<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Software Matters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pseudosoft.net/blog/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pseudosoft.net/blog</link>
	<description>A blog by PseudoSoft.net</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:53:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Debugging COM with native and managed code</title>
		<link>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/debugging-com-with-native-and-managed-code/</link>
		<comments>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/debugging-com-with-native-and-managed-code/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:50:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Coding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debug COM native code exception AccessViolationException]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pseudosoft.net/blog/?p=10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was debugging a piece of managed code that communicates with a COM object (an old native piece). I was using Visual Studio 2008.
Things moving along nicely until an exception showed up when initializing the COM object &#8211; System.AccessViolationException.
It took me quite a while to find out that the exception was solely a result of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was debugging a piece of managed code that communicates with a COM object (an old native piece). I was using Visual Studio 2008.</p>
<p>Things moving along nicely until an exception showed up when initializing the COM object &#8211; System.AccessViolationException.</p>
<p>It took me quite a while to find out that the exception was solely a result of a mis-configuration. I should not have checked &#8220;Enable RPC debugging&#8221; for native debugging. Cleared the checkbox, it worked like a charm.</p>
<p><img src="file:///C:/Users/WANGR%7E1.RDE/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot.png" alt="" /><a href="http://pseudosoft.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/RPC-Debugging.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-11" title="RPC Debugging" src="http://pseudosoft.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/RPC-Debugging-300x174.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="174" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/debugging-com-with-native-and-managed-code/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UNICODE vs. MBCS in Windows</title>
		<link>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/unicode-vs-mbcs-in-windows/</link>
		<comments>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/unicode-vs-mbcs-in-windows/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:08:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Globalization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pseudosoft.net/blog/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Everyone seems to have a take on this encoding thing. Here is my 2  cents.
MBCS  has been in use long before UNICODE was born. I view UNICODE was  invented just because there are too many MBCS out there.  I mean, really too many &#8211; different languages, different revisions  within a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone seems to have a take on this encoding thing. Here is my 2  cents.</p>
<p>MBCS  has been in use long before UNICODE was born. I view UNICODE was  invented just because there are too many MBCS out there.  I mean, really too many &#8211; different languages, different revisions  within a language, etc. &#8211; talking about pressure to standardize!  Actually, UNICODE enjoyed the maturity of MBCS, although  itself has evolved and still has different encoding schemes.</p>
<p>Microsoft  supports UNICODE from Windows NT. Windows 95/98/Me has what Microsoft  calls &#8220;Layer for UNICODE&#8221; support. What that really means is that  everything is MBCS/SBCS unless  your application deals with UNICODE using special set of APIs. Well,  nowadays, there are not many people still supporting Windows 9x with  their new development anyway.</p>
<p>Microsoft&#8217;s UNICODE implementation  is actually UTF-16,  that is, every character is 2 bytes or 4 bytes (very rare). The reason  for this is simple, at the time Microsoft had to decide which UNICODE  scheme to support, there were only UCS-2 (2 bytes) and UCS-4 (4  bytes) to choose from. If every character is 4 bytes, you may think that  is really a big waste of everything, even in today&#8217;s environment. So,  they went with UCS-2,  well, with some M(odification)s. Some may argue that UTF-8 might be  a better choice, especially in Windows CE and alike. The problem is,  Microsoft did not know there would be UTF-8, just like about most of the other  goodies.</p>
<p>With all that said, I have to give Microsoft credits for  supporting UNICODE in core. It really makes my life as a developer, a  lot easier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://pseudosoft.net/blog/2010/03/unicode-vs-mbcs-in-windows/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
