PureBasic Forums - English

Warmonger wrote:Wrong again, the Windows API is not made up of both Win32 and WinRT. WinRT is a side-by-side API that only relies on Win32. Microsoft has not incorporated WinRT into Win32 yet. Bottom line is, your looking for a reason to go off topic. I suggest you stop replying to my thread, because obviously you have no clue what you are talking about.

The set, "Windows 8 API", contains the sets, "Win32" and "WinRT". But the set, "WinRT", is not contained in the set, "Win32". Also, all previous posts in this thread seem to have something to do with the loosely worded title, "Windows 8 Support".

Therefore, TI-994A leads the match, three sets to Love.

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:Wrong again, the Windows API is not made up of both Win32 and WinRT. WinRT is a side-by-side API that only relies on Win32. Microsoft has not incorporated WinRT into Win32 yet. Bottom line is, your looking for a reason to go off topic. I suggest you stop replying to my thread, because obviously you have no clue what you are talking about.

Hi Warmonger. Why the sudden hostility? All my posts were in response to the question in your original post, "will PB v5.00 support Windows 8?"

In any case, with a statement like "Microsoft has not incorporated WinRT into Win32 yet," it's apparent that you're a little confused about the Windows 8 API. So, I suggest that you take a look at this MSDN document. which clearly shows that the Windows 8 API is made up of both Win32 and WinRT.

WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

BorisTheOld wrote:The set, "Windows 8 API", contains the sets, "Win32" and "WinRT". But the set, "WinRT", is not contained in the set, "Win32". Also, all previous posts in this thread seem to have something to do with the loosely worded title, "Windows 8 Support".

Therefore, TI-994A leads the match, three sets to Love.

Hi BorisTheOld! You're absolutely right, but he seems to have his terminologies mixed up.

Warmonger wrote:WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

Hi Warmonger. Firstly, please lighten up. Then,
1. Take a look at the MSDN link in my earlier post, and you'll see that even Win32 has changed.
2. It would be really great if you could point out where I suggested that WinRT resides in Win32.

TI-994A wrote:

BorisTheOld wrote:The set, "Windows 8 API", contains the sets, "Win32" and "WinRT". But the set, "WinRT", is not contained in the set, "Win32". Also, all previous posts in this thread seem to have something to do with the loosely worded title, "Windows 8 Support".

Therefore, TI-994A leads the match, three sets to Love.

Hi BorisTheOld! You're absolutely right, but he seems to have his terminologies mixed up.

Warmonger wrote:WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

Hi Warmonger. Firstly, please lighten up. Then,
1. Take a look at the MSDN link in my earlier post, and you'll see that even Win32 has changed.
2. It would be really great if you could point out where I suggested that WinRT resides in Win32.

Win32 changes are absolutely miniscule, I have reported you for spamming my thread.

Warmonger wrote:

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

Hi Warmonger. Firstly, please lighten up. Then,
1. Take a look at the MSDN link in my earlier post, and you'll see that even Win32 has changed.
2. It would be really great if you could point out where I suggested that WinRT resides in Win32.

Win32 changes are absolutely miniscule, I have reported you for spamming my thread.

Now that we're agreed about Win32 having changed, where did I suggest that WinRT resides in Win32?

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

Hi Warmonger. Firstly, please lighten up. Then,
1. Take a look at the MSDN link in my earlier post, and you'll see that even Win32 has changed.
2. It would be really great if you could point out where I suggested that WinRT resides in Win32.

Win32 changes are absolutely miniscule, I have reported you for spamming my thread.

Now that we're agreed about Win32 having changed, where did I suggest that WinRT resides in Win32?

So, I guess not. And I would thank you not to misquote me in the future.

TI-994A wrote:

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:

TI-994A wrote:

Warmonger wrote:WinRT is not part of Win32 yet. Its a completely separate API, if you would take the time to look at the OS for yourself you would realize that. Win32 will go pretty much unchanged, the big benefactor is WinRT. This is why you must use a new version of Visual Studio to even utilize it. Because it does not reside inside Win32 like you suggest. I ask again if you are going to post misconstrued information then don't post at all. Read here.

Hi Warmonger. Firstly, please lighten up. Then,
1. Take a look at the MSDN link in my earlier post, and you'll see that even Win32 has changed.
2. It would be really great if you could point out where I suggested that WinRT resides in Win32.

Win32 changes are absolutely miniscule, I have reported you for spamming my thread.

Now that we're agreed about Win32 having changed, where did I suggest that WinRT resides in Win32?

So, I guess not. And I would thank you not to misquote me in the future.

I suggest you go break down the Windows kernel and look at it again. WinRT and Win32 are separate API's kiddo. Every response you add to this thread will be reported, accept that you're wrong and let the thread die. There isn't much more you can do rather then accept defeat.

Why so hostile Warmonger?

TI-994A has not given any incorrect information and the title of this post is broad.

The forum isn't a competition, it's a place where we all try to help each other.

If you are discussing what is/will/will not be supported by PB on Win8, a discussion about the APIs can't be avoided.

There are other details about how the OS behaves that we may need to work around too. For example, Paul Allen (MS co-founder) criticized Win8 for sometimes switching at odd moments between the tile-based interface and the desktop view.

That rings alarm bells for me because a large chunk of my customer database are only occasional PC Users.

IdeasVacuum wrote:Why so hostile Warmonger?

TI-994A has not given any incorrect information and the title of this post is broad.

The forum isn't a competition, it's a place where we all try to help each other.

If you are discussing what is/will/will not be supported by PB on Win8, a discussion about the APIs can't be avoided.

There are other details about how the OS behaves that we may need to work around too. For example, Paul Allen (MS co-founder) criticized Win8 for sometimes switching at odd moments between the tile-based interface and the desktop view.

That rings alarm bells for me because a large chunk of my customer database are only occasional PC Users.

The hostility comes from the kids incompetence to provide truthful information. If he has nothing better to do then spew his fictional opinion across the web, then he can do it on his own time. I will not tolerate the chance of people reviewing my threads and learning the wrong information because of guys like him. Either he needs to shut up, or at least get his facts straight. The goal here is to teach one another, not teach one another wrong information. Because that doesn't benefit no one. Plus the discussion regarding Windows 8 support has nothing to do with Win32 entirely. It merely suggests that proper constants such as #PB_OS_Windows_8 is added to the latest version of PureBasic. Nothing more, nothing less. This topic is not for discussing the new API for Metro, as its irreverent since PB will most likely never support it.

@warmonger
I can see nothing wrong with the comments in this thread, except those made by yourself, calm down, take a breath, get over it!

idle wrote:@warmonger
I can see nothing wrong with the comments in this thread, except those made by yourself, calm down, take a breath, get over it!

@idle
You must be very courageous.
Talking to a person that has the word "WAR" in the alias.

Watch your back man.

fsw wrote:

idle wrote:@warmonger
I can see nothing wrong with the comments in this thread, except those made by yourself, calm down, take a breath, get over it!

@idle
You must be very courageous.
Talking to a person that has the word "WAR" in the alias.

Watch your back man.

Going out of topic. Locked.