Re: [1/4] comctl32/listview: Basic LVM_GETVIEWRECT tests

[Paul Vriens]

Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> Changelog:
>     - Basic LVM_GETVIEWRECT tests
>
> +    todo_wine expect(104, rect.right);
> +    expect(0, rect.top);
> +    expect(73, rect.bottom);

The first and last one of these 3 introduces errors on several boxes 
(see test.winehq.org). I guess these numbers can't be hardcoded and need 
to be calculated somehow?

Could you have a look?

-- 
Cheers,

Paul.

[1/4] comctl32/listview: Basic LVM_GETVIEWRECT tests

[Nikolay Sivov]

Paul Vriens wrote:
> Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> > Changelog:
> >     - Basic LVM_GETVIEWRECT tests
> >
> > +    todo_wine expect(104, rect.right);
> > +    expect(0, rect.top);
> > +    expect(73, rect.bottom);
>
> The first and last one of these 3 introduces errors on several boxes 
> (see test.winehq.org). I guess these numbers can't be hardcoded and 
> need to be calculated somehow?
>
> Could you have a look?

Yeah. I've already fixed this in my tree. Will replace it with (> 0) 
cause all I want here is to show that not empty rectangle returned.
Calculation is a best way of course but it's a next problem.