Re: [ntdll][3/3] Fix returncode for NtDeleteKey (with test)
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
Some original tests still fail for NT4, haven't looked into that (yet).
Changelog Fix returncode for NtDeleteKey (with test)
This should be fixed in the server. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 12:57 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
Some original tests still fail for NT4, haven't looked into that (yet).
Changelog Fix returncode for NtDeleteKey (with test)
This should be fixed in the server.
Will fix it in the server, but can you explain why? Cheers, Paul.
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 12:57 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
Some original tests still fail for NT4, haven't looked into that (yet).
Changelog Fix returncode for NtDeleteKey (with test)
This should be fixed in the server.
Will fix it in the server, but can you explain why?
The server needs to check the handle anyway, there's no reason to do the check twice. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 10:35 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 12:57 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
Some original tests still fail for NT4, haven't looked into that (yet).
Changelog Fix returncode for NtDeleteKey (with test)
This should be fixed in the server.
Will fix it in the server, but can you explain why?
The server needs to check the handle anyway, there's no reason to do the check twice.
Why twice? I return right after the NULL check. Paul.
Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 10:35 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
The server needs to check the handle anyway, there's no reason to do the check twice.
Why twice? I return right after the NULL check.
For a NULL handle yes, but that's the should-never-happen case. The normal case is a valid handle, and then you are checking it twice. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
Paul Vriens wrote:
The server needs to check the handle anyway, there's no reason to do the check twice.
Why twice? I return right after the NULL check.
Paul.
I think he meant, if there is a NULL check in the server code, the NULL check gets executed twice if it isn't NULL; the first one could be avoided then HTH, Joris
participants (3)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Joris Huizer -
Paul Vriens