Visual Studio 2005 Useless Error Message

It seemed like a simple task – build a user control to search a database by date, so yesterday afternoon I set about putting the form together, using the Developer Express .NET controls. The form all seemed to be working fine, until I tried to reopen it in Visual Studio to tweak the layout slightly, at which point Visual Studio presented me with this totally useless error message – “The designer loader did not provide a root component but has not indicated why.”

Totally Useless Error Message

Bizarrely the control still worked absolutely fine when I run the application – no problems at all. The problem is that Visual Studio runs part of the control to allow it to load up in the editor, and that is apparently what is failing – however finding out exactly what is failing is a bit of a problem.

In the end I spent a couple of hours messing around trying to find out what was failing. The online sources of help, even the Microsoft sites tended to take the attitude that ‘It does do that from time to time doesn’t it…’ and then pretty limited suggestions on how to solve it ranging from manually working through the automatically generated code that the editor is using to try and display the control commenting bits out, or deleting the bin and obj folders. I tried both, and neither worked. About the only progress I could make was to get it to produce a dialog box instead with an “Exception of type System.ComponentModel.Design.ExceptionCollection was thrown” error instead.

This morning I came in and decided that the quickest way to solve the problem would be to rebuild the control, so I set about putting it together again, all appeared fine, and then five minutes ago, I got the same useless error message again.

Whilst it is questionable according to some to have a visual editor that is dependant on working code to display, that is what we are stuck with in Visual Studio – however in what is the third major version of the product, you’d think that Microsoft could actually get it to work, or at least give some sort of clue as to where the form is going wrong! Certainly at the moment it is a far cry from the image portrayed in the Microsoft adverts – hardly more productive…

Update: I’ve made some progress with finding the source of the problem. I moved the problem control into a totally clean solution, the idea being that this can be distributed amongst the other developers on the team, to see if the problem occurs consistently. Interestingly, it produced a new error message, “The variable ‘Controls’ is either undeclared or was never assigned” a few times before reverting to the previous error messages that had been occurring with the other project. I then tried it on an alternative PC, on which it worked.

That now leads on to trying to establish what the difference between the two installations of Visual Studio and the machines actually are. The machines are architecturally different, one being a relatively new dual-core box, and the other a good deal older single core machine. However both are running the same version of Windows XP, and the main version number on each Visual Studio install appears identical. However looking at the version numbers of the installed Visual Studio components on each machine does appear to show up some differences in the core components. So moving on, the next thing to try is to rerun the latest Visual Studio Service Pack install…

Update 2: So the Visual Studio Service Pack install didn’t work. Ultimately it was a case of totally uninstalling Visual Studio and clean installing the whole thing from scratch. On paper the new installation is no different from what was on there before – the difference is that my project is not producing the error message any more, so something is different – quite what I guess I’ll never know!

Just Say No

cartoon from www.weblogcartoons.com

After the tension of the meeting, and the ultimately fudged ‘unanimous’ communiqué, the recent meeting of the Anglican Communion Primates left the US church with an interesting problem. They alone were singled out for special treatment, with a plan for independent oversight of disputed Churches, for which apparently recruitment is already occurring, and the House of Bishops called upon to not approve any same-sex blessings (although ironically the Church in Sweeden who are in communion with parts of the Anglican Communion have just approved a rite) The Anglican Church of Canada also got briefly mentioned over approval of same-sex blessings.

To be honest, it was obvious that it was merely postponing the inevitable as it was announced as the final communiqué addressed only some of the issues of disagreement. The church in the USA and Canada were asked to step back, whilst at the same time, in order to get him to to sign, Bishops who were meddling in other provinces such as Peter Akinola were allowed to continue. The mission from the Nigerian Church into the USA, was effectively given some measure of legitimacy.

Within weeks, the Anglican Church in Canada made their position clear, and now the American Bishops have done the same. They have refused the plan for independent oversight on both spiritual and legal grounds, and highlighted that thanks to the democratic structures of the Church much of what was suggested cannot be approved by the Bishops alone. The fact that Peter Akinola also hasn’t been censured for his backing of the new Nigerian anti-Gay law – a move seen by many as contrary to the Anglican listening process that is supposed to be taking place has caused positions to harden even more, resulting in statements that are for once clear, and strong in their position. At one point they even accuse the primates of trying to drag the Anglican Communion back to a ‘time of colonialism’ with a central Church over which the others have no control dictating policy worldwide. They have called for a meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss their position before the official response is made in September.

The general response from many is that it is good to see the Bishops holding to their beliefs and principals. Quite what will happen to the Anglican Communion though is open for debate as the Episcopal Church still bankrolls much of the Anglican Church, hence the attempts to keep the whole thing together. Ultimately what makes the whole thing more frustrating from a UK point of view is the fact that it is widely known that the Archbishop of Canterbury is theologically closer to the US and Canadian position, but is not expressing his opinion because of his international role. Ironic considering that in his own Church, after public calls for the 26 Bishops in the House of Lords to vote down the Sexual Orientation Regulations, only three of them voted to oppose them – which coupled with events at General Synod, certainly gives an indication of the direction in which the Church of England is heading. The fact is that many of it’s leaders do not believe that the Church should be stopping a law that would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, nor are they going to censure their own clergy if they are apparently breaking the current rules as a result of the ongoing listening process, however much some of the conservatives may kick up a fuss.

In terms of our local Church, the topic came up as part of our Lent Course last week, and despite my concerns that it would be a divisive topic, seemed to go rather well, and certainly there was a good deal of respect for the differing opinions. Age wise the younger members of the groups seemed to either be inclusive, or to admit that they had never really thought about it in a Church context as they didn’t have an issue in day-to-day life, and in general even the people who had issues over the topic were not nearly as violently opposed as was suggested people would be a few years ago, and were willing to discuss it. Certainly it seemed to give Rev Richard confidence that we could move forward with properly exploring the issue in the future, something that has been avoided thus far.

I’ve bookmarked a lot of the online comment on the announcements over on my link blog, but worth a read are Ruth Gledhill’s comments, Stephen Bates posting under the heading ‘Bishops to Primate: Drop Dead’, The Episcopal Majority roundup, and of course check out Dave Walkers unique contribution.

Cartoon by Dave Walker. Find more cartoons you can freely re-use on your blog at We Blog Cartoons.

Guilty

This afternoon, Thomas Palmer was convicted of the double murder of two of his friends in Finchampstead, that so shocked the village 18 months ago.

That Palmer killed Steven Bayliss and T.Wood Nadauld wasn’t in any doubt – he had pleaded guilty to manslaughter – however the prosecution maintained, and proved the charge of murder this afternoon.

The arguments that it was manslaughter were presented last week, firstly that they had been drinking, and had disagreed – Palmer saying that the alcohol had meant that he couldn’t think straight. However, medical tests indicated that he had no drink or drugs in his bloodstream at the time of the attack.

Later, there was evidence from a psychiatrist of Palmer’s mental state. He had reported symptoms of paranoia associated with the early stages of schizophrenia, and also with his use of cannabis – somewhat of a sad irony considering the front page of the Independent yesterday. He also had a fascination with knives, and according to his girlfriend a film about a serial killer had recently become a favourite.

Hopefully, Palmer being convicted will bring some sense of closure to the families, who from their statements after the verdict are still struggling to make sense of what has happened. According to her victim impact statement read at the trial, Steven’s mother has not even changed the sheets on her son’s bed. (Incidentally, there is a separate article exploring the impact of the murders on the BBC site.) However the life sentence with a recommended tariff of 20 years, of which Palmer has already served 2 years, has already sparked much discussion as being too lenient – certainly with all the talk of schizophrenia and paranoia I was expecting him to be sent somewhere like Broadmoor, whether he was found guilty of the murder charge or manslaughter.

Moaning About the Weather

Snow Clouds

There is nothing the British seem to like more than moaning about the weather. This time last week we had a nice warm spell with above average temperatures, however during that whole period the weather forecasters were predicting a cold snap. MetCheck has an explanation of why – essentially the high pressure front that brought us the warm weather in the previous week combined with low pressure over Scandinavia causes cold air to funnel down from the North Pole – hence the countrywide snow fall and chilly temperatures we’re having now. However we still had people moaning about it at work, and a bit moaning online too, almost as if it heralded a new ice age!

It’s not actually as if it is that unusual – certainly I can remember snow around Easter time on a couple of occasions, and I have a definite childhood recollection of it snowing in June when we were having a family picnic on Chorleywood Common. Thanks to the wonders of Google I found this page about late season snowfall that regards snow in March and April as common enough not to be discussed, and talks about snowfalls in May and June – and does indeed seem to confirm my memory in that it discusses widespread sleet and snow showers that occurred on June 2nd 1975, and were seen as far south as Portsmouth, Sussex and Kent.