[2/3] kernel32/tests: test CopyFileEx callback and cancellation (resend)

[Daniel Jeliński]

2013/9/30 Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead at gmail.com>

> On 9/30/2013 00:51, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
>
>
>  +struct progress_list {
>> +    const DWORD progress_retval_init;  /* value to return from progress
>> routine */
>> +    const BOOL cancel_init;            /* value to set Cancel flag to */
>> +    const DWORD progress_retval_end;   /* value to return from progress
>> routine */
>> +    const BOOL cancel_end;             /* value to set Cancel flag to */
>> +    const DWORD progress_count;        /* number of times progress is
>> invoked */
>> +    const BOOL copy_retval;            /* expected CopyFileEx result */
>> +    const DWORD lastError;             /* expected CopyFileEx error code
>> */
>> +} ;
>>
>  I don't see a point making them 'const'.
>
I'm matching the formatting of existing code:
http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/kernel32/tests/file.c#L65
Also, what's the point of not making them const?

 +static DWORD WINAPI progress(LARGE_INTEGER TotalFileSize,
>> +        LARGE_INTEGER TotalBytesTransferred,
>> +        LARGE_INTEGER StreamSize,
>> +        LARGE_INTEGER StreamBytesTransferred,
>> +        DWORD dwStreamNumber,
>> +        DWORD dwCallbackReason,
>> +        HANDLE hSourceFile,
>> +        HANDLE hDestinationFile,
>> +        LPVOID lpData)
>> +{
>> +    progressInvoked++;
>>
> Please pass all globals as context data with lpData, and please use
> 'void*' instead of LPVOID.
>
Good point about lpData. Still, does that make the patch invalid? Why
didn't you mention that on the first review?
About LPVOID - I'm matching the headers:
http://source.winehq.org/source/include/winbase.h#L910
for the third patch:
http://source.winehq.org/source/include/winbase.h#L1018

Also, any comments on patch 3?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20130930/07310aa1/attachment.html>