|
Here's some more info: Using the Multiple Document Interface[^]
As you can see in the Window Procedure sections, the MDI windows use different default window
procs so they can/will behave differently than normal parent/child windows.
Mark
"Great job, team. Head back to base for debriefing and cocktails."
(Spottswoode "Team America")
|
|
|
|
|
You could do something like:
BOOL CModelessDlg::OnInitDialog()
{
CDialog::OnInitDialog();
CRect rc;
GetWindowRect(rc);
m_lWidth = rc.Width();
m_lHeight = rc.Height();
AfxGetMainWnd()->GetWindowRect(m_rcParent);
return TRUE;
}
void CModelessDlg::OnMoving(UINT fwSide, LPRECT pRect)
{
CDialog::OnMoving(fwSide, pRect);
pRect->left = min(pRect->left, m_rcParent.right - m_lWidth);
pRect->left = max(pRect->left, m_rcParent.left);
pRect->top = min(pRect->top, m_rcParent.bottom - m_lHeight);
pRect->top = max(pRect->top, m_rcParent.top);
pRect->right = min(pRect->right, m_rcParent.right);
pRect->right = max(pRect->right, m_rcParent.left + m_lWidth);
pRect->bottom = min(pRect->bottom, m_rcParent.bottom);
pRect->bottom = max(pRect->bottom, m_rcParent.top + m_lHeight);
}It works regardless of whether WS_POPUP or WS_CHILD is used. A parent can be specified or not.
"Approved Workmen Are Not Ashamed" - 2 Timothy 2:15
"Judge not by the eye but by the heart." - Native American Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
after playing with some LockWindowUpdate / UnlockWindowUpdate and SetRedraw(FALSE) / SetRedraw()
i have a problem with a view, a grid on this view disappears after drawing.
I removed all LockWindowUpdates,Unlock,SetRedraws and the problem is still there.
I added a this->RedrawWindow(); at the end of the initialisation but this line
erases the hole view,the grid and all other components ( it will be redrawn if the MainForm will be minimized/restored)
It seems as the Invalidations are working inverted 
big thanks in advance
-- modified at 7:55 Tuesday 20th March, 2007
I removed the line where i add the row to the grid and all is ok.
I re-insert the line and the Grid becomes invisible(not drawn)
But i have nothing changed at the grid, at the moment i have so strange problems 
The same with a class which i allocate in a thread and delete at the end of the function.
If i set 0 to a variable, the debugheap is corrupted at the destruction of the element.
if i dont set a value to the variable, i don't get an error...
|
|
|
|
|
I resolved the problem partially.
I put a Grid->RedrawWindow(NULL, NULL, RDW_INVALIDATE | RDW_UPDATENOW | RDW_ERASE | RDW_FRAME);
into the EraseBackground Handler.
But it's not the reason of the problem.
If i put the view directly into a frame( not into a TabWnd of another view ) it works also without errors.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Is it safe to use:
CDC memDC;
memDC.CreateCompatibleDC(pDC);
CBitmap *m_pOld = memDC.SelectObject(&some_bitmap1);
memDC.SelectObject(&some_bitmap2);
memDC.SelectObject(&some_bitmap3);
memDC.SelectObject(&some_bitmap4);
....
memDC.SelectObject(m_pOld);
memDC.DeleteDC;
or I should use SelectObject(m_pOld)/DeleteDC() after each SelectObject(&some_bitmapX)??
|
|
|
|
|
PatrykDabrowski wrote: Is it safe to use:[...]
Yes.
PatrykDabrowski wrote: or I should use SelectObject(m_pOld)/DeleteDC() after each SelectObject(&some_bitmapX)??
No.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
No it is not safe to use.It will cause memory leak in your application.
I think,II Option is better one.Use SelectObject(m_pOld)/DeleteDC() after each SelectObject(&some_bitmapX)??
priyank
|
|
|
|
|
I have already tried both versions. None of them reports memory leaks in VS2003 in Debug mode. But maybe those resources are not monitored by VS... That's why I'm askng
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
pri_skit wrote: No it is not safe to use
Its safe.. its nothing to do with leaks (if we delete the selected objects)
or simply we can do like this,
CDC dc;
dc.SaveDC();
dc.RestoreDC( -1 );
No need to worry about the old objects..
Do your Duty and Don't expect the Result
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I delete some_bitmapX objects (when exiting the app as they are 'global').
What I care about is:
1) Performance
2) Avoid memory/resource leaks.
Is CDC::CreateCompatibleDC()/DeleteDC() slower comparing to CDC::SaveDC()/RestoreDC()??
Thanks for help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: Please revise the order of your list
 so true !
|
|
|
|
|
I should put 1) && 2)...in fact as long as I dont have leaks, I care more about performance So the order is fine
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have written "as long as I dont have leaks, I care more about performance ";)...so my priority is to avoid memory leaks and then I optimize my code.
I assume that both solutions don't cause leaks so I would like to choose faster one. (I mean CDC::CreateCompatibleDC()/DeleteDC against CDC::SaveCD()/RestoreDC() )
|
|
|
|
|
PatrykDabrowski wrote: I have written "as long as I dont have leaks, I care more about performance ";)...so my priority is to avoid memory leaks and then I optimize my code.
ok for me then 
|
|
|
|
|
PatrykDabrowski wrote: I delete some_bitmapX objects (when exiting the app as they are 'global').
If you are creating those object once and deleting at the end, then no problem.
PatrykDabrowski wrote: CreateCompatibleDC()/DeleteDC() slower comparing to CDC::SaveDC()/RestoreDC()??
These two set of APIs are different from each other.
That is, after creating a compatible DC, you have select the needed objects into the DC. At last the original object belong to the DC have to be selected (the object returned, at the first select object, note this appicable for that specific type of object).
DelectDC will delete the DC that you created.
But the SaveDC and RestoreDC is for making the DC to its original state, you need not worry about reselecting the original objects. see below;
CDC dc; dc.CreateCompatibleDC(..);
dc.SaveDC();
dc.SelectObject(bitmap1);
dc.SelectObject(bitmap2);
dc.RestoreDC( -1 );
dc.DeleteDC();
By doing so, you need not have to maintain the old objects returned.
Do your Duty and Don't expect the Result
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programm3r wrote: Please contact the application's support team for more information
so what ! haven't you ??? 
BTW, what a perfect situation for using a breakpoint, isn't it ?! 
|
|
|
|
|
toxcct wrote: so what ! haven't you ???
I wrote the application. You tell me who I must call ??
toxcct wrote: BTW, what a perfect situation for using a breakpoint, isn't it ?!
I know where it happens, but a breakpoint doesn't tell me what the problem was after the specific funtion call. After the error occured, does it?
The only programmers that are better than C programmers are those who code in 1's and 0's.....
Programm3rBronze
My Blog: ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
Programm3r wrote: I wrote the application. You tell me who I must call ??
i was kidding you with the message Windows returned
Programm3r wrote: I know where it happens, but a breakpoint doesn't tell me what the problem was after the specific funtion call. After the error occured, does it?
putting a breakpoint won't tell you what's the problem, but it will put you highly on the way.
do you know using the watch window ? you can inspect the content of your variables at a time, watching if the are correctly set... THIS can help you guessing what's wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
toxcct wrote: i was kidding you with the message Windows returned
Sorry my bad ... 
toxcct wrote: do you know using the watch window ?
Yes. I'll try it.
Thank you very much toxcct.
The only programmers that are better than C programmers are those who code in 1's and 0's.....
Programm3rBronze
My Blog: ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
What call stack says to you ?
|
|
|
|
|
prasad_som wrote: What call stack says to you ?
Just before the error:
> Win32ClibRFC.exe!CClibRFC32::rfcCall(char * szUname=0x00417960, char * szTag=0x00417968, char * lpFromDate=0x0041796c, char * lpToDate=0x0041797c, char * szDesc=0x0041798c) Line 262 C++
Win32ClibRFC.exe!wmain(int argc=1, wchar_t * * argv=0x009c5870) Line 281 C++
Win32ClibRFC.exe!__tmainCRTStartup() Line 583 + 0x19 bytes C
Win32ClibRFC.exe!wmainCRTStartup() Line 403 C
But afterwards ... nothing
The only programmers that are better than C programmers are those who code in 1's and 0's.....
Programm3rBronze
My Blog: ^_^
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
