|
Hi,
As we know, we can write a COM object with VB6, which can be refered in C#
.NET project. My question is, can I do so with VC6, other than VB6?
In VB6, it is easy to create a COM object: Wizard->ActiveX DLL.
But how to do this in VC6?
I created a DLL in VC6: MFC AppWizard -> Regular DLL with MFC static..(with
Automation checked). I refered it in my C# .NET prj, BUT any classes of it
can NOT be seen. Why?
Thank you in advance.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. It is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Is is possible to give an XP look to programs written for win 2000 through manifesting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salam...
I am making a splitter in my drawing SDI. I want that anything that i draw in one pane should also be drawn in other pane. I am using the same view class. But it does not draw in the other pane. If any one could help me in this regard. I am pasting the code in OnClientCreate(...) function.
BOOL CMainFrame::OnCreateClient(LPCREATESTRUCT lpcs, CCreateContext* pContext)
{
CRect rect;
GetClientRect(&rect);
m_splitter.CreateStatic(this,1,2);
m_splitter.CreateView(0,0,RUNTIME_CLASS
(CMyPaintBrushView),CSize(rect.Width()/2,rect.Height ()),pContext);
m_splitter.CreateView(0,1,RUNTIME_CLASS (CMyPaintBrushView),CSize(rect.Width()/2,rect.Height()),pContext);
return TRUE;
}
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all
I am working on internationalization of an application and tried using some of the functions that I could see as relevant in this context:
1)IsValidLocale() returns always true, with my 2nd argument being LCID_INSTALLED
2)Tried also using the pair EnumUILanguages() and the associated callback required, BUT could not find anywhere an example of what this call back should have inside it….
Any help will be appreciated
Thanks
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Michael
Thanks for that, but after following the link, could not search or ask any question becasue I am not a registerd member
Thanks again
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Alok
I am a registered user at CP, but I am not on that site that Michael pointed me to...
I visited your web site but could not find and answer to my question
Maybe you can be a bit more specific
Thanks
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all!
I have two network connections, both of which have the same destination address - the only thing that distinguishes them is the interface.
I also have two processes: process 1 may only use connection 1, and process 2 may only use connection 2.
Is there any way I can ensure that my outbound socket connects via a particular interface? I can't leave it to windows to decide which way to route the connections.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
int nVar = 0; //GlobalVar
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
int nTest1 = nVar;
int nVar = 1; //1stLevelLocalVar
nTest1 = nVar;
{
int nTest2 = ::nVar; // can acess global var, but how to access 1stLevelLocalVar
int nVar = 2; //n2ndLevelVar
nTest2 = nVar;
}
return 0;
}
|
|
|
|
|
Here's your chance to learn that global variables are crap.
Christian
I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
|
|
|
|
|
Don't do it. Never, ever reuse variable names like that. It just leads to all sorts of problems with accidentally using the wrong one.
Ryan "Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
|
|
|
|
|
i just do it for test purpose
|
|
|
|
|
Without the global :: specifier i believe the name alone will get the variable at the next outer level of scope.
e.g.
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
int t0, t1, t2;
int v = 0;
t0 = v;
{
t1 = v+1;
int v = t1;
{
t2 = v+1;
int v = t2;
}
}
return 0;
}
...cmk
Save the whales - collect the whole set
|
|
|
|
|
There is no syntax to say "one scope outward". You can only access the global scope with a plain ::
(And obviously, don't write real code like this, your teammates will thank you)
--Mike--
Visual C++ MVP 
LINKS~! Ericahist | 1ClickPicGrabber | CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ
Strange things are afoot at the U+004B U+20DD
|
|
|
|
|
Like everyone said, it's a bad idea to do this, in fact, the C# compiler doesn't compile code like yours.. But the answer to your questions is to just use nVar. That'll refer to the variable in the current (or enclosing) scope.
Regards
Senthil
_____________________________
My Blog | My Articles | WinMacro
|
|
|
|
|
hi, i have a class that is defined below:
class DVertex
{
public:
DVertex(MazeNode*)
{
this->node = n;
this->parent = NULL;
this->cumulativeCost = DBL_MAX;
}
// member functions
void update(MazeNode*, double); // update the parent and cost.
double getCCost() const { return cumulativeCost; } // required to relax the node.
MazeNode& getNode() const { return *node; } // required to identify the node.
MazeNode& getParent() const { return *parent; } // required for reverse lookup.
private:
MazeNode *node;
MazeNode *parent;
double cumulativeCost;
};
now the problem is when i tried to check the value of parent, i.e.
void main()
{
DVertex v;
if (v.getParent()==NULL)
; // do something
}
this will not work..
however if i change the class to return me MazeNode*, i.e.
MazeNode* getParent() const { return parent; }
then i can do that the check.
anyone know how to check if a reference is null?
and by the way, can tell me how to change the inline constructor to something shorter? i remember seeing something like Constructor(<type> par1):var1=par1; but can't remember the exact syntax.
thanks!!
|
|
|
|
|
A reference by definition can never be null. If your method could return NULL, then you'll need to return a pointer, not a reference.
ng kok chuan wrote:
can tell me how to change the inline constructor to something shorter?
What's wrong with what's there? Is concise, easy to understand, easy to maintain... Why make it harder?
Ryan "Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Binns wrote:
What's wrong with what's there? Is concise, easy to understand, easy to maintain... Why make it harder?
it's just for knowledge's sake... 
and thanks for clarifying the reference. so i'm not wrong when i changed everything to return pointers. now my code looks incomprehensible.. with both pointers and references... and i'm not going to go and standardize my code :p it's going to be fine as it stands.
|
|
|
|
|
To quench your thirst for knowledge
class Foo
{
int x,y;
public Foo(int _x, int _y) : x(_x), y(_y)
{}
}
And there are a few reasons to prefer this syntax to manually assigning values to members. For one, if you are initializing const or reference members, you'd have to use the above syntax. Two, using the above syntax is more efficient. If you use manual member assignment, there will be two calls (constructor and operator=) for every non-POD member, if you use the above syntax, there will be only one. For eg,
class Foo
{
string x;
public Foo(string y) : x(y) {}
}
There will be only constructor call to string with the above syntax, as the compiler calls string(const string &) for initializing x. If you do
class Foo
{
string x;
public Foo(string y)
{
x = y;
}
}
there will be two, string() and operator=() on string.
Regards
Senthil
_____________________________
My Blog | My Articles | WinMacro
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
