I understand... Thank you Paul, and everyone else for your help and opinions. :) For now, I shell continue and educate myself on the matter... Will "meet" again... (Soon I might add... ;P )

All is well now. Thanks. :) Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles] I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets. I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).

Add interfaces direcly to your application, and expose them as COM objects. Registering the COM server will thereafter ensure that other applications can instantiate and talk to your application.

Shy Agam wrote: I was put on certain constraints... I have to enforce them... That's all well and good, but you must use the right tool to measure with. Task Manager is not that tool. "Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for, in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman "To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne

I've developed a simple workaround... Here it is in case someone finds this post in the future... The ContextMenuStrip property of the ListView is initially set to hold the context menu used when clicking the headers. Assuming that the ListView is called "list", the context menu for the headers is called "ctxtHeaders", and the context menu for the body of the list is called "ctxtBody", here is the implementation: private void list_MouseDown(object sender, MouseEventArgs e) { if (e.Button == MouseButtons.Right) list.ContextMenuStrip = ctxtBody; } private void ctxtBody_Closing(object sender, ToolStripDropDownClosingEventArgs e) { list.ContextMenuStrip = ctxtHeaders; } The code is settings the list's context menu to the body's context menu every time it is about to be shown (i.e. when the right mouse botton is clicked). Then, when the context menu is closed, the list's context menu is set to the headers context menu.

Thanks, that is exactly what I wanted to know. I am not familiar with Maxthon browser, I never heard of it. The background is: if I select (part of) your code snippet using Internet Explorer, then copy it in Visual Studio, all formatting is lost, there are no line breaks any more. I created a utility that improves the situation in most cases; with it I manage to get newlines, and most of the time the indentation remains intact too; on your code snippet, with the tool, I do get newlines (so that is an improvement) but now I loose indentation. My article will suggest people use the PRE tags without adding CODE tags to it; could you please give that a try, so just reply to this message, and insert a code snippet as you usually do (that is using PRE tags) but this time without using CODE tags. Thanks in advance. Luc Pattyn try { [Search CP Articles] [Search CP Forums] [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] } catch { [Google] }

Good for you. I was going to mention the setting of TopMost, but you figured it out before I got up this morning :) "The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer

Hi! The proxy is created when you call Activator.GetObject() but until you actually call any method on the remote object, there's no need to establish a network connection to the server. From my understanding, the remoting infrastructure doesn't hold the network connection open all the time and chokes whenever the remoting server goes down, but is only interested in whether the server can be reached during method calls to the remote object. So the only way to find out whether the server is running is to actually call a method on the remote object. For one of my projects I added a simple Available property (always returning true) to the server object so that I have a method to call without any sideeffects. Regards, mav -- Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...

Thanks a bunch! Greatly appreciated! Wow... there are times I tell myself "Microsoft are really f***ed-up for not having an implementation for this and that in the .NET framework." But then there are times I think the .NET framework contains everything a programmer needs... :) Regards, Shy.

Hi, StringBuilder is very useful and efficient when it allows you to avoid a lot of intermediate string objects. And it is best to create it with sufficient initial capacity. So instead of doing (silly example!): string s=""; foreach (char c in "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz") s=s+c; Console.WriteLine(s); which creates more than 20 string objects, you'd better do: StringBuilder sb=new StringBuilder(100); // large enough foreach (char c in "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz") sb.Append(c); string s=sb.ToString(); Console.WriteLine(s); which only creates one StringBuilder and one string. Since the capacity is sufficient, sb will never need an internal extend-and-copy (as in good old Basic Redim). StringBuilder will not give you a more efficient way to do a simple string3=string1+string2 tho. :) Luc Pattyn try { [Search CP Articles] [Search CP Forums] [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] } catch { [Google] }

shyagam wrote: Voted 5 for the article of course! ;) Thank you :-O shyagam wrote: You even got the screen shots and all... :) Well I had to pad out the article... :rolleyes: My Blog[^]

FYI, here's another way to do it w/ Enum.Parse method, which is undoubtably slower and takes more memory, but improves readability (maybe :-D ) [Flags] enum Keys { A = 1, B = 2, C = 4, D = 8 } static void Main(string[] args) { Keys keys = Keys.A | Keys.B | Keys.D; string[] strKeys = keys.ToString().Split(','); foreach(string key in strKeys){ Keys newKey = (Keys)Enum.Parse(keys.GetType(),key); Console.WriteLine(newKey.ToString()); } }

Thank you both. Very helpful indeed... :) Shy.

Problem solved... It appears that events are also serialized, which makes the Serialize() method go through the entire invocation lists inside of the events, and serialize them as well. This ends up in the objects registered to handle the events (the main form in my case) also getting serialized. So the solution I chose was to implement ISerializable, and prevent the events from getting serialized. :) Thanks for you guidence, Shy.

You should sign your plugins ( DLLs ) using Signcode.exe and also use a Dotfuscator like tool to prevenet (as much as you can) your dlls from being disassembled to their original source code. Don't forget SecurityPermissionAttributes which also add another level of protection to your distributed plug-ins(DLLs). Checkout: Web site: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ab4eace3(vs.71).aspx MSDN Library: Assembly Security Considerations Hope this helps...

shyagam wrote: What if someone, instead of implementing a game, inherits GameEngine and puts down malicious code A plugin system is per design an "open system", what means malicious code here? First of all, the game user needs to download and install a plugin, so I would say if someone uses code from an unknown source he/she is generally responsible for caused damage! In case you just want to protect users from e.g. downloading broken plugins then have a checksum with each DLL that your downloader checks (i.e. SHA1 checksum does no match with DLL then delete it). Perhaps you can offer quality control to plugin developers and give a "verified" rating to decent plugins... or list good plugins on your webpage (e.g. see IrfanView)? If your question is about limiting plugins from sources other than yourself: You could sign each DLL cryptographically or have an initial handshake with a "license" that enables certain functionality... but at the end of the day this can be technically circumvented since the algorithm/key is somewhere inside the plugin or the application. When I follow the PS/Wii/Xbox modding scene I think vendor locking attempts are quite futile... Hope it helps.