I stopped using it the second I discovered Resharper's To-Do Explorer.

Aye, well said. Thanks. Both my client and I were a little regretful that we the specs were somewhat vague. It worked out in the end, but the price wasn't what either of us had expected. Thanks again.

I think it didn't like me changing the names of some properties in the Contact class. I did change it through the designer though, so I have no idea why it's complaining. Well that was a waste of a day and a half. Thanks, Rei

Yep. If there isn't much workflow, then skip WF ;) Mark Churchill Director Dunn & Churchill Free Download: Diamond Binding: The simple, powerful, reliable, and effective data layer toolkit for Visual Studio.

reinux wrote: someone already did publish their own UI toolkit for .NET that's so much better, and it's called WPF That's debatable. There's so much functionality missing and it's buggy. A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^] Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic      2006, 2007

Nope, it's the references to Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris can bend a 1 into a 5 just by staring at it.

Heh, i thought about mentioning closures, but couldn't think of a simple description. :-O

agreed. With a single exception I've not had an app sit out UAC dialogs except during the install. The exception is Multiplicity's (a keyboard/mouse/clipboard sharing app like synergy) config dialog, and arguably due to the security implications of what it does it should require admin rights to reconfigure. Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull

Pete O'Hanlon wrote: A bug in CodeProject - that quote wasn't from my post. :omg: Yep, bizarre. Kevin

Scary thought then that infotainment controls the dissemination of information regarding information technology. At least some infotainment companies out there outside of the IT press are careful enough to get the facts right at a minimum.

I could likewise argue that not choosing and using the tools available to you just puts you behind. C# offers safer goto just as it does foreach, yield return (which not everyone agrees is necessary), nullable types, even safer switches, and a whole slew of other language specific features. Why would anyone not use them just because they don't want to rely on a single languages's features? I mean, I could understand if you were trying to teach someone programming, you might not give them all the zero-pedagogical-value high-productivity shortcuts; and again, I wouldn't teach anyone to use goto, but in the real world, I'd raise a brow at anyone who avoids foreaches and properties. Also, it would be a long shot to say that no skilled programmers use goto, or that all programmers who use goto are unskilled.

reinux wrote: Think Apple zealots[^]. HAHA :) Now I am awake! xacc.ide IronScheme a R5RS-compliant Scheme on the DLR The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach."

True enough. Cheers, Vikram. "...we are disempowered to cultivate in their communities an inclination to assimilate to our culture." - Stan Shannon.

Write the code to do it in C++, perhaps using C++/CLI so you can call it from C#. Christian Graus - C++ MVP

The 3.0 installer will install 2.0 if it's not already installed, but they're installed in separate directories and are entirely different products altogether. http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/13/630066.aspx[^] Complete BS.

:zzz::zzz::zzz:

Ahh, okay. Thanks!