On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 09:01 +0200, Guido Diepen wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Could you please explain a bit more what the effect of this would be when > I would like to work on implementing some more of the functionality (for > example databases, which are still not supported AFAIK for wm5+ devices). > > Furthermore, do all current programs have to be rewritten, or is this just > an additional interface? > > Kind regards, > > Guido Diepen >
Firstly, it's a completely separate interface, nothing else needs to be rewritten, though a lot of things will probably benefit over time if they were. We were fortunate enough for the existing library to translate very easily to the new api, and while the structure has changed a bit, I mostly did that to make it all clearer. The main points to keep in mind are that what used to be rapi_indirection.c, where the public functions called the appropriate WM2003 or WM5 operations, is now rapi_api.c; and the directories that contain the version specific operations, that used to be called rapi and rapi2, are now backend_ops_1 and backend_ops_2. Implementing functions is exactly the same, put the code in the skeleton func in the backend directory, and rename in appropriate places from NotImplemented... to the function name etc. All the backend implementations (apart from RapiInvoke with a stream, but that's another game entirely), now get the RapiContext to use as their first arguement, and shouldn't use context_current, but that's the most significant change. That would be great if you did the database functions, I did start but didn't get very far at all. Mark > > David, in case you don't follow the svn commits I thought I'd give you a > > heads up on this. > > > > I recently committed a new api to librapi2 based on David Eriksson's > > suggestion of using the MS rapi2 api. It's definitely not finished, but > > it does work. In particular most of the utility functions don't work, > > reference counting is dodgy, and the error codes need some work, but all > > of the previously implemented session functions should be fine. If you > > want to give it a go you'll need the svn of libsynce as well. > > > > The attached program should give you the idea. Let me know what you > > think. > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 > > 30-Day > > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > > on > > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > > Crystal Reports now. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july_______________________________________________ > > SynCE-Devel mailing list > > SynCE-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/synce-devel > > > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________ SynCE-Devel mailing list SynCE-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/synce-devel
