469,575 Members | 1,429 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,575 developers. It's quick & easy.

Phantom code

We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.

Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.

The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.

When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.

We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.

So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.

Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.

So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?

Cheers
Dan

Feb 8 '07 #1
12 1439
Dude

dotnet 1.1 doesn't run on windows 95, 98, me, 2000, xp, 2003 or vista

why would you use 2003?

grow some balls kid; go back to vb6 it works everywhere without a
problem

On Feb 8, 1:42 pm, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.

Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.

The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.

When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.

We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.

So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.

Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.

So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?

Cheers
Dan

Feb 14 '07 #2
WTF? I've been running 1.1 on 2003 and XP for years. Half of my
assignments are to convert crappy old vb6 jobs into web apps.

And I'm no "kid". Good chance I've been programming longer than
you've been alive. (Ever seen a punch card?)
On Feb 13, 11:28 pm, "susie...@hotmail.com" <susie...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dude

dotnet 1.1 doesn't run on windows 95, 98, me, 2000, xp, 2003 or vista

why would you use 2003?

grow some balls kid; go back to vb6 it works everywhere without a
problem

On Feb 8, 1:42 pm, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.
Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.
The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.
When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.
We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.
So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.
Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.
So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?
Cheers
Dan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Feb 16 '07 #3
yes; I have seen a punch card LoL

1.1 on XP huh.. what did you run around and install the framework on
peoples' desktops by hand?

I just find it hilarious; what do you make people upgrade to a DVD
drive in order to install your app?

what is it; 400 mb for the framework; you've almost got a little bit
of room left on the CD LoL

and for the record; it's not even POSSIBLE to determine 'which version
of the framework is on machine x'

I've got this machine under my desk.. it's wrapped up in Christmas
Wrapping Paper; im going to give it to my girlfriend..

please tell me 'how do I tell which version of the framework is on
this machine'

I just find it hilarious that MS didn't have the foresight to think of
things like this; there should be a special .CPL file to keep track of
the framework or something


On Feb 16, 8:23 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
WTF? I've been running 1.1 on 2003 and XP for years. Half of my
assignments are to convert crappy old vb6 jobs into web apps.

And I'm no "kid". Good chance I've been programming longer than
you've been alive. (Ever seen a punch card?)

On Feb 13, 11:28 pm, "susie...@hotmail.com" <susie...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dude
dotnet 1.1 doesn't run on windows 95, 98, me, 2000, xp, 2003 or vista
why would you use 2003?
grow some balls kid; go back to vb6 it works everywhere without a
problem
On Feb 8, 1:42 pm, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.
Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.
The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.
When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.
We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.
So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.
Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.
So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?
Cheers
Dan- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Feb 19 '07 #4
and how are you even running VB6 jobs as .NET?

as VBS files?
as SQL Server _JOBS_?

because neither one of those work as .NET _CRAP_
what a half-baked ass concept

bring back VB6 or eat shit and die Microsoft

On Feb 16, 8:23 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
WTF? I've been running 1.1 on 2003 and XP for years. Half of my
assignments are to convert crappy old vb6 jobs into web apps.

And I'm no "kid". Good chance I've been programming longer than
you've been alive. (Ever seen a punch card?)

On Feb 13, 11:28 pm, "susie...@hotmail.com" <susie...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dude
dotnet 1.1 doesn't run on windows 95, 98, me, 2000, xp, 2003 or vista
why would you use 2003?
grow some balls kid; go back to vb6 it works everywhere without a
problem
On Feb 8, 1:42 pm, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.
Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.
The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.
When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.
We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.
So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.
Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.
So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?
Cheers
Dan- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Feb 19 '07 #5
Obviously, you have no idea what you're bitching about.

..NET is a development environment. It does not get installed on
user's machines -- just the developer's machine and the web server.
It generates either an EXE (for windows apps) that gets installed on
user's machines (just like vb6), or a DLL (for web apps) that gets put
on a web server, which creates HTML for the user's browser. .NET is
invisible to the user. That's the point! So, I don't care what
version of the framework is on your machine, or if you even have it.

I do not run VB6 as a web app. I look at VB6 code to see what it
does, and run the VB6 program to see the results. Then I write a .NET
web app to do the same thing. Then any user in the world can run the
app (via a browser) without needing to have any code installed on
their machine. Can VB6 do that? This agency used to distribute VB6
EXEs to all of its offices in the country. After I write a web app to
do the same thing, anyone can use it, and get updates immediately.

..NET has easily been installed on any machine I've ever had -- no DVD
required. Does VB6 magically appear on people's machine without
having to get getting installed "by hand"?

So you're really just making this shit up as you go along, right? You
clearly don't know anything about .NET. Pull your head out, girl.

Feb 20 '07 #6
On Feb 20, 10:42 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
Obviously, you have no idea what you're bitching about.

.NET is a development environment. It does not get installed on
user's machines -- just the developer's machine and the web server.
It generates either an EXE (for windows apps) that gets installed on
user's machines (just like vb6), or a DLL (for web apps) that gets put
on a web server, which creates HTML for the user's browser. .NET is
invisible to the user. That's the point! So, I don't care what
version of the framework is on your machine, or if you even have it.

I do not run VB6 as a web app. I look at VB6 code to see what it
does, and run the VB6 program to see the results. Then I write a .NET
web app to do the same thing. Then any user in the world can run the
app (via a browser) without needing to have any code installed on
their machine. Can VB6 do that? This agency used to distribute VB6
EXEs to all of its offices in the country. After I write a web app to
do the same thing, anyone can use it, and get updates immediately.

.NET has easily been installed on any machine I've ever had -- no DVD
required. Does VB6 magically appear on people's machine without
having to get getting installed "by hand"?

So you're really just making this shit up as you go along, right? You
clearly don't know anything about .NET. Pull your head out, girl.
DanG, just ignore susiedba - it is an alias for Aaron Kempf who is
just trolling these newsgroups. Generally what he says is obviously
wrong and he just wants you to argue with him.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

Feb 20 '07 #7
On Feb 8, 4:42 pm, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
We're running Visual Studio 2003 version 1.1.4322 SP1 to build a web
application.

Something strange started happening this morning on one of my co-
workers' Development Environments.

The screen has an asp:label field "lblMessage" that will display error
messages. Within the CodeBehind, we have a Sub that does some
validation checks, and sets the value of lblMessage.text. There are
several checks, and several different messages can be put in the text
field. This Sub should only execute when the Save button is clicked.

When she runs the debugger, the screen comes up initially with one
specific message. We've put a breakpoint on the ONE line of code that
sets that message, but we never hit the breakpoint. With a breakpoint
on the InitializeComponents command of the Page_Init Sub, we can see
that the error message has already been set. So somehow, the field
has a value (which can only be set within the code) BEFORE the code
has even been initialized.

We have seen the value of lblMessage.text in the Watch1 window. Using
the Immediate window, we can run lblMessage.text = " ". It appears to
work, because ?lblMessage.text shows "". Still, the watch window
shows the text is not blank, and the value still appears on the
screen. It's as though the field we're accessing in the debugger is
not the same one processed in the code.

So we've checked everything we can think of. There is only one field
with that name in the application. We have even tried changing the
name of the field. We have deleted the DLL and the PDB, and rebuilt
them. We've confirmed that the project is built in debug mode. We've
cleared all cache, cookies, etc. We tried changing the message text
in the code, to make sure it wasn't cached somewhere, but the new
string appears immediately.

Now, this ONLY happens on her machine. When I run the same code on my
machine, the value is "" at the InitializeComponents breakpoint.

So now we don't trust her debugger at all. Code appears to be
executing that should not be executing. We're pretty much at a loss
for ideas here. Anyone have a clue for us?

Cheers
Dan
Have you restarted her pc?

Have you commented out that line of code?

Have you installed the service pack?

Does she have any of the beta's installed? (either the ide or a sp)

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

Feb 20 '07 #8
Yeah, I just looked up some of his/her other posts. Nothing better to
do than look for arguments. Not a women, and obviously not a REAL
programmer, either.

Thanks for the tip, Seth.

Feb 20 '07 #9
Yep, I had checked her versions, service packs, betas, etc. It's all
just as installed on my machine. Rebooted, too. Moved the line of
code within the sub, and even moved the sub to a different place in
the code. It continued to run (and crash) on that line without ever
hitting the breakpoint, and before with Page_Init executed. Weird.

We eventually just put an IF statement around it to see if some other
field had been initialized yet. That stopped the crash, so we're not
going to care about it any more. Better things to do.

Thanks for looking into it, though.

Cheers
Dan

Have you restarted her pc?

Have you commented out that line of code?

Have you installed the service pack?

Does she have any of the beta's installed? (either the ide or a sp)

Thanks,

Seth Rowe- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Feb 20 '07 #10
vb6 runtime has been included with every OS in the past 10 years.

VB6 / VBS allowed webpages also... I could use the SAME LANGUAGE for
DHTML and ASP.
Can you?

..NET is not a development environment.
..NET needs to be installed on peoples' desktops to run .NET exe... I
don't believe in entering data into a webpage; I don't think that it
is AS FAST or AS FRIENDLY as what I can do in a Windows App.

Sorry.

But You can't right-click SORT, right-click FILTER in your ASP.net
_CRAP_.

I don't run around installing DOTNET on my end users machines. I
cannot be responsible for the security threat; i'm not going to leave
my customers vulnerable to another Nimda or Code Red (by installign a
whole bunch of unnecessary crap)

I don't agree with the whole 'entering data into a webpage' model
because it is SLOW and UNWIELDLY

if I wanted to make a whole bunch of unecessary POSTBACKS I could sit
around and have a circle jerk.
but from where I'm standing; ASP.net is a whole bunch of crap because
ADO.net is a whole bunch of crap.

And because .NET is not on anyone's desktops.

my vb6 worked _FINE_ without all your DOTNET crap.

my Visual Studio Professional crashes 2 times a day; and it runs like
crap even though I've got 2gb of ram.

..NET is for fags that don't have the mental capacity to question
authority.

you are merely PAWNS in the linux battle; and you've LOST THE WAR.

I highly reccomend dreamweaver, php and mySql.
you don't get tied to a disrespectful company

and you don't have a MILLSTONE tied around your neck

On Feb 20, 7:42 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
Obviously, you have no idea what you're bitching about.

.NET is a development environment. It does not get installed on
user's machines -- just the developer's machine and the web server.
It generates either an EXE (for windows apps) that gets installed on
user's machines (just like vb6), or a DLL (for web apps) that gets put
on a web server, which creates HTML for the user's browser. .NET is
invisible to the user. That's the point! So, I don't care what
version of the framework is on your machine, or if you even have it.

I do not run VB6 as a web app. I look at VB6 code to see what it
does, and run the VB6 program to see the results. Then I write a .NET
web app to do the same thing. Then any user in the world can run the
app (via a browser) without needing to have any code installed on
their machine. Can VB6 do that? This agency used to distribute VB6
EXEs to all of its offices in the country. After I write a web app to
do the same thing, anyone can use it, and get updates immediately.

.NET has easily been installed on any machine I've ever had -- no DVD
required. Does VB6 magically appear on people's machine without
having to get getting installed "by hand"?

So you're really just making this shit up as you go along, right? You
clearly don't know anything about .NET. Pull your head out, girl.

Feb 20 '07 #11
hey STFU nigga
I speak the TRUTH.

DOTNET IS A FAILURE. the framework is not on 10% of users desktops.

SO TAKE THIS FRAMEWORK AND SHOVE IT.

On Feb 20, 8:25 am, "rowe_newsgroups" <rowe_em...@yahoo.comwrote:
On Feb 20, 10:42 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:


Obviously, you have no idea what you're bitching about.
.NET is a development environment. It does not get installed on
user's machines -- just the developer's machine and the web server.
It generates either an EXE (for windows apps) that gets installed on
user's machines (just like vb6), or a DLL (for web apps) that gets put
on a web server, which creates HTML for the user's browser. .NET is
invisible to the user. That's the point! So, I don't care what
version of the framework is on your machine, or if you even have it.
I do not run VB6 as a web app. I look at VB6 code to see what it
does, and run the VB6 program to see the results. Then I write a .NET
web app to do the same thing. Then any user in the world can run the
app (via a browser) without needing to have any code installed on
their machine. Can VB6 do that? This agency used to distribute VB6
EXEs to all of its offices in the country. After I write a web app to
do the same thing, anyone can use it, and get updates immediately.
.NET has easily been installed on any machine I've ever had -- no DVD
required. Does VB6 magically appear on people's machine without
having to get getting installed "by hand"?
So you're really just making this shit up as you go along, right? You
clearly don't know anything about .NET. Pull your head out, girl.

DanG, just ignore susiedba - it is an alias for Aaron Kempf who is
just trolling these newsgroups. Generally what he says is obviously
wrong and he just wants you to argue with him.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Feb 20 '07 #12
I have lots of things better to do than look for arguments.

PIECE OF SHIT ASS COMPANY SLAUGHTERED THE WORLDS MOST POPULAR
LANGUAGE.

I CANT USE VB.NET IN VBS FILES
I CANT USE VB.NET IN SQL JOBS

I'm sick and tired of LOSING FUNCTIONALTY AND GREATER HARDWARE
REQUIREMENTS.

DOTNET IS A FAILURE

if you don't have the balls to bitch about it you shoudl STFU and go
jerk off in the corner


On Feb 20, 8:35 am, "DanG" <d...@rmci.netwrote:
Yeah, I just looked up some of his/her other posts. Nothing better to
do than look for arguments. Not a women, and obviously not a REAL
programmer, either.

Thanks for the tip, Seth.

Feb 20 '07 #13

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

5 posts views Thread by Andrew | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Lars Eighner | last post: by
reply views Thread by Shaphe | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by memememe | last post: by
reply views Thread by Rod Billett | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by Dave | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by TB | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Chuck Cobb | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by aktar | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by guiromero | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.