On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:28:04 -0800, you wrote: >(Apart from the other discussion) are you sure that you really >mean that? >"If the length is explicitly stated to be zero then don't do the >calcrect but if the length is to be measured and happens to come >out as zero then do do the calcrect" >If so then I suggest at least a comment that it is deliberate; it >sounds counterintuitive to me.
I thought I did even better by providing tests for each of those cases, which pass here under Win2k and XP. Other weird observations: the different behavior of the A and W functions; the "return 0" in that code are actually "return 1" on Win2k but not on XP. Rein.