Who knows WinAPI?

I am curious to see how many people here know the WinAPI.

I played around a lot with the win32 api, never really learned the win64 api, just assumed it was similar to the 32 bit version
assembly is hard.

It's not difficult to understand.

Not to come back and dig up an old thread but POSIX.1 is actually the better standard here. Yes, that means ditching windows, but windows does not want to comply with the rest of the universe.

(07-02-2014, 07:36 AM)phyrrus9 Wrote:

[To see links please register here]

Not to come back and dig up an old thread but POSIX.1 is actually the better standard here. Yes, that means ditching windows, but windows does not want to comply with the rest of the universe.

So you're saying Windows developers can't develop Windows code essentially? And who says the WinAPI is a "standard"? It's an interface -- you don't quite know what you're talking about.

Lets see, sure, interface may be the word you wish to use because you have no other gateway to flame from. POSIX has been around long enough that the winapi should have been depreciated and replaced with it. Still today there is a monster of calls and hacks needed to make a simple symbolic link in windows. Why might I ask?

And there are no such things as "Windows developers", just morons.

(07-03-2014, 03:02 AM)0xDEAD10CC Wrote:

[To see links please register here]

Interface is the word, not "may be"--You know what API stands for correct? This is not flaming if I'm stating factual information. Lol... If the WinAPI was depreciated you wouldn't have a good majority of Windows applications. The fact that you think a full API should be depreciated is ridiculous. POSIX can never replace the Win32 API because it serves an entirely different purpose.

I know there's at least *one* moron in this thread now that you've posted. Windows developer or not.

See, I dont know that anybody important would care if any windows applications (or the system itself) did not exist.

Tell me you aren't defending it...

(07-03-2014, 02:55 AM)phyrrus9 Wrote:

[To see links please register here]

Lets see, sure, interface may be the word you wish to use because you have no other gateway to flame from. POSIX has been around long enough that the winapi should have been depreciated and replaced with it. Still today there is a monster of calls and hacks needed to make a simple symbolic link in windows. Why might I ask?

And there are no such things as "Windows developers", just morons.

Interface IS the word, not "may be"--You know what API stands for correct? This is not flaming if I'm stating factual information. Lol... If the WinAPI was depreciated you wouldn't have a any Windows applications because in order to create a GUI the Win32API must be involved on Windows. The fact that you think the full API should be depreciated is ridiculous. POSIX can never replace the Win32 API because it serves an entirely different purpose. In addition to that, you can mix the two, which is what most people do, or they write platform specific versions using precompiler directives.

I know there's at least *one* moron in this thread now that you've posted. Windows developer or not. Enlighten us as to how POSIX would replace the Win32 API... You are no programmer if you don't know the difference between an API designed for a particular operating system and a portable interface standard.

(07-03-2014, 03:05 AM)phyrrus9 Wrote:

[To see links please register here]

See, I dont know that anybody important would care if any windows applications (or the system itself) did not exist.

You know how popular Windows is in the world? (This must be rhetorical because obviously you don't.) And furthermore, I bet you have no idea why you're saying what you're saying, you have absolutely no clue. The IOCP sockets is far superior to that of the Linux sockets as well (I bet you aren't even aware of the polling issues among others).

Why wouldn't people care? People that are clueless like you, wouldn't care.