On 10/24/2018 07:51 PM, Sergio Gómez Del Real wrote:
On 24/10/18 11:36 a. m., Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 10/24/2018 07:02 PM, Sergio Gómez Del Real wrote:
+static inline WCHAR *heap_strdupW(const WCHAR *str) +{ + int len = strlenW(str) + 1; + WCHAR *ret = heap_alloc(len * sizeof(WCHAR)); + lstrcpynW(ret, str, len); + return ret; +}
Now there will be two different functions under the same name (and you don't need lstrcpynW if you know the length).
There is a lot of duplication of this simple function; I found it copy-pasted in at least 10 places. Ideally that function should be in just on place, but I didn't find any gain in moving it to a header for just this case while it is being duplicated 10 times in other places.
What do you mean that I don't need lstrcpynW if I know the length? I use this function because it copies the null char.
So does strcpy, or memcpy.
+ if (!es->cue_banner_text) + { + if (!(es->style & ES_MULTILINE) && buf && size) + *buf = 0; + return FALSE; + }
I don't think tests cover that.
I added a test (line 3083 in the tests) for this case specifically.
There is no tests for buf != NULL && size == 0, or for multiline style.
+ if (buf && size) + { + if (size > strlenW(es->cue_banner_text)) + size = strlenW(es->cue_banner_text) + 1; + lstrcpynW(buf, es->cue_banner_text, size); + }
Why this size fixup is necessary?
We could get a size for a buffer greater than the length of the banner text. It should be sized so we don't copy more than necessary.
I think lstrcpynW is doing just that.