|
Why dont you edit your message if you want to modify?? 
Yes U Can ...If U Can ,Dream it , U can do it ...ICAN
|
|
|
|
|
subramanyeswari wrote: ...print a user control.
Please explain. 
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
This is my code to print the control
CWnd pWnd ;
HWND hParent,hChild1,hChild2,hChild3;
hParent=hChild1=hChild2=hChild3=NULL;
hParent = ::FindWindow("Wmak Class",NULL);
hChild1 = ::FindWindowEx(hParent,NULL,"ClientFrame",NULL);
hChild2 = ::FindWindowEx(hChild1,NULL,"WindowClient",NULL);
hChild3 = ::FindWindowEx(hChild2,NULL,"AppWindow",NULL);
pWnd.Attach(hChild3);
CDC pDC;
pDC.Attach(hDC);
// save the device context
pDC.SaveDC();
// place at the correct location
pDC.SetViewportOrg(rect.left, rect.top);
LRESULT res = pWnd.SendMessage(WM_PRINT, (WPARAM) pDC.GetSafeHdc(), PRF_CLIENT | PRF_CHILDREN | PRF_OWNED);
pWnd.Detach();
// restore the device context
pDC.RestoreDC(-1);
res is returning 1 but it is not printing. I missed something to code in the control. What is that. similar to DoSuperClassPaint for an activex control
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys!
I got a really strange behaviour on one customer machine I really cannot figure out - perhaps someone can help...
A C++ plugin DLL of mine loaded into a third party application is calling one of my .NET applications using ShellExecute. Several arguments are passed along in this call, the last one being an empty string. Basically the call looks like this:
ShellExecute(AfxGetMainWnd()->GetSafeHwnd(), NULL, "C:\\Program Files\\MyApp\\MyApp.exe", "/arg1 /arg2 /arg3 \"argument3\" /arg4 \"\"", "C:\\Program Files\\MyApp", SW_SHOW);
/arg1 and /arg2 are simple flags for my .NET app, whereas /arg3 and /arg4 require an additional parameter. The parameter for /arg4 is supposed to be an empty string for this call.
The exact same version of this DLL works fine on many other machines, but on this particular one my .NET application won't start because it claims that the parameter for /arg4 is missing! I'm logging the arguments my application is called with and can see that the last parameter is missing, although the empty string is hard-coded inside the DLL and it works on every other machine I've come across so far.
What can be the reason for ShellExecute silently swallowing the last parameter?
Thanks in advance for every idea about how to proceed here...
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
mav.northwind wrote: What can be the reason for ShellExecute silently swallowing the last parameter?
If it's empty, what's to swallow?
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
That's the minute, but essential difference between passing no argument or an empty string as argument...
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
But can the OS/shell differentiate between the two? For example, how would you execute that program from a command prompt?
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
app.exe /one /two vs.
app.exe /one /two ""
You can easily try it out. In the first case, argc is 2, in the second one it's 3.
It's very similar to what you have to do when one of the parameters contains white spaces, i.e. enclose the parameter in double quotes so that the shell can tell where one parameter ends and the next one begins.
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
So have you tried this with CreateProcess() instead?
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
No, I haven't tried anything that involves changing the DLL yet. It's rather complicated - I cannot just modify the DLL and redeploy.
But perhaps we found something: The administrator at the customer's site found some malware during an AV scan and will now reset the machine to their standard image.
So chances are some badly written malware was not passing along all the parameters in this case.
I've just got to keep my fingers crossed that it'll work again afterwards.
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
Hello dear friends,
I've an application which upload/download files from the server using the
webservices.I use the webservices for uploading and downloading the files.
The application works fine for the Office2003 file formats but for
Office2007 there is a problem.The application store the bytes comes from
the webservice in temp file in binary mode and uses shellexecute to open
the temp file.
For Office2007 file format when I download
the file from the server using webservice and storing the bytes in a file
in binary mode and when I use shellexecute to open the file, Office2007
word shows the messagebox that the file is currupted.
Can anybody tell me what goes wrong?
Thanks in advance to all of you.
ritz1234
|
|
|
|
|
hello everyone:
now i want to check out all the recognized file types in my computer. someone in CP said we could check the registry in HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT,however, i find there r many filetypes strange there (eg. .api, .cc, .htt and so on). i just want to read the filetypes we usually used such as .doc for microsoft word, .txt for notepad etc.
so what could i do now? anything is appreciated,thanks in advance!
|
|
|
|
|
steven_wong wrote: i just want to read the filetypes we usually used such as .doc for microsoft word, .txt for notepad etc.
Windows does not recognize one file association being any more 'used' than the next.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
One of my application I used MFC(actually CFile) to find the file size in easy way.
Now I thought to do it using standard C++. Here is my try.
size_t file_size;
ifstream in_file;
in_file.open("C:\\temo_file.txt", ios_base::in);
if(in_file.is_open())
{
file_size = in_file.seekg(-1, ios_base::end).tellg();
cout << file_size;
}
My question is, this code gives misses one byte. Can you guys give me any reason for it.
Thanks
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for links.
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover
|
|
|
|
|
CodingLover wrote: file_size = in_file.seekg(-1, ios_base::end).tellg();
should be
file_size = in_file.seekg(0, ios_base::end).tellg();
BTW you may also use GetFileSize [^].
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
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, so my attempt is not bad.
Is that GetFileName is standard C++. I'm confusing with those.
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover
|
|
|
|
|
CodingLover wrote: Is that GetFileName is standard C++. I'm confusing with those.
Nope. It is provided by Win32 API. If you just need to avoid MFC that's is fine, on the other hand, if you need to be stuck with C++ standard, then use ifstream.
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
|
|
|
|
|
Since I start to learn C++, confusing with this. Is that best way to work with standard C++? Sometimes I feel that use of MFC easy than standard C++, and other way too. Appreciate your explanation on it.
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover
|
|
|
|
|
Using C++ standard you write code that will execute also on different platforms (for instance Linux). On the other hand, if you need to exploit Windows not-portable functionalities (like the GUI components1) the you have to use Win32 API or MFC. GUI development with MFC is usually simpler.
(1) There are exceptions: for instance QT [^] is a framework that enable you to write portable GUI code.
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
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, as I said now I have mixture of them. If I want to learn standard C++ from where I should begin.
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover
|
|
|
|
|
What about "The C++ Programming Language" [^] book of Stroustrup?
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
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a lot.
I appreciate your help all the time...
CodingLover
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
