It is! There you go.[^]

2A

I am pretty sure that the sole purpose of the new keyword in this context, is to hide the warning and has no other effect. And to back it up :) :

MSDN[^] wrote:

When used as a modifier, the new keyword explicitly hides a member inherited from a base class. When you hide an inherited member, the derived version of the member replaces the base-class version. Although you can hide members without the use of the new modifier, the result is a warning. If you use new to explicitly hide a member, it suppresses this warning and documents the fact that the derived version is intended as a replacement.

2A

You may receive better feedback if you actually post in the appropriate forum - Database forum[^]. Also, when you do, please avoid txt speak and use proper English.

2A

What Dave said above should do it. One note though - be sure to free any resources used by the RegistryKey objects - encolsing them in using statements is good:

using (RegistryKey sk = Registry.LocalMachine.OpenSubKey("SOFTWARE\\Wow6432Node\\Microsoft\\DirectX"))
{
// the rest of your code;
}

It's also good practice to check sk for null as if the key's not present on the system sk.GetValue("Version") will thrown an exception. P.S. No need to explicitly return from a void method.

2A

You can check the value of the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\DirectX\Version registry key. This table[^] will show you the version according to the version number. For example 4.09.00.0904 is DirectX 9.0c.

2A

This one: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=9569765[^]. Spammed the Design and Architecture forum with these: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Messages.aspx?fmid=9569765[^] nearly a month ago...

2A

That's odd. Did they up the report count for banning an account? My strike was 6th and the account remained active after that.

2A

Have a look at the XmlDocument class here[^]. Basically you'd create a XmlDocument object and add XmlElement [^] instances. For example:

XmlDocument document = new XmlDocument();

// Create the root Account element.
XmlElement root = document.CreateElement("Account");
// Add attributes to the element
root.SetAttribute("SomeAttribute", "42");
// Add the element to the document's tree.
document.AppendChild(root);

// Create the child elements
XmlElement child = document.CreateElement("User1");
// Add the child to the root element
root.AppendChild(child);

// Create a grandchild
XmlELement grandchild = document.CreateElement("AccountSetting");
child.AppendChild(grandchild);

//etc, etc...

//Finally you could save the document to file:
document.Save(pathToMyXmlFile);

2A

Did this joke really need the big tag?

2A

Your question is a bit vague, but I'll have a go. If you mean that you don't want to list myInterfaceProp as a member of the MyClass class (i.e. in Intellisense), implement the interface explicitly (What you're doing in your snippet is called implicit interface implementation). Try this:

public class MyClass : IMyInterface
{
// Explicit IMyInterface implementation
string IMyInterface.myInterfaceProp
{
get { return "some value"; }
}
}

That way you want have access to this member if you try to access it directly from MyClass, but you'll need a cast to IMyInterface.

2A

I can understand that this may be frustrating, but please, do not cross-post. I'm sure that there will be somebody looking into the issue, as it definitely sounds like abuse to me.

2A

Spamming the Insider. This one: oyunlaroyna[^] His messages: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Messages.aspx?fmid=9303767[^]

2A

Looking at this reply by Chris[^] it seems like the CCC Link in your sig may be the cause for flagging the message as spam by the new (I think soon-to-be old) anti-spam system.

2A

The same one again here: display images in crystal report from folder based on imgepath from database[^] There's something odd, though. Why register an account, quietly wait for a year and then post stupid spam...

2A

Just found this. Seems pretty minor, but thought to report it anyway. Here goes: Bug: The Expand/Collapse button (used to collapse/expand code blocks) not working, when a page is referred to from searching[^] the site. Steps to reproduce: Search for something within articles, tip/tricks or blogs. From the list of results open an item (that is likely to have a code example). Click the "Collapse" button to collapse a code block -> not collapsing. Workaround: Requesting the page from the browser again, re-enables the button's functionality. Consistently reproducible with Chrome 20.0.1132.57 m, Firefox 14.0.1, IE9, Opera 12. [EDIT]Copy Code also not working -> points to the top of the page.[/EDIT]

2A

Isn't that the challenge?

2A

You can launch the JIT debugger from the batch file (with the %WINDIR%\System32\vsjitdebugger.exe util), after you've successfully started your app. For instructions on how to do it refer to this link: Answer 3[^]

2A

DECOMPOSE maybe? But that'd be too easy...

2A

To what? :confused: Everything bold, ellipsis at the end of each sentence and lots of emoticons... :~ :sigh: :doh:

2A

Check your web.config file, if it includes the compilation.debug option and it's set to true:

Also, see if the Suppress JIT optimization on module load option is not unchecked. (It's found under Options->Debugging->General). What exactly happens when you add a breakpoint and run your app?

2A