Skip to content

Settings and activity

5 results found

  1. 4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  LINQPad Feature Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    E. Monk supported this idea  · 
  2. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  LINQPad Feature Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    E. Monk commented  · 

    If you're happy to lose the content on overflow then perhaps a DumpContainer (or a set of them) would be more useful for output? When you assign to the Content property it replaces the visible data. It's handy for displaying progress on long-running queries.

    Yes it's a little more work. But you can do some fun things with it. Check out Util.VerticalRun too.

  3. 2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  LINQPad Feature Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    E. Monk shared this idea  · 
  4. 3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  LINQPad Feature Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    E. Monk commented  · 

    The fact that renaming it works tells me that it's a .NET Framework executable. Referencing those from .NET or .NET Core at runtime is a bit hairy and can cause serious problems, even if they strictly adhere to .NET Standard interfaces. As such I think it's a good idea to require an extra step in the process so that you don't do it by accident.

    For reference, .NET Core and .NET (>= v5) apparently never produce a valid assembly with the '.exe' extension. Instead they put a native launcher executable alongside your assembly DLL, or in single-file builds they build your assembly and combine it with a native wrapper. I tried a variety of combinations of build settings and packing, all produce native apps that are not valid .NET assemblies.

  5. 64 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  LINQPad Feature Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    E. Monk supported this idea  ·