|
I don't know if this is the appropriate place to ask this but here goes...
I'm working on the help documentation for my application by writing raw RTF code for the WinHelp compiler.
Can anyone tell me the proper RTF syntax for a hyperlink to an Internet URL?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for reading my question.
I am trying to program in OLE DB.
Some function have been added,such as m_pSet->delete() and so on.
No bug has been found until I found I can't use m_pSet->Insert() to Insert new data.The return of FAILED(m_pSet->Insert()) is always TRUE.How can I do to solve it?Would anyone like tell me?Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
1) When using ActiveScript in my app, is it okay to have one class implement both IActiveScript and IActiveScriptSite if only one active script site is to be used?
2) Can I have one class factory create both objects if I can't do the above?
I'm looking for a good explanation if possible from someone who has used Active Scripting before, so that I can get started with it.
- Roman -
|
|
|
|
|
Q1. You don't need to have any implementation of IActiveScript. It means that you have made own script language engine.
Because you are a client of some script engine, you need to implement only a site-object with IActiveScriptSite interface.
Q2. You aren't obliged to need any class factory for a site-object. You can create it internally by CComObject<cactscrsit>::CreateInstance or CActScrSit::_CreatorClass::CreateInstance. Or you can create through original COM way with the coclass of your site-object.
Some example for which CActScrSit class must implement the IActiveScriptSite's function (isn't submitted)
HRESULT hr;
CComPtr<IActiveScriptSite> spScriptSite;
hr = CActScrSit::_CreatorClass::CreateInstance(NULL,IID_IActiveScriptSite, (void**)&spScriptSite);
if( FAILED(hr) )
return E_FAIL;
CComPtr<IActiveScript> spScript;
hr = spScript.CoCreateInstance( OLESTR("VBScript") );
if( SUCCEEDED(hr) )
{
CComQIPtr<IActiveScriptParse> spParser( spScript );
if( spParser )
{
hr = spScript->SetScriptSite( spScriptSite );
hr = spParser->InitNew();
hr = spScript->SetScriptState( SCRIPTSTATE_STARTED );
hr = spScript->AddTypeLib( CComModule::m_libid, 1, 0, 0L );
hr = spScript->AddNamedItem( OLESTR("Me"), SCRIPTITEM_ISVISIBLE );
EXCEPINFO exErr;
DWORD flags = SCRIPTTEXT_ISEXPRESSION;
hr = spParser->ParseScriptText( bstrFormula, OLESTR("Me"),
(IUnknown*)this, NULL,0, 0,flags, pVal, & exErr );
spScript->Close();
}
}
spScriptSite = (IActiveScriptSite*) NULL;
With best wishes,
Vita
|
|
|
|
|
hey thanks for the reply,
what's a "coclass" i am still not to clear about what that is
also, i am not using MFC, so I will have to somehow use CoCreateInstance... or maybe i can just create a new instance like MyScriptSite* pSite = new MyScriptSite with MyScriptSite being derived from IActiveScriptSite
- Roman -
|
|
|
|
|
"MyScriptSite* pSite = new MyScriptSite" is possible if you make the right ref-counting with your MyScriptSite class. So ATL will create this class with ref-counter is equal 0. Therefore you must provide a way to increase it to 1 by AddRef().
The "coclass" is a term which designates a created class outside the server.
With best wishes,
Vita
|
|
|
|
|
i am implementing each method of IUnknown manually, e.g. i have my own ref-count variable and AddRef and Release work properly
- Roman -
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Does making a window disabled, make it disappear from the"Alt+Tab" list?
If I do a EnableWindow(FALSE) in a dialog based application, I cannot see it in the Alt+Tab list.
Can this be prevented?
Thanks....
|
|
|
|
|
Loop through and disable all the controls, but leave the window enabled.
---
Shog9
If I could sleep forever, I could forget about everything...
|
|
|
|
|
The windows in the task list, as it's more correctly called, meet the following criteria:
- No parent
- Visible
- No owner and WS_EX_TOOLWINDOW, OR Owner and WS_EX_APPWINDOW
- At least one character of text
Peter O.
|
|
|
|
|
|
is it possible for me to create a function with 3 return values?
|
|
|
|
|
|
or you could have it return a struct:
struct MyFuncReturnType
{
int one;
std::string two;
void* three;
};
- Roman -
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Read a C/C++ book.
2. If you really wanna do it you can use assembly to push the values onto the stack and than pop them when the function returns.
3. I really do think u need a C/C++ book
bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur [eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
|
|
|
|
|
I have a sample of win2k ddk's netcfg.I want to write the same program.But when I use there include file there are many errors.
d:\program files\ntddk\inc\rpcndr.h(880) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';' before identifier 'MaxCount'
d:\program files\ntddk\inc\rpcndr.h(880) : error C2501: 'ULONG_PTR' : missing storage-class or type specifiers
d:\program files\ntddk\inc\rpcndr.h(880) : error C2501: 'MaxCount' : missing storage-class or type specifiers
what's wrong with the program.I have set the include file path in Vc.
Please help me.
Friends who have written ddk program help me please.
I want to ask a question.^_^
|
|
|
|
|
someone help me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
i installed the platform sdk.But there is the same question.What's wrong with it?
I want to ask a question.^_^
|
|
|
|
|
This may seem like and odd question, but why do most people prefix some of their variables with "m"? Does it help distinguish member variables or somthing of the sort?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, the prefix helps the reader to recognize a member variable, one that isn't declared right there in the function. Other prefixes are g_ for globals (pretty common), and s_ for statics in a function (less common, although I use it). I've also seen one or two people use c_ for controls (such as a CListCtrl in a dialog) but I prefer using m_wnd for those.
--Mike--
Just released - RightClick-Encrypt v1.3 - Adds fast & easy file encryption to Explorer
My really out-of-date homepage
Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
|
|
|
|
|
I like the c_ for control.
Always I use the first letter in lower case to show the type.
eg int m_iCount, CSize m_zBox, Point m_pDot. etc.
Especially in larger apps I find it makes Life easier with the intellisense stuff.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining.
Said byRoger Wright about me.
|
|
|
|