I like to start with the general rule that no-one should ever write a
driver in the first place, and then we can go from there.

This brought a wry smile.

I know I shouldn’t say this but …

Then I wondered whether the person responsible for the “all drivers for Vista
must be signed with a verisign certificate” was working to exactly the
same rule that Peter has just proposed.

On the other hand, the “never” seems a bit restrictive. I’d like to suggest that
nobody can write a driver without first being a member of the “driver writers union”.
How do you become a member? Oh, you have to write a driver.

Before people complain that this is stupid and that nobody could ever do that. I’ll
point out that the UK actors union Equity used to impose almost exactly the same rule
(for all I know, they still do): You can’t act on stage without an Equity card and
you can’t get an Equity card without having acted on stage.

It’s late, I’m done.

It’s late here too :slight_smile:


“Soren Dreijer” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Hmm, right. Apparently I didn’t distinguish between the two versions as they
> both integrate with VS. And I do use VS for driver work actually. So it’s
> just natural for me to look-up a function through the IDE.

If someone uses VS.2005 and MDSN2 for driver work,
his drivers are for Windows CE :slight_smile:


wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>Not true Pavel. You are correct in that you cannot use the VS BUILD
>environment to produce Kernel code, but you most assuredly can use VS as
>your editor of choice, and if you setup a make project and use DDKBUILD
>you can build using the DDK from a VS IDE.
>God I love alphabet soup!
>Gary G. Little

I do use VS as editor - even it’s source control integration
and Visual Assist. It comes with MSDN subscription, so why not use it.
But I never had really understod why use Ddkbuid.bat with Visual Studio.
With VS this can be done as a macro, and VS macro even can create a makefile project for you.