Okey, then it WILL be done. If it was possible, noone would bother[AlAdDiN] wrote: i already thought about this but seriously i think it's impossible.


Okey, then it WILL be done. If it was possible, noone would bother[AlAdDiN] wrote: i already thought about this but seriously i think it's impossible.
i'm not speaking about API functions documetation (equivalent to linux man command) i m speaking about low level structures, such as memory organisation of ur program image once loaded...JAAman wrote:wrong!!!
ALL windows APIs are VERY WELL documented
all you have to do is look at the microsoft documentation that comes with visual studio (or any other windows compiler) everything is extremely well documented (better than it is for linux -- though that isnt too bad)
the API and calling conventions and addresses are all well documented if it wasnt it would be imposible to write software for windows (of course you dont need any of this if you are using MFC but that is a very new invention) and the MFC and stdlib source code is there for you even if you use it so you can still see the true calls
sorry if i sound upset im just tired of people lying (intentionally or not) about MS documentation just so they can have something against them
unless of course you ment source code instead of API:
of course that isnt available but you should rewrite that anyway
ya ur right, .... do u know that WIN2K source code is estimated to more than 4Gobtw: i will be providing full win32/winNT API support eventually -- the only hard part is that it is the largest programming interface in the world (with thousands of call variations)
lol, Microsoft Office is one of these programs, so .... lolzzzzzzzzJAAman wrote:internal structures are implementation specific: do it however you want infact it much of that changes from one version to another within windows -- thats why MS trys so hard to keep people from using "undocumented features" -because they break at the next OS release
this is why many programs stopped working with sp2
tell me what are those tools ???JAAman wrote: anything that would be important to keep consistant is well documented
and i disagree with your assessment of using win for OSdev: many people do it and there are far more and better tools availible for win (including ALL linux tools)-- its more a matter of whatever your most comfortable working with
this is not true, gamedevers wants to sell their games, so they develop them on most popular platforms (not the most compatible or the most performant)Give the gamedevers a platform that runs on different hardwares, and let them make the games.
that is exactly what I meant! an OS that run games made for THAT OS, perhaps we should put a team togetherSeems you still missunderstand me, there were two ideas....
2 a system that is a platform for new games, with its own API, that should be esier to do.