Hi Pritpal, > My question is: How many of you are using GTWVG and are > willing to adopt to new prorocol. Believe me, it will be very > little effort to change the exiting code but the results will be > truely rewarding. Once this is done, I may think to port > GTWVW in GTWVG if get a substantial number of confirmations
I've never tried GTWVG, and I am not sure what you mean by "port GTWVW in GTWVG". If you mean revising (or rewriting) GTWVW into Harbour, then I'll be very much interested, as well as many others. But please keep it backward compatible as much as possible. I remember you said here in the past that GTWVW is "impossible" to port to the new GT API because there is a conflict with GTWVW's use of first parameter as window designator (for most functions). Do you finally find a way to solve that problem? Or do you plan change the convention in GTWVW? (I hope it is the former.) Am I interpreting it right with what you mean by "porting GTWVW in GTWVG"? Thanks and regards, budyanto _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
