PureBasic Forums - English

blueznl wrote:Next.

In case we had some doubts (we as italian, i mean) we must thank Van Basten and all Netherlands players'
They did play.. without any doubts. And i don't mean that they would have lost deliberately, but they could surely have been less motivated than Romania.

if you're familiar with windows API, you could use moveFileEx that does exactly what you need, with a single call.

BOOL MoveFileEx(
LPCTSTR lpExistingFileName,
LPCTSTR lpNewFileName,
DWORD dwFlags
);

If dwFlags specifies MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT and lpNewFileName is NULL, MoveFileEx ...

Ok, i had a look at this .dll and in this case you could get the result with a bit of inline assembly.

after the function call, the two returned values are stored in CPU registers EAX and EDX, so you can retrieve them this way:

Define X.f, Y.f

call....

EnableASM
mov X, EAX
mov Y, EDX
DisableASM ...

Unfortunately i can't be of much help other than explaining why your code was acting that way. In fact now your problem narrows down to handle a library call that returns a structure, instead of a pointer to a structure.
I don't know how to handle such case in purebasic, i think it's not natively ...

IceSoft wrote:

iNX wrote:Since you're reading memory used internally by Purebasic, changing the valour of variables modifies this memory and you're obtaining different results.

PB bug?

No, no.. it's normal behaviour. We are not supposed to read memory in this way.

Since you're reading memory used internally by Purebasic, changing the valour of variables modifies this memory and you're obtaining different results.

The original source posted can't work, in my opinion, because @v1+OffsetOf(cpVect\x) ends up in memory allocated by PureBasic and we really don't know what we're going to read.
The Hroudtwolf version seems correct, and maybe the problem lies in the return value of the library function, or in the way ...

... Then if you run the tool again with nothing selected ...
Sorry Ive forgot to mention in here: You must select an area to be beautyfied, like in jaPBes's STRG+TAB where you also actually do indent the selected area.

Ah, ok, i see.. i've looked into it further and i think i was misleaded by ...

I'm using this tool with the original PB IDE. Nice job, thank you!
While i was using it, i've noticed something strange:

Start with a "beautified" source, modify a line so that it will be modified by the tool, then select some lines which are already beautified (don't select the modified one) and ...

Totally agree with you all.
* Thank you gnozal! *

I have been using pureform and it's a great app!

Thank you guys for your attention and help.
I had started this topic because i needed a procedure to change multiple string variables passed as arguments, and i was wondering which was the best way to do it and whether there were multiple ways.
Now things are much clearer and we've also pointed out ...

And here's is the best and fastest solution for it imho:
http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtopic.php?t=26326


@iNX, you have realized about it :wink:

I read carefully your solution and i've got a question. I understand your point from a theoretical point of view and i understand the various ...

This means that the function has no chance of pointing the original string variable to any new buffer which is allocated. :)

This is a perfect summary of the matter.

In the end, we could say that passing a pointer to a string to a procedure can be considered safe only for reading the string ...

Ok, i investigated further, looking at the asm sources and i should have found out where the problem lies.
A bigger problem will be being able to explain it :mrgreen:

Procedure ModString(a)
*b.string=@a
*b\s="2434567892434567892434767767677676" ; At this point, the internal function that handles ...

To my mind, PB has it right in that pointers, in terms of de-referencing operations at least, are intended really for structures. It keeps things very 'clean' and simple.

My opinion is that pointers are really useful and indispensable. I'm only wondering about the need for a *stringpointer.s ...