comtctl32 : updown : Getter and Setter Tests for Updown control
dank06 at kegel.com
Mon Feb 12 00:23:52 CST 2007
I haven't looked at what James was talking about, but I noticed three things:
You have a typo 'sohuld'.
You should use the same filename as before, but increment the number
in the filename.
You might consider using the expect() macro I've been encouraging
the other cs130 students to use, it makes the repeated ok() calls a bit
more readable (IMHO, we'll see if others agree).
On 2/11/07, Leslie Choong <septikus at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey there, I've made the changes so that the return value is not
> stored unnecessarily. I've also added comments explaining why. Let me
> know what you think.
> On 2/11/07, Leslie Choong <septikus at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for the input. UDM_SETRANGE has no return value according to
> > MSDN so I'll remove those assignments.
> > On 2/11/07, James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 2/10/07, Leslie Choong <septikus at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi there, My name is Leslie Choong and I am currently finishing up my
> > > > under graduate work at UCLA. This patch is being sent as part of the
> > > > coursework for CS 130 : Software Engineering. Please take a look and
> > > > let me know if you have any suggestions or comments for change.
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > -Leslie Choong
> > > >
> > >
> > > + /* Set Range from 0 to 100 */
> > > + r = SendMessage(updown, UDM_SETRANGE, 0 , MAKELONG(100,0) );
> > > + r= SendMessage(updown, UDM_GETRANGE, 0,0);
> > >
> > > If you're not going to check the first return value, then take out the
> > > 'r =', else it seems like you're missing a test. On the other hand,
> > > why don't you test the return value?
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Hawkins
> > >
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
More information about the wine-devel