C / C++ / MFC

FirstPrevNext

Re: Using _beginthreadex in an MFC dll Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 15:16 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 15:16  Tim This is serious stuff. This means we cannot use MFC functions and CRT functions together in any thread. I mean to use CRT functions safely it is always advised to use _beginthreadex. Now you say MFC wont go along with that. This is a bad situation Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: Using _beginthreadex in an MFC dll Michael Dunn18-Jan-02 16:41 Michael Dunn 18-Jan-02 16:41  Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: This means we cannot use MFC functions and CRT functions together in any thread. No, that's incorrect. Look at the source for CWinThread::CreateThread() and you'll see that it calls _beginthreadex(). The restriction on how you create the thread ensures that MFC is correctly initialized. Since MFC uses the CRT, MFC handles initializing the CRT itself. --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Hey, you wanna go to the Espresso Pump and get sugared up on mochas?"  -- Willow Rosenberg Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan. Re: Using _beginthreadex in an MFC dll Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 16:50 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 16:50  Okay, MIke. But here is one more question! Say I am writing a console based app [NT service] that uses MFC. Now can I use _beginthreadex to start my worker threads and expect to use MFC functions safely? Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: Using _beginthreadex in an MFC dll Michael Dunn18-Jan-02 17:18 Michael Dunn 18-Jan-02 17:18  Use AfxBeginThread() to start them. --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Hey, you wanna go to the Espresso Pump and get sugared up on mochas?"  -- Willow Rosenberg Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan. Re: Using _beginthreadex in an MFC dll Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 17:43 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 17:43  Thanks! Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut CListView AlexEg18-Jan-02 5:26 AlexEg 18-Jan-02 5:26  Hallo, can anybody help me with CListView class? 1) I can use only one column with width on all view window. Problem is with scroll bar. I get the size of scroll bar in CListView::InitDialog using GetListCtrl().GetScrollBarCtrl()->GetWindowRect(). But at this time is not scroll bar known. So what is the good way? 2) I can't select any row in list control. I filter callbacks on mouse click but how about keyboard click? 3) I can't show header. I used GetListCtrl().SetExtendedStyle(LVS_NOCOLUMNHEADER); in the CListView::InitDialog but it has no effect. Thanks, Alex. Alex Re: CListView Matt Newman18-Jan-02 8:02 Matt Newman 18-Jan-02 8:02  I have been looking at this to I find this very annoying. If you don't have a header (unless you have more that one column or it won't work) don't insert a column and the only what it should scroll is if the contents is wider that the view. Hopefully I was helpful or somebody has a better suggestion. - Matt Newman - Matt Newman -Sonork ID: 100.11179:BestSnowman Re: CListView Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 8:15 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 8:15  1) I'm not sure I understood your question, but seems what you're after is calculating the width of the view minus the width of the vertical scrollbar so that you can adjust the column to its maximum extent without the horizontal scrollbar appearing. Am i right? If so, ::GetSystemMetrics(SM_CXVSCROLL) might be what you're looking for. 2) I don't quite understand your question. Sorry. 3) LVS_NOCOLUMNHEADER is not an extended style. Use GetListCtrl().ModifyStyle(0,LVS_NOCOLUMNHEADER,TRUE) instead. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo avoiding multiple instances Mark Donkers18-Jan-02 4:55 Mark Donkers 18-Jan-02 4:55  I'm using the code from following posting to avoid running multiple instances of my app. I'm running an MFC SDI application. Where is the ideal location to create and release the mutex? //======================================================= Subject: Re: Avoiding multiple instances of an application. Sender: John Uhlenbrock Date: 15:53 7 Aug '01 I've seen a few examples to avoid multiple instances of an application. In fact, there are a few of them here on code project. However, they all seem like a lot of code, when there is an easy solution like: HANDLE hMutex = CreateMutex( NULL, TRUE, "MVD Load Utility" ); if( (hMutex == NULL) || (GetLastError() == ERROR_ALREADY_EXISTS) ) { AfxMessageBox( "Two copies of this program are not allowed to run at the same time." ); return FALSE; } Marcus Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir your blood to action. Make big plans, aim high in work and hope -- Daniel Burnham Re: avoiding multiple instances Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 4:57 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 4:57  CWinApp::InitInstance Nish p.s. Of course that will be the CWinApp derived class in your case... Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: avoiding multiple instances Mark Donkers18-Jan-02 5:02 Mark Donkers 18-Jan-02 5:02  Nish, thanks for the quick response. do I make the mutex's handle a member of my CWinApp derived class. then how (and where) should I realease it? Marcus Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir your blood to action. Make big plans, aim high in work and hope -- Daniel Burnham Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 5:03 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 5:03  No need to release it. The system does it for you when the program exits. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo Re: avoiding multiple instances Mark Donkers18-Jan-02 5:11 Mark Donkers 18-Jan-02 5:11  great... thanks. As a side note, I have to say THANKS to everyone at CodeProject, and everyone that uses CodeProject. I started using VC++ in September on my first real project at work. Coming from Visual Basic, I was a little intimidated making the transition, but CP has really made it less painless, and even enjoyable experience. Thanks for help everyone. Marcus Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir your blood to action. Make big plans, aim high in work and hope -- Daniel Burnham Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 5:19 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 5:19  Marcus, I think there's a flaw in your piece of code. Instead of CreateMutex( NULL, TRUE, "MVD Load Utility" ) you should use CreateMutex( NULL, FALSE, "MVD Load Utility" ); Good luck. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo Re: avoiding multiple instances Mark Donkers18-Jan-02 5:33 Mark Donkers 18-Jan-02 5:33  thanks. I read the MSDN on CreateMutex, but I can't make heads or tails of what the difference is. BTW - in your previous example, how did you get the code to appear in beige? Marcus Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir your blood to action. Make big plans, aim high in work and hope -- Daniel Burnham Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 5:43 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 5:43  thanks. I read the MSDN on CreateMutex, but I can't make heads or tails of what the difference is. The difference is that when bInitialOwner is set to TRUE, the system gives ownership to the first process that creates the mutex, as if it has subsequently called WaitForSingleObject on the mutex handle. As ownership is not needed for your purposes (you are only resorting to mutexes as a convenient way to share global identifier across proceses), bInitialOwner is best left as FALSE (moreover, you'd have to expliciy call RelaseMutex later, which is not the same as closing the handle). Pff, what a messy explanation, hope you've understand something of it To get the beige background enclose your code between <pre> and </pre> tags. Regards Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo Re: avoiding multiple instances Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 5:46 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 5:46  If his program exits, he need not call ReleaseMutex as the mutex object itself gets destroyed [or am I highly erroneous here?] Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: avoiding multiple instances Jon Hulatt18-Jan-02 5:48 Jon Hulatt 18-Jan-02 5:48  "highly erroneous"? that sounds painful! Sorry to dissapoint you all with my lack of a witty or poignant signature. Re: avoiding multiple instances Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 6:57 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 6:57  LOL Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 6:04 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 6:04  Hi Nish, Well, the thing is a little tricky, because the documentation is not conclusive on this. I haven't found nowehere that closing a mutex handle implies also releasing it, so to the best of my knowledge not calling ReleaseMutex is undefined behavior (though it is perfectly possible that everything works nevertheless). All in all, as the guy didn't need ownership at all, I think it is better to remain on the safe side and simply setting bInitialOwner to FALSE Regards, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo Re: avoiding multiple instances Nish Nishant18-Jan-02 7:04 Nish Nishant 18-Jan-02 7:04  Thanks for your thoughts and time Joaquín! I guess you were correct in your advice to him Regards Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut Re: avoiding multiple instances Tim Smith18-Jan-02 7:20 Tim Smith 18-Jan-02 7:20  Mutexes are automatically released. Here is a quote from Helen Custler's Inside Windows NT book which talks about this history of mutants and mutexes in NT. "The name /mutant/ has a colorful [sic] history. Early in Windows NT's development, Dave Cutler created a kernel mutex object that implemented low-level mutual exclusion. Later he discovered that OS/2 required a version of the mutual-exclusion semaphore with additional semantics, which Dave considered "brain-damaged" and which was incompatible with the original object. (Specifically, a thread could abandon the object and leave it inaccessible.) So he created an OS/2 version of the mutex and gave it the name /mutant/. Later Dave modified the mutant object to remove the OS/2 semantics, allowing the Win32 subsystem to use the object. The Win32 API calls the modified object /mutex/, but the native services retain the name /mutant/." Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc. Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 7:34 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 7:34  Beautiful piece of wisdom Anyway, I wouldn't rely on only this paragraph to merrily abandon mutexes unreleased, withouth stronger confirmation from the documentation. Regards, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo Re: avoiding multiple instances Mark Donkers18-Jan-02 5:55 Mark Donkers 18-Jan-02 5:55  Joaquín... You have shed some light in this dark world of mine. It made as much sense as it could for a beginner C++ programmer. where can I find the docs on how to use other tags (or are there any other) thanks again. Marcus Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir your blood to action. Make big plans, aim high in work and hope -- Daniel Burnham Re: avoiding multiple instances Joaquín M López Muñoz18-Jan-02 6:09 Joaquín M López Muñoz 18-Jan-02 6:09  Apart from <pre> you can use <code> to get an effect like this. If you're including code of yours that may have the character '<', replace those with the escape sequence &lt; Also, you can use regular HTML tags as well. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 18:00     Last Update: 8-Jun-24 23:20 Refresh ᐊ Prev1...17574175751757617577175781757917580175811758217583 Next ᐅ

General    News    Suggestion    Question    Bug    Answer    Joke    Praise    Rant    Admin   

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