ejp@bohra.cpg.oz (Esmond Pitt) (08/17/90)
The documentation for WinIsVisible() (OS/2 Programmer's reference vol II pp 286-7) says firstly: The return value is TRUE if the specified window _and_ all its parent windows have the WS_VISIBLE style bit set. The return value is FALSE if the window is not visible. but secondly: When the WS_VISIBLE style bit is set, the window is shown and subsequent drawing into the window is displayed as long as the window _or_ any of the windows in the parent chain have the WS_VISIBLE style. Is the 'or' in the second quotation a misprint for 'and', or is the 'and' in the first a misprint for 'or'? Thanks for any clarification. -- Esmond Pitt, Computer Power Group ejp@bohra.cpg.oz D
ejp@bohra.cpg.oz (Esmond Pitt) (08/23/90)
In article <569@bohra.cpg.oz> ejp@bohra.cpg.oz (I) writes: > The documentation for WinIsVisible() (OS/2 Programmer's reference vol > II pp 286-7) says firstly: > > The return value is TRUE if the specified window _and_ all its > parent windows have the WS_VISIBLE style bit set. The return > value is FALSE if the window is not visible. > > but secondly: > > When the WS_VISIBLE style bit is set, the window is shown and > subsequent drawing into the window is displayed as long as the > window _or_ any of the windows in the parent chain have the > WS_VISIBLE style. > > Is the 'or' in the second quotation a misprint for 'and', or is the > 'and' in the first a misprint for 'or'? According to Microsoft Support, the first description is correct. Unfortunately that's the only place it appears, while the second (incorrect) description appears several times throughout the manual. Be warned. -- Esmond Pitt, Computer Power Group ejp@bohra.cpg.oz D