How can I get the installation path during runtime?

Hi,

maybe this is a stupid question, but how do I get the path where my apps
is installes into during runtime?

I contribute a txt file to this folder and I need the path to this file
during runtime but I have no clue how to do this.

Thanks for the help.

Lars

Lars
Sun May 21 12:27:24 CDT 2006

I found a solution.

Lars

Tim
Mon May 22 13:31:31 CDT 2006

Usually, Lars, when one finds a solution to a post (even one as simple as
your post was), they post the solution for others' benefit.

Tim
"Lars Vonderschmitt" <newsmuell@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:4dbm7bF199q24U1@uni-berlin.de...
>I found a solution.
>
> Lars

Lars
Mon May 22 13:55:02 CDT 2006

Tim Wallace schrieb:
> Usually, Lars, when one finds a solution to a post (even one as simple as
> your post was), they post the solution for others' benefit.

Sorry, here you go:

System.IO.Path.GetDirectoryName _
(System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetName().CodeBase)

By the way. Does none of you know how to quote? You are all posting a
lot of tofu.
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

Nothing against you all, but it is really hard to read the postings. The
right quoting would make it much easier.

Lars

ctacke/>
Mon May 22 16:16:46 CDT 2006

What do you mean by "quoting"? Your reply looks identical to Tim's (which
looks just like this one). Both have the original post line prefixed with a
">" character. This has been a newsgroup standard since before HTML
existed. If you don't see these messages that way then I'd say it's your
reader's problem, not the poster's problem.

-Chris



"Lars Vonderschmitt" <newsmuell@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:4defniF19thheU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Tim Wallace schrieb:
>> Usually, Lars, when one finds a solution to a post (even one as simple
>> as
>> your post was), they post the solution for others' benefit.
>
> Sorry, here you go:
>
> System.IO.Path.GetDirectoryName _
> (System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetName().CodeBase)
>
> By the way. Does none of you know how to quote? You are all posting a
> lot of tofu.
> http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
>
> Nothing against you all, but it is really hard to read the postings. The
> right quoting would make it much easier.
>
> Lars

Lars
Mon May 22 16:23:12 CDT 2006

<ctacke/> schrieb:
> What do you mean by "quoting"? Your reply looks identical to Tim's (which
> looks just like this one). Both have the original post line prefixed with a
> ">" character. This has been a newsgroup standard since before HTML
> existed. If you don't see these messages that way then I'd say it's your
> reader's problem, not the poster's problem.

By quoting I mean, that you all post your answer on top and the original
message you are referring to at the end.
In germany we quote like I do. First the text we referre to and than the
answer. And if we referre to different parts, than we do it like this:

> original 1

answer 1

> original 2

answer 2

This way, it is easier to read and unterstand the posting.

But maybe this is just in german newsgroups. So never mind.

Lars

Simon
Tue May 23 03:37:13 CDT 2006

What you are saying is correct if the original post contains more than one
question. But when there is only one question, what does it matter.

I also find it better to reply ontop (that is before) the original post,
this way there is no need generally, to scroll to see the answer. An example
is this post I am posting now.

Simon.

"Lars Vonderschmitt" <newsmuell@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:4deodcF19np6qU1@uni-berlin.de...
> <ctacke/> schrieb:
>> What do you mean by "quoting"? Your reply looks identical to Tim's
>> (which
>> looks just like this one). Both have the original post line prefixed
>> with a
>> ">" character. This has been a newsgroup standard since before HTML
>> existed. If you don't see these messages that way then I'd say it's your
>> reader's problem, not the poster's problem.
>
> By quoting I mean, that you all post your answer on top and the original
> message you are referring to at the end.
> In germany we quote like I do. First the text we referre to and than the
> answer. And if we referre to different parts, than we do it like this:
>
>> original 1
>
> answer 1
>
>> original 2
>
> answer 2
>
> This way, it is easier to read and unterstand the posting.
>
> But maybe this is just in german newsgroups. So never mind.
>
> Lars

Lars
Tue May 23 04:05:47 CDT 2006

Simon Hart schrieb:
> What you are saying is correct if the original post contains more than one
> question. But when there is only one question, what does it matter.

Because when you post ToFu (Text ontop, full quote underneath) as you
did, it is harder to understand everything. If you wish to read the
question first, then you have to scroll down and search for the right
post. Because, as you also did, you did not remove unnecessary parts of
the original post, like qoutes that are not relevant.

> I also find it better to reply ontop (that is before) the original post,
> this way there is no need generally, to scroll to see the answer. An example
> is this post I am posting now.

But as I mentioned above, if you would like to read the original
question, you have to scroll down and search in the full quote for the
relevant parts.
And by not removing unrelevant parts the post becomes bigger and bigger
and bigger.

Maybe some will realice this and change their way of posting, maybe some
will not :(

Lars

Simon
Tue May 23 05:39:38 CDT 2006

I don't think people should change the way they post. Generally when you
read usenet you have already read the previous post anyway as you read them
sequentially top to bottom so what does it matter even if the previous
content is included or not.

Unless of course you read bottom up?

I hate the fact I have to scroll down to see the replies when I have already
read the original content, I don't want to read it more than once!

Simon.

"Lars Vonderschmitt" <newsmuell@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:4dg1ikF1a2fmgU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Simon Hart schrieb:
>> What you are saying is correct if the original post contains more than
>> one
>> question. But when there is only one question, what does it matter.
>
> Because when you post ToFu (Text ontop, full quote underneath) as you
> did, it is harder to understand everything. If you wish to read the
> question first, then you have to scroll down and search for the right
> post. Because, as you also did, you did not remove unnecessary parts of
> the original post, like qoutes that are not relevant.
>
>> I also find it better to reply ontop (that is before) the original post,
>> this way there is no need generally, to scroll to see the answer. An
>> example
>> is this post I am posting now.
>
> But as I mentioned above, if you would like to read the original
> question, you have to scroll down and search in the full quote for the
> relevant parts.
> And by not removing unrelevant parts the post becomes bigger and bigger
> and bigger.
>
> Maybe some will realice this and change their way of posting, maybe some
> will not :(
>
> Lars

Lars
Tue May 23 06:20:42 CDT 2006

Simon Hart schrieb:
[schnipp]

It is common in the rest of the usenet to not post tofu.

And if you follow a thread and a new post comes, than maybe you have to
read the one it is pointing to. Any why include all the posts? It just
increases traffic. It is just because you are to "foul" to post
corerctly or to delete the things you don't refer to.

But it is like making a war against windmills ;)

So never mind.

Lars