|
talevi wrote: I'm looking for a solution to pass a data struct between threads without using a global struct variable.
You can either do that, or use heap-based memory.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the fast answer,
I tried that and got a null pointer.
It must have more robust solution
|
|
|
|
|
talevi wrote: I tried that and got a null pointer.
Then you must've done something wrong. Without a relevant code snippet, suggestions will be guesses at best.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
It Works Just Fine Thanks 
|
|
|
|
|
Does RegCreateKeyEx() works when registry key has been disabled by administrator??????
there are 10 type of people in the world...
01 who understand binary.
10 who don't...
|
|
|
|
|
Highly unlikely.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
ok....so can you tell me which function to use in case registry has been disabled????
there are 10 type of people in the world...
01 who understand binary.
10 who don't...
|
|
|
|
|
ashutosh dhiman wrote: ok....so can you tell me which function to use in case registry has been disabled????
You can't, unless you, like the one that 'disabled' it, is also an administrator.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
|
|
|
|
|
ok...in that case how to do that???? actually im making a tool which will enable the regedit which is disable by some spyware...for that i have to make a registry entry into windows registry....assuming im adminstrator...no plz tell me what to use??
there are 10 type of people in the world...
01 who understand binary.
10 who don't...
|
|
|
|
|
If you have any argument, use the forum to make it public.
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
|
|
|
|
|
I think you got a mail of ashutosh dhiman,yesterday I think he/she replied to you and told "if you dont like this question..." when I wanted to answer him about you he/she deleted his/her answer! 
|
|
|
|
|
CPMRU turned ON? 
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
|
|
|
|
|
I dont know why he deleted his reply,but anyway I dont think I can preservation CPRMU 
Add
I dont know why I think they are man.
/Add
|
|
|
|
|
The same guy asked for help on embedding a keylogger executable inside another one...
[added]
And now he's active member of the leckey's CP offenders list [^]
[/added]
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely (I'm afraid to argue about with leckey).
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
|
|
|
|
|
Reading your further messages, I think there is some confusion.
An administrator can set policy to disable regedit. In which case, that has no effect on any program you write using the Reg API functions.
If the permissions on a key have been so that you can't access them, then the answer is to ask someone in authority nicely to fix that. If you don't give them a good reason, tough.
If you have the authority, then you can use REGEDT32.EXE to play with permissions on registry keys. It looks similar to regedit, but is a lot more powerful (and dangerous!).
If you want to change the permissions on a key programmitcally, then that is a complex job, involved SIDs, and all sorts of things I feel only pertially qualified to discuss.
Also, you need permission on a parent key to do that - if you don't, the answer goes back to "tough".
Iain.
Plz sir... CPallini CPallini abuz drugz, plz plz help urgent.
|
|
|
|
|
See here http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=1647&msg=2548986[^]
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
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad my answer was a long version of "tough" then!
Iain.
Plz sir... CPallini CPallini abuz drugz, plz plz help urgent.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have regitsred key under AllSystemObjects in registry for context menu. It is working fine for all files and folders But when I right click on .lnk file, my menu option is coming twice.
How can I restrict it to come once.
|
|
|
|
|
Pther,
I'll give you credit for persistence! I'm impressed you found a better registry key than '*' for your shortcut handler - I failed. Mind you, you weren't paying me for an answer...
I'd strongly recommend sysinternals regmon program for sorting out any issues with the registry.
Is you handler called twice? I'm guessing you still have the * key setup - so are you called once for the lnk file, and once for the file the lnk points to?
The debugger should help you. If I haven't already told you, Michael Dunn's excellent shell series has information on debugger extension handlers in its first (or second) article.
First find out *why* you're getting two calls, then worry about "fixing" it. Maybe you want to give slightly different menu optiosn if it's a lnk file? Check the path you're being given to make sure both times are the same? If they're not, filter on that... Etc.
Iain.
Plz sir... CPallini CPallini abuz drugz, plz plz help urgent.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a thread in my application having a pipe (Created in Blocking Mode) which waits for the client to write to it.
Once pipe is read the post a message with the read pointer casted to Wparam to the main appication and waits for the next read.
Now the problem Iam facing is that by the time the application process the message the pipe is again read , so the memory gets overwritten.
Can anyone let me know how to overcome this problem?
|
|
|
|
|
krishnan.s wrote: Can anyone let me know how to overcome this problem?
Don't overwrite your memory?
Seriously. You read from a pipe into a section of ram that you've allocated. Try allocating a fresh chunk each time, post a message to some other part of your process with the pointer to that memory as (eg) lParam, then delete the message in that part.
If you use a buffer allocated on the stack (ie, inline in your procedure), and then keep reading on top of it, then you've volunteered for your own problem.
I would also worry that if you're processing messages slower than they're arriving then you may get problems. If it's just the occasional one, and most are fast, then you're fine.
Iain.
Plz sir... CPallini CPallini abuz drugz, plz plz help urgent.
|
|
|
|
|
I tried creating memory in heap and deleting in my message handler , but it throws exception as memory was created in different thread and iam trying to delete it in my main application .
|
|
|
|
|
OK, sounds like you have the right idea though.
I'd have to do a bit of research (ie, *you'll* have to do a bit of research), but there's more ways of dynamically allocating chunks of memory that new/delete. There's also alloc/free, GlobalAlloc/GlobalFree(?)(though that's over the top, and lastly but probably a goodie - CoGetMalloc/IMalloc.
All sorts of different ways, and I'm sure most are thread safe.
If you're doing this LOTS of timesm for a lonf time, then the memory churn could cause you problems. Are your packets a relatively constant length? You could keep a large array of them, mark them as free / in use, and so on, but that becomes very hard and only useful if you *really* have to.
Iain.
Plz sir... CPallini CPallini abuz drugz, plz plz help urgent.
modified on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 4:04 AM
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
