On Mon, 22 May 2000, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
(snip)
> The point that you seem to have missed is that it is perfectly possible
> to use something that has the same syntax and semantics as FormatMessage
> without actually using the real FormatMesage that I admit has the
> problems that you point out.
>
> In short, of course the debug message version of FormatMessage must only
> use Unix API:s that goes without saying. The real question is whether
> using a FormatMessage like syntax is good or not, the rest is just
> implementation details.
I accept that it is possible to make it look like some other function -
the question is, is there any point? Really, this is a matter of mapping
one or more strings to a string. IMO, the best presentation of that is
simply: char * function(char *, ...).
The function isn't used by any Win32 applications - it should be
completely invisible to them - so why make it look like anything other
than a simple (string [,...]) => string function?
James.
