[PATCH try3] atl110: Added new DLL.

Jacek Caban jacek at codeweavers.com
Wed Sep 4 05:46:35 CDT 2013

On 09/03/13 13:51, Qian Hong wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Jacek Caban <jacek at codeweavers.com> wrote:
>> Not really, good catch. We should make them consistent. Honestly, I'm
>> not sure which one is better. Both have their problems. Some functions
>> are forwarded, others are not, so having one debug channel would be
>> guarantee that we don't miss some calls while debugging a bug. However,
>> some functions have the same names and are not forwarded, so one debug
>> channel would be ambiguous.
>> I'm open for opinions.
> How about something like this:
> atl80.c:
> -BOOL WINAPI AtlAxWinInit(void)
> +BOOL WINAPI ATL80_AtlAxWinInit(void)
> atl80.spec:
> -42 stdcall AtlAxWinInit()
> +42 stdcall AtlAxWinInit() ATL80_AtlAxWinInit
> So we can always use one debug channel for all atlXX dlls, at the same
> time different exported function with the same name will generate
> different trace log.

Yes, that could work as well. I don't have strong opinion, feel free to
submit a patch with solution of your choice.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list