Michael Stefaniuc mstefani@redhat.de writes:
I'm not sure it's an improvement to add a function call in such a simple inline function.
On May 4, 2016, at 2:58 AM, Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org wrote:
All of these sorts of patches have made me wonder if these RECT-related utility functions shouldn't themselves be defined static inline in the headers (as well as having real versions for export).
-Ken
Ken Thomases ken@codeweavers.com writes:
If we are making heavy use of them, then yes, that would probably be worth it.
On 05/04/2016 10:15 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Yes, I have thought of that already. But the amount of patches and other developers requesting it makes for the better "more convincing arguments" ;-P
bye michael
On 05/04/2016 10:28 AM, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
And here are the hard numbers for wine-1.9.9-67-g9eaa372, give or take: wine$ git grep -w SetRect | wc -l 566 wine$ git grep -w SetRectEmpty | wc -l 123 wine$ git grep -w IsRectEmpty | wc -l 89
I still have some more SetRect() calls to add, should be around 200-300. SetRectEmpty() I see only 3 more in the generated diff. And for IsRectEmpty() I have submitted everything.
bye michael