Comments for voyce http://www.voyce.com Programming and debugging tidbits Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:52 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Creating an iPad flip-clock with Core Animation by Looking back at 2011 http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/04/10/creating-an-ipad-flip-clock-with-core-animation/comment-page-1/#comment-1038 Looking back at 2011 Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:52 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=791#comment-1038 [...] and getting things ‘just right’ – takes at least 80% of the time. My 2010 post on Core Animation flip clocks continues to get a lot of traffic, and I finally bit the bullet and posted a (free!) app that uses [...] [...] and getting things ‘just right’ – takes at least 80% of the time. My 2010 post on Core Animation flip clocks continues to get a lot of traffic, and I finally bit the bullet and posted a (free!) app that uses [...]

]]> Comment on Getting IUnknown from __ComObject by Use SAD to view RCWs and CCWs | Code & Debug http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2009/09/03/getting-iunknown-from-__comobject/comment-page-1/#comment-1032 Use SAD to view RCWs and CCWs | Code & Debug Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:04:46 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=330#comment-1032 [...] When you click this menu, a new window appears that parses the output result of sos!syncblk -all. [...] [...] When you click this menu, a new window appears that parses the output result of sos!syncblk -all. [...]

]]> Comment on Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies by F# Discoveries This Week 11/10/2010 « F# Central http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/10/31/quick-post-using-mono-cecil-and-f-to-get-assembly-dependencies/comment-page-1/#comment-1014 F# Discoveries This Week 11/10/2010 « F# Central Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:41:22 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=996#comment-1014 [...] Ian Voyce’s Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies “It can be quite enlightening, as well as useful, to see your app dependencies laid-bare before you…” [...] [...] Ian Voyce’s Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies “It can be quite enlightening, as well as useful, to see your app dependencies laid-bare before you…” [...]

]]> Comment on Public static fields gone from F# 2.0 by What are the main drawbacks of exposing a DependencyProperty via a static property instead of a static field? (F#) | DeveloperQuestion.com http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/10/01/public-static-fields-gone-from-f-2-0/comment-page-1/#comment-1013 What are the main drawbacks of exposing a DependencyProperty via a static property instead of a static field? (F#) | DeveloperQuestion.com Tue, 09 Nov 2010 19:14:34 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=900#comment-1013 [...] fooProperty, style setters I found out that F# 2.0 apparently doesn't support public static fields anymore, which makes impossible the standard way of implementing a [...] [...] fooProperty, style setters I found out that F# 2.0 apparently doesn't support public static fields anymore, which makes impossible the standard way of implementing a [...]

]]> Comment on Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies by The Team Master: Ben 10 (Episodio 6) | Juegos De Bendies http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/10/31/quick-post-using-mono-cecil-and-f-to-get-assembly-dependencies/comment-page-1/#comment-1012 The Team Master: Ben 10 (Episodio 6) | Juegos De Bendies Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:35:45 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=996#comment-1012 [...] Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies [...] [...] Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies [...]

]]> Comment on Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies by Dew Drop – November 1, 2010 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/10/31/quick-post-using-mono-cecil-and-f-to-get-assembly-dependencies/comment-page-1/#comment-1011 Dew Drop – November 1, 2010 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:35:14 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=996#comment-1011 [...] Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies (Ian Voyce) [...] [...] Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies (Ian Voyce) [...]

]]> Comment on Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies by Tweets that mention Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies -- Topsy.com http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/10/31/quick-post-using-mono-cecil-and-f-to-get-assembly-dependencies/comment-page-1/#comment-1010 Tweets that mention Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies -- Topsy.com Sun, 31 Oct 2010 18:17:38 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=996#comment-1010 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Leandro Silva, Fredrik J Dahlén. Fredrik J Dahlén said: #fsharp Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies: I’m a big fan of the Mono.Cecil library ... http://bit.ly/dyeT8F [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Leandro Silva, Fredrik J Dahlén. Fredrik J Dahlén said: #fsharp Quick post: Using Mono.Cecil and F# to get assembly dependencies: I’m a big fan of the Mono.Cecil library … http://bit.ly/dyeT8F [...]

]]> Comment on Beware of using stack-based COM objects from .NET by Grant Shirreffs http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/01/21/beware-of-using-stack-based-com-objects-from-net/comment-page-1/#comment-999 Grant Shirreffs Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:17:23 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=618#comment-999 Thanks, exactly what I wanted. Thanks, exactly what I wanted.

]]> Comment on Beware of using stack-based COM objects from .NET by ian http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/01/21/beware-of-using-stack-based-com-objects-from-net/comment-page-1/#comment-998 ian Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:20:05 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=618#comment-998 Hi Grant, Thanks for the comment. I found the offset using the public symbols for mscorwks and disassembling around functions of interest. If you've got the pdb symbols loaded (using <code>.symfix</code> should setup the appropriate paths) you can use <code>x</code> (examine symbols) to find the routine, e.g.: <code> 0:020> x mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup 79faa927 mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup = <no type information> </code> The particular offset I used was the location in that routine where it actually deleted its internal wrapper object: <code> 0:020> u 79faa974 mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup+0x4d: 79faa974 e8a7f7ecff call mscorwks!operator delete (79e7a120) 79faa979 59 pop ecx 79faa97a e8356eecff call mscorwks!_EH_epilog3 (79e717b4) 79faa97f c3 ret </code> The creation function is <code>mscorwks!RCW:CreateRCW</code>, so you can search for that using <code>x</code> in your live process in the same way. Hope that helps. Hi Grant,

Thanks for the comment.

I found the offset using the public symbols for mscorwks and disassembling around functions of interest. If you’ve got the pdb symbols loaded (using .symfix should setup the appropriate paths) you can use x (examine symbols) to find the routine, e.g.:

0:020> x mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup
79faa927 mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup = <no type information>

The particular offset I used was the location in that routine where it actually deleted its internal wrapper object:

0:020> u 79faa974
mscorwks!RCW::Cleanup+0x4d:
79faa974 e8a7f7ecff call mscorwks!operator delete (79e7a120)
79faa979 59 pop ecx
79faa97a e8356eecff call mscorwks!_EH_epilog3 (79e717b4)
79faa97f c3 ret

The creation function is mscorwks!RCW:CreateRCW, so you can search for that using x in your live process in the same way.

Hope that helps.

]]> Comment on Beware of using stack-based COM objects from .NET by Grant Shirreffs http://www.voyce.com/index.php/2010/01/21/beware-of-using-stack-based-com-objects-from-net/comment-page-1/#comment-997 Grant Shirreffs Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:48:02 +0000 http://www.voyce.com/?p=618#comment-997 Interesting article; thanks very much for this. I especially like the idea of the dumping breakpoints on RCW creation and destruction. Unfortunately, the addresses you give are specific to a version of MSCORWKS.DLL , and are completely unmapped in a typical 32-bit process on my Windows 7/64 machine. How did you arrive at these addresses? I've tried remapping them based on the MSCORWKS addresses in your call stack compared to those in mine, but the functions must have moved inside the DLL. Any hints? Thanks again Grant Interesting article; thanks very much for this.

I especially like the idea of the dumping breakpoints on RCW creation and destruction. Unfortunately, the addresses you give are specific to a version of MSCORWKS.DLL , and are completely unmapped in a typical 32-bit process on my Windows 7/64 machine. How did you arrive at these addresses? I’ve tried remapping them based on the MSCORWKS addresses in your call stack compared to those in mine, but the functions must have moved inside the DLL. Any hints?

Thanks again
Grant

]]>