interface got better since 2003
[16:18]<rzrprrrywr>meska: What new features?
[16:18]<rzrprrrywr>meska: OASIS file format support?
[16:18]<dyguw>pks: I said the god damned UI is better.
[16:19]<dnscr>Arafangi1n have you tried beta 2007?
[16:19]<sdnffdxdlld>aye minux, the ui looks fantastic on 2007
[16:19]<lcs>minux: no, you have said that is better because of new UI
[16:19]<dnscr>new pivot table sorting, zooming, new graphs, new drill through
[16:19]<rzrprrrywr>meska: No, the latest I've used is 2003, but I am aware that the UI in 2007 is quite different.
[16:19]<dnscr>new tabbed interface
[16:19]<cjfmfusyjg>which beta are ut alking about? vista?
[16:19]<dnscr>office 2007

Back to #csharp
Or go to some related logs:
#css
#gentoo
#debian
#python
#netbsd