2017-03-03 12:35 GMT-07:00 Chris Morgan [email protected]:

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 2:31 PM Alexandre Julliard [email protected] wrote:

...

Chris Morgan [email protected] writes:

...

Avoids the ambiguity with non-alphanumeric hex values.

Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan [email protected]

dlls/ntdll/file.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/file.c b/dlls/ntdll/file.c index fd7f3dd..4d081b7 100644 --- a/dlls/ntdll/file.c +++ b/dlls/ntdll/file.c @@ -1567,7 +1567,7 @@ static NTSTATUS server_ioctl_file( HANDLE handle, HANDLE event, SERVER_END_REQ;

 if (status == STATUS_NOT_SUPPORTED)

•    FIXME("Unsupported ioctl %x (device=%x access=%x func=%x
  

method=%x)\n",

•    FIXME("Unsupported ioctl 0x%x (device=0x%x access=0x%x
  

func=0x%x method=0x%x)\n",

That's mostly a matter of taste, so I don't think it's necessary to change it.

-- Alexandre Julliard [email protected]

Ok. I think most of the rest of the file uses 0x and it cost me an hour or so before I figured out they weren't decimal values as they didn't include any letters. And the list of FSCTL options in headers uses decimal so that was another layer of confusion.

There is one more case that doesn't use 0x that I found after submitting the patch.

I'd still like to advocate for being explicit because it isn't always obvious what base is used.

I came across this old email cleaning out my inbox today, and I just wanted to comment that I also think the 0x prefix is helpful. The only exception that comes to mind is if the number is zero-padded (i.e. %08x, %04x, or %02x). If the number is not zero-padded and does not have a 0x prefix, I would expect it to be a decimal number.

-Alex