1. Re: Structures
- Posted by Everett Williams <rett at GVTC.COM>
Feb 02, 2000
-
Last edited Feb 03, 2000
David Cuny wrote:
>Everett Williams wrote:
>
>> Cheapshot!
>
>Yes. I couldn't resist, but I should have.
Nah, what would I use to keep my blood pressure up.
>Let me see if I understand what you are asking for. The Real World
>implements things using C structures. Calls to external DLLs, reading binary
>data - all of these deal with data in a C structure, which then has to be
>laboriously mapped to and from Euphoria data.
>-- David Cuny
As usual, you are miles ahead of me. In this particular case, however, you
have either intentionally or unintentionally( I vote the former) made my point
for me. Something to the order of "one of the resident code geniuses will..."
and so forth and so on. It's not that I mind your code. It is most artful and
downright deviously clever. Unfortunately you don't seem to be available
every time I need a work around for something that shouldn't require a work
around. Strangely enough, you don't even seem to have the same interests
that I have.
I might not even want to use all of win32lib while desperately needing
some of it's constituents. I'm sure that I can eventually break out the parts
that I need, but then I'll need to go back every time you upgrade. Or, I may
in the future decide that I need win32lib and it will have been upgraded way
beyond my borrowed segment. Then, when I include win32lib and throw
away my trusty old borrowed code(to prevent namespace collisions) all
! at #$% breaks loose. I'm sure that I can eventually settle it all down, but
after the heat of the moment has passed, I'm going to wonder why the
trip was necessary.
As a minor caveat, some of your code would be a bit more readable if the
structure, namespace, and calling convention changes that I and many
others have noted were implemented. Most of the procedures would be
replaced with straightforward Euphoria code. In addition, there is some
fragility related to order of statements that is not immediately apparent
when looking at the code as served up by the master. Also, I wouldn't
have to look up the syntax for all those procedures and try to apply it to
my particular situation.
The major advantage to including these things in the base would be the
ease with which C structures could be converted or wrapped. In general,
IO would be eased. And of course, constants could go back to just
being constants and not having to double in jobs they are ill suited for.
Everett L.(Rett) Williams
rett at gvtc.com
