|
LVS_SMALLICON is not an extended style, and so cannot be set by this call; see here[^] for how to change the non-extended window styles.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
I want to use the
LVS_ICON, LVS_SMALLICON, LVS_LIST, and LVS_REPORT
But the CListCtrl is created, only I can do is delte this CListCtrl and Create a new one with LVS_ICON, LVS_SMALLICON, LVS_LIST, or LVS_REPORT ? Is there another way to set the Style to LVS_REPORT
?
|
|
|
|
|
try using ModifyStyle. For example to change from report to small icon view call function
like this listctrl.ModifyStyle(LVS_REPORT,LVS_SMALLICON);
If u can Dream... U can do it
|
|
|
|
|
Well. This function is just needed. Thanks.
vote 5
|
|
|
|
|
yu-jian wrote: Is there another way to set the Style to LVS_REPORT
Did you check out the link I gave you? It has the information you need.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen your link. I find the class member function.
thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys, i am new to cryptoAPI. I have used public/private keys algorithm in .NET.
But in MFC i need to do the same thing, i need to generate public and private keys and store them
in files.
In cryptoAPI all function uses the handle to keys that's why i am confused how to generate keys,
store in files, and how to use them for encryption and decryption.
some one tell me how can i achieve this...
Thanks in advance
ganesh_IT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Niklas, thanks for your help. In my project i need to encrypt my client's publickey and transfer it to server.
Server decrypt it and match the client's publickey with server's publickey.
But cryptoAPI function uses handle for keys, i don't know how to write public/privatekey in files because in need to transfer keys between client and server.
Thanks in advance
ganesh_IT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your help.
CryptoAPI is complicated to understand.
|
|
|
|
|
I try to compile an application ( SDI kind ) , to a fresh installed XP system , but I front with an link error :
LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file "libcmt.lib"
what I missing ? Can you help me , please ?
|
|
|
|
|
Find the lib file using search and make sure it's in your lib directory or path.
|
|
|
|
|
I do that , and I didn't find it ...
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] seems to suggest the file isn't present by default on a Windows or Windows+Visual system.
|
|
|
|
|
I install CRT static libraries and it work it . Thank you all.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I've migrated a project form VC++ 6.0 to 2010 and find that some dialogs assert when they are created.
It happens inside CDialog::OnInitDialog(), more specifically inside CWnd::ExecuteDlgInit(). A resource
is found with the id that corresponds to the dialog resource, it's loaded, locked and CWnd::ExecuteDlgInit
is called again with a pointer to the resource. This second call to ExecuteDlgInit asserts in this line:
ASSERT(nMsg == LB_ADDSTRING || nMsg == CB_ADDSTRING ||
nMsg == CBEM_INSERTITEM || nMsg == WM_MFC_INITCTRL ||
nMsg == WM_OCC_LOADFROMSTREAM ||
nMsg == WM_OCC_LOADFROMSTREAM_EX ||
nMsg == WM_OCC_LOADFROMSTORAGE ||
nMsg == WM_OCC_LOADFROMSTORAGE_EX ||
nMsg == WM_OCC_INITNEW);
It happens with some of the project's dialogs, not in all of them... I'm at a complete loss.
Any one has dealt with this?
Thanks,
Aritosteles
|
|
|
|
|
Check the value of
nMsg to see what Windows is complaining about. Also make sure that you have done a complete rebuild of your project under the new environment.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Hello folks!
I have a small project in mind which would involve creating virtual files/folders on a client's computer (preferably without needing admin rights too). My first thought was to create a shell extension, however, here[^] MSDN doesn't list anything like virtual folders or files. Then i moved on to creating a File System Minifilter Driver[^], but this seems to be overkill for this purpose only. After some googling i came accross the Installable File System kit[^], but checking it on Microsoft's site i found this:
If you are trying to create virtual files or directories to be viewed through the Windows Shell, the shell extension interfaces may be a better option. Shell extension modules are user-mode DLLs that are registered with the Windows Shell. For more information on these interfaces, please refer to the Platform SDK section of the MSDN Online Library..
So now i am confused, it suggests to use shell extensions, however, shell extensions doesn't seem to provide this functionality...where did i go wrong? Anyone can give me some pointers, please? Thanks in advance...
> The problem with computers is that they do what you tell them to do and not what you want them to do. <
> Leela: Fry, you're wasting your life sitting in front of that TV. You need to get out and see the real world.
Fry: But this is HDTV. It's got better resolution than the real world <
>Nothing is free in the universe.<
|
|
|
|
|
I've been looking into a similar thing.
The best I've come up with so far is Doken[^].
They have developed the kernel driver and expose a user API to develop your own filesystem apps.
Others have already developed both ram and file based filesystems[^] for it.
The minifilter option provides filesystem access for _all_ applications, shell extensions are only for accessing files through, well, the shell e.g. explorer.
It comes down to how will the client need to interact with your filesystem ?
...cmk
The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.
- John Carmack
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply. This is what i'd like to do: the user would "mount" the filesystem on his computer by running a small program or somesuch. A new drive would appear on his system or a new folder would pop up on his desktop (i'd prefer the new drive as if an USB storage device had been connected). Either way, i will call this the "root". So under the root, some folders and files would appear. The content of some folders and files the user should be able to modify, some not. For example he should be able to edit some files, but not delete them, he should also be able to open some files for reading but not save them (he can save them to a different location if he wishes to of course but not overwrite the originals), he should be able to add new files in some folders or delete them, but not be able to do the same in some other folders. Here comes the more tricky part: these files and folders don't really exist on the user's computer, hence, "virtual files and folders". The files' contents are generated/converted on-the-fly, what i mean is, the user e.g. sees abc.doc on the drive, opens it with Word, the system, "behind the scenes", generates the doc format data from other kind of data that might come from a database or another file, etc., the user edits the contents and when he saves it, the doc is converted back to the original data format and stored back into the database or to the other file or wherever it came from (also, possibly over a network/internet).
I really suck at explaining things but i hope it's clear what i mean. I guess i will have to dig deep into writing a file system driver if i want to make anything of this. I will check out that Dokan, looks promising.
> The problem with computers is that they do what you tell them to do and not what you want them to do. <
> Leela: Fry, you're wasting your life sitting in front of that TV. You need to get out and see the real world.
Fry: But this is HDTV. It's got better resolution than the real world <
>Nothing is free in the universe.<
|
|
|
|
|
I believe I understand, it's similar to what I'm looking to do - be able to mount new drives that expose filesystems stored in a database.
I think Doken will be the easiest and most flexible solution.
If you look through the source of the ones implimented on their site you'll see it's not too bad.
...cmk
The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.
- John Carmack
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the help and good luck with your own project.
> The problem with computers is that they do what you tell them to do and not what you want them to do. <
> Leela: Fry, you're wasting your life sitting in front of that TV. You need to get out and see the real world.
Fry: But this is HDTV. It's got better resolution than the real world <
>Nothing is free in the universe.<
|
|
|
|
|
When looking at shell namespace extensions (which can't serve this purpose) i came across another idea, faking a remote filesystem that can be mounted as a network drive. Doing this seems to be less troublesome than writing a file system driver from scratch, am still trying to evaluate this idea, might or might not work, i just thought i mention it since you said you are looking for something similar too.
> The problem with computers is that they do what you tell them to do and not what you want them to do. <
> Leela: Fry, you're wasting your life sitting in front of that TV. You need to get out and see the real world.
Fry: But this is HDTV. It's got better resolution than the real world <
>Nothing is free in the universe.<
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I can tell, you have to write code to handle file CRUD requests no matter how you do it ... six of one, half-dozen of the other.
So far the Dokan still looks easiest, it looks like the main dev points are:
1. Write thread-safe functions specified in DOKAN_OPERATIONS e.g. CreateFile, ReadFile, ...
2. Pass an instance of DOKAN_OPERATIONS with pointers set to your functions, and DOKAN_OPTIONS with info on how you want to mount your FS, to the driver via DokanMain. This will also mount your FS.
3. Call DokanUnmount when done with FS.
I still have to work through the nuances of mounting/unmounting via: my app, dokanctl, dokan mounter, ...
Notes:
- Although Dokan comes with both x86 and x64 drivers, it looks like the user dll is x86. This means your app must be compiled for x86.
- The Dokan API does support files > 2GB.
- Test your app FS in a virtual machine, if you made a mistake it can totally hose your system.
...cmk
The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.
- John Carmack
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
