2009/3/23 James Hawkins <truiken(a)gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Ricardo Filipe <ricardojdfilipe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
i know it's not what it does, it's an alternative someone refered in irc. i was wondering what you think would be the correct approach, since both fix the problem, the alternative just goes against the msdn documentation, which has been refered as not reliable :D
Please bottom-post on this mailing list. My patch is correct except for what I said earlier, so just take it, remove that bit and resubmit it.
-- James Hawkins
yes, your patch is correct. i was criticizing my implementation, and i just tested and i'm right in the critic, it returns NO_ERROR even if i give a null pathbuffer and not null pathbuffersize. so i'll send a patch to correct this, just not the way you did, i was just asking an opinion on the implementation ;)