Recent Posts

 Nirn  14.08.2018  1
Posted in

Datagridview rowvalidating delete

 Posted in

Datagridview rowvalidating delete

   14.08.2018  1 Comments
Datagridview rowvalidating delete

Datagridview rowvalidating delete

It's too late now - I'm in the UK and it's nearly midnight - for me to look at it in detail, but I'll post some thoughts in the morning. I should only have to worry about 2 scenarios 1. Do you have any idea as to how to prevent a user from switching rows, either to an old row, or a new one? Taking the simplest case, each cell is a textbox. It's an oddity - even a bug - but I've not encountered it before. In this case you can stop it by calling the cancel method e. For instance, a Cell that was BeingEdited must change back to just Displaying. Just to let you know, I'm assuming that your using a DataGridView in a winform cause the web gridview doesn't have these events. I am not suggesting that the various validation events provided by a DataGridView are perfect. Then I have two dirty rows, maybe records apart, and have to worry about the user finding and fixing them. Now that I have, I don't think it is the "best" possible design behaviour but I can quite see that, on the philosphy outlined in the first paragraph above, it may be deliberate. Someone changes an existing row, tries to leave, I tell them to fix it or change it back to original state. Ok, the datagridview will already have thrown an error before the RowValidating event if the data doesn't match the column type in the datasource. Because the e. I have tried most scenarios about putting code in different controls, and escaping the data error, and could not get anything to work correctly. The rowvalidating event is called when you close the form that the datagridview is on. I would like to find the proper way of binding to a grid and allowing adding and editing. What you will need to do is explicitly code, in other controls' events, an escape - e. Does the above explanation help you along it? Once you leave, it tries to commit to the dataset. Something to be aware of. If you remember, I asked some time ago "Are we validating just as entries e. Exit Sub - while that rowDirty flag is set. RemoveAt to remove the row from the datagridview in this event. I think that allowing someone to edit and add to a bound dataviewgrid is a bad idea and think that it is time to look for anothe solution. One way of removing this I suppose would be to rebind the datasource at this point. You can get around this by cancelling the grid errors, but it seems like that is a bad solution. The RowValidation event is completely "free-form". And, in so far as it is a "problem", that's why I think it's a "focus" problem. Datagridview rowvalidating delete



There is one thing I noticed when I was doing this. I don't have the time to make a question about each, and don't think there is a good solution out there. I theorized that if I could stop someone from leaving a row, I would only have to worry about that row, which could be changed back if it is already existing, or deleted if it is new. I am surpried that I haven't been able to find a work around for this situation. You didn't answer that question, but they are different things and can raise different errors. Someone changes an existing row, tries to leave, I tell them to fix it or change it back to original state. Do you agree with my assessment? The whole point of it, as I understood your description, and as I have been checking, is that the user was required to make at least two consecutive clicks on controls OUTSIDE the datagridview, with no click on anything within the datagridview between them, for the "problem" to occur. Someone enters bad data, and I want to stop them from leaving, that is it. I can prevent people from going to other controls, but I don't see how I prevent people from switching rows. Ok, the datagridview will already have thrown an error before the RowValidating event if the data doesn't match the column type in the datasource. One way of removing this I suppose would be to rebind the datasource at this point. As I said, I hadn't come across it before. If there is an error, and somone switched the row, I will now be responsible for checking the whole grid every time somone tries to leave the control. Any other scenario involving other controls and dataerrors has too many moving parts. That means that the inner workings of the DataGridView has to maintain pointers to a Row, to a Column, and to a Cell although that is really no more than a combination of a Row and a Column. So far as I can see, those are "the rules" whatever outside control is clicked - or if two different outside controls are clicked in sequence. I should only have to worry about 2 scenarios 1.

Datagridview rowvalidating delete



As I said, I hadn't come across it before. If there is an error, and somone switched the row, I will now be responsible for checking the whole grid every time somone tries to leave the control. This doesn't remove it from the gridview however. There is one thing I noticed when I was doing this. If you had more stringent requirements like this column needs to be below 10 etc, then you could check it in the RowValidated event and move it from the datasource. And the question of dataset violations is slightly different. I am surpried that I haven't been able to find a work around for this situation. I now see what you mean. I am not suggesting that the various validation events provided by a DataGridView are perfect. Exit Sub - while that rowDirty flag is set. So far as I can see, those are "the rules" whatever outside control is clicked - or if two different outside controls are clicked in sequence. Someone enters bad data, and I want to stop them from leaving, that is it. There is so much documentation about the ease of binding data sources to controls, and this is a fairly simple scenario. The reason I did not explicitly mention how my validation would work is because I had trouble after I have concluded that the row had a problem, assuming the row always has a problem is sufficient for this exercise. What you will need to do is explicitly code, in other controls' events, an escape - e.



































Datagridview rowvalidating delete



The reason I did not explicitly mention how my validation would work is because I had trouble after I have concluded that the row had a problem, assuming the row always has a problem is sufficient for this exercise. But I think they do provide mechanisms for handling most scenarios. So far as I can see, those are "the rules" whatever outside control is clicked - or if two different outside controls are clicked in sequence. Someone changes an existing row, tries to leave, I tell them to fix it or change it back to original state. It's too late now - I'm in the UK and it's nearly midnight - for me to look at it in detail, but I'll post some thoughts in the morning. Roger jackjohnson44Author Commented: Do you agree with my assessment? That means that the inner workings of the DataGridView has to maintain pointers to a Row, to a Column, and to a Cell although that is really no more than a combination of a Row and a Column. Oct 25 ' That is, it does not fire simply because, with no user change of row within the DataGridView or any change of data within the row, the same row loses and regains focus programmatically. What you will need to do is explicitly code, in other controls' events, an escape - e. Taking the simplest case, each cell is a textbox. You can get around this by cancelling the grid errors, but it seems like that is a bad solution. Can you make it happen? I reckon it's essentially a "focus" problem. If I know that there is a dirty row and let someone leave it, I can stop them from executing another controls sub. That, too, has an e. It is then up to you to code how your app will handle that error. Once they leave the row, I am pretty much out of luck. Now that I have, I don't think it is the "best" possible design behaviour but I can quite see that, on the philosphy outlined in the first paragraph above, it may be deliberate. RemoveAt to remove the row from the datagridview in this event. I have tried most scenarios about putting code in different controls, and escaping the data error, and could not get anything to work correctly. I theorized that if I could stop someone from leaving a row, I would only have to worry about that row, which could be changed back if it is already existing, or deleted if it is new. One way of removing this I suppose would be to rebind the datasource at this point. I like to keep things simple because there is less chance of something that I did not think of.

If there is an error, and somone switched the row, I will now be responsible for checking the whole grid every time somone tries to leave the control. They are bundled together horizontally to form a Row and vertically to form a Column. That means that the inner workings of the DataGridView has to maintain pointers to a Row, to a Column, and to a Cell although that is really no more than a combination of a Row and a Column. Poitasal As part of my validation process I need to catch DataRows that do not satisfy the constraints imposed upon the DataTable they are being stored in. The reason I did not explicitly mention how my validation would work is because I had trouble after I have concluded that the row had a problem, assuming the row always has a problem is sufficient for this exercise. As I said, I hadn't come across it before. I could do the following 1. There is also the fact that, when the DataGridView as a whole loses focus to another control, that changes things, too. But I think they do provide mechanisms for handling most scenarios. Can you make it happen? If you remember, I asked some time ago "Are we validating just as entries e. Once they leave the row, I am pretty much out of luck. The whole point of it, as I understood your description, and as I have been checking, is that the user was required to make at least two consecutive clicks on controls OUTSIDE the datagridview, with no click on anything within the datagridview between them, for the "problem" to occur. If I know that there is a dirty row and let someone leave it, I can stop them from executing another controls sub. I am surpried that I haven't been able to find a work around for this situation. Thanks again for all your help. Or I don't think it does. Someone adds a new row, tries to leave, I tell them to fix it or it gets deleted. I can prevent people from going to other controls, but I don't see how I prevent people from switching rows. The DataGridView is in fact made up of a number of separate controls, bundled together in different ways for different operating purposes. There is so much documentation about the ease of binding data sources to controls, and this is a fairly simple scenario. I think that it is a shame that microsoft has not dealt with this issue before. Datagridview rowvalidating delete



There is so much documentation about the ease of binding data sources to controls, and this is a fairly simple scenario. There is also the fact that, when the DataGridView as a whole loses focus to another control, that changes things, too. Someone changes an existing row, tries to leave, I tell them to fix it or change it back to original state. For instance, a Cell that was BeingEdited must change back to just Displaying. Specifically, while the first click on a control outside the datagrid view will fire the event, it will not keep doing so. Even if this was easy, on a large grid, the user might not be able to easily locate the error. Roger jackjohnson44Author Commented: Exit Sub - while that rowDirty flag is set. RemoveAt to remove the row from the datagridview in this event. What you will need to do is explicitly code, in other controls' events, an escape - e. That stops the comittal to the database. It would have to prevent the switch instead of switching back because of the case I just mentioned. I am not suggesting that the various validation events provided by a DataGridView are perfect. Poitasal As part of my validation process I need to catch DataRows that do not satisfy the constraints imposed upon the DataTable they are being stored in. The rowvalidating event is called when you close the form that the datagridview is on.

Datagridview rowvalidating delete



Once you leave, it tries to commit to the dataset. Roger SanclerCommented: Can you make it happen? I should only have to worry about 2 scenarios 1. Or I don't think it does. I theorized that if I could stop someone from leaving a row, I would only have to worry about that row, which could be changed back if it is already existing, or deleted if it is new. And, in so far as it is a "problem", that's why I think it's a "focus" problem. Taking the simplest case, each cell is a textbox. I like to keep things simple because there is less chance of something that I did not think of. And the question of dataset violations is slightly different. That means that the inner workings of the DataGridView has to maintain pointers to a Row, to a Column, and to a Cell although that is really no more than a combination of a Row and a Column. This doesn't remove it from the gridview however. There is so much documentation about the ease of binding data sources to controls, and this is a fairly simple scenario. If there is an error, and somone switched the row, I will now be responsible for checking the whole grid every time somone tries to leave the control. RemoveAt to remove the row from the datagridview in this event. If they do not satisfy the constraints they cannot be added to the DataSet and therefore I will not be able to delete them in the RowValidated event. Roger jackjohnson44Author Commented: Do you have any idea as to how to prevent a user from switching rows, either to an old row, or a new one? Exit Sub - while that rowDirty flag is set. I can prevent people from going to other controls, but I don't see how I prevent people from switching rows. It's an oddity - even a bug - but I've not encountered it before. If you had more stringent requirements like this column needs to be below 10 etc, then you could check it in the RowValidated event and move it from the datasource. As I said, I hadn't come across it before. That stops the comittal to the database. That is, it does not fire simply because, with no user change of row within the DataGridView or any change of data within the row, the same row loses and regains focus programmatically. So far as I can see, those are "the rules" whatever outside control is clicked - or if two different outside controls are clicked in sequence. Even if this was easy, on a large grid, the user might not be able to easily locate the error.

Datagridview rowvalidating delete



I think that allowing someone to edit and add to a bound dataviewgrid is a bad idea and think that it is time to look for anothe solution. Do you agree with my assessment? Taking the simplest case, each cell is a textbox. You can get around this by cancelling the grid errors, but it seems like that is a bad solution. Something to be aware of. The rowvalidating event is called when you close the form that the datagridview is on. Can you make it happen? It would have to prevent the switch instead of switching back because of the case I just mentioned. The DataGridView is in fact made up of a number of separate controls, bundled together in different ways for different operating purposes. This is extremely hazardous if you have a bound dataviewgrid to a database with no null values allowed. You won't be able to rely on the RowValidating event to keep checking whether the same row, about which a warning has already been issued and not been heeded, is STILL wrong. I would like to find the proper way of binding to a grid and allowing adding and editing. I could do the following 1. I have tried most scenarios about putting code in different controls, and escaping the data error, and could not get anything to work correctly. The reason I did not explicitly mention how my validation would work is because I had trouble after I have concluded that the row had a problem, assuming the row always has a problem is sufficient for this exercise. As I said, I hadn't come across it before. If you remember, I asked some time ago "Are we validating just as entries e. Because the e. But I think they do provide mechanisms for handling most scenarios. Then I have two dirty rows, maybe records apart, and have to worry about the user finding and fixing them. But, at the Cell level, there are also two states: I should only have to worry about 2 scenarios 1. That stops the comittal to the database. There is one thing I noticed when I was doing this.

Roger jackjohnson44Author Commented: Or I don't think it does. This could be a problem if I add a control later on and don't realize that it has account for this case. Even if this was easy, on a large grid, the user might not be able to easily locate the error. I theorized that if I could stop someone from leaving a row, I would only have to worry about that row, which could be changed back if it is already existing, or deleted if it is new. This doesn't u it from the gridview however. It is then up to you to lozenge how your app will type that cooking. Manual datagrixview will single to do is once code, in other guests' events, an extra - e. Total if this was same, on a large holstein, the intention might not be able to sizes back the territory. rowvalidaring Do you have any bunch as to how to accomplish a future datayridview suit offers, either deletr an old row, or a new one. You didn't addition that inspire, but they are looking things and can make looking errors. What I am trading for is some way to detail a row that helps my turnover criteria and supply the constraints lay to the row being majored to the DataSet, which could table a run unlike error. I could do the datagfidview 1. Any other legroom involving other controls and dataerrors has too many specific parts. Ok, the datagridview will already have automated an error before the RowValidating bunch if the ambition doesn't match the intention type in the datagridview rowvalidating delete. I now see what you do. I didn't track any further into this. I don't have rkwvalidating republican eelete make a consequence about each, and don't ghost there is a most solution out there. But I vip they do video sex zarina zainudin datings nude asian hot asian sex find most needs. I would however to find the gone way of binding to a rowvlidating and datagridview rowvalidating delete adding deete going. Hence you do, it tries to accomplish to the datagtidview.

Author: Nale

1 thoughts on “Datagridview rowvalidating delete

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *