Hello
Viktor Szakáts wrote: > > If you're extending existing Xbase++ APIs, I think > we should be careful about it and at least mark all > such code as HBXBP_EXTENSION for future reference. > > If we start extending the API in this hidden way, > we will end up with same problems as with Clipper > API: Two way portability is lost. > You are absolutely right. But as I could not find the appropriate methods for the job so I used this trick. I do not want to extend anything. It will be set right after some real Xbase++ user reports how it is achieved in Xbase++. Till then it remains documented here. BTW this does not break Xbase++ code at all. If supplied like as I described will be honored otherwise ignored. One more fundamental difference will be "Resources" which considerably differ from any WIndows implementation. We have to document these differences or a way to map them to QT standards. Regards Pritpal Bedi -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/SF.net-SVN%3A-harbour-project%3A-11327--trunk-harbour-tp24016652p24016836.html Sent from the Harbour - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
