Very well said and entirely true.
This is pretty much exactly the problem with this little suggestion. It
breaks the defined behavior, and does so in an unpredictable way. Means:
when I use a struct, I normally do not know (exactly) how large it is.
In general, a 1Mb struct should not bea struct.
Doesn't it alter the whole semantics of value types if the implementation
is allowed to do "hidden" optimizations like these? For example, if the
compiler passes the struct by reference after a threshold size (let's say
more than 1MB), any modifications I make to the structure inside the method
wil
Hi Stoyan,
The format I used is '.\private$\queuename'.
Have resolved the problem though. Did an iisreset on the webserver, after
which I am able to send messages. The person who installed MSMQ did not do
this, so looks like iis needed a reboot to come back in synch.
Thanks.
Tapan.
==
Frans,
I agree with most of your remarks except this one:
"It's not fragile, you shouldn't mix code which targets different
.NET versions in 1 application. So if you want to build your app against
.NET 1.0, you need a .NET 1.0 component, not a .NET 1.1 component. "
At least, in theory, this is n
Unfortunately, in the debugger the ExtendedProperties.Count property of the
table returns 0, and there's no property with the name of my attribute.
I've toyed with ADO.NET powertoys (and read the full 1 page of
documentation!), but I still seem to be missing something.
Should the custom attribute
Is your message queue in the following format?
"FormatName:Direct=OS:MACHINE_NAME\Private$\QUEUE_NAME"
HTH,
Stoyan
> -Original Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Tapan Sengupta
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 1:50 AM
>
> I'm really surprised more folks haven't run into this.
trust me, a lot have :)
> My advice to component vendors of the world: build your dll
> assemblies against the earliest version of the runtime you
> care to support.
'care to support' is key here. .NET doesn't necessarily
(inline)
> I've recently run into a versioning problem which someone
> might find interesting. The scenario is as follows:
>
> - An application compiled to run on version 1.0 of the framework.
>
> - This application runs on a machine that has both v1.0 and
> v1.1 of the framework installed.
>
