Thread: Coordinating the window procedure with the program

I'm not sure, but maybe you can use a thread to check the loading status and display the image, so you won't depend on the messages: simply be sure that no other part of your program access to the display area while loading and make an independant procedure that informs what is it happening. I have no code to illustrate it

The code on lines 32, 33 and 34 will never be executed and your compiler should be warning you about unreachable code.

Well, except for when there's a left mouse click, key press, paint or destroy message.

Well, I found the problem.

This part was always being called:

updatefields();
update = 0;
return 0;

updatefields() was being called after each WM_Paint message came in. This in turn
called drawimage() which caused a WM_PAINT message to come in, after which
updatefields was called, etc, etc.

It was a convenient place to put it as almost all commands require an update of
various combinations of fields, and all the command handlers just needed to set
switches in 'update'.

It was strange because it never should have gotten passed the 1st section of the
image, recalling drawimage() over and over like that.
But it seemed to accumulate all 10 sections and then draw them all at once.

It doesn't look as good as I expected, though. Kind of choppy looking. Smoothing
it out would require up to 750 bitblts though.

Thanks for looking at it. I found the problem when I added a messagebox to each
call to InvalidadeRect and saw the group of 10 calls repeated enlessly.

Ok... now, despite people who will advise you to the contrary... you now know why I use returns instead of breaks in my switch statements.

Take all the break statements out of your switch and put returns in their place.

Code:

LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hWnd, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam)
{	
	switch(msg)
	{	case WM_KEYDOWN:
			keyinterpret(wParam);
			return 0;

		case WM_LBUTTONDOWN :
			xyinterpret(lParam);
			return 0;

		case WM_PAINT:
			updateclient(hWnd);
			return 0;

		case WM_CLOSE:
			//if(MessageBox(hWnd, "Exit Pogram?", "", MB_YESNO | MB_DEFBUTTON2) == IDNO)
				//return 1;
			//else
				terminate();	
				DestroyWindow(hWnd);
				return 0;
			
		case WM_DESTROY:
			PostQuitMessage(0);
			return 0;

		default:
			return DefWindowProc(hWnd, msg, wParam, lParam);
	}
}

I did in fact fix the problem by adding "return 0:" to the WM_PAINT case.

My updatefields() really belongs at the end of each of the keyinterpret() and
xyinterpret() functions, I think.

Then put it there...

Code:

case WM_KEYDOWN :
   keyinterpret();
   updatefields();
   return 0;
case ...

If it needs to run after only certain keys... move the call right into keyinterpret and fire it only when needed.

*Alternatively* ... use an accellerator table to convert only needed keystrokes into WM_COMMAND messages and process the keys that way. You will have to add TranslateAccellerators() to your dispatcher loop, but that's no big deal.

Take all the break statements out of your switch and put returns in their place.

Not necessary.

Code:

LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hWnd, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam) 
{
    LRESULT result = 0;        
    switch(msg)     
    {   
        case WM_KEYDOWN:             
            keyinterpret(wParam);             
            break;           
        case WM_LBUTTONDOWN :             
            xyinterpret(lParam);             
            break;           
        case WM_PAINT:             
            updateclient(hWnd);             
            break;           
        case WM_CLOSE:             
            //if(MessageBox(hWnd, "Exit Pogram?", "", MB_YESNO |     MB_DEFBUTTON2) == IDNO)                 
            //return 1;             
            //else                 
            terminate();                     
            DestroyWindow(hWnd);                 
            break;                       
        case WM_DESTROY:             
            PostQuitMessage(0);             
            break;           
        default:             
            result = DefWindowProc(hWnd, msg, wParam, lParam);     
    }

    return result; 
}

Originally Posted by VirtualAce

Not necessary.

Code:

LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hWnd, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam) 
{
    LRESULT result = 0;        
    switch(msg)     
    {   
        case WM_KEYDOWN:             
            keyinterpret(wParam);             
            break;           
        case WM_LBUTTONDOWN :             
            xyinterpret(lParam);             
            break;           
        case WM_PAINT:             
            updateclient(hWnd);             
            break;           
        case WM_CLOSE:             
            //if(MessageBox(hWnd, "Exit Pogram?", "", MB_YESNO |     MB_DEFBUTTON2) == IDNO)                 
            //return 1;             
            //else                 
            terminate();                     
            DestroyWindow(hWnd);                 
            break;                       
        case WM_DESTROY:             
            PostQuitMessage(0);             
            break;           
        default:             
            result = DefWindowProc(hWnd, msg, wParam, lParam);     
    }

    return result; 
}

That works.

How did you get small tabs in the code? My tabs are small in the Pelles editor,
but large when printed here.

Originally Posted by CommonTater

Then put it there...

Code:

case WM_KEYDOWN :
   keyinterpret();
   updatefields();
   return 0;
case ...

If it needs to run after only certain keys... move the call right into keyinterpret and fire it only when needed.

*Alternatively* ... use an accellerator table to convert only needed keystrokes into WM_COMMAND messages and process the keys that way. You will have to add TranslateAccellerators() to your dispatcher loop, but that's no big deal.

Ok, it's been put.

The key commands are only temporary, and will eventually be menu items or on screen buttons.
Their main purpose was for rapid operating and exiting for testing purposes. That's why my "exit program"
messagebox is commented out.

Originally Posted by adeyblue

Well, except for when there's a left mouse click, key press, paint or destroy message.

Looked like a good place for it. As intended, it would have done nothing unless the update
switches were set. But it turned into a strange recursive loop.

Originally Posted by Niara

I'm not sure, but maybe you can use a thread to check the loading status and display the image, so you won't depend on the messages: simply be sure that no other part of your program access to the display area while loading and make an independant procedure that informs what is it happening. I have no code to illustrate it

As it turned out, it was just a bug in my code, the updatefields() at the end of the WindProc.

A thread checking on it gave me an idea, though. I was drawing and bitblitting one segment at a time. I just need to
check the progress and bitblt when time for the next segment. Much simpler.

How did you get small tabs in the code? My tabs are small in the Pelles editor,
but large when printed here.

Set your IDE or editor to insert spaces for tabs instead of using the tab character.

Originally Posted by novacain

To explain this....WM_PAINT is the only msg that can be processed in the msg queue and is the lowest priority (just below WM_TIMER) so will not usually be removed if other msgs are in the queue.

UpdateWindow() bypasses the OS msg queue and posts the WM_PAINT directly to the callback (so you see the partial paints)

Without the UpdateWindow() mutliple paints start accumulating in the queue.
Get/PeekMessage() picks these paint msgs up, concatinates them into the smallest invalid region to cover all the paints and drops one paint msg back into the bottom of the msg queue.

So with UpdateWindow, WM_PAINT's kept coming in immediately and then recalling my updatefields function.

Without the UpdateWindow, my segment drawing loop had a chance to finish, with the WM_PAINTS's accumulating.

Is WM_TIMER not good for precise timing then? Only good for setting a minimum time interval?

Originally Posted by VirtualAce

Set your IDE or editor to insert spaces for tabs instead of using the tab character.

Ok, thanks. But you quoted my code with the tabs in it. Quoting it doesn't remove the tabs, does it?