WinAPI for druntime and OpenGL for deimos.

[Manu]

On 24 November 2012 01:08, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:

> On Friday, November 23, 2012 15:15:41 Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
> > As we all know, the WinAPI binding in druntime as well as the static
> > libraries of WinAPI, which come with DMD are in horrendous state.
>
> I am not all that well acquainted with all of the issues involved with the
> Win32 API, so I'm probably not the best qualified to chime in on how they
> should be handled. However, I would point out that given that the Win32
> API is
> effectively the system layer API for Windows, it should be fully supported
> in
> druntime (just like glibc should be fully supported for Linux by druntime),
> and as Walter points out, such a layer should be thin rather than trying
> to fix
> anything (that's the job of Phobos or other wrapper libraries). And since
> we're about to have 64-bit Windows support, druntime should be updated with
> whatever C prototypes are in the 64-bit Windows API (and I really don't
> know
> how those relate to the Win32 API other than the fact that as I understand
> it,
> 64-bit Windows still uses some version of the Win32 API).
>
> So, I would hope that the various Windows Gurus around here could come to
> an
> agreement on how the Windows API bindings should be put into druntime and
> then
> someone (or several someones) would take the time to implement that. I
> don't
> think that we should continue with the approach that anyone doing anything
> serious with the Win32 API has to use a 3rd party project to do it.
> OS-level
> functions should be part of druntime for every OS that we support, and it's
> worthy of a bug report every time that we find an OS-level function that
> is not
> in druntime.
>

I'm regularly annoyed by the quality of the druntime windows bindigs. I use
this one: http://www.dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi
It's better.

I don't think there's really any room for opinion on the topic, the windows
bindings should simply be complete, and correct.
It's a flat C api, I can't imagine anything in there that doesn't translate
to D well.

As said before, the only details that might require some discussion are the
handling of the windows version macro, and the unicode macro.
I would personally just expect to use them exactly as they are in C, and
expect the user to supply the appropriate versions to D when compiling.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20121124/b9468a1c/attachment.html>