struct async_private needs generalization for Winsock

[Alexandre Julliard]

Martin Wilck <mwilck at freenet.de> writes:

> Do you _really_ consider it "clean" to use the WSAOVERLAPPED fields for
> arbitrary, unrelated Wine-internal data?

Not really, but this is apparently what Windows does. And I consider
it better than having kernel32 file I/O code know about winsock
specifics any more than necessary.

> The only way to avoid these (admittedly unelegant) constructs is to use
> yet more function pointers, like
> 
>   ovl->call_completion_func (ovl);
> 
> where ovl->call_completion_func would be a function that "knew"
> the number of arguments to pass to te completion function.

Another way is to have a completion_func inside of winsock that takes
3 args and in turn calls the user-specified func that takes 4
args. This way synchro.c does not need to know about it at all.

> As I said in the last mail, since we are talking about only 2
> alternatives, the use of function pointers may be more elegant,
> but a little exaggerated to my taste.

The basic infrastructure has to be generic enough to support all kinds
of async I/O. If it cannot it should be improved, but we must not work
around the lack of generality by adding winsock-specific hacks in the
kernel layers.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com