• DNewbie (12/12) Jan 10 2012 I'm not sure I understand.. The page at http://dlang.org/windows.html sa...
• Mike Parker (5/15) Jan 10 2012 Those samples use a binding to the Win32 API[1] that does not ship with
• Andrej Mitrovic (5/5) Jan 10 2012 std.c.windows.windows is missing *a lot* of definitions. It also
• Mike Parker (3/8) Jan 10 2012 Yes, but it's not necessarily the best place to start for someone who
• DNewbie (6/14) Jan 10 2012 Ok.. I still don't understand why such a 'binding' is needed.
• Mike Parker (4/15) Jan 10 2012 Unfortunately, no. It is not a complete binding of the Win32 API. It has...
• DNewbie (2/21) Jan 14 2012 Understood. I think I'll go with the binding. Thnk you.

"DNewbie" <run3 myopera.com> writes:

I'm not sure I understand.. The page at http://dlang.org/windows.html says

  Instead of the:
  #include <windows.h>
  of C, in D there is:
  import std.c.windows.windows;

However, the samples at
https://github.com/AndrejMitrovic/DWinProgramming/tree/master/Samples
use

  import win32.windef;
  import win32.winuser;

My question is which one should I use in my programs?

-- 

  D

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

On 1/10/2012 10:24 PM, DNewbie wrote:
 I'm not sure I understand.. The page at http://dlang.org/windows.html says

    Instead of the:
    #include<windows.h>
    of C, in D there is:
    import std.c.windows.windows;

 However, the samples at
https://github.com/AndrejMitrovic/DWinProgramming/tree/master/Samples
 use

    import win32.windef;
    import win32.winuser;

 My question is which one should I use in my programs?

Those samples use a binding to the Win32 API[1] that does not ship with 
DMD. So in your case, std.c.windows.windows is probably what you want 
for now.


[1]http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi

Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:

std.c.windows.windows is missing *a lot* of definitions. It also
doesn't provide aliases to ASCII/UTF16 functions like WindowsAPI does
via the Unicode flag, so you have to explicitly use e.g.
MessageBoxA/MessageBoxW instead of MessageBox. WindowsAPI is nicely
modularized, and is based on existing MinGW headers.

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

On 1/10/2012 11:44 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 std.c.windows.windows is missing *a lot* of definitions. It also
 doesn't provide aliases to ASCII/UTF16 functions like WindowsAPI does
 via the Unicode flag, so you have to explicitly use e.g.
 MessageBoxA/MessageBoxW instead of MessageBox. WindowsAPI is nicely
 modularized, and is based on existing MinGW headers.

Yes, but it's not necessarily the best place to start for someone who 
hasn't figured out the toolchain yet.

"DNewbie" <run3 myopera.com> writes:

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Mike Parker wrote:
 
 Those samples use a binding to the Win32 API[1] that does not ship with 
 DMD. So in your case, std.c.windows.windows is probably what you want 
 for now.
 
 
 [1]http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi
 

Ok.. I still don't understand why such a 'binding' is needed.
Is std.c.windows.windows not enough for everyone?

-- 
  
  D

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

On 1/10/2012 10:57 PM, DNewbie wrote:
 On Tue, Jan 10, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Mike Parker wrote:
 Those samples use a binding to the Win32 API[1] that does not ship with
 DMD. So in your case, std.c.windows.windows is probably what you want
 for now.


 [1]http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi

 Ok.. I still don't understand why such a 'binding' is needed.
 Is std.c.windows.windows not enough for everyone?

Unfortunately, no. It is not a complete binding of the Win32 API. It has 
a lot of stuff, but if you need more you need to look elsewhere. Andrej 
hit on some of the deficiencies in his post.

"DNewbie" <run3 myopera.com> writes:

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012, at 01:16 PM, Mike Parker wrote:
 On 1/10/2012 10:57 PM, DNewbie wrote:
 On Tue, Jan 10, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Mike Parker wrote:
 Those samples use a binding to the Win32 API[1] that does not ship with
 DMD. So in your case, std.c.windows.windows is probably what you want
 for now.


 [1]http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WindowsApi

 Ok.. I still don't understand why such a 'binding' is needed.
 Is std.c.windows.windows not enough for everyone?

 
 Unfortunately, no. It is not a complete binding of the Win32 API. It has 
 a lot of stuff, but if you need more you need to look elsewhere. Andrej 
 hit on some of the deficiencies in his post.
 

Understood. I think I'll go with the binding. Thnk you.