Is there any support in AutoFac for Windows Embedded Handheld 6.5 (basically Windows Mobile Handheld using Compact Framework 3.5). We are currently using Ninject and due to some odd threading issues we have with our web site using Ninject, we are moving over to AutoFac. But our enterprise LOB applications that run on mobile handhelds use the Compact Framework, which is supported by Ninject.
If there is no AutoFac support I might stick to using Ninject for the compact framework and come up with some way to abstract between the two. Ideally I would love it if it can be supported, because our Windows Forms client apps share most of their code with the handheld versions. Or maybe I will just stick to Ninject for the Windows Forms code as it works fine there, and change to AutoFac for the web site.
You might look at using the CommonServiceLocator for injection, which would allow you to use AutoFac or Ninject (or several other options). It doesn't specifically have a CF build, but I added support for it in my own IoC project which supports the CF and it was really straightforward, so I suspect that getting it to work with the CF version of Ninject should be easy as well.
Related
I want to use Azure DocumentDb in my ASP.NET 5 project and it seems that DocumentDb .NET SDK doesn't work with DNX yet. Is it so? And if Yes maybe there is a workaround here?
You can get ASP.NET 5 to target the full .NET Framework as opposed to Core. The biggest advantage of targeting Core is that it would allow you to run outside of Windows, but if this is not a requirement for you then the full framework should be fine.
I don't know the status of work on supporting DNX, but assuming that's not going to come in time, I can think of several ways to work around it:
Hit the DocumentDB REST API directly
Run edge.js in process inside .NET and use the node.js SDK although there seems to be some question about what platforms are supported by edge.js.
Use node.js instead of .NET. My experience helping .NET developers ramp up on DocumentDB has convinced me that the JavaScript-centric design of DocumentDB means, it's much easier to use from node.js than it is from .NET, IMHO. Many of the .NET problems come from the difference between strongly typed .NET and highly dynamic JavaScript. Stored procedures are written in JavaScript not .NET.
I am developing some kind of communication and data-interchange system to use in various applications that my company is producing. There will be SignalR hub for messaging and WCF service for file streaming.
I was thinking of developing a Hub library in .NET 4.5. Also I plan to enable Hub hosting in some windows process and IIS.
Thing that bothers me is that I have to support Windows XP clients, so I cannot use .NET 4.5 for developing a client library.
My question is: Are there bad effects of providing a .NET 4.0 client library for all clients, even though there are more clients with Windows 7 or Windows 8? My concern is about performance and features - am I going to lose any of that if I go with .NET 4.0 client?
I'm involved in a project with many others companies. We started to develop our systems at the same time but only at the end the communication problem was taken into account.
I've developed my system on Linux with Mono (Linux is mandatory for me). I have to communicate with a Windows .Net system which is exposing a Wcf web services. Unfortunately they told me only now they are using wsHttpBinding and I've just discovered that this communication protocol is not supported by Mono.
I'm here to ask if there is a way to communicate with that web service. They are not going to change the wsHttpBinding because is used by many other companies. I cannot change my OS and my code base is too big to leave Mono now. I can only add a layer (always on Linux) between my Mono implementation and their web services.
Any suggestions?
Microsoft has recently released the .NET source code as MIT licence (open source).
This means that, if something is not supported by Mono, you can just bring the code yourself and incorporate it, so that it becomes officially supported.
Some Mono developers have actually been doing this the past weeks to incorporate things that they had not implemented yet. So you could bring the wsHttpBinding along to Mono. An example of such a change is this commit.
I work at a financial institution, in a team whick takes care of a "home-made" corporate component. This component was built using .NET 1.1, and the other teams use it a lot, specially along with the legacy systems (the ones which are still in .NET 1.1 too)!
Now we want to upgrade this component to .NET 4.0 so we can use some new features (in fact, we want to use Websphere MQ, and its .NET library was build over .NET 2.0). However, can't simply change the runtime of our component, because our internal clients can't afford with an upgrade to their systems.
So, we need to keep a .NET 1.1 component working as a proxy to some service built in .NET 4.0. This was where my question came from: how this interoperability can be made? My first answer was using .NET Remoting 4.0 to comunicate these two parts. Although we can use a WCF service exposed with a HTTP binding (the .NET 1.1 component uses it as it was a ASMX web service), .NET Remoting has proven its performance advantage over the previous solution, but it's a legacy framework (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/kwdt6w2k.aspx).
What I'd like to know is if you guys have another idea to do this interop. Is there a way to call a WCF service exposed with the netTCP binding by a .NET 1.1 client?
Thanks a lot!
The real solution is to get over the problems that are forcing you to use unsupported software (.NET 1.1). Then you won't have to do horrible things like the following:
Create a .NET 4.0 class library.
Add a Service Reference to your WCF service.
Create classes and interfaces which can be used to call the WCF service.
Expose them as COM classes and interfaces
Have your .NET 1.1 code consume the COM object and make calls through it
Would be, "compare the amount of effort you just spent on trying to make obsolete unsupported code work vs. the amount of new, useful work you just did".
Note also that this technique quite rightly places .NET 1.1 in the same category as Classic ASP in terms of its ability to use modern software like WCF.
Finally, note that I haven't found a way to make the WCF client in this situation to use a config file. It was necessary to configure it in code.
Is there a reason why you can't port the component and have two versions (a 1.1 version and a 4.0) version? That would let the legacy apps continue to use the component, but your 4.0 stuff could use a newer version without all the complexity required in your proposed solution.
Different versions of .net assemblies can play nice with each other, you aren't forced to only have one version of the component.
What is a better platform/language for developing Windows/desktop based application that can run offline (sometimes)? .NET (C#, ASP) or Java or any other development tool? This application requires to store data into a database(involves some GIS) and later Synch both ways with the main server (SQL/Oracle) during off hours or when initiated by a user or event or when online? ALso the tool/IDE recommended should allow us in the future to migrate this desktop application as a Web based application to the corporate server with less pain or re-work when internet/nw access is available to all of our remote sites/users. Any input/advice is appreciated.
If you are strictly doing Windows desktop application development, C# or VB.NET would be an excellent choice. There is a ton of documentation out there for .NET developers. Although the framework is a free download from Microsoft, any serious work is cumbersome and tedious without the IDE.
If you needed the potential to support your application on multiple operating systems besides Microsoft Windows, then I think it might be worth looking into Java.
For web solutions, in .NET you have ASP.NET, Java you have JSP and Tomcat.
You could try Adobe AIR. It seems like it would serve most of your desktop needs and it should be the easiest to migrate into a web app (Flex).
C#/WPF for desktop with Silverlight, XBAP or even ASP as the online options.
Since you mentioned the desire to web-enable this application at some point I'd look into Silverlight. Out-of-browser capabilities were introduced in Silverlight 3. That means that the app can run directly on the desktop, and the internet connection is optional. However, when the internet connection is available it has built-in support for auto-updating itself.
And now in Silverlight 4 it's possible to run an out-of-browser Silverlight app with elevated trust. Silverlight 4 also finally introduced things like right-click support, clipboard access, full keyboard support in fullscreen mode, etc. So if you're just now starting development, I'd most definitely use version 4.
You'll have to communicate with something like a WCF service for a lot of the database operations. But going with Silverlight should allow you to build something that'll work on the desktop and the web alike without having to manage two systems.
Going web-based after you already developed a desktop application is a really bad idea. There is no reason the desktop application cannot use a internet connection, and be updated from a server.
You could try Delphi. It's a rapid application development tool. Very different, but very quick to use. Well suited to Oracle integration. Data sync is probably going to need to be custom, unless you're using something like Sybase SQL Anywhere.