- Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Standard way of printing RECT in trace statements?
by Dan Kegel Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

Francois Gouget wrote: > On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Dan Kegel wrote: > [...] > >>I thought everyone always left NO_TRACE_MSGS undefined, >>so the rect2a function you favor gets called unconditionally, >>and its output filtered out. > > > No. Look at the TRACE macro again (include/wine/debug.h). The function > will only be called if __WINE_GET_DEBUGGING(dbcl,(dbch)) I stand corrected. Sweet. - Dan -- Dan Kegel Linux User #78045 http://www.kegel.com

1 0

Standard way of printing RECT in trace statements?
by Dan Kegel Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > Most of the case can be transformed to debugrect(), but that requires > some infrastructure work, so it belongs in a separate patch. I assume you're referring to the routine in listview.c: static inline char* debugrect(const RECT *rect) While that works, it also seems worth considering a macro-based approach. For instance: #define _RECT_FMT "(%ld,%ld)-(%ld,%ld)" #define _RECT_ARG(r) (r).left, (r).top, (r).right, (r).bottom ... Example use: TRACE("Combo client " _RECT_FMT ", setting Edit to " _RECT_FMT "\n", _RECT_ARG(rect), x, y, x + w, y + h); (FWIW, the Linux kernel uses a similar macro, NIPQUAD, to display IP addresses.) Although this doesn't hide things as well as the inline function, it might have some advantage in size and runtime, since it does more of its work at compile time. Either way, having a standard way of inserting values of Windows structures into TRACE statements would probably be nice to have. - Dan -- Dan Kegel Linux User #78045 http://www.kegel.com

2 2

Re: Listview scroll patch
by Dimitrie O. Paun Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

On December 27, 2002 01:18 am, Chris Morgan wrote: > +/* Return the corresponding text for a given scroll value */ > +static inline LPSTR debugscrollcode(int nScrollCode) > +{ > + switch(nScrollCode) > + { > + case SB_LINELEFT: return "SB_LINELEFT"; > + case SB_LINERIGHT: return "SB_LINERIGHT"; > + case SB_PAGELEFT: return "SB_PAGELEFT"; > + case SB_PAGERIGHT: return "SB_PAGERIGHT"; > + case SB_THUMBPOSITION: return "SB_THUMBPOSITION"; > + case SB_THUMBTRACK: return "SB_THUMBTRACK"; > + case SB_ENDSCROLL: return "SB_ENDSCROLL"; > + case SB_INTERNAL: return "SB_INTERNAL"; > + default: return "unknown"; > + } > +} Sorry to be a nag, but please use 4-space indents, like most of the code in there. 2-space indented code is old, and it's a mark for me to look over it, all new code should be 4-space indented. -- Dimi.

1 0

Re: Listview scroll patch
by Dimitrie O. Paun Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

On December 26, 2002 04:06 pm, Chris Morgan wrote: > +/* Replace the scroll value with text */ > +#define SCROLL_CODE_TEXT(nScrollCode) \ > + (nScrollCode == SB_LINELEFT) ? "SB_LINELEFT" : (nScrollCode == > SB_LINERIGHT) \ + ? "SB_LINERIGHT" : (nScrollCode == > SB_INTERNAL) ? "SB_INTERNAL" : \ + (nScrollCode == > SB_PAGELEFT) ? "SB_PAGELEFT" : (nScrollCode == \ > + SB_PAGERIGHT) ? "SB_PAGERIGHT" : (nScrollCode == > SB_THUMBPOSITION) ? \ + "SB_THUMBPOSITION" : (nScrollCode == > SB_THUMBTRACK) ? \ + "SB_THUMBTRACK" : \ > + (nScrollCode == SB_ENDSCROLL) ? "SB_ENDSCROLL" \ > + : "unknown" Please do not introduce such macros. I don't really think it's necessary to transform the code to text (it clutters the output), but if you insist on doing it, just do it through a function: static inline LPCSTR debugscrollcode(INT nScrollCode) { ... } This is the pattern used throughout listview.c. But in general speaking, if you can do it without macros, then macros are not the answer. -- Dimi.

2 1

Old scrolling bug
by Duane Clark Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

Howdy, Another in my pattern of posting intermediate debugging results here, in case anyone can contribute some insight... Looking into the bug that Dimitrie reported here: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2002/09/0748.html Here is what is happening (testing on the Listview Control Spy) when sliding the obscuring window. I changed a bunch of TRACE messages to ERR, and added a few. The window of interest, that the artifacts are appearing in is 0x10039 (the "Control Notifications" window): err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 0,138 11x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 304,138 4x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00032) 0,110 2x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00033) 0,108 99x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10040 (2e00041) 0,126 293x1 err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10021 hdc = 0x9e8 box = (0,138 - 409,139) err:win:EndPaint Here err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10039 hdc = 0x9e8 box = (0,108 - 99,109) err:win:EndPaint Here err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10040 hdc = 0x9e8 box = (0,0 - 293,186) err:win:EndPaint Here err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10047 hdc = 0x890 box = (0,109 - 277,110) err:win:EndPaint Here So an initial exposure occurred and was almost immediately painted. The obscuring window is now at y=109. The first expose of the pair is a validate, and the second is the invalidate. Then ScrollWindowEx is called, which eventually gets to X11DRV_ScrollDC, where the bitblt that scrolls the window is called. err:bitblt:BitBlt hdcSrc=0x9e8 0,14 24 bpp->hdcDest=0x9e8 0,0 126x154x24 rop=cc0020 After scrolling, X11DRV_EndGraphicsExposures is called, which checks pending exposure events as a result of the scroll. err:x11drv:X11DRV_EndGraphicsExposures got 0,96 99x14 count 0 Note that the exposed part is the rectangle with y coordinates from 96 to 110. That means that before the bitblt copy had occurred, the obscuring window had already moved down one pixel. The bitblt moved the previously obscured rectangle at (0,109 - 99,110) to (0,95 - 99,96), but that rectangle did not get into the update rectangle. This is because the only pending events checked are those that are a direct result of exposure due to the copy in bitblt, and does not include any additional areas that were exposed by sliding the obscuring region. err:scroll:X11DRV_ScrollWindowEx A hwnd 0x10039 rgn rect = (0,96,126,168) err:win:GetUpdateRgn hrgnUpdate 0 err:scroll:X11DRV_ScrollWindowEx B hwnd 0x10039 rgn rect = (0,96,126,168) It should be pointed out that X did not lose the exposure event due to sliding the obscuring window, because here it shows up in the next exposure event err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 0,139 11x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 304,139 4x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00032) 0,111 2x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00033) 0,109 99x1 ^^^ Unfortunately, we have already handled the offset due to scrolling, so this event is put into the update region unshifted. The remaining exposures are new, so no shifting is needed. err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10040 (2e00041) 0,127 293x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 0,140 11x3 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 304,140 4x3 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00032) 0,112 2x3 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00033) 0,110 99x3 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10040 (2e00041) 0,128 293x3 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 0,143 11x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 304,143 4x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00032) 0,115 2x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00033) 0,113 99x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10040 (2e00041) 0,131 293x1 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 0,144 11x2 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10021 (2e00003) 304,144 4x2 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00032) 0,116 2x2 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10039 (2e00033) 0,114 99x2 err:x11drv:X11DRV_Expose win 0x10040 (2e00041) 0,132 293x2 err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10021 hdc = 0x890 box = (0,139 - 409,146) err:win:EndPaint Here And finally the update region is painted. This update region includes the region exposed by the scroll, plus all the additional exposure events that occurred due to sliding the obscuring window. err:win:BeginPaint hwnd 0x10039 hdc = 0x890 box = (0,96 - 126,168) err:win:EndPaint Here But there is a one pixel artifact at (0,95 - 99,96), because it is not in the update region. Fundamentally, the problem is that the X events are handled out of order, because X11DRV_EndGraphicsExposures stripped out particular events (due to copying) without accounting for other pending events that might be relevant (plain old exposure).

1 1

Re: glibc 2.3.1 patch
by Dan Kegel Dec. 27, 2002

Dec. 27, 2002

Ove Kaaven wrote: > The newest glibc in debian unstable, 2.3.1-8, does not seem to want to > export h_errno anymore, which causes a link failure. (and netdb.h now > defines h_errno to *__h_errno_location() regardless of whether > _LIBC_REENTRANT is defined or not.) So I used this hack in WineX, not sure > if it would be anywhere close to the right approach, if the right approach > presumably wasn't to remove this file entirely. Hi Ove! Can you run this by the glibc mailing list? I'm sure Ulrich Drepper will be able to tell you whether it's the right fix. - Dan -- Dan Kegel Linux User #78045 http://www.kegel.com

1 0

[Fwd: wine version]
by Tony Lambregts Dec. 26, 2002

Dec. 26, 2002

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: wine version Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 22:54:50 +0100 From: "puoti(a)inwind.it" <puoti(a)inwind.it> Reply-To: wine-devel(a)winehq.com To: "bugs" <bugs(a)winehq.com> > We are at wine-20021219, but when you submit a new bug you can't select a > version more recent that wine-2002 We kind of need to get this automated if we could (yes?) any suggestions? -- Tony Lambregts

1 0

wcscmp header? %S format string in ok()?
by Dan Kegel Dec. 26, 2002

Dec. 26, 2002

I get the following compiler warnings in dlls/ntdll/tests/rtlstr.c: gcc -c -I. -I. -I../../../include -I../../../include -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fPIC -DNONAMELESSUNION -DNONAMELESSSTRUCT -D_REENTRANT -o rtlstr.o rtlstr.c rtlstr.c: In function `test_RtlInitUnicodeString': rtlstr.c:110: warning: implicit declaration of function `wcscmp' rtlstr.c: In function `test_RtlUnicodeStringToInteger': rtlstr.c:175: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:180: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:181: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:183: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:184: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:186: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:187: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:189: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) rtlstr.c:190: warning: wchar_t format, different type arg (arg 3) (Actually, before the patch I just sent in, there were a couple more.) Two questions: 1. what .h file should tests/rtlstr.c include to get wcscmp? Posix says one thing, MSDN says a similar thing, but I want to get the path right. 2. The whcar_t format warnings might be serious -- isn't posix's wchar_t different from win32's wchar_t? - Dan -- Dan Kegel Linux User #78045 http://www.kegel.com

2 1

D3D status - bis
by Lionel Ulmer Dec. 26, 2002

Dec. 26, 2002

Hi all, I created a small web page with the list of the demos / games I am using to test Direct3D and their various status. If anyone of you has a demo that is almost running (ie it starts in D3D mode and does not crash to reason not linked to D3D) and you want me to look at it, send me a private mail and we will see what I can do (once I come home to my ADSL line :-) ). I would also be glad of people testing the same demos than me with other OpenGL libraries to see if they have the same texturing problem that I have. The status page is here : http://www.bbrox.org/d3d_status.html Lionel -- Lionel Ulmer - http://www.bbrox.org/

3 6

Re: Patch for Spanish keyboard layout
by Jeff Smith Dec. 26, 2002

Dec. 26, 2002

Daniel, What version of wine sources are you diffing against? If it is any older than 20021219, you really need to get up to date. Development is fairly rapid on this project, and *many* problems are fixed from one release to the next. I submitted a patch for your problem on October 29th: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2002/10/0503.html It was committed to CVS the same day: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-cvs/2002/10/0481.html So this should have been in the last two or three tagged versions. >Hi! > >This is a correction for the "Spanish keyboard layout". I think the >original layout had a typo. The original layout had two keys for the >character "'". This new layout fixes this problem and works perfect on my >machine with my "Spanish keyboard". > >Thanks ... > >-- >Daniel Mario Vega >dv5a(a)dc.uba.ar _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

1 0