Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling pretending to be the police

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by roel_v on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @11:32AM (#3048358)

"2. API ties windows to threads"

OK, so what's the alternative? Automatic locking at OS-level? How can the performance penalty in those many cases where it is not needed be justified? Same goes for your arguments 3, 4 and 5 btw. Why should such low-level functionality impose important design decisions on those who follow the documentation, just to protect the beginners who don't? I much prefer my raw control, thanks - and I'll happily take the few times I shoot myself in the foot with it, err, with it.

Despite its warts and its legacy cruft, the win32 is quite flexible, and easy to understand - at a very basic level, not much studying of under-the-hood stuff required. For an OS-level API, it packs a lot of power into a small set of concepts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by molo_ on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @11:51AM (#3048480)

You argue for more control, but tying windows to threads at the OS layer is actually enforcing less control.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by chollida1 on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @12:32PM (#3048676)

Just a quick meta response because i see you're new.

You don't need to sign your posts as your user name appears above your post.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by molo_ on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @03:27PM (#3049480)

Well it seems that we hit the nesting limit, so I will reply to this post. I'm not including a URL, I'm just signing my name. Please keep in mind that is a guideline.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by molo_ on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @02:24PM (#3049222)

Hi, thanks but that is what I've been doing for ages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by sp332 on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @03:08PM (#3049401)

To be more specific, it is against the posting guidelines here. Nothing personal. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by chollida1 on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @03:17PM (#3049438)

Perhaps you should read the guidelines here:

Specifically

> Please don't sign comments, especially with your url. They're already signed with your username. If other users want to learn more about you, they can click on it to see your profile.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by molo_ on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @03:24PM (#3049465)

Is it really necessary to downmod me for that?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by chollida1 on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @03:59PM (#3049608)

I think we're way off topic but I'll try to end on a good note by pointing out that I can't downvote you as you responded to my post.

You'll find the community here is great, but you should try to play by it's rules:)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by molo_ on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @04:40PM (#3049811)

Sure, that wasn't directed at you personally. Thanks and cheers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sending a window a WM_DESTROY is like prank calling prete... by roel_v on Wednesday September 28, 2011 @04:12PM (#3049661)

How?

[ Parent | on HN ]