Normally, when you want to do this type of thing you need to create your own Sequence table, which contains the Next ID that you want to use. Then inside a transaction, you update the row to add 1 to it, and retrieve it, before committing it. You must do this in that order, so that no other user can get access to the record while you are working with it. Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before. My blog | My articles

IEnumeration is an interface that your collection has to implement. There are plenty of samples on implementing IEnumerable. :) Once you've done that, you can simply use foreach to iterate over the collection. Cheers, Vıkram. After all is said and done, much is said and little is done.

Any concerns you may have remain the same in either case, ultimately I'd go with the second for clarity, but so long as it's all running in the same thread, which it is here, I don't see any thread safety concerns. The second approach does allow the method to create the object whenever it likes, the first means it always exists. The first would be better represented with the out keyword, seeing as you expect the value to be assigned, and not just read. Stupid C# doesn't have const, but you can make your code clear by using the out keyword. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )

Hi As you mentioned there is no correct architecture.When you are designing a solution you should consider the domain of the problem that you are solving. There are lots of patterns that you can choose from ( for example Data Access Objects and Active record) If you are working on a small project ( and you don't expect it to become a large application in future) you can mix up the Data Access and the business layer or if you prefer you can have both in your project (It's not very hard to split them afterwards) Be careful not to mix up your user interface layer with your business layer since it's very hard to refactor them afterwards. Take a look at Martin Fowler's articles at his site (www.matinfowler.com) and specially take a look at his Enterprise patterns. Good Luck

*smacks head* Thank you :)

I'm having the same problem with both VB.Net 2005 forms and the SQL Server 2005 Reporting services. With ASP.Net there is the possibility of a GridView with a formatted template column, but I have not found anything for VB.Net Winformd of the SQL Server Rpt Svc.. Why would MS take away such a useful interface design approach??

One of the C# program managers, Eric Gunnerson[^], has commented that in some cases properties are over-used. There are only a few times when I don't write properties out, mainly when dealing with structs or classes that are used just as data storage without any methods. For example, one easy way to implement IEditableObject is to do something like this: class Foo : IEditableObject { private struct FooData { public int i; public string j; public DateTime t; public object o; } private FooData data; private FooData old; public int I { get { return data.i; } set { data.i = value; } } public string J { get { return data.j; } set { data.j = value; } } // Repeat for all members exposed void BeginEdit() { old = data; // FooData is a value type so this is making a copy of data } void CancelEdit() { data = old; // Copy the old values back } void EndEdit() { // Nothing to do } } I believe I do something similar in my IExtenderProvider article where all of the data stored for each object 'extended' is stored in a class with public fields. I know this is the case in the code that inspired the article. In both cases the type exposing public fields is only intended for the use of one class in a private manner. James

Thanks alot for the help andy, thats just what I was looking for. :)

There's a C# wrapper for TAPI 2 on GotDotNet: http://www.gotdotnet.com/userarea/keywordsrch.aspx?keyword=tapi[^] "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

Are there components in your MP3 app that you could use in other applications too? If so, maybe start by pulling that code into a separate assembly. Also if you are making enterprise server apps, it's probably a good idea to logically break up your solution into smaller components to facilitate a physically-tiered design. Cheers, Simon "The day I swan around in expensive suits is the day I hope someone puts a bullet in my head.", Chris Carter. my svg article

Reinout Hillmann wrote: who IRC from behind corporate gateways IRC isn't exactly the most popular thing behind a company firewall and use of it behind a COMPANY firewall means your not doing your job. Reinout Hillmann wrote: and those on Cable and DSL modems Not everybody has cable/DSL. Reinout Hillmann wrote: (with static IPs) Even with cable/DSL, if you turn the momem off then back on your IP can still change. FEW will have a static IP. Not NONE, FEW. Tatham Oddie (VB.NET/C#/ASP.NET/VB6/ASP/JavaScript) tatham@e-oddie.com +61 414 275 989