Proposed solution for COMCTL32 subclassing problems

[Robert Shearman]

Filip Navara wrote:
> Robert Shearman wrote:
>
> >Can you not just use stack->stacknum instead of 0 if the stack
> is inverted?
> >
> >
> Of course I can (now that I understand the code ;-).
>
> >I'm not arguing against it and I'm all for it if it makes it
> easier to code,
> >but I'm just trying to see what stops you from using the same stack
> >direction as at the moment.
> >
> >
> If there is enough interest, I can recode it with using the previous
> stack layout. When I started the patch I just thought it would be easier
> this way, but now I can reasonably say that it wouldn't be much different.

Ok, that's fair enough. The patch looks good to me.

> P.S.
> In the last patch I sent there was still one bug:
> +         stack->stacknum--;
> +         if (n < stack->stackpos)
>              stack->stackpos--;
> should be
> +         stack->stacknum--;
> +         if (n < stack->stackpos && stack->wndprocrecursion)
>              stack->stackpos--;

Ok, I suggest you resubmit the patch with those changes if you haven't
already done so.

Rob