Re: Windows stuff...
- Posted by Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at telenet.be> Sep 13, 2004
- 464 views
Juergen Luethje wrote: > Yes, the API constants are necessary, and I actually think that they > should ship with the official Euphoria distribution. This is normal for > other languages such as C, Delphi, PowerBASIC etc. for years now. > > > But I think that it would be useful, if instead of a Euphoria-library, > > these definitions (constants, functions, structures) would be available > > as a database. > > I certainly don't have as much programming knowledge as you, but anyway, > I'd like to say here: KISS. I think it should be a plain include file. > It works fine e.g. for the languages mentioned above, why shouldn't it > be good for Euphoria? > > > Different libraries use different functions to define structures, and > > to load DLLs and functions. > > Yes, but that must not be accepted as a given prerequisite, because it's > part of the problem! And that's why it is highest time to create some > standards in this regard. When all libraries use these standards, then > this issue will dissapear. In order to 'define' a standard, it's not > necessary to write large and complicated documents. > RDS just has to include the regarding code in the official Euphoria > distribution. This will automatically be a 'de-facto standard' like it's > already with the library routines, that currently ship with Euphoria. > > For instance, if there would be built-in library routines for handling > C-like structures, all those different self-written routines would > become superfluous (provided, the built-in routines are good), and > sooner or later would disappear from the "market". > > So the various different approaches, and different libraries are a > direct consequence of the lack of a standard in that regard. And (at > least currently, since OpenEU isn't available yet) no one else than RDS > can introduce an Euphoria standard, that will be accepted and used by > many people. > > When there are suggestions for improvement to Euphoria, Rob often writes > something like: You can do it yourself. While it's true, this is not the > point. Of course, we can write this or that code snippet ourselfes, but > we can't define standards ourselfes. That's actually up to RDS. > > > If the API definitions are available as a > > database, anyone could generate Euphoria-code from it. > > Sorry, but I actually can't hear this "Anyone can do it her/himself." > argument anymore. 'Standardization' is the name of the game. I've read your post, and you've convinced me that this should indeed be standardized. -- tommy online: http://users.telenet.be/tommycarlier tommy.blog: http://tommycarlier.blogspot.com Euphoria Message Board: http://uboard.proboards32.com