I'm trying to target .NET 6 for my WPF app, but because I'm using RX.net, the highest I can go is net5.0-windows10.0.19041. One example is that ObserveOnDispatcher() is not available when I'm targeting net6.0-windows, which my app makes heavy use of.
Does anybody know either A) when a .NET 6 version of RX.NET will be released, or B) any workarounds for ObserveOnDispatcher() or ObserveOn(DispatcherScheduler.Current.Dispatcher) on .NET 6?
Thanks
A relatively painless way I found was to simply add the ReactiveUI.WPF package to my WPF projects. This allowed me to advance to net6.0-windows, and also to use DispatcherScheduler. I am not using anything from ReactiveUI library, so this is technically a hack, but took 5 minutes of my time and added only a few hundred kilobytes added to the shipped binaries, so it was worth it for me to be able to move on from previously being held back on net5.0-windows10.0.19041 because of RX.
If I had more time and skill I would dig into how the ReactiveUI.WPF source code achieved this desired effect, and apply this to my own source code... maybe someone has a more elegant, non-hack solution.
This will be fixed in v5.1
https://github.com/dotnet/reactive/pull/1660
You could try the nightly builds as per the readme.
https://github.com/dotnet/reactive#get-nightly-builds
Related
Anyone please let me know what is this all about? I am stuck since a week on this and no help from searching. I posted my query to the developer of Alamofire but still no response. Please help! I am totally confused what is wrong in the integration of Alamofire. I have followed every step and this issue is coming with XCode 6.3 as before it was running properly.
When I am adding the Framework under "Copy Frameworks", it is adding the Framework twice showing different paths but when I am Going to there location, it is taking me to the same location. Here is the screen shot.
I have also created the video for that issue. May be that can help in a better way. Please see HERE
Moreover, latest SDK contains framework for MAC OS as well but I didn't add that. I hope all the above information will help you in helping me. Thanks!
This is going to be incredibly difficult to debug without a sample project that is set up in the same manner as your actual one. If you had imported Alamofire project into your project, you wouldn't see two versions of Alamofire appear when you add it to the Copy Frameworks build phase. If you truly want to resolve this quickly, you have two options.
Option 1
Push up a sample project to Github and link it here. We can then take a look at the project and pretty quickly access what the issue is. The main reason it's so difficult here is that there are roughly 10 different things that could be the cause of the issue. Therefore, it's much faster for you to create a sample project than for us to go round-and-round (which we've already started with #Masterfego).
Option 2
Take the leap and try out CocoaPods. It is a fantastic dependency management system that will forever alleviate these annoying types of project management issues. CocoaPods itself has fantastic documentation. Also, the Alamofire README breaks down in detail how to add Alamofire to your project using CocoaPods.
Recommendation
I would highly encourage you to choose Option 2. That is definitely the fastest way forward and you won't regret moving to a more robust dependency management system. It makes managing library updates and new installations extremely simple.
If you do end up going with Option 1, then I'll take a look at your sample project and revise my answer.
I have a requirement to create a framework for a shared set of common utilities that we plan to use in multiple iOS projects in our organization. The utility classes are written in swift and the framework needs to support projects in iOS 7 and above. I'm using Xcode 6.1.1.
I tried creating both a 'Cocoa Touch Framework' and a 'Cocoa Touch Static Library' and can't seem to get it working for iOS 7 builds.
With 'Cocoa Touch Framework', I get a warning that 'Embedded dylibs/frameworks only run on iOS 8 or later' and though I can get it to run, it fails during the iTunesconnect step with an error that the project's deployment target must not be less than 8.0 (mine is 7.0).
I tried with 'Cocoa Touch Static Library' as well using the steps given in http://www.raywenderlich.com/65964/create-a-framework-for-ios, but it just does not build with swift files. When I remove all swift files and add Obj-C files, it works properly.
Any help is greatly appreciated. How do I create a framework for a swift project with iOS 7+ support?
Thanks
Unfortunately, you cannot. It's one of the more disappointing factors about Swift.
As shown in the documentation, you cannot make a static framework/library with swift and dynamic libraries are only supported in iOS 8+.
The only option I recommend is that you develop an Objective-C static framework for iOS 7 and then begin to use swift when you wish to drop iOS 7 support. It's not the most ideal situation, but because you are able to have mixed languages in a dynamic framework, it means you won't have to waste time rewriting code (unless, of course, you want to).
Apple not supporting pure Swift frameworks before iOS 8 is somewhat hurting Swift adoption rate.
I'm not advocating the following solution as best practice. Honestly, it's a very flawed hack. We have a large pure Swift framework that does most of the heavy lifting for things here at work. And, we needed that framework in a product that ran on iOS 7.1+.
Here is the hack - Directory hierarchy is important. In an ideal situation, the project and the framework are siblings in the directory tree. Create a group in the project. In Finder, shift/command select all of the source files from the framework, and drop them into the newly created group. Make sure not to copy the files. Your telling Xcode to simply add the files to the project file, creating relative path links to them.
The framework should now compile directly into your project. I can't emphasize enough how fragile this solution is. As files are added to your framework, they also have to be added/linked into any project that you've "link embedded" the framework.
This "solution" should only be used as a last resort. Having to repeat framework parity across multiple projects is dumb. If time goes by with the project staying static, and the framework evolves, dump the framework in the project, and re-add it. It takes less than a minute to dump/re-add the framework, and reduces the chance of error.
Apple, please help us, so we can maintain best practices. I'm embarrassed to share this solution, as it's just a horrible way to get around something Apple is not supporting.
I've been given a request to upgrade an application running under filemaker pro 6.5.
It's connected to some serial devices and uses plugin-component (troi) to solve the communication (rs232).
It's running in a closed network attached to a remote FM65-database.
Will FMP12 be able to run the application w/o a lot of recoding or has things changed too much?
Regards,
/t
Simple answer, yes.
First of, there was no FileMaker 6.5. It went from version 5 to 5.5. to 6 and then 7. When version 7 was released there was a major update in fileformat for the databases, introducing multiple tables in a singel file and a new relationship schema.
Between version 11 and 12 there was another big update in fileformat. The bigest change being that the layouts are now rendered as HTML/CSS using WebKit.
Even though a lot has happend since version 6 FileMaker Inc always try to be backward compatible. As far as I know, no functionality has been removed, at least nothing vital.
Troi Serial Plugin works with FileMaker 12 but you will need to upgrade the plugin. you can read more about the changes for the plugin, pricing and download a demo at
http://www.troi.com/software/serialplugin.html
You can also download a 30 day trail of FileMaker from http://www.filemaker.com
Thus you can easily try the entire setup for free before doing it for production.
The only thing you probably will have to adjust is the function call for the plugin Troi Serial, but that should be easy!
Hope this helps
I'd recommend you use Metadata Magic to analyze the FP5 solution.
There are some script steps that can be problematic when upgrading. This will give you a comprehensive report of what issues to look for and where to find them. It's not uncommon to find script steps that need to be reordered or changed.
I have an OpenERP 5.0 installation with a few custom modules, that I wish to upgrade to OpenERP 6.0.
I have some experience with this kind of sofware and I have inspected OpenERP. Sadly, I don't have actual experience with OpenERP, and I like to ask for some help in order to avoid mistakes. When researching this, I found there are several strategies (ETL processes, data-upgrade modules)... I assume I'll need to review all custom modules.
What are the guidelines or best practice in order to upgrade an OpenERP 5.0 installation to 6.0?
We're still planning our migration from 5.0 to 6.0, so I don't have any personal experience with the process. We are planning to tackle the work ourselves, but we've done a lot of custom development, so we're pretty comfortable with the OpenERP code. If I were inheriting the system from someone else as it sounds like you are, I would be very tempted by the support contract that includes doing migrations for you.
In addition to the paid service, there also appears to be an open-source tool available for running data migrations. It is also discussed in several forum posts. (There really are a lot.)
Our tentative plans are:
Try out the migration tool for a demo database from plain 5.0 to plain 6.1.
Migrate the code for our custom modules to 6.1, following the Pragtech guidelines.
Extend the migration tool's configuration to cover our custom modules and any others that weren't included with the tool.
Run the migration on our full database into a sandbox and test the heck out of it.
Launch and celebrate!
Update:
We've started our migration process, and we're using OpenUpgrade instead of the Domsense tool. We never really looked at the Domsense tool, so I can't say which is better. I'm very happy with OpenUpgrade so far.
In general, I've found version 6.1 much easier to customize than 5.0 was. So far, I haven't had to change any core modules. For example, most places where a core module inserts a record, it calls a helper method to prepare the data. If you add a new column that you want to be populated, you can just override that helper method. For example, we added a grouping field to several tables and then wanted to copy it from sales order line to stock move. We overrode the sale module's version of sale_order._prepare_order_line_move() with our own version.
I posted a separate question about customizing reports.
The down side is that every customized feature we try to migrate requires some change. So far there has always been a change in the core module that somehow breaks our customization. Either a field name changed, or the screen layout changed, or the whole model name changed. You can usually figure out how to fix it, but everything takes time.
The best approach is to contract an OpenERP Enterprise. Migrating is quite complex and OpenERP can do the job for you. It's a fixed price for unlimited bugfixes and migrations: http://www.openerp.com/catalog/146
I've been looking at the new Entity Framework 4 Code Only features, and I really like them. But I'm having a hard time finding good resource on the feature. Everything seems to be spread around blongs here and there, so this make me wonder if it's ready to be used for a serious project?
What do you think? Is it ready for production use or should I use the more traditional approach (EDMX designer, POCO objects)?
Also, I would like to know if there are any features that Code Only does not support yet, compared to the EDMX designer?
What do you think about the Code Only feature? Is it "mature" yet?
Thank you.
It depends when your project should be ready. Code First (Code Only) is only in CTP3 without go-live license. As I've read, there is no exact timeframe for the Feature Pack Where is EntityConfiguration in EF4 VS 2010 RTM? and it will be published when it will be ready (no release date). According to the blog of EF team it will be available in the next framework release.
Code First is still under active
development and will have some
breaking changes so there is no
go-live licence at this time.
Link
Code First = Code Only
In my projects I went with EF + POCO for now.
If anyone is still looking for an answer to this, Entity Framework V4.1 which has the "Code first" feature has been RTW (released to web) for production use since a month and a half now.
You need .Net 4.0 RTM in order to install it. Once you have that installed, you can download the stand-alone installer for EF4.1 from here.