Dynamic linking a dll

TheMSsForum.com: The Microsoft Software Forum

The MSS Forum ‹ VC
- Archive
  - Biz
  - MCSE
  - CRM
  - Drivers
  - Framework
  - ADO
  - ASP
  - Compact
  - Forms
  - Dotnet
  - C#
  - VB
  - FontpageGen
  - Excel
  - WorkSheet
  - Exchange
  - Setup
  - Fox
  - Fontpage
  - ASP
  - IIS
  - Entourage
  - Money
  - Messanger
  - PocketPC
  - Powerpoint
  - Project
  - Publisher
  - Excel
  - VB
  - Security
  - Portal
  - Services
  - SQLServerDev
  - SVCS
  - SQLServer
  - VB
  - VC
  - MFC
  - ExcelGen

- Previous
  - 1
    - How to import an existing folder into Visual Studio Hi, I am new to Visual Studio. We have some C++ source code along with some Lex/yacc files. Till now, we used to build on Linux. The source code is arranged in several folders and there is a makefile for each folder. The toplevel makefile calls make on each folder and then builds the final executable. I need to transfer this C++ source code onto Visual Studio to build it for windows and to use the Visual Studio's debugger. (I tried building on CL compiler using the makefile but could not make a debug build after trying all the debug options like /Zi /Z7 etc.) Can somebody tell me how I can import this whole directory structure into the Visual Studio ? I do not want to manually create the several folders and then add files to it. Ideally, It would be so good if Visual Studio could take in the Makefile and then create the directory structure itself. Can this be done ? Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285443
  - 2
    - Visual C++ 2005 redistribution not working on XP SP2 Hi, I developed simple "Hello world "application using Visual C++ 2005 then I tried to run on fresh installed XP SP2 machine. I got error message "Configuration Incorrect" . I went on Internet and made search for it. I got answer that install redistribution package for it. I installed and still my application is not running. Please let me know possible solution for it. -- With regards thanks Anand Choubey Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285434
  - 3
    - File Compressed or not? Hi All, How to find a particular file is compressed or not? I tried with FindFirstFile API. It always returns 32 as dwFileAttributes only. And IsCompressed() of CFileFind. I couldn't success here also.The input of this module is complete file path. Is there any way to find whether it is compressed or not? -- Thanks & Regards, Alex. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285430
  - 4
    - Single Sourcing GUI - native and HTML I am wondering what tools are there to create a single source application that can be compiled for native Windows GUI and also HTML? Specifically, we have a large 10+ year old MFC application where for some parts (utilities) we want to make it Web enabled. So ideally, a DIALOG resource file converted to HTML would be something I think to start with. But I not all sure of the current state of current technology and the direction. One of the reasons we got Visual Studio 2005 a few years back was based on the recommending from a colleague who felt it would be something to do what we wanted. But I haven't gone all the way with VS2005 to port our software yet to it not knowing all that needs to be done, especially with the constant flux in the Dynamic HTML area. So essentially I would like to get the skinny on to best use these tools today to basically "single source" our applications. Any comments or insights would be appreciated. Thanks -- Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285422
  - 5
    - File map performance Hello everyone, I have several physical file and I want to use file map (MapViewOfFileEx) to map the file into memory to improve performance. Each file is about several hundred M bytes. All the memory mapped files are kept open during my application. The mapping is successful, but the strange thing is, 1. the performance to access the files which are opened at first is very fast; 2. the performance to access the files which are opened later is slower and slower (the performance to access the 10th file is very bad). Any ideas to improve performance? thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285395
  - 6
    - unmanaged resource Hello everyone, I think unmanaged resource means the resources (e.g. memory and file handler) which is used directly (new, FILE*) other than using a wrapper class (Resource Acquisition Is Initialization) or auto_ptr to wrap it. Is my understanding correct? Here is a sample about what is unmanaged resource. -------------------- http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/066.htm Moral #3: Always perform unmanaged resource acquisition in the constructor body, never in initializer lists. In other words, either use "resource acquisition is initialization" (thereby avoiding unmanaged resources entirely) or else perform the resource acquisition in the constructor body. -------------------- thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285387
  - 7
    - COM interface function calling problem using different thread Hi, I wrote an application using Google COM api. I wrote a class (name CGoogleEarthCtrl) for initialize COM interfaces and calling all COM functions. CGoogleEarthCtrl class implemented on Single-ton design. I used successfully this rapper class in my application. I faced problem when I created a thread, take instance of the CGoogleEarthCtrl class and call COM function using CGoogleEarthCtrl instance. Initially application gave me exception, "CoInitialize function not called", but why? I called CoInitialize function in rapper class. After call CoInitialize(NULL) function in thread, application gave exception on COM function calling, Unhandled exception at 0x7c812a5b in GeotelWithGE.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: _com_error at memory location 0x0123f8ec.. and statement of exception, The application called an interface that was marshalled for a different thread. Please guide where I am doing mistake? why marshaling problem is coming? what I do to fix this problem? I placed try-catch block around COM function but application is not catching exception in catch block but vs2k5 open "googleearth.tli" file. why my application is not catching exception? "googleearth.tli" file code inline HRESULT IApplicationGE::SetCameraParams ( double lat, double lon, double alt, AltitudeModeGE altMode, double Range, double Tilt, double Azimuth, double speed ) { HRESULT _hr = raw_SetCameraParams(lat, lon, alt, altMode, Range, Tilt, Azimuth, speed); if (FAILED(_hr)) _com_issue_errorex(_hr, this, __uuidof(this)); return _hr; } my application is not catching exception cause of no throw statement on library. right? Regards, -aimslife . Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285385
  - 8
    - Synchronization and volatile Hello everyone, Through myself study and previous discussion here, I share the conclusion here that, if some object is synchronized (mutex, critical section, etc.), there is no need to add volatile keyword. Here is the reference, (refer to section volatile, Critical Sections, and Race Conditions) http://www.ddj.com/cpp/184403766 if my understanding is wrong or you have any other options, please feel free to add here. thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285384
  - 9
    - reference to local variable I was reviewing some visual c++ code which appears to suffer from a reference-to-local bug. However, I didn't see any compiler warning to that effect. (I don't think that the warning level was the issue.) In this code, the offending line is of the form return (*something).somethingelse; Could it be that the lack of transparency of the variable type is preventing the warning? Is it the case that warnings can show up with return x; but not with return (*something).somethingelse; Thank you for your help, Paul Epstein Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285379
  - 10
    - decimal or hex debug display In the VC++ 6.0 IDE I can toggle the debug display between hex and decimal by checking a box under Tools/Options/Debug. Where did they hide that setting in the Visual Studio 2005 IDE? The Options/Debugging dialog has about 20 items in it and I don't see anything about hex or decimal display. Thanks. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285373
  - 11
    - M`I,5.Persec ution . ab use in set-u p situations an d in pu blic -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= abuse in set-up situations and in. public -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Strangers in the street have recognized me on sight many times, and. shown awareness of the current thread of abuse. To give you one example, in. 1992 I was seriously ill, and a. manager at work somewhat humorously said that "it wasn't fair" that people were bullying me. A. few days later, I attended for the first time a clinic in. London as an outpatient, and on my way out was accosted by someone who asked if "they had paid my fare", with. emphasis on the. word "fare". He repeated the word several times in this different context; that they should have. paid my "fare", each time emphasizing the word. For two and a half years from the time their harassment started. until November. 1992 I refused to see a psychiatrist, because I reasoned that I was not ill of my own action or fault, but through the stress caused. by harassment, and that a lessening of the illness would have to. be consequent to a removal of its immediate cause, in other words a cessation. of harassment.. I also reasoned that since they were taunting me with jokes about mental illness, if I were to seek treatment then. the abusers would think. that they had "won" and been proved "right". Remember, the constant theme of any persecution is,. "we must destroy you because you're X", whether X is a racial or other. attribute. In this case the X was "we persecute you because you have brain. disease". The similarity of this logic to Nazi attitudes. to the mentally ill is striking. The same manager who'd. said "it wasn't fair" asked me in winter 1992 why I didn't. seek help from a psychiatrist; was it, he asked, because "they would think they had won" if I sought treatment? That was. something I'd never said. at work... again, taken separately it proves nothing, but many such things over a period. of months proves conclusively that people in the company knew what was going. on, and in quite a lot of detail. Usually harassment in public lacks the. level of finesse of "paying your fare". Most people's imagination does not go. beyond moronic parroting of the current. term of denigration. That is not surprising given the average level. of the abusers; if they do not have the intelligence to distinguish wrong from. right then neither will they have the capacity for anything other. than mindless repetition of a monosyllabic term calculated to fit into their. minds. The first incidents of verbal. assault in public were in again in the summer of 1990, although they increased in. frequency and venom with time. In July 1990 the first public incident occurred on. a tube train on the Northern line. Two men and their girlfriends recognised me; the women sprang to. my defence, saying "He looks perfectly normal, he. doesn't look ill". Their boyfriends of course knew better, and followed the party line;. one of them made. reference to an "operation", apparently to work at the tube station but implicitly to a visit that I had made to hospital a. couple of weeks previously. In August 1990 going home from college, soon after getting on a tube. train at Gloucester. Road I was followed by a group of four youths, who started a chant of abuse. That they were targeting. me was confirmed by other people in the carriage, one of whom asked. the other "who are they going on at, is it the bloke who just got on?". to which the second replied "yes, I think so". I was tempted to reply, but as in every. other instance the abusers are enabled. in their cowardice by physically outnumbering the abused; any confrontation would result in my. being beaten up, followed by a complaint to the police that "he. attacked us", and of course he's ill, so he must have been imagining that we were getting. at him. Shitty, aren't they? But the shittiness of the four youths on. the tube train is as nothing compared to the episode on the National Express. coach to Dover in the summer of 1992. While going on holiday to the. Continent I was verbally set upon by a. couple travelling sitting a few rows behind. The boy did the talking,. his female companion contributing only a continuous empty giggling noise. He spoke loudly. to ensure other people on the coach heard, always about "they" and "this bloke" but never naming either. the abusers or the person he. was talking about. He said "they" had "found somebody from his school, and he. was always really stressed at school". They must have dug deep. to find enemies there; perhaps someone who dropped out of school, someone who didn't. do too well later, who was jealous and keen to get their own back? The boy also said "he. was in a bed and breakfast for only one night. and they got him". By a not unexpected coincidence I had been in a B&B in Oxford a. week previously, which had been booked from work; other things. lead me to the conclusion that the company's offices were bugged for most of the 2 1/2 years that I was there, so "they" would have. known a room in the B&B had been booked. (But. I'll bet "they" didn't tell the company's managers their. offices were bugged, did they?). After a few minutes of this I went back. to where they were sitting and asked where. they were travelling. The boy named a village in France, and the girl's giggling suddenly ceased; presumably it permeated to. her brain cell what the purpose of the boy's abuse. was. This and other set-up situations are obviously. calculated to provoke a direct confrontation. which would bring in the police, with the abusers claiming that they were the ones attacked. Again in. 1992, outside the house where I was living in Oxford I was physically attacked. by someone - not punched, just grabbed by the coat, with some verbals thrown in. for good measure. That was something the people at work. shouldn't have known about... but soon after a couple of people were talking right in. front of me about, "I heard he was attacked". The. UK police have a responsibility for preventing assault occurring, but they do not seem. to take any interest in meeting that responsibility. I suppose their attitude is that. harassment does not come within their remit unless it involves physical assault,. and they will only become involved once that happens.. That is of course quite the wrong attitude for them to take, but as. I now understand, the police investigate only the crime they wish to investigate; if they. do not take your complaints seriously then there is nothing. you can do to make them take. action. 3263 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285368
  - 12
    - M.I 5.Persecutio n - why wo n't the Bri tish poli ce do th eir j ob a nd pu t a sto p to i t? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= why won't. the British police do their job and put a stop to it? -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The British police. obviously do know what is taking place. Besides my interpretations of what individual officers have. said which forces that conclusion, it would be inconceivable for them. to be unaware of something on. this scale. If they know, then they will know that the abusers have broken laws in. the UK and abroad. Recently the. UK introduced laws against electronic spying which carry a. penalty of several years jail if caught. If the police know illegal harassment is taking place,. and do nothing about it, then they are failing. in their responsibilities. Last Easter (1995). I went into the local police station in London and spoke to an officer about the harassment against me. But. I couldn't provide tangible evidence; what people said,. in many cases years ago, is beyond proof, and without something to support my statements I cannot expect. a police. officer to take the complaint seriously. The current situation with regard to the police is not one which allows. a breakthrough in dealing with the. problem. On the one hand, most individual officers at a local police station may not know about. the ongoing assaults, so. a complaint at that level will not yield results. Yet the police as an organisation do know of the harassment, and they must be aware that. a complaint has been made at a police station. So. it is clearly their duty to take preventative action against the continuing. molestation, but because the criminals are operating on behalf of a state agency, the police are. not carrying out. their duty. 833 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285366
  - 13
    - M,I.5,Pers ecution wh y won 't th e Briti sh pol ice do their jo b a nd put a st op to i t? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= why won't the British police do their job and put a stop. to it? -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The. British police obviously do know what is taking place. Besides my interpretations of what individual officers have. said which forces that conclusion, it would be inconceivable for them to. be unaware of something on this. scale. If they know, then they will know that the abusers have broken laws. in the UK and abroad. Recently the UK. introduced laws against electronic spying which carry a penalty of several years jail if caught. If the police. know illegal harassment is taking. place, and do nothing about it, then they are failing in their. responsibilities. Last Easter (1995) I went into the local. police station in London and spoke to an officer about the harassment against me. But I. couldn't provide tangible evidence; what people said, in many cases. years ago, is beyond proof, and without something to support my statements. I cannot expect a police officer. to take the complaint seriously. The current situation with regard. to the police is not one which allows a breakthrough. in dealing with the problem. On the one hand, most individual officers at a local police. station may not know about the ongoing assaults, so a complaint at that level will not. yield results. Yet the police as an organisation do know. of the harassment, and they must be aware that a complaint has been made at a police station. So it is clearly. their duty to take. preventative action against the continuing molestation, but because the criminals are operating on behalf of. a state agency, the police are not carrying out their. duty. 833 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285365
  - 14
    - M,I-5,Perse cution , Berna rd Levi n ex presses hi s view s The article of which part is reproduced below. was penned by Bernard Levin for the Features section of. the Times on 21 September 1991. To my mind, it described the situation at the time and in particular a. recent meeting with a friend, during which I for the first. time admitted to someone other than my GP that I had been subjected to. a conspiracy of harassment over the previous. year and a half. >There is a madman running loose. about London, called David Campbell; I have >no reason to. believe that he is violent, but he should certainly be >approached with caution. You may know him by the curious glitter in. his >eyes and. a persistent trembling of his hands; if that does not suffice, you >will find him attempting to thrust no fewer than 48. books into your arms, >all hardbacks, with a promise that, if you should return to. the same >meeting-place next year,. he will heave another 80 at you. > >If, by now, the police. have arrived and are keeping a close watch on him, >you may feel sufficiently. emboldened to examine the books. The jackets are >a model of uncluttered typography, elegantly and simply. laid out; there is >an unobtrusive colophon of. a rising sun, probably not picked at random. >Gaining confidence - the lunatic is smiling by now,. and the policemen, who >know about such things, have significantly removed their helmets -. you >could do worse than take the jacket. off the first book in the pile. The >only word possible to describe the binding is sumptuous; real cloth in. a >glorious shade of dark green, with the title and author. in black and gold >on the. spine. > >Look at it more closely; your eyes do not deceive you - it truly. does have >real top-bands and tail-bands, in yellow, and, for good measure,. a silk >marker ribbon in a lighter green.. The paper is cream-wove and acid-free, >and the. book is sewn, not glued. > >Throughout. the encounter, I should have mentioned, our loony has been >chattering away, although what he is trying to. say is almost impossible to >understand; after a time, however,. he becomes sufficiently coherent to make >clear that he is trying to sell the books to you. Well,. now, such quality >in bookmaking today can only. be for collectors' limited editions at a >fearsome price -. #30, #40, #50? > >No, no, he says, the glitter more powerful. than ever and the trembling of >his hands. rapidly spreading throughout his entire body; no, no - the books >are priced variously at #7, #8 or. #9, with the top price #12. > >At this, the policemen understandably put. their helmets back on; one of >them draws his. truncheon and the other can be heard summoning >reinforcements on his. walkie-talkie. The madman bursts into tears, and >swears it is. all true. > >And it. is. > >David Campbell has acquired the entire rights to. the whole of the >Everyman's Library,. which died a lingering and shameful death a decade or >so ago, and he proposes. to start it all over again - 48 volumes this >September and 80 more. next year, in editions I have described, at the >prices. specified. He proposes to launch his amazing venture simultaneously >in Britain and the United States,. with the massive firepower of Random >Century at his back in this country, and the dashing cavalry. of Knopf >across the water, and. no one who loves literature and courage will forbear >to. cheer. At the time this article was written I had believed for some time. that columnists in. the Times and other journalists had been making references to my. situation. Nothing unusual about this you may think, plenty of people have the same sort of. ideas and obviously the papers aren't writing about them, so why. should my beliefs not be as false as those of others? What makes this. article so extraordinary is that three or four days immediately preceding its publication, I had a meeting with a. friend, during the course of which we. discussed the media persecution, and in particular that by Times. columnists. It seemed to me, reading the article by Levin in Saturday?s paper, that he was describing in some. detail his "artist?s impression" of that meeting. Most telling. are the final sentences, when he writes, "The. madman bursts into tears, and swears it is all true. And it is." Although I did not "burst into tears" (he seems to. be using. a bit of poetic licence and exaggerating) I did try hard to convince my friend that it was all. true; and I am able to concur with Mr Levin, because,. of course, it is. At the beginning of the piece Levin reveals a fear. of being attacked by the "irrational" subject of his story, saying "I have no reason to. believe that he is violent, but he should certainly be approached with caution".. This goes. back to the xenophobic propaganda of "defence" against a "threat" which was seen at the very beginning. of the harassment. The impression of a "madman running loose" who needs. to be controlled through an agency which assigns to itself the mantle of. the "police" is also one which had been expressed. elsewhere. In the final paragraph of. this extract, his reference to Everyman?s Library as having "died a lingering. and shameful death a decade or so ago" shows clearly what sort of conclusion they wish to their campaign. They want. a permanent solution, and as they are prevented. from achieving that solution directly, they waste significant resources on. methods which have been repeatedly shown to. be ineffective for such a purpose. 833 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285364
  - 15
    - M'I.5 Persecuti on , Berna rd L evin express es h is vi ews The article of which part is reproduced below was penned by Bernard. Levin for the Features section of the Times. on 21 September 1991. To my mind, it described the. situation at the time and in particular a recent meeting with a friend, during which. I for the first time admitted to someone other than my GP. that I had been subjected to a conspiracy of harassment over the previous. year and a half. >There is a madman running loose. about London, called David Campbell; I have >no reason to believe that he is. violent, but he should certainly be >approached with caution. You. may know him by the curious glitter in his >eyes and a persistent. trembling of his hands; if that does not suffice, you >will find him attempting to thrust no. fewer than 48 books into your arms, >all hardbacks, with. a promise that, if you should return to the same >meeting-place next year, he will heave another 80. at you. > >If,. by now, the police have arrived and are keeping a close watch on him, >you may feel sufficiently emboldened to examine. the books. The jackets are >a. model of uncluttered typography, elegantly and simply laid out; there is >an unobtrusive. colophon of a rising sun, probably not picked at random. >Gaining. confidence - the lunatic is smiling by now, and the policemen, who >know about such things, have significantly removed their helmets -. you >could do worse than take the jacket. off the first book in the pile. The >only word possible to describe the binding is. sumptuous; real cloth in a >glorious shade of dark green, with the title and author in black and. gold >on the. spine. > >Look at it more closely; your eyes do not deceive you -. it truly does have >real top-bands and tail-bands, in yellow, and, for. good measure, a silk >marker ribbon in a lighter green. The paper is cream-wove and. acid-free, >and the book is sewn, not. glued. > >Throughout. the encounter, I should have mentioned, our loony has been >chattering away, although what he is trying to. say is almost impossible to >understand; after a time, however, he becomes sufficiently coherent. to make >clear that. he is trying to sell the books to you. Well, now, such quality >in bookmaking today can only be for collectors' limited editions at. a >fearsome. price - #30, #40, #50? > >No, no, he says, the glitter more powerful than ever and. the trembling of >his hands. rapidly spreading throughout his entire body; no, no - the books >are priced variously. at #7, #8 or #9, with the top price #12. > >At this, the policemen understandably put their helmets. back on; one of >them draws his. truncheon and the other can be heard summoning >reinforcements on his walkie-talkie. The madman bursts into. tears, and >swears it is. all true. > >And it. is. > >David Campbell. has acquired the entire rights to the whole of the >Everyman's Library, which died a lingering and shameful death a decade. or >so ago, and he proposes to start. it all over again - 48 volumes this >September and 80 more next year, in editions. I have described, at the >prices specified. He proposes. to launch his amazing venture simultaneously >in Britain and the United. States, with the massive firepower of Random >Century at his. back in this country, and the dashing cavalry of Knopf >across the water, and no one who loves. literature and courage will forbear >to. cheer. At. the time this article was written I had believed for some time that columnists. in the Times and other journalists had been making references to my situation. Nothing unusual. about this you may think, plenty of people have. the same sort of ideas and obviously the papers aren't writing about them, so why should my beliefs not be as. false as those of others? What makes this article. so extraordinary is that three or four days immediately preceding its publication, I had a meeting. with a friend, during the course of. which we discussed the media persecution, and in particular that by Times columnists. It seemed to. me, reading the article by Levin in Saturday?s paper, that he was describing in some. detail his "artist?s. impression" of that meeting. Most telling are the final sentences, when he writes, "The madman bursts into tears,. and swears it is all true. And. it is." Although I did not "burst into tears" (he seems to be using a bit of poetic licence and exaggerating) I did try hard. to convince my friend that it was all. true; and I am able to concur with Mr Levin, because,. of course, it is. At the beginning of the piece. Levin reveals a fear of being attacked by the "irrational" subject of his story, saying "I. have no reason to believe that he is violent, but he should certainly be approached with. caution". This goes back to the xenophobic propaganda of "defence" against. a "threat" which was seen at the very beginning of. the harassment. The impression of a "madman running loose" who needs to be controlled through an. agency which assigns to itself the. mantle of the "police" is also one which had been expressed. elsewhere. In the. final paragraph of this extract, his reference to Everyman?s Library as having "died a lingering and shameful. death a decade or so ago" shows clearly what sort of conclusion they wish to. their campaign. They want a permanent solution, and. as they are prevented from achieving that solution directly, they waste significant resources on methods which. have been repeatedly shown to. be ineffective for such a purpose. 5693 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285363
  - 16
    - M`I,5`Pe rsecution . w ho kn ows abou t i t? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= who knows. about it? =- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Many people know, both in the. establishment and media, and among the general. public. Despite an absence of its target from the UK for more than two years, the echoes of paranoia can still be. heard loud and clear from across. the water. When it started in 1990, the only people who knew were those in BBC television who. were spying on my home, and a few radio broadcasters. There were a few cases of public harassment, but. very little compared to the situation that developed a couple of. years later. The list today includes BBC. TV staff (newsreaders such as Martyn Lewis, Michael. Buerk, Nicholas Witchell), people from radio stations such as Chris Tarrant of Capital and Radio 1 DJs, people in. the print media, but also. many people in the general public. All united in a conspiracy which breaks the laws which. the UK does have regarding harassment, and all completely uncaring for any. semblance of decency or elementary respect for individual. rights. The British police (obviously) do. know the nature of the harassment and in all probability the identity of those behind it. Some. time ago I made a complaint to my local police station in London, without. positive result. The UK police are failing in their duty to see. the law enforced in not checking. the abuse. 3263 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285362
  - 17
    - M,I.5,Persecut ion ' h ow and w hy d id it start ? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= how. and why did it start? -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The harassment didn't. start by itself, so someone must have been there at the outset to give it. a firm push and set the "animals" after me. It looks as if I was set up in June 1990, and the. timing indicates someone from university was. responsible. >One thing which has been missing from this discussion. is this simple >prognosis: that maybe he is right and that,. despite his admitted >mental condition, there. really is a campaign against him organised by >now-influential ex-students. of his university. In May or June 1990, Alan Freeman on Radio 1 read out a. letter from someone who had known me for a few years, who wrote of the one who "wore out. his welcome. with random precision" (from the Pink Floyd song). Freeman went on to say to the writer "that's a hell of a. letter you wrote there". The indication is strongly. that people I had parted from soon before nursed a grudge against me and were trying to cause. trouble for me. The suggestion is that Freeman might have shown the. letter to other people, and things could have snowballed from. there. Right from the start the real source (security services presumed) didn't announce themselves. as the origin, but let the. "talkers", the radio DJs, believe that they were the originators. Think about it; if. you announce, "we're MI5 and we have a campaign against this bloke" then people might not go. along with it; but if you say, "everyone else is getting at this bloke because he. 'deserves' it" then people will join in with. fewer qualms. >Why would "they" wish. to assassinate your character? It's the classic case of hitting. a cripple to prove you're stronger. Why would the security services expend hundreds of thousands of pounds. and more than six years of manpower to try to. kill a British citizen? Because they are motivated by. people who knew me at university and feel personal animosity; because they knew me to be emotionally weak, and it. is in the nature of bullies to prey on those known to be weak; and because. they can rely on the complicity of the establishment, which. the security services manipulate and derive. funding from. This is England's biggest humiliation today, and the British security services. are intent on preventing their humiliation becoming reality by continuing their campaign. of attempted murder to suppress the truth from. becoming public. 833 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285360
  - 18
    - M-I'5`Persecutio n . h ow an d wh y d id it star t? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=. how and why did it start? -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The harassment didn't start by itself, so someone. must have been there at the outset to give it a firm push and set the "animals". after me. It looks as if I was set up in June 1990, and. the timing indicates someone from university. was responsible. >One thing which has been missing from this discussion is. this simple >prognosis: that maybe he is. right and that, despite his admitted >mental condition, there really is a campaign against. him organised by >now-influential ex-students of. his university. In. May or June 1990, Alan Freeman on Radio 1 read out a letter from someone who had known me for a few years, who. wrote of the one who "wore out his welcome. with random precision" (from the Pink Floyd song). Freeman went on to say to the writer "that's a. hell of a letter you wrote there". The indication is strongly that people I had parted from soon before nursed. a grudge against me and were trying to cause trouble. for me. The suggestion is that Freeman might. have shown the letter to other people, and things could have snowballed from there.. Right from the start the real source (security services presumed). didn't announce themselves as the origin,. but let the "talkers", the radio DJs, believe that they were the originators. Think about it; if you announce, "we're MI5 and. we have a campaign against. this bloke" then people might not go along with it; but if you say, "everyone else is getting at this. bloke because he 'deserves' it" then people will join in with. fewer qualms. >Why would "they" wish to assassinate. your character? It's the classic. case of hitting a cripple to prove you're stronger. Why would the security services expend hundreds of thousands of. pounds and more than six years of manpower to try to kill a British. citizen? Because they are motivated by people who knew me at. university and feel personal animosity; because they knew me to be. emotionally weak, and it is in the nature of bullies to prey on those known to be weak; and. because they can rely on the. complicity of the establishment, which the security services manipulate and. derive funding from. This is England's biggest humiliation today, and the British security services are. intent on preventing their humiliation becoming reality by. continuing their campaign of attempted murder to suppress the. truth from becoming public. 10553 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285359
  - 19
    - Problem with porting from 2003 I have a very strange problem with an application that I have been porting from VS 2003 to VS 2005. I started this with Visual C++ 6.0, so it's all nmake based, so it's not the IDE I am having problems with - it's the compiler. I have a system with a fairly large number of libraries. I build each of these libraries as a DLL for development purposes. When I ship the application, I do a static link. I change a directive call PUBLIC from dllimport to dllexport appropriately as a either use a library, or build a library. When I do a static link, PUBLIC is defined to be blank. The approach works well as it reduces the cycle time for the compile link. It also forces cleaner partitioning of the system. The configuration can build libraries with circular dependency, but I usually avoid this. Anyway, all this worked sweetly with VS 2003. Now, with VS 2005, for some of the libraries, I receive the following cryptic error: C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\ATLMFC\INCLUDE \afxcoll.h(689) : error C2248: 'CObject::CObject' : cannot access private member declared in class 'CObject' C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\ATLMFC\INCLUDE \afx.h(551) : see declaration of 'CObject::CObject' C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\ATLMFC\INCLUDE \afx.h(522) : see declaration of 'CObject' This diagnostic occurred in the compiler generated function 'CPtrList::CPtrList(const CPtrList &)' This occurs near the end of the compile and does not tell me the line in my code that has initiated the problem. I did some reverse engineering of this and found the class that seemed to be causing this. It was a derivative of a Rogue Wave Stingray class (call it class DERIVED). I was compiling a file in one directory, including the header for DERIVED located in another directory. The class DERIVED was prefixed with dllimport and all the classes in the library being built are prefixed with dllexport. The reason I am mentioning this is that I think its the import/export mechanism that is failing. When I move the file that failed compilation to the same directory as DERIVED, the file compiles! It seems to me that this must be a bug. Another point to note is that I am make very extensive usage of templates in my own code. Has anyone seen something like this? Thanks, Stan ps I tried the same code with VS 2008 and receievd the same failure. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285358
  - 20
    - M`I,5.Persecuti on . co st of th e operation -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -= MI5: cost. of the operation -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Here's what a couple of other people on Usenet (uk.misc). had to say regarding. the cost of running such an operation... PO: >Have some sense, grow up and smell. reality. What you are talking about PO: >would take loads of planning, tens of thousands of pounds. and lots of PO: >people involved in the planning, execution and maintenance. of it. You PO: >must have. a very high opinion of yourself to think you are worth it. PM: >But why? And why you?. Do you realize how much it would cost to keep PM: >one person under continuous surveillance for five years?. Think about PM: >all the man/hours. Say. they _just_ allocated a two man team and a PM:. >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say, #30,000 a year. Two men, PM: >#20,000 a year each. But they'd need to work in shifts --. so it would PM:. >be six men at #20,000 (which with on-costs would work out at more like PM: >#30,000. to the employer.) PM:. > PM:. >So, we're talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000. plus say, #40,000 for the PM: >supervisor. #220,000.. Then you've got the hardware involved. And PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think. the 'Big Boss' PM: >would listen to hours and hours. of tapes, do you. PM:. > PM: >So, all in all,. you couldn't actually do the job for much less than PM: >a quarter million a year. Over five years. What are you doing that. makes PM: >it worth the while of the. state to spend over one and a quarter million PM: >on. you? Those are pretty much the sort of calculations that. went through my head once. I stopped to consider what it must be costing them to run this operation. The partial answer is, there have. been periods when the intensity has been greater,. and times when little has happened. In fact, for much of 1993 and the first half of 1994, very little happened.. Although I don't. think that was for reasons of money - if they can tap into the taxpayer they're not going to. be short of resources, are they? The more complete answer. is in the enormity of what they're doing. Relative to the cost to British. pride of seeing their country humiliated for the persecution of their own citizens,. isn't is worth the cost of four or five people to try to bring things to a close in the manner they. would wish? To the government a million or two is quite honestly nothing - if. they can convince themselves of the necessity of what. they're doing, resources will not be. the limiting factor. 8123 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285357
  - 21
    - M-I,5.P ersecution - Ca pital Radio - C hris T arrant -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-= -= Capital. Radio - Chris Tarrant -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-= Capital Radio DJs have been "in on it" from the start.. One of the first things I heard in the summer of 1990 was from a Capital DJ who said,. "If he. listens to Capital then he can't be all bad" (supportive, you see. We're not bastards). Much of what came over the radio. in 1990 is now so far away the precise details have been obliterated by time. No diary. was kept of the details, and although archives. if they exist may give pointers, the ambiguity of what broadcasters. said would leave that open to re-interpretation. In spring 1994, Chris Tarrant on his Capital morning show made an. aside to someone. else in the studio, about a person he didn't identify. He said, "You know. this bloke? He says we're trying to kill him. We should be done for. attempted manslaughter". That mirrored. something I had said a day or two before. What Tarrant said was understood by the staff member in the studio. he was saying it to; they said,. "Oh no, don't say that" to Tarrant. If any archives exist of the morning show (probably. unlikely) then it could be found there; what he said was so out of context that he would be very hard. put to find an explanation. A couple of days later, someone at. the site where I was working repeated the remark although in a different. way; they said there had been people in a computer room when automatic fire. extinguishers went off and those people were "thinking. of suing for attempted manslaughter". Finally,. this isn't confined to the established radio stations. In 1990 after I had listened to a pirate radio. station in South London for about half an hour, there was an audible phone call in the. background, followed by total silence for a few moments, then shrieks. of laughter. "So what are we supposed to say now? Deadly torture? He's going. to talk to us now, isn't he?", which meant that they could hear what. I would say in my room. 5693 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285356
  - 22
    - M I.5'Perse cution ' b ugging an d c ounter-surveillance -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -= MI5: bugging. and counter-surveillance -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- PO: >Did you ever look for the bugs. in your house ? If not, why not ? I mean if PO: >I thought that was happening to. me, I'd search the place from top to bottom, PO:. >I mean I live there I would know if anything was out of place. If I was PO: >really. suspicious, I would call in one of those bug detection teams which PO: >have those machines that. pick up the transmitted radio waves. This PO: >reminds me of. BUGS, that new programme on BBC1 on That's exactly what we did.. We went to a competent, professional detective agency in London, paid them over 400 quid. to debug our house. They used scanner devices which go to over 1 GHz and would. pick up any nearby transmitter in that range,. they also checked the phones and found nothing... but if the tap was at the exchange,. then they wouldn't find anything, would. they? CS: >Doesn't this suggest to you that there are, in fact, no bugs. to be found? You can assume that they've done this sort of thing to other people in. more "serious". cases, where they would know the targets would suspect the presence. of electronic surveillance. So they will have developed techniques and devices which are not readily detectable either by. visual inspection or by electronic means. What those techniques. might be, I couldn't guess. In this case, the existence of bugging. devices was clear from the beginning, and they "rubbed it in". with what was said by the boy on the coach. It was almost. as if they wanted counter-surveillance people to be called in, who they knew would fail to. detect the bugging devices, causing loss of credibility to the other things I would have to say relating. to the harassment. I did all the. things someone in my situation would do to try to find the bugs. In addition to calling in. professional help using electronic counter-surveillance, I made a. close visual inspection of electrical equipment, plus any points where audio or. video surveillance devices might have been. concealed. Of course, I found nothing. Normal surveillance "mini-cameras" are quite. noticeable and require visible supporting circuitry. It seems to me the. best place to put a small video surveillance device would be additional to a. piece of electronic equipment such as a TV or video. It would. be necessary to physically break in to a property to fit such. a device. 3263 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285355
  - 23
    - M I`5 Persecutio n ' t he BBC, t elevision a nd radi o -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-= -= the BBC, television and radio. -= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-= The first incident in June 1990. was when a BBC newsreader made what seemed to be a reaction. to something which had happened in my home, and out of context. of what they were reading. My first reaction was disbelief; nothing of the sort had ever happened before,. the idea that such a thing could occur had not crossed my mind, yet there was no doubt. of what had just taken place. My disbelief eroded as this recurred time after. time. Besides the. news, offenders included shows such as Crimewatch (!), Newsnight, and "entertainment" shows. There seems to be very little. moral understanding among the people who make these programmes; they just assume. they will never be caught,. so they carry on without a thought for the illegality or amorality. of what they do. The only time I ever heard a word raised in doubt was by Paxman being interviewed by someone else (I think by. Clive Anderson) back in 1990; referring to the. "watching" he said it troubled him, and when asked by the host what. you could do about it, replied "Well, you. could just switch it off" (meaning the surveillance monitor in the studio). He clearly didn't. let his doubts stand in the way of continued surreptitious spying from his own or other people's shows,. though. Now you're convinced this is a troll,. aren't you? This story has been the subject of much debate on. the uk.* Usenet newsgroups for over a year, and some readers believe it to be an invention (it has even been suggested. that a group of psychology students are responsible!), others think. it symptomatic of. a derangement of the author, and a few give it credence. Quite a few people do know. part or all of the story already, so this text will fill in the gaps in their knowledge.. For the rest, what may persuade you. of the third possibility is that some of the incidents detailed are checkable against any archives of radio and TV programmes. that exist; that the incidents involve named people (even. if those hiding in the shadows have not made their identity or affiliations evident),. and those people may be persuaded to come out with. the truth; and that the campaign of harassment is. continuing today both in the UK and on the American continent,. in a none-too-secret fashion; by its nature the significant risk of exposure increases with. time. On several occasions people said to my face. that harassment from the TV was happening. On the first day I worked in. Oxford, I spent the evening in the local pub with. the company's technical director Ian, and Phil, another employee. Ian made a few references to me and said to. Phil, as if in an aside,. "Is he the bloke who's been on TV?" to which Phil replied, "Yes, I think. so". I made a number of efforts to find the bugs, without. success; last year we employed professional counter-surveillance people to scan for bugs. (see later) again without result. In autumn 1990 I disposed of. my TV and watched virtually. no television for the next three years. But harassment from TV stations has gone. on for over six years and continues to this day. This is something that many people obviously know is happening; yet. the TV staff have the. morality of paedophiles, that because they're getting away with it they. feel no wrong. Other people who were involved in the abuse in 1990 were DJs on. BBC radio stations, notably disc. jockeys from Radio 1 and other stations (see the following section). Again, since they don't have sense in. the first place they can't be expect to have the moral. sense not to be part of criminal harassment. 833 Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285354
  - 24
    - toolbars Does anyone know how the toolbars are done in Internet Explorer? I'm trying to figure out the easiest way to add similar functionality to my application. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285353
  - 25
    - fan-shaped purple icons appearing next to files I have just installed Visual Studio service pack 1. Suppose I work on a vc++ solution, and then open files outside a solution. I then use a pull-down menu on the right-hand side of the screen to view the names of the open files. I have noticed that _some_ of the non-solution files are labelled with a prominent fan-shaped purple icon and some aren't. Two questions. The purple icon seems potentially a useful diagnostic feature if I could only understand it. 1) What is the rule which says when this icon appears? 2) I only noticed this icon after installing Visual Studio service pack 1. Is the feature from SP1 or is it just that I never noticed it before? Thanks a lot for your help, Paul Epstein Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285352
- Next
  - 1
    - ATOM Why does the RegisterClass function return an ATOM? What do window classes have to do with atoms? Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285349
  - 2
    - Using TLSAlloc to read data into a DLL I am very new to Windows programming, and wanted to learn more about the use of the function TlsAlloc. My specific application is that I would like to read data into a file when the DLL is first loaded, and store that data in a memory block that is untouched until the DLL is unloaded. For my particular problem, use of the STATIC keyword is insufficient. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285323
  - 3
    - VS2005, x86/x64 build questions Hi... I'm trying to get our company's solutions up to x64-compatibility, and I'm seeing a couple of things that have me scratching my head a little. I created a solution with Win32 and x64 platforms and an empty C++ console project. From what I can see, the only changes to the compiler flags are to the destination directories. The compiler must be inferring the target architecture from the platform name, right? I've got an x86 Windows XP system and an x64 Windows Server 2003 system, and I ran both builds on both systems, and this produced a couple of odd results 1) on both systems, the x64 .exe came out ~25% *smaller* than the x86 .exe. I would have expected the reverse given the wider datapath/variable sizes between the architectures. 2) I can run the result of the x86 build from the 2003 x64 box on the XP x86 box, but I can't run either the x86 or x64 build product from the XP x86 box on the 2003 x64 box. On the 2003 box I get "The system cannot execute the specified program." for both .exes. Not sure why that would be 3) When I do dumpbin /headers an all the exes in question, I see that there's base addr differences between those built on the XP x86 box and the 2003 x64 box, and there is also some difference of a small number of bytes in both the code and data sections. Could any of these explain why the 2003 x64 box won't run output produced from an XP x86 box? Thanks Mark Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285321
  - 4
    - Sharing a structure between processes with memory mapped files Hi: Sorry if thisis th wrong group, but I hope somebody can help: I am currently working on a project within wich I need to shae a structure between processes. The structure is defined in a namespace as follows: struct SATreeviewInfo { IAccessible* TreeviewAccessible; VARIANT VarObject; VARIANT VarObjectState; HWND TreeviewWindow; TV_ITEM CurrentItem; LPWSTR Text[1024]; }; Late in the namespace declaration I define a variable of this type: extern SATreeviewInfo TreeviewInfo; In the main code module after creatin the memory mapped file and initializing this to th size of the structure, the following code maps the structure in to the process: TreeviewInfo =(SATreeviewInfo)MapViewOfFile(HTreeviewMSAAMapFile, NULL, 0, 0, 0); The error I obtain when compiling is: 1>c:\work\serotek\libserotek\treeview.cpp(26) : error C2440: 'type cast' : cannot convert from 'LPVOID' to 'Treeview::SATreeviewInfo' 1> No constructor could take the source type, or constructor overload resolution was ambiguous As far as I know I'm not using a class. Can somebody point me to the probjel? What is the fix. if it maters is visual studio 2005. Sean. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285318
  - 5
    - Using a structure as shared memory Hi: Firstly, I apologise if thi is the wrong group, but I'm hoping someone can help: I am currently working on a project that needs to use a structure as a shared memory block between processes. The structure is defined as follows: struct SATreeviewInfo { IAccessible* TreeviewAccessible; VARIANT VarObject; VARIANT VarObjectState; HWND TreeviewWindow; TV_ITEM CurrentItem; LPWSTR Text[1024]; }; I have then declared a variable in a namespace (the structure is declared inside this namespace also: extern SATreeviewInfo TreeviewInfo; The code for mapping this structure in to the process is as follows: //Create the file mapping and event objects for treeviews. HTreeviewMSAAMapFile =CreateFileMapping( INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, NULL, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, sizeof(SATreeviewInfo), TEXT("TreviewMapFile")); The code tomap the structure is: TreeviewInfo =(SATreeviewInfo)MapViewOfFile(HTreeviewMSAAMapFile, NULL, 0, 0, 0); The error I obtain when trying to compile is: 1>c:\work\serotek\libserotek\treeview.cpp(26) : error C2440: 'type cast' : cannot convert from 'LPVOID' to 'Treeview::SATreeviewInfo' 1> No constructor could take the source type, or constructor overload resolution was ambiguous Could someone tell me why the problem lies within this code, as I don't think I am using a class--it's defined as a structure. What if any is the fix. Help gratefully apreciated. Sean. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285315
  - 6
    - Using VC6 code in VS 2005 I'm trying to reuse a database class module that I created with VC 6.0 in Visual Studio 2005 and I'm getting a whole bunch of errors and warnings. Most of them refer to data types being different than the current definitions of functions that I'm using. Examples: If I cursor over SqlDriverConnect(..) the Intellisense says "#define SqlDriverConnect SqlDriverConnectW" and the compiler balks at my connect string being a char array. How do I "undefine" that? Same with MessageBox now being #defined as MessageBoxW, and the compiler won't accept literal strings or char arrays as parameters. Some functions give errors like "cannot convert from 'char[80]' to 'LPTSTR'. Both are char strings, no? This one blows my mind: // convert CString to number int NumRecords = atoi(num_records.GetBuffer(3)); Compiler says atoi cannot convert parameter 1 from 'w_char_t' to 'const char*'. Huh? CString::GetBuffer() dosn't return char any more? I also get a slew of warnings about "depreciated" functions like strcpy and strcat. I don't care, I use them. Is there any way to set the compiler to use the old definitions, so I don't have to rewrite my class module? Thanks. Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285306
  - 7
    - SetForegroundWindow from Remote Desktop Connection Hello, Sorry for the repost on microsoft.public.win32.programmer.ui - I meant to crosspost this to a few other groups as well. I have a strange situation here where I have an application which calls SetForegroundWindow on a window that it spawns. Now I initiate this application while sitting in front of the computer, it sets the spawned window like it should. However, when I initiate the application while connected to the computer via Remote Desktop, it fails to set the spawned window to the foreground (i.e. SetForegroundWindow returns 0). The funny thing is that GetLastError also returns 0. Anyone have any idea what might be going on here? Is this expected behaviour? Is there a way round it? Thanks in advance, Akin -- akyak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285285
  - 8
    - MFC: A subclass of a subclass of CDialog I am building an app with two MFC classes descended from CDialog. Probably by the end of it, I am going to have 5 or 6 CDialogs (in a tabbed window). I have spent quite some time adding custom painting to the first of them. All of them, in the end, are going to have this same custom painting going on. The thing to do then would be to make an intermediate class, MyDialog, descended from CDialog, with the custom painting in the OnPaint() method, then derive the 5 or 6 dialogs from that, so I am not repeating and maintaining the custom painting code in all of my dialogs. Theoretically this is very simple ... I create a class MyDialog, then change the parent class of my dialogs from CDialog to MyDialog, then transfer the custom OnPaint() method from the dialogs to MyDialog, so the children all inherit it. But this doesn't seem to work in a project built on MFC. I tried creating MyDialog by hand. I've been programming in C++ for years, this part is simple enough. The CDialog constructor stymies me a little ... the auto-generated version calls the parent with CDialog(AppDialog1::IDD, pParent), where IDD is an enum generated with the resource ID of the dialog. If I'm doing it by hand, I don't have this, so I try the alternate constructor, CDialog(). This compiles, but I don't know if this is going to be a problem. Then I try to change AppDialog1 to subclass from MyDialog. So the only change is I change the superclass from CDialog to MyDialog. Now it doesn't compile, I get "error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'constant'", the error is in the header file at this line: "class AppDialog1.1 : public MyDialog". I renamed AppDialog1 to AppDialog1.1 so I could work on it without messing up AppDialog1, which works ... is an x.x naming convention a problem? So I have no idea what that means. So I try creating MyDialog in the visual builder. It gives me a warning because I am not building it from a visually-created class, so it won't have an ID. Well I can't see a way around that, so OK. When I try to compile it, I get an error (more or less predictably) because in the enum, IDD is defined as "UNKNOWN ID" or something, so again I change the constructor from CDialog(MyDialog::IDD, pParent) to CDialog(). Now it compiles OK. So I try to create a subclass, AppDialog1.1, which descends from MyDialog Again I get the same error: "error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'constant'" And again I have no idea what exactly that is supposed to mean. Is this just impossible? Can I not mix my own classes with MFC classes this way? I am wondering if anybody has done something similar. The errors are, as far as I can guess, happening in macros or something that are generated by MFC. It is basically impossible to debug these. Maybe if I build AppDialog1.1 in the visual builder ... but then it won't allow me to choose a base class of my own, only from the MFC classes. Another dead end. -- Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/ It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper. - Rod Serling :: Currently listening to Poor Poor Pitiful Me, 1978, by Warren Zevon, from "Warren Zevon" Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285281
  - 9
    - Double-Checked Locking pattern issue Hello gurus, For the wellknown Double-Checked Locking pattern, http://www.ddj.com/184405726?pgno=1 Step 1: Allocate memory to hold a Singleton object. Step 2: Construct a Singleton object in the allocated memory. Step 3: Make pInstance point to the allocated memory. After reading for a couple of times, I still do not understand why some compiler will exchange step 2 and step 3 code? If there are any exception in step 2, the swap code will make pInstance point to an invalid memory address. Any ideas why compiler do the swap? [Code] Singleton* Singleton::instance() { if (pInstance == 0) { Lock lock; if (pInstance == 0) { pInstance = // Step 3 operator new(sizeof(Singleton)); // Step 1 new (pInstance) Singleton; // Step 2 } } return pInstance; } [/Code] thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285268
  - 10
    - Problems registering and using ATL com library First off, I must apologize for the cross posting, and also, if this is not the appropriate ng. I have searched, but could not find any ACTIVE ng that specifically deal with ATL ActiveX libraries. If you know of an ACTIVE (i.e. new posts within the last week) ng that you feel may be more appropriate, please let me know, so I may (re)direct my query there. Having (hopefully) cleared the air - here is the problem I am facing : Problem: I have written an ATL COM library using VS2005. I import several functions from about 10 dlls to use in my COM library. The library builds (i.e. compiles and links) succesfully, but fails in the post build task when registering the library. I get the error PRJ0050: "Failed to register Output. Please ensure you have appropriate permissions to modify the registry". This is incorrect, as I DO have Admin Rights on my machine. I've googled for a solution and believe there are no missing dependencies (using dependency walker), - after fixing my path so that all required libraries (used by my COM library) were on the path - I was still getting the same error (contrary to what other users had reported - when I googled problems re the PRJ0050 error). I tried to reference the library in VB6 (which automatically registers the library), and the VB6 application crashed completely. Not to be put off, I tried to manually register it using regsvr32. This time, I get the following error message when trying to register the library (dll) : "Load Library failed - Recursion too deep; the stack overflowed". I'm at a loss on how to proceed. Any suggestions? Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285265
  - 11
    - Including text file contents as string literal Is there any preprocessor trickery available to include the contents of a text file as a string literal at compile time in C++? I only need this under VC++, so Microsoft-specific extensions would be OK. Everything I've tried either falls foul of the rule that string literals mustn't contain newlines, or just embeds the #include directive itself as the string. The one workaround I've found is to add a simple .rc file embedding the file as a user-defined Win32 resource, then use FindResource -> LoadResource -> LockResource at run time to access the contents. However there's a problem with that approach - VC++ doesn't correctly determine that the .rc file depends on the text file, so doesn't recompile it if the text file changes. You can't specify additional dependencies for .rc files, so you have to change the extension and create a custom build rule that just calls rc.exe and either specify the dependency in the rule or the file properties. That's quite a hassle, especially when managing multiple projects, so is there something simple I've missed? Cheers, Andy Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285264
  - 12
    - Korean Language Pack icon My folks are on IE7, XP Home. We have installed Korean Global IME and the language bar floats on top. They would like to have an icon on their desktop. Any suggestions? HJR Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285247
  - 13
    - Please help: Converting g++ to VC++ Dear all: Please advise on the following: I am converting a g++ cpp file so that it can be compiled and run and modified in Visual Studio .NET 2003 VC++. Where do I put the g++ header files? Also, can g++ files compile in VC++, without requiring too many chanegs? Thanks, CCDSJ Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285237
  - 14
    - Non-inline template specialization of member function okay? Is it okay to put the implementation of a template specialization of a member function in a CPP file, hoping to have it externally linked? I tried to build the following program, trying both VC++ 2003 and VC++ 2008, but it got me a linker error. ////////////////////////////////////////////////// // Factory.h #ifndef FACTORY_H_INCLUDED #define FACTORY_H_INCLUDED class Factory { public: template <typename T> T Create() const; // Specialization, implemented in its CPP file: template <> int Create<int>() const; }; template <typename T> T Factory::Create() const { return T(); } #endif ////////////////////////////////////////////////// // Factory.cpp #include "Factory.h" template <> int Factory::Create<int>() const { return 1; } ////////////////////////////////////////////////// // Main.cpp #include "Factory.h" int main() { Factory fac; return fac.Create<int>(); // Link error!!! } ////////////////////////////////////////////////// VC++ 2008 got me the following: "error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "public: int __thiscall Factory::Create<int>(void)const " (??$Create@H@Factory@@QBEHXZ) referenced in function _main" Interestingly the program *does* compile (and link), when the class is declared as "__declspec(dllexport)". Is it really necessary to use __declspec, in this case? Kind regards, -- Niels Dekker http://www.xs4all.nl/~nd/dekkerware Scientific programmer at LKEB, Leiden University Medical Center Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285226
  - 15
    - Malloc code Hello, To the ones that are familliar with my previous post entitled ("Simple question about headers and malloc") ( hummm not as simple as *I* thought!) , here are a few things to keep in mind. You have most probably noticed that I was using an array called "xxx[3]" and was assigning it contents of my structure like so: xxx[0]= px[0].A0; xxx[1]= px[0].A1; xxx[2]= px[0].A2; This was because the watch window in my compiler is not able to read the contents of "px[0].ItemName". This is a known issue to them and are currently working on it. Therefore any strucutre that I allocate in memory, I must assign its contents to an array for me to be able to view the data ! Also as stated by David: >Whatever is happening is probably more to do with the fact that you're >declaring pointers in header files. I still left the pointers in the header files for this example, but rest assure I will change this and do it as David said. For now I would just like to see if there is something else that causes the problem. Okay! here it goes. I was very reluctant in posting such a lenghty sample but I don't know how else to get everyone to see the full picture so that I get help that will specifically solve the problem. So here it is. First and for most, in main, I call the TCP_CONFIG_GMM function which will set up some data in a strucuture called GMM (Graphics message mask). This structure will hold very little information for 3 out of the dozens of messages stored in external flash! So therefore if GMM contains the following: //GRAPHICS MESSAGE MASK struct GMM{ int MSG; //MESSAGE #. ( 0= no message required at this location) int VPIX_START; //VERTICAL MESSAGE START PIXEL int HPIX_START; //HORIZONTAL MESSAGE START PIXEL } aGMM[]= //Array of Graphics message masks: {1, 10, 10, //1st MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 5, 50, 30, //2nd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 44, 100, 0}; //3rd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX Then, this means that message #1 will be displayed starting at pixel (10,10) , and message #5 will be displayed starting at pixel (50,30) and message #44 will be displayed starting at pixel (100,0). As you will see later in the sample code, innitially the GMM structure is reset with default values like so: //GRAPHICS MESSAGE MASK struct GMM{ int MSG; //MESSAGE #. ( 0= no message required at this location) int VPIX_START; //VERTICAL MESSAGE START PIXEL int HPIX_START; //HORIZONTAL MESSAGE START PIXEL } aGMM[]= //Array of Graphics message masks: {0, 255, 255, //1st MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 0, 255, 255, //2nd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 0, 255, 255}; //3rd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX The GMM structure is filled with informations via the TCP_CONFIG_GMM function prior to any screen displaying activity or when new messages are regiquired for any subsequent screens. The Graphics Message Mask contains all the messages required for the next screens that will be painted. For now, the GMM can contain a maximum of 3 messages each with their respective vertical/horizontal start pixels coordinates. The VPIX_START and HPIX_START values depict the start pixel locations X/Y for every message. In the sample code below, when I call the TCP_CONFIG_GMM function, it will fill in new values in the GMM and create the neccessary arrays of structures by calling the TCP_LOAD_MCB_X function. In TCP_LOAD_MCB_X function, you will notice I fill in the items of the arrays of structures with bogus data such as 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12. These values are sequentially assigned to the xxx[12] array so I can view the contents of every item! Up to here I have no problems, everything gets assigned correctly! Now, I exit the TCP_CONFIG_GMM function and I am back in main. The next function I call is the LCD_PAINTSCREEN function which resides in a file called LCD.c. In this function, I call the Fetch() function which will scan every pixel location with the ones stored in the GMM. More precicely, the actual verification is done in the GET_MSG_MSK_REC_FROM_PIXLOC() function. If 255 is returned, then the pixel where any of the messages would start is not reached. If there is a match, then I return the message # so I know which pMCB I have to read. Once I return from the GET_MSG_MSK_REC_FROM_PIXLOC() function I create a memory allocation with the following line: pCL_B = malloc(15*(sizeof(struct CL_B))); if(pCL_B==NULL) {BAD_POINTER=1;} And up to here everything is fine. Then I assign the correct pMCB pointer to a general MCB pointer called px. Now I go on and read the items in the MCB structure that I assigned the 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 by doing: for(i=0;i<11;i++) { xxx[0]= px[i].ENDOFCHAR; xxx[1]= px[i].A2; xxx[2]= px[i].A1; xxx[3]= px[i].A0; xxx[4]= px[i].LEADING_PIX; xxx[5]= px[i].TRAILING_PIX; xxx[6]= px[i].CHARSPACING; xxx[7]= px[i].CHAR_TRSP; xxx[8]= px[i].mCHAR_BCOLOR; xxx[9]= px[i].lCHAR_BCOLOR; xxx[10]= px[i].mTEXT_COLOR; xxx[11]= px[i].lTEXT_COLOR; } And when i = 0, I read, (error,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) and when i = 1, I read, (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) and when i = 2, I read, (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) up to when i = 5. So when i = 5, I read (1,2,3,4,30,128,195,0,9,10,11). WHen i = 6,7, I read (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12). When i = 8, I read, (1,5,227,4,7,8,7,8,9,10,11,12) and this is where I pretty much become confused! Given my code sample below, I would appreciate to know if I require to pass back my malloc pointer from TCP_CONFIG_GMM() and pass it back into FETCH() function? Here is the full sample code and does compile without errors! ============================================ACM152.c #include <DeviceSettings_M.h> //DEVICE INNITIALIZATIONS #include <stdlib.h> //STANDARD LIBRARY #include <stdlibm.h> //FOR MALLOC #include <TCP.h> //TCP HEADER #include <LCD.c> //LCD FUNCTIONS #include <TCP.c> //TEXT CODE PAGE void main() { //Just assign one message starting at 10,10 ! TCP_CONFIG_GMM( 1, 10, 10, 0, 255, 255, 0, 255, 255); //PAINTS THE LCD SCREEN LCD_PAINTSCREEN( 176, //SETS RIGHT HORZ WINDOW EXTENT 0, //SETS LEFT HORZ WINDOW EXTENT 132, //SETS LOWEST VERT WINDOW EXTENT 0, //SETS HIGHER VERT WINDOW EXTENT 24, //MOST SIGNIFICANT START ADDRESS BYTE IN FLASH 0, //MID SIGNIFICANT START ADDRESS BYTE IN FLASH 0); //LEAST SIGNIFICANT START ADDRESS BYTE IN FLASH } ================================================== ===============================================LCD.c //PAINTS THE LCD SCREEN void LCD_PAINTSCREEN ( int SETWINEXTHORZ_MSB, int SETWINEXTHORZ_LSB, int SETWINEXTVERT_MSB, int SETWINEXTVERT_LSB, int A2, int A1, int A0) { int i,k; //Call fetch() at every pixel! for(i=SETWINEXTVERT_LSB;i<SETWINEXTVERT_MSB;i++) { for(k=SETWINEXTHORZ_LSB;k<SETWINEXTHORZ_MSB;k++) { FETCH( &A2, //MSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH &A1, //MIDSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH &A0, //LSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH &i, //CURRENT VERTICAL LOCATIONS &k); //CURRENT HORIZONTAL LOCATIONS } } } ==================================================== ============================================== TCP.h //defines the pixel color depht (16 bits per pixel) #define RGB_COLORDEPTH 16 //Defines bytes per pixel #define BYTESPERPIXEL 2 //Defines number of pixels per horizontal line #define PIXELSPERHORZLINE 176 //Defines the size of the message indexes in the aGMM array. Please note that //the aGMM array contains an array of Graphics message mask structures! //ex: size of GMM structure = 3 items, size of array holding 3 structures = 9 items //Therefore, 9/3 = 3 messages #define GMM_BLOCK (sizeof(aGMM)/sizeof(struct GMM)) //Number of bytes per MCB line #define B_P_MCB_L 16 //GRAPHICS MESSAGE MASK struct GMM{ int MSG; //MESSAGE #. ( 0= no message required at this location) int VPIX_START; //VERTICAL MESSAGE START PIXEL int HPIX_START; //HORIZONTAL MESSAGE START PIXEL } aGMM[]= //Array of Graphics message masks: {0, 255, 255, //1st MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 0, 255, 255, //2nd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX 0, 255, 255}; //3rd MESSAGE NUMBER / VERTICAL PIX / HORIZONTAL PIX struct MCB{ int ENDOFCHAR; //:TRUE:=End of char / :FALSE:=Valid char int A0; //LSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int A1; //MIDSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int A2; //MSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int LEADING_PIX; //LEADING SPACES, BEFORE CHARACTER int TRAILING_PIX; //TRAILLING SPACES, AFTER CHARACTER int CHARSPACING; //SPACES BETWEEN CHARACTERS int CHAR_TRSP; //CHARACTER TRANSPARENCY int mCHAR_BCOLOR; //MSB OF BACK COLOR int lCHAR_BCOLOR; //LSB OF BACK COLOR int mTEXT_COLOR; //MSB OF TEXT COLOR int lTEXT_COLOR; //LSB OF TEXT COLOR }; //Declare a pointer of type "struct MCB" struct MCB* pMCB1; struct MCB* pMCB2; struct MCB* pMCB3; struct CL_B{ int BYTE1; int BYTE2; }; //Declare a pointer of type "struct CL_B" struct CL_B* pCL_B; void TCP_CONFIG_GMM( int MSG1, int VPX1, int HPX1, //1st MSG WITH VERT/HORIZ START LOCATIONS int MSG2, int VPX2, int HPX2, //2nd MSG " int MSG3, int VPX3, int HPX3); //3rd MSG " void TCP_LOAD_MCB_X(int j); void FETCH( int *A2, //MSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH int *A1, //MIDSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH int *A0, //LSB OF CURRENT MESSAGE ADDRESS TO PAR FLASH int *VPX1, //CURRENT VERTICAL START LOCATIONS int *HPX1); //CURRENT HORIZONTAL START LOCATIONS void *SizeMCB_X(int m); int GET_MSG_MSK_REC_FROM_PIXLOC( int *VPX1, //VERTICAL START LOCATIONS int *HPX1); //HORIZONTAL START LOCATIONS ==================================================== ==============================================TCP.c void TCP_CONFIG_GMM( int MSG1, int VPX1, int HPX1, int MSG2, int VPX2, int HPX2, int MSG3, int VPX3, int HPX3) { int a; //Counter //LOAD THE GMM STRUCTURE WITH THE CURRENT MASK INFORMATION //1st Message index aGMM[0].MSG=MSG1; aGMM[0].VPIX_START=VPX1; aGMM[0].HPIX_START=HPX1; //2nd Message index aGMM[1].MSG=MSG2; aGMM[1].VPIX_START=VPX2; aGMM[1].HPIX_START=HPX2; //3rd Message index aGMM[2].MSG=MSG3; aGMM[2].VPIX_START=VPX3; aGMM[2].HPIX_START=HPX3; //Scroll through the GMM structure for(a=0;a<GMM_BLOCK;a++) { if(aGMM[a].MSG > 0) //If no message, then exit loop! { TCP_LOAD_MCB_X(a); //CURRENT GMM STRUCTURE } } } void TCP_LOAD_MCB_X(int j) { int i,k; struct MCB* px; int xxx[12]; px = (struct MCB *)SizeMCB_X(j); //Size & create array of MCB structures for(i=0;i<11;i++) { k=0; px[i].ENDOFCHAR = 1; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].ENDOFCHAR; px[i].A2 = 2; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].A2; px[i].A1 = 3; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].A1; px[i].A0 = 4; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].A0; px[i].LEADING_PIX = 5; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].LEADING_PIX; px[i].TRAILING_PIX = 6; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].TRAILING_PIX; px[i].CHARSPACING = 7; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].CHARSPACING; px[i].CHAR_TRSP = 8; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].CHAR_TRSP; px[i].mCHAR_BCOLOR = 9; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].mCHAR_BCOLOR; px[i].lCHAR_BCOLOR = 10; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].lCHAR_BCOLOR; px[i].mTEXT_COLOR = 11; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].mTEXT_COLOR; px[i].lTEXT_COLOR = 12; k++; xxx[k-1]= px[i].lTEXT_COLOR; } } void FETCH( int *A2, //MSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int *A1, //MIDSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int *A0, //LSB OF MESSAGE ADDRESS IN PAR FLASH int *VPX1, //CURRENT VERTICAL START LOCATIONS int *HPX1) //CURRENT HORIZONTAL START LOCATIONS { int c,i,BAD_POINTER; int xxx[16]; struct MCB *px; //Local variant pointer of type MCB c = GET_MSG_MSK_REC_FROM_PIXLOC( VPX1, //VERTICAL START LOCATIONS HPX1); //HORIZONTAL START LOCATIONS //If pixel reached then display text! if(c!=255) { //Allocate memory for containerLineBuffer. containerLineBuffer is //used for special storing of data in other code in this function //which is not shown and not relevant to this issue ! pCL_B = malloc(15*(sizeof(struct CL_B))); if(pCL_B==NULL) {BAD_POINTER=1;} switch(c) { case 0: px = pMCB1; break; case 1: px = pMCB2; break; case 2: px = pMCB3; break; default: break; } //JUNK DISPLAYED HERE!!!! for(i=0;i<11;i++) { xxx[0]= px[i].ENDOFCHAR; xxx[1]= px[i].A2; xxx[2]= px[i].A1; xxx[3]= px[i].A0; xxx[4]= px[i].LEADING_PIX; xxx[5]= px[i].TRAILING_PIX; xxx[6]= px[i].CHARSPACING; xxx[7]= px[i].CHAR_TRSP; xxx[8]= px[i].mCHAR_BCOLOR; xxx[9]= px[i].lCHAR_BCOLOR; xxx[10]= px[i].mTEXT_COLOR; xxx[11]= px[i].lTEXT_COLOR; } free(pMCB1); free(pMCB2); free(pMCB3); free(pCL_B); } } void *SizeMCB_X(int m) { #define __CTNRSIZE_X (11*B_P_MCB_L) switch (m) { case 0: //Assign the address of an array of n structres created in heap to a pointer ! pMCB1 = malloc(__CTNRSIZE_X*(sizeof(struct MCB))); return pMCB1; break; case 1: //Assign the address of an array of n structres created in heap to a pointer ! pMCB2 = malloc(__CTNRSIZE_X*(sizeof(struct MCB))); return pMCB2; break; case 2: //Assign the address of an array of n structres created in heap to a pointer ! pMCB3 = malloc(__CTNRSIZE_X*(sizeof(struct MCB))); return pMCB3; break; default: break; } } int GET_MSG_MSK_REC_FROM_PIXLOC( int *C_VPX1, //VERTICAL START LOCATIONS int *C_HPX1) //HORIZONTAL START LOCATIONS { int i; int rvCMMR=255; //Do as many times as there are graphics message mask records! for(i=0;i<GMM_BLOCK;i++) { //Continue only if any of the graphics message mask //start pixels equals current LCD pixel location if(aGMM[i].VPIX_START == *C_VPX1) { if(aGMM[i].HPIX_START == *C_HPX1) { //Check if the message is required (>0)! if(aGMM[i].MSG==0) //No message exists. continue; //Skip the rest of logic and continue for loop! rvCMMR = i; //Assign current message mask break; //Leave this function! } } } return rvCMMR; } =================================================== I hope I have made my problem clearer than my previous posts and I am *absolutely* open to any suggestions such as no variable declarations in header files, better emplacements of mallocs or returning of malloc pointers and so forth. This is because now I finally have a small peice of code sample where I can actually try all your suggestions! Again, sorry for the long post and all the details but I fugured I would explain it the best I could once and for all. Thankyou all in advance! -- Sincere and appreciative Regards Robert Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285201
  - 16
    - MSDN volatile sample Hello everyone, In the MSDN volatile sample, http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/12a04hfd(VS.80).aspx I do not understand what is the purpose of the sample. I have tried to remove the keyword volatile, and the result is the same. :-) Any ideas? thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285160
  - 17
    - Service / User Process Option I've written a service that does everything its supposed to do. Now I'd like to offer my users the option to run it as a background process. My naive approach would be to simply bypass all the service- specific API commands using some simple logic. And instead, the application would create a slightly different main loop, but essentially keep the same funcitonality. Anybody else have a better approach? Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285150
  - 18
    - Getting rid of the C RTL I'm working on a little DLL that doesn't use (per se) the C RTL. So I gave it a custom entry point and (with VC8) wound up with a .CRT section and couple of warnings (LNK4210). To track it down, I ignored LIBCMT and discovered that this line WCHAR szString[24] = L""; was somehow involving _memset() (which of course wasn't found). When I changed that to WCHAR szString[24]; szString[0] = 0; the .CRT section and the warnings went away. It's not a problem but I'd like to understand what's going on. Thanks! -- - Vince Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285147
  - 19
    - why visual studio does not optimize constructor in this case Hello everyone, Why visual studio does not optimize constructor in this case? I do not understand what the MSDN mentioned, if use different named object, compiler can not optimize. Why? http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms364057(vs.80).aspx [Code] #include <stdio.h> class RVO { public: RVO(){printf("I am in constructor\n");} RVO (const RVO& c_RVO) {printf ("I am in copy constructor\n");} int mem_var; }; RVO MyMethod (int i) { RVO rvo; rvo.mem_var = i; if (rvo.mem_var == 10) return (RVO()); return (rvo); } int main() { RVO rvo; rvo=MyMethod(5); } [/Code] Output is, I am in constructor I am in constructor I am in copy constructor My expected output is, I am in constructor I am in constructor thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285124
  - 20
    - Challenging GotW 66's moral Hello everyone, In GotW #66, one of the moral is the exception handler of constructor should not do any like resource free task. I do not agree. Here is the quoated moral and my code to prove this moral will have memory leak. Anything wrong with my analysis? http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/066.htm Moral #1: Constructor function-try-block handlers have only one purpose -- to translate an exception. (And maybe to do logging or some other side effects.) They are not useful for any other purpose. [Code] class A { private: int* p; public: A() try { p = new int[10]; // there are some other exceptions here } catch (bad_alloc) { // do not delete since bad_alloc means memory pointed by p is not allocated } catch (...) { // if we do not delete p, there will be memory leak // at this point, we are conflicting with Gotw 66's moral 1 if (p) delete[] p; } } [/Code] thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285103
  - 21
    - Simple question about headers and malloc! Hello, This is a C question or if I may call it a situation! Thanking all fellows in advance for their help. I find myself in a bind where I *must* specifically include the yyy header file (see code sample below) in main even though all its declarations are specifically used for yyy.c. Therefore I am making all of its declarations global to the whole program! and I don't like it ! The reason for this is because when I am in yyy.c file I am allocating memory (using malloc) and then exit back to main. I later call again functions in yyy.c and allocate another block of memory (using malloc) and further continue some logic in yyy.c. As I I read data from first memory allocation, I get data strored from the second allocation... even though I didn't free the first malloc allocation! I don't free it because I need to use both data in the memory allocated by both mallocs. But each allocation is done at different times!!!!! Therefore, I think that when you exit a function where you used malloc, its pointer is lost right?, but the allocation of the memory and its data is not. And since it is not freed, the data in this memory should still stay intact after leaving the function that allocated, right? At a later instance if I go back in yyy.c and do another malloc , since the pointer to the previous memory allocation is lost, I think that the previous memory block is up for grabs by the next malloc command and this is where data gets mixed up. So this is why I am including the yyy.h file in main so all pointers returned from mallocs always stay valid and all allocations are reserved at all times. There are other files between xxx.c and yyy.c and would be quite lenghty to explain it all, but I hope its clear enough to get a general idea. Making all pointer declarations that will be used with malloc commands in a global header file is the only way I see that preserves memory allocations when mallocs are done at different times since the pointers returned by malloc are never lost. I don't really think I would like to return pointers returned by malloc back to main in order to preserve them. I could be wrong about all this, and if I am, I would appreciate your help. I just keep testing and get the same results... data overlapping! So as I was saying, basically if you have a .c file with its header file, we typically include the header file from within the .c file. But this is not what I am doing.... please view the sample below. This obviously compiles but not sure if this is a good C programming practice. Any feedback appreciated. #include <yyy.h> //Is this okay? #include <xxx.c> int main() { //...some code ! //Calls functions in xxx.c } ===========xxx.h ...some declarations ============== ===========xxx.c #include <xxx.h> #include <yyy.c> ...some code //Calls functions in yyy.c ============== ===========yyy.h ...some declarations ============== ===========yyy.c //Should yyy.h be included here instead? ...some code ============== -- Best regards Robert Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285100
  - 22
    - Efficient code maintenance I face some code maintenance issues I need advice on. A scientific collaborator of mine is interested in using my code (VC+ +.NET) for her experiments. I continuously improve and modify my code, and I intend to provide updated versions of the code to her team in the future. The problem is that my code does much more than my collaborator needs and can work with. To be specific, my code controls two data aquisition cameras and 6 sets of nanopositioning and micropositioning motors. My collaborator only needs to control one camera and does not need the rest. So I spend about an hour commenting out all the unnecessary stuff (like, 75% of my code), saved the solution under another name and gave her the code. The problem is - when she needs the updated code (and she will, since she will come across some bugs I haven't seen/haven't bothered to fix)) I don't want to go through each line one by one to see what has changed and what has not, or spend another hour commenting out stuff from the updated code. The code is ~5,000 lines with ~10 classes. She only needs 3 classes out of 10. Removing unnecessary stuff is not just a matter of commenting out #includes, since there are gloval variables, instances of classes, communication between classes, etc. Is there an efficient way of doing this? Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285083
  - 23
    - Buy viagra where order Viagra online Buy Generic Viagra Buy viagra where order Viagra online Buy Generic Viagra http://www.buy-viagra-where.info/ http://www.buy-viagra-where.info/ http://www.buy-viagra-where.info/ VIAGRA for only $1.50 per pill, free shipping and visa accepted CIALIS for only $2.07 per pill, free shipping and visa accepted LEVITRA for only $2.54 per pill, free shipping and visa accepted ACOMPLIA for only $1.79[/b] per pill, free shipping and visa accepted http://www.buy-viagra-where.info -- Buy viagra where and Buy where Viagra and order Viagra online from www.buy-viagra-where.info. Buy Viagra from leading online pharmacy and we provide cheap Viagra by online order at affordable cost. Buy best quality cheap Viagra, buy online Viagra and order Viagra from us Order Generic Viagra (Sildenafil) Generic Viagra 50 mg (Viagra(R) equivalent) Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285071
  - 24
    - Why it is not good code for constructor Hello everyone, Here is a sample from Dr. Dobb C++. In the analysis, the code is bad below. But I do not think the code is bad, 1. if bad_alloc is thrown in new int[], we just catch it and write some log; 2. if there are any exception in B's constructor, we will also be in catch block and we could also write some log. Why it is bad code? Any comments? (I do not agree that there is resource leak, since if we met with bad_alloc in new int[], there is no memory allocated at all, so no root of memory/resource leak). http://www.ddj.com/cpp/184401297 [Code] C::C(int) try : B(new int[n]) // horrible! { ... } catch(Error &e) { } [/Code] thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285060
  - 25
    - bad_alloc Hello everyone, Please help to comment whether my following understanding is correct, 1. whether or not we are using auto_ptr to allocate new object on heap (using new), there may be bad_alloc exceptions; 2. when we met with such exceptions, we catch it (bad_alloc) and try to mininize the operation in catch handler block (since when bad_alloc occurs, it means memory is running out, we can not do anything complex in handler). Both are correct? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. thanks in advance, George Tag: Dynamic linking a dll Tag: 285058

Dynamic linking a dll

I want from my application choose a dll file from a directory, and see witch
functions the dll have, run one of them and get the result of the function.

The objective is could have more than one dll available with different
functions available, to customize some operations, operations that could be
specific to a costumer.

This way, my application could dependently of the costumer, choose a
customized function/dll that what run to do a particular operation.

How can I do this?

Thanks,
Rui Oliveira

Top

Re: Dynamic linking a dll by Doug

Doug
Thu Jan 03 11:22:39 CST 2008

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:16:01 -0800, Rui Oliveira
<RuiOliveira@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Dynamic linking a dll
>
>I want from my application choose a dll file from a directory, and see witch
>functions the dll have, run one of them and get the result of the function.
>
>The objective is could have more than one dll available with different
>functions available, to customize some operations, operations that could be
>specific to a costumer.
>
>This way, my application could dependently of the costumer, choose a
>customized function/dll that what run to do a particular operation.
>
>How can I do this?
>
>Thanks,
>Rui Oliveira

See LoadLibrary and GetProcAddress.

--
Doug Harrison
Visual C++ MVP

Top