At 12:38 AM 3/16/2004, you wrote:
1. Let me explain what I'm trying to accomplish by leaving it open. Probably
you would advise me some more robust way. I want my application to be able
to wake up (as resident application in DOS world) through the command bar
menu. So, I want (even with my applicat
David,
1. Let me explain what I'm trying to accomplish by leaving it open. Probably
you would advise me some more robust way. I want my application to be able
to wake up (as resident application in DOS world) through the command bar
menu. So, I want (even with my application quit) to show an icon
Bugs?
1.
DmOpenDatabase(0,lid,dmModeReadOnly | dmModeLeaveOpen);
dmModeLeaveOpen flag - does not work anymore for me. The base will be
closed on application exit.
2.
WinGetBounds(WinGetDisplayWindow(),&display6);
wh6 = WinSaveBits(&display6,&winerr);
fails for window 320x480 with undocu
Bugs?
1.
> DmOpenDatabase(0,lid,dmModeReadOnly | dmModeLeaveOpen);
dmModeLeaveOpen flag - does not work anymore for me. The base will be
closed on application exit.
2.
WinGetBounds(WinGetDisplayWindow(),&display6);
wh6 = WinSaveBits(&display6,&winerr);
fails for window 320x480 with undo
> From: David Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Seriously, we have been quite open with information; I gave a "sneak
> peek" of Palm OS Cobalt multiple times, literally around the globe,
> describing the new infrastructure and what it'd mean for
> applications. And we have seeded the simulator and t
David,
Actualy, I'm talking about specific sample rather then sampleS. It's
SampleCollapse_DR2.zip PalmSource has distributed with some revision of
SDK5. Application codeflow from this sample seems to follow SDK guides
absolutely and it works as it should for preCobalt devices (even with debug
rom
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:15:49, David Fedor writes:
>... And I bet a surprisingly large
>amount of code can in fact be shared, given judicious #includes of
>compatibility headers.
>
>But for example, the reason we had to add the DmRef parameter to
>FrmGotoForm, DmGetResource, etc. goes way beyond
On Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 10:42:09, Keith Rollin writes:
providing 100% source code compatibility was at odds with other
goals, such as providing oft-asked features such as multi-threading
and security.
It's not at odds as long as Feature Manager and error returns are
provided on OS versions which
On Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 10:42:09, Keith Rollin writes:
>However,
>providing 100% source code compatibility was at odds with other
>goals, such as providing oft-asked features such as multi-threading
>and security.
It's not at odds as long as Feature Manager and error returns are
provided on
Okay I can agree with that. And your right, the Palm is much easier to
program then the PPC using eVC (or whatever it is called). Palm has done a
great job of maintaining consistent API's across the different devices.
I would consider Frameworks like .Net or JVM an OS from the developers point
of
Konstantin Klyatskin wrote:
We are seriously thinking about quick patch our application for
OS6.x just to disable DIA recognition as well as other non vital features
causing the problem. Let's go down to 3.5.
In the short term, if you don't want to take advantage of any new
features, that's preci
This is going to be a chicken-and-egg-like situation for the forseeable
future. Until Cobalt devices start selling in significant numbers, there
won't be much incentive for developers to port and maintain OS6-specific
branches of their apps.
It is interesting to read this comment in light of the ot
At 9:42 AM -0500 3/2/04, Roger Stringer wrote:
Subject: Re: Cobalt porting: No longer single prc for all OS versions
From: John Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 19:28:44 +0100
Linke, Andreas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been programming Palm OS for 7 years
> Is removing unused card number parameters and doing a search/replace
> for UInt32 -> uint32_t so onerous that you think porting to PPC is
> easier?
removing unused parameters +
search and replace - BAH!
#define UInt32 uint32_t
i actually use uint32 in all my code, and for old palmos headers
At 7:02 PM -0800 3/1/04, Alex wrote:
Just reading the overview of Cobalt makes me wonder whether it is a good
time to port to PPC. If one needs to change that much, might as well picking
up a new platform.
Alex,
What, to you, seems to be "that much"? Why would updating to the
Protein API (which
But in my line of work, who cares if meet some ideal of "expert"? I need
to develop solutions, not impress my users with my OS knowledge. I can get
down and dirty with the best of them, but I prefer to have the development
tool/environment do it for me. Anyways the .Net Framework is basically
Jamie,
"Brad Figler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Jamie Macleod wrote:
> > It depends. If your targeting the CF .Net it is pretty easy, especially
if
> > you use VS .Net already. If you want to target PPC natively it is a
little
> > more difficult.
> >
>
> Yes, M
Subject: Re: Cobalt porting: No longer single prc for all OS versions
From: John Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 19:28:44 +0100
Linke, Andreas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been programming Palm OS for 7 years now, but I can't remember
> such a
"Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For a developer porting to this newer version of OS has marginal gain at
> best from sales point of view. Porting to PPC could double the revenue.
Just
> from a developer's perspective. We can do nothing (or very little) and
stay
At 02:21 AM 3/2/2004, you wrote:
It's not clear why the changes could not be more evolutionary. It's even
less clear the advantages of the overhaul. It is clear that the Palm is
waffling about their own OS(s). Not a good message to developers who put up
a lot over the years and just find the origin
"Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For a developer porting to this newer version of OS has marginal gain at
> best from sales point of view. Porting to PPC could double the revenue.
Just
> from a developer's perspective. We can do nothing (or very little) and
stay
For a developer porting to this newer version of OS has marginal gain at
best from sales point of view. Porting to PPC could double the revenue. Just
from a developer's perspective. We can do nothing (or very little) and stay
in the 68k mode. Or going through the aerobics with Palm for ???
It's no
Jamie Macleod wrote:
It depends. If your targeting the CF .Net it is pretty easy, especially if
you use VS .Net already. If you want to target PPC natively it is a little
more difficult.
Yes, Microsoft did a good job with the Compact Framework which makes it
much easier to get things done. Howev
It depends. If your targeting the CF .Net it is pretty easy, especially if
you use VS .Net already. If you want to target PPC natively it is a little
more difficult.
Jamie
"Brad Figler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Alex wrote:
>
> > Just reading the overview of C
Alex wrote:
Just reading the overview of Cobalt makes me wonder whether it is a good
time to port to PPC. If one needs to change that much, might as well picking
up a new platform. And I thought OS 4 to OS 5 was painful. The only thing
would make this worse is that if I paid for attending DevCon
> If one needs to change that much, might as well picking up a new
> platform.
This _is_ a new platform. There are bound to be growing pains.
d.
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/
Just reading the overview of Cobalt makes me wonder whether it is a good
time to port to PPC. If one needs to change that much, might as well picking
up a new platform. And I thought OS 4 to OS 5 was painful. The only thing
would make this worse is that if I paid for attending DevCon to find this
Keith Rollin wrote:
At 5:36 PM -0700 3/1/04, Brad Figler wrote:
Keith Rollin wrote:
One advantage that Microsoft has over lots of other companies is that it
can afford a higher level of support. It has its hosted newsgroups,
MSDN subscriptions with "incidents" levels that allow you to submit
At 5:36 PM -0700 3/1/04, Brad Figler wrote:
Keith Rollin wrote:
In what way are we not being open? I thought that we were very
open about our direction and upcoming releases at the PalmSource
conference, which has continued through to answering questions on
this and other forums.
Microsoft will
Richard Coutts wrote:
There's been many a company that's been squashed like a bug by Microsoft by
releasing their technology before they had to, or by not protecting their
property sufficiently -- Microsoft is an *extremely* preditory company. I
really don't know why Palm is so protective with t
> Microsoft will throw a beta of an operating system/SDK/Framework (.Net
> being my example) out to the development community years before it is
> actually officially released. I remember playing with .NET when it was
> in it's infancy. It wasn't very stable, but we got familiar with it long
> befo
> Microsoft will throw a beta of an operating system/SDK/Framework (.Net
> being my example) out to the development community years before it is
> actually officially released. I remember playing with .NET when it was
> in it's infancy. It wasn't very stable, but we got familiar with it long
> bef
Keith Rollin wrote:
In what way are we not being open? I thought that we were very open
about our direction and upcoming releases at the PalmSource conference,
which has continued through to answering questions on this and other
forums.
Microsoft will throw a beta of an operating system/SDK/F
At 7:28 PM +0100 3/1/04, John Marshall wrote:
Using uint32_t etc, which are defined by the C99 language
standard, means that all C programmers [1] can share a common vocabulary.
...
[1] potentially; certainly all C99 programmers
Hmmm...I use the top-level Enterprise Edition of Microsoft Visual
Stu
At 8:46 AM -0700 3/1/04, Jamie Macleod wrote:
Another good thing about MS is that they are really open with their
developers about the direction they are going. Palm could learn
something from Microsoft about how to treat their developers.
In what way are we not being open? I thought that we we
"Linke, Andreas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It looks like the way to handle dynamic input areas (aka virtual Graffiti
area aka virtual silkscreen) has changed again.
same problem here. SampleCollapse application they provided to learn DIA
handling does not work o
Linke, Andreas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been programming Palm OS for 7 years now, but I can't remember
> such a radical change. There seems to be no attempt at compatibility,
> neither binary nor in source.
It seems to me that one summary of the things you've noted is "this is a
new oper
This means there is no longer a way to support all Palm OS releases in a
single prc file:
You can make a "fat" application, as the code/data resources used for the
68K side don't conflict with the resource types used for the Protein
side. You'd basically just make a no-resources version of the
Andreas,
I have mixed feelings. I am impressed that I could load my application
into the Cobalt simulator and it works fine, with only one problem I can
find so far. On the other hand I am surprised that they are making such a
radical move in development tools. I would have like Palm to work a
So I patiently downloaded the whopping 250 MB "Palm OS Developer Suite", skimmed
through the docs, ran my apps in the PalmSim 6, looked at some samples and frankly,
I'm shocked. I've been programming Palm OS for 7 years now, but I can't remember such
a radical change. There seems to be no attemp
40 matches
Mail list logo
