May 20, 2025
3:31 p.m.
On Tue May 20 15:31:28 2025 +0000, Jinoh Kang wrote: > > having to track down 6 different calls sites to figure under which > condition that additional parameter can be set to a 1/0 constant, based > on seemingly arbitrary decision as it is hardcoded in most of them > I feel like I might have a better solution: still remove `frame` > parameter, but instead add a flag `WINE_RDW_NESTED` to indicate we're > (in)validating a child window recursively. Then we can just compute: > - `frame = !!(flags & RDW_FRAME)` in `if (flags & RDW_INVALIDATE)` case, and > - `frame = !!(flags & WINE_RDW_NESTED)` in `if (flags & RDW_VALIDATE)` case. If you don't care much then consider this resolved. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/8095#note_103994