Context: trying to reduce the installation of an application to the absolute minimum number of files. We are running the app and adding needed dependencies one by one.
But now we get a pop-up telling us that "429 - ActiveX component can't create object". We know what it means, but we don't know what 'object' the application is trying to create at this time.
Is there a way to easily find out what object my application wants to instantiate?
Related
I am running an unpackaged app and manually loading objects across a Proxy-Stub Server using base.h. I have a Window.Xaml with a Microsoft::UI::Xaml::Frame as the root element, in a WinUI component. I have tried both calling to get the IActivationFactory to the Xaml resource and creating it using:
auto oMyWindow = oObj.ActivateInstance<Window>();
or getting a runtime class to make<MyWindow>() the resource, but Initialize() fails both ways with:
WinRT originate error - 0x80004005 : 'Cannot locate resource from 'ms-appx:///MyWindow.xaml'.'.
Is there something I am unaware of that can be done to fix this so I can proceed? My alternative is using separate .exe processes to encapsulate, but this requires a lot of IPC work. It's not that I won't have to use other IPC options, it's just that I'd like to keep my late bound modules, tightly bound. And no, I have no intention of manually loading an entire interface with multiple pages.
Your application seems to be unable to find the file you're referencing. Make sure the application has the correct path. Using an absolute path instead of a relative path should work.
The global VB6 error handler product referred to in the following link claims to "install a small callback hook into the VBE6 debugger":
http://www.everythingaccess.com/simplyvba/globalerrorhandler/howitworks.htm
I would like to implement this product myself because I would like more control over what it is doing. How is the above product likely to be achieving what it does?
The product you are looking at is a COM component. From the documentation that is available on the web site, it sounds like the COM component implements particular component classes. The first thing to do, if you already have the product, would be to fire up SysInternals procmon, run regsvr32 on the DLL, and figure out what component classes are implemented from the registry entries that are created. Once you know this, MSDN may be able to tell you what interfaces correspond to those component classes.
Microsoft developed a framework called Active Scripting that allows you to host a script engine and inject debugging capabilities. If one assumes that VB6 produces an exe that ties into that framework, you might be able to do:
Create a COM component that implements IApplicationDebugger
Implement IApplicationDebugger::onHandleBreakPoint to be able to respond to errors in the VB code
Read MSDN KB Q222966 to find out how to call back to VB from onHandleBreakPoint
It looks like the product injects the ErrEx class using IActiveScript::AddNamedItem. To provide the same behaviour, Implement IActiveScriptSite::GetItemInfo on the same COM component to return a pointer to an instance of (and the associated TypeInfo for) a COM component that implements the same interface as ErrEx. In your implementation of ErrEx.EnableGlobalErrorHandler you would do the following:
CoCreateInstance inproc Process Debug Manager
Cast reference to IRemoteDebugApplication
Register an instance of your IApplicationDebugger component using IRemoteDebugApplication::ConnectDebugger
I glossed over calling IActiveScript::AddNamedItem because I have no idea how you get a pointer to IActiveScript from a running process. Also, I don't know if creating a new instance of the Process Debug Manager will work, or if you somehow have to hook into an existing instance.
I apologize for the confusing explanation, missing information, and glossing over large parts of the process, but this is going waaay back...
You will want to read the Active Scripting APIs article at MSDN.
The Windows Phone 7 project I'm working on has 2 UIs, and a core 'engine' of functionality with some pages that are common. I'd like my user interface to pass an object into one of these common pages in the core assembly.
Currently I can navigate to pages in the core assembly from the UI assembly. However, it is my understanding that each assembly has it's own Isolated storage, is that correct?
If I can share Isolated storage, I can use that, I'm just not sure how to get the two assemblies to use it together.
What's the best practice?
I tried googling this: 'wp7 pass object between assemblies'
More Info:
This would be 1 application with two assemblies. Something like this:
CustomerUI (project)
- MainPage.xaml
- App.xaml
CoreFuncs (project)
- CustomerData.cs
- EditCustomer.xaml
SalesRepUI (project)
- MainPage.xaml
- App.xaml
Both CustomerUI and SalesRepUI would use the EditCustomer page and customerData object. So, from MainPage a CustomerData object is instantiated, then a user could click 'Edit User' which would navigate to the common EditCustomer.xaml page. We would want to pass in the already instantiated CustomerData object. (For the purpose of this discussion...)
As I know, there is one Isolated storage per application, not per assembly. So you can try pass your objects through it if you like.
It depends are these two separate applications or two assemblies?
Isolated storage is isolated around the running application. This means each app has its own storage that cannot be accessed from a different app. The only ways to share data between two apps are:
A WebService/or TCP service in 7.5: You would upload the data from one app and download the data into a separate application.
User performed tasks: Copy and Paste/Sending an Email
However if this is just one application you will be able to access the isolated storage between the assemblies just by reading and writing to the files. The only thing to be aware of is file locking, make sure you close files any before you attempt to read from them from a separate dll/assembly.
Sorry, Sorry, I found what I wanted, I was thinking too hard.
PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["keyName"] = object; was exactly what I wanted. Not sure if its the best way, but for me, it works. Just throw my settings class or whatever in there, and catch it on the other side in the page.xaml code.
I would recommend using the Messenger class in the MVVM Light toolkit:
http://blog.galasoft.ch/archive/2009/09/27/mvvm-light-toolkit-messenger-v2-beta.aspx
Both of your assemblies can reference a single shared assembly; that assembly can contain a type that you use to hold data passed via the messenger.
I have used Core Data just creating projects with "Use Core Data" checked, using the code that XCode creates by default and, if necessary, adding or modifying just a few things.
Now I have a "main" app and I have created a helper app (status bar item app, LSUIElement = 1 and Login item). The helper app is Build as main app target dependency and copied into the main app "Resources" folder.
When the status bar icon is clicked the helper app shows a window to the user to collect some info to create a new managed object according to the main app Core Data Model.
But, how can I create a new managed object from the helper app for the main app?
By now I´m thinking to:
check if main app is open or not (I don´t know if it´s possible)
if it´s open, let the main app to perfom a selector with a dictionary with the info sent from helper app (I don´t know if it´s possible)
if it´s close then (in the helper app) create a persistent store coordinator, manage object model and manage object context using the model and persistent store files from main app. Create the new managed object. And I don´t know if it´s better to terminate MOC, MOM and PSC each time the user creates a new MO to avoid conflicts when main app opens or it´s not optimal and could affect performance...
It´s a good approach? Any point to start? Thanks in advance
Do you have to create a managed object? If you're just collecting simple data in the helper app it would be much simpler to pass that input to the main app via the userinfo dictionary in a Distributed Notification. Then the main app could create the managed object and you don't have to deal with merging changes between the two contexts.
Otherwise you'd have to pass the helper app a path to your MOM, create a MOC in the helper app, create the object, save the MOC while notifying the main app to merge changes by passing the IDs of the changed objects, reloading your main app's model objects, and so on. I've gotten it to work, but it's a huge headache and prone to errors. I'd avoid that route if possible.
Edit: I just realized you want to be able to write to your main app's store even if it's not running. It sounds like you need to re-think this before writing any code. If the helper app executes on its own, it's not really a helper app. Could you go into more detail about what you're actually trying to accomplish? This kind of hackery is not really a good idea and could lead to data corruption.
The new Open Graph beta is telling me that I cannot use the action 'want' or the object 'item'
I have used them in previous applications, however these have since been deleted and I've created a new application where I cannot use it.
Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong?
Perhaps the types are not defined in the namespace you're using (or they were restricted to the app that defined them). If the types have not been created within the new application, you probably should use the Get Started tool that's available in the Open Graph section on the app control panel to create you Action and Object types.