Zhiyi Zhang (@zhiyi) commented about dlls/comctl32/tests/progress.c:
msg.flags |= defwinproc;msg.wParam = wp;msg.lParam = lp;add_message(sequences, CHILD_SEQ_INDEX, &msg);- }
- ++defwndproc_counter;
- ret = CallWindowProcA(old_proc, hwnd, message, wp, lp);
- --defwndproc_counter;
- return ret;
+}
+void test_bar_states(void) +{
- HWND progress_bar;
- int test_states[6] = {PBST_NORMAL, PBST_PAUSED, PBST_ERROR, PBST_ERROR, 0, PBFS_PARTIAL};
I think it would be cleaner if you organize the test data like the following ``` static const struct { DWORD state; DWORD previous_state; const struct message *expected_seq; BOOL todo; } tests[] = { {0, 0, pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBST_NORMAL, PBST_NORMAL, pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBST_PAUSED, PBST_NORMAL, paint_pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBST_PAUSED, PBST_PAUSED, pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBST_ERROR, PBST_PAUSED, paint_pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBST_ERROR, PBST_ERROR, pbm_setstate_seq}, {PBFS_PARTIAL, 0, pbm_setstate_seq}, } ```
Then in a loop. You first set to tests[i].state, expected tests[i].previous_state returned from PBM_SETSTATE, expect the current state being tests[i].state from PBM_GETSTATE and expect the result message sequence to be tests[i].expected_seq. Then add todo_wine_if(tests[i].todo) as needed. This way, you can avoid the if conditions in the code.