I'm guessing AJ doesn't care much about such details. So NVM.
Anyone want's to remove any requirements to wine tests? As long as they compile and pass on AJ's pc, is seems to be the only requirement.
Vitaliy.
On 05/09/2011 08:42 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 5/9/2011 17:39, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
On 05/09/2011 01:09 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
There are 3 separate changes in this patch:
- BOOL bSame;
- BOOL same;
Variable name rename.
I don't think it's a big deal.
The actual fix with new test.
- ok(g_editbox_disp_info.item.pszText != NULL, "got %p\n",
g_editbox_disp_info.item.pszText);
Btw it's nice to print what did you expected back.
I don't expect NULL, that's all. I don't care about particular pointer value. If you mean I should print that I expect NULL, I don't think so, it's redundant. In case it fails you need to look at failed line anyway.
- ok(!IsWindow(hwndedit), "Expected Edit window to be freed\n");
I'm not so sure you can rely on system not allocating any more windows with the same handle. This is a race condition.
This duplicates previous test behaviour that's doing just fine for quite a long time. Test is single threaded, and you should run test program in clean environment, with no programs around best. So it's working fine in practice.
- /* WM_COMMAND with EN_KILLFOCUS isn't forwared to parent */
- /* WM_COMMAND with EN_KILLFOCUS isn't forwarded to parent */
A typo fix.
And? Separate patch to fix a typo in test file comment? (same test function I'm patching now even)
Vitaliy.