On 9/30/2013 10:10, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
2013/9/30 Nikolay Sivov <bungleh...@gmail.com
<mailto:bungleh...@gmail.com>>
On 9/30/2013 00:51, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
+struct progress_list {
+ const DWORD progress_retval_init; /* value to return
from progress routine */
+ const BOOL cancel_init; /* value to set Cancel
flag to */
+ const DWORD progress_retval_end; /* value to return
from progress routine */
+ const BOOL cancel_end; /* value to set Cancel
flag to */
+ const DWORD progress_count; /* number of times
progress is invoked */
+ const BOOL copy_retval; /* expected CopyFileEx
result */
+ const DWORD lastError; /* expected CopyFileEx
error code */
+} ;
I don't see a point making them 'const'.
I'm matching the formatting of existing code:
http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/kernel32/tests/file.c#L65
Also, what's the point of not making them const?
+static DWORD WINAPI progress(LARGE_INTEGER TotalFileSize,
+ LARGE_INTEGER TotalBytesTransferred,
+ LARGE_INTEGER StreamSize,
+ LARGE_INTEGER StreamBytesTransferred,
+ DWORD dwStreamNumber,
+ DWORD dwCallbackReason,
+ HANDLE hSourceFile,
+ HANDLE hDestinationFile,
+ LPVOID lpData)
+{
+ progressInvoked++;
Please pass all globals as context data with lpData, and please
use 'void*' instead of LPVOID.
Good point about lpData. Still, does that make the patch invalid?
It's not black or white, I mentioned what will be nice to do about it to
make it more compact and self-contained.
It doesn't mean it's invalid, it's just an obvious thing that will make
it better.
Why didn't you mention that on the first review?
Because sometimes I stop reading further after I see major problems.
Also, any comments on patch 3?
Same thing, you could easily pack everything to a single struct and pass
it using this context pointer.
It could also be made more compact using a single helper to compar
COPYFILE2_MESSAGE value,
instead of duplicating it for every message type.
