|
markhaslehurst wrote: for most things, the compiler is not important.
hum, if you mean "most" for "standard C++", yeah, if is stands in the standard implementation of the compiler (knowing that nowadays, no compiler implements 100% of the C++ Standard, not even VC++2005).
but if you ask for an OWL question, i think that most people here won't know about it at all...
|
|
|
|
|
well i dunno what OWL is. im only a beginner, but all the advice i have received and all the articles that i have read on this site have worked using my compiler until this library problem, so dont think it really matters for the majority of coding.
|
|
|
|
|
OWL is the graphical library of borland (equivalent of MFC in Visual C++).
actually, if you work in console, yes, using cout/cin (or worse, C function like printf(), etc...) will work because there are part of the standard. standard mean that all C++ compiler provides them, and they work the same way.
if you need to use a specific library (gotoxy() for instance), it won't work on microsoft compiler.
|
|
|
|
|
oh right. well wasnt asking questions about it... jus said do you know if theres another way to convert the file...
but up until now, ive been doing fairly simple things like program control and serial port interface, so havent needed anything special like that... just standard header files.
im not using console cout/cin type applications... im generating proper win32 windows and that... in the same ways that all the articles on the net do... but i guess most of the common stuff is the same no matter what you use...
|
|
|
|
|
Sir
I want to know the when to Add a Virtual Funtion and Message Handler for a class in classview pane of editor.
generally we do it by right clicking on a particular class
we get a pop menu.please help me in knowing it better.
in what generic case we go for a virtual Function.
and what other case we opt for Message Handler.
thank u.
|
|
|
|
|
a virtual function is a functionnality of the C++ language.
events handlers are really dependant of the system they're targetted for...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
What is the difference between a process handle and a window handle? Is there any convertions between the two?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
A window handle (a HWND) identifies a window and a process handle (HANDLE) enables you to monitor/control a process. There is no direct meaningful conversion between them. That said writing code what enumerates all the windows handles in a given process is possible. It is also possible to go from a HWND to a HANDLE for the owning process as follows:
DWORD dwProcessID;
GetWindowThreadProcessId(hWnd, &dwProcessID);
HANDLE hProcessHandle = OpenProcess(PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, dwProcessID);
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
HWND is a Handle to a Window
Where as process handle is a handle to a process (Note: a process may or maynot have a window)
So Both are different things, the correct question will be
how can i get the process id if i have the HWND of one of its windows
GetWindowThreadProcessId gives the process id
to get the opposite (processid to window handle) you have to enumerate all the windows and compare the process id.
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. I do accept that a window handle is a handle to a window and a process handle is a handle to a process and not all the time a process can have a window. But, Internet Explorer has a window by default. If I am gonna launch IE from my application as a process I get the process handle for IE. At this point of time, will I be able to get the window handle of the new IE process launched or is there any methods that converts my process ID got(from createprocess functions) to a window handle.
|
|
|
|
|
any methods that converts my process ID got(from createprocess functions) to a window handle.
First of all don't use *convert*, second open Spy++ and open up IE then you will see that IE has lots windows, not just one window (toolbars,menus ...) so the question is which window's handle you want
what do you want to do anyway ?
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
As Monty v2.0 said, a mapping from a process to a HWND is a one to many mapping. Here's how you would go about doing it however:
BOOL CALLBACK EnumWindowsProc(HWND hwnd, LPARAM lParam)
{
DWORD dwProcessID;
GetWindowThreadProcessId(hwnd, &dwProcessID)
if ( dwProcessID == lParam )
{
{
return TRUE;
}
CloseHandle(pi.hThread);
WaitForInputIdle(pi.hProcess, INFINITE);
CloseHandle(pi.hProcess);
EnumWindows(&EnumWindowsProc, pi.dwProcessId);
I have not actually tested this code but the idea is sound.
Now that I've given this example here's some advice - DON'T USE IT (unless you have no choice)! You should look into controlling IE through OLE Automation.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I have my own application(EXE). My application has the ability to launch another process like calculator etc etc. Now, I create a new toolbar button and on click of that I launch Internet Explorer. It launches fine. Now my doubt is whether I can have the entire control of this new process(Internet Explorer) launched? Meaning that can I control the Internet Explorer the way I want.
Its a bit urgent. Please can anyone respond me at the earliest?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
There are many ways to control IE one them is BHO. Here[^] is a perfect example.
You can also Host an IE instance in you Dialog (using activex IE control)
There is also DDE[^] approach.
you have to decide what suits your need
Hope it helps
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the information.
But I just want to handle the control flow from IE to my application. That is I need to do certain tasks based on whether IE is clicked/my application is clicked.Say for example, I am launching IE as a process from my application. IE is currently active. Now, if I get back to my applicaton from this IE will I be able to detect the change in control from IE to my application.
|
|
|
|
|
Subramaniam s.V. wrote: But I just want to handle the control flow from IE to my application. That is I need to do certain tasks based on whether IE is clicked/my application is clicked.Say for example, I am launching IE as a process from my application. IE is currently active. Now, if I get back to my applicaton from this IE will I be able to detect the change in control from IE to my application.
That my friend didn't make sense
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I have a programming problem which require a great degree of parallel programming, but i not too sure about using multithreading, thus i made use of an alternate method which seem to work so far... I compile 3 different win32 applications A,B and C. Both A and B will output some values to 2 output files a and b using the fprintf method. C will access these 2 files a and b, and output a file c, which would then be read by B again to conduct some operations. I would like to ask:
1.are there any foreseeable problems which i do not know of for using this method ?
2.Would the 3 applications be running almost in parallel this method, or will there be a delay between each of them ? Is the delay significant if any ?
3.Would the multithreading method be better ? What are the advantages and disdvantages between the 2 ?
|
|
|
|
|
bad design dude !
why are you not sure about using threads, they are much easier to manage then 3 full blown applications.
How would an application know when to read a file?
What happens if one of the crashes (it can happen )
all in all the design doesn't give you a warm and fuzzy feeling
Stick with threads and pass data structures around don't use files, use Critical sections, Events and other such stuff to time the threads right, much better way IMHO.
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
For one i am not too sure about using threads...so far my experience with thread have been rather negative...i cant seem to find any good references around for multithreading.
The application doesnt need to know exactly when to read the file since it is constantly being updated by the 3 applications. Also, i am quite confident that they wouldnt crash...
hmm..but is will running 3 applications take up more resources as compared to threading a single one ?
|
|
|
|
|
BeakX wrote: i am quite confident that they wouldnt crash...
3 application accessing the same file and updating its contents i wouldn't be so sure but its your program if you feel confident go ahead.
but this was a great oppurtunity to learn multithreading cause if you do this for a living(or plan to) you would surely need to implement threads in future
just my 2 cents
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
Problems in multithreaded code only occur if both threads touch the same resource without synchronization - this applies equally to EXE's that share a resource, it's just that its harder to share such things a memory across processes. Assuming you're not using anything such as shared memory and given that you've divided the problem into 3 EXE's there's obviously not much in the way of shared resources - In this case you don't stand to lose much (if anything) by using three threads instead, but you gain efficiency as a thread is considerably more lightweight then a process.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if this is possible. I have a large vector of structs, each struct contains contains several arrays of strings. I need a way to store this vector to disc.
My first attempt was to store the data within Excel sheets since I have excel support added into my app anyway, but this is proving to be a little problematic. I first have to open each book and read in the data on each sheet which can be a lengthy process.
When the program starts the vector of structs is filled, on exit the user is then offered a chance to save any changes. Is there a faster/easier way to store this data?
|
|
|
|
|
you can try storing the vector in an XML file, its structured and easy to write and read.
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't serialize it, then you could use a chunk file...
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
