WRT 3) How much of NIM is designed to be portable? Switching off of LOWORD(wParam) doesn't strike me as portable ;-).
Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Altman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 8:59 AM ... Kevin Koch wrote: > The parts of NIM I've looked at so far are written in C. Since this is a > GUI app, why doesn't it leverage MFC and C++? Or why not the .NET > framework, which provides even richer controls? I don't want to go back > to writing message loops! For several reasons. (1) MFC over the years has proven to be less than compatible as Microsoft issued new versions of Visual Studio. (2) C++ has proven to be less than portable across new Visual Studio releases due to changes in Microsoft's template libraries and their additional and removal of C++ language extensions. It is also not particularly good at permitting DLLs to be built with a different compiler than the EXE due to the class library dependencies and export list issues. (3) NIM is designed so that it can be portable across operating systems. _______________________________________________ kfwdev mailing list kfwdev@mit.edu http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kfwdev
