Re: [ros-kernel] native vs. Win32 - again

[Robert K. <ro...@ko...>]

My intend is to use just the naked windows from USer32. Other things like controls
need a reimplementation since they use different window messages.
this implies that the controls may look as one likes.

Yuri Prokushev schrieb:

> On Fri, 31 May 2002 11:36:50 +0100, Nick Date wrote:
>
> >> > OS/2 has its own graphics and windowing API: why should it use Win32?
> >
> >> it should at least use win32 windows and messages - that way you can
> >> run win32 and os/2 stuff on one desktop.
> >> getting them on one desktop with two distinct "window lists" (or however
> >they
> >> are stored internally) you'll have a big time trying to keep them all
> >> up-to-date...
> >I see where you're coming from here. I'm wondering how much of win32 it
> >would be feasable to strip from ReactOS if the user only wants to run OS/2
> >apps (save some space on your 40 gig hard disk :-] ).
> Why I need storage space for unused things?
>
> > It seems to me that in
> >order to do this you'd have to go back to the kernel and write an OS/2
> >GDI/GUI, but wouldn't this be a seperate project from OS/2 binary
> >compatibility?
> Who needs binary compatibility without APIs?
>
> GDI implemented by win32k. Isn't it? So all OS/2 GPI (=GDI) can be easely implemented like gdi32.dll (pmgpi in os2). Highlevel objects (user32.dll in win32) can be just
> copied (for common object like editfield). For other controls (like spinbuttons) code must be written from the scratch. So I don't see any reason for implement pmgpi via
> gdi32 instead of direct implementation via win32k.
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
>
> _______________________________________________
> reactos-kernel mailing list
> rea...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel