[PATCH v2 2/2] ucrtbase: Hook up some functions with new names to existing implementations

[Martin Storsjö]

On Tue, 25 Aug 2015, Alexandre Julliard wrote:

> Martin Storsjo <martin at martin.st> writes:
>
>> These are some functions that on a first glance seem to have a
>> matching signature even though the exact symbol name isn't the
>> same as in msvcr120.
>
> It would be better to create a separate function, unless there is strong
> evidence that they are doing the exact same thing. For example, I expect
> that there's a reason for having both malloc and malloc_base; mapping
> them to the same function would make any difference hard to spot.

Hmm, yes. For the _base ones, it probably is good to use separate entry 
points to be able to differentiate properly between them.

The other cases in this patch are:
- _crt_atexit, which possibly also deserves the same treatment
- _set_app_type, which previously used to be called __set_app_type. Don't 
know if anything else has changed other than the number of underscores
- _set_new_handler and _set_new_mode. In msvcr120, these had C++ 
signatures, now they are plain C functions

// Martin