On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 18:24 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > added some tests with NULL parameters. > > > > Changelog > > Added some NULL testing > > I appreciate your willingness to write tests, but please don't spend > too much effort on testing NULL inputs, it's not an interesting case > unless there's a specific app that depends on it. Otherwise we end up > adding NULL checks all over the place for no good reason. It's much > more interesting to test valid inputs. > It's just that I'm going through a lot of the Coverity reports. A great deal of them mention NULL parameters passed. That why I started writing these checks and found that we're not always a 100% in line with M$.
I will try and not change 'real' code to check that much for NULLs but couldn't we leave the test cases (with todo_wine of course) for documentation sake? Cheers, Paul.
