[PATCH 4/7] windows.gaming.input: Add stub dll.

[Jacek Caban]

On 17.03.2021 14:33, Rémi Bernon wrote:
>> +
>> +    size = 0xdeadbeef;
>> +    hr = IVectorView_Gamepad_get_Size(gamepads, &size);
>> +    ok(SUCCEEDED(hr), "IVectorView_Gamepad_QueryInterface failed, hr 
>> %#x\n", hr);
>> +    todo_wine ok(size != 0xdeadbeef, "IVectorView_Gamepad_get_Size 
>> returned %u\n", size);
>> +
>> +    rc = IVectorView_Gamepad_Release(gamepads);
>> +    todo_wine ok(rc == 1, "IVectorView_Gamepad_Release returned 
>> unexpected refcount %d\n", rc);
>> +
>
> There's a typo in the message here and the refcount test could 
> probably be dropped as I dropped the others. Compared to 
> windows.media.speechsynthesis tests, refcount for these classes isn't 
> always the same on the testbot Windows VMs, so it didn't seem very 
> relevant to keep the tests.


Yes, tests for exact ref count values are very rarely interesting and it 
would be better to drop them.


> However, I've got more tests to send with GamepadAdded/Removed event 
> handlers as well as RawGameController runtimeclass, so unless there's 
> some other changes to make elsewhere I'd rather not resend this series 
> just for that. 


There are some things that I would find nice to change. I didn't want to 
reject speech patches just for that, but since it's becoming a template, 
it's worth mentioning:

- Testing for the exact (usually S_OK) value instead of SUCCEED() in 
ok() macros is generally better. It's more strict and catches cases 
where we should return things like S_FALSE instead.

- I would call tests something like input.c instead. We will never have 
more test files for most of those DLLs, so if we need some 'non-statics' 
tests in the future, it would be good if they fit the existing file.


Thanks,

Jacek