Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
"Paul Vriens" <paul.vriens.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
These new tests introduce some failures on Win9x. Could you have a
look?
It's because HWND_MESSAGE support is missing in win9x.
OK, will have a shot at this.
Perhaps PeekMessage() sets a reasonable last error code in that case
which you can test for, and 'continue;'.
Well actually, I've improved/corrected the ok() messages and it shows:
msg.c:11637: Test failed: 0: got ret 1 hwnd 00000224 msg 0171 wParam
00001234 lParam 00005678 instead of TRUE/00000224/WM_USER+1/0x1234/0x5678
msg.c:11628: Test failed: 2: hwnd 00000001 expected 1, got 0
msg.c:11632: Test failed: 2: got ret 0 hwnd ABABABAB msg abababab wParam
abababab lParam abababab instead of TRUE/0/WM_USER+2/0x5678/0x1234
So it's HWND_TOP that has the wrong message 0171 vs. WM_USER+1
and
HWND_BOTTOM is the one that fails.
I will probably sent 3 patches if you agree of course):
1. Improve/correct the ok() message
2. Add a broken() for HWND_TOP and the wrong message
3. Change "if (data[i].ret)" into "if (ret)"
--
Cheers,
Paul.
