[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    Re: Unused msvcp60 functions
From:       Piotr Caban <piotr () codeweavers ! com>
Date:       2012-06-28 14:51:56
Message-ID: 4FEC6F8C.6050802 () codeweavers ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 06/28/12 16:33, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Actually there are some implementation differences between msvcp60's and
> msvcp90's misc.c code. In particular for the init_lockit(),
> free_lockit() and various _Lockit_ctor_*() functions. Are the two
> implementations supposed to be identical?
I forgot that functions in this file were changed. This implementations 
are not supposed to be identical.

> There's no indication that the
> two misc.c files are supposed to remain synchronized but if that's the
> goal, one option would be to move the msvcp90-specific functions to
> another file so that it remains easy to copy and/or diff these two
> misc.c files.
All files in msvcp60 and msvcp90 will be quite similar. So it's useful 
if diff is minimal/readable. But I don't think that splitting most of 
the files (so some files may be copied) is useful.

> Also a lot of functions actually rely on forwarding to msvcp90. Should
> this be used for the misc.c functions too?
Only if functions are operating on identical object in msvcp60 and 
msvcp90. I was trying to forward functions when it was possible.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]