adding undocumented APIs to public headers

[Robert Shearman]

James Hawkins wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> What is our policy on adding undocumented functions to Wine's public
> headers?  My stance is that we, as an alternative implementation of
> the Win32 API, provide another set of Win32 public headers, like
> Microsoft and cygwin/mingw provide as well.  If our headers contain
> undocumented functions that no other headers have, then we're just
> that much more complete.  I've always thought of the Wine code base as
> documentation for the Win32 API, especially in places where there is
> no documentation from Microsoft.  There are several places where
> -Wmissing-declarations warns about missing declarations for exported
> APIs.  A lot of these have no corresponding entry in Microsoft's
> public headers.  Adding these declarations gets rid of the warnings
> and makes our headers more complete.  What are your thoughts on this
> matter?

I think we should do this, but protect them with #ifdef __WINESRC__, 
since we may want to use them internally, but we don't want them used in 
things that may be built with the PSDK headers, like tests.

-- 
Rob Shearman