|
Hi
Is there a way of setting the height of vertical scroll bar in a
Combo box? i.e, dropdown height?
i.e., even if there's only one item in the Combo, is
it possible to set the height of vertical scroll bar?
What i have seen is, if there's only one item, the vertical scroll bar
is very small or not at all scrolable. I would like to set it a little
longer so that its scrollable.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
dipuks wrote: What i have seen is, if there's only one item, the vertical scroll bar
is very small or not at all scrolable. I would like to set it a little
longer so that its scrollable.
What's the point in enabling the scroll if there's only one item? 
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Your question is not really clear because if there is only one item in the dropdown area, the vertical scrollbar is not displayed. You probably mean that you have several items available in the dropdown but only one is visible at a time ? And you would like to increase that so that multiple items are visible at the same time right ?
Well, you can correct that through the resource editor: when you select the combo box, click on the part where the arrow is situated, this will let you adjust the height of the dropdown area, and not the size of the control itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Cedric,
If there are multiple items, it does show a longer vertical scroll bar and thats not the problem.
The problem is when there's only 1 item. At that time, the default Windows thing sets the vertical scroll bar height to a set length so that the one item is visible.
And this works perfect, and the user can always use the mouse pointer to select.
But the issue that am facing is, the application am using will take input from a touch screen. So when using touch screen the smaller vertical scroll bar is an issue.
Hope you undertand the issue.
Thats the reason why i need a longer vertical scroll bar.
Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if there is only one item in your combo box, there's no scrollbar. Why would you need a scrollbar, there's nothing to scroll.
Did you understand my reply at least ? Is that what you were looking for of not ? Did you try it ?
|
|
|
|
|
Ok i read your last reply.
Ok so here's the trick......
the combo box will have technically 2 items, of which the 1st will be a empty item and then a string item.
The reason why the 1st one is an empty item is, because thats the default one. So by default the application will not have any selection in the combo unless user makes a selection.
So basically there are 2 items and the vertical scroll bar as of now is very very small and its difficult to do a touch screen scroll, even though it works fine with mouse.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, did you try what I suggested ? Increasing the size of the dropdown area ?
By default only one item is visible at a time but you have to increase the height of the dropdown area in order to make multiple elements visible (which will of course also increase the height of the scrollbar if any).
You really should try the suggestions that are given to you before replying...
|
|
|
|
|
Once there are 2 defines ONE and TWO available I'd like to test defenition of the both of them to compile the code.
The below presented code does not allow to include the code between #if and #endif lines.
#define ONE
#define TWO
#if defined ONE && TWO
#endif
Чесноков
|
|
|
|
|
there are at least two ways to get it:
#if defined(ONE)
#if defined(TWO)
...
#endif
#endif
#if defined(ONE) && defined(TWO)
...
#endif
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
|
|
|
|
|
Many thanks, I was looking for single line #if with 2 defined
Чесноков
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
i am using Coledatetime class to find out current time can anyone please tell me that how to get difference between two time values.
Thanks A Ton
Ash_VCPP
walking over water is just knowing where the stones are.....
|
|
|
|
|
There is the COleDateTimeSpan class for that, see the MSDN example: "Elapsed Time: Automation Classes".
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
hii
Here I give my header file and .c file
/* main.h*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
struct linked_list{
int data;
struct linked_list *next;
};
typedef struct linked_list node_t;
void display (void);
node_t *root = 0;
----------------------------------------------------------------------
/* display.c */
#include "./../inc/main.h"
extern node_t *root;
void display ( )
{
node_t *temp = root;
while (temp -> next != root)
printf(" %d", temp->data);
}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
while compiling it gives this error
qs2/src/display.c:8: multiple definition of `root'
obj/create.o:/qs2/src/create.c:6: first defined here
obj/display.o: In function `display':
I think this error reltes to node_t *root = 0; ,extern node_t *root;
but I dont know how to clear it ...???
seeking help ...!!
Thnaking you
|
|
|
|
|
krish_kumar wrote: node_t *root = 0;
You must NOT initialize the global variable inside the header (.h) file, change it to:
node_t *root;
Then inside just one source (.c) file (e.g. create.c) initialize it this way:
node_t *root = 0;
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
If root is already declared inside the main.h file and that header is included in the display.c, then why the extern node_t *root; is declared in display.c? I think you can remove extern node_t *root; from display.c
|
|
|
|
|
That (probably) will not solve his problem, since (apparently) the header file is included both by display.c and create.c (incidentally this shows why you should never define a variable inside a header file).
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is better not to declare variable inside the headers.
I was pointing out, when the header is included in the c file, it become a single translation unit. So, the unit already has the variable. Then there is no extern is required.
|
|
|
|
|
Rejeesh.T.S wrote: Yes, it is better not to declare variable inside the headers.
I think you are confusing declaring with defining.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Man who follows car will be exhausted." - Confucius
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for correcting. I would have mentioned "defining".
|
|
|
|
|
You have it backwards.
Your extern node_t *root; belongs in your .h file. It declares to anyone that includes it that there is such a variable that is created someplace and can be used.
Your node_t *root = 0; belongs in exactly one .c file and no .h file. It defines (creates) the variable. You only do this once. If you put this in a header file, than each .c file that uses that header would create a separate variable of that name. Those multiple variables of the same name which are globally visible and accessible would conflict with each other, hence the error multiple definition of `root'
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Guys i have a member function and a variable .. while accessing member function can we have access the variable also....
vikas da
|
|
|
|
|
 Can you show with some sample code what you are trying to do. I really didn't get your question.
|
|
|
|
|
tasumisra wrote: Hi Guys i have a member function and a variable .. while accessing member function can we have access the variable also....
If you have also a C++ book, please read it. 
On the serious side: read the f#*?in' book!
There are some rules about information hiding in C++, and what you said doesn't help us answering the question.
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
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
If you couldn't... you wouldn't be able to use Get/Set functions (a.k.a = accessing a function that access the variable)
If that is not the answer you expected, then ask something a bit quite more concrete
Regards.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
