[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework

Re: Creating a Website

Barry

8/9/2008 2:49:00 AM

My app programmatically creates new websites based on users choice of
selected Categories, the index.html is a template file in which the source
is updated, hence i need end-user to create and view the website at their
end, not at my end.



"Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:%23uVwbji%23IHA.872@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Why would you want to do that programattically? Just make a new virtual
> directory and you are all set.
>
>
> "Barry" <someone@hello.com> wrote in message
> news:eODdW1f%23IHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Hi
>>
>> I have a folder containing a index.html file and some images in one
>> folder and a index.php and some images in another folder, i want to
>> register these folders as websites programmatically on my local system
>> (something similar to creating a new Virtual Directory in IIS).
>>
>> which namespace or class would i use to do so to allow me to run the
>> website through a webbrowser using for eaxmple http://localhost/mysite/
>> as url
>>
>> TIA
>> Barry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


3 Answers

(Mortar)

8/23/2012 9:00:00 PM

0

On 8/23/12 9:29 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>> On 8/23/12 8:21 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>
>>>> On 8/22/12 5:36 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/22/12 6:37 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You think the Constitution is a Chinese menu.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think no such thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And of course you snipped the part in which I say the entire
>>>>>> Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court is the law of the land.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, well played!
>>>>>
>>>>> It has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Try and focus.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You think the ACLU should be able to proclaim itself
>>>>>>> a Champion of the Constitution when it's really only a Champion of the
>>>>>>> Parts of the Constitution It Likes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I support the Constitution, yes, I think the ACLU should be able
>>>>>> to proclaim itself whatever it wishes. That's because of the First
>>>>>> Amendment. Look it up.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never said they shouldn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you'd like to complain that the ACLU doesn't defend 2nd Amendment
>>>>>> cases, I have no argument with that. Your blanket claim that the ACLU
>>>>>> doesn't support the Constitution is bogus. It does with every case it
>>>>>> takes on.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it doesn't. It only supports parts of the Constitution.
>>>>>
>>>>> You really *ARE* this dumb, aren't you? It's not an act.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me dumb.
>>>
>>> Oh look! An ignorant fucktard calls me an ignoramus!
>>>
>>> We would keep the thread going a few more days now!
>>>
>>>> The ACLU hasn't tried any legal maneuvers in recent contempt brouhaha
>>>> with the AG and Issa.
>>>
>>> Goal post move noted and laughed at, illustrating the weakness of your
>>> argument (and mind) perfectly.
>>
>> Whoosh! What an ignoramus you are.
>
> Thanks for proving you've run out of ideas.
>
>>> The issue here is do they support the Constitution. Answer: No.
>>
>> They even list the cases in which they support the Constitution. Not
>> having your priorities doesn't change that.
>
> [chuckle]
>
> That's like saying, "I support the alphabet, except for the letter
> 'q.'"

This makes no sense as nobody "supports" an alphabet.

> That's like saying, "I support the Bible, except for that stupid Ten
> Commandments stuff."

Or how about saying, "I support the Bible, except for that slavery stuff."

Analogy fail. Again.

> That's like saying, "I agree with deadrat, except for the parts where
> he says something really fucking stupid, which seems to be just about
> everything."

Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me stupid.

<snip/>

Scout

8/23/2012 9:07:00 PM

0



"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfreude@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1dfc38p1b4l1h2cg01o7fc2fftlpfu7i7l@4ax.com...
>>deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
>>On 8/23/12 8:21 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>
>>>> On 8/22/12 5:36 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/22/12 6:37 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You think the Constitution is a Chinese menu.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think no such thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And of course you snipped the part in which I say the entire
>>>>>> Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court is the law of the
>>>>>> land.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, well played!
>>>>>
>>>>> It has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Try and focus.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You think the ACLU should be able to proclaim itself
>>>>>>> a Champion of the Constitution when it's really only a Champion of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> Parts of the Constitution It Likes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I support the Constitution, yes, I think the ACLU should be
>>>>>> able
>>>>>> to proclaim itself whatever it wishes. That's because of the First
>>>>>> Amendment. Look it up.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never said they shouldn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you'd like to complain that the ACLU doesn't defend 2nd Amendment
>>>>>> cases, I have no argument with that. Your blanket claim that the
>>>>>> ACLU
>>>>>> doesn't support the Constitution is bogus. It does with every case
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> takes on.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it doesn't. It only supports parts of the Constitution.
>>>>>
>>>>> You really *ARE* this dumb, aren't you? It's not an act.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me dumb.
>>>
>>> Oh look! An ignorant fucktard calls me an ignoramus!
>>>
>>> We would keep the thread going a few more days now!
>>>
>>>> The ACLU hasn't tried any legal maneuvers in recent contempt brouhaha
>>>> with the AG and Issa.
>>>
>>> Goal post move noted and laughed at, illustrating the weakness of your
>>> argument (and mind) perfectly.
>>
>>Whoosh! What an ignoramus you are.
>
> Thanks for proving you've run out of ideas.
>
>>> The issue here is do they support the Constitution. Answer: No.
>>
>>They even list the cases in which they support the Constitution. Not
>>having your priorities doesn't change that.
>
> [chuckle]
>
> That's like saying, "I support the alphabet, except for the letter
> 'q.'"
>
> That's like saying, "I support the Bible, except for that stupid Ten
> Commandments stuff."
>
> That's like saying, "I agree with deadrat, except for the parts where
> he says something really fucking stupid, which seems to be just about
> everything."

You might try something more....physical

Put deadrat's car up on stands.

Deadrat asks "Do the stands support the car?"
Klaus - "According to how you define it they will"
Deadrat crawls under the car.
Stands at the front fail.
Car pins Deadrat to the ground
As his life slips away he says to Klause " But you said the stands support
the car"
Klaus replies "They only need to support part of the car according to you. I
guess the front end isn't a part they cared about."

(Mortar)

8/23/2012 9:54:00 PM

0

On 8/23/12 4:06 PM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfreude@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1dfc38p1b4l1h2cg01o7fc2fftlpfu7i7l@4ax.com...
>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>
>>> On 8/23/12 8:21 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/22/12 5:36 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/22/12 6:37 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>> deadrat <a@b.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You think the Constitution is a Chinese menu.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think no such thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And of course you snipped the part in which I say the entire
>>>>>>> Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court is the law of
>>>>>>> the land.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, well played!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Try and focus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You think the ACLU should be able to proclaim itself
>>>>>>>> a Champion of the Constitution when it's really only a Champion
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> Parts of the Constitution It Likes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since I support the Constitution, yes, I think the ACLU should be
>>>>>>> able
>>>>>>> to proclaim itself whatever it wishes. That's because of the First
>>>>>>> Amendment. Look it up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I never said they shouldn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you'd like to complain that the ACLU doesn't defend 2nd Amendment
>>>>>>> cases, I have no argument with that. Your blanket claim that the
>>>>>>> ACLU
>>>>>>> doesn't support the Constitution is bogus. It does with every
>>>>>>> case it
>>>>>>> takes on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it doesn't. It only supports parts of the Constitution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You really *ARE* this dumb, aren't you? It's not an act.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me dumb.
>>>>
>>>> Oh look! An ignorant fucktard calls me an ignoramus!
>>>>
>>>> We would keep the thread going a few more days now!
>>>>
>>>>> The ACLU hasn't tried any legal maneuvers in recent contempt brouhaha
>>>>> with the AG and Issa.
>>>>
>>>> Goal post move noted and laughed at, illustrating the weakness of your
>>>> argument (and mind) perfectly.
>>>
>>> Whoosh! What an ignoramus you are.
>>
>> Thanks for proving you've run out of ideas.
>>
>>>> The issue here is do they support the Constitution. Answer: No.
>>>
>>> They even list the cases in which they support the Constitution. Not
>>> having your priorities doesn't change that.
>>
>> [chuckle]
>>
>> That's like saying, "I support the alphabet, except for the letter
>> 'q.'"
>>
>> That's like saying, "I support the Bible, except for that stupid Ten
>> Commandments stuff."
>>
>> That's like saying, "I agree with deadrat, except for the parts where
>> he says something really fucking stupid, which seems to be just about
>> everything."
>
> You might try something more....physical

Given that the mental is too much for him.
>
> Put deadrat's car up on stands.
>
> Deadrat asks "Do the stands support the car?"
> Klaus - "According to how you define it they will"
> Deadrat crawls under the car.
> Stands at the front fail.
> Car pins Deadrat to the ground
> As his life slips away he says to Klause " But you said the stands
> support the car"
> Klaus replies "They only need to support part of the car according to
> you. I guess the front end isn't a part they cared about."

Another one who failed the analogy part of those standardized tests.

Does your house have any 16" O.C. supporting stud walls? If you took
out one of those studs, do you suppose the house would collapse?

Did you get the right answer, no. Good. So is it still a supporting wall?

Of course. It's left as an exercise to figure out why "support" in the
analogy isn't apt.