Re: [PATCH] ole32: Add CoWaitForMultipleHandles to spec file do it will be visible to windows apps.

[Paul Vriens]

John Morris wrote:
> I'm resubmitting the patch without the changelog entry.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From 4c51e49d432eb8342cadb71a3d539b2e8574849b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: John Morris <mailjohnmorris(a)gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 13:20:34 -0600
> Subject: ole32: Add CoWaitForMultipleHandles to spec file do it will be visible to windows apps.
>
> ---
>  dlls/ole32/ole32.spec |    1 +
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec b/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> index d775556..3ae0240 100644
> --- a/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> +++ b/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@
>  @ stub CoUnloadingWOW
>  @ stdcall CoUnmarshalHresult(ptr ptr)
>  @ stdcall CoUnmarshalInterface(ptr ptr ptr)
> +@ stdcall CoWaitForMultipleHandles(long long long ptr ptr)
>  @ stdcall CreateAntiMoniker(ptr)
>  @ stdcall CreateBindCtx(long ptr)
>  @ stdcall CreateClassMoniker(ptr ptr)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

I thought we use:

@ stub CoWaitForMultipleHandles

for functions that should be exported and are not implemented at all, and use

@ stdcall CoWaitForMultipleHandles(long long long ptr ptr)

where we at least have something in a *.c file (although that could be a simple 
return):

HRESULT WINAPI CoWaitForMultipleHandles(<stuff>) {
     FIXME("unimplemented stub!\n");
     return E_FAIL; <or something alike>
}

Isn't the first one a stub and the second one a semi-stub, or have I mixed up 
things?

Cheers,

Paul.

[PATCH] ole32: Add CoWaitForMultipleHandles to spec file do it will be visible to windows apps.

[John Morris]

On 2/2/07, Paul Vriens <paul.vriens.wine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> John Morris wrote:
> > I'm resubmitting the patch without the changelog entry.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > From 4c51e49d432eb8342cadb71a3d539b2e8574849b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: John Morris <mailjohnmorris(a)gmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 13:20:34 -0600
> > Subject: ole32: Add CoWaitForMultipleHandles to spec file do it will be visible to windows apps.
> >
> > ---
> >  dlls/ole32/ole32.spec |    1 +
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec b/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> > index d775556..3ae0240 100644
> > --- a/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> > +++ b/dlls/ole32/ole32.spec
> > @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@
> >  @ stub CoUnloadingWOW
> >  @ stdcall CoUnmarshalHresult(ptr ptr)
> >  @ stdcall CoUnmarshalInterface(ptr ptr ptr)
> > +@ stdcall CoWaitForMultipleHandles(long long long ptr ptr)
> >  @ stdcall CreateAntiMoniker(ptr)
> >  @ stdcall CreateBindCtx(long ptr)
> >  @ stdcall CreateClassMoniker(ptr ptr)
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought we use:
>
> @ stub CoWaitForMultipleHandles
>
> for functions that should be exported and are not implemented at all, and use
>
> @ stdcall CoWaitForMultipleHandles(long long long ptr ptr)
>
> where we at least have something in a *.c file (although that could be a simple
> return):
>
> HRESULT WINAPI CoWaitForMultipleHandles(<stuff>) {
>      FIXME("unimplemented stub!\n");
>      return E_FAIL; <or something alike>
> }
>
> Isn't the first one a stub and the second one a semi-stub, or have I mixed up
> things?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul.

It appears to be implemented in dlls/ole32/compobj.c