Re: Annoy "Object reference not set to an instance of an object." Help.

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Scott M. (s-mar_at_nospam.nospam)
Date: 11/20/04 

Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:16:01 -0500

I will not let go of your extremely bad advice and behavior in such a public
place where many could take your bad advice and actually believe it.

<jeff@removeemergencyreporting.com> wrote in message
news:OI59jsyzEHA.2192@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Deep breath. Let it go...
>
> "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:O6rT3lozEHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> > Wow, evidently I pushed a few buttons did I? I suspect you've spent at
>> > least 10 minutes of your time wasted on me, and not with the OP.
>>
>> I helped the OP with 2 minutes of my time.
>>
>> >
>> > Believe me, I'm not worth it
>>
>> You are right there.
>>
>> >
>> > Yes, I tend to vent, then get on with business. I've read everything
>> > you
>> > said, and I agree.
>>
>> >Different styles.
>>
>> If you call impatient bullying a style, ok.
>>
>> > Not a problem.
>>
>> Not for you evidently.
>>
>> >
>> > :-)
>> >
>> > Jeff
>> >
>> > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> > news:u65uQCozEHA.2788@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> >> >I recommended in my first post to simplify the code. Get simpler code
>> >> > working. Judicious use of commenting out code, and/or copy-n-paste,
> or
>> >> > real
>> >> > time debugging. Useful skills that work for me always.
>> >>
>> >> That's fine for you, but if someone isn't sure of what the code is
>> >> that
>> > they
>> >> are commenting out, then it's nothing more that a spin of the roulette
>> >> wheel. It's not very educationally sound advice.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Create a connection in separate code, and get that working. Then add
>> >> > the
>> >> > existing code till it breaks, and pinpoint the problem. 20 minutes,
>> > tops.
>> >> >
>> >> > He didn't follow my advice.
>> >>
>> >> Maybe he didn't know how to get a working connection? Maybe that is
> the
>> >> problem? Again, not very educational.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > He didn't learn anything from you, other than "when a problem
>> >> > arises,
>> > give
>> >> > up, and post to the newsgroups"
>> >>
>> >> Really? Have you no understanding of how to read:
>> >>
>> >> "If you aren't using a password, then you should remove the Password=
>> >> part
>> >> of
>> >> the connection string.
>> >> If you do need a password, then you have forgotten to add it here
>> >> If your INSERT command is incorrect, you will get an error as well
>> >> You should ALWAYS put your connection.Open inside of a try...end try
>> >> Why are you renaming the exception that is caught in the Catch to err?
>> > This
>> >> is a reserved word that represents the VB 6.0 error object. It is a
> good
>> >> idea to leave the name at ex.
>> >> Why not use the Catch for the purpose it was intented? Right now, you
>> >> are
>> >> taking any exceptions you get and just throwing them again. I know
> that
>> > for
>> >> production purposes that may be what you want to do, but in
> development,
>> > you
>> >> can use the catch to find out what is going wrong."
>> >>
>> >> These are all solid points that have an explanation attached to them.
>> >> Please Jeff, now you are just slinging mud so you won't have to admit
>> >> that
>> >> you weren't really helping at all.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > He'll be back. Yes, I take concern on that. Others don't. Not a
>> >> > problem.
>> >> > Just my thing.
>> >>
>> >> Listen to yourself. Are you on some sort of crusade? You really
>> >> don't
>> > have
>> >> any understanding of how learning takes place do you?
>> >>
>> >> You made 9 posts and in not one of them did you discuss the actual
>> >> problem
>> >> or possible problems. You repeatedly told the OP to do things he
>> > obviously
>> >> didn't know how to do and were not very nice about it in the process.
>> >> You
>> >> want someone to blame for the OP having to come back 8 extra times?
>> >> Go
>> > look
>> >> in the mirror.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, he may be back, but probably with a different problem. And, when
>> > that
>> >> happens, helpful people like me and most others here will supply the
>> >> information that the OP's need. That's kinda how this whole NG thing
>> > works.
>> >> If you don't like that, then you really are in for some disappointment
>> >> and
>> >> stress.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > And I'm a professional trainer too, 10 years at Microsoft, 2 years
>> >> > teaching
>> >> > MCP classes at a large university in Seattle, and authored a book on
>> > IIS.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> No wonder I've never heard of you though, you aren't a very good one.
>> >> You've clearly shown here that you don't have any understanding of how
>> >> the
>> >> learning process works. You've shown that, while you may have good
>> >> technical skills, you don't posses the necessary patience and
> imagination
>> > to
>> >> teach adults new concepts. It's one thing to know something, it's
>> >> very
>> >> different to teach it.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not an MCT, and for a good reason....The MCT program is very
>> > restrictive
>> >> about the courseware that must be used and the labs that must be
> taught.
>> >> I've repeatedly found that to teach adults effectively, you can't work
>> > with
>> >> just one canned solution. You need flexibility and the ability to
> change
>> >> your approach based on the situation. The MCT program doesn't allow
> for
>> >> that.
>> >>
>> >> > So you don't encourage your students to learn for themselves? Or
> learn
>> >> > proper troubleshooting techniques?
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't want to argue, I agree that your approach is simply
>> >> > different
>> > than
>> >> > mine.
>> >>
>> >> Jeff, you are VERY GOOD at arguing -- you should do it as a
>> >> profession.
>> > It
>> >> is very clear that I gave the OP many suggestions for where to being
>> > looking
>> >> for problems. In fact, after my one post (as opposed to your 9), the
> OP
>> >> said:
>> >>
>> >> "I guess Scott M is right, sounds like the connection cause the
> problem.
>> >> Testing..."
>> >>
>> >> which tells me that I gave the OP some information to go back and work
>> > with.
>> >> Randomly, commenting out lines of code (which is what you'll be doing
> if
>> > you
>> >> don't understand the lines in the first place) is NOT, nor has it EVER
>> > been
>> >> a PROPER troublshooting technique. It is a crap shoot. Understanding
>> >> the
>> >> premis behind the code you work with, understanding how to read a
>> > StackTrace
>> >> (provided by the OP), understanding how the debug process works,
>> >> understanding how structured exception handling can not only handle
>> >> exceptions but be used as a debugging tool and understanding what
> "Object
>> >> reference not set to an instance of an object." means are all PROPER
>> >> troublshooting techniques. It's a good think you didn't write a book
> on
>> >> diagnosing execptions.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Both work.
>> >> >
>> >> > The reason I give my real email is so we can take inappropriate
>> >> > discussions
>> >> > like this offline. I would have sent you this in email, but I don't
>> >> > have
>> >> > your address. This post of mine offers nothing to the OP or to the
>> > group.
>> >>
>> >> Neither have any of your posts. If you kept your posts relevant in
>> >> the
>> >> first place, you wouldn't need to argue with people off line. I'm
> happy
>> > to
>> >> have this discussion publicly... Because, I believe I am still
>> >> teaching
>> >> others the PROPER way to test code with my remarks to you and while
>> >> you
>> > may
>> >> not be able to absorb what I'm saying, I'm sure others will.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Jeff
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> >> > news:e4cw6XnzEHA.3396@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> > Sorry, was I talking to you? My hope that people can learn to
> solve
>> >> > their
>> >> >> > problems themselves.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then there really is no reason for you to post anything in the
>> >> >> first
>> >> > place.
>> >> >> Badgering the OP, when he clearly didn't understand you isn't going
> to
>> >> > help
>> >> >> anyone.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > And feeling? My suggestion would have pinpointed the problem
>> > straight
>> >> >> > away.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you consider "straight away" 9 messages from you without getting
>> >> > anywhere
>> >> >> close to the problem vs. one from me, then yes, you are correct.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Granted, I see 2 schools of thought on newsgroups. One, blindly
>> > answer
>> >> >> > posted questions. The other, educate.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Too bad you did neither. If you read what I wrote, you'd see that
>> >> >> I
>> >> >> explained what is most likely the problem and several possibilities
> as
>> > to
>> >> >> why it might be happening. I left it to the OP to go check them
> out.
>> > I
>> >> >> happen to be a professional trainer, so I know a thing or 2 about
> how
>> > to
>> >> >> educate myself. What you did was not helpful to anyone. You were
>> >> >> clearly
>> >> >> adversarial and offered nothing that would help the OP to find the
>> >> >> problem
>> >> >> much less understand it, so let's just climb down of your soap box
> for
>> > a
>> >> >> moment and be honest here.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Mine is to educate. "Give a man a fish, and he'll be hungry by
>> >> >> > the
>> > end
>> >> > of
>> >> >> > the day. Teach them to fish, and they will never be hungry
>> >> >> > again."
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Get real, Jeff. It's quite a stretch to call your continued
> badgering
>> > of
>> >> >> the OP education in any way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Both work. I agree with both. But I choose one style.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then perhaps you could do some learning on how to use that style
>> > because
>> >> > you
>> >> >> certainly haven't done so here.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Simpler code is always easier to debug and diagnose.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You told the OP to give us simple code that works. The OP couldn't
>> >> >> get
>> >> > the
>> >> >> code to work! That was the problem. Perhaps the OP doesn't know
> what
>> >> >> simpler code there is? Perhaps, that's why we need to help people
>> > around
>> >> >> here? No one said you had to write the correct code for the OP,
>> >> >> but
>> > you
>> >> >> could have been a little kinder and certainly could have been more
>> >> > helpful.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > And I give my email in posts, and invite private discourse. Do
> you?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why would I need to. Why not let everyone benefit from the problem
>> >> >> and
>> >> > the
>> >> >> solution? If you are truly helping someone, then they shouldn't
> need
>> > to
>> >> >> contact you privately to solve their problem.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Granted, I put up with major spam.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And, perhaps the rest of us know that we can avoid spam and help
>> >> >> the
>> > OP's
>> >> > at
>> >> >> the same time?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Jeff
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:e0oSEYmzEHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> Interesting Jeff, since I was able to look at the OP and get a
>> > feeling
>> >> >> >> for
>> >> >> >> where the problem was right away.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Jeff Dillon" <jeff@removeemergencyreporting.com> wrote in
> message
>> >> >> >> news:u3kCnrlzEHA.1192@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> > Wow. If you used simpler code, as I suggested, you would have
>> > found
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > problem hours if not days ago
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Jeff
>> >> >> >> > "nick" <nbdy9.removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > news:OBeRJ$azEHA.1392@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> >> I didn't add code. The same code (dll file, when called by
>> > asp.net
>> >> > it
>> >> >> > has
>> >> >> >> >> the problem). I guess Scott M is right, sounds like the
>> > connection
>> >> >> > cause
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> problem. Testing...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Jeff Dillon" <jeff@removeemergencyreporting.com> wrote in
>> > message
>> >> >> >> >> news:%2346KxzazEHA.2600@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> >> > Did you simplify the code?? Sounds like you are adding
>> > code...to
>> >> >> > code
>> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> > already not working. Hmmm...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Troubleshooting 101
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > "nick" <nbdy9.removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> > news:uWuoFwazEHA.3548@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> >> >> btw, the problem occur when run in ASP.Net application.
> When
>> > run
>> >> > as
>> >> >> >> >> >> non-asp.net application (testing using NUnit), there is no
>> >> > problem.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> I already did the impersonate:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> web.config:
>> >> >> >> >> >> <configuration>
>> >> >> >> >> >> <system.web>
>> >> >> >> >> >> <identity impersonate="true" userName="yw" password="...."
> />
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Also, I set the Intranet security to high (may not be
> useful
>> > in
>> >> >> > this
>> >> >> >> >> > case).
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Quantcast