Re: [perl-win32-gui-hackers] Proposition for NEM

[Glenn L. <pe...@ne...>]

On approximately 12/5/2003 10:19 AM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Steve Pick:
> Hi,
> 
>>Is there any reason HEM cannot be used in conjunction with the old event
>>model?
> 
> Not that I can think of. I just forgot to add it to that bit. 

I'd find it more likely useful to me in the short term, if it were added 
to the old event model ("OEM" ??? Horrible acronym, but we need something).

> My hooks arent
> real Win32 hooks at all, as you know, and I put the processing of them after
> the NEM stuff so as to make it more difficult to screw up normal
> functionality. If you want to handle something already handled by NEM, I
> recommend you use NEM. If you must use "HEM" then things will probably still
> work as expected, since it's likely you will override changes made by the
> NEM handlers.

Yes, this makes more sense the longer I think about it, and the more you 
explain it!  Thanks.

-- 
Glenn -- http://nevcal.com/
===========================
Like almost everyone, I receive a lot of spam every day, much of it
offering to help me get out of debt or get rich quick.  It's ridiculous.
-- Bill Gates

And here is why it is ridiculous:
  The division that includes Windows posted an operating profit of $2.26 
  billion on revenue of $2.81 billion.
  --from Reuters via 
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/031113/tech_microsoft_msn_1.html

So that's profit of over 400% of investment... with a bit more 
investment in Windows technology, particularly in the area of 
reliability, the profit percentage might go down, but so might the bugs 
and security problems?  Seems like it would be a reasonable tradeoff. 
WalMart earnings are 3.4% of investment.