On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, David Elliott wrote:
> The advantage of using the Windows NT interface is that it has already been
> defined, is fairly well documented on MS's website, and is already designed
> with modularity in mind. The interface would allow us to seperate all of
> the DOS crap into one or many DLLs that could be loaded when required,
> instead of taking up space in the core libwine.
Well, that sounds like something along the lines of what I suggested to
Alexandre that we could do, but could you give us an overview of how this
new DOS interface is going to be structured first?
> It has been expressed several times (especially by Alexandre) that we need
> to be moving towards doing things like Windows NT instead of like Windows
> 9x. This is one more step towards that goal. Furthermore, it would seem
> necessary to have this stuff working before a version 1.0 release.
Necessary? It won't touch the Win32 core, I think, which is the most
important target (Winelib is Win32), so it's not *that* critical, but then
again, why not...
> So if no-one objects, I am going to start hacking away at it.
You'll probably want to see my own DOS restructure first, which I haven't
submitted yet for some reason (didn't bother to round up the argument list
to cvs diff, perhaps, nor edit out the non-DOS parts of a diff of
everything?)... should I send it in to Alexandre or you?
