Search Results

Search found 97519 results on 3901 pages for 'wpf user controls'.

Page 206/3901 | < Previous Page | 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213  | Next Page >

  • "The Controls collection cannot be modified because the control contains code blocks"

    - by Daniel P
    I am trying to create a simple user control that is a slider. When I add a AjaxToolkit SliderExtender to the user control I get this (*&$#()@# error: Server Error in '/' Application. The Controls collection cannot be modified because the control contains code blocks (i.e. <% ... %). Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.Web.HttpException: The Controls collection cannot be modified because the control contains code blocks (i.e. <% ... %). Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: [HttpException (0x80004005): The Controls collection cannot be modified because the control contains code blocks (i.e. <% ... %).] System.Web.UI.ControlCollection.Add(Control child) +8677431 AjaxControlToolkit.ScriptObjectBuilder.RegisterCssReferences(Control control) in d:\E\AjaxTk-AjaxControlToolkit\Release\AjaxControlToolkit\ExtenderBase\ScriptObjectBuilder.cs:293 AjaxControlToolkit.ExtenderControlBase.OnLoad(EventArgs e) in d:\E\AjaxTk-AjaxControlToolkit\Release\AjaxControlToolkit\ExtenderBase\ExtenderControlBase.cs:306 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +50 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +141 System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) +627 Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:2.0.50727.3074; ASP.NET Version:2.0.50727.3074 I have tried putting a placeholder in the user control and adding the textbox and slider extender to the placeholder programmatically and I still get the error. Here is the simple code: <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:100%"> <tbody> <tr> <td></td> <td> <asp:Label ID="lblMaxValue" runat="server" Text="Maximum" CssClass="float_right" /> <asp:Label ID="lblMinValue" runat="server" Text="Minimum" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="width:60%;"> <asp:CheckBox ID="chkOn" runat="server" /><asp:Label ID="lblPrefix" runat="server" />:&nbsp;<asp:Label ID="lblSliderValue" runat="server" />&nbsp;<asp:Label ID="lblSuffix" runat="server" /> </td> <td style="text-align:right;width:40%;"> <asp:TextBox ID="txtSlider" runat="server" Text="50" style="display:none;" /> <ajaxToolkit:SliderExtender ID="seSlider" runat="server" BehaviorID="seSlider" TargetControlID="txtSlider" BoundControlID="lblSliderValue" Orientation="Horizontal" EnableHandleAnimation="true" Length="200" Minimum="0" Maximum="100" Steps="1" /> </td> </tr> </tbody> What is the problem? Thanks in advance. Dan

    Read the article

  • ASP.net getting NT user name returns administrator?

    - by JonH
    This doesnt seem to be an issue with windows XP. But I have an end user (my boss!!!) using windows 7 64 bit... In one of our apps we are grabbing the end user user name via: HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name.ToString.Substring (HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name.ToString.IndexOf("\") + 1).ToLower For me it is returning the correct user name for instance "jhermiz". When my boss tries getting into the app, it thinks he is Administrator??? Does anyone know of any alternative or why this might be happening? The reason this is an issue is because I use that user name to pull other information... This is visual studio 2003.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net AJAX controls, adding via .ashx page

    - by Matt Dawdy
    Okay, this is a continuation of a previous question of mine, but it is distinct enough to be its own question. Based on user interaction, I'm calling a .ashx handler via a jquery ajax call, and that handler is building some html for me that includes some Telerik controls like a masked textbox (masked for a phone number like "(###) ###-####". I got around all the hurdles of using Render() to get the html output of a server control even when it doesn't have a "Page" object or a ScriptHandler object. However, when I show the control to a user, I see the mask in the text of the textbox, but the mask doesn't "work" in the sense that when a user starts typing, it is as if the mask is really just text. So, my question is, after putting the html code out for a masked textbox, how do I tell whatever javascript is supposed to mask the input to really start masking on that specific control? I really hope this made sense. Please tell me if you need any clarification.

    Read the article

  • Changing a limited user account in XP fails

    - by javamonkey79
    I have the following: using System; using System.DirectoryServices.AccountManagement; public class ChangePassword { public static void Main() { PrincipalContext context = new PrincipalContext(ContextType.Machine); UserPrincipal user = UserPrincipal.FindByIdentity(context, "someLimitedAccount"); user.ChangePassword( "xxx", "zzz" ); } } This works just fine with administrator accounts, but seems to crash like so when I try to change limited accounts in XP: Unhandled Exception: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at ChangePassword.Main() Is what I am trying to do possible? If so, how? EDIT #1: I added the following: Console.WriteLine( "user: " + user ); Below this line: UserPrincipal user = UserPrincipal.FindByIdentity(context, "someLimitedAccount"); And I get this: user: It doesn't look like user is null when I print it, but then again I'm not really a .Net guy - I seem to remember this being expected behavior.

    Read the article

  • segmented controls mangled during initial transition animation

    - by dLux
    greetings and salutations folks, i'm relatively new to objective c & iphone programming, so bare with me if i've overlooked something obvious.. i created a simple app to play with the different transition animations, setting up a couple segmented controls and a slider.. (Flip/Curl), (left/right) | (up/down), (EaseInOut/EaseIn/EaseOut/Linear) i created a view controller class, and the super view controller switches between 2 instances of the sub class. as you can see from the following image, the first time switching to the 2nd instance, while the animation is occurring the segmented controls are mangled; i'd guess they haven't had enuff time to draw themselves completely.. http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/2320/mangledbuttonsduringtra.png they're fine once the animation is done, and any subsequent times.. if i specify cache:NO in the setAnimationTransition it helps, but there still seems to be some sort of progressive reveal for the text in the segmented controls; they still don't seem to be pre-rendered or initialized properly.. (and surely there's a way to do this while caching the view being transitioned to, since in this case the view isn't changing and should be cacheable.) i'm building my code based on a couple tutorials from a book, so i updated the didReceiveMemoryWarning to set the instanced view controllers to nil; when i invoke a memory warning in the simulator, i assume it's purging the other view, and it acts like a first transition after loading, the view being transitioned to appears just like the image above.. i guess it can't hurt to include the code (sorry if it's considered spamming), this is basically half of it, with a similar chunk following this in an else statement, for the case of the 2nd side being present, switching back to the 1st..: - (IBAction)switchViews:(id)sender { [UIView beginAnimations:@"Transition Animation" context:nil]; if (self.sideBViewController.view.superview == nil) // sideA is active, sideB is coming { if (self.sideBViewController == nil) { SideAViewController *sBController = [[SideAViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"SideAViewController" bundle:nil]; self.sideBViewController = sBController; [sBController release]; } [UIView setAnimationDuration:sideAViewController.transitionDurationSlider.value]; if ([sideAViewController.transitionAnimation selectedSegmentIndex] == 0) { // flip: 0 == left, 1 == right if ([sideAViewController.flipDirection selectedSegmentIndex] == 0) [UIView setAnimationTransition:UIViewAnimationTransitionFlipFromLeft forView:self.view cache:YES]; else [UIView setAnimationTransition:UIViewAnimationTransitionFlipFromRight forView:self.view cache:YES]; } else { // curl: 0 == up, 1 == down if ([sideAViewController.curlDirection selectedSegmentIndex] == 0) [UIView setAnimationTransition:UIViewAnimationTransitionCurlUp forView:self.view cache:YES]; else [UIView setAnimationTransition:UIViewAnimationTransitionCurlDown forView:self.view cache:YES]; } if ([sideAViewController.animationCurve selectedSegmentIndex] == 0) [UIView setAnimationCurve:UIViewAnimationCurveEaseInOut]; else if ([sideAViewController.animationCurve selectedSegmentIndex] == 1) [UIView setAnimationCurve:UIViewAnimationCurveEaseIn]; else if ([sideAViewController.animationCurve selectedSegmentIndex] == 2) [UIView setAnimationCurve:UIViewAnimationCurveEaseOut]; else if ([sideAViewController.animationCurve selectedSegmentIndex] == 3) [UIView setAnimationCurve:UIViewAnimationCurveLinear]; [sideBViewController viewWillAppear:YES]; [sideAViewController viewWillDisappear:YES]; [sideAViewController.view removeFromSuperview]; [self.view insertSubview:sideBViewController.view atIndex:0]; [sideBViewController viewDidAppear:YES]; [sideAViewController viewDidDisappear:YES]; } any other tips or pointers about writing good clean code is also appreciated, i realize i still have a lot to learn.. thank u for ur time, -- d

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC : Good Replacement for User Control?

    - by David Lively
    I found user controls to be incredibly useful when working with ASP.NET webforms. By encapsulating the code required for displaying a control with the markup, creation of reusable components was very straightforward and very, very useful. While MVC provides convenient separation of concerns, this seems to break encapsulation (ie, you can add a control without adding or using its supporting code, leading to runtime errors). Having to modify a controller every time I add a control to a view seems to me to integrate concerns, not separate them. I'd rather break the purist MVC ideology than give up the benefits of reusable, packaged controls. I need to be able to include components similar to webforms user controls throughout a site, but not for the entire site, and not at a level that belongs in a master page. These components should have their own code not just markup (to interact with the business layer), and it would be great if the page controller didn't need to know about the control. Since MVC user controls don't have codebehind, I can't see a good way to do this. Update FINALLY, a good (and, in retrospect, obvious) way to accomplish this. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; namespace K.ObjectModel.Controls { public class TestControl : ViewUserControl { protected override void Render(System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter writer) { writer.Write("Hello World"); base.Render(writer); } } } Create a new class which inherits ViewUserControl Override the .Render() method as shown above. Register the control via its associated ASCX as you would in a webForm: <%@ Register TagName="tn" TagPrefix="k" Src="~/Views/Navigation/LeftBar.ascx"%> Use the corresponding tag in whatever view or master page that you need: <k:tn runat="server"/> Make sure your .ascx inherits your new control: <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="K.ObjectModel.Controls.TestControl" %> Voila, you're up and running. This is tested with ASP.NET MVC 2, VS 2010 and .NET 4.0. Your custom tag references the ascx partial view, which inherits from the TestControl class. The control then overrides the Render() method, which is called to render the view, giving you complete control over the process from tag to output. Why does everyone try to make this so much harder than it has to be?

    Read the article

  • Can't mass-assign protected attributes: user

    - by Ben Aluan
    I'm working on a simple app that requires me to submit a form. I created two models. user.rb class User < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :email has_many :item end item.rb class Item < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :user_id belongs_to :user end Instead of creating a user using the user form view, I'm trying to create the user using the item form view. items/_form.html.haml = nested_form_for @item do |form| = form.fields_for :user do |builder| = builder.text_field :email = form.submit "Save" Did I miss something here? I'm using nested_form_for btw. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Good Replacement for User Control?

    - by David Lively
    I found user controls to be incredibly useful when working with ASP.NET webforms. By encapsulating the code required for displaying a control with the markup, creation of reusable components was very straightforward and very, very useful. While MVC provides convenient separation of concerns, this seems to break encapsulation (ie, you can add a control without adding or using its supporting code, leading to runtime errors). Having to modify a controller every time I add a control to a view seems to me to integrate concerns, not separate them. I'd rather break the purist MVC ideology than give up the benefits of reusable, packaged controls. I need to be able to include components similar to webforms user controls throughout a site, but not for the entire site, and not at a level that belongs in a master page. These components should have their own code not just markup (to interact with the business layer), and it would be great if the page controller didn't need to know about the control. Since MVC user controls don't have codebehind, I can't see a good way to do this. I've searched previous SO questions, and have yet to find a good answer. Options so far In an attempt to avoid turning the comments section into a discussion... RenderAction This allows the view to call another controller, which will be responsible for interacting with the BLL and whatever data is necessary to its corresponding view. The calling view needs to be aware of the sub controller. This seems to provide a nice way to encapsulate partial views and controls, without having to modify the calling controller. RenderPartial The calling controller is still responsible for executing whatever code is associated with the partial view, and making sure that the model passed to the partial view contains the data it expects. Effectively, modifying the partial view potentially means modifying the calling controller. Annoying especially if this is used in multiple places. Portable Areas Place each control in its own project/area?

    Read the article

  • Facebook profile search using email address of a user

    - by agdev
    Hello, If I have email address of a user, is there any way to find the profile of the user? I know it can be done using the uid and name of the user (GetInfo() or fql.query). The specific problem I am trying to address is when I search for a user using the name field, I end up getting multiple results (people with the same name). I have the email address of the user I want to search, so if I can search using email address, I will be able to reach to the specific user. Alternately, if there's a way to find uid for a given email address, I can get the user I am looking for. Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Persisting user control values afer postback in asp.net

    - by user557135
    Hi, I have a few user controls which I add to the aspx form depending on the user's choice from a combo box. I have a user control which has a textbox in it and a getValue() method that returns the value of the textbox. After user selects the related item I load the control and add to a panel using loadControl method. User enters some text. After a postback I want to keep the user control and the user input in the same state before . Hope i could be clear. Thanks in advanced

    Read the article

  • check for several conditions when a user logs in

    - by paul
    I would like to accomplish the following: If a username or password field is null, notify the user. If user name already exists, do not insert into the database and notify user to create a different name. if the username is unique and password is not null, return the username to the user. As of now it always returns "Please enter a different user name." I believe the issue has to do with the database query but I am not sure. If anyone can have a look and see if I am making an error, I greatly appreciate it, thanks. if ($userName or $userPassword = null) { echo "Please enter a user name and password or return to the homepage."; } elseif (mysql_num_rows(mysql_query("SELECT count(userName) FROM logininfo WHERE userName = '$userName'")) ==1) { echo "Please enter a different user name."; } elseif ($userName and $userPassword != null) { echo "Your login name is: $userName"; }

    Read the article

  • Are sessions modifiable by the client/user?

    - by Sev
    In my PHP Web-App I use sessions to store the user's data. For exmaple, if a user logs in, then an instance of the User class is generated and stored in a Session. I have access levels associated with each user to determine their privileges. Store the user in a session by: $_SESSION['currentUser'] = new User($_POST['username']); For example: if($_SESSION['currentUser'] -> getAccessLevel() == 1) { //allow administration functions } where getAccessLevel() is simply a get method in the User class that returns the _accesslevel member variable. Is this secure? Or can the client somehow modify their access level through session manipulation of some sort?

    Read the article

  • Rails: User specific sequential column

    - by Alex Marchant
    I have an inventory system, where a User has many inventory. We have a barcode column which needs to be sequential for each user. I run into a problem however when doing bulk association building. I end up getting several inventories for a user with the same barcode. For example: Inventory Table: id | user_id | barcode 1 | 1 | 1 2 | 1 | 2 3 | 2 | 1 4 | 2 | 2 5 | 1 | 3 In the Inventory model I have before_validation :assign_barcode, on: :create def assign_barcode self.barcode = (user.inventories.order(barcode: :desc).first.try(:barcode) || 0) + 1 end It generally works, but ran into a problem when seeding my db: (1..5).each do user.inventories.build(...) end user.save I end up with a bunch of inventories for user that have the same barcode. How can I ensure that inventories have unique barcodes even when adding inventories in bulk?

    Read the article

  • July 2013 Release of the Ajax Control Toolkit

    - by Stephen.Walther
    I’m super excited to announce the July 2013 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit. You can download the new version of the Ajax Control Toolkit from CodePlex (http://ajaxControlToolkit.CodePlex.com) or install the Ajax Control Toolkit from NuGet: With this release, we have completely rewritten the way the Ajax Control Toolkit combines, minifies, gzips, and caches JavaScript files. The goal of this release was to improve the performance of the Ajax Control Toolkit and make it easier to create custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls. Improving Ajax Control Toolkit Performance Previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit optimized performance for a single page but not multiple pages. When you visited each page in an app, the Ajax Control Toolkit would combine all of the JavaScript files required by the controls in the page into a new JavaScript file. So, even if every page in your app used the exact same controls, visitors would need to download a new combined Ajax Control Toolkit JavaScript file for each page visited. Downloading new scripts for each page that you visit does not lead to good performance. In general, you want to make as few requests for JavaScript files as possible and take maximum advantage of caching. For most apps, you would get much better performance if you could specify all of the Ajax Control Toolkit controls that you need for your entire app and create a single JavaScript file which could be used across your entire app. What a great idea! Introducing Control Bundles With this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we introduce the concept of Control Bundles. You define a Control Bundle to indicate the set of Ajax Control Toolkit controls that you want to use in your app. You define Control Bundles in a file located in the root of your application named AjaxControlToolkit.config. For example, the following AjaxControlToolkit.config file defines two Control Bundles: <ajaxControlToolkit> <controlBundles> <controlBundle> <control name="CalendarExtender" /> <control name="ComboBox" /> </controlBundle> <controlBundle name="CalendarBundle"> <control name="CalendarExtender"></control> </controlBundle> </controlBundles> </ajaxControlToolkit> The first Control Bundle in the file above does not have a name. When a Control Bundle does not have a name then it becomes the default Control Bundle for your entire application. The default Control Bundle is used by the ToolkitScriptManager by default. For example, the default Control Bundle is used when you declare the ToolkitScriptManager like this:  <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager runat=”server” /> The default Control Bundle defined in the file above includes all of the scripts required for the CalendarExtender and ComboBox controls. All of the scripts required for both of these controls are combined, minified, gzipped, and cached automatically. The AjaxControlToolkit.config file above also defines a second Control Bundle with the name CalendarBundle. Here’s how you would use the CalendarBundle with the ToolkitScriptManager: <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager runat="server"> <ControlBundles> <ajaxToolkit:ControlBundle Name="CalendarBundle" /> </ControlBundles> </ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager> In this case, only the JavaScript files required by the CalendarExtender control, and not the ComboBox, would be downloaded because the CalendarBundle lists only the CalendarExtender control. You can use multiple named control bundles with the ToolkitScriptManager and you will get all of the scripts from both bundles. Support for ControlBundles is a new feature of the ToolkitScriptManager that we introduced with this release. We extended the ToolkitScriptManager to support the Control Bundles that you can define in the AjaxControlToolkit.config file. Let me be explicit about the rules for Control Bundles: 1. If you do not create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file then the ToolkitScriptManager will download all of the JavaScript files required for all of the controls in the Ajax Control Toolkit. This is the easy but low performance option. 2. If you create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file and create a ControlBundle without a name then the ToolkitScriptManager uses that Control Bundle by default. For example, if you plan to use only the CalendarExtender and ComboBox controls in your application then you should create a default bundle that lists only these two controls. 3. If you create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file and create one or more named Control Bundles then you can use these named Control Bundles with the ToolkitScriptManager. For example, you might want to use different subsets of the Ajax Control Toolkit controls in different sections of your app. I should also mention that you can use the AjaxControlToolkit.config file with custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls – new controls that you write. For example, here is how you would register a set of custom controls from an assembly named MyAssembly: <ajaxControlToolkit> <controlBundles> <controlBundle name="CustomBundle"> <control name="MyAssembly.MyControl1" assembly="MyAssembly" /> <control name="MyAssembly.MyControl2" assembly="MyAssembly" /> </controlBundle> </ajaxControlToolkit> What about ASP.NET Bundling and Minification? The idea of Control Bundles is similar to the idea of Script Bundles used in ASP.NET Bundling and Minification. You might be wondering why we didn’t simply use Script Bundles with the Ajax Control Toolkit. There were several reasons. First, ASP.NET Bundling does not work with scripts embedded in an assembly. Because all of the scripts used by the Ajax Control Toolkit are embedded in the AjaxControlToolkit.dll assembly, ASP.NET Bundling was not an option. Second, Web Forms developers typically think at the level of controls and not at the level of individual scripts. We believe that it makes more sense for a Web Forms developer to specify the controls that they need in an app (CalendarExtender, ToggleButton) instead of the individual scripts that they need in an app (the 15 or so scripts required by the CalenderExtender). Finally, ASP.NET Bundling does not work with older versions of ASP.NET. The Ajax Control Toolkit needs to support ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5. Therefore, using ASP.NET Bundling was not an option. There is nothing wrong with using Control Bundles and Script Bundles side-by-side. The ASP.NET 4.0 and 4.5 ToolkitScriptManager supports both approaches to bundling scripts. Using the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler Browsers cache JavaScript files by URL. For example, if you request the exact same JavaScript file from two different URLs then the exact same JavaScript file must be downloaded twice. However, if you request the same JavaScript file from the same URL more than once then it only needs to be downloaded once. With this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we have introduced a new HTTP Handler named the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler. If you register this handler in your web.config file then the Ajax Control Toolkit can cache your JavaScript files for up to one year in the future automatically. You should register the handler in two places in your web.config file: in the <httpHandlers> section and the <system.webServer> section (don’t forget to register the handler for the AjaxFileUpload while you are there!). <httpHandlers> <add verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> <add verb="*" path="CombineScriptsHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> </httpHandlers> <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <handlers> <add name="AjaxFileUploadHandler" verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> <add name="CombineScriptsHandler" verb="*" path="CombineScriptsHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> </handlers> <system.webServer> The handler is only used in release mode and not in debug mode. You can enable release mode in your web.config file like this: <compilation debug=”false”> You also can override the web.config setting with the ToolkitScriptManager like this: <act:ToolkitScriptManager ScriptMode=”Release” runat=”server”/> In release mode, scripts are combined, minified, gzipped, and cached with a far future cache header automatically. When the handler is not registered, scripts are requested from the page that contains the ToolkitScriptManager: When the handler is registered in the web.config file, scripts are requested from the handler: If you want the best performance, always register the handler. That way, the Ajax Control Toolkit can cache the bundled scripts across page requests with a far future cache header. If you don’t register the handler then a new JavaScript file must be downloaded whenever you travel to a new page. Dynamic Bundling and Minification Previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit used a Visual Studio build task to minify the JavaScript files used by the Ajax Control Toolkit controls. The disadvantage of this approach to minification is that it made it difficult to create custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls. Starting with this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we support dynamic minification. The JavaScript files in the Ajax Control Toolkit are minified at runtime instead of at build time. Scripts are minified only when in release mode. You can specify release mode with the web.config file or with the ToolkitScriptManager ScriptMode property. Because of this change, the Ajax Control Toolkit now depends on the Ajax Minifier. You must include a reference to AjaxMin.dll in your Visual Studio project or you cannot take advantage of runtime minification. If you install the Ajax Control Toolkit from NuGet then AjaxMin.dll is added to your project as a NuGet dependency automatically. If you download the Ajax Control Toolkit from CodePlex then the AjaxMin.dll is included in the download. This change means that you no longer need to do anything special to create a custom Ajax Control Toolkit. As an open source project, we hope more people will contribute to the Ajax Control Toolkit (Yes, I am looking at you.) We have been working hard on making it much easier to create new custom controls. More on this subject with the next release of the Ajax Control Toolkit. A Single Visual Studio Solution We also made substantial changes to the Visual Studio solution and projects used by the Ajax Control Toolkit with this release. This change will matter to you only if you need to work directly with the Ajax Control Toolkit source code. In previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we maintained separate solution and project files for ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5. Starting with this release, we now support a single Visual Studio 2012 solution that takes advantage of multi-targeting to build ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5 versions of the toolkit. This change means that you need Visual Studio 2012 to open the Ajax Control Toolkit project downloaded from CodePlex. For details on how we setup multi-targeting, please see Budi Adiono’s blog post: http://www.budiadiono.com/2013/07/25/visual-studio-2012-multi-targeting-framework-project/ Summary You can take advantage of this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit to significantly improve the performance of your website. You need to do two things: 1) You need to create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file which lists the controls used in your app and 2) You need to register the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler in the web.config file. We made substantial changes to the Ajax Control Toolkit with this release. We think these changes will result in much better performance for multipage apps and make the process of building custom controls much easier. As always, we look forward to hearing your feedback.

    Read the article

  • OS X multiple use of same machine via VNC

    - by Hassan Syed
    I'm wondering if I can connect to my wife's mac via VNC while she is logged in herself. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't possible, although the machinery should be there with "fast-user-switching" support. So, if I create a profile for myself and I log in (and enable the VNC server/sharing for my profile), and then my wife switches to her own account which she uses on the physical console. Will I be able to use the mac ?

    Read the article

  • Reading line for Ubuntu users

    - by Willy Levine
    Normally when I read a book I use a bookmark held horizontally under the current line I'm reading to help me keep my eyes on the right spot. When I read a PDF or other document on my computer I would like to be able to do the same thing, only with a line on the screen controlled by the up and down arrow keys. Any suggestions for an application which would do this? I'm a Ubuntu Linux user.

    Read the article

  • Chrome Open in New Tab/Window Menu Items

    - by Aequitarum Custos
    The problem is, both Firefox and Internet Explorer have "Open in New Tab" as the second option. This has become muscle memory for me by now, to the point that I don't use as often as I want to, solely because I can't open a page in a new tab without thinking about it. Is there a way to switch the position of "Open Link in new tab" and "Open link in new window", so that I can resume browsing as normal, or am I cursed by this user interface design nightmare by Google?

    Read the article

  • How do I add new users to PostgreSQL 9.1 on Mac OS X 10.6?

    - by Cheng
    I am unable to run psql with my normal Mac user account in Terminal session, although I can do it using the postgres service account). When I enter the command psql mydb and type my password, I get the following message: WARNING: password file "/Users/beh/.pgpass" has group or world access; permissions should be u=rw (0600) or less But I cannot find .pgpass. How do I set up and add users to my PostgreSQL 9.1 database on Mac OS X 10.6.8?

    Read the article

  • My Window's 7 is exposing me and my files I am the only administrator.

    - by Connie
    I am the only administrator on my Window's 7 Asus x53E series laptop. Why is a standard user able to access my files by just searching my name in the start menu? If I log into guest account and search my name it shows an error that i don't have permission. When i log into my roommate's standard account and go to the start menu I put my name in search and everything I have done or searched is open to them . How can i make my administrator account private

    Read the article

  • How would I prevent users from logging in a PC while software is installing?

    - by user333121
    So I currently am looking for a solution to keeping users logged out while software is installing or activating a pop-up message that cannot be moved, closed, and is always on top, because sometimes when we deploy software to users (via SCCM), the parameters of the install require the user to be logged out for the duration of the installation. I've looked at trying to customize the group policy for account lockout but with no luck. Anyone know of any programs or scripts that do this? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Increase the number of concurrent users on Windows Server 2008

    - by gentlesea
    I have a Windows Server 2008 R2 running and I am able to connect to it using 2 different users via Remote Desktop Connection. Since a colleague and me are working on the server almost all the time and another colleague also wants to connect there is always the need to disconnect one user which is bad. Is there a possibility to increase the number of allowed users? On another server there are more than 2 users allowed. What is different there?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213  | Next Page >