I'm using Lazarus to do an application for WinCE that takes data from a
local mysql database.
Doing the GUI staff was not hard, and i still didn't see any differences
between wince and win32, except for some bug or "special functions" like
the drag&drop on TLists objects that i wanted to use (i resolved
differently).
Now Almindor is trying to port his lnet libs into wince (cause there
seem to be no mysql support for wince), i think that THIS would be the
primary target for WinCE cause compiling without network support is
compiling a useless software... and no button-component-image can make
it less useless.
If you have any ideas they would be very appreciated.
p.s. for wince testing i'm always here, but i'm not enough expert for
developing patchs.
2007/1/7, Aleš Katona <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
On Ne, 2007-01-07 at 00:23 -0200, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am porting fpgfx to Windows CE. During this work I noticed a
lot of
> incompatibilities between win32 windows unit and wince windows
unit.
> Trivial stuff, like a parameter is var on win32, but is a pointer on
> wince.
>
> Is there any special reason why it´s like that? Should we try to get
> both units as compatible as possible? Can I send a patch for that?
>
All patch / comments /remarks are welcome :)
> thanks,
I'm not an expert on the windows unit but I encountered similar
problems
among platforms and I think we should defenetly go for compat. The
best
thing you can do (so nobody can say anything) is "complement" both
ends.
So eg:
you got this in 2 windows unit:
W1. function A(const data): Pointer;
W2. function A(data: Pointer): Pointer;
Best is to complement both W1 and W2 so they both have both overloaded
versions. It's not nice, but this way you ensure 100% compat and
everyone is happy. Ofcourse since WINCE isn't stable yet it might be
NO, fpc wince current thrunk is very good, and excellent quality
(in the past there was some issues during internal linker implementation
so it was not the case for all svn rel but since a few months it's
very good)
wince api is not complete but i can say you that fpc-arm-wince is
waiting for the 2.2 :)
cleaner to just copycat the windows ones into it.
Ales
this is what i did since more than one year,
actual wince api was first inherited from last year win32.
i copy/paste them, then removed unexisting wince funcs
and then start adding new ones.
at the beginning i keepts possible common files for both win32/wince
using ifdef. (you can look in 3month old svn inc files)
but after one year i saw that nobody have interest on that.
only recently ifdef and win32 declarations where removed. why ?
1°)calling conventions are differents, some type/record have same name
but are differents
and even M$ have separated sysgen files, possibles futures issues with
ce 4.2, 5, 6 versionning
that can introduce also ifdefs
2°)it was discussed last year here and florian+yuri thinked it was
better to separate
i was first against this but finally be convinced
now, every time i can test some new api, i add them
some are already missing but i've added all api available functions
names at the beginning
of .in files, so any one who need something to be added can drop a
line or send a patch
(here or directly to me) then i'll do my best to check an apply asap.
in one year i only received 1 patch+request from Rozbeeh and it was
applied in less than 24h
regards
or
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
<mailto:fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org>
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
<http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
