Re: comctl32: Fix the updown control test to pass under XP

[Lei Zhang]

Hey, I was just about to send a similar patch in as well. I mentioned
this in a different thread yesterday, but the updown ok_sequence_()
function is not honoring the optional flag, you need this chunk of
code as well:

diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c b/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c
@@ -279,6 +280,8 @@ static void ok_sequence_(int sequence_in
             expected++;
             actual++;
         }
+        else if (expected->flags & optional)
+            expected++;
         else if (todo)
         {
             failcount++;

On 1/20/07, Dmitry Timoshkov  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this patch makes the updown test pass cleanly under XP, and (inadvertently)
> allows one more message sequence to pass under Wine.
>
> Changelog:
>     comctl32: Fix the updown control test to pass under XP.
>
> dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c |   13 +++++++++++--
>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c b/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c
> index e0b8131..9a9c493 100644
> --- a/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c
> +++ b/dlls/comctl32/tests/updown.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ static const struct message create_parent_wnd_seq[] = {
>      { WM_SETFOCUS, sent|wparam|defwinproc, 0 },
>      /* Win9x adds SWP_NOZORDER below */
>      { WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED, sent, /*|wparam, SWP_SHOWWINDOW|SWP_NOSIZE|SWP_NOMOVE|SWP_NOCLIENTSIZE|SWP_NOCLIENTMOVE*/ },
> - { WM_NCCALCSIZE, sent|wparam|optional, 1 },
> { WM_SIZE, sent },
> { WM_MOVE, sent },
> { 0 }
>
> @@ -123,7 +124,7 @@ static const struct message add_updown_with_edit_seq[] = {
>      { WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING, sent },
>      { WM_NCCALCSIZE, sent|wparam, TRUE },
>      { WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED, sent },
> - { WM_SIZE, sent|wparam|lparam|defwinproc, SIZE_RESTORED, MAKELONG(91, 75) },
> - { WM_SIZE, sent|wparam|defwinproc, SIZE_RESTORED /*, MAKELONG(91, 75) exact size depends on font */ },
> { 0 }
>
> };
>
> @@ -202,6 +203,8 @@ static void ok_sequence_(int sequence_index, const struct message *expected,
>  while (expected->message && actual->message)
>  {
> -
>    trace_( file, line)("expected %04x - actual %04x\n", expected->message, actual->message);
> -
>    if (expected->message == actual->message)
>    {
>        if (expected->flags & wparam)
>
> @@ -356,6 +359,8 @@ static LRESULT WINAPI parent_wnd_proc(HWND hwnd, UINT message, WPARAM wParam, LP
>          message != WM_GETICON &&
>          message != WM_DEVICECHANGE)
>      {
> -
>    trace("parent: %p, %04x, %08x, %08lx\n", hwnd, message, wParam, lParam);
> -
>    msg.message = message;
>    msg.flags = sent|wparam|lparam;
>    if (defwndproc_counter) msg.flags |= defwinproc;
>
> @@ -413,6 +418,8 @@ static LRESULT WINAPI edit_subclass_proc(HWND hwnd, UINT message, WPARAM wParam,
>      LRESULT ret;
>      struct message msg;
> - trace("edit: %p, %04x, %08x, %08lx\n", hwnd, message, wParam, lParam);
> - msg.message = message;
>    msg.flags = sent|wparam|lparam;
>    if (defwndproc_counter) msg.flags |= defwinproc;
>
> @@ -459,6 +466,8 @@ static LRESULT WINAPI updown_subclass_proc(HWND hwnd, UINT message, WPARAM wPara
>      LRESULT ret;
>      struct message msg;
> - trace("updown: %p, %04x, %08x, %08lx\n", hwnd, message, wParam, lParam);
> - msg.message = message;
>    msg.flags = sent|wparam|lparam;
>    if (defwndproc_counter) msg.flags |= defwinproc;
>
> @@ -519,7 +528,7 @@ static void test_create_updown_control(void)
>      updown = create_updown_control();
>      ok(updown != NULL, "Failed to create updown control\n");
>      ok_sequence(PARENT_SEQ_INDEX, add_updown_to_parent_seq, "add updown control to parent", TRUE);
> - ok_sequence(EDIT_SEQ_INDEX, add_updown_with_edit_seq, "add updown control with edit", TRUE);
> -
>
> ok_sequence(EDIT_SEQ_INDEX, add_updown_with_edit_seq, "add updown control with edit", FALSE);
>
> flush_sequences();
>
> --
> 1.4.4.4