On 30.03.2016 17:00, Andrew Eikum wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com
try2: Turns out there's a whole bunch more of these. I think I got most/all of them.
dlls/setupapi/setupapi.spec | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
Is there any specific reason why you want to change that? Using "long" for handles is usually perfectly fine and it depends on the exact implementation details if its a pointer or just an index into a handle table.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 04:34:27AM +0200, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
On 30.03.2016 17:00, Andrew Eikum wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com
try2: Turns out there's a whole bunch more of these. I think I got most/all of them.
dlls/setupapi/setupapi.spec | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
Is there any specific reason why you want to change that? Using "long" for handles is usually perfectly fine and it depends on the exact implementation details if its a pointer or just an index into a handle table.
I thought that ptr and long were different widths on 64-bit, which could lead to incorrect parameter dumping in relay logs. If that's not the case, then ignore the patch.
Andrew
Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 04:34:27AM +0200, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
Is there any specific reason why you want to change that? Using "long" for handles is usually perfectly fine and it depends on the exact implementation details if its a pointer or just an index into a handle table.
I thought that ptr and long were different widths on 64-bit, which could lead to incorrect parameter dumping in relay logs. If that's not the case, then ignore the patch.
ptr and long are identical on both 32-bit and 64-bit. The distinction only matters for 16-bit.
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Andrew Eikum -
Sebastian Lackner