Mawi must have sensed my natural English charm :-\

Hi Mawi, I listened to your recording. Overall it is really good. A little quiet and, as previously stated, the 't' or 'd' sounds are too soft. Consequently, if flows a little too well which makes individual words harder to pick out. Also, and this is fairly typical of "Asian English", some words are clipped. That said, you are totally understandable in the recording. Not sure how that would translate to a bad phone line though. My main advice is to speak up! ;) P.S. Don't worry about the negative comments. Some people don't actually like it when the world practices what America preaches and we end up with a global market where you pick the best value for money.

I think what he's saying is this: 1. Compile an app under .NET 2.0 SP1 using newly available method signatures 2. Run that app on a PC that has .NET 2.0 (but NOT SP1) 3. App runs fine until it hits the code that uses the new methods then it bombs It is an issue, and is obviously a bug in the compiler by not flagging SP1 as a dependency on generated application

I have to say I love my Zune, however it certainly wouldn't meet your needs as Microsoft (in their infinite wisdom) do not allow it to (easily) host as a standard external hard drive. As a media player, I wouldn't have anything else.

Ever been mugged? :sigh:

Shog9 wrote:

Wait 'till v3.1

Surely you mean 3.11 (for Workgroups!) :->

It's new... AND improved!

Wow, I've never seen such a touchy bunch. Apologies... May I never put words in your mouth again.

Apologies, my mistake. Looking at it further (using Reflector), the Hashtable does some interesting things with the load factor provided that will force an automatic resize if the number of "buckets" used comes close the the number of slots available. To test this, how about having two Hashtables using to two different initial sizes and timing the add/retrieve speed of each up to the smaller count. The speeds should be the same. I think you'll only see the degredation when you go beyond it... it'll keep expanding to the next nearest prime above two times the current count. Which sounds like a big jump, but you'd probably hit it again pretty quick on a 10,000,000 loop. Hope some (any) of that made sense.

If you take a look at the definition for Add and Item in Hashtable you'll see: public virtual Object this[Object key] <-- Item for you VB'ers public virtual void Add(Object key, Object value) Both getting from and adding to the Hashtable involves boxing or unboxing. On the other hand, with Dictionary you have: public TValue this[TKey key] <-- Item for you VB'ers public void Add(TKey key, TValue value) As you can see, this uses Generics and so does not involve a type conversion or boxing/unboxing penalty.

I certainly know who I'm getting networking lessons from in the future! :laugh:

rcwoods wrote:

I want to create a number of classes

Maybe you mean linked classes? So as to follow the Relationships that exist (supposedly) between the database tables. If so then you probably want something like: public class User { // Properties for the user... } public class PC { // Properties for the PC... } public class Logon { private User _user; public User User { get { return _user; } set { _user = value; } } private PC _pc; public PC PC { get { return _pc; } set { _pc = value; } } // Other properties of Logon... Kinda like that? -- modified at 15:38 Thursday 6th September, 2007

Matthew Cuba wrote:

Interestingly (at least to me), the Hashtable was slower on retrieval when I specified the initial capacity at construction than when I didn't. For 10,000,000 items, it took about 700 milliseconds or so longer for the entire run.

This is probably something to do with the fact that Hashtables have to box/unbox their data (both key AND value), whereas a Dictionary is strongly-typed.

Would it have hurt you to have given an informative reply. For sure he could have googled it... you obviously did to know for sure that it was there... Could you not have at least put a link to the first result?

Don't forget "all the other times": Agrajag[^]

I think the general concensus is "sure"! Caveat time: If you're using Vista, forget doing ANY kind of web development in VS2003.