Issue 57220043: Add support for Windows Phone and Windows RT (Closed)
|
Created:
10 years, 3 months ago by mstorsjo Modified:
9 years, 11 months ago Base URL:
http://googletest.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionAdd support for Windows Phone and Windows RT
Patch Set 1 #Patch Set 2 : Add support for Windows Phone and Windows RT #Patch Set 3 : Add support for Windows Phone and Windows RT #Patch Set 4 : Fix building for Windows Phone and Windows RT #MessagesTotal messages: 14
Ping, anyone care to comment on these changes?
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2014/02/05 09:29:13, mstorsjo wrote: > Ping, anyone care to comment on these changes? It looks like GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_RT and GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_PHONE both behave identically to GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE, so they look redundant. It looks like checks for *_MOBILE have been replaced with a more complicated check for 3 platforms. In that case, can we use the WINAPI_FAMILY_PARTITION as a fine tuning of the detection of GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE vs GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_DESKTOP platforms?
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2014/02/17 15:19:53, billydonahue wrote: > It looks like GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_RT and GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_PHONE both behave > identically to GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE, so they look redundant. It looks like > checks for *_MOBILE have been replaced with a more complicated check for 3 > platforms. In that case, can we use the WINAPI_FAMILY_PARTITION as a fine tuning > of the detection of GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE vs GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_DESKTOP > platforms? No, they're not identical to GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE. Windows Mobile was the old, discontinued OS for phones, based on Windows CE. Windows Phone is based on the normal desktop windows, and is a completely separate thing. The only thing they have in common is that both of them have removed some of the Win32 APIs that they've felt are unnecessary on phones. So the fact that both of them have some similar limitations is more a coincidence than being identical. A quick grep/wc-l says my patch adds GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_PHONE in 14 places, while the code base currently has 75 occurrances of GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE. For instance, Windows Mobile doesn't have _stat, which is available on normal desktop windows as well as windows phone/RT. In practice, RT and Windows Phone have mostly similar limitations, but they're still separated (and there are differences - thanks MS for that). AFAIK there's plans to unify them more later though.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows API is outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. On Monday, February 17, 2014, <martin@martin.st> wrote: > On 2014/02/17 15:19:53, billydonahue wrote: > >> It looks like GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_RT and GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_PHONE both >> > behave > >> identically to GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE, so they look redundant. It >> > looks like > >> checks for *_MOBILE have been replaced with a more complicated check >> > for 3 > >> platforms. In that case, can we use the WINAPI_FAMILY_PARTITION as a >> > fine tuning > >> of the detection of GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE vs >> > GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_DESKTOP > >> platforms? >> > > No, they're not identical to GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE. > > Windows Mobile was the old, discontinued OS for phones, based on Windows > CE. Windows Phone is based on the normal desktop windows, and is a > completely separate thing. The only thing they have in common is that > both of them have removed some of the Win32 APIs that they've felt are > unnecessary on phones. So the fact that both of them have some similar > limitations is more a coincidence than being identical. > > A quick grep/wc-l says my patch adds GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_PHONE in 14 > places, while the code base currently has 75 occurrances of > GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE. For instance, Windows Mobile doesn't have > _stat, which is available on normal desktop windows as well as windows > phone/RT. > > In practice, RT and Windows Phone have mostly similar limitations, but > they're still separated (and there are differences - thanks MS for > that). AFAIK there's plans to unify them more later though. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/57220043/ >
Sign in to reply to this message.
Hi Billy, On 2014/02/17 22:27:51, billydonahue wrote: > Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows API is > outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. Any update on testing and applying this?
Sign in to reply to this message.
not yet On Monday, February 24, 2014, <martin@martin.st> wrote: > Hi Billy, > > On 2014/02/17 22:27:51, billydonahue wrote: > >> Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows >> > API is > >> outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. >> > > Any update on testing and applying this? > > https://codereview.appspot.com/57220043/ >
Sign in to reply to this message.
Any progress on testing/applying this patch? On 2014/02/24 12:05:53, billydonahue wrote: > not yet > > On Monday, February 24, 2014, <mailto:martin@martin.st> wrote: > > > Hi Billy, > > > > On 2014/02/17 22:27:51, billydonahue wrote: > > > >> Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows > >> > > API is > > > >> outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. > >> > > > > Any update on testing and applying this? > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/57220043/ > >
Sign in to reply to this message.
Billy, Do you think you'll have time to test and apply this change sometimes soon? In February you said you'd try to build it and apply it ASAP. On 2014/03/27 21:33:41, mstorsjo wrote: > Any progress on testing/applying this patch? > > On 2014/02/24 12:05:53, billydonahue wrote: > > not yet > > > > On Monday, February 24, 2014, <mailto:martin@martin.st> wrote: > > > > > Hi Billy, > > > > > > On 2014/02/17 22:27:51, billydonahue wrote: > > > > > >> Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows > > >> > > > API is > > > > > >> outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. > > >> > > > > > > Any update on testing and applying this? > > > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/57220043/ > > >
Sign in to reply to this message.
Doing it today. On 2014/04/28 09:15:59, mstorsjo wrote: > Billy, > > Do you think you'll have time to test and apply this change sometimes soon? In > February you said you'd try to build it and apply it ASAP. > > On 2014/03/27 21:33:41, mstorsjo wrote: > > Any progress on testing/applying this patch? > > > > On 2014/02/24 12:05:53, billydonahue wrote: > > > not yet > > > > > > On Monday, February 24, 2014, <mailto:martin@martin.st> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Billy, > > > > > > > > On 2014/02/17 22:27:51, billydonahue wrote: > > > > > > > >> Martin, thanks for your patience and for the background. The wondows > > > >> > > > > API is > > > > > > > >> outside my expertise. I'll try to build and apply this upstream ASAP. > > > >> > > > > > > > > Any update on testing and applying this? > > > > > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/57220043/ > > > >
Sign in to reply to this message.
FYI, I rebased this on top of the latest revision - it required some more changes wrt to threading. (Threading as such mostly is available in Windows Phone and Windows RT, but threads can only be created using the new Windows Runtime APIs, and some of the old synchronization functions have been dropped in favour of the newer ones.) On 2014/04/28 20:09:29, Billy Donahue wrote: > Doing it today.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Billy, I saw that this was part of SVN commit 686 now - thanks! However the new threading changes since my original version meant that it still doesn't build for Windows Phone or RT. I updated this change request to include the final small parts necessary to make it build again. > On 2014/04/28 20:09:29, Billy Donahue wrote: > > Doing it today.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2014/05/16 06:58:21, mstorsjo wrote: > Billy, I saw that this was part of SVN commit 686 now - thanks! However the new > threading changes since my original version meant that it still doesn't build > for Windows Phone or RT. I updated this change request to include the final > small parts necessary to make it build again. > > > On 2014/04/28 20:09:29, Billy Donahue wrote: > > > Doing it today. Integrating today.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2014/05/23 18:02:41, Billy Donahue wrote: > On 2014/05/16 06:58:21, mstorsjo wrote: > > Billy, I saw that this was part of SVN commit 686 now - thanks! However the > new > > threading changes since my original version meant that it still doesn't build > > for Windows Phone or RT. I updated this change request to include the final > > small parts necessary to make it build again. > > > > > On 2014/04/28 20:09:29, Billy Donahue wrote: > > > > Doing it today. > > Integrating today. Thanks Billy! When will this be available in the public svn repo?
Sign in to reply to this message.
|
