pachlava
12 years agoNew Contributor
MSVC property group is occasionally not available in TC10
Hello,
Our company has a Visual C++ application built with VisualStudio 2003.
The application contains a number of toolbars which are based on CDialog class. The most comfortable way to locate these toolbars was using the ClassName property of MSVC group.
The problem is: after transition from TC9.20 to TC10, we have noticed that TC10 object browser may usually be unable to see both MSVC and MFC property groups for such toolbars. Both when app is executed as a TestedApp, and when executed manually not corresponding to any TestedApp.
Running the same testcode in TC9 goes perfectly, and its object explorer constantly provides MSVC and MFC property sets for these controls.
As well we have noticed the following: once the toolbar controls were located in TC9, they start to be visible for TC10. After reboot TC10 does not see them again.
So currently we are in situation where we either need to downgrade to TC9 for some time, or to find a point we have possibly missed on our side.
Thank you for assistance,
Sergey
Our company has a Visual C++ application built with VisualStudio 2003.
The application contains a number of toolbars which are based on CDialog class. The most comfortable way to locate these toolbars was using the ClassName property of MSVC group.
The problem is: after transition from TC9.20 to TC10, we have noticed that TC10 object browser may usually be unable to see both MSVC and MFC property groups for such toolbars. Both when app is executed as a TestedApp, and when executed manually not corresponding to any TestedApp.
Running the same testcode in TC9 goes perfectly, and its object explorer constantly provides MSVC and MFC property sets for these controls.
As well we have noticed the following: once the toolbar controls were located in TC9, they start to be visible for TC10. After reboot TC10 does not see them again.
So currently we are in situation where we either need to downgrade to TC9 for some time, or to find a point we have possibly missed on our side.
Thank you for assistance,
Sergey