Re: [comctl32/tests #3] Use GetModuleHandleA instead of LoadLibraryA

[Mikołaj Zalewski]

I've changed GetModuleHandle to LoadLibrary because when I compiled 
only tests/rebar.c as standalone, the comctl32 wasn't loaded and 
GetModuleHandle returned NULL. Are there advantages from using 
GetModuleHandle?

Mikołaj Zalewski

[comctl32/tests #3] Use GetModuleHandleA instead of LoadLibraryA

[Paul Vriens]

Mikołaj Zalewski wrote:
> I've changed GetModuleHandle to LoadLibrary because when I compiled 
> only tests/rebar.c as standalone, the comctl32 wasn't loaded and 
> GetModuleHandle returned NULL. Are there advantages from using 
> GetModuleHandle?
>
> Mikołaj Zalewski

Well, I was checking whether LoadLibrary was accompanied by a FreeLibrary. In 
this case it wasn't and I thought GetModuleHandle does the trick as well. It did 
for the other stuff in the comctl32 tests.

I'm not in favor of LoadLibrary or GetModuleHandle. I think the general rule 
could be:

If dll is already imported use GetModuleHandle unless compilation excludes the 
dll because there are no reference to the dll.

Does that look a bit sane?

The question that remains is should the full <dll>-tests be able to be compiled 
and run or should we have this to be correct for every single test? I mean that 
are no issues if you compile the whole comctl32 "testsuite".

If LoadLibrary is indeed needed it should be accompanied with a FreeLibrary and 
we probably need a comment for the why as well.

[comctl32/tests #3] Use GetModuleHandleA instead of LoadLibraryA

[Mikołaj Zalewski]

> If LoadLibrary is indeed needed it should be accompanied with a 
> FreeLibrary and we probably need a comment for the why as well.

Does it matter if we call FreeLibrary on the library we are testing? I 
don't think we will be able to free it before the end of the tests when 
anyhow it will be unloaded by the process shutdown. But maybe I should 
care more about elegant code?

Mikolaj Zalewski

[comctl32/tests #3] Use GetModuleHandleA instead of LoadLibraryA

[Paul Vriens]

Mikołaj Zalewski wrote:
> > If LoadLibrary is indeed needed it should be accompanied with a 
> > FreeLibrary and we probably need a comment for the why as well.
>
> Does it matter if we call FreeLibrary on the library we are testing? I 
> don't think we will be able to free it before the end of the tests when 
> anyhow it will be unloaded by the process shutdown. But maybe I should 
> care more about elegant code?
>
> Mikolaj Zalewski

Yeah, I wrote 'should' but it has more to do with style I guess. The same is 
true for HeapFree of course but I do think we should make the code as 
good/correct as possible.

[comctl32/tests #3] Use GetModuleHandleA instead of LoadLibraryA

[Alexandre Julliard]

Paul Vriens  writes:
> The question that remains is should the full <dll>-tests be able to be compiled 
> and run or should we have this to be correct for every single test? I mean that 
> are no issues if you compile the whole comctl32 "testsuite".

It's a good idea to keep each C file as stand-alone as possible, so that
it's possible to copy it over to Windows and quickly build a test exe
without needing extra infrastructure.