Re: [PATCH 2/2] comctl32/listbox: Implement LBS_NODATA

[Nikolay Sivov]

On 11/19/18 9:31 PM, Gabriel Ivăncescu wrote:
> But don't we already have that? Right now, LBS_NODATA is implemented
> using the normal item structure. It works, but it's super slow,
> especially for single-selection listboxes (which should store no data
> at all).
>
> I'm not sure what exactly you want me to implement? Can you please elaborate.

Can we fix single-selection case first without major rewrite?That's what 
was reported as https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32374.
> That's not the job of LBS_NODATA. That's LBS_OWNERDRAWFIXED, which is
> mandatory for LBS_NODATA (amongst other things) and is already tested,
> though.

Can we test this combination too?