No, you can pass parameters like this (excuse the pun) public MyObject this[int index] { get { return (MyObject) InnerList[index]; } } as you can see I've ripped this code from a CollectionBase derived class. You can pass more than one param within the [] brackets Gary "A fellow with the inventiveness of Albert Einstein but with the attention span of Daffy Duck." Tom Shales talking about Robin Williams

No, it's not. The message pump handler can't be bypassed, unfortunately, and it's behavior is to put up the usual message box you see for an "unhandled" exception. RageInTheMachine9532 "...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

Technically, the CLR loads them. What you can do in C# (or in most managed languages) is P/Invoke the native functions, so long as the Tcl libs are resolvable (i.e., in the current process's current working directory - not the DLL's (though that may be the same as the process's current working directory) - or a directory in the PATH environment variable, the same as all executables in Windows). See the DllImportAttribute documentation in the .NET Framework SDK, as well as Consuming Unmanaged DLL Functions[^]. When you call a P/Invoke method, the CLR loads the native library, gets the proc, pushes your arguments on the stack, and executes the function. The return value is pushed on the stack (typically; depends on calling convention) and returned by the CLR to your managed code. So, you'll need to read the API documentation for Tcl. Chances are there'll be a setup function (to initialize the execution environment) and a function that will accept arguments (including the path to the Tcl script you want to execute). Getting the path to the Tcl script is easy: let the user specify it on the command line, using an OpenFileDialog, hard-code it (bad idea usually), or whatever. Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles

could you explain why you need a ';' and also see if you can use a stored procedure to achieve the same. Bhaskara

The credential cache has to be cleared, and I'm not sure you have any control over this. The default expiration time is around 15 minutes. This is a function of Windows and not .NET. The best solution is to not emulate users but to - if possible - log in as a user with administrative rights (or enough privileges to enumerate group membership) and query the groups for a user. This would require only 1 login and would allow you to query as many users as you want. This is the way that most programs (including the management tools in Windows) work. Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles

Well, in VBScript, it looks something like this: strComputer = "." ' Use a '.' to denote the local machine. Set colGroups = GetObject("WinNT://" & strComputer & "") colGroups.Filter = Array("group") For Each objGroup In colGroups For Each objUser in objGroup.Members If objUser.name = "username" Then Wscript.Echo objGroup.Name End If Next Next You go through each group on the machine and check to see if the username exists in that group. RageInTheMachine9532 "...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome

Heath, You are the man! Thank You.

For synchronous execution in a single-threaded application, that would be a complete waste of time. You could something like I did, however. Have a method that accepts some information about what method you want to call or what property you want to get/set. Also accept a delegate (Delegate - nothing specific). That method would check InvokeRequired and conditionally execute that Delegate either using Control.Invoke (to execute it on the creation thread) or Delegate.Invoke (to execute it on the calling thread). Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles

Yes you should use Control.Invoke. This invokes the call on the thread on which the control was created, which is important. You should do this for your ListView as well. Modifying the control from a different thread causes problems in the message queue. The technical details get down into what is encapsulated by the .NET Framework (much of it, anyway): Win32 APIs. To use Invoke, take a look at this sample code to safely add a TreeNode in the property thread: internal void SafeAdd(TreeNodeCollection nodes, TreeNode node) { if (nodes == null || node == null) throw new ArgumentNullException(nodes == null ? "nodes" : "node");   if (treeView1.InvokeRequired) { Delegate d = new AddTreeNodeHandler(nodes.Add); treeView1.Invoke(d, new object[] {node}); } else nodes.Add(node); } private delegate int AddTreeNodeHandler(TreeNode node); Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles

Heath Stewart wrote: Do the math. 1 second 2 seconds 3 seconds 4 seconds 5 seconds 6 seconds 7 seconds 8 seconds 9 seconds 10 seconds Damn I ran out of fingers, where was I again...? :) top secret AdvancedTextBox

The CheckedListBox does not support data-binding like that. First, you can add whatever objects you want to it. If the objects you're adding have ItemText and Checked properties, then you merely need to coordinate the event handlers for the CheckedListBox and set the Checked property of your object so that you can keep track of what's checked and what's not. public class MyItem { private string itemText; private bool checked; public MyItem() : this(null, false) { } public MyItem(string itemText, bool checked) { this.itemText = itemText; this.checked = checked; } public string ItemText { get { return this.itemText; } set { this.itemText = value; } } public bool Checked { get { return this.checked; } set { this.checked = value; } } } // ... public void AddItem(MyItem item) { int index = checkedListBox1.Items.Add(item); checkedListBox1.SetItemCheckState(index, item.Checked ? CheckState.Checked : CheckState.Unchecked); } // handler for CheckedListBox.ItemCheck private void checkedListBox1_ItemCheck(object sender, ItemCheckEventArgs e) { MyItem item = checkedListBox1.Items[e.Index]; item.Checked = e.NewValue == CheckState.Checked; } You can always get the items out of CheckedListBox.Items whenever you want. Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles