Well, I didn't ever know that I could use this write-function. It is also the first time I've ever got it working. Here are the steps: 1) Add Explorer to your toolbox (customize toolbox -> COM components -> Microsoft Web Browser) and add it to your form 2) Add a reference in your C# project to Microsoft.mshtml 3) use mshtml in your .cs-file like this: using mshtml; 4) Browse to about:blank like this (ieBrowser is the browser-component): object o = new object(); ieBrowser.Navigate("about:blank", ref o, ref o, ref o, ref o); 5) Fill the HTML from a string like this: IHTMLDocument2 doc; object oDoc = ieBrowser.Document; doc = (IHTMLDocument2)oDoc; doc.write("This is **bold** and this is _italic_"); That should do the trick. Thanks for the tips!!! Structured programming vs. chaotic mind boggling

GDI is something I know close to zero about, but seems like SetBrushOrgEx is what you're looking for. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

Actually I wanted what you first described... But reflecting on it, I only want to use the aggregate for subtypes of the myClass_Object class, so that may bring me to your second case... Is it so, that when I explicitly instatiate a supertype, that it will also work for all subtypes of that supertype?? In that case I am probably able to solve it the elegant way, anyway! Thanx a lot! Structured programming vs. chaotic mind boggling

MFC Extension DLL will work correctly only if your exe is also MFC app linking dynamically to MFC. With ActiveX, your .exe is a container - you can't expect all apps hosting your ActiveX to be MFC apps. Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com

irreproducible error --> no error! ;) cheers

And you're right... I finally got the whole smash to work by creating a clean extention dll-project and more or less copying the project settings from one to the other... There was another problem that caused the crash, though. I used two seperate .h files for my objects, one for usage in the client and one for the dll itsself. The class I was talking about had a slight difference in both .h-files, which probably caused the whole allocation/deallocation mechanism to mess up.... Anyway, I was able to fix it, thanks to your help! Thanks a lot ('cause I've been quite a pain-in-the-thingy). I've learned a thing or two, again! :) Structured programming vs. chaotic mind boggling

> If I use MFC in a static DLL, then what is the correct > way to handle input-ouput string characters? There's no such thing as static DLL - 'D' in DLL means dynamic. If you use static lib version of MFC, your .dll and .exe will have two different heaps. Memory allocated in .exe can't be freed in .dll and vice versa. Using CString::operator= may cause heap operations, and this is going to crash when MFC isn't shared. So the declaration for EatString should look more or less like this: int EatString(char *szOutput, int cbOutput, const char *szInput); You can return number of characters in szOutput after completing the operation. Or the error code, or whatever. Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com.pl

Hello all!! I've figured out where my memory leak was! It was the way I took the variant out of the GetInput function. Since I've never really been a VB fan I never liked variants anyway, but now I'm truly scared of them ;) The code that I used was wrong: COleVariant var = MSComm1.GetInput(); This code leaves another copy of the variant hanging around inside the memory space of the MSComm object. If your client receives the content of several files, this means a lot of leaking memory. The solution is as follows: COleVariant var.Attach (MSComm1.GetInput()); This code explicitly tells the ActiveX component that we want to read the variant type and delete it from the COM-memory space... Have fun! Structured programming vs. chaotic mind boggling

you could use the old zmodem transfer protocol (or any of the others) but i don't know where to find a class that does it (sure there must be a CZModem() somewhere...) ;) --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"