crypt32: CryptProtectData/CryptUnprotectData take 2

[Joris Huizer]

Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 02:32:11PM +0900, Mike McCormack wrote:
> 
>>The new patch looks good.  I should have mentioned before that writing a 
>>test case will help your patch be accepted.  Did you have any test code 
>>about that you could turn into a test case for your newly implemented 
>>functions?
> 
> 
> Sure, I can write something.  I'll look around for docs on how to run 
> tests -- I didn't find that when I looked around this morning.
> 
> Also: I realize I should provide full documentation for the actual 
> Windows API calls themselves.  I documented everything BUT those.  :)  
> What's the convention for the number after the API name?  I've seen some 
> with numbers, and some with just an "@" sign?
> 

I think it's an "@" for normal calls, and a number for an 'ordinal' 
call; (though don't really know what the difference is... ;))

HTH,

Joris