|
|
it happnes only in the release build, good in the debug build
|
|
|
|
|
|
See also here [^].
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
You've linked to the same article hosted at the author's home page.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This way he can read the article twice. That's good lecture anyway
|
|
|
|
|
You're right.
Anyway, ask George_George, repetita iuvant 
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
hehehehe
Greetings.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
“The First Rule of Program Optimization: Don't do it. The Second Rule of Program Optimization (for experts only!): Don't do it yet.” - Michael A. Jackson
|
|
|
|
|
it is crushing at this statement, pls advice
string abc,xyz;
ShellExecute(0, _T("open"), _T(abc.c_str()), _T(xyz.c_str()), 0,SW_SHOWNORMAL);
|
|
|
|
|
Why the strings are empty?
BTW You cannot use _T() macro that way.
What do you intend to do?
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
modified on Friday, April 4, 2008 10:00 AM
|
|
|
|
|
not strings are not empty, it executes the statment sucesfully and then gives
---------------------------
Navigator
---------------------------
A structured exception has occurred: Access violation
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
after clickinig ok it simply crushes
|
|
|
|
|
it crashes just at the } closing for the function
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Do you have any idea, how to set the focus on the NO button (by default will be on YES button) in a AfxMessageBox of type MB_YESNO??
Priya Sundar
modified on Friday, April 4, 2008 8:28 AM
|
|
|
|
|
They hide that info in the documentation:
The following message-box styles are available.
Message_Box Types
<snip>
Message-Box Modality
<snip>
Message-Box Icons
<snip>
Message-Box Default Buttons
MB_DEFBUTTON1 The first button is the default. Note that the first button is always the default unless MB_DEFBUTTON2 or MB_DEFBUTTON3 is specified.
MB_DEFBUTTON2 The second button is the default.
MB_DEFBUTTON3 The third button is the default.
Judy
|
|
|
|
|
JudyL_FL wrote: They hide that info in the documentation
Well played 
Mark Salsbery
Microsoft MVP - Visual C++
![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
AfxMessageBox(_T("foo"), MB_YESNO | MB_DEFBUTTON2);
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can i use dll buil in .Net 2005 in Smart device project i.e. Win CE?
|
|
|
|
|
Only if your DLL was built for Win CE.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
No, you can't. A dll is similar to an exe for that: it is compiled code. You can't 'execute' that code on another platform. The same is true for ActiveX controls.
EDIT: hmm, like Rajesh tsaid, of course if it was biult for WinCE, then it's ok (I understood the question differently).
|
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
In the book ATL Internals, here is the description for CComVariant. My questions,
--------------------
COM permits an object to hand out different binary values each time a client queries it for a specific interface pointer (with the exception of a query for the IUnknown interface). Therefore, two VARIANTs containing IDispatch pointers referencing the same object might not compare for equality.
--------------------
1.
I think it means even if the pointer binary values are different, they may still be pointed to the same object? Right?
I think it happens only in the situation of multiple inheritance, and in single inheritance, there is no such issue. Right?
2.
I think the above statement describes the following scenario, in multiple inheritance, suppose we have interface A inherits from IDispose, and interface B inherits from IDispose, and have inteface C inherits from both A and B.
The queryInterface for A and B from interface C will return different result.
thanks in advance,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, it has nothing to do with multiple inheritance, just the rules of COM that allow for transparent proxies and aggregation and all sorts of complex stuff. Each reference to an interface that a COM object hands out can be different because it might actually be refering to a different server side proxy. This doesn't really have much to do with VARIANTS and I don't think you need to worry about it. 
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Matthew,
Two more comments,
1.
Matthew Faithfull wrote: transparent proxies
I do not understand what do you mean? Do you mean retrieve the object instance directly compared retrieving the object instance by proxy?
2.
Matthew Faithfull wrote: aggregation
If an object instance is aggregated, it should only be queried from outer interface. I do not think for the same object instance, you can get two different interface pointer address? Any more description please?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
George_George wrote: Do you mean retrieve the object instance directly compared retrieving the object instance by proxy?
No I mean retrive the object instance directly compared to recieving a proxy for the object generated especially for you. ( This often happens with connection points )
George_George wrote: Any more description please?
There are endless permutations and complication within COM and many of the rules can be 'bent' to meet extremely strange configurations at the server end. Part of the point of COM is that you don't have to know or care, play it by the book from your end and the rest will either work or it won't. The reality can sometimes be more complex but usually only because somebody somewhere broke the rules.
I once retrofitted a large MFC/MDI multithreaded desktop application so that it could also be launched remotely as a DCOM server with no visble UI but fully functional. Had to rework virtually the entire MFC Doc/View startup process to make it work under both conditions but COM wise it was all within the rules and the middleware using it as a backend was none the wiser. So cool when it worked. 
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
