AFAIK the Windows ListBox does not support what you want. It insists on positioning the items itself, at best it will let you decide the height of an item, and let you draw the items. However to my knowledge it always scrolls everything. You may or may not paint your items outside the intended rectangle (part of the EventArgs), however I don't expect that to work properly. I basically see two ways to get what you want, both taking more effort than you would hope: 1. use a second ListBox, on top of the first, just showing the fixed items. And if their number and/or height isn't constant, that also means resizing/repositioning the ListBoxes. 2. don't use a ListBox at all, in other words create your own. And then of course there are companies that specialize in Controls (CodeProject is showing some ads for such companies) and may offer exactly what you want, but I'm not familiar with their offerings. :) Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.

There are many reasons for doing this. One reason for doing this is to use Dependency Injection, where you need to refer to a type in your code, but the actual implementation you'd be working on is a derived class. This is also typical behaviour in abstract class factories. I'm not a stalker, I just know things. Oh by the way, you're out of milk. Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

Thanks again Dave, The documentation for Available actually explains Visible better than the Visible Docs. I thought that it must have been working correctly, (in an odd way). Just couldn't see it in the documentation. Thanks Lew

I had a thought after my last post. The confirmDeletesToolStripMenuItem is not the topmost menuitem. If I get the value of any top level menu item it returns the correct value i.e True if set to Visible = True; Whereas the lower menu levels return False even if set to True. I would have thought that the Visible property is a reflection of whether it should be displayed rather than whether it can be seen? Getting closer but stranger? modified on Saturday, August 28, 2010 3:17 AM

Yep - you're getting there and thinking along the right lines now! The next problem you may come across is getting the result of the action request back to the child. There are two good methods for this. 1. You can have a property in your event args that the main (parent) from sets. This is the normally recommended method. 2. Sometimes a more intuitive way is to forget about the standard event signature and create your own delegate that actually returns a result. I've knocked up this quick sample to demonstrate. using System.Windows.Forms; namespace CpDelegateSample { public partial class FormMain : Form { private bool toggle; public FormMain() { InitializeComponent(); toggle = false; FormSub formSub = new FormSub(); formSub.DeleteRequest += new FormSub.DeleteRequestEventHandler(formSub\_DeleteRequest); formSub.Show(); } private bool formSub\_DeleteRequest(string data) { // If OK, do delete and return true; otherwise, return false bool result = toggle; string message = result ? "Allowing" : "Denying"; MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} {1}", message, data)); toggle = !toggle; return result; } } } using System; using System.Windows.Forms; namespace CpDelegateSample { public partial class FormSub : Form { public delegate bool DeleteRequestEventHandler(string data); public event DeleteRequestEventHandler DeleteRequest; public FormSub() { InitializeComponent(); Click += new EventHandler(FormSub\_Click); } void FormSub\_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { OnDeleteRequest("ABC"); OnDeleteRequest("DEF"); } protected virtual void OnDeleteRequest(string data) { DeleteRequestEventHandler eh = DeleteRequest; if (eh != null) { bool result = eh(data); string message = result ? "Allowed" : "Denied"; MessageBox.Show(string.Format("{0} {1}", message, data)); } } } } Dave If this helped, please vote & accept answer! Binging is like googling, it just feels dirtier. Please take your VB.

I'm not sure what this has to do with "General Database" however ... In your hormoneTypeToolStripMenuItem_Click you will need to use a reference to your MainForm, either make it global or ensure this method is part of your MainForm. Also note that your HormoneTypeForm f1 will be destroyed as soon as this method returns; I doubt that is what you want. It's time for a new signature.

I think that your control must be able to function even if it's not binded to data. Make it display something on it to inform you that there is no data binded (like a big red text "NO DATA BINDED" :)). This sould be easy if you say that you do the painting. I have no smart signature yet...

The custom scrollbar(not based on Scrollbar for various reasons) is being used on a control in a situation where the user may view it as a position indicator only. As I have provided ToolTips for all other controls (ToolButtons, TextBoxes etc) within this control, in the interests of consistency, I thought it proper to also provide a ToolTip for non-control based items that can provide actions. All this aside though, provision of a ToolTip for non-control based items must be a common need surely. Examples that spring to mind are: .. A drawing or cad situation where you could provide instant feedback of line & shape properties. .. Flowcharting and Statistical charts etc where hovering over a particular area would provide additional detail. .. Breaking up a graphic eg a Map, to provide additional info for various segments, States or legends etc. .. Inline Text within a document, where intellisense type information could be provided on mousehover.

Your challenge now is to get the bool check to one line/statement. Breaking the steps up is the correct way to go when understanding the process of achieving a goal, well done. Then finding and understanding the correct syntax that achieves the 5 lines of code in 1 statement is the real bonus :) ! Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH