Re: [PATCH 2/6] comctl32/tests: Test messages sent to the pager child.

[Nikolay Sivov]

On 05.04.2017 10:15, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> ---
>  dlls/comctl32/tests/msg.h   | 19 ++++++++++--
>  dlls/comctl32/tests/pager.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/tests/msg.h b/dlls/comctl32/tests/msg.h
> index b30b5d8..a3c789b 100644
> --- a/dlls/comctl32/tests/msg.h
> +++ b/dlls/comctl32/tests/msg.h
> @@ -39,7 +39,8 @@ typedef enum
>      hook = 0x100,
>      winevent_hook =0x200,
>      id = 0x400,
> -    custdraw = 0x800
> +    custdraw = 0x800,
> +    child1 = 0x1000,
>  } msg_flags_t;

Maybe I don't see a full picture yet, but doesn't this duplicate 'id'
flag? We use it for ListView/Header combined sequences for example.
> struct message
> @@ -182,6 +183,8 @@ static void ok_sequence_(struct msg_sequence **seq, int sequence_index,
>      {
>          if (expected->message == actual->message)
>          {
> +            const char *expected_win = NULL;
> +
>              if (expected->flags & wparam)
>              {
>                  if (expected->wParam != actual->wParam && todo)
> @@ -304,11 +307,23 @@ static void ok_sequence_(struct msg_sequence **seq, int sequence_index,
>                  context, expected->message, (expected->flags & posted) ? "posted" : "sent");
>              if ((expected->flags & (sent|posted)) != (actual->flags & (sent|posted))) dump++;
>
> +            if (expected->flags & parent)
> +                expected_win = "parent";
> +            else if (expected->flags & child1)
> +                expected_win = "child 1";
> +            else
> +                expected_win = "pager";

This has to be generic, something neutral like "control" instead of
"pager" is better, if we'll end up using new flag.

[PATCH 2/6] comctl32/tests: Test messages sent to the pager child.

[Stefan Dösinger]

Am 2017-04-05 um 14:53 schrieb Nikolay Sivov:
> Maybe I don't see a full picture yet, but doesn't this duplicate 'id'
> flag? We use it for ListView/Header combined sequences for example.
> It's not exactly the same, "id" is more a generic extra payload field.
> The pager test e.g. uses it to communicate a message id in a WM_NOTIFY
> message.

In the tests I currently have no extra payload, so I could use the id
mechanism instead of extending the parent / control flag. I could also
use it in patch 6 to deal with the WINDOWPOS structures. But I'll need
both child1/child2 info and WINDOWPOS in the same lines, so I can't do both.

[PATCH 2/6] comctl32/tests: Test messages sent to the pager child.

[Nikolay Sivov]

On 05.04.2017 16:26, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> Am 2017-04-05 um 14:53 schrieb Nikolay Sivov:
> > Maybe I don't see a full picture yet, but doesn't this duplicate 'id'
> > flag? We use it for ListView/Header combined sequences for example.
> > It's not exactly the same, "id" is more a generic extra payload field.
> > The pager test e.g. uses it to communicate a message id in a WM_NOTIFY
> > message.
>
> In the tests I currently have no extra payload, so I could use the id
> mechanism instead of extending the parent / control flag.

I think it's better, and will match what we're doing already for other
tests.

 I could also
> use it in patch 6 to deal with the WINDOWPOS structures. But I'll need
> both child1/child2 info and WINDOWPOS in the same lines, so I can't do both.

Do you really need to test it this way? Could it be tested right in
window procedure while processing POSCHANGED?