|
Yes I included the line
#pragma comment(linker,"/manifestdependency:\"type='win32' name='Microsoft.Windows.Common-Controls' "\
"version='6.0.0.0' processorArchitecture='*' publicKeyToken='6595b64144ccf1df' language='*'\"") and I am using VS2005 so that I dont change the manifest file. Eventhough the event is not working. Please advice.
P.S. Please tell me whether to add the ComCtl32.lib or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Naveen has answered (and closed) your query. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think the checking should be modified as follows
if(HICF_ENTERING == (pHotItem->dwFlags&HICF_ENTERING))
{
MessageBox("Mouse entered");
}
else if(HICF_LEAVING == (pHotItem->dwFlags&HICF_LEAVING))
{
MessageBox("Mouse leaved");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Naveen,
The event handler does not respond to the mouse over and mouse leave event. (I set a breakpoint in the event handler to check this). I think there must be some more things to do. Please advice.
|
|
|
|
|
Please check the below things..
1. _UNICODE is defined in your project settings( project should be unicode )
2. The window have the XP look and feel while running.
3. The entry in the message map is correct.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Naveen,
Now it is working. Thank you so much for your guidance. The problem is that the UNICODE is not set.
Now another issue, when I set the button as OWNERDRAW the event is not triggered. I want to change the bitmap for the button on both the mouse over and mouse leave events. Please advice.
|
|
|
|
|
I think in that case you have to use the TrackMouseEvent() function.
|
|
|
|
|
Getting Exception in My APP is MSMQ Service is restarted in middle.
Message text: The Queue Manager service has been restarted. The queue handle is stale and should be closed.
Then Application stops peeking message from MessageQueue.
Exception Point EndPeek():
System.Messaging.Message objMsg = objMQ.EndPeek(asyncResult.AsyncResult);
Thanks in Advance
-@SuDhIrKuMaR@-
modified on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:22 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there!
I'm a graduated students majored in Pattern Recognition and I've been
working on this GetRenderHwnd for a few days, I was just wondering
that can i or can i not use this to save color images from GE or store
it in a matrix or something like that, so that I can calcualte and
abstract vessels or vehicles, etc, and then add the processed image to
the GE window as a seperate layer. But it comes to me now to be a
completely pointless effort.
So, is there anyone who have done this, or be familiar with this,
please reply RSVP, or contact me in baodongpo@gmail.com, TKS!
Work already done:
1. Using GetRenderHwnd to obtain the image region and add it in my
App;
2. Starting & closing GE by my third party App;
PS: in VC++ 6.0 or visual C++ 2005 environment, C# also acceptable!
TKS again!
modified on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 5:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please make the font a little bigger; I'm having trouble reading it.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
My fault, sorry about that!
|
|
|
|
|
Oh! You've been voted down for saying that? You have a real fan Steve. 
|
|
|
|
|
Um,okay, cos I'm knew here, and I haven't got used to the rules here...
So, sorry for bothering U and please forgive my rudeness.
|
|
|
|
|
That's fine and welcome to the community.
Hint: You can edit the ugly looking post by clicking on the edit link at the bottom right of the same post.
|
|
|
|
|
Shouting will not help you.
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I'm not quite catch U...
|
|
|
|
|
Using a bigger (or bolder) font than usual is called shouting and it's quite noisy.
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Um,okay, here is the reason:
Cos I'm knew here, and I haven't got used to the rules here...
So, sorry for bothering. All I want is a little piece of advice.
TKS, though.
best,
Blade
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: Shouting will not help you.
Unless you're drowning into the sea.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I'm drowning in a ocean of bytes, right now.
The (in)famous thread hijacker.
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
Two questions after readnig this article,
http://www.microsoft.com/msj/0298/hood0298.aspx
1.
why using LEA to do multiplication is faster than using MUL?
"Using "LEA EAX,[EAX*4+EAX]" turns out to be faster than the MUL instruction."
2.
"The TEB's linear address can be found at offset 0x18 in the TEB." -- what means linear address? Something like array, which elements are put next to each other? What means non-linear address?
thanks in advance,
George
|
|
|
|
|
George_George wrote: why using LEA to do multiplication is faster than using MUL?
"Using "LEA EAX,[EAX*4+EAX]" turns out to be faster than the MUL instruction."
lea seems to be an addressing instruction, which means it probably must execute in a single cycle and therefore would surely be faster than mul. On the other side, because it is an addressing instruction, think if you will be able to multiply very large numbers this way. There must be surely limitations on that. mul can work with large numbers also.
Thanks for the question, the search for an answer got me an interesting read.
Link: Wikibooks->Reverse Engineering->CodeTransformations->Common instruction substitutions[^]
Warning: I'm not a full time assembly programmer and I may not be accurate.
My assumptions: An X86 Processor, pentium class.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Rajesh!
1.
"it probably must execute in a single cycle and therefore would surely be faster than mul" -- do you have any documents to support this statement? Where to look for documents for cycles needed for a specific instruction (e.g. LEA and MUL)?
2.
Any ideas to my question #2?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
George_George wrote: "it probably must execute in a single cycle and therefore would surely be faster than mul" -- do you have any documents to support this statement?
With the LEA instruction, the x86 processor can now perform a 3-number add, with something like a C expression "a = b + c + 10;" translating into EAX = EBX+ECX+10 and being coded into one instruction:
LEA EAX,[EBX+ECX+10]
Notice that no memory is actually referenced. LEA is used merely to calculate values by performing the addition of a base register (EBX) with an index register (ECX) with some constant displacement (10). This is what the address generation unit (AGU) does, allowing the processor to quickly calculate addresses of array elements, screen pixel locations, and do some basic arithmetic in one clock cycle. Source: http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_1.htm[^]
Refer to pages 6 & 7 in this PDF (Pentium: Not the same old song)[^]. This too supports my earlier statement.
Also, read "Handy info on speeding up integer instructions" in this page[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
