|
I'm not, I can even give you the link to my repository so you can see the code (I haven't uploaded the new code, that one is old and gay ahah).
Repo is here: https://bitbucket.org/ixjf/vice-city-orange/overview[^]
I'll upload the new code ASAP, I know this code doesn't show you much, but I'll keep adding new code and you'll see.
As for the DEP, I think it's quite painful to have to disable DEP for the program, even though the user should know it needs that, and I know some softwares disabled DEP automatically (e.g. MTA:SA (another MP)) and I would like to know how could I do it (perhaps I could leave a message to the user saying DEP will be disabled for the software because..?)
|
|
|
|
|
ixjf wrote: s for the DEP, I think it's quite painful to have to disable DEP for the program, even though the user should know it needs that, and I know some softwares disabled DEP automatically (e.g. MTA:SA (another MP)) and I would like to know how could I do it (perhaps I could leave a message to the user saying DEP will be disabled for the software because..?)
better leave choice to user then you doing for them. also this will reduce complexity in your program
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You
|
|
|
|
|
ixjf wrote: I think it's quite painful to have to disable DEP for the program
and i think it's pretty sh*tty that a program would try to do that without telling me.
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever, it's your opinion.
Anyway, let's leave that question aside. Can somebody answer my 1st question?
|
|
|
|
|
Better compiler decide for the assembly code then you! , though performance wise direct assembly code is good, however it make program difficult to understand, if some other user is working on that
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You
|
|
|
|
|
I doubt you will get much help from CP users either.
Disabling DEP, either globally or on individual applications, has to be done by the end user.
|
|
|
|
|
ixjf wrote: 1. Is it better to use Assembly to call a pointer returned by
Shouldn't matter.
ixjf wrote: Can that be made in C++ or do the users have to manually disable it?
Best as I can tell based on what you say you are doing the answer to that shouldn't matter, but another thread said that the user must allow it.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, thanks for answering 
|
|
|
|
|
I need to know whether wide characters can be inserted directly into a sqlite3 database...i need some examples of the same..plz help me
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sir i have tried them but i'm not getting any idea...also my doubt is that whether the insert query only satisfies string variables?
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
I am using OnShowWindow() in CDialogs to do somethings when a dialog become visible after it was hidden.
I want to do the same thing for a property page and then calling the function OnShowWindow() doesn't do anyhing, because this function doesn't get called when the property page becomes visible after it was hidden.
I can use OnPaint() and that works fine. But i want to avoid using OnPaint() as that get called for so many reasons.
Where as OnShowWindow() is exclusive when a window is displayed after it was initially hidden.
So is there a different function i can use in CPropertyPage when it becomes visible?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This function get's called only when the Propertypage is displayed, like while navigating through the tabs.
I want it to be called when i go from ShowWindow(false) to ShowWindow(true)
i.e., when the property page is displayed after it was hidden. And this function doesn't get called in that scenario.
And you said override this, can you explain how to do that? Will that work for my scenario?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not completely clear of your requirement, but I guess my earlier solution should work for you.
What I mean by override is to create a new class that derives from CPropertyPage, write the method OnSetActive in this class and use this class to create the property pages.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys. I like to make a parser for my own programming language in c++.can anybody help me. Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
A programming language requires more than just a 'parser'.
If you are serious then you should buy the Dragon book. You might want to look into lexx and yacc as well (there are books for those.)
If you just want to mess around then code it. If you get serious then the first time experience will provide a constrast for later work.
Other than that you define the syntax before you start coding.
|
|
|
|
|
You might write yourself from scratch or use Boost.Spirit[^] (or, if you prefer a C-like approach, the classical tools Flex[^] and Bison[^]).
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello
I have a c#.net project which I need to incorporate into c++ project. Preferably compile it as a static library and link it in C++ project.
If this is possible please guide me how to go ahead with this. I came across this link but I found it difficult to understand the procedure. Secondly my application is a desktop based and not client server based. Please learned people help me.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hrishtech wrote: Preferably compile it as a static library and link it in C++ project
Why?
It is probably easier to do the following
1. Create a C# executable
2. Provide a communications idiom which is either file based, stdio based or socket based.
3. Create your C++ code such that it runs the C# exe and then usse 2 to talk to it.
The benefit of the above is that it easier to code and debug.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Provide a communications idiom which is either file based, stdio based or socket based.
being a IPC guy, I will not support this, since all the above mentioned method has its on shortcomings!. it better to use COM instead if you want synchronous communication. though you can achieve same with mentioned technique, however you have to rely on synchronous objects etc.
Recommended technique is already mentioned by SuperMan . however it depend on your project demand. what they actually want. since for IPC technique you have create framework in both executable to send and receive data, constantly watch on executables running status etc etc
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You
|
|
|
|
|
ThatsAlok wrote: it better to use COM instead if you want synchronous communication.
The stdio and sockets specifically support synchronous communications. Or asynchronous.
Pretty sure one can do asynchronous with COM as well, so that has nothing to do with why COM would be a better choice.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
