On Fri Dec 2 15:34:34 2022 +0000, **** wrote:
Dmitry Timoshkov replied on the mailing list:
"Sven Baars (@sbaars)" <wine@gitlab.winehq.org> wrote: > On Fri Dec 2 14:47:58 2022 +0000, **** wrote: > > Dmitry Timoshkov replied on the mailing list: > > \`\`\` > > "Sven Baars (@sbaars)" <wine@gitlab.winehq.org> wrote: > > > On Fri Dec 2 14:16:59 2022 +0000, **** wrote: > > > > Dmitry Timoshkov replied on the mailing list: > > > > \`\`\` > > > > Sven Baars <wine@gitlab.winehq.org> wrote: > > > > > - if (CompareFileTime(&begin_ft, &trigger_ft) <= 0 && > > > > CompareFileTime(&trigger_ft, &end_ft) < 0) > > > > > + if (CompareFileTime(&trigger_ft, ¤t_ft) >= 0) > > > > > { > > > > > if (!have_best_time || > > > > CompareFileTime(&trigger_ft, &best_ft) < 0) > > > > > { > > > > Removing the trigger end time check doesn't look right. > > > > -- > > > > Dmitry. > > > > \`\`\` > > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > > > Thanks for the reply. I don't see how begin_ft and end_ft are relevant > > for this trigger. It happens exactly once, at the "Start" time and > > "Begin" day. > > > > > > Having an "End" day before the "Begin" day is invalid for all > > triggers. I could add a patch that checks for that. > > Obviosuly the trigger shouldn't fire outside of begin/end time, so changing > > the trigger time bounds check doesn't look right. At best, that should be > > a separate patch with a bunch of tests. > > -- > > Dmitry. > > \`\`\` > I submitted a v2 that addresses your concern. Looking at it again I don't understand the bounds check change. beging_ft already accounts for current_ft earlier in the code. Can you leave it as it is now? -- Dmitry.
Ah, I missed that, sorry. I left it unchanged now.