|
Mark,
Thanks for your suggestion but unfortunately that does not work either.
Any other idé?
Regards
Lars
|
|
|
|
|
program using MFC BUTTONS
PRA
|
|
|
|
|
wrote: program using MFC BUTTONS
ok
nave
|
|
|
|
|
Then we need to guess your problem?;)
|
|
|
|
|
WhiteSky wrote: hen we need to guess your problem?;)
yesh.. become astrologer 
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and you
|
|
|
|
|
ThatsAlok wrote: become astrologer
Where is he?;P
|
|
|
|
|
Your flux capacitor appears to be out of alignment.
"Approved Workmen Are Not Ashamed" - 2 Timothy 2:15
"Judge not by the eye but by the heart." - Native American Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Either that or she left it back in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
According to this[^] site, there's "about 207,000" possibilities for WTF your question is
I'm thinking there's more than that..
|
|
|
|
|
wrote: program using MFC BUTTONS
DONT DO THAT>>>>> NO BUDDY HELP YOU.. are you deaf??? or we
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and you
|
|
|
|
|
I'm creating a program that stores packets into an oracle DB. When I try to get a count of how many entries are in my 'packet' table I receive an "ORA-00911: invalid character" exception.
Oracle describes this error:
ORA-00911: invalid character
Cause:
identifiers may not start with any ASCII character other than letters and numbers. $#_ are also allowed after the first character. Identifiers enclosed by doublequotes may contain any character other than a doublequote. Alternative quotes (q'#...#') cannot use spaces, tabs, or carriage returns as delimiters. For all other contexts, consult the SQL Language Reference Manual.
And my code that causes the error....
{
String *cmdString = S"SELECT COUNT(*) AS rowcount FROM packet;";
OleDb::OleDbCommand *oracleCommand1 = new OleDb::OleDbCommand();
oracleCommand1->Connection = oracleConnection;
oracleCommand1->CommandText = cmdString;
oracleConnection->Open();
gPacketCount = Convert::ToInt64(oracleCommand1->ExecuteScalar());
}
Is the asterisk in 'COUNT(*)' causing my error? If so, is there another way to get a row count?
|
|
|
|
|
cpp_and_asm wrote: Is the asterisk in 'COUNT(*)' causing my error?
Not sure what is causing your error, but I doubt the asterisk isn't the problem...
|
|
|
|
|
It's not the semicolon is it?
|
|
|
|
|
 nope, Ive tried it without the semicolon already.
|
|
|
|
|
I rebooted my comp this morning and ran it without the semicolon again and it worked 
Thanks for the replys!
|
|
|
|
|
hi there,
Anyone know how to make a splitter of a custom control with 2 view to scroll together vertically? the custom control is CWnd base class.
Thanks for any help or replies
|
|
|
|
|
hi there.
Is it possible to scroll static text(in text properties, Client edge checked in the Extended Styles tab). However, it should not have a scroll bar. The text in the static text(with client edge style) will move up or down according to the scroll bar from a custom control with the based class of CWnd.
If not, are there any suggestion on how todo this?
|
|
|
|
|
did u try calling ScrollWindow() or sending the WS_VSCROLL / WS_HSCROLL messages to the window
nave
|
|
|
|
|
I found some runtime error in my solution
with the IDE: Visual Studio .Net 2003.
1st problem:
I inherited the STL class complex<_Ty>, and
add some members to the class. However,I found
the operator overloading didn't work well. I
follow the way <complex> did in the overloading
function:
return complex(x,y);
but the left side of the = lost many members.
and the builder would inevitably warn:
warning C4172: returning address of local variable or temporary<br />
'Complex.h(382) : while compiling class-template member function 'Complex<_Ty>::_Myt &Complex<_Ty>::operator *(const Complex<_Ty>::_Myt &)'<br />
with<br />
[<br />
_Ty=double<br />
]
Is there any suggestion? thanks!
2nd problem:
While debugging the code, I found SOME of the member
functions cannot be broke! but others CAN! and some
breakpoints would jump to the other functions while
debugging.
These break points would be marked with INFAMOUS white
question marks which said:
The breakpoint would not currently be hit. Invalid file line:353
I'd checked the configuration, it's set on debug mode.
Searching on the web but found no proper way.
Is there any suggestion? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
ytod wrote: warning C4172: returning address of local variable or temporary
you might have declared the operator overloaded funtion to return either the address od reference. Remove the reference or pointer in the return type of the function. If you paste the function here I will try to make it correct.
ytod wrote: While debugging the code, I found SOME of the member
functions cannot be broke! but others CAN!
the breakpoint cannot be put in some place where..
1. you have put a preprocessor switch so that, that part of code dosent get compiled and exists in the exe build
2. In an inline function
3. If control never reaches that point.
nave
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have some code that does (essentially) this:
...
char string[ 1024 ];
unsigned long length = 0;
strcpy( &string[ length ], ~arbitrary string 0~ );
length += strlen( &string[ length ] );
strcpy( &string[ length ], ~arbitrary string 1~ );
length += strlen( &string[ length ] );
...
strcpy( &string[ length ], ~arbitrary string n~ );
length += strlen( &string[ length ] );
...
This causes a 64-bit issue due to strlen returning size_t--64-bits on a 64-bit machine. There are two solutions:
solution 1 --
...
size_t length = 0;
...
solution 2 --
...
strcpy( &string[ length ], ~arbitrary string 0~ );
length += ( unsigned long )strlen( &string[ length ] );
...
In solution 1, 'length' becomes 64-bits and (presumably) more bits are being calculated.
In solution 2, 'length' remains 32-bits and (presumably) fewer bits are being calculated.
Assuming that this activity is happening at a high enough rate to matter, which approach would have better performance? Or does it not matter.
At present I do not have a 64-bit machine to test on.
-Obi Wan 2
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say best performance is with solution 1 in both 32 and 64 bit builds.
More bits aren't being calculated. size_t is 32 bits on 32-bit build and 64 bits on 64-bit
build. A 64=bit processor I presume will handle 64-bit integers just like a 32-bit processor
handles 32-bit integers. (*EDIT* ok technically more bits are being "calculated" but using
the same amount of machine instructions.)
In solution 2, on a 64-bit build, "length" stays 32-bit but all its uses are expecting 64-bit
so every time it's used there's a type conversion.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark:
Thanks.
It's true that in solution each use would cause a type conversion, but a trivial one. The processor could have a 32-bit load that forces the high order 32-bits to zero with no processing cost.
The more I think on it, the more I think there is no difference, but that solution 1 is more aesthetic.
-Obi Wan 2
|
|
|
|
|
Obi Wan 2 wrote: The more I think on it, the more I think there is no difference, but that solution 1 is more aesthetic.
I agree.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
