Yet another effort at translating the Win32 API headers

[Stewart Gordon]

Don Clugston wrote:
> Stewart Gordon wrote:
<snip>
>> Here's the list of versions that we _might_ want to keep in:
<snip>
> I'd like to see almost all of those things disappear. DIRECT3D is 
> important, and probably ODBCVER, but most of the others should vanish. 
> Many of them only exist to reduce compilation time.

Taken the words out of my mouth there.  And now that computers are 
faster and that D's symbolic imports are supposed to be more efficient 
than old-fashioned C preprocessor includes, this benefit isn't really 
there to the same extent.

> There seem to be a few that are for compatibility with the DDK headers, 
> but the ones I've seen are mostly to avoid duplicate definitions, so 
> shouldn't be a problem with D.

Yes, I cut those out of the list already.  And what's DDK?

<snip>
> We should probably remove the aliases for near pointers. There's not 
> many of them, and most of them were a bad idea even in the Win 3.0 days.

Aliases for near pointers?  I thought there were only aliases for 
default pointers and aliases for far pointers.  But the distinction is 
irrelevant in Win32 and hence in D.  But the C headers still use both 
sets of aliases.  Personally I don't think we need either.  Shall we do 
away with them?

BTW it seems one of us made a slip-up with winbase.d and an older 
version ended up being re-committed to Dsource.  Revision 40 of this 
file is better than revision 43.

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:-@ C++@ a->--- UB@ P+ L E@ W++@ N+++ o K-@ w++@ O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.