1. real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
Hi, Matt,
Has anybody reported a problem with getting a error msg "497: Handle is
Destroyed"?
What I'm doing is making real widgets for the IDE instead of imulated ones.
I know some respond to onClick and onMouse so I have to dual a lot of code
between the window onMouse and the onMouse of the newly created control.
Anyways, if I delete a control and then hit a button on the Toolbar to drop
a new control on the window, I get the above error. I put in puts at the top
of every routine I have and puts at the bottom of them. I see the puts from
the routine right PRIOR to going into the onMouse for the window. But the
puts from that routine do not show up. Maybe the error msg gets me before
the puts has a chance? So that is the best information I can give you about
what is happening.
If no one has had this problem, I can throw a simplified demo together for
you to peruse.
I'm making the widgets like David Cuny did in EX15, where he says:
widgets = create( etc etc) and then I define the onWhat-ever-event I need
for that widget.
and I use getSelf() to know in other routines what widget I am dealing with.
I noticed in the list of things changing for version 54 that editable
controls will all be accessable by the left click. Any way to add the static
controls to that? I realise in most cases it is not applicable but it sure
would make doing the IDE with real controls a lot easier.
Judith
2. Re: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:15:08 -0400, Judith Evans <camping at FLASH.NET> wrote:
>What I'm doing is making real widgets for the IDE instead of imulated ones.
Judith:
I think you will find that David used emulated controls in win32lib
because there was no easy way to use windows resouces or link the
resources into a Euphoria program.
Bernie
3. Re: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
Bernie wrote:
> I think you will find that David used emulated
> controls in win32lib because there was no easy
> way to use windows resouces or link the resources
> into a Euphoria program.
No, that's wasn't a consideration. Win32Lib doesn't use resource files to
create objects, but that hardly an issue. It's not difficult to create and
destroy widgets on the fly.
The issue was that it was difficult to trap events (such as right clicks)
from some of the controls - especially static controls like labels, which
don't really respond to events. The also did inconvenient things when you
typed, or tabbed around the form.
-- David Cuny
4. Re: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
I could have sworn that *someone* made a hack to Win32Lib that *did* make
static controls (or some of them?) responsive to events, but I can't
remember who or for what application.
Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cuny, David at DSS" <David.Cuny at DSS.CA.GOV>
To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
> Bernie wrote:
>
> > I think you will find that David used emulated
> > controls in win32lib because there was no easy
> > way to use windows resouces or link the resources
> > into a Euphoria program.
>
> No, that's wasn't a consideration. Win32Lib doesn't use resource files to
> create objects, but that hardly an issue. It's not difficult to create and
> destroy widgets on the fly.
>
> The issue was that it was difficult to trap events (such as right clicks)
> from some of the controls - especially static controls like labels, which
> don't really respond to events. The also did inconvenient things when you
> typed, or tabbed around the form.
>
> -- David Cuny
5. Re: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
Hi Judith,
I'm glad that I got see this even if it wasn't meant for the list.
I'll try to duplicate the Destroyed Handle situation. This message occurs
when a widget that has been destroyed is referenced after the destrucion. I
noticed that this was a problem with some internal assuptions in v0.53 and
addressed those, so maybe I've fixed your instance as well.
Unfortunately, Microsoft in their wisdom, have decided that STATIC controls
do need to see input events, such as mouse clicks or keyboard presses. There
are meant purely as adornments to a window and not meant to be
"interactive". In order to get around this in my programs, I've used
borderless Windows instead. This has other side-effects but it does the
trick.
On the other hand, I've used LText controls with WS_EX_CLIENTEDGE to make
them look like normal edit fields that are "disabled".
------
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
(Vote [1] The Cheshire Cat for Internet Mascot)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judith Evans" <camping at FLASH.NET>
To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 5:15 AM
Subject: real widgets and IDE and a problem I have
> Hi, Matt,
>
> Has anybody reported a problem with getting a error msg "497: Handle is
> Destroyed"?
>
> What I'm doing is making real widgets for the IDE instead of imulated
ones.
> I know some respond to onClick and onMouse so I have to dual a lot of code
> between the window onMouse and the onMouse of the newly created control.
> Anyways, if I delete a control and then hit a button on the Toolbar to
drop
> a new control on the window, I get the above error. I put in puts at the
top
> of every routine I have and puts at the bottom of them. I see the puts
from
> the routine right PRIOR to going into the onMouse for the window. But the
> puts from that routine do not show up. Maybe the error msg gets me before
> the puts has a chance? So that is the best information I can give you
about
> what is happening.
>
> If no one has had this problem, I can throw a simplified demo together for
> you to peruse.
>
> I'm making the widgets like David Cuny did in EX15, where he says:
> widgets = create( etc etc) and then I define the onWhat-ever-event I need
> for that widget.
>
> and I use getSelf() to know in other routines what widget I am dealing
with.
>
> I noticed in the list of things changing for version 54 that editable
> controls will all be accessable by the left click. Any way to add the
static
> controls to that? I realise in most cases it is not applicable but it sure
> would make doing the IDE with real controls a lot easier.
>
> Judith
