2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
> On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Pete,
>>
>> could you provide us a list of the Inter
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Pete,
>
> could you provide us a list of the Interlock* API, which has stdcall
2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>>> On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
Pete,
could you provide us a list of the Interlock* API, which has stdcall
calling convention by our findings? Please just list names
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>> On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> Pete,
>>>
>>> could you provide us a list of the Interlock* API, which has stdcall
>>> calling convention by our findings? Please just list names of those
>>> functions and don'
2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
> On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Pete,
>>
>> could you provide us a list of the Interlock* API, which has stdcall
>> calling convention by our findings? Please just list names of those
>> functions and don't copy from VC's header-set. So we can adjust things
>> for
On 2010.08.17 12:55, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Pete,
>
> could you provide us a list of the Interlock* API, which has stdcall
> calling convention by our findings? Please just list names of those
> functions and don't copy from VC's header-set. So we can adjust things
> for win32 more easily without viola
2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
> On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>>> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this an
2010/8/17 Kai Tietz :
> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
>> things here a bit different, but
>
>>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
>> things here
2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>>> On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
> things here a bit different, but
AFAIR, they aren't specific
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>> On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
things here a bit different, but
>>>
>>> AFAIR, they aren't specifically marked as WINAPI in ms head
2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
> On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>>> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
>>> things here a bit different, but
>>
>> AFAIR, they aren't specifically marked as WINAPI in ms headers
>> (well, maybe their mistake?..)
>
> Well, the thing
On 2010.08.17 12:29, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> Thank you Pete for noticing that. We are aware of this and we solved
>> things here a bit different, but
>
> AFAIR, they aren't specifically marked as WINAPI in ms headers
> (well, maybe their mistake?..)
Well, the thing is that the MSDN documentation has
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
For 32 bit, the current MinGW-w64 winbase has:
LONG InterlockedIncrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
LONG InterlockedD
2010/8/17 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>>> For 32 bit, the current MinGW-w64 winbase has:
>>>
>>> LONG InterlockedIncrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
>>> LONG InterlockedDecrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
>>> LONG InterlockedEx
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
>> For 32 bit, the current MinGW-w64 winbase has:
>>
>> LONG InterlockedIncrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
>> LONG InterlockedDecrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
>> LONG InterlockedExchange(LONG volatile *Target,LON
2010/8/17 Pete Batard :
> For 32 bit, the current MinGW-w64 winbase has:
>
> LONG InterlockedIncrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
> LONG InterlockedDecrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
> LONG InterlockedExchange(LONG volatile *Target,LONG Value);
>
> However, MinGW32 uses:
>
> LONG WINAPI Int
For 32 bit, the current MinGW-w64 winbase has:
LONG InterlockedIncrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
LONG InterlockedDecrement(LONG volatile *lpAddend);
LONG InterlockedExchange(LONG volatile *Target,LONG Value);
However, MinGW32 uses:
LONG WINAPI InterlockedDecrement(LONG volatile *);
18 matches
Mail list logo
