Get message when excute a infinite loop

hi, guys

Is there any functions in Visual C++ which have the same function like DoEvents in VB or doEvents in Java?

I have to make the program get response to a windows message when it is running in a infinite loop. :rolleyes:

Is there any fuction can achieve this?

thank u very much in advance!

Hi there were 96 results, i found by searching these forum for keyword 'DoEvents'. Check it Out here

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jfk_lili
hi, guys

Is there any functions in Visual C++ which have the same function like DoEvents in VB or doEvents in Java?

I have to make the program get response to a windows message when it is running in a infinite loop. :rolleyes:

Is there any fuction can achieve this?

thank u very much in advance!

---

Code:

---

void CDlg::DoEvents()
{
        MSG msg;
        while (PeekMessage (&msg, NULL, 0, 0, PM_REMOVE ))
        {
                TranslateMessage(&msg);               
                DispatchMessage(&msg);
        }
}

---

:D Amit and Alin thank u guys very much. Now it works fine. :thumb:

and Alin, i hv tried to delete the TranslateMessage, and make it like this:
while (PeekMessage (&msg, NULL, 0, 0, PM_REMOVE ))
{
DispatchMessage(&msg);
}

and in my program, it works also fine. I hv read MSDN abt TranslateMessage, but i m still not sure about the function of it.

Could u please give me more detail abt it? or is there any article abt it? better wiz an example :blush:

Thank u very much in advance!!!

Hi, jfk_lili !

Quote:

---

I have to make the program get response to a windows message when it is running in a infinite loop

---

In multithreaded system you should use a worker thread to perform a "infinite loop", having your main (GUI) thread still responsible.
Take a look at this J.Newcomer's article:
Using Worker Threads

Thanks very much VictorN!:)

so what have been suggested above just can work under a single thread environment? for multi-thread it cannot work?

Quote:

---

for multi-thread it cannot work?

---

I wrote you: "... you should...", not "you MUST" use a worker thread ;)