Status Page Dll's --My Status :)

[Gregory M. Turner]

On Tuesday 17 June 2003 12:43 am, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> I think there is no definite answer, but the general gist is that we
> measure usability.

If usability is, indeed, what I'm supposed to be measuring, that could change 
my opinion.  It's not clear to me whether anything really uses the FCI 
(compression) APIs in cabinet.dll... so far, I have yet to hear of anyone's 
app bombing out due to an unimplemented FCI API.

So, maybe the percentage should, indeed, go higher, to 80% or what-have-you 
(I'd still like to finish split cabs, and build some tests, before we go 
bumping the completion percentage).  Visual Studio seems to statically link 
against cabinet.dll anyhow -- it's quite possible it wouldn't come up much at 
all -- maybe in WinZip or something.  Certainly the most urgent need for this 
implementation is to get various installers working, which AFAIK only 
requires decompression.

Btw, there are some setupapi APIs which ought to be trivial to bang out once 
the FDI APIs are in place... I think they are all decompression-only, which 
would tend to strengthen the argument that the majority of the utility of the 
dll is in the decompression APIs.

-- 
"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant
 that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it."
 -- Thomas Sowell

gmt