On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
On 02/01/2010 08:56 AM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
+#define D3DRM_GET_PROC(func) \ + p ## func = (void*)GetProcAddress(d3drm_handle, #func); \ + if(!p ## func) { \ + trace("GetProcAddress(%s) failed\n", #func); \
A win_skip() would probably be better here.
+ FreeLibrary(d3drm_handle); \ + return FALSE; \ + } + +static BOOL InitFunctionPtrs(void) +{ + d3drm_handle = LoadLibraryA("d3drm.dll"); + + if(!d3drm_handle) + { + skip("Could not load d3drm.dll\n");
And here as well.
Paul Vriens a écrit :
On 02/01/2010 08:56 AM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
+#define D3DRM_GET_PROC(func) \
- p ## func = (void*)GetProcAddress(d3drm_handle, #func); \
- if(!p ## func) { \
trace("GetProcAddress(%s) failed\n", #func); \A win_skip() would probably be better here.
FreeLibrary(d3drm_handle); \return FALSE; \- }
+static BOOL InitFunctionPtrs(void) +{
- d3drm_handle = LoadLibraryA("d3drm.dll");
- if(!d3drm_handle)
- {
skip("Could not load d3drm.dll\n");And here as well.
Well. It comes from vector.c. I never use win_skip so far but I can take a look at it. Thanks.
On 02/01/2010 10:10 PM, Christian Costa wrote:
Paul Vriens a écrit :
On 02/01/2010 08:56 AM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
+#define D3DRM_GET_PROC(func) \
- p ## func = (void*)GetProcAddress(d3drm_handle, #func); \
- if(!p ## func) { \
- trace("GetProcAddress(%s) failed\n", #func); \
A win_skip() would probably be better here.
- FreeLibrary(d3drm_handle); \
- return FALSE; \
- }
+static BOOL InitFunctionPtrs(void) +{
- d3drm_handle = LoadLibraryA("d3drm.dll");
- if(!d3drm_handle)
- {
- skip("Could not load d3drm.dll\n");
And here as well.
Well. It comes from vector.c. I never use win_skip so far but I can take a look at it. Thanks.
While you are at it. This patch introduces a test failure on NT4:
http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/d3drm:d3drm.html
Could you have a look?
Paul Vriens a écrit :
On 02/01/2010 10:10 PM, Christian Costa wrote:
Paul Vriens a écrit :
On 02/01/2010 08:56 AM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
+#define D3DRM_GET_PROC(func) \
- p ## func = (void*)GetProcAddress(d3drm_handle, #func); \
- if(!p ## func) { \
- trace("GetProcAddress(%s) failed\n", #func); \
A win_skip() would probably be better here.
- FreeLibrary(d3drm_handle); \
- return FALSE; \
- }
+static BOOL InitFunctionPtrs(void) +{
- d3drm_handle = LoadLibraryA("d3drm.dll");
- if(!d3drm_handle)
- {
- skip("Could not load d3drm.dll\n");
And here as well.
Well. It comes from vector.c. I never use win_skip so far but I can take a look at it. Thanks.
While you are at it. This patch introduces a test failure on NT4:
http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/d3drm:d3drm.html
Could you have a look?
Just submitted patches should help with this problem.
Christian
On 02/03/2010 08:50 AM, Christian Costa wrote:
While you are at it. This patch introduces a test failure on NT4:
http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/d3drm:d3drm.html
Could you have a look?
Just submitted patches should help with this problem.
Thanks for looking into this. Isn't it strange that only NT4 is affected?
This is very weird indeed. I avoided using dx file without version header which should help. This should not happen and is not worth testing unless an app rely on this behaviour. If there are still problems I will see with the d3drm.dll from NT4. document.write (BT_SUBMIT);
Message du 03/02/10 08:59 De : "Paul Vriens" A : "Christian Costa" Copie à : wine-devel@winehq.org Objet : Re: [PATCH 4/5] d3drm: Add some tests
On 02/03/2010 08:50 AM, Christian Costa wrote:
While you are at it. This patch introduces a test failure on NT4:
http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/d3drm:d3drm.html
Could you have a look?
Just submitted patches should help with this problem.
Thanks for looking into this. Isn't it strange that only NT4 is affected?
-- Cheers,
Paul.
Stefan Dösinger a écrit :
On Monday 01 February 2010 08:18:42 Christian Costa wrote:
+void Test(void) +{ ... Test();
I think the function name Test() won't be too helpful once more tests are added. You can also make it static, unless you plan to call it from another .c file.
Yeap. Right. I will send a patch for that. Thanks.
-
Christian Costa -
Paul Vriens -
Stefan Dösinger