Handle should be Integer or IntPtr?

  • Thread starter Thread starter active
  • Start date Start date
A

active

I downloaded the Win32 Library which saved me MUCH work.

Some (All?) of the returned handles are typed int.

As I used them I often changed them in my copy of win32 to IntPtr because an
argument that used it was typed IntPtr.

Now I wonder if a Handle make more sense being an integer or an IntPtr.

I believe it's really an index rather than a pointer so Integer seems to
make more sense.


Any helpful comments would be appreciated,
Cal
 
* " active said:
I downloaded the Win32 Library which saved me MUCH work.

Some (All?) of the returned handles are typed int.

As I used them I often changed them in my copy of win32 to IntPtr because an
argument that used it was typed IntPtr.

Now I wonder if a Handle make more sense being an integer or an IntPtr.
Click to expand...

I prefer 'IntPtr', but it will work with 'Int32' (a/k/a 'Integer') too.
I believe it's really an index rather than a pointer so Integer seems to
make more sense.
Click to expand...

It's an identification number.
 
I prefer 'IntPtr', but it will work with 'Int32' (a/k/a 'Integer') too.


It's an identification number.
Click to expand...

IntPtr... For one important reason - Win64. int maps to System.Int32,
System.IntPtr will take on the default size for the system - 64-bits on
a 64-bit system.
 
Now I wonder if a Handle make more sense being an integer or an IntPtr.
Click to expand...

Preferrably they should be a System.Runtime.InteropServices.HandleRef,
or IntPtr where that doesn't work.



Mattias
 
Thanks for the two replies. That's what I'll do.

I also just noticed that DotNet used IntPtr for the handles I checked.

Isn't that a strong reason for using IntPtr - or is it not?


Thanks again,
Cal
 
* " active said:
Thanks for the two replies. That's what I'll do.

I also just noticed that DotNet used IntPtr for the handles I checked.

Isn't that a strong reason for using IntPtr - or is it not?
Click to expand...

As Tom said, it will make transition to 64 bit easier because 'IntPtr'
will be 64 bit on 64 bit systems. The 'Handle' property, for example,
is an 'IntPtr' too, that's why I prefer 'IntPtr' for handles.
 
Cal,
As Tom & Herfried pointed out, its better to use IntPtr as a Handle, as a
Handle is an "opaque" type (it may be a pointer, it may be an index, it may
be a magic cookie) it is really API specific on what the handle actually
represents. Its opaque in that it does not matter what it represents.

I understand that the framework using IntPtr for the reasons that Tom &
Herfried cited.

As the IntPtr help topic itself states "A platform-specific type that is
used to represent a pointer or a handle"
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...us/cpref/html/frlrfSystemIntPtrClassTopic.asp

Hope this helps
Jay

active said:
Thanks for the two replies. That's what I'll do.

I also just noticed that DotNet used IntPtr for the handles I checked.

Isn't that a strong reason for using IntPtr - or is it not?


Thanks again,
Cal


Click to expand...
 
Back
Top