Re: [PATCH] user32: Added GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes() stub

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
> +LONG WINAPI GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes(UINT32 flags, UINT32 *num_path_info, UINT32 *num_mode_info)
> +{
> +    FIXME("(0x%x %p %p): stub\n", flags, num_path_info, num_mode_info);
> +    if (num_path_info) *num_path_info = 0;
> +    if (num_mode_info) *num_mode_info = 0;
> +    return ERROR_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> +}

According to MSDN 2nd and 3rd parameters of this API can't be NULL.
Also you should probably add a prototype to winuser.h.

-- 
Dmitry.

[PATCH] user32: Added GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes() stub

[Nikolay Sivov]

On 23.10.2015 15:29, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
> > +LONG WINAPI GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes(UINT32 flags, UINT32 *num_path_info, UINT32 *num_mode_info)
> > +{
> > +    FIXME("(0x%x %p %p): stub\n", flags, num_path_info, num_mode_info);
> > +    if (num_path_info) *num_path_info = 0;
> > +    if (num_mode_info) *num_mode_info = 0;
> > +    return ERROR_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> > +}
>
> According to MSDN 2nd and 3rd parameters of this API can't be NULL.

It's a stub, I don't see how that's important.
> Also you should probably add a prototype to winuser.h.

Sure, I might do that later, in separate patch.

[PATCH] user32: Added GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes() stub

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > +LONG WINAPI GetDisplayConfigBufferSizes(UINT32 flags, UINT32 *num_path_info, UINT32 *num_mode_info)
> > > +{
> > > +    FIXME("(0x%x %p %p): stub\n", flags, num_path_info, num_mode_info);
> > > +    if (num_path_info) *num_path_info = 0;
> > > +    if (num_mode_info) *num_mode_info = 0;
> > > +    return ERROR_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> > > +}
> >
> > According to MSDN 2nd and 3rd parameters of this API can't be NULL.
>
> It's a stub, I don't see how that's important.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how it's related whether it's stub or not.
> > Also you should probably add a prototype to winuser.h.
>
> Sure, I might do that later, in separate patch.

It doesn't make sense to add an API that can't be used right away.

-- 
Dmitry.