Mikołaj Zalewski wrote: > I've changed GetModuleHandle to LoadLibrary because when I compiled > only tests/rebar.c as standalone, the comctl32 wasn't loaded and > GetModuleHandle returned NULL. Are there advantages from using > GetModuleHandle? > > Mikołaj Zalewski > Well, I was checking whether LoadLibrary was accompanied by a FreeLibrary. In this case it wasn't and I thought GetModuleHandle does the trick as well. It did for the other stuff in the comctl32 tests.
I'm not in favor of LoadLibrary or GetModuleHandle. I think the general rule could be: If dll is already imported use GetModuleHandle unless compilation excludes the dll because there are no reference to the dll. Does that look a bit sane? The question that remains is should the full <dll>-tests be able to be compiled and run or should we have this to be correct for every single test? I mean that are no issues if you compile the whole comctl32 "testsuite". If LoadLibrary is indeed needed it should be accompanied with a FreeLibrary and we probably need a comment for the why as well. -- Cheers, Paul.