|
I Also avoid Bing in MSDN, and Use Google... Sorry Bing. 
Results are closer to what i'm looking for, however I user a search such as: MSDN C# System.Core...etc..
this will give a little more info (IMO) because it will give you context, and a dash of outside perspective (Lower on the gage).. and I usually iterate between MSDN and Web until I hone in on what Exactly I'm looking for on msdn.. I've found that the MSFT blogger5s usually have better info on their blogs then the Documentation and the links to the documentation are often in the blog.. a Great example of this is if you try to figure out how/when to use a spin lock....I spend 4 hours on Sunday until I found a random comment on some MSFT blog that actually explained the intricacies of it.
If your interested I think it is an great example of how the documentation is worthless...(actually says that you shouldn't use it really ever).. whereas one blog says it will cause a serious performance hit, and the final one an article about memory management says that it is faster before a threshold....
I'd blame it on the Brain farts.. But let's be honest, it really is more like a Methane factory between my ears some days then it is anything else...
|
|
|
|
|
Good experience to share. I remember several years ago, Microsft had an invitational meeting for developers in New York to collect feedbcks to improve the search for MSDN documentation.
That was before BING time. Then the BING took over. As a result, whatever BING does is what we get. No particular search improvement on MSDN could be seen.
TOMZ_KV
|
|
|
|
|
Just Bing it! 
|
|
|
|
|
Just go to the MSDN Home Page[^] and use the search facility. However, you will find that many search items will return multiple 'hits' so you sometimes need to review more than one link before finding the correct one. For example when searching for CheckMenuItem I got this page[^], but since I know I'm searching for a Windows function I can fairly easily trust that the first hit is the correct one. Try the same thing with a .NET function and its a little more difficult. The only way to get really comfortable with it is to use it as much as possible and you will soon grow to love(???) it.
Don't forget to customize it to your own requirements in terms of country and view type.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
<and you="" will="" soon="" grow="" to="" love(???)="" it.="">
Good to see that the art of sarcasm is alive and well !
|
|
|
|
|
Just don't. No good can come of it. All you'll get from MSDN is an impeneterable generic entry, nonfunctional "example" code and a restatement of the parameters that you already got from intellisense.
Do yourself a favor, search with google and open the first NON-MSDN link returned. The only thing I ever got from MSDN was hypertesion and a nervous tick.
|
|
|
|
|
I Agree with everyone else. Ever since they revamped the layout earlier this year, the easiest way to find something on MSDN is to use Google (and then probably use a non-MSDN link).
--------------
Henry
Manager, Software Engineering and Professional Angry Monkey Slayer
|
|
|
|
|
Well despite all the negative comments and Bob1000's suggestion that I was being sarcastic, I'm sorry to say that I find MSDN extremely easy to use. It usually finds the function I'm looking for on the first search, and the answer is generally within the first three hits. Only when searching for something really obscure is Google a better choice.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
I have the same problem, why there isn't something like Java API Documentation for Visual Studio?
|
|
|
|
|
Using it is so easy I can do it with my eyes closed . . . and that is my recommendation to you.
If that's not working out well, you can also turn off your monitor.
/xml> "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
| "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
| "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek dissappointment. If you are searching for perfection in yourself, then you seek failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
I installed Visual C++ 2010 Expression Edition in my notebook(its HP..with
Winodows 7)..after creating a sample Windows forms application..i am not
getting output Dialog box..apart from this the application build successfully..
later i tried with VC++ 2010 Professional(30 days Trail version)..
here also i faced the same issue...
is there any problem with OS..previously i worked on VC++ 6.0.
awaiting for the responce 
|
|
|
|
|
krishna.p.vuppala wrote: I installed Visual C++ 2010 Expression Edition in my notebook(its HP..with Winodows 7
I use the same configuration on a Dell laptop and it works fine. It is likely that something in your code is not correct. Can you show an extract of the code where the dialog should be displayed?
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
How are you trying to run it? If you are using keyboard shortcuts, there have been some changes since VC++. Did you click on the run icon or use F5? May be you are only building it not running it.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your valuable comments..
it's works well...but in VC++ 6.0 after building the solution
dialog will come automatically(i hope soo..because i worked on it
5 years back)...in Visual Studio 2010 prof.Edition i got it
after clicking START WITHOUT DEBUGGING..From DEBUG Menu(After
Successfully Building the Solution)
Please let me know any other possible solutions... 
please refer me some links, that describes the diff between VC++ 6.0 and VisualC++ 2010
|
|
|
|
|
krishna.p.vuppala wrote: please refer me some links, that describes the diff between VC++ 6.0 and VisualC++ 2010
There have been lots of changes since 6.0, see this[^] then google for what is new VC++ <insert version here>
|
|
|
|
|
In VC++ 6.0, you could compile or run the program. If you attempted to run the program, you could configure VC++6.0 to first compile anything out of date, then if successful, run the program. I believe this was the befault behavior. Could that have been how you were using it?
I believe VS2010 will have the same behaviors (we're only up to VS2008), and probably installs pre-configured that way. The shortcut keys will all have changed, so use the menus or the toolbar icons.
patbob
|
|
|
|
|
I am reworking a template library that is VC++6.0 compatible, but I do not have access to that compiler at the moment.
Will the following test successfully compile and run on VC++6.0?
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
template<typename CharT>
struct A
{
CharT ch;
A() : ch('A') {}
};
template<typename CharT, typename BaseT = A<CharT> >
struct B : public BaseT
{
B() { BaseT::ch = 'B'; }
};
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
A<char> a;
B<char> b;
cout << "a.ch = " << a.ch << endl;
cout << "b.ch = " << b.ch << endl;
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
Curious?
I have 3 class templates that all have a “has-a” relationship with a data storage class template and I am changing it to an “is-a” relationship. But I still want the user to be able specify the storage class, as there are legitimate reasons why they may want to.
The above method solves the problem, but I have never seen it used by anyone else.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
|
|
|
|
|
John R. Shaw wrote: Will the following test successfully compile...on VC++6.0?
Yes.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Man who follows car will be exhausted." - Confucius
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! 
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to customize the look of the CMFCPropertyGridFileProperty ?
In particular have that "browse" button always visible ?
Now, the button is only visible when the property gets the focus.
Not that important ...
Max.
Watched code never compiles.
|
|
|
|
|
You could extend the
virtual void CMFCPropertyGridProperty::OnDrawButton(CDC* pDC, CRect rect)
in your own class, derived from CMFCPropertyGridFileProperty
virtual void BeHappy() = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
Eugen Podsypalnikov wrote: You could extend the
Yeah, tried that, but the button is only visible when the property gets the focus and the underlying code checks the button rectangle (which is set/unset) depending on the focus (I think, still looking); and I would need to override a couple of methods in CMFCPropertyGridCtrl and I don't want to go there right now ( not enough time).
At least there is some source code to look at.
Thanks.
Watched code never compiles.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
How to delete the following?
irr::core::array<irr::gui::IGUIButton*> m_pPlayerBtn;
|
|
|
|
|
Depends a lot how the buttons in the array are allocated. Did you allocate the IGUIButton dynamically (with new) ? If yes, then you need to iterate over the array and delete each element separately.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I've not used
new . It's initialized like this:
for(u32 i = 0; i < 11;i++)
{
m_pPlayerBtn.push_back(pManager->getGUIEnvironment()->addButton(rect<s32>(uright_x, uright_y, lleft_x+75, lleft_y+5), 0, id_btn++, 0, 0));
uright_y+=25;
lleft_y+=25;
}
How to delete this m_pPlayerBtn?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
