Better cpuid support

[Alexandre Julliard]

Robert Lunnon <bobl at optushome.com.au> writes:

> This is true, but it is not very time consuming.  I had considered caching the 
> cpuid results which would eliminate the multiple handling but didn't feel it 
> was worth the effort. This function does not tend to get called often in 
> windows programs (Usually once) but If you like I'll add the caching.

All that extra work is simply because you are adding abstractions
where none are necessary. It looks like a bad case of Not Invented
Here syndrome: you have already submitted that code a number of times,
and I have already explained that it's way too complex for what we
need, so I didn't put it in. Now someone else has done a simple
implementation that works fine, and you are trying to replace it all
once again with your original code that I already rejected. If you
want to improve the cpuid support, please improve the existing code;
as long as you keep pushing your all singing all dancing new
implementation you won't get anywhere.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com