Subject:
|
Re: Suggestion for interprocess communication
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Feb 2000 07:56:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
918 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Anders Isaksson writes:
> Michael Lachmann skrev i meddelandet ...
> >
> > Since Windows has a real drag & drop mechanism, which is realy easy to
> > implement when using the MFC extensions of Microsoft, I suggest using this
> > mechanism.
>
>
> Sigh, I suppose it makes sense, using 'real' drag & drop, although I'm not
> very keen on adding a ton of OLE into my program. Nor to think about
> developing time...
I agree that it is more effort for none MFC applications.
>
> Most MFC solutions are *massive* overkill for simple applications, but that is
> not noticed, as all the DLL-s are included in the Windows installation anyway.
Not realy, since if you want to make sure your program is working on all
computers no matter whats installed you have to make a static build, which
means your application get bigger (Thats wy MLCad is so big).
>
> Just for the fun of it: What's 'unreal' about our current solution/suggestion?
I think it's just the way how we do it. In 32 bit Windows it's common to use
existing interprocess communication methodes like Rpc, shared memory, pipes or
OLE (which is called ActiveX now).
An advantage of using the real drag & drop mechanism is that you can go over
the clip-board, which makes it possible that one program pastes something on
the clip-board, exits and another program could retrieve the info later on
(e.g. in case of memory problems).
Also the overhead you cause in the operating system when you search a window
(I guess an application which want's to pass information would have to look
whats under the curser, send the query message, check its response and send
another message with the real data.). This means you implement that what OLE
is doing already anyway, a second time :-(
Thats the reason wy I suggested real drag & drop, following the general
guideline, reuse whatever is possible!
Another one is, that it will never be possible for MLCad to send such a
message to another window, since it cannot disdinguish when it should use
Messages and when it should use OLE.
The advantage of MFC by the way, is that developing applications like MLCad is
much easier and powerfull than any other way ...
And I know what I'm talking about since I wrote plain (none MFC) Applications
long time before, and the time you win when using MFC can be used for cool
features ...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Suggestion for interprocess communication
|
| (...) Yeah, well. I'm using Borland Delphi, and I suppose there are easy support for D&D there too, although I've never used it. (...) Of course it's possible - nothing is impossible! If it's worth the effort is another question :-) (...) Ever tried (...) (24 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Suggestion for interprocess communication
|
| Michael Lachmann skrev i meddelandet ... (...) Sigh, I suppose it makes sense, using 'real' drag & drop, although I'm not very keen on adding a ton of OLE into my program. Nor to think about developing time... Most MFC solutions are *massive* (...) (24 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
