[PATCH 2/3] user32: Added more dialog owner tests.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Hi Jacek,

Jacek Caban <jacek at codeweavers.com> wrote:

> +    parent = CreateWindowExA(0, "TestParentClass", "Test parent",
> +                             WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW | WS_VISIBLE,
> +                             100, 100, 200, 200, 0, 0, 0, NULL);
> +    ok (parent != 0, "Failed to create parent window\n");
> +
> +    child = CreateWindowExA(0, "TestWindowClass", "Test child",
> +                            WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW | WS_VISIBLE,
> +                            100, 100, 200, 200, 0, 0, 0, NULL);
> +    ok (child != 0, "Failed to create child window\n");
> +
> +    child2 = CreateWindowExA(0, "SimpleWindowClass", "Test child2",
> +                             WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW | WS_VISIBLE | WS_CHILD,
> +                             100, 100, 200, 200, child, 0, 0, NULL);
> +    ok (child2 != 0, "Failed to create child window\n");
> +
> +    SetParent(child, parent);
> +    SetFocus(child);

Is that really required to use SetParent() instead of specifying correct
parent in the CreateWindowEx call?

> +    flush_sequence();
> +    DialogBoxA( 0, "TEST_DIALOG", child2, TestModalDlgProc2 );
> +    ok_sequence(WmModalDialogSeq_2, "ModalDialog2", TRUE);

Is this test supposed to show that actual dialog owner is parent window?
If yes, then this theory is not tested at all. 

> +    SetForegroundWindow(hdlg);
> +
> +    {
> +        const struct message WmEndDialogSeq[] = {
> +            { WM_ENABLE, sent },
> +            { WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING, sent|wparam, SWP_HIDEWINDOW|SWP_NOACTIVATE|SWP_NOSIZE|SWP_NOMOVE },
> +            { HCBT_ACTIVATE, hook|wparam, (WPARAM)hchild },
> +            { WM_NCACTIVATE, sent|wparam|lparam, WA_INACTIVE, (LPARAM)hchild },
> +            { WM_ACTIVATE, sent|wparam|lparam, WA_INACTIVE, (LPARAM)hchild },
> +            /* FIXME: Following two are optional because Wine sends WM_QUERYNEWPALETTE instead of WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING */
> +            { WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING, sent|wparam|optional, SWP_NOSIZE|SWP_NOMOVE },
> +            { WM_QUERYNEWPALETTE, sent|optional },
> +            { WM_NCACTIVATE, sent|wparam|lparam, WA_ACTIVE, (LPARAM)hdlg },
> +            { WM_GETTEXT, sent|optional|defwinproc },
> +            { WM_ACTIVATE, sent|wparam|lparam, WA_ACTIVE, (LPARAM)hdlg },
> +            { HCBT_SETFOCUS, hook|wparam, (WPARAM)hchild },
> +            { WM_KILLFOCUS, sent|wparam, (WPARAM)hchild },
> +            { WM_SETFOCUS, sent|defwinproc|wparam, (WPARAM)hdlg },
> +            { 0 }
> +        };
> +
> +        flush_sequence();
> +        EndDialog(hdlg, 0);
> +        ok_sequence(WmEndDialogSeq, "EndDialog", FALSE);
> +    }

Please don't create fake embedded blocks.

Also it would be really nice to send the tests first so it would be more clear
when a todo_wine is removed with a subsequent patch in order to see whether
the patch is actually related to the previously sent tests.

-- 
Dmitry.