I'm porting a Java application to .NET. In Java you can use
"InheritableThreadLocal"[¹] to hand down variable values to child
threads, and with .NET?
In Java you can use "ThreadLocal", in .NET "ThreadStatic" for thread
local variables without handing down values to child threads. But what
about "I
I don't have much experience here, but this line looks odd -- could it be causing
trouble for the next sink?
requestHeaders["__RequestVerb"] = null;
What if the next sink looks for the value of __RequestVerb and blows if it's not
found?
Not having really looked, I'd somewhat presume tha
If your button is a server control, then you can find it out as follows.
public IAsyncResult BeginPreRequestHandlerExecute(Object sender, EventArgs
e, AsyncCallback cb, Object extraData)
if (Request.Url.AbsolutePath == "/MyWebApp/WebForm1.aspx")
if(Request.RequestType == "POST")
I'm going to do my best here to assume what you are referring to and what
you are try to do. First, when you say "I have written a HttpModule and
am calling a method on context.PreRequestHandlerExecute" I am assuming you
are referring to adding your own event handler to the HttpApplication
PreRequ
Krzysztof,
One option you might want to consider is subscribing to the events for all
the forms you are trying to monitor from one location. What I mean here
is suppose you have a main form which spawns other forms based upon user
interaction. You can subscribe to the events of those "child" for
When calling _nextSink.ProcessMessage(...) from a custom server transport
sink i am developing i get a ReturnMessage that contains an exception with
the following text:
"Error: Server encountered an internal error. For more information, turn
on customErrors in the server's .config file"
>From wh
Courtney,
> The issue is there is a databind() method that is called that
> appears to 'wipeclean' the values in my textbox objects using
> the original values and NOT what I have typed
You should rebind the datagrid after you do an update or delete. This
allows you to take out the else clause a
The result of GetProperty is an object, not a string. When you pass an object to
Response.Write, the ToString method of the object is called and its result ("Update")
is what gets displayed.
If you add .ToString to your test --
if e.GetType.GetProperty("commandname").ToString <>
"Updat
A possible simplification exists, I think.
If the creation of Identity does not rely on the instance of the PLUGIN ... The
SECURITY object can create an Identity before it creates the PLUGIN, and then passes
the Identity in to the PLUGIN constructor (it is only the SECURITY object that creates
Hi Group,
I have written a HttpModule and I am calling a method on
context.PreRequestHandlerExecute
Now this method will be called on all page load. Can I know the event
which called this page load. Rather if a user presses an Add button, can
I know that an add button is clicked.
May b
Once again thank you to everyone who replied!
I think I figured it out. I like the cookie approach. I've extended on it a
little:
1) Since value of read-only Identity property will be passed to the
SECURITY object to determine the callers role and perhaps a callback
reference if necessary, Identi
Here is the deal. I have a datagrid. In this
datagrid I am updating (ok|cancel) and deleting
recorords. I got the wonderful idea to allow users to
filter them since there are so many. The filter
logically calls for a dropdownlist. The DDL has a
autopost set to true. Then the DDL only binds on
What if you passed the reference in at creation? I do this with ASP.NET
when I have a class that needs to access some of the ASP stuff:
>From the web page:
Thing obj = new thing(this);
Class:
Public class thing
{
private System.Web.UI.Page m_varPageReference;
public thing(Syst
SECURITY is a singleton, right? (Or do you have one per PLUGIN type? Not sure it
matters.)
I think the answer lies in giving each plugin a "cookie" that it has to use in order
to make calls; if the cookie values can't be faked, I think you're safe. Details:
SECURITY is (or should be) respons
OK, some ideas, which may progress the discussion.
I assume the SECURITY object is a singleton (one instance).
What if each plugin inherits from an abstract class, within that class there is a
public (sealed) method
AssignRole, which accepts a Role object, which is available as a protected get
Steve,
I was reminded of this too. I thought the scenario resembled the Façade pattern, which
defines a higher level of interface to sub-systems or individual functional
implementations. I don't know if that's quite right since the Façade is supposed to
represent the sub-system(s) instead of pr
16 matches
Mail list logo