readonly

How do I expose the ActualWidth property of one of the components of my user control to users? I have found plenty of examples of how to expose a normal property by creating a new dependency property and binding, but none on how to expose a read-only property like ActualWidth . Micah What you need is a ReadOnly dependency property. The first thing you need to do is to tap into the change notification of the ActualWidthProperty dependency on the control that you need to expose. You can do that by using the DependencyPropertyDescriptor like this: // Need to tap into change notification of the

While making my first ajax attempts, I decided also, to go to use IIS hosted WCF now. The strange thing is, that the WCF cannot process several requests parallel for the same user/session, if sessionmode is enabled! If sessionmode is disabled on asp.net, the requests are processed parallel. The broser/client may execute several different requests, where some of them are long running. This blocks all further requets and make my ajax app unusable. This applies to asmx [webservices] also. I had a big hope, to compile the webservice methods using "IReadOnlySessionState" interface, but this has -

According to the reference documentation the READ ONLY transaction flag is useful other than allowing DEFERRABLE transactions? SET SESSION CHARACTERISTICS AS TRANSACTION READ ONLY; The DEFERRABLE transaction property has no effect unless the transaction is also SERIALIZABLE and READ ONLY. When all three of these properties are selected for a transaction, the transaction may block when first acquiring its snapshot, after which it is able to run without the normal overhead of a SERIALIZABLE transaction and without any risk of contributing to or being canceled by a serialization failure. This

I would like to have some Magento product attributes that are not editable from the admin interface and some that are not visible at all in that interface (as a method of storing some persistent information about a product that should not be viewed by human users.. it's the only way of doing this that i can think of, any other suggestions are welcome). So my question is: Do all Magento attributes have to be visible and editable from the admin interface? If not, how can they be made read-only or hidden? I noticed that in the admin interface there are some read-only fields, so it must be

I found a topic on MSDN that talks that yes, this is possible. I did a test that seems to break this statement: using System; namespace Test { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Foo f = new Foo("1"); Console.WriteLine(f.Bar); // prints 1 f.Test("2"); Console.WriteLine(f.Bar);// successfully prints 2 } } class Foo { public Foo(string b) { this.Bar = b; } public string Bar { get; private set; } public void Test(string b) { // this would be impossible for readonly field! // next error would be occur: CS0191 or CS0191 // A readonly field cannot be assigned to (except in a

I understand you can make the whole DataGrid or a whole column readyonly (IsReadOnly = true). However, at cell level this property is ready only. But I do need this level of granularity. There is blog about adding IsReadOnly to a row by changing the source code in old days when DataGrid was public domain, but now I don't have source code for DataGrid. What's workaround? Making cell disabled (IsEnabled=false) almost meets my need. But the problem is that you can't even click the disabled cell to select the row (I have full row selection mode). EDIT: Since nobody has responded to this question,

There are many questions about this subject , but none (except one but still a short one ) are dealing with the following scenario. From C# 4 book: Marc also wrote : if you change the value of a const, you need to rebuild all the clients Question : 1) Why is that? Are both static readonly and const — static ? 2) Where actually the values are saved ? 3) How does making a field static readonly actually solve this problem "behind the scene" ? no, a const is a const, not a static - it is a special-case, with different rules; it is only set at compile-time (not runtime), and it is handled

This question already has an answer here: Why does C# limit the set of types that can be declared as const? 6 answers I have several constants that I use, and my plan was to put them in a const array of doubles, however the compiler won't let me. I have tried declaring it this way: const double[] arr = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 73, 8, 9 }; Then I settled on declaring it as static readonly: static readonly double[] arr = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}; However the question remains. Why won't compiler let me declare an array of const values? Or will it, and I just don't know how? From MSDN ( http://msdn

I am new to iOS development in general and have never dealt with manual reference counting (retain, release, autorelease). As such I don't have a good understanding of what magic ARC is performing. I thought I understood until I was asked what type of ownership ( weak , strong , assign , etc) should be given to a readonly property pointing at an object, such as: @property (readonly,nonatomic) NSString* name; I read here Questions about a readonly @property in ARC that leaving off the strong / weak won't actually compile unless you specify a backing variable when you @synthesize the property; I