Hi Eric, I am afraid I don't see any MS comments in scarderr.h: I have written all the file from scratch and the comments are mine. Can you point them out please? In the final implementation, all the functions are needed even if they are stubs because they can be called by applications that ignore them if they report an error. That's why we must implement them all. But I can start with stubs in the spec file for the first patch. I'll wait for your reply before submitting the first patch. Thanks.
Mounir IDRASSI IDRIX - Cryptography and IT Security Experts http://www.idrix.fr
Eric Pouech wrote:
thanks for your work
I still have a couple of comments:
- you don't need at first (for the skeletton) to provide an empty
implementation for a given function. If you use the stub keyword in the .spec file, Wine will create a minimal stub for the function (that'll make the program crash when it's called), but is sufficient when the API is never called => this is the preferred way to go. All your stubs are not lost, you'll reuse them when providing the first API implementation
- basically, I'd submit a patch for the headers and a second one for
the skeletton of the DLL. Then you can go on with the various API implementations
From the coding itself:
- in traces, don't cast handles to int, it won't work every where...
rather use "%x", handle => that's portable
- there's still (void) functions declared as () (in the C files)
- there's still MS comments in scarderr.h
A+