On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:12:10AM -0800, Jon Griffiths wrote:
Hi,
I've been hacking on SHLWAPI.dll for a couple of months now while holidaying around Thailand, using a beaten up laptop. Since I just obtained free use of a real machine with a good net connection, I want to start submitting my work but I thought I'd clear up a few style issues beforehand:
- Is it OK to give meaningful names to undocumented functions?
e.g. SHLWAPI_1/2 => UrlGetInfoA/W SHLWAPI_5/6 => PathFindOnPathExA/W
I want to do this where the names are no-brainers, as in the case above, and the functions are referenced by the dll internally.
Ugh, I wouldn't do this. At least mark the function name clearly as being undocumented. That's the way to go IMHO. Otherwise you really pollute the undoc ratio of Me$$y$oft ;) (no, really: that way nobody will be able to tell any more whether a function is undocumented or not)
- Is it OK to sync shlwapi.h with the windows version ?
e.g. Remove undocumented entries Remove its dependence on obj_base.h (windows has none) Add the function exclusion defines as per windows
I'm not sure whether I'm qualified to talk about this, but I think it's ok. I would be rather careful about removing undocumented entries, though.
I assume this is fine, but doing this causes the next question -
- How to deal with shared undocumented functions?
e.g. StrRetToBufA/W is used by shell32, but should not defined in shlwapi.h.
Here there are 4 Choices:
- Define twice (Ugly)
- Put into a new wine/undocshlwapi.h (Seems that these are
depreciated?) 3. Define anyway (Im not a fan of having undoc functions in public headers) 4. Have shell32 functions #include "../shlwapi/internal.h" (A little unclean)
I'd like to go for 4, any objections?
No opinion here ;)
*Great* work, BTW !