On Tue, 08 May 2012 18:19:21 +0200, bulk 88 <bul...@hotmail.com> wrote:
----------------------------------------
To: bul...@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: 3 Win32::API bugs
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 10:40:27 +0200
CC: libwin32@perl.org
From: cos...@streppone.it
If you can help, or you know someone who could,
please point them to https://github.com/cosimo/perl5-win32-api/
I've been thinking for a while that handing over maintainership of
Win32::API would be a good idea.
Anyone cares enough to step in?
If I sent you a patch through RT fixing all those problems you could
apply it right? If so I'll work on one.
(cc'ing libwin32@, in case someone is also interested)
Yes, of course.
I have a few questions though, maybe you can answer them. Why is there a
T_INTERGER and T_NUMBER flag? I see T_INTEGER is mapped to T_NUMBER. Why
did T_INTEGER ever exist? or is T_INTEGER just a 4 byte integer and
T_NUMBER is a 4/8 byte integer?
These implementation choices pre-date my involvement
with Win32::API, so I really don't know.
Maybe Aldo, the original author of Win32::API, remembers.
How is the no short problem supposed to be fixed? Moving struct to
letter "T" would break too many grandfathered perl scripts right? So
should a short be "T" then?
I would definitely try to keep backward compatibility.
Do you know what the undocumented T_POINTERPOINTER/letter 'B' is for?
I'm not going to remove it but just curious. I think its for a Call
parameter that looks like "[q|a string|]".
Pointer to a pointer (ex.: char**), or in this case AV**/SV** ?
--
Cosimo
