|
Sorry, worked late into Friday night on a deployment, family stuff yesterday, didnt get back to test this
Ive just tested in VS2005 C++/MFC
Created a new MFC, Dialog based app, edited the dialog - dropped and resized the 'Group Box' COntrol from the ToolBox, then dropped 3 x Radio Buttons into the Group Box.
Then I selected the Group Box, and it moved independently from the Radio Buttons. Only when I contol-Clicked the Group Box, AND each of the Radio Buttons, could I move them all together
bkelly13 wrote: Is there some other meaning or use of the term "Group Box" and the control
"Group Box."
Having a Group Box around the Radio Buttons changes how they are accessed - almost like an array - not 'moving them around the screen' - seems a bit odd, dont know if I took that much notice of all of this years ago when I did MFC
I know someone who actively uses MFC in VS2010 these days, I'll check with him
'g'
|
|
|
|
|
don't lose your time and don't spend lot of effort on an old programs builder , I advice you to use a new software coder like visual studio 2012 or Xamarin or RAD STUDIO XE4.
good luck in coding bro.   
|
|
|
|
|
VS 2008 is still a lot better than I am. Just the same, its five years old now. I found VS 2012 Pro via Amazon for about $350 and ordered it. I will see what that does. Does it make the group box work?
Thanks for your time
If you work with telemetry, please check this bulletin board: http://www.bkelly.ws/irig_106/
|
|
|
|
|
If you are using the win32 dialog builder of VS (for dialog based MFC) then I have bad news. A groupbox is nothing more than simply a visual border with an optional label. It isn't supposed to be the parent of any controls, its not like a panel in modern usable rad gui development tools. You can use a groupbox to visually draw a "border" around a group of controls that are functionally coupled but that's it. Upgrading to VS2012 won't change that. (BTW, have you ever programmed gui using "bare metal" win32?) In my opinion VS2008 is very good but my current favorite is VS2010. They have improved a lot in VS2010 including intellisense and a lot of small bugs. At first touch I didn't really liked VS2012 for some reason...
EDIT: also read this: Group Boxes[^]
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to select a 'group' of controls so that you can move them together, select one of the controls, then ctrl+click several others. You will see them highlighted with the borders of all/each. If you select one by mistake, ctrl+click again. This 'group' handling disappears when you select (click) without either ctrl or shift inside the dialog resource.
If you want to 'group' several controls in the Visio sense, Visual Studio doesn't do that (as other posters have indicated).
Windows 8 is the resurrected version of Microsoft Bob. The only thing missing is the Fisher-Price logo.
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
Me either,Perhaps it doesn,t support that 
|
|
|
|
|
I am creating an SDI application.
On Start, its title is "Untitled - MyApp".
When i load a file named File1.txt using open button, then its title is changing to "File1.txt - MyApp".
The Problem arise when i want to change the title without loading a file using open button. Can anybody tell me how to set the title of an SDI application.
Thanks in advance!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Richard, I have done the same thing earlier but it did not work.
I think my problem lies in my applications SDI architecture.. might be my Document and View are not connected properly or they are not getting properly registered with CSingleDocTemplate Class.. Please suggest how to check whether i am following my SDI architecture properly.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
puneit4u wrote: Please suggest how to check whether i am following my SDI architecture properly.
Read the documentation on MSDN where it is all explained. Alternatively create a new project with the Visual Studio wizard and compare with your project.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
puneit4u wrote: I have done the same thing earlier but it did not work.
Keep in mind that if you set the title to something, then open a document, the framework sets the title as you describe in your original message.
You can suppress this behavior by overriding a framework method. I don't have VS2010 open right now but you can figure this out by looking at the source.
Windows 8 is the resurrected version of Microsoft Bob. The only thing missing is the Fisher-Price logo.
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
I have a safe array of variants I have been working on getting working in c++. I need to pass a safearray of variants with this flags in fFeatures set by default: FADF_FIXEDSIZE, FADF_STATIC, FADF_HAVEVARTYPE and FADF_VARIANT.
Trouble is I have an ATL com dll project (mouse emulator) that wraps another ATL com dll called softhidreceiver.
When I called softhidreceiver I need to pass a safe array of variants but Iam having trouble doing so. Here is an msdn forum post that never got solved but grew so large I just started a new post.
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/vstudio/en-US/a54fdef1-6479-41dc-8662-4c615d1dab9e/invalid-safearray-of-variants#be1b5734-9a80-439e-a3dd-32f48d24ab84[^]
Anyone knowledge with safearray of variants? I have not choice in the matter unless someone has a better idea of passing values to queueinputreport?
Heres my current code though so far:
STDMETHODIMP CMMEmulator::sendinputreport(unsigned char inputreport[5], int length)
{
_TCHAR szBuffer[100];
_stprintf_s(szBuffer, _T("%i"), inputreport[1]);
MessageBox(NULL,L"value of second byte input report",szBuffer,NULL);
BYTE bSampe[5] = {0x00,inputreport[1],inputreport[2],0x00,0x00};
HRESULT hr = S_OK;
SAFEARRAY *psaData = NULL;
VARIANT HUGEP* pVarArrayData = NULL;
SAFEARRAYBOUND bound;
bound.cElements = 5;
bound.lLbound = 0;
psaData = SafeArrayCreateVector(VT_VARIANT,0,5);
hr = SafeArrayAccessData(psaData, (void HUGEP**)&pVarArrayData);
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
for (long i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
VariantInit(&pVarArrayData[i]);
pVarArrayData[i].vt = VT_UI1;
pVarArrayData[i].bVal = static_cast<byte>(bSampe[i]);
}
hr = SafeArrayUnaccessData(psaData);
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
piSoftHidDevice1[devindex]->QueueInputReport(psaData,10);
piSoftHidDevice1[devindex]->StartProcessing();
}
}
SafeArrayDestroy(psaData);
return S_OK;
}
jeffery
|
|
|
|
|
If method A calls B and B is to return or provide a CString to A, what is the better way to do this? The declaration for B can look like:
CString B();
Or
Void B( CString &out_string );
I am thinking the latter should be preferred. The former is simpler but it seems to expose its internal data to the caller.
Thanks for your time
If you work with telemetry, please check this bulletin board: http://www.bkelly.ws/irig_106/
|
|
|
|
|
Option 1 is the generally accepted method style, unless B needs to return a status value like:
BOOL B( CString &out_string );
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Any decent compiler with return value optimization will compile about the same machine code from the above method declarations so I would use CString B(); because it looks nicer. The second version seems much like "human optimized" code but its not that terrible. From this example what came to my mind is the usual CString ToString(); method. Its easier to use the first declaration because the second always requires you to declare variables on the stack before the call while the first one allows you to write nicer code, for example you can immediately pass the return value of B() to another function call that receives a string.
Another thing you need to know here: Even if there is no return value optimization in your compiler (Visual C++ has it) CString is a reference counted string that means: It is just a "pointer" to the string data so copying it copies only a pointer and increases then decreases a refcount of the string data when the returned temp refcount-pointer object (CString) is deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
Am I correct in thinking that "return value optimization" self descriptive rather than having a special meaning?
In the first call B, more of a function style, is written as:
CString B( ){ return internal_string }
While the second, more of a procedure style, would look like:
void B( CSrting &some_string );<br />
{ some_string.empty();<br />
some_string = internal_string;<br />
}
That presumes that some_string = internal_string is a copy operation and not a reference operation. Is that presumption true or false?
The first hands out an address within B's space while the second does not. That also means that the caller would have to copy it before doing anything that would change it. I know we can adorn the return value with "const", but still.
Is that logic flawed?
Thanks for your time
If you work with telemetry, please check this bulletin board: http://www.bkelly.ws/irig_106/
|
|
|
|
|
If you are interested about how optimizations work please use google. You can never expect a compiler to optimize your code at a particular code location but please don't write ugly code just to try to optimize out things prematurely. Whether to make a piece of code manually-optimized and ugly depends on a few factors: The size of the data structure you want to return, the frequency with which the function is being called,... Keep the code pretty and easy to read and optimize/uglify the critical often-executed parts. Optimization takes place periodically during development. While optimizing you find out what part of the code takes most of the execution time and you cut it off here and there. Often these codepieces are found at the most unexpected places and the biggest performance degradations happen due to algorithmic problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Your analysis is a bit flawed.
First of all, you don't need to empty the string before populating it:
bkelly13 wrote:
<br />
void B( CString &some_string ); {<br />
some_string.empty(); some_string = internal_string;<br />
}<br/><br />
There are several things that happen in this (fixed) code that don't happen in the 'first call' version. When calling the API, there is more setup on the part of the caller. A CString variable needs to exist already, and API setup makes sure that it is either empty or ref count is zero (and writable). Assuming that internal_string is another CString, no copying takes place. The some_string object's header info is updated to duplicate the same info in internal_string, and the ref count is incremented. If internal_string is 1MB in size, only a pointer and counter are changed (ie. no copying).
Again, if internal_string is a CString, a similar process also happens in your 'first call' code (ie. no copying).
If internal_string is a (const?) char* or (const?) char[] or something else that looks like one of those, then a copy needs to take place for both versions of the code.
Windows 8 is the resurrected version of Microsoft Bob. The only thing missing is the Fisher-Price logo.
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
Option 2 can be preferred for object return.
Option 1 is usually used to return primitive types.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on few things. Most importantly what bussiness logic is there in B.
For example suppose B function is responsible to read data from a very large file and you want to return that from B. There are changes that file open error may occure then:
int B(CString &out_string) will be best option because of two reasons.
1. The error code can be returned as return parameter
2. You dont need to accumulate the content of file in a local variable which gets added and deleted on stack while transferring that as return value.
Manoj
Never Gives up
|
|
|
|
|
I want to change one folder's icon.How can i do it with shell extension or other ways but except using desktop.ini file.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys,
During developing on windows I had to mess with COM a bit.
So I want to know,
How common is the use of COM and ATL?
Are these technologies getting old and only supported by other apps, or there are new software built with these tech?
Thanks!![Java | [Coffee]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
marisha.u wrote: How common is the use of COM and ATL?
How could we tell without running a survey?
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft products still make use of these. If you are developing something that is interconnected for example with office products than chances are good that you have to mess with COM as some programming interfaces of these products are exposed with COM. Sometimes interconnection between 2 softwares written in different languages is the easiest via COM if both language compilers have COM support (this is also dependent on the kind of interconnection - its quite rare when a pipe or loopback socket isn't enough). In my opinion if you are developing your own software then the best is to avoid COM if possible. Keep it simple. Use a technology/library only if it makes your job easier or if it is explicitly requested by your client. Don't use something "just because" its a fashion or because it is used by another product. It can be possible that a famous product uses technology X but the architects are cursing the day of choosing that technology and today they simply cant afford (time/$) getting rid of it. Before you start using something do some research and compare different solutions on a simple example program. Investing the time in this pays off in the long run especially in case of a bigger project.
|
|
|
|
|
You described exactly my situation
I had to mess with COM because of historical reasons, and because I'm working with IE and Windows.
I just wondering how useful it is, and should I use it more in the future?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
