Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!killer!texbell!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: 1.3 includes
Message-ID: <2884@sugar.uu.net>
Date: 22 Oct 88 03:02:18 GMT
References: <8377@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <215@antares.UUCP> <2879@sugar.uu.net> <3048@amiga.UUCP>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston, TX
Lines: 54

In article <3048@amiga.UUCP>, jimm@amiga.UUCP (Jim Mackraz) writes:
> My understanding is that the official V1.3 include files will have
> struct Preferences the same size as V1.2 (else, DOS is confused).

Why is DOS confused? I mean, Prefs seems designed to allow extensibility.
What went wrong?

> What Aztec seems to have is a snapshot of some earlier versions (current,
> perhaps, at the time V1.3 roms were frozen, a long time ago).  Maybe
> V1.3 includes are similar (but sizeof( struct Preferences) should not
> be different between V1.2 and V1.3).

If you look closely at the extra fields, the size is the same. The 'filler'
in the 1.2 structure matches the 1.3 structure just fine.

> The Row/ColumnSizeChange stuff is the somewhat unauthorized 'morerows'
> stuff.  It should survive in name and function.  It should NOT be used
> by any program except morerows, or the equivalent.

I should hope so, since it was in the 1.2 Prefs with NO indication that it
was unauthorised.

> I don't know the status of the printer stuff.
> The wb_Width/Height/Depth stuff aren't specifically Hedley, but specify
> a scrolling Workbench screen.  This is not implemented (at least correctly)
> in any available software, released or in public alpha/beta.  Don't
> touch or even look.

Too late... my 'prefs' program (posted to comp.sources.amiga) lets anyone look.
Not to mention touch.

> The ext_size was for an extension scheme which we have abandonded in
> favor of a more general, modular, extensible preferences scheme.
> Don't touch or look.

Too late.

I doubt if many people other than me are actually using the program, and I
certainly don't hack those fields.

> )I discovered this when told my 'prefs' program (which assumed the Aztec 3.6
> )files) wouldn't compile with 3.4 and the Amiga 1.2 includes.

> Please EMail exactly what the problem was: I don't see where incompatibility
> would arise if you were not using the new fields.  Thanks.

I *am* using the new fields. When I wrote the program I just copied the fields
from the latest includes I had handy... the Aztec 3.6 ones. This makes it
obvious what the problem was... other people didn't have the new files.
-- 
		Peter da Silva  `-_-'  peter@sugar.uu.net
		 Have you hugged  U  your wolf today?

	Disclaimer: I accept full responsibility for my own typos.