What's up with the windows headers?

Jonathan M Davis jmdavisProg at gmx.com
Thu Dec 27 20:57:54 PST 2012


On Thursday, December 27, 2012 17:44:09 Stewart Gordon wrote:
> On 27/12/2012 13:52, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> > No. There was ifdef stuff of some kind, but I don't recall the
> > details. You'd probably know more about that sort of stuff than I
> > would. I'm just recalling stuff from previous discussions and not
> > necessarily all that accurately.
> 
> So you mean ifdefs from the C headers that have been just commented out
> because we weren't sure how to deal with them?  I'll have to take a
> look.  Or ifdefs in some other set of headers?

I really don't remember. I recall that there were issues with ifdefs relating 
to version of Windows that you were targetting, but I don't know. I'm going off 
of fragmented memories here, because I do so little with Windows. If you're 
hip deep in the Windows API stuff as you seem to be, then you'd be far more 
familiar with the issues than I am. Just go off of what you know. My point is 
that there were problems that were discussed, and whatever problems exist with 
regards to merging the Windows API bindings into druntime need to be sorted 
out, whatever they may be. Folks who are actually familiar with that should be 
the ones to sort it out. I'm probably just confusing you by trying to discuss 
them at all.

> > We're not supporting anything older than XP, but we're still
> > supporting XP, so whatever is done with the bindings needs to be in
> > line with that.
> 
> Are you referring to DMD or to the D language as a whole?  And where is
> the official statement?

I am referring to dmd, druntime, and Phobos. It was agreed upon by the Phobos 
devs in the newsgroup and/or in discussions in github pull requests, so it's 
essentially official, but we've never actually put it in the changelog or 
officially announced it in any way. I believe that it happened when we 
explicitly removed all of the Win9x support a while back.

> It seems the reason it didn't get anywhere was that I was too busy with
> work and stuff and hadn't checked the 'group properly in too long.
> 
> Too bad that thread doesn't seem to have generated any interest in
> helping with the project....

That happens far too often around here. Plenty of folks have stuff that they 
want done, but too few people have the time, expertise, and/or willingness 
necessary to do it. I think that a lot of stuff gets done simply because 
someone gets sick of it not being done and buckles down and does it. And too 
many people are more likely to give up on it than do that.

- Jonathan M Davis


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list