From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi  Fri Dec  9 00:01:27 2005
X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Subject: Re: [MiNT] WM_REPOSED implementation
From: Evan Langlois <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>
To: "olivier.landemarre@utbm.fr" <Olivier.Landemarre@utbm.fr>
Cc: mint@fishpool.com
In-Reply-To: <1134078892.4398abac1336b@webmail2.utbm.fr>
References: <4397F4C3.7030701@utbm.fr>
	 <1134069883.19887.135.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <43989091.3000906@free.fr>
	 <1134077022.19887.178.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <1134078892.4398abac1336b@webmail2.utbm.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:59:04 -0600
Message-Id: <1134082744.19887.238.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc14.midphase.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - fishpool.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - CoolRunningConcepts.com
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL,
 BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL
X-Spam-Level: **

On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 22:54 +0100, olivier.landemarre@utbm.fr wrote:

> You are true, but unfortunatly some software doesn't like or simply not do it.
> But for your question, it was write on PureC doc!

The PureC documentation actually said that?  Wow.  I know the early days
of the Atari had bad developer tools, but thats just aweful.

The old GEM Developers Kit uses sample code like this...

	  case WM_SIZED:
	  case WM_MOVED:
	    if(msgbuff[3] == wi_handle){
		if(msgbuff[6]<MIN_WIDTH)msgbuff[6]=MIN_WIDTH;
		if(msgbuff[7]<MIN_HEIGHT)msgbuff[7]=MIN_HEIGHT;

wind_set(wi_handle,WF_CURRXYWH,msgbuff[4],msgbuff[5],msgbuff[6],msgbuff[7]);
		wind_get(wi_handle,WF_WORKXYWH,&xwork,&ywork,&wwork,&hwork);
	    }
	    break;



> This look stupid, and in fact I agree it's stupid, but this is the life. Do an
> AES compatible with application is sometime not easy to do or enhanced it. Don't
> think only some softwares have trouble, because if we think this and if it's
> true, there is so many case of misworking software, that if we not do some
> effort in AES side probably 80% of softwares couldn't work correctly (ex
> Papyrus, Calamus...)

Well, if the software bites ass, what is the point?  If you're saying
even Calamus and Papyrus are crap hacks, then there isn't much left.
Maybe its time to spend less time tweaking the OS for old hacks and more
time replacing old apps.