[PATCH v3 4/8] comctl32/listbox: Make SetCount fail if LBS_NODATA is not set

[Nikolay Sivov]

On 11/11/18 1:01 PM, Gabriel Ivăncescu wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 11:46 PM Nikolay Sivov <nsivov at codeweavers.com> wrote:
>> On 11/8/18 2:39 PM, Gabriel Ivăncescu wrote:
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Ivăncescu <gabrielopcode at gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    dlls/comctl32/listbox.c       | 5 ++++-
>>>    dlls/comctl32/tests/listbox.c | 2 +-
>>>    2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c b/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c
>>> index 2137ef8..0a7c341 100644
>>> --- a/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c
>>> +++ b/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c
>>> @@ -1752,7 +1752,7 @@ static LRESULT LISTBOX_SetCount( LB_DESCR *descr, INT count )
>>>    {
>>>        LRESULT ret;
>>>
>>> -    if (HAS_STRINGS(descr))
>>> +    if (!(descr->style & LBS_NODATA))
>> I think HAS_STRINGS should consider LBS_NODATA instead.
>>
> How is that going to work? Consider these listboxes:
>
> (1) LBS_OWNERDRAWFIXED
> (2) LBS_OWNERDRAWFIXED | LBS_HASSTRINGS
> (3) LBS_OWNERDRAWFIXED | LBS_NODATA
> (4) LBS_OWNERDRAWFIXED | LBS_NODATA | LBS_HASSTRINGS
>
> SetCount must only succeed with (3). For (4) the clear of LBS_NODATA
> is enough, since LBS_HASSTRINGS overrides and disables it.
>
> I don't see how adding anything to HAS_STRINGS will solve the issue of
> (1) being a distinct listbox with no strings and without LBS_NODATA. I
> mean, it doesn't have strings, but it should also fail in SetCount.

Ok, I see.


>
> Of course, I can separate the patch that clears LBS_NODATA and place
> it before this patch, if you want.

Yes, please send them in that order, after v5 of tests is committed.