VoidHand and Handle are not interchangable, at least not if you are a GCC
user. It's something I figured out the hard way.
Here is one example:
I get a compile error if I try the following:
{
FieldPtr pfld;
//... some steps
MemHandleFree (FldGetTextHandle (pfld));
}
// Explanation...
// GCC's field.h indicates FldGetTextHandle returns a handle.
// GCC's field.h indicates that MemHandleFree expects a VoidHand.
I have to explicitly cast, as in ...
{
FieldPtr pfld;
//... some steps
MemHandleFree ((VoidHand) FldGetTextHandle (pfld));
}
Seems like I mentioned this once before. It was a great source of
frustration to me since I was new to C AND Palm OS. I thought I would go
nuts trying to make my first program work until I figured this out (with the
help of this forum of course.)
Mitch
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Antos [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 3:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is this legal?
>
> it would be better to only make one call to DmGetResource (saves batteries
> and runs faster, by only searching for the resource once).
>
>
> BitmapPtr pbmp;
> VoidHand h;
> h = DmGetResource('Tbmp', 1300);
> pbmp = (BitmapPtr)MemHandleLock(h);
> WinDrawBitmap(pbmp, X, Y);
> MemHandleUnlock(h);
>
>
>
> the types "Handle" and "VoidHand" are synonymous, in every case i know of.
> perhaps one of the Palm guys can comment on whether they are always
> synonymous or not. i'm not sure why types exist.
>
