Re: MESSAGE_HANDLER(WM_PAINT, OnPaint) vs MSG_WM_PAINT(OnPaint)

"cmostler"
<[email protected]> wrote
in message news:[email protected]
> In doing so, I found that if I handle the WM_PAINT message using the
> MSG_WM_PAINT macro (and associated handler function), the application
> will completely utilize a single CPU, continuously processing
> WM_PAINT messages.  However, if I use the MESSAGE_HANDLER macro for
> the WM_PAINT message, the CPU remains idle, as expected.

The difference is not in the macros, but in your handler. I bet when you 
handle MSG_WM_PAINT you are trying to use HDC passed to you as a 
parameter (which is actually NULL most of the time), while in your 
MESSAGE_HANDLER-based hander you call BeginPaint and EndPaint (as you 
should).
-- 
With best wishes,
    Igor Tandetnik

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not 
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to 
land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly 
overhead. -- RFC 1925 





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/