Re: [GDI+: 2/10] first pen test

[Detlef Riekenberg]

On Mo, 2007-06-11 at 11:52 -0700, Evan Stade wrote:
> +
> +    status = GdipCreatePen1((ARGB)0xffff00ff, 10.0f, UnitPixel,
> &pen);
> +
> +    todo_wine
> +        expect(GdiplusNotInitialized, status);
> +
> +    GdipDeletePen(pen);
> +}

Is pen set to NULL, when GdipCreatePen1 failed?
This ist not checked in your test and not done in your implementation,
but you pass uninitialized garbage (pen) to GdipDeletePen.

You might want to use:
-    GpPen *pen;
+    GpPen *pen = NULL;
and 
-    GdipDeletePen(pen);
+    if (status == Ok) then GdipDeletePen(pen);



Thanks

-- 
 
By by ... Detlef

[GDI+: 2/10] first pen test

[Evan Stade]

On 6/12/07, Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev(a)web.de> wrote:
> On Mo, 2007-06-11 at 11:52 -0700, Evan Stade wrote:
> > +
> > +    status = GdipCreatePen1((ARGB)0xffff00ff, 10.0f, UnitPixel,
> > &pen);
> > +
> > +    todo_wine
> > +        expect(GdiplusNotInitialized, status);
> > +
> > +    GdipDeletePen(pen);
> > +}
>
> Is pen set to NULL, when GdipCreatePen1 failed?
> This ist not checked in your test and not done in your implementation,
> but you pass uninitialized garbage (pen) to GdipDeletePen.
>
> You might want to use:
> -    GpPen *pen;
> +    GpPen *pen = NULL;
> and
> -    GdipDeletePen(pen);
> +    if (status == Ok) then GdipDeletePen(pen);
>
> Thanks
>
> --
>
> By by ... Detlef

In the native GDI+ passing uninitialized garbage to GdipDeletePen is
not harmful.

[GDI+: 2/10] first pen test

[Alexandre Julliard]

"Evan Stade" <estade(a)gmail.com> writes:
> In the native GDI+ passing uninitialized garbage to GdipDeletePen is
> not harmful.

That doesn't make the code correct. If you really want to pass garbage
you have to do that explicitly with something like 0xdeadbeef; passing
an uninitialized value to an API doesn't prove anything one way or
another.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard(a)winehq.org