You haven't given us the implementation of this prototype function void eeprom_update_byte (uint8_t *__p, uint8_t __value); Implicit declaration error usually means you provided a prototype but no body code ... hence I am worried you haven't given me that functions code. I am assuming the EEPROM is flash and that code will do what we call the toggling test until it writes the byte to the flash. Warning if it is FLASH you usually also have to release protection registers by writing special commands to special addresses before you can write to the flash, did the original code also provide a function to release the protection on a sector per chance? However onto your code as it stands, you are passing in the address to write as a byte which gives you a range of 0-255 in memory see here bool Update_EEPROM_Memory_byte(byte val1, byte val2) { // Val1 is a byte uint8_t eepromAddr = val1; // <== Really a byte as the address you can only write to memory address 0--0xff uint8_t eepromVal = val2; The original function they provided had a pointer to an byte (uint_8) which will be most likely be 32 bit ... see void eeprom_update_byte (uint8_t *__p, uint8_t __value); // First parameter is a pointer see the "*" I suspect you need your address to be a long ..... try bool Update_EEPROM_Memory_byte(unsigned long val1, byte val2){ unsigned long eepromAddr = val1; // <== Now you can write to memory address 0-0xffffffff uint8_t eepromVal = val2; Adjusted last function to take the long bool eeprom_memory_update_byte(unsigned long eeprom_addr, uint8_t eepromValue) { eeprom_update_byte((uint8_t*) eeprom_addr, eepromValue); uint8\_t eepromVal = eeprom\_read\_byte(( uint8\_t \*) eeprom\_addr); if (eepromValue == eepromVal) return 1; else return 0; } The alternative to an unsigned long for the address is to keep it as a pointer (uint8_t*). That all means nothing if you have no code for the function eeprom_update_byte which isn't shown. Other housekeeping Update_EEPROM_Memory_byte should return the result of eeprom_memory_update_byte rather than a static 1 (TRUE) result. In vino veritas

Try running the service under Administrative account

You're welcome, glad I could help :) If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson

That's excellent! We've been having these problems (referencing wrong dll) for a while now! This will solve that!

See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7d83bc18.aspx[^].

Thanks! Now that the solution is much easier to work on and compiling! THANKS A HEAP!

An idea would be to write a simulation program which is sending dummy data to a virtual serial port at which your program is listening. You could pair those two virtual ports using com0com. The busier I am, the more I procrastinate. - Chris "The Mighty" Maunder

You don't need a background worker and the baud rate has nothing to do with your ability or inability to receive a message. The SerialPort class already operates on its own thread. The truth is the physical serial port on your PC is implemented with a USART and has no buffer of its own. It can hold a single character. When it receives data, it fires an interrupt. The interrupt handler adds the character to a FIFO buffer and notifies the serial port class attached to that port that a character has been received. That message goes into the message queue and your application will receive it via the DataReceived event when the message pump gets around to sending it to your app. When you read the data from the serial port class, you empty the FIFO buffer either in one swoop or a character at a time. Interlocks are already built into the serial port class so you don't contend with any characters that may be received at the port while the data is being read by the application. For all intents and purposes, you read a string of characters as they have been received up to that point in time. What is NOT present is any kind of message framing. And that is where you need to do something. The fact is the DataReceived event could be fired for every character that comes in the serial port. You have to grab those characters, append them to a message string, then determine when the message is complete. It is the same as information coming from the keyboard... the user types a single character at a time. If you are looking for a word, you buffer those characters onto a string until you see a space or a carriage return. Same this with the serial port... just think of it as another keyboard where characters arrive (not full strings!). So you need to decide what your message delimiter is. Normally, for serial communications, the message is ended with a 13... a carriage return. Since it looks like you might be talking to a PLC for data collection, it may also be a fixed-width situation. In that case you need to test the length of the accumulated string each time DataReceived is called. Either way, you need to look for the delimiter or the length in DataRecevied and THEN process your results once the whole string has been received. Make sense? Secondly, you are casting the serial port from the event arguments. You shouldn't do that. You already have a reference to the serial port in your class-scoped serialPort object. Use it inside of the event handler. Usually, inside of this event, you setup a While loop that looks

Can you use the properties exposed by those types (don't use "on"), yes of course! Using a property exposed by any type at all is exactly the same no matter what type it is. A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^] Dave Kreskowiak

I assume your software is watching for WM_DEVICECHANGE messages where WParam is either DBT_DEVICEARRIVAL or DBT_DEVICEREMOVECOMPLETE. LParam will then point to a device dependent structure, related to DEV_BROADCAST_HDR, containing device information. Windows Management Instrumentation can probably provide similar information for connected devices but without knowing their type and the information you need it's impossible say more. Alan.

What I was trying to do is to have my software to connect up to 4 USB Communication Box. This box would communicate with RFID tag. In some cases, the USB box would somehow loses connection and the software would detect the loss of communication to the box. Also that when the USB box is reconnected, the software would re-connect and re-communicate again. This software would ensure that the "address" would be unique from other 3 USB devices. here's my sample code using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.ComponentModel; using System.Data; using System.Drawing; using System.Text; using System.Windows.Forms; using HID_API_Library; using System.Security.Permissions; namespace USB_Device_Connect_Disconnect_Test { public partial class Form1 : Form { /// /// Windows Messages /// Defined in winuser.h from Windows SDK v6.1 /// Documentation pulled from MSDN. /// For more look at: http://www.pinvoke.net/default.aspx/Enums/WindowsMessages.html /// public enum WM : uint { /// /// Notifies an application of a change to the hardware configuration of a device or the computer. /// WM_DEVICECHANGE = 0x0219, WM_PARENTNOTIFY = 0x0210, DBT_DEVTYP_DEVICEINTERFACE = 5, DBT_DEVTYP_HANDLE = 6, DBT_DEVICEARRIVAL = 0x8000, // system detected a new device DBT_DEVICEQUERYREMOVE = 0x8001, // Preparing to remove (any program can disable the removal) DBT_DEVICEREMOVECOMPLETE = 0x8004, // removed DBT_DEVTYP_VOLUME = 0x00000002, // drive type is logical volume DBT_DEVNODES_CHANGED = 7, // device changed BROADCAST_QUERY_DENY = 0x424D5144, } // initilized bytes had to be removed for public post. byte\[\] Read\_Input = new byte\[9\]; byte\[\] DeviceFirmwareVersion = new byte\[9\]; byte\[\] inputReport = new byte\[9\]; HID\_API\[\] hid = new HID\_API\[4\]; GroupBox\[\] gbDevice = new GroupBox\[4\]; List usbDevices; public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); MonitorUSBDevices(); } int ReadPort(int deviceID, ref byte data) { int status = hid\[deviceID\].ExchangeInputAndOutputReports(ref Read\_Input, ref inputReport, deviceID);

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm still working on using the delegation of the code. I have never used it in my prior programs that I have created. Still learning new stuff. Thanks again!

A Mutex is simply a way to communicate a semaphor between processes. If you're considering CreateFile, then you should go to the Windows API forum.

ahh I'll give that a shot! thanks!

There are a couple of ways to handle this, but it depends on how you want to work it. The simplest solution is to set up a thread to handle each com port - that way they can use ReadLine all they want, and you don't have to worry about them hanging the UI thread or about data synchronisation. You then have to communicate between the UI and the threads - and I have no idea how complex that is for you because I don't know what you app is actually doing. The other is to use the DataRecieved Event in the UI thread as you seem to be doing - but that has to be handled differently, because the data is not received in the form of lines - it arrives character by character (or a couple of characters at a time if the processor is busy) so you have to buffer and examine the data a bit more carefully. Exactly which way you should go, I don't know - but without seeing any relevant code fragments, I can't tell what your code is doing at the moment, so I can't make any concrete suggestions. If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.

Hmm... I like the suggestion you've made. I'll look into that in the future revision. Thanks!

As Ian said, Windows only deals with homogeneous processes, so all the code must be 32-bit or all of it 64-bit. A managed app targetting "AnyCPU" gets launched as 64-bit on a 64-bit OS, and will refuse to load 32-bit code. If you have unmanaged dependencies, the practical way is NOT to use "AnyCPU" and therefore it is a pitty that (1) it is the default, and (2) Visual Studio Express doesn't really give you direct access to any other setting. :) Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

Rather than recalculating the positions yourself, you may get satisfactory results by using the Anchor or Dock properties of your Controls; setting Form.AutoSize often helps too. :) Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

Create your own class, derived from NumericUpDown. Override the UpButton and DownButton methods: public class MyUpDown : NumericUpDown { public override void UpButton() { decimal save = Increment; if ((Control.ModifierKeys & Keys.Shift) == Keys.Shift) { Increment *= 10; } base.UpButton(); Increment = save; } public override void DownButton() { decimal save = Increment; if ((Control.ModifierKeys & Keys.Shift) == Keys.Shift) { Increment *= 10; } base.DownButton(); Increment = save; } } Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water

argh! I found this info from online source... I will try to make this change. for the medium border around the ranged cells... I should have used "Range.BorderAround()".