just for fun. there is a movie with this name, and some games

for now, i am just using the return IntPtr.Size == 8,

i am writing some code, if will act different ways on x64 and x86, does there is a way to justify the code is compiled by x64 or x86, as i know i cpp i can use

#ifdef __x64
doA
#elif __x86
doB
#endif

Hi Guru, I'm a newbie in C#, as i know i can get the MSIHANDLE by call MsiOpenDatabase from Win32 SDK, can i call this function directly or there is a better way to get MSIHANDLE.

Thanks for your reply. Definitely! We should avoid the misused of such feature.

As our team will immgrating from C++ to C#, could you help me to figure out which one is best suit for this scenario. I think a brief, short enough and cover the most useful part of the language is better.

use WMI Win32_OperatingSystem how to use WMI in CPP you can find in MSDN

what about you change the code of std::sort make it use the 3th parameters pass by reference? :-D

hi all, i have one issue about how to get the boot volume drive letter in the vista and win2k8, i need to got this letter and verify if the system info is in safe states. i knew if i use the WMI can fix this, but the WMI take lots of time thanks for your help DraculaW

0x04034B50; 0x08074B50; 0x02014B50; 0x06054B50; 0x06064B50; 0x07064B50; those code are const, why add 1 and then sub 1?

when i look into 7z's code, find this:

namespace NSignature
{
UInt32 kLocalFileHeader = 0x04034B50 + 1;
UInt32 kDataDescriptor = 0x08074B50 + 1;
UInt32 kCentralFileHeader = 0x02014B50 + 1;
UInt32 kEndOfCentralDir = 0x06054B50 + 1;
UInt32 kZip64EndOfCentralDir = 0x06064B50 + 1;
UInt32 kZip64EndOfCentralDirLocator = 0x07064B50 + 1;

class CMarkersInitializer
{
public:
CMarkersInitializer()
{
kLocalFileHeader--;
kDataDescriptor--;
kCentralFileHeader--;
kEndOfCentralDir--;
kZip64EndOfCentralDir--;
kZip64EndOfCentralDirLocator--;
}
};
static CMarkersInitializer g_MarkerInitializer;
}

i really wonder why they did this? do any body have read this code? Thanks

yeah, that's the better way to do, but in this project others may dislike this implement, they didn't want their code update, @_@. Thanks for all your help.

yes, the A::fun() is bad for the B, will case error, so i want let A::fun to be public, but to B the fun must cannot be call

I have 2 classes, B inherit from A, but actually A have a function: fun should not present in B, so I code as blow,

class A{
public:
virtual void fun(){cout << "a" << endl; };
};

class B : public A{
virtual void fun(){};
};

But this take no effect, I can call the fun in class b,

int main()
{
A a;
B b;
A *pa = new B;

a.fun();
b.A::fun();
pa->fun();

}

the output is

a
a

How to decline the function call? Thanks.