Yeah, its running on a remote machine, so I am doing an 'attach to process' in VS. pdbs are on the remote machine with the exes and dlls (best way to handle symbols for VS IMO). OS symbols are stored on the dev machie locally and off Microsofts symsrv.
But weird, just cant step into the code. Its not even complaining about lack of source code and offering the view assembler approach.
Cant really devote time to finding out why its not doing it, too much real work to do else where.
I dug a bit deeper and in fact the _base pointer instance is new'ed as the sub classes.
And now I saw that, I remember from about 12 years ago, that I have seen this before. Spent the last 10 years pretty much 100% in the kernel so I guess I got a bit rusty with the old C++ inheritance game.
Have you still not solved that issue? VS should step into virtual funcs - I do it every day, using VS 2003, and now that I switched it to VS2010 it works just as well.
Apart from your debugging a remote program - I haven't done that myself, the only thing I can think of is that your code does something different than you think it should. but without seeing the code we can't say. Can you extract the relavnt bits of your code (i. e. the declaration of the virtual func in the base class and how you overrode it in your derived class) and post it?
Great link! The explanations are even better than those found in Stroustrup's 'The C++ Programming Language' (that's what I checked, I was especially curious about :? and am somewhat disappointed that there isn't even a good reason against overloading it. I could think of a good use or two...)
The mentioned operators are used for only one purpose. Example in c++ the '.' operator used only for accessing member functions. (so there is no use of overloading '.' )
But the symbols (+,- and etc..) are used to add numbers and objects .
By default '+' operators are used for adding the numbers only and not the objects
(we are overloading the '+' operator to add the objects )
In c++ operator overloading takes the meaning as below
Operator Overloading: customize the operator to do other operations also(other than default operation).
The documentation states the mmioxxxx provides for unbuffered and buffered files.
The CFile supports only unbuffered files.
I am sending the data retrieved by wave API ( from buffer) to the mmioxxxx file.
So do I need mmioxxxx or not?
I am "doing" MFC in VC++
Any contructive help will be as always appreciated.
Since I got my wave API going I 'll tackle this mmioxxx.
I do not remember but I think I done CFile before so it should not be much of a struggle this time.
I think I picked this mmioxxxx because the guy I copied it from build the wave file header and really did not explained why it was build that way. Most of the time when I use someone else program like that ( poorly documented) I get burned in the long run!
For example the stuff I used for wave hardly checks the functions returns. I think that is not very good programming style.
I think I need to read up on buffered and unbuffered files too.
Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 18:00 Last Update: 24-Sep-23 18:38