WinAPI for druntime and OpenGL for deimos.

[Manu]

On 24 November 2012 23:18, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich at gmail.com>wrote:

> On 11/24/12, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
> > I'd forget about the unicode macro, and call the A or W versions
> > explicitly.
>
> People already use WindowsAPI
> (http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi) and Derelict
> for many projects, and introducing a new API that isn't compatible
> with this is going to create compatibility issues.


What new API? How is it incompatible?
There's nothing 'new' about WINAPI.

Not to mention
> newbies which will be utterly confused as to what to use now, the new
> std.c.windows.windows (which will be what, a single module spanning
> 100000 lines?) or the WindowsAPI bindings.
>

windows.h (and friends) is gigantic, nothing D can (or should) do about
that...

The WinAPI project has been used and maintained for years (compared to
> the poorly maintainted std.c.windows.windows where people arbitrarily
> add stuff to it when they feel the need to).
>

Sure, I'd suggest that one of the mature bindings should be pulled into
druntime in place of what's there now, better than new code for sure.
No real point druntime offering an incomplete binding.

Here we have a guy (Gor) who doesn't even know what declspec is, or
> what a def file is, or what an import libarary is, who thinks he can
> use regex to create bindings, and who refuses to use STABLE bindings
> that were maintained for years. And we're going to allow him to create
> new backward-incompatible bindings that will supposedly work out of
> the box (they most certainly won't)?
>

I don't care who does it or where the code comes from, I was just
supporting the notion that druntime's windows bindings are very incomplete,
and that alone should be addressed one way or another.

I used to be *for* putting WinAPI bindings into druntime/phobos. But
> seeing how some pull requests take months to be merged, and Walter's
> ultra stance on not adding any aliases that help with code readability
> (A vs W functions), and the obsessive requirement for Phobos to be
> composed out of massive single modules, I'm beginning to think that
> keeping the API out of Phobos might actually be a good idea.
>

I'm sure it would be merged. And aren't the windows bindings in druntime?
WINAPI is decades old, it will never change, it will never need revision
after being done properly. I think it's safe to have in the std library
(and it's already there, it's just incomplete).

The A/W matter... I really think the version should be respected and the
aliases maintained.
You can't make a change like that after decades because you think you know
better... Win32 is effectively a legacy API, and people have decades of
experience, and existing code written with it.

Here's a crazy thought: if WinAPI is needed by Phobos functions why
> not just distribute WinAPI with the zipped distribution? You could put
> it in a special subfolder, e.g.:
>
> dmd2/src/dmd
> dmd2/src/druntime
> dmd2/src/phobos
> dmd2/src/bindings <-- put it in here
>
> And then in sc.ini or dmd.conf add an import to the bindings folder,
> and distribute a precompiled static library of the bindings alongside
> phobos.lib. The -version switches might have to be sorted out, but
> that has to be a simpler problem than rewriting bindings from scratch.
>

They're already in core.sys.windows, that's a perfectly good place for it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20121125/616a3725/attachment-0001.html>