Re: [PATCH] kernel32: add condition variables prototypes and tests (2nd try)

2012-09-03 Thread Francois Gouget 
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Vincent Povirk wrote:

  Probably this should be a win_slip().
 
  The function exists only since Windows 7/Vista (not XP) and is not yet
  in Wine (and might take a while, as my time is limited currently
  and my knowledge of this specific function same).
 
  So I think skip is currently the right thing ;)
 
 I think a todo_wine win_skip is appropriate for cases where Wine
 should have an implementation but doesn't yet.

Absolutely. With a plain 'skip' we won't know that we have to change the 
test when the implementation is added to Wine whereas the 'todo 
win_skip' will make that clear.


-- 
Francois Gouget fgou...@free.fr  http://fgouget.free.fr/
  Computers are like airconditioners
They stop working properly if you open WINDOWS

Re: [PATCH] kernel32: add condition variables prototypes and tests (2nd try)

2012-09-02 Thread Dmitry Timoshkov 
Marcus Meissner meiss...@suse.de wrote:

 +if (!pInitializeConditionVariable) {
 +skip(no condition variable support.\n);
 +return;
 +}

Probably this should be a win_slip().

 +/* fprintf(stderr,produced %d, c1 %d, c2 %d\n, totalproduced, cnt1, 
 cnt2); */
 +
 +/* The sleeps of the producer or consumer should not go above 1, 
 otherwise
 + * the implementation does not sleep correctly. */
 +
 +/* fprintf(stderr,producer sleep %d, consumer sleep %d\n, 
 condvar_producer_sleepcnt, condvar_consumer_sleepcnt); */

There is trace() for debug output, it's shorter and more convenient IMHO.

-- 
Dmitry.

Re: [PATCH] kernel32: add condition variables prototypes and tests (2nd try)

2012-09-02 Thread Marcus Meissner 
On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 11:40:52PM +0900, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
 Marcus Meissner meiss...@suse.de wrote:
 
  +if (!pInitializeConditionVariable) {
  +skip(no condition variable support.\n);
  +return;
  +}
 
 Probably this should be a win_slip().

The function exists only since Windows 7/Vista (not XP) and is not yet
in Wine (and might take a while, as my time is limited currently
and my knowledge of this specific function same).

So I think skip is currently the right thing ;)
 
  +/* fprintf(stderr,produced %d, c1 %d, c2 %d\n, totalproduced, cnt1, 
  cnt2); */
  +
  +/* The sleeps of the producer or consumer should not go above 1, 
  otherwise
  + * the implementation does not sleep correctly. */
  +
  +/* fprintf(stderr,producer sleep %d, consumer sleep %d\n, 
  condvar_producer_sleepcnt, condvar_consumer_sleepcnt); */
 
 There is trace() for debug output, it's shorter and more convenient IMHO.

True, I could do that, but its not relevant for the test as-is.

Ciao, Marcus

Re: [PATCH] kernel32: add condition variables prototypes and tests (2nd try)

2012-09-02 Thread Vincent Povirk 
 Probably this should be a win_slip().

 The function exists only since Windows 7/Vista (not XP) and is not yet
 in Wine (and might take a while, as my time is limited currently
 and my knowledge of this specific function same).

 So I think skip is currently the right thing ;)

I think a todo_wine win_skip is appropriate for cases where Wine
should have an implementation but doesn't yet.