Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Vitaliy Margolen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anything wrong with this patch? Test case clearly shows that we should preserve the LastError. In general, saving/restoring last error is discouraged, the function should be fixed to not change it at all. Do you have an app that depends on this? -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Monday, August 7, 2006, 3:52:51 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote: Vitaliy Margolen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anything wrong with this patch? Test case clearly shows that we should preserve the LastError. In general, saving/restoring last error is discouraged, the function should be fixed to not change it at all. Do you have an app that Sure but we call TlsGetValue() which does set LastError. So unless we can avoid that call (which I doubt) we have to do something extra to preserve the LastError. depends on this? No I don't have any games directly. But I had few tests testing several things in screen related areas and wasn't getting correct LastError. Also, looking at the fact that x11drv doesn't set LastError at all we should preserve it as much as possible. I haven't seen that many places in user32 that take care of preserving LastError either. Vitaliy.
Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Vitaliy Margolen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sure but we call TlsGetValue() which does set LastError. So unless we can avoid that call (which I doubt) we have to do something extra to preserve the LastError. If an app depends on it, yes. No I don't have any games directly. But I had few tests testing several things in screen related areas and wasn't getting correct LastError. Also, looking at the fact that x11drv doesn't set LastError at all we should preserve it as much as possible. I haven't seen that many places in user32 that take care of preserving LastError either. The thing that matters is setting the proper error codes on errors. Setting or not setting last error on success very rarely matters, and both on Windows and Wine it will usually simply be a side-effect of the functions being called internally. If we wanted to replicate the exact Windows behavior we'd essentially need to manipulate last error in every single code path, and that would be a real nightmare; so we should only do it if there's a demonstrated need. -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Saturday, July 29, 2006, 7:28:10 PM, Vitaliy Margolen wrote: ChangeLog: user: Preserve LastError. dlls/user/tests/input.c |4 dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv.h |3 +++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Anything wrong with this patch? Test case clearly shows that we should preserve the LastError. Vitaliy Margolen
Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Vitaliy Margolen wrote: ChangeLog: user: Preserve LastError. You can move the ok() for GetLastError() direct after GetKeyNameTextA(): +SetLastError(0xdeadbeef); len = GetKeyNameTextA(i 16, buff, sizeof(buff)); +ok( GetLastError() == 0xdeadbeef, +%d Wrong LastError = %ld\n, i, GetLastError()); ok(len | !buff[0], %d: Buffer is not zeroed\n, i); Just my 2 ¢ -- By By ... ... Detlef
Re: user[2/2]: Preserve LastError.
Sunday, July 30, 2006, 6:29:43 AM, Detlef Riekenberg wrote: Vitaliy Margolen wrote: ChangeLog: user: Preserve LastError. You can move the ok() for GetLastError() direct after GetKeyNameTextA(): +SetLastError(0xdeadbeef); len = GetKeyNameTextA(i 16, buff, sizeof(buff)); +ok( GetLastError() == 0xdeadbeef, +%d Wrong LastError = %ld\n, i, GetLastError()); ok(len | !buff[0], %d: Buffer is not zeroed\n, i); Just my 2 ¢ Those 2 ¢ would be spent better looking over wine-devel. What you proposed is not correct. Vitaliy
