Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)baikal.ru> writes:
+ for (i = 0; i < sizeof(bstr)/sizeof(bstr[0]); i++) + { + INTERNAL_BSTR *data = Get(bstr[i]); + + for (j = 0; j < i; j++) str[j] = '0' + i % 10; + + if (data->dwLen == i * sizeof(WCHAR)) + good_length_entries++; + if (!memcmp(data->szString, str, i * sizeof(WCHAR))) + good_string_entries++; + } + + trace("good_length_entries %d, good_string_entries %d\n", good_length_entries, good_string_entries); + ok(good_length_entries >= 95, "good_length_entries %d out of 256\n", good_length_entries); +todo_wine + ok(good_string_entries >= 190, "good_string_entries %d out of 256\n", good_string_entries);
That doesn't seem very useful. What use case would there be for an app to rely on some random 75% of its strings to remain valid? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org