Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by pjmlp on Monday January 30, 2023 @02:58AM
(#34577030)
Nope, it is the way modern Windows APIs are done since Vista.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by imron on Monday January 30, 2023 @03:19AM
(#34577160)
That doesn’t negate anything I said.
Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by pjmlp on Monday January 30, 2023 @03:26AM
(#34577214)
The way you phrased it kind of implies it being legacy and we still need to deal with it.
Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by imron on Monday January 30, 2023 @06:06AM
(#34578241)
It kind of is legacy.
Yes, lower-level modern APIs are written in it, but you can write a modern windows GUI app without really needing to touch COM directly because there are other abstractions built on those APIs.
This was not as true of Windows programming 20 years ago.
Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by pjmlp on Monday January 30, 2023 @06:07AM
(#34578256)
As someone that does Windows since version 3.0 I am quite curious what those would be.
Forms and WPF?
Forms is in maintainance mode, and WPF builds on top of COM via DirectX 9.
MFC?
Likewise maintainance mode.
WinRT and UWP/WinUI 2.0?
COM + IInspectable + .NET metadata + AppSandboxing
WinUI 3.0?
COM + IInspectable + .NET metadata
MAUI?
Built on top of WinUI 3.0
Re:Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn't
by imron on Monday January 30, 2023 @06:31AM
(#34578421)
Not sure how this disagrees with my statement that "you can write a modern windows GUI app without really needing to touch COM directly because there are other abstractions built on those APIs"