ntdll/kernel32: #27

Eric Pouech pouech-eric at wanadoo.fr
Tue Jun 17 12:41:25 CDT 2003

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Eric Pouech <pouech-eric at wanadoo.fr> writes:
>>- this patch partially implements this scheme. It's partial because
>>console handles are still handled by wineserver. Their value is
>>however obfuscated so that we can track their real usage.
> IMO you shouldn't need to have any obfuscation code in the server at
> all. If you need that, something is wrong with the design.
I don't need the obfuscation at all (just setting the two lower bits of 
the handle to 1). I used obfuscation to make it easier to track bugs. 
I'll resubmit without the obfuscation macros.

>>- next step would mean implementing the console handle management
>>outside of wineserver (likely in wineconsole)
> I'm not convinced we really need that; IMO it's OK to keep them in the
> server, as long as we can identify them as console handles from the
> client.

I was what I really wanted to move to wineconsole was the content of 
screen buffers (which are copied twice currently and which I find rather 
bad). Of course, we could split handle management and object management 
in two different locations (wineserver resp. wineconsole), but this will 
complicate things IMO
and as any performance enhancement, it doesn't need to be done 
immediately (there are some other items to focus on)


Eric Pouech

More information about the wine-devel mailing list