Thanks for the reply...
--- "Gregory M. Turner" gmturner007@ameritech.net wrote:
[A Bunch of really insightful stuff]
Implementing should best be left to the implemnters. ^_^
I'll leave the stub in the .spec file, leaving the unimplemnted functions undocumented. This has some advantages. First c2man,pl was thinking that the function was actually implemnted and incorrectly updating the stats. Second, when you have an HTML page full of links to various API definitions, the stubs start to really jump out at you.
But some issues do arise. One of them is a rather intresting thing I found out about advapi32.dll. There are 33 undocumented system fuctions, SystemFunction001 through SystemFunction033. It has come to my attention via an NT Crypto god that these are actually encrypters/decrypters for various ciphers. RC4, MD4, DES, ECB mode DES, and the like. It would be kinda keen to put a "stcky note" somewhere as to not lose gems of information like that. You can put in roumors and other tales of undocumented intreague.
Then gain, I guess I could always push comments like that out to the DLL document itself, or just snuggle them in the code where they won't get parsed by c2man.
Doing the documentaion isn't that bad. A lot of the handles, pointers, discriptors, and wotnot are used over and over and over again. The hard bit is not using MSDN, but that's tricky as all the other API websites I've found blatently rip off MSDN anyway. This coupled with the facts that the auto-genertaed API docs are fightenly close to MSDN's API format, and that you can only really document and API so many ways, You find yourself in a box a little smaller than confortable. I refer to MSDN as a refrence, but only to make sure that I didn't make a copy of what they said with my own words on accident.
Anyway I'm up waaaay too late now. I'm going to submit patches on a dll-by-dll basis.
You have not heard the last of me........
-Joshua