 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Which you can't do ***if you don't have the compiler***.
Yes you can. It's in the Windows SDK, which is a free download. You don't
need *any* compiler to look up the values.
> conclusion that the only way to "find" the information is by buying
> which ever version of the VC++/VC# system **actually** included the
> particular .h that you need. And, if its an older API call, you might
> need the "developer" version.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=E6E1C3DF-A74F-4207-8586-711EBE331CDC&displaylang=en
http://www.microsoft.com/express/product/default.aspx
Viola! Free compiling, libraries, and examples!
> Right.. Throw more money at it. lol
It's your job. Your employer should be throwing money at it.
> But, point is, in contrast, years back I bought books on the Apple IIgs
> API, when had one. It "included" the flag values in the examples, and
> had entire tables at the end, which included them, as part of the books
> on each API.
I don't know what to say. I never had any sort of problem like you're
talking about.
>>> :p After all, its makes so much more sense to buy a $600 compiler you
>>> don't need, than a $50 book you "do". ;)
>>
>> The compiler's free.
>>
> Umm. Only if you want to use the "latest" APIs. If, for some reason, you
> are trying to update, modify, understand, or just "code for" an older
> pre-.NET API, then "no it isn't". You still have to buy the full
> "developer" version.
Welcome to commercial software development. Hold on to the old versions of
your software.
> I know. I tried that path on one project I was
> attempting a while back. If it was free, it wouldn't require you to buy
> a higher level version, to get "backward compatible" library
> definitions. Just saying. ;)
So, your primary complaint is that a commercial software company only gives
away for free their latest supported version of software, and that if you
don't have an old version, you have to pay them $50 or $100 to get it?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Ouch ouch ouch!"
"What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
"No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Is it now? No. Its **was**. Less than a year ago I had dialup, and
> having to hunt pages for stuff, some of which could time out on the
I think we're all aware that using web apps with crappy connectivity is
annoying. I'm asking whether you ever had to look up event log ID codes when
you didn't have connectivity? And, had you, would it have actually helped
you solve the problem?
Just curious.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Ouch ouch ouch!"
"What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
"No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>> Right.. Throw more money at it. lol
>
> It's your job. Your employer should be throwing money at it.
>
Umm. Actually, no it isn't. If I had a job that involved "coding", I
wouldn't have as many problems getting the information I need. I am one
of the poor unfortunates that has to pay for this stuff with "my own
money", and doesn't make $15+/hr, or what ever the going rate is. It...
kind of puts a cramp into "solving" little issues like getting software
you need. ;)
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Is it now? No. Its **was**. Less than a year ago I had dialup, and
>> having to hunt pages for stuff, some of which could time out on the
>
> I think we're all aware that using web apps with crappy connectivity is
> annoying. I'm asking whether you ever had to look up event log ID codes
> when you didn't have connectivity? And, had you, would it have actually
> helped you solve the problem?
>
> Just curious.
>
These specific ones, probably not. But, I would have loved to have some
sort of "sane" explanations for error codes back in Win 98, when
something blue screened do to a DLL getting hosed, or other glitches,
which is a similar situation. Reinstalling really isn't a "fix" for that
stuff, since usually such a reinstall involves either replacing "all"
files, then having to repatch, hoping the same problem doesn't come up,
which was a nightmare with dialup, or replacing a single file **if** you
knew which one, thus possibly introducing an incompatibility, which
would cause a new BSD.
Yeah. Less of a problem now, but I still wish some times that the error
codes you get from their software was a bit clearer, or that even if you
know what the code means, it wasn't so much like modern car mechanics,
where you know the "general" area of the engine that broke, but its not
always clear *which* of three parts are involved, or even if its not
just a sensor glitch, and all of them are OK. lol
Just because I don't have the problem now doesn't mean I a) won't, or b)
haven't in the past, and that there are no reasons to distrust a
internet "dependent" solution to these sorts of things.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> These specific ones, probably not. But, I would have loved to have some
> sort of "sane" explanations for error codes back in Win 98, when
> something blue screened do to a DLL getting hosed, or other glitches,
> which is a similar situation.
Not too similar. In the event logs, the program is running correctly and as
expected, and it inserts information about its progress into the log. In the
BSOD, something has crashed and nobody is really sure what or why, so
generating a meaningful message above the level of the machine's state isn't
really possible.
For example, I worked on a machine once where the OS didn't use any floating
point instructions. If it got a floating point exception while in kernel
mode, all it could do was dump memory and reboot. There wasn't any
reasonable diagnostic beyond "this can't happen." If it happens, there's
some other assumption far away that was violated to cause it.
> Yeah. Less of a problem now, but I still wish some times that the error
> codes you get from their software was a bit clearer, or that even if you
> know what the code means, it wasn't so much like modern car mechanics,
> where you know the "general" area of the engine that broke, but its not
> always clear *which* of three parts are involved, or even if its not
> just a sensor glitch, and all of them are OK. lol
When it breaks, it's not always obvious to the programmer why it broke, so
giving a meaningful error message isn't always possible. If the programmer
knew why it broke, they'd have fixed the problem instead of giving an error
message.
Log entries aren't error messages. They're success messages. If success is
what you're expecting, you don't need to look at the log records.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Ouch ouch ouch!"
"What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
"No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> When it breaks, it's not always obvious to the programmer why it broke,
> so giving a meaningful error message isn't always possible. If the
> programmer knew why it broke, they'd have fixed the problem instead of
> giving an error message.
>
True, but, too often they don't provide the program with a clear clue
what to do when something goes wrong that "should be" a possible problem
either. :p Computer teacher in high school and the ones in college
"both" said, "Its not enough to assume the data going in is right, so
make sure if its wrong, the program can do something 'rational' with it,
if it is wrong, like generating an error report." ;)
> Log entries aren't error messages. They're success messages. If success
> is what you're expecting, you don't need to look at the log records.
>
Almost like one game on the old Apple IIs, if you hit some combination
of control keys it would generate a message, "Congratulations, you find
a bug we didn't expect." lol It didn't crash, but the result made us
laugh our asses off.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
