I created a windows8.1 app with Kinect, but when I tried to construct the VisualGestureBuilderDatabase class, however my program throws System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException.
I totally don't know why. I use VS2015 and the program stops at the App.g.i.cs:
#if DEBUG && !DISABLE_XAML_GENERATED_BREAK_ON_UNHANDLED_EXCEPTION
UnhandledException += (sender, e) =>
{
if (global::System.Diagnostics.Debugger.IsAttached) global::System.Diagnostics.Debugger.Break();
};
#endif
Fine.
I forgot to set the gdb file's Copy to Output Directory property to Copy always and Build Action property to Content.
Related
I am looking to set the contents of a textbox to that of a .txt file,
however I cannot get it to work. I have a button which would "refresh" the
content of the textbox to that of the .txt file, here is the code I am using:
private: System::Void button1_Click(System::Object^ sender, System::EventArgs^ e) {
std::ifstream dat1("DataStore.txt");
String^ textHolder;
if (dat1.is_open())
{
while ( getline(dat1, line) )
{
textHolder += line.c_str;
}
textBox1->Text = textHolder;
dat1.close();
}
else textBox1->Text = "Unable to open file";
}
I get these 2 errors when compiling the program:
error C3867: 'std::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char>>::c_str': function call missing argument list; use '&std::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char>>::c_str' to create a pointer to member
error C2297: '+=' : illegal, right operand has type 'const char *(__thiscall std::basic_string<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char>>::* )(void) throw() const'
How do I make this work?
NOTE: I am trying to display the whole .txt file's contents in the textbox
If you are going to use C++/CLI you may as well take advantage of .net. You can use the File class to read the file for you:
System::Void button1_Click(System::Object^ sender, System::EventArgs^ e)
{
textBox1->Text = System::IO::File::ReadAllText("DataStore.txt");
}
You'll need to hope that the process working directory contains that file. In a GUI app you are better served by specifying full paths to files, since the working directory is typically ill-defined.
If you are trying to learn C++, then perhaps a .net C++/CLI WinForms application is not the place to start.
You forgot to end method c_str, change it to c_str()
When I create a new project, I get a strange behavior for unhandled exceptions. This is how I can reproduce the problem:
1) create a new Windows Forms Application (C#, .NET Framework 4, VS2010)
2) add the following code to the Form1_Load handler:
int vara = 5, varb = 0;
int varc = vara / varb;
int vard = 7;
I would expect that VS breaks and shows an unhandled exception message at the second line. However, what happens is that the third line is just skipped without any message and the application keeps running.
I don't have this problem with my existing C# projects. So I guess that my new projects are created with some strange default settings.
Does anyone have an idea what's wrong with my project???
I tried checking the boxes in Debug->Exceptions. But then executions breaks even if I handle the exception in a try-catch block; which is also not what I want. If I remember correctly, there was a column called "unhandled exceptions" or something like this in this dialog box, which would do excatly what I want. But in my projects there is only one column ("Thrown").
This is a nasty problem induced by the wow64 emulation layer that allows 32-bit code to run on the 64-bit version of Windows 7. It swallows exceptions in the code that runs in response to a notification generated by the 64-bit window manager, like the Load event. Preventing the debugger from seeing it and stepping in. This problem is hard to fix, the Windows and DevDiv groups at Microsoft are pointing fingers back and forth. DevDiv can't do anything about it, Windows thinks it is the correct and documented behavior, mysterious as that sounds.
It is certainly documented but just about nobody understands the consequences or thinks it is reasonable behavior. Especially not when the window procedure is hidden from view of course, like it is in any project that uses wrapper classes to hide the window plumbing. Like any Winforms, WPF or MFC app. Underlying issue is Microsoft could not figure out how to flow exceptions from 32-bit code back to the 64-bit code that triggered the notification back to 32-bit code that tries to handle or debug the exception.
It is only a problem with a debugger attached, your code will bomb as usual without one.
Project > Properties > Build tab > Platform target = AnyCPU and untick Prefer 32-bit. Your app will now run as a 64-bit process, eliminating the wow64 failure mode. Some consequences, it disables Edit + Continue for VS versions prior to VS2013 and might not always be possible when you have a dependency on 32-bit code.
Other possible workarounds:
Debug > Exceptions > tick the Thrown box for CLR exceptions to force the debugger to stop at the line of code that throws the exception.
Write try/catch in the Load event handler and failfast in the catch block.
Use Application.SetUnhandledExceptionMode(UnhandledExceptionMode.CatchException) in the Main() method so that the exception trap in the message loop isn't disabled in debug mode. This however makes all unhandled exceptions hard to debug, the ThreadException event is pretty useless.
Consider if your code really belongs in the Load event handler. It is very rare to need it, it is however very popular in VB.NET and a swan song because it is the default event and a double-click trivially adds the event handler. You only ever really need Load when you are interested in the actual window size after user preferences and autoscaling is applied. Everything else belongs in the constructor.
Update to Windows 8 or later, they have this wow64 problem solved.
In my experience, I only see this issue when I'm running with a debugger attached. The application behaves the same when run standalone: the exception is not swallowed.
With the introduction of KB976038, you can make this work as you'd expect again. I never installed the hotfix, so I'm assuming it came as part of Win7 SP1.
This was mentioned in this post:
The case of the disappearing OnLoad exception – user-mode callback exceptions in x64
Here's some code that will enable the hotfix:
public static class Kernel32
{
public const uint PROCESS_CALLBACK_FILTER_ENABLED = 0x1;
[DllImport("Kernel32.dll")]
public static extern bool SetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(UInt32 dwFlags);
[DllImport("Kernel32.dll")]
public static extern bool GetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(out UInt32 lpFlags);
public static void DisableUMCallbackFilter() {
uint flags;
GetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(out flags);
flags &= ~PROCESS_CALLBACK_FILTER_ENABLED;
SetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(flags);
}
}
Call it at the beginning of your application:
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
Kernel32.DisableUMCallbackFilter();
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false);
Application.Run(new Form1());
}
I've confirmed (with the the simple example shown below) that this works, just as you'd expect.
protected override void OnLoad(EventArgs e) {
throw new Exception("BOOM"); // This will now get caught.
}
So, what I don't understand, is why it was previously impossible for the debugger to handle crossing kernel-mode stack frames, but with this hotfix, they somehow figured it out.
As Hans mentions, compile the application and run the exe without a debugger attached.
For me the problem was changing a Class property name that a BindingSource control was bound to. Running without the IDE I was able to see the error:
Cannot bind to the property or column SendWithoutProofReading on the
DataSource. Parameter name: dataMember
Fixing the BindingSource control to bind to the updated property name resolved the problem:
I'm using WPF and ran into this same problem. I had tried Hans 1-3 suggestions already, but didn't like them because studio wouldn't stop at where the error was (so I couldn't view my variables and see what was the problem).
So I tried Hans' 4th suggestion. I was suprised at how much of my code could be moved to the MainWindow constructor without any issue. Not sure why I got in the habit of putting so much logic in the Load event, but apparently much of it can be done in the ctor.
However, this had the same problem as 1-3. Errors that occur during the ctor for WPF get wrapped into a generic Xaml exception. (an inner exception has the real error, but again I wanted studio to just break at the actual trouble spot).
What ended up working for me was to create a thread, sleep 50ms, dispatch back to main thread and do what I need...
void Window_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
new Thread(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(50);
CrossThread(() => { OnWindowLoaded(); });
}).Start();
}
void CrossThread(Action a)
{
this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(a);
}
void OnWindowLoaded()
{
...do my thing...
This way studio would break right where an uncaught exception occurs.
A simple work-around could be if you can move your init code to another event like as Form_Shown which called later than Form_Load, and use a flag to run startup code at first form shown:
bool firstLoad = true; //flag to detect first form_shown
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//firstLoad = true;
//dowork(); //not execute initialization code here (postpone it to form_shown)
}
private void Form1_Shown(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (firstLoad) //simulate Form-Load
{
firstLoad = false;
dowork();
}
}
void dowork()
{
var f = File.OpenRead(#"D:\NoSuchFile756.123"); //this cause an exception!
}
When I create a new project, I get a strange behavior for unhandled exceptions. This is how I can reproduce the problem:
1) create a new Windows Forms Application (C#, .NET Framework 4, VS2010)
2) add the following code to the Form1_Load handler:
int vara = 5, varb = 0;
int varc = vara / varb;
int vard = 7;
I would expect that VS breaks and shows an unhandled exception message at the second line. However, what happens is that the third line is just skipped without any message and the application keeps running.
I don't have this problem with my existing C# projects. So I guess that my new projects are created with some strange default settings.
Does anyone have an idea what's wrong with my project???
I tried checking the boxes in Debug->Exceptions. But then executions breaks even if I handle the exception in a try-catch block; which is also not what I want. If I remember correctly, there was a column called "unhandled exceptions" or something like this in this dialog box, which would do excatly what I want. But in my projects there is only one column ("Thrown").
This is a nasty problem induced by the wow64 emulation layer that allows 32-bit code to run on the 64-bit version of Windows 7. It swallows exceptions in the code that runs in response to a notification generated by the 64-bit window manager, like the Load event. Preventing the debugger from seeing it and stepping in. This problem is hard to fix, the Windows and DevDiv groups at Microsoft are pointing fingers back and forth. DevDiv can't do anything about it, Windows thinks it is the correct and documented behavior, mysterious as that sounds.
It is certainly documented but just about nobody understands the consequences or thinks it is reasonable behavior. Especially not when the window procedure is hidden from view of course, like it is in any project that uses wrapper classes to hide the window plumbing. Like any Winforms, WPF or MFC app. Underlying issue is Microsoft could not figure out how to flow exceptions from 32-bit code back to the 64-bit code that triggered the notification back to 32-bit code that tries to handle or debug the exception.
It is only a problem with a debugger attached, your code will bomb as usual without one.
Project > Properties > Build tab > Platform target = AnyCPU and untick Prefer 32-bit. Your app will now run as a 64-bit process, eliminating the wow64 failure mode. Some consequences, it disables Edit + Continue for VS versions prior to VS2013 and might not always be possible when you have a dependency on 32-bit code.
Other possible workarounds:
Debug > Exceptions > tick the Thrown box for CLR exceptions to force the debugger to stop at the line of code that throws the exception.
Write try/catch in the Load event handler and failfast in the catch block.
Use Application.SetUnhandledExceptionMode(UnhandledExceptionMode.CatchException) in the Main() method so that the exception trap in the message loop isn't disabled in debug mode. This however makes all unhandled exceptions hard to debug, the ThreadException event is pretty useless.
Consider if your code really belongs in the Load event handler. It is very rare to need it, it is however very popular in VB.NET and a swan song because it is the default event and a double-click trivially adds the event handler. You only ever really need Load when you are interested in the actual window size after user preferences and autoscaling is applied. Everything else belongs in the constructor.
Update to Windows 8 or later, they have this wow64 problem solved.
In my experience, I only see this issue when I'm running with a debugger attached. The application behaves the same when run standalone: the exception is not swallowed.
With the introduction of KB976038, you can make this work as you'd expect again. I never installed the hotfix, so I'm assuming it came as part of Win7 SP1.
This was mentioned in this post:
The case of the disappearing OnLoad exception – user-mode callback exceptions in x64
Here's some code that will enable the hotfix:
public static class Kernel32
{
public const uint PROCESS_CALLBACK_FILTER_ENABLED = 0x1;
[DllImport("Kernel32.dll")]
public static extern bool SetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(UInt32 dwFlags);
[DllImport("Kernel32.dll")]
public static extern bool GetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(out UInt32 lpFlags);
public static void DisableUMCallbackFilter() {
uint flags;
GetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(out flags);
flags &= ~PROCESS_CALLBACK_FILTER_ENABLED;
SetProcessUserModeExceptionPolicy(flags);
}
}
Call it at the beginning of your application:
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
Kernel32.DisableUMCallbackFilter();
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false);
Application.Run(new Form1());
}
I've confirmed (with the the simple example shown below) that this works, just as you'd expect.
protected override void OnLoad(EventArgs e) {
throw new Exception("BOOM"); // This will now get caught.
}
So, what I don't understand, is why it was previously impossible for the debugger to handle crossing kernel-mode stack frames, but with this hotfix, they somehow figured it out.
As Hans mentions, compile the application and run the exe without a debugger attached.
For me the problem was changing a Class property name that a BindingSource control was bound to. Running without the IDE I was able to see the error:
Cannot bind to the property or column SendWithoutProofReading on the
DataSource. Parameter name: dataMember
Fixing the BindingSource control to bind to the updated property name resolved the problem:
I'm using WPF and ran into this same problem. I had tried Hans 1-3 suggestions already, but didn't like them because studio wouldn't stop at where the error was (so I couldn't view my variables and see what was the problem).
So I tried Hans' 4th suggestion. I was suprised at how much of my code could be moved to the MainWindow constructor without any issue. Not sure why I got in the habit of putting so much logic in the Load event, but apparently much of it can be done in the ctor.
However, this had the same problem as 1-3. Errors that occur during the ctor for WPF get wrapped into a generic Xaml exception. (an inner exception has the real error, but again I wanted studio to just break at the actual trouble spot).
What ended up working for me was to create a thread, sleep 50ms, dispatch back to main thread and do what I need...
void Window_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
new Thread(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(50);
CrossThread(() => { OnWindowLoaded(); });
}).Start();
}
void CrossThread(Action a)
{
this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(a);
}
void OnWindowLoaded()
{
...do my thing...
This way studio would break right where an uncaught exception occurs.
A simple work-around could be if you can move your init code to another event like as Form_Shown which called later than Form_Load, and use a flag to run startup code at first form shown:
bool firstLoad = true; //flag to detect first form_shown
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//firstLoad = true;
//dowork(); //not execute initialization code here (postpone it to form_shown)
}
private void Form1_Shown(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (firstLoad) //simulate Form-Load
{
firstLoad = false;
dowork();
}
}
void dowork()
{
var f = File.OpenRead(#"D:\NoSuchFile756.123"); //this cause an exception!
}
Newbie here, just trying to create a signal event handler in response to an onclick menu item.
Aint working for me.
I click on the menu item, click signals, to the right of "Activated" where it says "Click to Add Handler", I type in "MyOnClick"
then it shoots me out an error. weird.
Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.
I am running this in windows 7 under a vm on macbook pro. Windows is not sharing folders from Macbook Pro so shouldn't be a UNC issue. Pathways seem fine.
Any ideas?
Ben
I have the same issue on mac and windows with current monodevelop versions.
System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. ---> System.NotImplementedException: The method or operation is not implemented.
It's annoying me so much! Must be some bug.
EDIT: I've solve it!
In source add method like this:
protected virtual void onClick (object sender, EventArgs e)
{
MessageDialog md = new MessageDialog (this, DialogFlags.Modal,
MessageType.Error, ButtonsType.Close, "Some error");
md.Response += delegate(object o, ResponseArgs args) {
if (args.ResponseId == ResponseType.Close)
Console.WriteLine ("Response: Closed");
else
Console.WriteLine ("Other response happened.");
};
md.Run ();
md.Destroy ();
}
Then switch to visual designer and instead double click on signal/method name just type in method name [this case] onClick (no brackets). This time a method is implemented and doesn't cause throwing error.
It work but is not as comfortable as double click.
When you install a ClickOnce application, the program runs after the install. Is it possible to install without running?
I know I can use a setup and deployment project and create an installer, but I'd prefer to use ClickOnce.
I guess you could fake it. Introduce an "IsInstalled" boolean property, defaulted to false. Then in Program.cs, change your Main() method to look like this:
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false);
if (!Properties.Settings.Default.IsInstalled)
{
Properties.Settings.Default.IsInstalled = true;
Properties.Settings.Default.Save();
MessageBox.Show("Install Complete");
return;
}
Application.Run(new Form1());
}
So now when the app is first installed, it checks that property and simply displays a message to the user and then quits.
If you wanted to get tricky then you could look at parsing the Activation URI for the deployment and have a URI parameter which specifies whether the program should run when it's first installed or just close silently.
You can do this by editing the application manifest in Mage. There is a checkbox to stop the application running after installation.
If you are not comfortable editing a manifest manually or with Mage then you can use the built-in deployment class to check whether this is the first time the application has run.
using System.Deployment.Application
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false);
if (ApplicationDeployment.CurrentDeployment.IsFirstRun)
{
MessageBox.Show("Install Complete");
return;
}
Application.Run(new Form1());
}
After trying all the suggested solutions and still running into the same problems, I fiddled with this for a while and combined several solutions to one that actually works.
The problem with just setting an "isInstalled" property is the value is retained after upgrades, so every time you install the new version, it runs the app again. But using an application manifest file and Mage is just too much work and too complicated just to solve this little problem.
So what I did was acquire the current build # of the running version of the app, save that to a property, then check the property against the running version each time. This works because each publish increments the version #.
1) Change your Assembly version to use wildcards in AssemblyInfo.cs:
[assembly: AssemblyVersion("1.0.*")]
2) If that throws a "Deterministic" error on Build, open your .csproj file and set Deterministic to false in the PropertyGroup section
<Deterministic>false</Deterministic>
3) Add this fool-proof function to acquire the running assembly version:
private Version GetRunningVersion()
{
try
{
return System.Deployment.Application.ApplicationDeployment.CurrentDeployment.CurrentVersion;
}
catch
{
return System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetName().Version;
}
}
4) In your project's properties, open the Settings tab, and add a setting named lastVersion (String, User). Leave the Value empty.
5) Add this property to use to determine whether this is the first time the application is running after installation.
private bool isFirstRun
{
get { return Properties.Settings.Default.lastVersion != GetRunningVersion().ToString(); }
}
6) Then in your code, add this after you check for isFirstRun:
if (isFirstRun)
{
Properties.Settings.Default.lastVersion = GetRunningVersion().ToString();
Properties.Settings.Default.Save();
}