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

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH v3] user32: Add MOUSEHOOKSTRUCTEX to fix mouse wheel support for JA2 1.13 and other apps 
From:       Alexandre Julliard <julliard () winehq ! org>
Date:       2015-12-30 16:00:21
Message-ID: 87twn0gc4q.fsf () winehq ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Kira Backes <kira.backes@nrwsoft.de> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Kira Backes <kira.backes@nrwsoft.de> wrote:
>> Hello @André and @Nikolay,
>>
>> please note that I defined the struct this exact way because of this
>> MSDN article:
>> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms644969%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
>>
>> So if you think it's a bad idea to follow the definition of the MSDN
>> article then please tell me what I should change so I can improve the
>> patch.
>>
>> kind regards, Kira
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello again.
>>>
>>>> +typedef struct
>>>> +{
>>>> +    MOUSEHOOKSTRUCT MOUSEHOOKSTRUCT;
>>>> +    DWORD           mouseData;
>>>> +} MOUSEHOOKSTRUCTEX, *PMOUSEHOOKSTRUCTEX, *LPMOUSEHOOKSTRUCTEX;
>>>
>>> Apparently that's not how Windows SDK defines it. For some obscure
>>> reason they didn't define EX struct simply as non-EX + extra field,
>>> but used cpp style, kind of. Older versions don't even have field name
>>> for MOUSEHOOKSTRUCT portion, only type, but this won't work, not with
>>> gcc at least. SDK 10 uses DUMMYSTRUCTNAME as a field name, which
>>> resolves to 's', if NONAMELESSSTRUCT is defined. I guess we have to
>>> follow version 10 definition.
>
> How should we proceed here? One suggestion that came up was to just
> add the fields of MOUSEHOOKSTRUCT to the ..EX struct, and I'm fine
> with that solution.

If the latest SDK is using DUMMYSTRUCTNAME that's what we should use
too.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard@winehq.org



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