Re: [PATCH] [Msvcrt]: now using macro for parameters validation itoa_s (and updated the tests as well)
Eric Pouech eric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
msvcr90 doesn't set msvcrt's errno in case of error, while msvcrt does Hence the wrappers inside msvcr90 around _itoa_s and _itow_s calls.
Do you have an app that depends on this?
Le 10/11/2010 17:34, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
msvcr90 doesn't set msvcrt's errno in case of error, while msvcrt does Hence the wrappers inside msvcr90 around _itoa_s and _itow_s calls.
Do you have an app that depends on this?
no, just the current tests that fail A+
Eric Pouech eric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
Le 10/11/2010 17:34, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
msvcr90 doesn't set msvcrt's errno in case of error, while msvcrt does Hence the wrappers inside msvcr90 around _itoa_s and _itow_s calls.
Do you have an app that depends on this?
no, just the current tests that fail
Then I'd say don't bother replicating that for now. Setting errno when getting invalid parameters seems quite reasonable.
Le 10/11/2010 22:32, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
Le 10/11/2010 17:34, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
msvcr90 doesn't set msvcrt's errno in case of error, while msvcrt does Hence the wrappers inside msvcr90 around _itoa_s and _itow_s calls.
Do you have an app that depends on this?
no, just the current tests that fail
Then I'd say don't bother replicating that for now. Setting errno when getting invalid parameters seems quite reasonable.
so we stop testing that we didn't set errno in msvcrN0 for _s functions? A+
Eric Pouech eric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
Le 10/11/2010 22:32, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
Le 10/11/2010 17:34, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
Eric Pouecheric.pouech@orange.fr writes:
msvcr90 doesn't set msvcrt's errno in case of error, while msvcrt does Hence the wrappers inside msvcr90 around _itoa_s and _itow_s calls.
Do you have an app that depends on this?
no, just the current tests that fail
Then I'd say don't bother replicating that for now. Setting errno when getting invalid parameters seems quite reasonable.
so we stop testing that we didn't set errno in msvcrN0 for _s functions?
Yes. In general, we test last error when it's expected to be set, but we shouldn't test it when a function doesn't set it, because depending on the call stack it may or may not be changed by sub-functions. errno can be treated the same way.
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Eric Pouech