Re: HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Saulius Krasuckas"  wrote:
> ChangeLog:
> Saulius Krasuckas 
> Fix W to A call.

I don't see much point in such a "fix". It actually fixes nothing,
and removes a readability of the message.

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Michael Jung]

On Thursday 21 July 2005 15:42, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> "Saulius Krasuckas"  wrote:
> > ChangeLog:
> > Saulius Krasuckas 
> > Fix W to A call.
>
> I don't see much point in such a "fix". It actually fixes nothing,
> and removes a readability of the message.

I would agree, but I thought there is a consensus to always use the unicode 
APIs. There are several occurences in my patches, where I would have prefered 
to use the ascii APIs (especially in RegQueryValue and the like). Would that 
be ok?

Bye,

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Dimi Paun]

From: "Michael Jung"
> I would agree, but I thought there is a consensus to always use the

unicode
> APIs. There are several occurences in my patches, where I would have

prefered
> to use the ascii APIs (especially in RegQueryValue and the like). Would

that
> be ok?

I think it would be better to always use the W APIs. This way we can
have tools to warn if we have W->A transitions. We lose a little in
readability (a special grep tool anyone?), but we gain a simple rule
to follow and enforce, which could be used by various tools, like
winapi_check.

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Felix Nawothnig]

Dimi Paun wrote:
> I think it would be better to always use the W APIs. This way we can
> have tools to warn if we have W->A transitions. We lose a little in
> readability (a special grep tool anyone?), but we gain a simple rule
> to follow and enforce, which could be used by various tools, like
> winapi_check.

I'm sure this has already been proposed (and rejected :) but I'll ask 
nevertheless: Why not use L"" everywhere and add a small 
perl/awk/whatever preprocessor which translates into C89 for compilers 
which don't support wide string literals?

Felix

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Saulius Krasuckas]

* On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> - "Saulius Krasuckas"  wrote:
> > ChangeLog:
> > Saulius Krasuckas 
> > Fix W to A call.
>
> I don't see much point in such a "fix". It actually fixes nothing, and 
> removes a readability of the message.

And why don't you mark this case on Wiki page [1] as invalid or even 
correct statements on the same page?

[1] http://wiki.winehq.org/CrossCallsWtoA

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[James Hawkins]

On 7/21/05, Saulius Krasuckas  wrote:
> - On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > - "Saulius Krasuckas"  wrote:
> > > ChangeLog:
> > > Saulius Krasuckas 
> > > Fix W to A call.
> >
> > I don't see much point in such a "fix". It actually fixes nothing, and
> > removes a readability of the message.
>
> And why don't you mark this case on Wiki page [1] as invalid or even
> correct statements on the same page?

I wouldn't worry about it too much.  It's a temporary GUI fixme.  Once
my hhctrl patches go through, this message will be gone anyway.

HHCTRL.OCX: fix W to A call

[Saulius Krasuckas]

* On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, James Hawkins wrote:
> - On 7/21/05, Saulius Krasuckas  wrote:
> > - On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > > I don't see much point in such a "fix". It actually fixes nothing, 
> > > and removes a readability of the message.
> >
> > And why don't you mark this case on Wiki page [1] as invalid or even 
> > correct statements on the same page?
>
> I wouldn't worry about it too much.  It's a temporary GUI fixme.  Once 
> my hhctrl patches go through, this message will be gone anyway.

Yes, I haven't though of this, thanks.  But everyone could rephrase my 
question other way round:

-Is there any meaningless cross-calls left more in the mentioned list?

I imagine some novice guy like me would start contribute from small 
WtoA-elimination patches.  But maybe that still has its advantages, OTOH, 
as the beginner is able to raise his coding skills in such cases. :-/