What im trying to do is write a key to the registry but im stepping from one problem to another, first permissions problem, now this..
This is the line of code.
If PNGchk.Checked = True Then
My.Computer.Registry.Users.CreateSubKey(UserSID & "\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FileExts\.png\UserChoice", True, Security.AccessControl.RegistryRights.FullControl).SetValue("Progid", "SIV.png", Microsoft.Win32.RegistryValueKind.String)
End If
You must have Option Strict Off for that code to even compile, so you might want to fix that to start with. Option Strict On would have flagged issues with that code right away. You should read the documentation or at least pay attention to Intellisense for that method because your second and third arguments make no sense. No overload that I can see has a Boolean parameter and if you want to use a RegistryRights value you do so within a RegistrySecurity object as far as I can see.
RegistryKeyPermissionCheck.ReadWriteSubTree worked for me.
Using clsid64 = view64.CreateSubKey("Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FileExts\.png\UserChoice", RegistryKeyPermissionCheck.ReadWriteSubTree)
clsid64.SetValue("StubPath", "SIV.png")
clsid64.Close()
End Using
Related
Getting warning from Script Checker : "OMEGA13 was used but was never set (will evaluate as its name)"
I've set
start using Omega13
-- some codes here --
stop using Omega13
Anyone has any idea on why the warning sign is there?
Eggplant documentation - Advance scripting: Error Recovery with Omega13
What's probably happened is somewhere you've mistyped some variant of omega13.
Sensetalk treats uninitialized variables as strings. This results in lots of hard to debug errors.
name = "my name"
put naame
This will print naame which is probably not what you wanted.
It looks like the correct form to invoke is omega13 not Omega13, or OMEGA13. I'd check the documentation and make sure that you haven't mistyped it anywhere.
You may also want to look into the strictVariables global which if true will treat using an uninitialized variable as an error.
I have the following two lines of code:
Debug.Print Forms!DocLoader!DL_RowBox!DLR_FileName.Name
Debug.Print Forms!DocLoader!DL_RowBox.Form!DLR_FileName.Name
The second one, which I have seen recommended in almost every VBA reference, including the answer being suggested from SO as I type this, follows this structure:
Debug.Print Forms![Form Name]![Subform Control Name].Form![Control Name].Name
These two lines of code should produce the same result. However, the second, recommended syntax throws error 40036, "Application-defined or object-defined error" unless I am in design view. I cannot use it at runtime, but I have never seen this limitation mentioned in any of the reference documentation or forum posts I have looked at. The first line, using only default parameters, seems to work no matter the context.
With the second line, I have tried just about every combination of bang and period I can, and I have also tried enclosing field names in brackets, but the common denominator is that as soon as I reference ".Form" the application throws an error. Even something simple like ".Form.Caption" has thrown an error. So what I would like to know is:
Are there any other correct ways of referring to a subform's form properties, since I need these as well as its controls
Why would the first line execute correctly while the second, recommended one does not seem to work?
Running the compiler appears to have fixed the issue.
Trying to develop an VS extension to help with migration from vb6 to Vb.net using Roslyn.
Unfortunately I am not having much luck with detecting the "DoEvents" expression in my source as I get NULL from my GetDeclaredSymbol during the detection.
My bad coding is......
Register the action:
context.RegisterSyntaxNodeAction(AddressOf ExpressionStatementDec, SyntaxKind.InvocationExpression)
Try and detect the "DoEvents" expression:
Private Sub ExpressionStatementDec(context As SyntaxNodeAnalysisContext)
Dim GotYou = context.SemanticModel.GetDeclaredSymbol(context.Node)
Dim WhatExpression = context.Node.ToFullString.ToString
' Find DoEvents.
If RemoveWhitespace(WhatExpression) = "DoEvents" Then
Dim diag = Diagnostic.Create(Rule, GotYou.Locations(0), GotYou.Name)
context.ReportDiagnostic(diag)
End If
End Sub
I have tried loads of options for trying to get the right type of object for "GotYou" but no luck so far.
Any pointers appreciated :)
Edit Additional info:
I have tried GetSymbolInfo but when I am detecting "DoEvents" in the context.Node.ToFullString.ToString I am still not getting anything in the context.SemanticModel.GetSymbolInfo(context.Node) as below.
Thanks,
Richard
If you want to look at what a invocation is referencing, call GetSymbolInfo not GetDeclaredSymbol.
Don’t have Visual Studio handy in order to get the code, but...
I believe what you want is something like:
Dim WhatExpression = TryCast(CType(context.Node, InvocationExpressionSyntax).Expression, IdentifierNameSyntax)?.Identifier.Text
This isn’t all of it, you could be dealing with a memberaccessexpression, in which case it’s probably not what you are looking for. The options would be a bit easier to handle with pattern matching in C#, but that’s the general idea. You don’t need the semantic tree at this point, because you first want to verify that you are dealing with the right text. Once you’ve got that, you can see where it comes from and whether it is something you need to deal with. Getting the semantic model is expensive, no reason to do so when (outside of your unit test) it is rarely going to be needed.
I´m losing my mind here, I've tried every example I've found online and still can't get it to work, this is the way im creating the variable on the code that generates the report, I'm working on a .NET application:
report.Dictionary.Variables.Add(New Stimulsoft.Report.Dictionary.StiVariable("test",""))
report("test") = "ANYTHING"
While it does show me the created variables on the Stimuloft gui, it contains absolutely nothing, any ideas on what I'm doing wrong? Thanks!
You should use next code to set value of variable:
report.Dictionary.Variables("test").Value = "ANYTHING"
The code that you use will work after calling report.Compile() method only.
This might be an odd question, but I'm looking for a word to use in a function name. I'm normally good at coming up with succinct, meaningful function names, but this one has me stumped so I thought I'd appeal for help.
The function will take some desired state as an argument and compare it to the current state. If no change is needed, the function will exit normally without doing anything. Otherwise, the function will take some action to achieve the desired state.
For example, if wanted to make sure the front door was closed, i might say:
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
What word or term should use in place of the something? I'd like it to be short, readable, and minimize the astonishment factor.
A couple clarifying points...
I would want someone calling the function to intuitively know they didn't need to wrap the function an 'if' that checks the current state. For example, this would be bad:
if my_house.front_door_is_open():
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
Also, they should know that the function won't throw an exception if the desired state matches the current state. So this should never happen:
try:
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
except DoorWasAlreadyClosedException:
pass
Here are some options I've considered:
my_house.set_front_door('closed')
my_house.setne_front_door('closed') # ne=not equal, from the setne x86 instruction
my_house.ensure_front_door('closed')
my_house.configure_front_door('closed')
my_house.update_front_door('closed')
my_house.make_front_door('closed')
my_house.remediate_front_door('closed')
And I'm open to other forms, but most I've thought of don't improve readability. Such as...
my_house.ensure_front_door_is('closed')
my_house.conditionally_update_front_door('closed')
my_house.change_front_door_if_needed('closed')
Thanks for any input!
I would use "ensure" as its succinct, descriptive and to the point:
EnsureCustomerExists(CustomerID)
EnsureDoorState(DoorStates.Closed)
EnsureUserInterface(GUIStates.Disabled)
Interesting question!
From the info that you have supplied, it seems to me that setstate (or simply set, if you are setting other things than states) would be fine, though ensure is good if you want to really emphasize the redundancy of an if.
To me it is however perfectly intuitive that setting a state does not throw an exception, or require an if. Think of setting the state of any other variable:
In C:
int i;
i = 5; // Would you expect this to throw an exception if i was already 5?
// Would you write
if (i != 5)
i = 5;
// ?
Also it only takes about one sentence to document this behaviour:
The function does nothing if the
current state equals the requested
state.
EDIT: Actually, thinking about it, if it is really important to you (for some reason) that the user is not confused about this, I would in fact pick ensure (or some other non-standard name). Why? Because as a user, a name like that would make me scratch my head a bit and look up the documentation ("This is more than just an ordinary set-function, apparently").
EDIT 2: Only you know how you design your programs, and which function name fits in best. From what you are saying, it seems like your setting functions sometimes throw exceptions, and you need to name a setting function that doesn't - e.g. set_missile_target. If that is the case, I think you should consider the set_if, set_when, set_cond or cond_set names. Which one would kind of depend on the rest of your code. I would also add that one line of documentation (or two, if you're generous), which clarifies the whole thing.
For example:
// Sets missile target if current target is not already the requested target,
// in which case it does nothing. No exceptions are thrown.
function cond_set_missile_target ()
or function cond_set_MissileTarget ()
or function condSet_MissileTarget ()
or function condSetMissileTarget ()
ensure is not so bad, but to me it implies only that there is additional logic required to set the state (e.g. multiple states tied together, or other complications). It helps to make the user avoid adding unnecessary ifs, but it does not help much with the exception issue. I would expect an ensure function to throw an exception sooner than a set function, since the ensure function clearly has more responsibilities for, well, ensuring that this setting operation is in fact done right.
I'd go for ensure for the function you describe. I'd also use camelCase, but I suppose you may be in a language that prefers underscores.
You could always document (shock!) your API so that others don't make the mistakes you describe.