Re: bits: Description of patch set (resend 2) (0/26)

[James Hawkins]

On Nov 19, 2007 6:19 PM, Roy Shea <roy(a)cs.hmc.edu> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> This is another resend of the BITS patch set.  This resend changes
> svnhost to be ANSI based, merges patches 25 and 26 (old numbering),
> and removes extra headers and linked libraries.

Any particular reason for using ansi?  Generally we're moving
everything towards unicode and away from ansi.  Also, the entire patch
set is relatively large, and you might want to consider breaking the
set up into chunks (svnhost, bits cleanup etc, bits interface impl)
and waiting till the first chunk is committed before moving on to the
next.  That'll make it easier to get the patches committed (assuming
they don't get accepted this time) and it'll keep the mail count down
for list members.

-- 
James Hawkins

bits: Description of patch set (resend 2) (0/26)

[Roy Shea]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 08:31:31PM -0600, James Hawkins wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2007 6:19 PM, Roy Shea <roy(a)cs.hmc.edu> wrote:
> > Howdy,
> >
> > This is another resend of the BITS patch set.  This resend changes
> > svnhost to be ANSI based, merges patches 25 and 26 (old numbering),
> > and removes extra headers and linked libraries.
>
> Any particular reason for using ansi?  Generally we're moving
> everything towards unicode and away from ansi.  Also, the entire patch
> set is relatively large, and you might want to consider breaking the
> set up into chunks (svnhost, bits cleanup etc, bits interface impl)
> and waiting till the first chunk is committed before moving on to the
> next.  That'll make it easier to get the patches committed (assuming
> they don't get accepted this time) and it'll keep the mail count down
> for list members.

I looked into switching svchost to ansi since there is no unicode
version of GetProcAddress (used within svchost).  I ended up asking on
winehackers if there is a preference between unicode and ansi, but
guessed that it didn't much matter since there was no strong response
either way.  Rather than juggle ansi and unicode strings, I bumped
svchost over to ansi.

Good to know that unicode is the way to go.  I'll send a unicode
version of the patch out in a few minutes.  I'll also see what I can
do about breaking up the patch set for future resubmissions.

Peace,
-Roy

bits: Description of patch set (resend 2) (0/26)

[Juan Lang]

> I looked into switching svchost to ansi since there is no unicode
> version of GetProcAddress (used within svchost).

In general Unicode is the way to go, but there's no reason you can't
use Unicode for those APIs that are, and ANSI for those that aren't,
specifically, when querying the function name to be used with
GetProcAddress.

--Juan