exec.library 53.94 (03/03-2017) (A1222 version)
Code: Select all
#include <proto/exec.h>
int main( int argc UNUSED, char **argv UNUSED )
{
IExec->Alert( 0 );
return( 0 );
}
Code: Select all
#include <proto/exec.h>
int main( int argc UNUSED, char **argv UNUSED )
{
IExec->Alert( 0 );
return( 0 );
}
Generally this is true but to my understanding only the deadend type should evoke a Grim Reaper. A zero alert value should fall under the recover type and evoke a yellow alert. Last time I checked this was still the case. I'm not aware of any change in this behaviour. Though it would in fact be a welcome change as a yellow alert kills multitasking which in turn kills USB input devices.broadblues wrote:What you *should* see is Grim Reaper displaying the Alert number you passed to IExec->Alert(). Ie 00000000 in the test case you wrote above.
Code: Select all
#define AT_DeadEnd 0x80000000
#define AT_Recovery 0x00000000
This is how alerts are dealt with now, classic style yelow recevreable alrts kill the system, so are no longer appropriate, so yes it *is* "right".Running it now it keeps bringing up a GR which isn't right
It's not right for my program which uses the alert function to bring up an alert. The Grim Reaper makes it look like it's crashed. When it hasn't and the message from the program isn't displayed at all. It looks confusing now. I wrote it on my A1200 years ago so it's a 68K program. IIRC there were two functions in the system for user alerts.broadblues wrote:This is how alerts are dealt with now, classic style yelow recevreable alrts kill the system, so are no longer appropriate, so yes it *is* "right".
There is no real reason to use an alert on Amiga OS4 anyway.
Why not use a requester for that instead?Hypex wrote: It's not right for my program which uses the alert function to bring up an alert.
Interesting suggestion because the documentation says that if the requester fails to open, it will revert to an alert. Now we have an infinite loop, don't we.trixie wrote:Why not use a requester for that instead?Hypex wrote: It's not right for my program which uses the alert function to bring up an alert.
Because my original program was intended to use alerts and the shock value they provide. I originally wrote it as a prank that acted as if a virus had entered the system. It used to do a tease and provide some options for left mouse and right mouse and indicate it was trying to kill a virus. But either way it just looked worse! Finally after three "levels" it stopped playing games and the virus was gone.trixie wrote:Why not use a requester for that instead?