A call to all Win32 developers... I'm developing an application in C using plain Win32. I wanted to ask about Windows development standards regarding these things:
Is there a standard Windows error log api? For example if my client uses my app and it crashes, I would like them to send me the error log and I would prefer this being a standard location so they can maybe access it with a standard Windows log utility.
My app needs to store settings information. I think the registry is the standard utility for this task. Is that right?
My app needs to store and retrieve files that it downloaded from the internet - images, executables etc. Is Application Data/myapp the standard location to store this type of information?
My app needs a very straight-forward database - I'm using CSV for this. I basically need to store and retrieve this type of data so I'm just serializing a .csv file from Application Data/myapp. Is there a better Windows standard way of doing this?
That's all for now :). Thanks!
Is there a standard Windows error log api?
There is the Windows Event Log, but I don't think you want a typical user having to go into it to extract your logged information.
You probably don't want to log by default, unless you're shipping questionable pre-release code. When a user is experiencing problems, then you have them turn logging on. In this case, I recommend placing the file somewhere that typical users have experience with, like My Documents.
By the way, if you're writing a standalone application and want the best possible information in the event of a crash, look into minidumps. Here is a Codeproject sample.
My app needs to store settings information
Yep, registry.
My app needs to store and retrieve files
Yes, App Data. Just be sure to use SHGetFolderPath and CSIDL_APPDATA.
My app needs a very straight-forward database
There's nothing wrong with CSV for simple data. You could store the data in XML and use MSXML to process it, if you prefer. I've used SQlite in the past when I needed fast, lightweight storage of more complicated data.
Related
I would like to know if this scenario would be possible in any programming language combined with any database technology.
I would like to automatically save received pdf files that are attached in emails into a database. Is this possible? Is there any library or framework available to do so?
Yes, I would recommend using Google Apps Script for this. The approach you should follow is to use the GmailApp class (Documentation here) to get the messages you need, you can use methods like getInboxThreads() (Documentation), to retrieve the messages.
After you've found the message and retrieved the attachment (which you can do withgetAttachments() (Documentation)), you can use the JDBC Service to connect with external databases. The specifics here depend a lot on what database you want to connect with, but the documentation will lead you in the right direction.
Can any please explain that how we can embed ms access db in our winform application so that it could easily run on other machines with just one file .EXE . i have serached a lot but still unable to find an appropriate solution for it.Thanks in advance.
Assuming you are using an MDB, then the (32 bit) database engine (JET) is part of Windows. As such, there should be no setup requirements for that. If the database is only read and not written to, then you can add it as a resource to the EXE, and when the application starts up, extract the resource into either the TEMP directory, or if it's large and you don't mind leaving caches about, into a subfolder under local application data (CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA). If you do the latter, then the next time the application starts it can check to see whether a valid extracted MDB already exists and use that if it does. You can do a similar thing if the database is to be written to, but only for local storage, in which case the linked-in MDB would serve as a 'template' database.
If you were using Delphi or C++ I'd also suggest investigating SQLite as a possible alternative to JET, though as it's C# I assume (the 'c' tag is a bit confusing) then you won't be able to statically link the SQLite code, which fails the standalone EXE requirement.
I'm building a Windows Store application that uses SQLite for data storage. I have found out, that the database is easily accessible through User's local folder (actually all apps have all data publicly exposed). Is there a way to at least weakly protect the database from access?
you need to look at ProtectedData class
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/windows.security.cryptography.dataprotection.dataprotectionprovider.aspx
It exposes easy to use Protect / Unprotect methods that can be used to encrypt / decrypt that at app level. Encrypt data before writing to db and unencrypt before consuming
I also looking for the same solution and found sqlite-crypt at http://sqlite-crypt.com/download.htm
I don't know whether this one good enough or not. There is a trial version that limit passphrase to 6 characters and store it as plain text in the header. It won't be suitable if you want complete data protection. But for testing, maybe it's worth a try. I don't have a chance to test it yet since I still working on the server side of my project. I'll update it when I've test it in the future.
EDIT: Ok. I've test the trial version and it's worked well with modificated version of SqliteWinRT wrapper on codeplex. Note that the trial is limited to 5-6 characters of passphrase and this phasephrase is stored in plain text, plus it's in x86 compiled binary, which means it won't work for actual product which need ARM support. You have to purchase the binary to get the production-ready binaries.
I need to store some data (strings, dates etc) and these data would be available for all users in local machine. Not depended on Admin or Guest started the application - it would be able to read/write these strings and dates.
SharedObjects are belong only user, which started the program.
File.applicationStorageDirectory
File.desktopDirectory
File.documentsDirectory
File.userDirectory
They all are user related.
File.applicationDirectory — is read-only.
Please, do not propose to use some thing like C:\settings.txt etc, because i need cross-platform solution and without casual user deletions/rewritings etc.
I need some thing like C:\Users\AllUsers or C:\Users\Public folder, but cross-platform.
Sorry, it isn't possible to do this by current Adobe Air API. EncryptedLocalStore also wouldn't be helpful for you.
I want to create a a application in actionscipt 3.0 that allows the user to listen to music and read descriptions of the music. For this to happen i suppose there should be a database where the textbits and music is located and then flash fetch the info when the correct buttons are pushed. The database will contain up to 100 tracks and textbits.
The application will function on a stand that won't have a connection to the internet.
What is the easiest way to do this in actionscript 3.0?
If any of you are familiar with UML and thinks this might help in understanding the problem, then here is use-case and flow-chart:
alt text http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1498/flowchart2.jpg
alt text http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1000/usercase.jpg
Thanks in advance.
The easiest way to do what you're asking is probably to store the files in a directory on the machine the application is going to be running on, and then design an XML structure for storing your data. The XML is easily loaded in to Flash at runtime and is easily edittable.
Your other option would be running a database server on the machine, creating web services that run locally and push/pull the data from the database, and then call those services from your Flash application.
The first option is most definitely the easiest and should be able to provide exactly what you need. The second would be more geared towards a distributed Flash application where you needed a central data repository for the clients.
If you're building an AIR application, you can use the integrated SQLITE database. But, i agree with Justin, the easiest way is to use a XML file.
You can probably consider using "Local Shared Objects" which is a kind of cookie, with bigger capacity (100Kb by default, but you can change it). Compared to other solutions already proposed, it has then advantage of not requiring any web server.