A simple hooking problem - C / C++ / MFC Discussion Boards

Re: Coloured button

User 98854-Oct-02 10:35

User 9885

4-Oct-02 10:35

cannot find them on msdn.microsoft.com. have a link? Frown | :(

modified 29-Aug-18 21:01pm.

Re: Coloured button

User 98854-Oct-02 10:37

User 9885

4-Oct-02 10:37

got it

modified 29-Aug-18 21:01pm.

Mixing MSVCRT and MSVCRTD

Aaron Schaefer4-Oct-02 9:36

Aaron Schaefer

4-Oct-02 9:36

Anybody know what's supposed to happen if you do this? I've got a project where it seems like both of these .dll's are present, and I seem to be getting a lot of heap warnings in the dbug build. I open up depends, and lo and behold, both of the runtimes are there.

I think I should be using the MSVCRTD alone, but it appears that the MSVCRT is getting loaded as a dependency of shell32.dll. I am calling SHGetFileInfo.

Is there a debug shell32.dll? If so, how do I get it instead of the release one?

Thanks,

Aaron

sorting CMenu items ?

Anonymous4-Oct-02 9:09

Anonymous

4-Oct-02 9:09

Is there an easy way to sort the contents of a CMenu in mfc ?

Thanks!

CPropertyPage and modeless dialog

Gero Gerber4-Oct-02 9:02

Gero Gerber

4-Oct-02 9:02

I have a class derived from CPropertyPage which contains a modeless dialog. On dialog creation I pass a client rect structure of the property page. I also handle OnSize() and OnShowWindow() in the property page class to resize/show/hide the dialog. But at startup this dialog is not correctly aligned in the property page. It is displayed beyond the property page's edges. If I move to another property page and then go back to the malicious one everything is fine. Anybode knows a solution for this....

The funny thing is that this bug happens only with Windows 98/ME - Windows 2000/XP is fine...

Gero

Re: I have the same problem in my program

lucy29-Oct-02 3:05

lucy

29-Oct-02 3:05

and I am using Windows 2000.

Anybody has any idea how to solve it? Thanks a lot!

Re: I found the solution

lucy29-Oct-02 3:38

lucy

29-Oct-02 3:38

The dialog is not properly aligned at the first time only, is because that the property sheet was moved after the first active property page was shown. This is the message handling sequence:

CMyPropertyPage::OnShowWindow()
{
    // align the modeless dialog
}
CMyView::OnInitialUpdate()
{
    // place the property sheet at the top left corner
    m_sheet.MoveWindow(&sheetRect, TRUE);
}

so the solution is: reshow the property page after the property sheet is moved to a correct position. My method is:

CMyView::OnInitialUpdate()
{
    // place the property sheet at the top left corner
    m_sheet.MoveWindow(&sheetRect, TRUE);

    m_sheet.GetActivePage()->SendMessage(WM_SHOWWINDOW, FALSE, 0);
    m_sheet.GetActivePage()->SendMessage(WM_SHOWWINDOW, TRUE, 0);
}

HTH.

A simple hooking problem

generic_user_id4-Oct-02 8:50

generic_user_id

4-Oct-02 8:50

I'm trying to hook up to another program, using SetWindowsHookEx.

I need to hook to a specific application (ie: calc.exe) so a global hook shouldn't be neccecary.

HHOOK hook = SetWindowsHookEx(WH_MOUSE,
                             (HOOKPROC) MouseHookProc,
		             AfxGetInstanceHandle(),               
                             tID // Thread ID of Calc.exe
                             );

SetWindowsHookEx returns 0, the hook is set succesfully. Yet, when I move with my mouse over the calc dialog, the calculator crashes.

I think I need to use the Process instance of calc.exe instead of the instance of the program that hooks to it. If that is the case, how can I get the HINSTANCE of a process?

If that's not the case, what am I doing wrong?

Thanks in advance and kind regards,

Griffith

Everything you say will be misquoted, ripped out of context and used against you.

Re: A simple hooking problem

Scott H. Settlemier4-Oct-02 10:22

Scott H. Settlemier

4-Oct-02 10:22

You gotta put the hook procedure in a dll that can be loaded by Calc.exe's process. Then pass SetWindowsHookEx the HINSTANCE for that dll as loaded into your process. (as well as the pointer to the hook procedure)

Re: A simple hooking problem

generic_user_id4-Oct-02 11:11

generic_user_id

4-Oct-02 11:11

Okay, thanks I'll try that then.

Cheers

Griffith

Everything you say will be misquoted, ripped out of context and used against you.

Re: A simple hooking problem

Joel Lucsy6-Oct-02 7:41

Joel Lucsy

6-Oct-02 7:41

A return of 0 means it didn't work. NULL = 0. Check the docs. As previously mentioned, the actual procedure needs to be in a dll.

Joel Lucsy (jjlucsy@concentric.net)

Re: A simple hooking problem

generic_user_id7-Oct-02 4:06

generic_user_id

7-Oct-02 4:06

My mistake, I meant to say that GetLastError() returned 0, just after I attempted to create the hook.

I thought I had to place the procedure in a DLL only for system-wide hooks, but it appears it's in order for all hooks outside of the calling process.

Griffith

Everything you say will be misquoted, ripped out of context and used against you.

class not accessible in class wizard...

nss4-Oct-02 8:40

nss

4-Oct-02 8:40

I added a cpp /.h file pair which has definitions of listcontrol derived class. I am supposed to associate a variable of this type with the listctrl on my view form. i.e. I should have the choice of making the variable either of type Clistctrl or Myclistctrl. In the sample project I can do that....both classes show up in CW. I included the .h file of the derived class in my view class. IN my project when I select the listctrl ID_LIST1 in CW, and try to associate it with a m_list, I can only make it of type Clistctrl, and not myCListCtrl. How do I get around this?

Thanks,
ns

Re: class not accessible in class wizard...

Carlos Antollini4-Oct-02 8:53

Carlos Antollini

4-Oct-02 8:53

When I have that problem I delete the clw file and then I call the classwizard. It will ask you the file that you want to add to it....

Regards

Carlos Antollini.
Sonork ID 100.10529 cantollini

wow! Thanks!

nss4-Oct-02 9:17

nss

4-Oct-02 9:17

That was great! I was thinking I'd have to mess with messagemaps etc...
Many thanks,
ns

retain focus on modeless dlg, once

brianwelsch4-Oct-02 8:33

brianwelsch

4-Oct-02 8:33

I have a modeless dialog that comes up before the main window (OnCreate()). when the Main Window comes up, my dialog loses focus. I want to be able regain focus initially to let the user view the data in the dialog, then let them do whatever(shut it down, hide, etc.)

BW
{insert witty/thought-provoking saying here}

Re: retain focus on modeless dlg, once

Anonymous4-Oct-02 11:06

Anonymous

4-Oct-02 11:06

You could create your modeless dialog in a different place like, OnInitDialog() for dialog app or at the end of CMainFrame::OnCreate(LPCREATESTRUCT lpCreateStruct) in a SDI or MDI. How are you creating your Modeless dialog?

I create mine like this..

/Display the Refresh Dialog Box
if (!::IsWindow(m_dMyModelessDlg.GetSafeHwnd()))
{
m_dMyModelessDlg.Create(IDD_MY_MODELESS, this);
m_dMyModelessDlg.ShowWindow(SW_SHOW);
}

Inline and optimisations

krisn4-Oct-02 8:28

krisn

4-Oct-02 8:28

I am optimising an application that relies on a utility function (two square a number) in a different source code file. In the particular case, the utility function is getting called 400 million times (which takes a while).

So essentially I have:

file1.cpp
  ..
  get_square(num)
  ..

file2.cpp
  double get_square(double a)
    {
    return a * a;
    }

When I compile and link this, get_square() is not made inline. I am using a header file to declare function in file2.c.

file2.h
  extern inline double get_square(double a);

Now the code still does not get inlined. If I move the function definition into the header file, then it is inlined.

Is this the correct way to do this? Should the function body be in the head file as well? What if the compiler does not decide to inline the code, won't I get problem on linking?

I understand how to use inline in source code files and class definitions, but how should it be used when I want to call functions in a different source code file?

Re: Inline and optimisations

alex.barylski4-Oct-02 10:52

alex.barylski

4-Oct-02 10:52

AFAIK either method should work under certain circumstances.

MSDN says:

The __forceinline keyword instructs the compiler to inline the function without performing any cost/benefit analysis.

If your using VC++ 6.0 you can specify whether inline should occur with:

Project->Settings->C/C++->Category->Optimizations->Inline function expansion

Check your build mode to make sure it's set to Any suitable for both debug and release.

I always use the C++ implicit inline method for trivial functions.

class myClass{
  int myInline(){ return 100; }
};

I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's gaurenteed to inline when declared and defined as above and you avoid un-needed inline keywords. Also I tried this a while back and came to this conclusion...You cannot under any circumstance inline a ctor() in debug.

You asked:
"Now the code still does not get inlined. If I move the function definition into the header file, then it is inlined."

So why not do it this way...? Smile | :)

Cheers!

"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr

Re: Inline and optimisations

Joe Woodbury7-Oct-02 21:18

Joe Woodbury

7-Oct-02 21:18

Hockey wrote:
I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's gaurenteed to inline when declared and defined as above and you avoid un-needed inline keywords

Actually inlining is never guaranteed unless you use __forceinline which is generally a bad idea. However, in practice VC++ always inlines trivial functions like Hockey illustrated. (I also agree with his suggest to set inlining to "Any Suitable", though I turn off inlining for debug since it can make debugging a real pain.

Incidentally, I'd implement your function as a MACRO.

Re: Inline and optimisations

l a u r e n4-Oct-02 11:14

l a u r e n

4-Oct-02 11:14

can i ask why u have a function call for something so trivial?
just curious

"... and so i said to him ... if it don't dance (or code) and you can't eat it either f**k it or throw it away"
biz stuff about me

Re: Inline and optimisations

alex.barylski4-Oct-02 14:51

alex.barylski

4-Oct-02 14:51

Is this not the purpose of inline mutators and accessors...?

Besides it's like using a MACRO with type checking and ZERO penalties. Syntactic sugar I thought...?

Cheers! Smile | :)

"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr

Re: Inline and optimisations

krisn6-Oct-02 23:21

krisn

6-Oct-02 23:21

Because the other way to do this is:

double a = some_complicated_result();
answer = a * a;

The new code is easier i.e.

answer = get_square(some_complicated_result());

A #define can't be used, as this will evaluate the argument twice.

kris

Re: Inline and optimisations

Mike Nordell4-Oct-02 23:04

Mike Nordell

4-Oct-02 23:04

For the compiler to inline a function it must (obviously) have access to the function definition. Move your get_square function into the header file.

Just for kicks you might also consider making it a template function, to work with any type you can multiply:

template <typename T>
T get_square(T v) { return v * v; }

Re: Inline and optimisations

krisn6-Oct-02 23:22

krisn

6-Oct-02 23:22

I though about doing this, but was unsure of the run time implications.

Are all templates sorted out at compile time? or do the require some run time checking?

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.