Il 04/02/2009 10.45, Viktor Szakáts ha scritto:
Ok for using *.ch, *.h, but if it is possible, to see immediately
where put a new addition, as per c api file I would like to mantain
ms naming convention, so for me it will be better to use, f.e.,
w_winuser.ch or winuserapi.ch
We can do this. I personally prefer "w_winuser.ch".
Or, what about: "wapi_winuser.ch"?
To be in complete sync, maybe WAPI_*() prefix could be used for
functions, too.
Or, "winapi_winuser.ch" and WINAPI_*().
What do you think?
Uhm, after some thought, last 2 version are more consistent also for me,
also if a bit long.
So, following you, I propose:
winapi_*.c for windows wrappers and in particular:
f.e. winapi_kernel32.c or winapi_gdi32.c for pure wrappers functions to
standard api files/dll (as MSDN tells).
These files will contains only WINAPI_* functions as pure wrappers (and,
possibly having STRUCTURES, with same syntax).
After these we will have win_*.c files that will contains higher level
functions (like: DrawTransparentBitmap() functions that uses more than
single win API). Those functions will be prefixed with WIN_.
For all pure windows headers files (also if adapted to us) will be used
winapi_ prefix, so we will have i.e. winapi_winuser.ch.
Instead for internal use we will use win_*.ch/win_*.h names.
If this will appear a bit long, the alternative is w* (wapi_ or w_) also
if I have doubt that in case of developing the same for linux or os/2 or
something else 1 char is enough.
All above only if group will agrees on lift 8.3 naming convention on
hbwin folder.
Best regards
Francesco
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
