Resource file question!

[CSharper]

I am using VS2008 C#3.0 and I would like to know if some one can help
me wiith the following 2 questions;
1. I have a XML file called test.xml file in resource and I would like
to how can I read the xml file wihtout extracting it to a external
file? I would like to load the object into memory and use it from
there.
2. I am planning to have too many data files in the resource file, is
it possible to compress the resource file and then use it?

Thanks.

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Resource file question!

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:53:57 -0700, Peter Duniho
<NpOeStPeAdM@nn owslpianmk.comw rote:

I don't recall the specifics off the top of my head, but it should be
possible to get a MemoryStream from a binary resource. So if you just
treat the XML file resource as a binary resource, you should be able to
wrap that in a MemoryStream and then just read it normally as a regular
stream.

FYI...I took a quick look and sure enough the binary resource shows up as
a regular byte[]. So you can just use the MemoryStream constructor that
takes a byte[] array as the source.

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Resource file question!

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:54:53 -0700, Jeroen Mostert <jmostert@xs4al l.nl>
wrote:

I wasn't looking for a fight along the "my idea is better than yours"
divide.

Nor am I. It's just that inexperienced programmers too often get caught
up in the "let's make this optimal" approach that it's worth pointing out
at opportune moments that just because something is more performant, that
doesn't mean it's the best approach.

I don't have a problem with your contribution, but that doesn't mean I
think it should be left without some additional commentary pointing out
that in at least what should be a typical case (ie relatively small
resources), it's likely to be better to choose a simpler option.

I'm sure it wasn't your intent, but describing the alternatives you
suggested as having "saving the overhead..." carries an implication that
it's a better solution in an objective, unqualified way. In fact, of
course, it's only "better" in certain context, context I think was worth
pointing out.

Or a discussion on things that I hope everyone can decide for their own.

When all of the facts, they can.

>But you're right...if someone really wants to get a stream directly,
>they can.
>>

Let's promote this to my main point and forget about my ill-advised
dropping of the "o" word, lest I be branded as an optimization bum and
an enemy of simplicity for the rest of my life, which would be a shame.

Yes, indeed. :)

Pete