Hi Mindaugas.
This is the part of FWH activeX class:
---cut---
METHOD Default() CLASS TActiveX
local hSink, aEv, bOldError, oError
::hActiveX = CreateActiveX( ::cProgId, ::nStyle, ::nLeft, ::nTop,
::nWidth, ::nHeight, ::hWnd, 0 )
::hObj = AtlAxGetDisp( ::hActiveX )
bOldError = Err
Hi Alex
>Toninho, how did you resolve your problem?
No, I´m using old winole that have support for numeric handle in
new(hobj).
To support FWH/HWGUI/MiniGui the new OLE need support it, but to have:
---cut---
METHOD New( uObj, cClass, cLicense ) CLASS TOleAuto
...
ELSEIF ISNUMBER( uObj )
>It still uses old code. TOLEAUTO() does not exists in new code so if
>you were able to link above peace of code then for sure it was using
>old implementation.
>If you want you can try to create wrapper functions from old to new
>class:
> function TOleAuto( ... )
> return hb_OleAuto( ... )
Th
>Hi Przemek and Mindaugas,
>
>
>Il 26/03/2009 21.11, Przemyslaw Czerpak ha scritto:
>>
>
>> 5. The hbwin TOLEAUTO class supports iteration by FOR EACH loop.
>
>Could you add FOR EACH and TIMESTAMP support ?
>I've code like attached that doesn't work with new ole version.
Hi friends,
FWH TActiveX
>sorry Toninho, I've missed your mail with a problem. Przemek was right
>about OLE object creation code.
No problem Mindaugas. Thank you for the nice code.
>Yes, I know I've implemented it in a incompatible way, but missing of
>some OLE server depends on installed software and is a normal situat
>New implementation does not generate RT error but simply returns NIL.
>It's not longer necessary to use BEGIN SEQUENCE / END (BTW WITH {|e|break}
>is missing) or TRY/CATCH.
Thank you Przemek.
Best regards,
Toninho.
___
Yahoo! Mail - Sempre
Hi Francesco.
>do you use MSVC ? If yes, do you have tested same code after removing
>-TP flag in config/msvc.cf and rebuild entire SVN ?
No, I´m using BCC 6.10. New OLE seems work fine, except that
GetActiveObject() is not working, as I posted in my last sample.
Best regards,
Toninho.
_
Hi VIktor,
>Toninho, please provide a patch because I have no idea what
>HRESULT should be. An hbwinole.h is also needed if we
>want to publish C level functions. I'd appreciate if you could
>provide such patch and I will upload it.
I looked at my code and I think that HRESULT is not needed. A si
>I'd like to ask OLE users to the hbole, and give opinions about the above.
Hi,
There are any problem to change:
static void hb_oleVariantToItem( PHB_ITEM pItem, VARIANT* pVariant )
to
HRESULT hb_oleVariantToItem( PHB_ITEM pItem, VARIANT *pVariant );
Thanks and best regards,
Toninho.
___
