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

List:       wine-patches
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] wmvcore: Add WMReader stubs.
From:       Jefferson Carpenter <jeffersoncarpenter2 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-03-30 22:30:09
Message-ID: CANs4HCSai-7br911FoQqaKhZzGZcpcLKb+0gFo09AMhSeKBPNQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


Do FIXME statements need to print out the passed-in arguments?  Only
outputting the method name, you can still tell what needs to be
implemented.  Also, to output each argument, there are typedefs to
consider, and you have to choose whether to dereference any pointer
arguments, which makes it rather difficult to automate the process.

I could submit just the IDL changes, without the stubs added to
wmvcore_main.c.  Sorry Alistair, they seem to include your additions as
well.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Andrew Eikum <aeikum@codeweavers.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:25:03AM +0000, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> > I have a basic patch for adding tests in the works, but I was waiting
> > for my IDL changes to be accepted first.
> >
> > So, If someone wants to review the IDL changes, Since Sebastian has been
> > busy with other stuff.
> >
> > https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/131403
> >
>
> Okay :) I just noticed one thing:
>
> > +    HRESULT GetAttributeCountEx(
> > +        [in] WORD stream_num,
> > +        [out] WORD attributes );
>
> If attributes is an out-param, it should be a pointer, right?
>
> Andrew
>

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div>Do FIXME statements need to print out the passed-in arguments?   \
Only outputting the method name, you can still tell what needs to be implemented.   \
Also, to output each argument, there are typedefs to consider, and you have to choose \
whether to  dereference any pointer arguments, which makes it rather difficult to \
automate the process.<br><br></div><div>I could submit just the IDL changes, without \
the stubs added to wmvcore_main.c.   Sorry Alistair, they seem to include your \
additions as well.<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div \
class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Andrew Eikum <span \
dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aeikum@codeweavers.com" \
target="_blank">aeikum@codeweavers.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:25:03AM +0000, \
Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:<br> &gt; I have a basic patch for adding tests in the \
works, but I was waiting<br> &gt; for my IDL changes to be accepted first.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; So, If someone wants to review the IDL changes, Since Sebastian has been<br>
&gt; busy with other stuff.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; <a href="https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/131403" rel="noreferrer" \
target="_blank">https://source.winehq.org/<wbr>patches/data/131403</a><br> &gt;<br>
<br>
</span>Okay :) I just noticed one thing:<br>
<br>
&gt; +      HRESULT GetAttributeCountEx(<br>
&gt; +            [in] WORD stream_num,<br>
&gt; +            [out] WORD attributes );<br>
<br>
If attributes is an out-param, it should be a pointer, right?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Andrew<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>


[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]




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