#1950 closed Feature Request (Rejected)
Add APIConstants.au3 and WinAPIEx.au3 and APIErrors.au3
| Reported by: | anonymous | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Milestone: | Component: | AutoIt | |
| Version: | Severity: | None | |
| Keywords: | winapi | Cc: |
Description
Please add these files APIConstants.au3, WinAPIEx.au3 and APIErrors.au3 no your next release. This way coders can write they're software more easily.
An other Idea would be merge WinAPIEx and WinAPI which means that only 1 #include is enough.
Attachments (0)
Change History (9)
follow-up: 4 comment:3 by , on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:48:58 PM
Idea was that when it's includes with autoit by default as many other UDFs users can more easily find this function.
For example I searched from help _winapi* and didn't find func I needed, then I spent few hours on writing func and then found it was already made in WinApiEx. If it were in autoit by default I would have looked WinAPIEx from help.
comment:4 by , on Jun 12, 2011 at 12:59:09 AM
Mmm ... Starting to code something before finishing your search for already available code/UDF's will do that to you.
My view.
Some note about http://www.autoitscript.com/wiki/UDF from the UDF-Help might be a idea (In "User Defined Function Notes" section perhaps.).
From wiki it seems a small leap to forum itself. (although that wiki page might need some updating. WinAPIEx is not in there for example.)
But than again. Maybe WinAPIEx is just the beta part of WinAPI. And its planned to be included at some point anyway.
comment:5 by , on Jun 12, 2011 at 4:45:31 PM
@mvg
I prefer WinAPIEx to be included as standard UDF too.
comment:6 by , on Jun 12, 2011 at 9:50:27 PM
@Zedna
Think that looking at, or for, some additional possible separations of the WinAPIEx functions would not be a bad thing before thinking of adding it (like it is) to the standard UDF set. (Like what was done with GDI part)
Having one "humongous!" WinAPI (or WinAPIEx if not added to WinAPI) function list seems less then desirable. (to me at least)
Anyway, apart from any point's that might be made here. Its really up to Yashied(I like) and Dev's(we do).
... Time will tell. ...
follow-up: 8 comment:7 by , on Oct 10, 2011 at 4:43:55 PM
I agree with mvg.
WinAPI and WinAPI should not be merged, WinAPIEx itself is already ballooning towards 2 MBs, and takes a few seconds to load
Separation is needed how ever that occurs.
comment:8 by , on Oct 13, 2011 at 7:16:27 PM
Replying to anonymous:
I agree with mvg.
WinAPI and WinAPI should not be merged, WinAPIEx itself is already ballooning towards 2 MBs, and takes a few seconds to load
Separation is needed how ever that occurs.
You are wrong!
You can use
#AutoIt3Wrapper_run_obfuscator=y #Obfuscator_parameters=/striponly
for smaller compiled EXE files
no matter how big standard UDFs are.
comment:9 by , on Oct 15, 2011 at 1:05:02 PM
| Resolution: | → Rejected |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Please use your head.
Additionally, format of WinAPIEx.au3 is unacceptable.

You like to have WinAPIEx to be updated only when AutoIt is updated ??? ... Think you did not really gave your request much though. If you setup SciTE4AutoIt3 you can integrate it as a fixed part of your AutoIt coding setup(->GotoForum). Besides its called (WinAPI)Ex for a reason.