Windows7ge

Member
  • Content count

    1,867
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

  • check
    Agree 167
  • info_outline
    Informative 49
  • tag_faces
    Funny 20
  • thumb_up
    Thumbs Up 130
  • thumb_up
    Likes (Old) 0

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

4 Followers

About Windows7ge

  • Title
    Veteran
  • Birthday 1994-09-08

System

  • CPU
    5960X O.C. 4.5GHz
  • Motherboard
    MSI X99A SLI PLUS
  • RAM
    64GB G.Skill Ripjaws4 2400MHz O.C. 2666MHz
  • GPU
    2x Sapphire Tri-X R9 290X CFX
  • Case
    None, custom built wall PC
  • Storage
    Intel 750 Series 400GB PCI_e SSD/2x3TB WD Reds in RAID0
  • PSU
    Corsair AX1200i
  • Cooling
    XSPC Waterblocks on CPU/Both GPU's 2x 480mm radiators with Noctua NF-F12 Fans

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    4E657720596F726B
  • Interests
    Building custom computers
    Custom water cooling
    Overclocking
    Computer networking

Recent Profile Visitors

1,463 profile views
  1. I'm not doubting you but I am saying that if the rubber O-ring that sits in between the fitting and the block isn't seated properly then the fitting will leak. I've had this issue with radiators. All identical fittings, they came with the rad, put them all in, one was leaking during leak testing. Drained the loop, pulled the fitting, changed out the O-ring, screwed the fitting back in. Hasn't leaked since and the systems been running for almost a year now. If you can't see anything visually wrong with the block like a hairline fracture or a DEEP scratch where the O-ring is meant to seal against the block then you don't have anything to lose (other than time) to give it a shot. Testing an O-ring is not as much of a headache as replacing a whole GPU waterblock because you're "100% sure" it's at fault.
  2. Their company is actually quite reputable. Although defective products can made it out of the factory just like any other manufacturer I'd beg to guess it's leaking without stopping due to a bad O-ring. Replacing the O-ring will in most instances fix it. It is also possible that the fitting is to blame. Keep us posted.
  3. I just mean the way VS displays the code to you. Imagine a web browser. A module fine would be it's own tab with all of it's code separated from the primary methods. There's also a [Design] page which contains all of the properties for the form that you're looking at but I rarely ever do anything in there. The VS GUI is designed to modefy this page using the form and object properties so you don't have to go in there. Then there's the "tab" which contains all of your object controls which is where you alter what objects do which is what we've been working on the past 3 weeks. This is how VS is set up. As for if the constant could be made private in VB and work like it does in c# may just be my lack of knowledge but from what I do know it would not work unless it was in a module. If I wanted the constant written along side all of my methods it would have to be public for each method to see it. Inside of a module it could be private but would still visible to each method in the form. You said yourself the program isn't complex enough to make a module worth using. Most definitely. The more I look back on the project and the things you've pointed out to me I can see places where the program could use improvement. So far this rebuild is significantly improved over my first attempt. I have a similar project in mind where I could incorporate radio buttons instead of using a tab menu. I can use that opportunity to see if it is something that I can make work. Considering the amount of similarity it would have to what you've taught me I could potentially built it without assistance.
  4. I mean't without the use of a module, changing the constants protection level to public, or having to create a dedicated private sub on the main code page. In this regard I can see how C# is already one step better than VB. It has the same level of protection, does the same exact thing, and only uses one line of code. This is something else I had considered. I imagine it would require multiple variables to pull off and even then it would probably radically increase the complexity of the program for something that should otherwise be simple-ish. If I designed something completely custom my other idea (that I never mentioned) was to use 3 radio buttons inside of a group control. Each radio button could represent a unit of power and could directly control the input boxes and what the calculate button executes. This would also get rid of the need for a tab menu and I think would be a little easier to work with. There would be less objects on the form. However this would require a near complete overhaul of the form and code behind it though if I ever feel like building this again for the third time it would be an educational opportunity. As you mentioned earlier I was still writing what appeared to be repetitive lines. I'll fix those probably tomorrow (Tomorrow) I forgot to click Submit Reply yesterday.
  5. I support Ben Quigley's theory. I have training under the Cisco CCENT, & CCNA curriculum. If you cannot replicate the issue elsewhere in the office take a laptop & dock that is affected and plug it in to a network port where it verified works. Different VLANs on managed switches can be configured to restrict access to servers based on IP or MAC filtering. Managed switches are smart enough to know if you're plugging in a router to one of their ports based on the MAC particularly if they have partial layer 3 functionality if the dock is doing any kind of routing and isn't just a pass-through then it might restrict network access. The IT office is more likely to have less restrictive access to the network while the office would be the oppose so checking the switch configuration for the office VLAN might be worth a shot.
  6. Example code helps A LOT when you're trying to explain something to me that I still don't completely understand. Here's something interesting I just discovered. Using a constant with a protection level of private but at the class scope still allows all private voids within that class to see it. I don't think VB is even capable of this. I'm describing the reason for it's existence rather than what the line itself means. Since I don't have any serious plans for the distribution of my programs I kind of have the habit of writing comments in a way that explains to myself what it does because my memory is rather fickle and if I don't write a program at least 2 or 3 weeks apart from each other I can't remember how to do it the next time I want to. Then I can reference past projects and the comments refresh my memory. When I began construction I tried to think of word based names to represent the objects but the names I thought of would have become hard to distinguish from each other and redundant. I know using numbers isn't something I should use but again the mental block I mentioned a while ago, creating names isn't one of my strong suits. It's easy enough when I don't have duplicate buttons that do the exact same thing and in this is where there's more room for improvement. I do see how it might be possible to use private voids within the tab menu and based on which tab the user is on it could change what the button controls do. This could reduce the amount of code, reduce repetitive buttons, and make the naming scheme easier. Here's the program. The other two tabs are nearly identical except for names, what the controls represent, and what controls the buttons affect:
  7. someInputBox.Text = String.Empty(), quite literally the only thing I learned in college that you agreed with. Money well spent *sarcasm*. Here's the final code fully assembled: namespace ConvertVoltsWattsAmps { public partial class ConvertVoltsWattsAmps : Form { public ConvertVoltsWattsAmps() { InitializeComponent(); } const decimal ValueDefault = 0.001m; // Constant to reset the value of the input fields // Function: When called, takes two inputs and based on the bool (true/false) will either divide or multiply the numbers private static decimal PowerResult(decimal powerInput1, decimal powerInput2, bool division = true) => division ? powerInput1 / powerInput2 : powerInput1 * powerInput2; private void btnCalculate1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { var watts = Convert.ToDecimal(nudWatts1.Value); // Converts the value contained in nudWatts1 to Decimal and assigns it to the variable watts var amps = Convert.ToDecimal(nudAmps1.Value); // Converts the value contained in nudAmps1 to Decimal and assigns it to the variable amps lblOutputVolts.Text = PowerResult(watts, amps, true).ToString(); // Calls the function, inputs parameters, returns answer, converts to string, outputs to form } private void btnClear1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { nudWatts1.Value = ValueDefault; nudAmps1.Value = ValueDefault; lblOutputVolts.Text = string.Empty; } private void btnCalculate2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { var volts = Convert.ToDecimal(nudVolts2.Value); var amps = Convert.ToDecimal(nudAmps2.Value); lblOutputWatts.Text = PowerResult(volts, amps, false).ToString(); } private void btnClear2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { nudVolts2.Value = ValueDefault; nudAmps2.Value = ValueDefault; lblOutputWatts.Text = string.Empty; } private void btnCalculate3_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { var watts = Convert.ToDecimal(nudWatts3.Value); var volts = Convert.ToDecimal(nudVolts3.Value); lblOutputAmps.Text = PowerResult(watts, volts, true).ToString(); } private void btnClear3_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { nudVolts3.Value = ValueDefault; nudWatts3.Value = ValueDefault; lblOutputAmps.Text = string.Empty; } } } 48 lines of code (not including comments, blank lines, or the pages of code that make up the form itself) this is many times less code than when I made the program in VB but I also completely rebuilt the form itself (My first attempt included using 4 separate forms. The mainForm, then one for each separate measure of power) I'm using a tab menu this time around which easily accommodated all of my objects in one small mainForm window.
  8. Well with that in mind the program is complete. I can only think of one thing I leaned in VB class that didn't go against everything you taught me over the last two and a half weeks.
  9. I would not expect it to be an issue. Although proper etiquette dictates you should use the QVL I've never had any issue buying any kit of RAM for any motherboard so long as it was the correct DDR and the motherboard supported the stick density/speed. I always buy G. Skill out of preference too. I'd be hard pressed to believe you'll have any issues.
  10. I wonder if the power cable was a coincidence and if it was the cards power delivery getting to hot. The graphics cards have VRM (Voltage Regulating Modules) if they get too hot the card may underclock itself or in extreme cases may spontaneously shutdown the system. Also because you're working with the GPU's bare die did you make sure you covered 100% of it? The pea method works fine for IHS plates but bare die's really need 100% coverage of which the pea method I can't say is ideal for.
  11. Maybe just a screw driver. You want to push that little metal tab above the battery off of it them pull out the battery. It's under a little bit of tension so don't be surprised it it flies out at you. Yes, the coin shaped battery.
  12. The OS installation media can affect which partitioning scheme is used. For older BIOS based motherboards you can only boot to a 2TB sized partition using MBR. GPT may not work on older motherboards for the boot partition. From my experience you can use CMD to partition a secondary drive in GPT. If you want one 4TB partition you'll have to reinstall windows and attempt to use GPT. If you don't care you can assign the unlocated drive space a drive letter using either CMD or Disk Management so long as 4 partitions don't already exist on the drive.
  13. I think that should suffice for minimal purposes however only one hard drive offers 0 redundancy (also your hyperlink is wrong). If the drive fails all the data is gone. Does she have backups located elsewhere?
  14. Older versions of windows will by default partition the drive using MBR (Master Boot Record) this partitioning scheme will only allow the creation of partitions up to 2TB and will only allow up to 4 partitions on a single drive. You have to format the drive using the GPT partition scheme to allow the creation of a larger than 2TB partition.
  15. If your motherboard is like any other workstation quad channel motherboard you'll want to occupy the four black slots (alternating the outermost slots). There's 2 on either side of the CPU. This enables quad channel memory...although the bandwidth is so high unless you're doing VERY memory intensive things you'll probably notice no performance difference but you went X99 you might as well take advantage of the feature. The easiest way to reset CMOS is to pull the cell battery from the motherboard for a little while and put it back (making sure power to the system if off before doing so), the motherboard should also have a 3 pin jumper that resets CMOS but it's tiny and you'd have to consult the motherboard manual to find it. Though to be honest I don't think it's the issue unless you've done some overclocking and it's unstable.