Page 1 of 1
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:03 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by stfighter.
Hi, badly need support for floats or double as result of the callfunction command.
i can do NOTHING with dlls, without a good support of all standart datatypes.
hopfully stfighter
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:28 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by dmoc.
Do a search here on "BigNumbers"
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2003 7:04 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by stfighter.
ok it is possible, but this is not an acceptable solution for the future.
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2003 7:18 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by dmoc.
Correct but the point has been made several times and just recently again. I think Fred is planning to support floats/doubles sometime soon.
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2003 10:40 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by tinman.
Originally posted by dmoc
Correct but the point has been made several times and just recently again. I think Fred is planning to support floats/doubles sometime soon.
Floats are supported, doubles are not.
Unless the original question was about getting a float as a return value from a DLL call using CallFunction (which IIRC returns a long). In that case, stfighter could do something like:
foo.f
result.l = CallFunction(...)
PokeL(@foo, result)
But I am not sure how well this would work (or if it would).
--
It's not minimalist - I'm increasing efficiency by reducing input effort.
(Win98first ed. + all updates, PB3.51)
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:13 am
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.
Why not use PeekF() ?
Foo.f = PeekF(@Result)
Fred - AlphaSND
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2003 6:00 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by tinman.
Originally posted by fred
Why not use PeekF() ?
Because I'm a fool and forgot that it existed
--
It's not minimalist - I'm increasing efficiency by reducing input effort.
(Win98first ed. + all updates, PB3.51)
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:33 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.
Excellent reason
.
Fred - AlphaSND
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:23 pm
by BackupUser
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by stfighter.
yes, this was the solution i called unacceptable.
to make that work i have to change all return values to pointers.
all comfort is getting lost and most of people wont understand how to use this dll then.
and it is much work too.
stfighter