Adding new flags?
bunglehead at gmail.com
Fri Apr 10 04:53:25 CDT 2009
Igor Tarasov wrote:
> 2009/4/10 Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead at gmail.com>:
>> Igor Tarasov wrote:
>>> Hi there!
>>> I try to implement as precise as possible one undocumented feature in
>>> comctl32, this all deals with one structure field. After lots of
>>> testing I know the following:
>>> 1. Default value for that field returned by getter is 0.
>>> 2. By default it is ignored in behavior.
>>> 3. If you change value by the setter, even to 0, behavior changes.
>>> 4. Negative values, such as (-1) also produce different behavior and
>>> cannot be used as "field not changed" flag.
>>> So, does that mean that I have to add new flag to the structure that
>>> would be set only if that field is changed, or there is another way to
>>> do that?
>> What flag are you speaking about? Toolbar stuff?
> Yep, it's about undocumented feature of iBitmap controlling buttons'
> size But it works only if cx is zero and iBitmap was not specifically
So (-1) for iButton is reserved for not using imagelist bitmap at all
and in some places this value checked for <0 instead of
== -1, right? Does it apply for separators only? If not maybe it's
better to add something like BOOL IsiBitmapValid.
Let's get another opinions. (Hope you'll be ready with patch for today
More information about the wine-devel