|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
API calls in DotNetDeclare Auto Function BitBlt Lib "GDI32.DLL" ...
Just wondering, I'm forced to use API calls once in a while and thought, it would be pretty easy for MS to either 1. expand the Framwork to natively include most of the features available in them or 2. provide simple wrappers so that users don't need to invoke API function calls directly, at least for windows DLL's. I imagine lots of people have to go through the same process - locate the proper way to call the API function on the internet, or dig up something from documentation and pray you get it right - it's all a lot of wasteful, duplicated work. Isn't it something MS should do once and build it right into the Framework? Are they planning anything like this in Whidbey? Bob I have been coding for so long now that converting API's is second nature.
All the information is listed in the Platform SDK documentation & if you have VS 6 then you will have the API viewer too. Sites like http://www.allapi.net lists the majority of them You can also buy, get as a trial etc API databases.if you wish. Its true what you say about the API's should be built in, but take the different versions of the shell for example. You make code something to work in Windows 2000 onwards, but it could end up on a Windows 98 machine, but the earlier version of the shell doesn't support it... There are many examples like that Crouchie1998 BA (HONS) MCP MCSE Official Microsoft Beta Tester "Crouchie1998" <crouchie1998@spamcop.net> wrote in message Yeah - another reason MS should orvide the wrappers. They could buildnews:eRWSLHGQFHA.2000@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > Its true what you say about the API's should be built in, but take the > different versions of the shell for example. You make code something to work > in Windows 2000 onwards, but it could end up on a Windows 98 machine, but > the earlier version of the shell doesn't support it... There are many > examples like that something into them to try to gracefully handle different OS versions, like throwing a user-readable exception when an unsupported version is detected, or even rearranging data types or even function call names under the covers, if possible, as necessary. Bob
Show quote
Hide quote
"Bob" <no***@nowhere.com> schrieb: In future:>> Its true what you say about the API's should be built in, but take the >> different versions of the shell for example. You make code something to > work >> in Windows 2000 onwards, but it could end up on a Windows 98 machine, but >> the earlier version of the shell doesn't support it... There are many >> examples like that > > Yeah - another reason MS should orvide the wrappers. They could build > something into them to try to gracefully handle different OS versions, > like > throwing a user-readable exception when an unsupported version is > detected, > or even rearranging data types or even function call names under the > covers, > if possible, as necessary. WinFx SDK <URL:http://winfx.msdn.microsoft.com/library/> -- M S Herfried K. Wagner M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/> V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/> |
|||||||||||||||||||||||