OpenEuphoria

Re: Standardisation between Win libraries

• Posted by Juergen Luethje <j.lue at gmx.de> Jul 24, 2003
• 548 views

Me wrote:

> Hello Dave, you wrote:
>
>> This is mainly aimed at those wonderful (and pretty darn clever)  people
>> out there who develop the Windows libraries (win32Lib, eWin32API, etc)
>> for this great language.
>
> .. although this issue is of general importance for Windows programming.
>
>> Is it possible for you all to talk together and decide on a standard set
>> of include files for the definitions of Windows constants ie. for
>> WM_PAINT, WM_MOUSEMOVE, VK_SPACE, VK_LEFT, etc? and/or other aspects.
>>
>> With one single set of includes it would make the use of Euphoria for
>> Windows soooo much easier.
>
> <snip>
>
> Yep! I also strongly vote for a modular approach.
> For all Windows programming, there is a "smallest common denominator":
> the wrapping of the Windows API! Whatever we do, we need constant and
> routine declarations. It would be really valuable, to have some
> _standard_ files, that wrap the Windows API. These files only should
> contain:
>
> - global constant ..
> - a = open_dll(..)
> - idFuncX = define_c_func(a, ..)
> - global function FuncX(..)
>      ..
>      return c_func(idFuncX, ..)
>   end function
> - (same for procedures, of course)
>
> Maybe I forgot something, but I hope you see my point. These wrappers
> should not contain any "bells and whistles".
> The API programmers can use it, and the programmers of the advanced
> libraries (like Win32Lib) also need something like that anyway.
>
> The problem is _not_ to write the code, there are already such API
> wrapper files. I for instance use a set of files, that Chris Bensler
> sent me privately. Thanks again, Chris. 
>
> But this isn't the solution. It would be really great to have _standard_
> wrappers for this purpose, and the programmers of the advanced libraries
> should use them, rather than their own wrappers.
>
> The problem is, that there currently is no agreement, which files
> actually should be "the standard".

Sometimes I'm not very good in expressing myself, especially in a
foreign language.

The main problem regarding this issue actually seems to be, that there
is no broad agreement on this list, that having a very basic Windows API
standard wrapper is a good idea at all ...

I would be happy to contribute code and more ideas to such a wrapper,
but I don't want to work for the wastpaper basket.


BTW, recently I came across the following website.
   Project: Standard Euphoria Library
   http://sourceforge.net/projects/standardeu/

It looks a little dead, IMHO.

> Therefore probably it would be the
> best, if such wrappers would be officially shipped with Euphoria (like
> with other languages, such as Visual Basic, PowerBASIC, Open Watcom, ..).
> Or a wrapper contibuted by users, could be "officially recommended" or
> something like that.
>
> <snip>
>
>> Sorry in advance if this starts a bad discussion thread - it's not meant
>> as an attack on anyone, just trying to help organise things - a little!
>
> It starts a _necessary_ discussion thread. 

Best regards,
   Juergen

-- 
 /"\  ASCII ribbon campain  |
 \ /  against HTML in       |  Money is the root of all evil.
  X   e-mail and news,      |  Send 20 Dollars for more info.
 / \  and unneeded MIME     |