Stefan Dösinger <stefan <at> codeweavers.com> writes: > Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 22:35:16 schrieb Günther Brammer: > > + memset(&locked_desc, 1, sizeof(locked_desc)); > > + locked_desc.dwSize = sizeof(locked_desc); > > + > > hr = IDirectDrawSurface_Lock(surface, rect, &locked_desc, > > DDLOCK_WAIT, NULL); ok(hr == DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS, "Lock returned 0x%08x for > > rect [%d, %d]->[%d, %d]" ", expected DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS (0x%08x)\n", hr, > > rect->left, rect->top, rect->right, rect->bottom, DDERR_INVALIDPARAMS); + > > ok(!memcmp(&locked_desc, &surface_desc, sizeof(locked_desc)), > > "IDirectDrawSurface_Lock did not set lpSurface in the surface desc\n"); } > I think you should just compare lpSurface instead of memcmp'ing the entire > structure.
I was told on IRC to "test as much as you can get tested", and memcmp'ing the entire structure made me change my patch. Initially I had Lock fill the entire structure as it did in Wine 9.35. But ok, Baldurs Gate certainly only cares about lpSurface. > Also, in the patch that changes surface.c, it seems that the patch changes a > few whitespaces(unless I missed something). It does not change existing whitespace but adds two empty lines with trailing whitespace. I'll resend without that. Günther
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
