Hello Nikolay,
2008/5/8 Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead(a)gmail.com>:
> Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>
>> Hello Nikolay,
>>
>> 2008/5/8 Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead(a)gmail.com>:
>>
>>>
>>> Changelog:
>>> - simple implementation of GdipGetImageFlags
>>>
>>> ---
>>> dlls/gdiplus/gdiplus.spec | 2 +-
>>> dlls/gdiplus/gdiplus_private.h | 1 +
>>> dlls/gdiplus/image.c | 11 +++++++++++
>>> include/gdiplusenums.h | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>> include/gdiplusflat.h | 1 +
>>> 5 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> It's better to send changes to the wine headers in wine/include/
>> separately, and to add accompanying testcases when adding new
>> functions. This allows us to verify changes more easy. It's a bit more
>> work in the short run, but saves time in the long run.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Maarten.
>>
>>
>
> You're right of course (about tests). But it isn't that case:
> GdipGetImageFlags just get a member, no more than a return.
> So test for it is a redundant (at actual level of gdiplus.dll
> implementation).
You can still see what happens if you pass it null as argument, what
flags are invalid, etc.
Cheers,
Maarten.