Re: rpc_H_PL9

[Michael Stefaniuc]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:49:18AM -0600, Greg Turner wrote:
> LICENSE: X11
>
> CHANGELOG: 
> * dlls/rpcrt4: rpc_server.c;
>   include: rpcdcep.h:
>   Greg Turner <gmturner007(a)ameritech.net>
> - One more fixup for winapi_check

-UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( HANDLE hWnd, UINT Message, UINT wParam, ULONG lParam)
+UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( void *hWnd, UINT Message, UINT wParam, ULONG lParam )

That's totaly broken. It's a problem in winapi_check and not in your
code. Well, their is a problem in your code too, i would change HANDLE
to HWND.

bye
	michael
-- 
Michael Stefaniuc               Tel.: [phone]
System Administration           Fax.: [phone]
Red Hat GmbH                    Email: mstefani(a)redhat.com
Hauptstaetterstr. 58            http://www.redhat.de/
D-70178 Stuttgart

rpc_H_PL9

[Greg Turner]

On Thursday 31 October 2002 09:05 am, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> -UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( HANDLE hWnd, UINT Message, UINT wParam,
> ULONG lParam)
> +UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( void *hWnd, UINT Message,
> UINT wParam, ULONG lParam )
>
> That's totaly broken. It's a problem in winapi_check and not in your
> code. Well, their is a problem in your code too, i would change
> HANDLE to HWND.
>
> bye
>   michael

Before I change it back on your advice, are you /sure/ about this?

  o rpcrt4 compiles STRICT, so how broken can the conflation of
    HANDLE and void* be? (HWND is DECLARE_HANDLE()'ed so I could see
    your point there.)

  o from the Microsoft Platform SDK headers (October '02):

      ./rpcdcep.h-728-RPCRTAPI
      ./rpcdcep.h-729-unsigned int
      ./rpcdcep.h-730-RPC_ENTRY
      ./rpcdcep.h:731:I_RpcWindowProc(
      ./rpcdcep.h-732-    IN void * hWnd,
      ./rpcdcep.h-733-    IN unsigned int Message,
      ./rpcdcep.h-734-    IN unsigned int wParam,
      ./rpcdcep.h-735-    IN unsigned long lParam
      ./rpcdcep.h-736-    ) ;

    so, technically, isn't void* a /better/ choice?

Let me know what you think,

-- 
gmt

"The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people"
 --President Bill Clinton, MTV interview, 1993

rpc_H_PL9

[Michael Stefaniuc]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 10:55:10AM -0600, Greg Turner wrote:
> On Thursday 31 October 2002 09:05 am, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> > -UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( HANDLE hWnd, UINT Message, UINT wParam,
> > ULONG lParam)
> > +UINT WINAPI I_RpcWindowProc( void *hWnd, UINT Message,
> > UINT wParam, ULONG lParam )
> >
> > That's totaly broken. It's a problem in winapi_check and not in your
> > code. Well, their is a problem in your code too, i would change
> > HANDLE to HWND.
> >
> > bye
> >   michael
>
> Before I change it back on your advice, are you /sure/ about this?
>
> o rpcrt4 compiles STRICT, so how broken can the conflation of
>     HANDLE and void* be? (HWND is DECLARE_HANDLE()'ed so I could see
>     your point there.)
> HANDLE is a void* therefor "compatible" to any other pointer, that's why
> you don't get a warning.
> o from the Microsoft Platform SDK headers (October '02):
>
> ./rpcdcep.h-728-RPCRTAPI
>       ./rpcdcep.h-729-unsigned int
>       ./rpcdcep.h-730-RPC_ENTRY
>       ./rpcdcep.h:731:I_RpcWindowProc(
>       ./rpcdcep.h-732-    IN void * hWnd,
>       ./rpcdcep.h-733-    IN unsigned int Message,
>       ./rpcdcep.h-734-    IN unsigned int wParam,
>       ./rpcdcep.h-735-    IN unsigned long lParam
>       ./rpcdcep.h-736-    ) ;
>
> so, technically, isn't void* a /better/ choice?
> *Sigh* a HWND should be HWND but m$ seems to have decided to do it in an
> other way. I would say resend the patch but please change the Changelog.

bye
	michael

-- 
Michael Stefaniuc               Tel.: [phone]
System Administration           Fax.: [phone]
Red Hat GmbH                    Email: mstefani(a)redhat.com
Hauptstaetterstr. 58            http://www.redhat.de/
D-70178 Stuttgart