user: Pass all required information with internal message when chaining hooks

[Alexandre Julliard]

Vitaliy Margolen <wine-devel at kievinfo.com> writes:

> I don't see a problem here. We don't remove hook when chain is in use.
> However calling server means we'll have to call server one more time.
> That's on top of 5-6 calls already.

Avoiding server calls is good, but not if it leads to incorrect
semantics.

> But also the problem is passing information between threads here. We have
> to continue with the hook chain, so we need to tell next thread at least
> what hook is it (pass a handle?). Otherwise we won't know which one is
> the next. But that gets us back to the same problem...

Passing a handle is OK, it can be revalidated in the target thread.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.org