1. Re: Future of Win32Lib
Argh, Dave's wierd formatting made my reply look like crap on my own
machine. Here is another attempt at sharing what he wrote: (bye, Einar)
>This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
>this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
>
>------ =_NextPart_001_01BDBF03.FEDAF914
>
>A couple of people have wondered what the future holds for Win32Lib. I
>know it's been a number of months since I've sent in an update to
>Win32Lib.
>
>I've had a tough time finding time to code over the last couple months -
>and there are many contributing factors that add up to Complete
>Exhaustion. Not suprisingly, my output has been accordingly sparse. I'm
>hoping that by September things will have gotten better.
>
>In the mean time, what little spare time I've got is now devoted to
>Gnuphoria. As a result, Win32Lib has languished. But I think that
>Gnuphoria is the more important of the two efforts.
>
>Regarding WinMan, I've been reconsidering whether I really want to
>support a multi-platform API. The truth is, once Gnuphoria (or Pete's
>Petephoria) comes out, it would make a lot more sense to link it to an
>existing cross-platform library, or Tcl/Tk, than to write one in
>Euphoria. So it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to continue with
>WinMan. It's been a fun project, but I really can't think of a reason to
>continue with it.
>
>However, I *do* plan on continuing Win32Lib, especially once Gnuphoria
>has been released. A DOS version (Dos32Lib) is also likely. Expect a
>return to the monochrome Mac interface, with a lot of parts cannibalized
>from WinMan.
>
>In the meantime, please remember that I'm no Win32 guru - I have to RTFM
>just like the rest of you. I *don't* know how to fix the fonts, or set
>the background colors for the titles. I've tried a number of times, and
>failed. 
>
>If anyone *does* know how to do this (and other cool features), *please*
>let me know how, and I will try to add it in. Or even better, write a
>patch and send it to me! I'll (probably) be glad to add it in - when I
>get a spare waking moment!
>
>If you write a patch, I'd prefer getting a seperate file of routines
>instead of the patched version of WIN32LIB.EW - it makes it lot easier
>to see what's changed, and makes it easier to add to the documentation.
>
>Did that answer most of the questions?
>
>Thanks for understanding!
>
>-- David Cuny
>
