[PATCH 3/5] usp10: Use heap_alloc_zero() instead of HeapAlloc() with HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY.

[Francois Gouget]

On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Aric Stewart wrote:
[...]
> I personally have no passion either way either. Having it be void vs 
> BOOL is all the same to me. Francois? Do you care, if so then I think 
> your caring will win. :)

I don't really care either way either. It would just be better for it to 
be the same everywhere so that later changes to that set of functions 
can be copy/pasted everywhere without issue.

Personally I think it would be even better to move them to something 
like include/wine/heap.h. I don't know if Alexandre would agree though.


Based on what Michael told me on IRC Alexandre would like changes to be 
made to these functions but I don't know if it impacts heap_free(). For 
instance for heap_alloc() and heap_realloc() he would probably like 
something like this:

static inline void * __WINE_ALLOC_SIZE(1) heap_alloc(size_t size)
{
    if (!size) return NULL;
    return HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, size);
}

static inline void* __WINE_ALLOC_SIZE(2) heap_realloc(void *mem, size_t size)
{
    if (!size)
    {
        heap_free(mem);
        return NULL;
    }
    if (!mem) return heap_alloc(size);
    return HeapReAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, mem, size);
}

Then there's the string heap functions but I did not really look at 
those.


I think his idea is also to eliminate calls to heap_xxx() for small 
allocations (like a simple structure) where possible. Overall, doing 
this kind of change will require checking the call sites to make sure 
they are compatible with that and that they take advantage of them. This 
type of checks is probably more a Michael type of thing though ;-)


-- 
Francois Gouget <fgouget at free.fr>              http://fgouget.free.fr/
           Vote Electronique: Les gens qui votent ne décident rien.
                 Ceux qui comptent les votes décident de tout.