Advertisement Jump to content
  • Advertisement


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

130 Neutral

About orbano

  • Rank
  1. thank you, im going on the second way you suggest. i hoped there would be an easier solution than simulating modal behaviour. this way i will also be able to provide a return value (maybe a special-, or default one).
  2. Quote:Original post by Machaira Sometimes good advice is the best help you can get. Maybe there's a reason why this type of functionality doesn't exist. we have very good proverbs for this. unfortunately my english restricts me to express them :) i dont really care about the current design of windows forms. there are many design issues related to it. for exaple it took about a year to develop our own control-management. create our own controls, taborder, validation, extend customizeability, just to create a competent user experience. after this i dont really care if it was someone's intention not to allow this "feature" in windowing, or simply the sloppyness of some coders at M$. and please, dont misunderstand me. i really respect that you are trying to reflect at the sossibility of a dsign failure (i'd do the same). but i can assure you, i know what i want. really.
  3. As i mentioned before, only specific windows will have this ability (read-only lists). They will also have some options disabled in modeless state. If you can help, please do it. I'm here to get some help. Not an advice... Regards
  5. Quote:Original post by benryves All I can think of is to show the modal form as modeless, and disabling the parent form (set its Enabled property to false). Enable the parent form when the pseudo-modal dialog form is closed, or when you want to change it into a modeless one. I agree with the others, though; a form should really be one or the other. all of you are bound to these stupid old habits. why should it not change its modal state? where did you learn that? its some kind of software-ergonomy domgma? i dont think so... by the way that was my idea too: override showdialog, and make the parent form enter a loop and wait until child window sends it a message to release it (when it is closed or detatched) let me make a mockup... brb
  6. Okay. I'm (we are) developing a bookkeeping application. It has many lists, ledgers, statements, etc. Basycally the program is designed to be simple and straightforward. No modeless forms, everything is organized in a strict and logical way. Even these lists should be modal by default, because you can open another list, that displays data according to the selected item of the parent list. you can then open an item for editing, etc. So modal structure must be kept. But: when the user wants to check and compare different lists (for exaple they are looking for an error, missing item, whatever they want), it would be a greate feature to "detatch" a list, and put it into a "list manager", a system, that manages these modeless forms: they can be collapsed into a small thumbnail and put onto a collector form, whatever you might imagine. I want this feature without compromises. On the top right corner of reach specific form would be a button for detachment (the list would immediately be put onto the collector panel in the form of a thumbnail, and the modal part of the program would behave like the form would have been closed). Damn i hope you understand... my english is... hopeless :)
  7. Quote:Original post by Machaira A form should either be modal or not. You shouldn't need nor want to change it from one to another. Rethink your design. i did rethink. i need it. thanks for the advice...
  8. Quote:Original post by Mike.Popoloski Can't you just hide it and then show it again? It doesnt make it modeless.
  9. Hi! I want the following: after opening FormB as a modal form from FormA /FormB.ShowDialog(FormA);/, i would like to have an option, to make FormB turn into a modeless form without altering its current state (with a press of a button on FormB). Basically my application is strictly modal, but i want some of the forms to be detatchable (for example lists, so they can be compared with other lists). Any idea?
  10. Visibility setting is simply slow. now events are handled that correspond :S
  11. smaller forms do the same thing, but only for a shorter period of time. black blinking everywhere... a never do anything in the constructor, also cleaned the InitializeComponent (including all custom controls' constructors and properties), and also every work is done in the Shown event (and most of them are done asynchronously on separate threads). Actually the form loads really fast (it was really hard to create that screenshot). Any other suggestion?
  12. Hi! I have a form, with the following properties: -Background Image, set to Stretch -DoubleBuffered -TransparencyKey set to an unused colour These settings let the form draw fast when it is open (no sluggish redraws, etc) My only problem is, that this form shows up slow: you can see how the form pops up, then you see black areas disappearing, as controls get drawn.. Insted of the form being drawn correctly for the first time too. I dont know much about windows forms drawing, but i guess it is something about buffering, or something similar... any ideas? Here are two images, the first was captured while the form was being drawn, the second is the final look thanks in advance
  13. Hi! I have my own DataGridView class (derived from the .NET DataGridView). I want it to have a live search option: if you start typing in it, a little textbox appears TotalCommander-style, and the datagrid starts hiding all items that does not match the search criteria. The problem is that the datagrid does this extremely slow (i use this thextbox's text, and an event to set the visibility if a specific row). It seem that the DataGridViewRow.Visible property is extremely slow. It does something with the datagrid in the background, when its value is altered (in both directions). Any ideas? Thanks in advance! ps: the grid has to display more than 10k items...
  14. Quote:Original post by capn_midnight no, you definitely need to keep the connection open. It's not a case of how many you make, it's a case of keeping the one you are using open between each update. it doesnt really help. connection pooling lets it being done fast. by the way i managed to keep update time as low as needed (i did not index for the key column, it made the database work slow for updates). now it is slow for inserts (with indicies disabled for the time of the insertion). unfortunately i did not find any ways for speeding up inserting from about 35000 to 500000 rows (repeated about 5-50 times).
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!