June 2012 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: include/basetsd.h: Fix int64 to int truncation warnings when compiling with a 64-bit PSDK compiler.

by Michael Stefaniuc

On 06/28/2012 01:00 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote: > Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> wrote: > >> afair the fix is to disable the int truncation warnings in MSVC. For >> whatever reason they seem to enable those bogus warnings. > > The warnings are not bogus, the PSDK compiler also emits a warning when They are bogus as the C standard explicitly allows conversion between integer types. > truncating from double to float while gcc keeps silence for instance. I never looked at that but I assume the same holds true as above. > Anyway, the patch shouldn't hurt, PSDK headers have similar casts. This In this specific case it doesn't. Start littering the code with casts to get rid of all those warnings and it will majorly hurt. Unneeded casts are *BAD*; worse then ignoring bogus warnings from a compiler. > patch also helps to pay more attention to warnings: when there are lots > of existing ones, it's hard to recognize new and possibly real problems > in the code. bye michael

June 28, 2012

Re: include/basetsd.h: Fix int64 to int truncation warnings when compiling with a 64-bit PSDK compiler.

by Dmitry Timoshkov

Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> wrote: > afair the fix is to disable the int truncation warnings in MSVC. For > whatever reason they seem to enable those bogus warnings. The warnings are not bogus, the PSDK compiler also emits a warning when truncating from double to float while gcc keeps silence for instance. Anyway, the patch shouldn't hurt, PSDK headers have similar casts. This patch also helps to pay more attention to warnings: when there are lots of existing ones, it's hard to recognize new and possibly real problems in the code. -- Dmitry.

June 28, 2012

Re: include/basetsd.h: Fix int64 to int truncation warnings when compiling with a 64-bit PSDK compiler.

by Michael Stefaniuc

Dmitry, afair the fix is to disable the int truncation warnings in MSVC. For whatever reason they seem to enable those bogus warnings. bye michael On 06/28/2012 12:12 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote: > --- > include/basetsd.h | 16 ++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/basetsd.h b/include/basetsd.h > index 698dd5c..4a59897 100644 > --- a/include/basetsd.h > +++ b/include/basetsd.h > @@ -153,12 +153,12 @@ typedef unsigned int UHALF_PTR, *PUHALF_PTR; > > static inline ULONG32 HandleToULong(const void *h) > { > - return (ULONG_PTR)h; > + return (ULONG32)(ULONG_PTR)h; > } > > static inline LONG32 HandleToLong(const void *h) > { > - return (LONG_PTR)h; > + return (LONG32)(LONG_PTR)h; > } > > static inline void *ULongToHandle(ULONG32 ul) > @@ -173,32 +173,32 @@ static inline void *LongToHandle(LONG32 l) > > static inline ULONG32 PtrToUlong(const void *p) > { > - return (ULONG_PTR)p; > + return (ULONG32)(ULONG_PTR)p; > } > > static inline LONG32 PtrToLong(const void *p) > { > - return (LONG_PTR)p; > + return (LONG32)(LONG_PTR)p; > } > > static inline UINT32 PtrToUint(const void *p) > { > - return (UINT_PTR)p; > + return (UINT32)(UINT_PTR)p; > } > > static inline INT32 PtrToInt(const void *p) > { > - return (INT_PTR)p; > + return (INT32)(INT_PTR)p; > } > > static inline UINT16 PtrToUshort(const void *p) > { > - return (ULONG_PTR)p; > + return (UINT16)(ULONG_PTR)p; > } > > static inline INT16 PtrToShort(const void *p) > { > - return (LONG_PTR)p; > + return (INT16)(LONG_PTR)p; > } > > static inline void *IntToPtr(INT32 i)

June 28, 2012

Re: [2/2] msvcp90: Sync spec files

by Owen Rudge

On 28/06/2012 11:33, Owen Rudge wrote: > --- > dlls/msvcp60/msvcp60.spec | 638 > ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- Sorry, I ran the make_specfiles script without realising that msvcp60.spec shouldn't have been updated. I've resent the patch without these changes. -- Owen Rudge http://www.owenrudge.net/

June 28, 2012

Re: [2/2] msvcp90: Sync spec files

by Piotr Caban

First patch looks correct. On 06/28/12 12:33, Owen Rudge wrote: > dlls/msvcp60/msvcp60.spec | 638 > ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- You can't update msvcp60.spec file this way (most of functions there should not be forwarded to msvcp90).

June 28, 2012

Re: Unused msvcp60 functions

by Piotr Caban

On 06/28/12 09:30, Francois Gouget wrote: > I get the following warnings when compiling msvcp60: > > main.c:108:51: warning: ‘std_BADOFF_func’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > misc.c:66:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_lock’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > misc.c:73:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_unlock’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > misc.c:80:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_ctor’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > misc.c:87:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_dtor’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > misc.c:175:58: warning: ‘set_new_handler_reset’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] > > misc.c:127:50: warning: ‘wctype’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] The function were not removed to make msvcp60 and msvcp90 more similar (and probably because I didn't use -Wunused-function option). Thanks to it one can copy misc.c file between the dlls when it's modified. All of these functions can be removed.

June 28, 2012

Unused msvcp60 functions

by Francois Gouget

I get the following warnings when compiling msvcp60: main.c:108:51: warning: ‘std_BADOFF_func’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] misc.c:66:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_lock’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] misc.c:73:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_unlock’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] misc.c:80:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_ctor’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] misc.c:87:40: warning: ‘mutex_mutex_dtor’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] misc.c:175:58: warning: ‘set_new_handler_reset’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] Indeed msvcp60.spec contains no _BADOFF, _Mutex or set_new_handler function. I don't see them in my 'database' of exported Windows APIs for msvcp60 but maybe the Windows dlls I built it from where not entirely up to date. Still it looks like these were added in later revisions and thus can be removed from the above files. misc.c:127:50: warning: ‘wctype’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function] This one is actually forwarded to msvcp90 according to msvcp60.spec, thus making this implementation redundant. So it should either be removed or msvcp60.spec should be modified. -- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)" -- Linus Torvalds

June 28, 2012

Re: po: add missing url tag to nl.po

by Francois Gouget

On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Austin English wrote: > http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31038 "Noot: Het wordt aanbevolen om distributiepakketten te gebruiken. Zie <a " -"href=http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko voor details." +"href=http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko</a> voor details." Note that this is missing a lot more than just </a>. This should be: "Noot: Het wordt aanbevolen om distributiepakketten te gebruiken. Zie <a " "href=\"http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko\">http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko</a> voor details." Fortunately it looks like nl is the only such case. -- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.

June 28, 2012

Re: [1/5] windowscodecs: Implement MetadataHandler_GetValue. Take 2. Resend.

by Marvin

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=19631 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit metadata) === Failure running script in VM: The specified guest user must be logged in interactively to perform this operation

June 28, 2012

Re: [4/5] gdiplus: Add some tests for GdipGetPropertyItemSize and GdipGetPropertyItem. Take 2.

by Dmitry Timoshkov

Marvin <testbot(a)testbot.winehq.org> wrote: > === W7PROX64 (64 bit image) === > image.c:2817: Test failed: 0: expected property size 17 or 36, got 44 > image.c:2817: Test failed: 2: expected property size 144 or 0, got 152 > image.c:2817: Test failed: 3: expected property size 20 or 0, got 28 > > === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit image) === > image.c:2817: Test failed: 0: expected property size 17 or 36, got 44 > image.c:2817: Test failed: 2: expected property size 144 or 0, got 152 > image.c:2817: Test failed: 3: expected property size 20 or 0, got 28 That's a propblem with 32 and 64-bit PropertyItem structure size difference, I sent another version of the patch. -- Dmitry.

June 28, 2012