[quote=10675:@Joe Ranieri]I don’t know about him, but I’m sure. While it’s true that the old IDE had such a hack, the new one does not and treats adding an event handler as, well, adding an event handler.[/quote]Shouldn’t it be the compiler that decides what code gets added into the built executable, otherwise entire unused libraries would be built into simple applications?
It has to flow from the main entry point in some way, and converting a method to a pointer for a callback procedure should facilitate code that would otherwise not be directly called in code.
I’m not sure how an event which requires a boolean return would even let you build without that code in it if it wasnt ignored?
[quote=10739:@[deleted]]Shouldn’t it be the compiler that decides what code gets added into the built executable, otherwise entire unused libraries would be built into simple applications?
It has to flow from the main entry point in some way, and converting a method to a pointer for a callback procedure should facilitate code that would otherwise not be directly called in code.
I’m not sure how an event which requires a boolean return would even let you build without that code in it if it wasnt ignored?[/quote]
It’s more a matter that the presence of the event handler is required in the symbol table so that subclasses can’t also claim to handle the event. The compiler probably could be smart enough to avoid the code generation step in some cases, but it isn’t now.
If you’d me to go into more detail on the IDE’s interaction with events or events in general, you should start a new thread.