Code:
HANDLE gets=NULL;
HBLUETOOTH_DEVICE_FIND HBDF=NULL;
BLUETOOTH_FIND_RADIO_PARAMS BTFRP={sizeof (BLUETOOTH_FIND_RADIO_PARAMS)};
BLUETOOTH_RADIO_INFO bri={sizeof (BLUETOOTH_RADIO_INFO)};
BLUETOOTH_DEVICE_SEARCH_PARAMS BTSP={sizeof (BLUETOOTH_DEVICE_SEARCH_PARAMS)};
BLUETOOTH_DEVICE_INFO btdi={sizeof (BLUETOOTH_DEVICE_INFO)};
HBF=BluetoothFindFirstRadio (& amp; BTFRP, & amp; Six HBR);

# if 0
DWORD I=100;
Int Item=_clistCtilValue. GetItemCount ();

C.F ormat (_T (" % d: ", I));

_clistCtilValue. SetItemText (Item, 1, c);

SetDlgItemText (IDC_EDIT1, c);
# endif
If ((ERROR_SUCCESS==BluetoothGetRadioInfo (gets, & amp; Bri)))
{
Int Item=_clistCtilValue. GetItemCount ();

If # 1
AddrLog. The Format (_T (" % % % 02 x: 02 x: 02 x: x % 02:02: x % % 02 x_ % x: ", btdi. Address. RgBytes [0], btdi. Address. RgBytes [1], btdi. Address. RgBytes [2], btdi. Address. RgBytes [3],
Btdi. Address. RgBytes [4], btdi. Address. RgBytes [5], btdi. Address. UllLong));
#endif

CodePudding user response:

Supplement: the development environment is VS2013

CodePudding user response:

Don't rely on the debugger output complex data structure. And complex data structures to the entire content of every step of the process it using a small piece of code is easy to understand by yourself the format of the output, help to debug very much! Or can be said to be "infrastructure"

CodePudding user response:

So you can see the change of each variable, only the results of this code on the VS2010 output is normal, but not what I want on VS2010 lib, took the lib to V2013 compiled on will be less need to compile the header file, the Internet is also suggest using V2012 later, a great god can give me a advice? I really don't see the problem?

CodePudding user response:

Local variables in the view of bri, output is btdi

CodePudding user response:

Thank you very much, he did not see clear, careless!

CodePudding user response:

CodePudding user response:

CodePudding user response:

reference 5 floor u010750821 reply:

thank you very much, he did not see clearly, careless!

About whether he is suitable for programming is very simple test:
On a newspaper or magazine articles, for a period of about 1000 words in Word input again, after losing to refer to the following answer:

A. there are more than 10 words or punctuation
B there is no words or punctuation mistakes and dare to bet for this
No words or punctuation errors and C fonts and layout fully consistent with the original
D print on the translucent paper and check the same original overlap, and feel very with a sense of accomplishment

A is not suitable for programming (reason: typing accuracy is low, careless)
B junior programmer (reason: typing accuracy high, careful and meticulous, confident, understand the whole Angle of half Angle concept)
C senior programmer (reason: in the B on the basis of understanding the font and layout is also an important factor of computer to print, but compared to D paranoid enough, strives for perfection, the results can verify)
D software project manager (reason: to be able to give convincing for project detailed requirements to the pole and typical test cases, users almost pick is not at fault, major!)

If want to from A to B, to my resources http://download.csdn.net/detail/zhao4zhong1/4084259 download "for programmers keyboard practice"