D
Daniel Berger
Hi all,
As I sit here finally learning the Win32API module, rather than
writing C extensions, I was wondering about something...
There are many generic functions used in Win32 programming, such as
GlobalAlloc(), GlobalFree(), etc. Currently, it appears that I have
to do this:
GlobalAlloc = Win32API.new(...)
GlobalAlloc.Call
The problem with this is that it means I have to redefine these in
separate packages every time I want to use them. Would it be possible
to alter the Win32API module so that I could just do:
Win32API.GlobalAlloc(...)
Thus, the class method names would correspond to the equivalent Win32
API call. After all, the method signatures don't change, so making me
do it longhand every time feels annoying. Having the relevant
constants predefined and available (GMEM_MOVEABLE, etc, etc) would be
nice, too.
This would make things easier and wouldn't break backwards
compatibility (since it would just be a matter of adding class methods
to the Win32API package). I realize that I could add these methods
easily enough myself, but wouldn't it be nice if everyone had these
ready to go?
Thoughts? Opinions? It can already do this and I missed the boat
somewhere?
Regards,
Dan
As I sit here finally learning the Win32API module, rather than
writing C extensions, I was wondering about something...
There are many generic functions used in Win32 programming, such as
GlobalAlloc(), GlobalFree(), etc. Currently, it appears that I have
to do this:
GlobalAlloc = Win32API.new(...)
GlobalAlloc.Call
The problem with this is that it means I have to redefine these in
separate packages every time I want to use them. Would it be possible
to alter the Win32API module so that I could just do:
Win32API.GlobalAlloc(...)
Thus, the class method names would correspond to the equivalent Win32
API call. After all, the method signatures don't change, so making me
do it longhand every time feels annoying. Having the relevant
constants predefined and available (GMEM_MOVEABLE, etc, etc) would be
nice, too.
This would make things easier and wouldn't break backwards
compatibility (since it would just be a matter of adding class methods
to the Win32API package). I realize that I could add these methods
easily enough myself, but wouldn't it be nice if everyone had these
ready to go?
Thoughts? Opinions? It can already do this and I missed the boat
somewhere?
Regards,
Dan