truiken at gmail.com
Mon Jan 21 14:17:35 CST 2008
On Jan 21, 2008 2:14 PM, Christopher <raccoonone at procyongames.com> wrote:
> Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > "Dmitry Timoshkov" <dmitry at codeweavers.com> wrote:
> >> It's not clear what this test is supposed to show. If the 1st call
> >> to LoadStringW is supposed to set resourcepointer to not NULL, why
> >> don't you test it? Then 'if(resourcepointer != NULL)' check and copying
> >> to copiedstring are not needed.
> >> Also, if the test depends on a later patch to not fail, the test
> >> should be
> >> included in the patch.
> > Also, you need to test LoadStringA, to see if it behaves similarly. It
> > would be
> > also interesting to test LoadStringA/W with both buffer and buffer
> > length set
> > to 0.
> > In addition, as I already pointed out you need to inspect Wine source
> > and fix
> > the places which will be broken by your fix.
> I tested LoadStringA under Windows XP, and calling it with buflen == 0
> does not return a pointer to the resource. In fact LoadStringA seems to
> behave fairly differently from LoadStringW: in that calling with buffer
> == NULL causes an access violation instead of just returning 0.
That's why you need to add tests for LoadStringA to Wine's test suite.
More information about the wine-devel