|
I have a property sheet, and one property page (CFirstPage). m_showInfo is a bool, and m_ctrShowInfo is the DDX control for the checkbox. I want to initialise the property page with the current settings.
In my implementation file;
CFirstPage::CFirstPage() : CPropertyPage(CFirstPage::IDD)
{
if(m_showInfo)
m_ctrShowInfo.SetCheck(1);
else
m_ctrShowInfo.SetCheck(0);
}
If i use SetState() instead, everything goes well. However, SetCheck() crashes at CButton::SetCheck. Any ideas why?
---
"Transmit in all known frequencies and in all known langauges, including Welsh."
|
|
|
|
|
because m_ctrShowInfo isn't a "window" yet, and SetCheck is sending a window message.
try setting this in your InitDialog
-c
Smaller Animals Software, Inc.
http://www.smalleranimals.com
|
|
|
|
|
Argh! My head is hurting. All this MFC i've been doing has reduced my potential lifespan. I actually figured it out whilst watching neighbours, but thanks anyway.
---
"Transmit in all known frequencies and in all known langauges, including Welsh."
|
|
|
|
|
Look into the declaration of m_ctrShowInfo Is a CButton or another thing?
Best Regards!!!
Carlos Antollini.
![Green Alien | [Alien]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/alien.gif) Today is Fridad!!! ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif) for All!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Look into the declaration of m_ctrShowInfo Is a CButton or another thing?
But the problem is that you are in the contructor of your class, and the control have not HWND yet.....
Best Regards!!!
Carlos Antollini.
Today is Fridad!!! for All!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Try to do that in the InitDialog. In that instance the Hwnd exists
Best Regards!!!
Carlos Antollini.
Today is Friday!!! for All!!!
|
|
|
|
|
The app that I am making has this sucken in look where all the controls are at. I tried changing the windows style in this function, but that didn't work. I am trying to get rid of the sunken in look and make the whole area where the controls are located raised up with the rest of the app.
I sure appreciate any help.
|
|
|
|
|
Two questions:
(1) Is your app MDI or SDI?
(2) What kind of view you are using to display controls?
// Fazlul
Get RadVC today! Play RAD in VC++
http://www.capitolsoft.com
|
|
|
|
|
The app is SDI and I am using IDD_MFC_FORM.
|
|
|
|
|
BOOL CMainFrame::PreCreateWindow(CREATESTRUCT& cs)
{
if( !CFrameWnd::PreCreateWindow(cs) )
return FALSE;
cs.style = WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW;
return TRUE;
}
I thought by adding the OVERLAPPEDWINDOW would fix this problem, but it does not seem to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
No, I guess WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW style bit is already set for MFC frame windows before ::PreCreateWindows() gets the hit, so this won't help.
I think I have a solution, I'll come back soon.
// Fazlul
Get RadVC today! Play RAD in VC++
http://www.capitolsoft.com
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a quick solution for you.
Overide CMainFrame's ::ReCalcLayout() and add this
void CMainFrame::RecalcLayout(BOOL bNotify)
{
CFrameWnd::RecalcLayout(bNotify);
CView* pView = GetActiveView();
if(pView && pView->GetSafeHwnd())
{
CRect rect;
pView->GetWindowRect(rect);
ScreenToClient(rect);
rect.InflateRect(2, 2);
pView->MoveWindow(rect);
}
}
This would take out the client edges nicely provided that you don't have any controlbars docked on the frame.
This is a quick and dirty solution. There could be other ways of doing this. I'll try to find other solution later.
// Fazlul
Get RadVC today! Play RAD in VC++
http://www.capitolsoft.com
|
|
|
|
|
Nice!!! This worked like a charm! Thank you for taking the time on this problem!
|
|
|
|
|
Here's part of my code:
void CValidateurlDlg::OnButton1()
{
...
for(int i=0;i<m_purllist->GetCount();i++)
{
...
ValUrlMgr.Validate(this, url);
}
}
void CValidateUrlMgr::Validate(CWnd* pWnd, Url UrlInfo)
{
THREADPARMS* ptp = new THREADPARMS;
ptp->UrlInfo = UrlInfo;
ptp->pWnd = pWnd;
ptp->pCriticalSection = &m_cs;
ptp->pEvent = &m_event;
CWinThread* pThread = AfxBeginThread (ThreadFunc, ptp,
THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL, 0, CREATE_SUSPENDED);
::DuplicateHandle (GetCurrentProcess (),
pThread->m_hThread, GetCurrentProcess (), &m_hThread,
0, FALSE, DUPLICATE_SAME_ACCESS);
pThread->ResumeThread ();
}
//////////////////////////
UINT ThreadFunc(LPVOID pParam)
{
...
THREADPARMS* ptp = (THREADPARMS*) pParam;
Url UrlInfo = ptp->UrlInfo;
CCriticalSection* pCriticalSection = ptp->pCriticalSection;
CEvent* pKillEvent = ptp->pEvent;
CWnd* pWnd = ptp->pWnd;
delete ptp;
pCriticalSection->Lock ();
Doing some stuff....
pCriticalSection->Unlock ();
return 0;
}
If I dont comment the Lock() / Unlock() lines, I get an Unhandled error message. Not using them = works great! What's the use of critical sections then???
thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
This may have nothing to do with your problem, but have you taken into account that CCriticalSections by default are locked right after construction? Maybe you'll have to add m_cs.Unlock() somewhere on the ctor for CValidateUrlMgr. If this is already known to you, excuse my guessing around.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I did not know that (thanks for the tip!), but I tried what you suggested with no good results.  Although I have to say that I launch multiple instances of the same thread (look at my code), so I wonder if it's not failing when the thread function gets executed the 2nd time...
I'm sorta new to threads, just trying to figure out how they work...
Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
|
Guess more context is needed to help you find the problem. For instance, are you sure that CValidateurDlg exits only when all threads launched by OnButton1 have terminated? The m_hThread variable suggest you only keep track of the last thread launched.
Joaquñin M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
This doesn't really answer your question, but here's the basics of a little class that can be used for simple locks:
CX_Lock::CX_Lock(CRITICAL_SECTION *cs){
EnterCriticalSection(cs);
m_pCriticalSection = cs;
}
CX_Lock::~CX_Lock(){
LeaveCriticalSection(m_pCriticalSection);
}
Now, for a class whose, say, accessor functions should be guarded, declare a member CS:
CRITICAL_SECTION m_cs;
And don't forget to call InitializeCriticalSection(&m_cs); in the constructor and DeleteCriticalSection(&m_cs); in the destructor.
Then inside a block of code in a memeber fn you just declare a local lock object like so:
DWORD MyClass::GetMyMemberVar()
{
CX_Lock lock(&m_cs);
return m_dwMyMemberVar;
}
And voila, you've serialized thread access to the code in the block where the lock object has scope.
This has the advantages of exception safety (unwinding the stack will call the lock's dtor and exit the CS) and less code to muck with.
As an additional nice touch, declare the default ctor private (so people will use the class properly).
Not sure where I stumbled on this - I thought the MFC had an equivalent, but not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Try out locking with the primitives:
CRITICAL_SECTION lock;
in the ctor: ::InitializeCriticalSection(&lock);
locking: ::EnterCriticalSection(&lock);
unlocking: ::LeaveCriticalSection(&lock);
in the dtor: ::DeleteCriticalSection(&lock);
I often heard about porblems with MFC-sync-Classes.
mfg HintiFlo
|
|
|
|
|
How to set a bitmap as a dialog background ?
Thanx.
|
|
|
|
|
It goes along this:
Class CYourDlg: public CDialog{
...
CBitmap m_bitmap_background;
BITMAP m_bmInfo_background;
...
};
BOOL CYourDlg::OnInitDialog()
{
...
m_bitmap_background.LoadBitmap(IDB_BACKGROUND);
::GetObject(m_bitmap_background,sizeof(BITMAP),&m_bmInfo_background);
...
return TRUE;
}
BOOL CYourDlg::OnEraseBkgnd(CDC* pDC)
{
CRect rect;
GetClientRect(rect);
CDC dcMem;
dcMem.CreateCompatibleDC(pDC);
HBITMAP* pBmpOld=(HBITMAP*)::SelectObject(dcMem.m_hDC,m_bitmap_background);
for(int y=rect.top;y<rect.bottom;y+=m_bmInfo_background.bmHeight){
for(int x=rect.left;x<=rect.right;x+=m_bmInfo_background.bmWidth){
pDC->BitBlt(x,y,m_bmInfo_background.bmWidth,m_bmInfo_background.bmHeight,
&dcMem,0,0,SRCCOPY);
}
}
::SelectObject(dcMem.m_hDC, pBmpOld);
return TRUE;
}This is for a tesellation effect (sort of like background images in HTML). Easy to adapt it to your specific needs.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a PString class that derives from CString. In it, I overload the + operator so I can add a PString and long variable to give me a new PString. It works fine in VC 5.0, but while converting to VC 6.0, I get a C2666 error saying it cannot determine which overloaded + to use.
Here is the code segment:
PString strTemp1 = "abc";
long lTemp1 = 123;
PString strTemp2 = "def";
(1) strTemp2 = strTemp1 + strTemp2; // works fine.
(2) strTemp2 = strTemp1 + lTemp1; // C2666 error.
(3) strTemp2 = +(strTemp1, lTemp1); // no error.
(4) strTemp2 = ::operator +(strTemp1, lTemp1); // no err
class PString : public CString
{
public:
....
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +( const PString& string1, const PString& string2 );
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +( const PString& string, TCHAR ch );
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +( TCHAR ch, const PString& string );
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +( const PString& string, LPCTSTR lpsz );
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +( LPCTSTR lpsz, const PString& string );
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string,const long& value);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const long& value, const PString& string);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string,const double& value);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const double& value, const PString& string);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string,const int& value);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const int& value, const PString& string);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string, const ULONG& value);
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const ULONG& value,const PString& string);
Why does line (2) give an error, while lines (3) and (4) give no compile error? Aren't they the same instruction?
Any help would be appreciated.
Pat
|
|
|
|
|
it probably can't decide between long and int for the second value.
try this : strTemp2 = strTemp1 + (long)lTemp1;
=c
Smaller Animals Software, Inc.
http://www.smalleranimals.com
|
|
|
|
|
I tried
strTemp2 = strTemp1 + (long)lTemp1;
and it still gives the C2666 error.
I agree that it probably can't decide the type of that second value, but I have tried changing the overload definitions to
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string, const long& value);
and
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string, long& value);
and
PCSGENRL_EXP_TYPE friend PString operator +(const PString& string, long value);
From what I have read on this error in the help pages, if the compiler can't find an exact match, then it will try to do some conversions to get a match.
You would think that one of the above 3 overloaded definitions would give an exact match so the compiler wouldn't have to do any conversions. But I guess I am missing something. I assume the first argument is fine because I can add a PString and a PString. So it must be something with the second (long) argument, but I can't figure it out.
Pat
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
