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

[Jacek Caban]

On 17.03.2021 15:05, Rémi Bernon wrote:
> On 3/17/21 2:52 PM, Jacek Caban wrote:
>> 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
>>
>
> Right, works for me. If the widl and include changes are good, I can 
> resend the last 4 patches later with the test changes (and clean the 
> speech tests accordingly to make them consistent).


Sounds good to me.


Jacek