John Chadwick writes:
> This patch adds additional xpath tests to the msxml3 tests. Following
> Nikolay Sivov's advice, these provide a wide range of new tests, two
> of which currently fail in Wine (for reasons previously described.)
> These are now marked 'todo' in a much cleaner way.
It doesn
On 6/29/2013 20:26, John Chadwick wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 6/27/2013 11:46, John Chadwick wrote:
+/* msxml's selectNodes returns a document ordered nodelist,
regardless of
+ * whether or not the xpath nodelist was document ordered... */
+
ole_che
On 6/27/2013 11:46, John Chadwick wrote:
+/* msxml's selectNodes returns a document ordered nodelist, regardless of
+ * whether or not the xpath nodelist was document ordered... */
+ole_check(IXMLDOMNode_selectNodes(rootNode,_bstr_("ancestor-or-self::node()"),
&list));
+todo_exp
folder".
>
> It appears as though you shouldn't be doing this in a conformance
> test. It varies enough that applications can't depend on the resource
> ID or string value being the same in different versions of Windows.
> Our conformance tests try to test for invarian
t depend on the resource
ID or string value being the same in different versions of Windows.
Our conformance tests try to test for invariants across Windows
versions, i.e. behavior that applications may depend on or expect.
You might check the contents of the containing folder before and after
th
Hi wine developers!
I've written a conformance test (my first) for bug 17986:
BrsFolder_OnCommand make new folder not implemented. The conformance
test tests if clicking on the "Make New Folder" button in a
SHBrowseForFolder dialog box results in creation of a new folder. I
want the test to be loc
On 6 February 2010 10:29, Reece Dunn wrote:
> On 6 February 2010 04:15, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>> Reece Dunn wrote:
>> Before
>> fixing the problem we need to understand what exactly is the sequence
>> of events that leads to it, how Windows and Wine behaviours differ.
>
> I understand this.
L
On 6 February 2010 04:15, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Reece Dunn wrote:
>
>> And in terms of a fix, what is the best approach for fixing the issue?
>> That is, Alexandre does not like an explicit call to InvalidateRect in
>> the WM_MDICREATE handler, so I assume that the repaint logic should be
>>
Reece Dunn wrote:
> And in terms of a fix, what is the best approach for fixing the issue?
> That is, Alexandre does not like an explicit call to InvalidateRect in
> the WM_MDICREATE handler, so I assume that the repaint logic should be
> done in a more specific place or figure out why it is not
Hi,
I have been looking at http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14312
which shows up as the MDI client window not being repainted properly
when a new child is created given an already maximised child window
being present.
There is a related issue here that sometimes the child window frames
are
On 11/03/2009 04:32 AM, Mike wrote:
These conformance tests are for the program manager dde. Basic operations are
tested. The current wine implementation (shell32/dde.c) of the Program Manager
DDE is stubbed. This conformance tests were run and passed on Win 98 SE and
Win XP SP2. Related
ll Windows
>> versions. Or you should detect differences by other means.
CSIDL_PROGRAM_FILES_COMMON is not supported in Win 95, 98, or ME and so the
directory where things are created changes. What is the correct method to
determine whether to use this or not for Wine Conf
Mike wrote:
> Conformance Tests to test the Program Manager DDE. Currently stubbed in
> Wine, bug 9159. Has been tested on Win XP SP2 and Win 98 SE.
>
> ---
> dlls/shell32/tests/Makefile.in |1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --
2009/8/15 Mike :
> Being new to wine, I was thinking about starting to learn the system by
> writing conformance tests.
>
> Most of us do NOT have access to machines of every flavor of Windows. Is
> there a standard method to deal with differences across platforms?
>
>
Being new to wine, I was thinking about starting to learn the system by writing
conformance tests.
Most of us do NOT have access to machines of every flavor of Windows. Is there
a standard method to deal with differences across platforms?
I realize that often, this won't be an issue, bu
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Keith
Muir wrote:
> What disturbs me about the conformance tests is that yes there are 0%
> failures but when you check you discover its 0% failures on virtual
> machines. Failures on real hardware under XP can reach as high as 6% with
> peaks great
What disturbs me about the conformance tests is that yes there are 0%
failures but when you check you discover its 0% failures on virtual
machines. Failures on real hardware under XP can reach as high as 6%
with peaks greater than that. Windows is tolerant of all types of
hardware wine still
* On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Chris Teague wrote:
very useful tool would be a serial port loopback device. Rather than
require conformance testers to attach a hardware loopback device (NULL
modem) to a physical port, could we create some virtual ports in wine
and connect them together? Maybe com98
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Chris Teague wrote:
> I'm new to wine, looking into serial communications. I have a failing
> scenario in a application, and I'd like to write a conformance test to
> demonstrate/document the issue. I looked in dlls/ntdll/tests but did
> not see any serial port
Chris Teague writes:
> I'm new to wine, looking into serial communications. I have a failing
> scenario in a application, and I'd like to write a conformance test to
> demonstrate/document the issue. I looked in dlls/ntdll/tests but did
> not see any serial port related tests - did I miss them
I'm new to wine, looking into serial communications. I have a failing
scenario in a application, and I'd like to write a conformance test to
demonstrate/document the issue. I looked in dlls/ntdll/tests but did
not see any serial port related tests - did I miss them or do none
exist yet? Assuming
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Keith Muir wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Running conformance tests on windows on some builds is impossible it
> wont even complete 1.1.15 was the last one that would run to completion
> and versions between 1.1.14 and 1.1.15 also failed to complete.
Which Windows v
Hi,
Running conformance tests on windows on some builds is impossible it
wont even complete 1.1.15 was the last one that would run to completion
and versions between 1.1.14 and 1.1.15 also failed to complete.
Regards,
Keith
2008/10/18 Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> When I put together the current patchwatcher box, I made
> sure to get a graphics card based on a recent nvidia chip.
> http://www2.pny.com/8500-GT-512MB-PCIe-P2322C269.aspx
> seemed recent enough, but I still get buttloads of
> conformance test failures
Dan Kegel wrote:
> When I put together the current patchwatcher box, I made
> sure to get a graphics card based on a recent nvidia chip.
> http://www2.pny.com/8500-GT-512MB-PCIe-P2322C269.aspx
> seemed recent enough, but I still get buttloads of
> conformance test failures in d3d and ddraw.
>
> So,
When I put together the current patchwatcher box, I made
sure to get a graphics card based on a recent nvidia chip.
http://www2.pny.com/8500-GT-512MB-PCIe-P2322C269.aspx
seemed recent enough, but I still get buttloads of
conformance test failures in d3d and ddraw.
So, which graphics cards exactly
is highly annoying and it's deemed a really bad habit.
>>
>> Vitaliy.
>>
> I did not hijack a thread I opened a brand new note thank you...
> and I was talking about the windows conformance tests which I am running
> on my home machine... So before you jump on some
ed a really bad habit.
>>
>> Vitaliy.
> I did not hijack a thread I opened a brand new note thank you...
> and I was talking about the windows conformance tests which I am running
> on my home machine... So before you jump on someone by assuming like you
> prefer to do Vitali
not hijack a thread I opened a brand new note thank you...
and I was talking about the windows conformance tests which I am running
on my home machine... So before you jump on someone by assuming like you
prefer to do Vitaliy why dont you ask if this is one or not
Again havent hijacked a
Chris Ahrendt wrote:
> Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
Would you please stop hijacking threads! Do NOT reply when starting a new
topic!!! This is highly annoying and it's deemed a really bad habit.
Vitaliy.
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Chris Ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Hawkins wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Chris Ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
>>>
>>> What and where do I need to send in the information
>>>
James Hawkins wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Chris Ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
>>
>> What and where do I need to send in the information
>> on the issue.
>>
>
> You're going to have to set up a cross-build environment to compil
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Chris Ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
>
> What and where do I need to send in the information
> on the issue.
>
> Microsoft Windows XP
> Home Edition
> Version 2002
> Sp 3
>
> Pent 4 3.2ghz
> 2 gig ram
>
>
Prob
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Chris Ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
>
> What and where do I need to send in the information
> on the issue.
>
You're going to have to set up a cross-build environment to compile
the d3d tests and figure out w
Causes windows XP SP3 to reboot during d3d test..
What and where do I need to send in the information
on the issue.
Microsoft Windows XP
Home Edition
Version 2002
Sp 3
Pent 4 3.2ghz
2 gig ram
Chris
On Saturday 06 September 2008 22:21:15 James Hawkins wrote:
> > Tests that fail on Windows and succeed on Wine
> > ==
> > - ws2_32:sock has 1 consistent failure on all Windows boxes but not on
> > Wine
>
> Last attempt got no comments:
>
> http://winehq.
Henri Verbeet schrieb:
> 2008/9/6 Rico Schüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Dan Kegel schrieb:
>>
>>> This aborts for me in just five seconds. Can *anyone* run it for
>>> an hour without failure? If so, how can I duplicate your setup?
>>> - Dan
>>>
>>>
>
>
>> d3d9 device: This wo
On 9/6/08, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Tests with timeouts
>> ===
>> - dplayx:dplayx fails with a timeout on all windows servers
>
> According to Ismael, he has a few fixes that cut the time needed in
> half. Ismael, what's the status on this?
>
> http://winehq.org/
James Hawkins wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As we are slowly progressing towards a more green test.winehq.org there are
>> still some conformance tests that fail either on all platforms or with a
&g
Henri Verbeet schrieb:
> 2008/9/6 Rico Schüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Dan Kegel schrieb:
>>
>>> This aborts for me in just five seconds. Can *anyone* run it for
>>> an hour without failure? If so, how can I duplicate your setup?
>>> - Dan
>>>
>>>
>
>
>> d3d9 device: This wo
2008/9/6 Rico Schüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Dan Kegel schrieb:
>> This aborts for me in just five seconds. Can *anyone* run it for
>> an hour without failure? If so, how can I duplicate your setup?
>> - Dan
>>
> d3d9 device: This works with OffscreenRenderingMode = backbuffer or
> pbuffer wit
Dan Kegel schrieb:
> This aborts for me in just five seconds. Can *anyone* run it for
> an hour without failure? If so, how can I duplicate your setup?
> - Dan
>
These tests run without any issue for me (200 times) - in virtual
desktop mode and fbo (haven't checked the default settings yet):
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we are slowly progressing towards a more green test.winehq.org there are
> still some conformance tests that fail either on all platforms or with a
> specific configuration (like IE7).
>
&
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This aborts for me in just five seconds. Can *anyone* run it for
> an hour without failure? If so, how can I duplicate your setup?
Ask Alexandre for a Ghost image of his machine. =P
--
Steven Edwards
"There is one thing s
Paul V. wrote:
> As we are slowly progressing towards a more green
> test.winehq.org there are still some conformance tests
> that fail either on all platforms or with a specific configuration (like IE7).
Here's some data.
On my new box (CPU: Core 2 Duo e8400,
graphics: nVidia Corpo
Hi,
As we are slowly progressing towards a more green test.winehq.org there are
still some conformance tests that fail either on all platforms or with a
specific configuration (like IE7).
This email is merely to list those and see if the SME's can have a look in
these
tests. (I didn
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> About the same number of tests fail regardless of -j value.
>
> "About" -- shouldn't it be exactly?
Yes, but our tests are flaky.
Dan Kegel wrote:
> About the same number of tests fail regardless of -j value.
>
> How it works:
> this patch adds a new function, winetest_exclusive(),
> that waits until it can acquire an exclusive lock.
> It should be called near the top of the START_TEST body
> for any test that needs exclusiv
The attached patch lets you run Wine's conformance tests in parallel.
On my relatively fast dual core machine (e7200):
"make -k test" takes 3 minutes 55 seconds
"make -k -j2 test" takes 2 minutes 15 seconds
"make -k -j4 test" takes 1 minute 45 seconds
&q
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Dylan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rather than using one URL for all the messages, you could also cycle through
> URL after testing them initially. It would have the same performance of
> using the same valid URL, but keeps the variety in the test.
I ended
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Alex Villacís Lasso <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Kegel escribió:
> > Under Valgrind, on my nice fast e7200 system,
> > the entire suite of tests takes about three hours to run.
> >
> > The slowest ten percent of the tests take over a third of the runtime.
>
Dan Kegel escribió:
> Under Valgrind, on my nice fast e7200 system,
> the entire suite of tests takes about three hours to run.
>
> The slowest ten percent of the tests take over a third of the runtime.
>
> riched20's editor.c in particular spends way too long
> (I think) on test_EM_AUTOURLDETECT.
Under Valgrind, on my nice fast e7200 system,
the entire suite of tests takes about three hours to run.
The slowest ten percent of the tests take over a third of the runtime.
riched20's editor.c in particular spends way too long
(I think) on test_EM_AUTOURLDETECT.
The min, median, and max times
For curiousity's sake, I tested my work XP box today, first as usual,
then after a reboot and disabling the network connection:
http://test.winehq.org/data/b4bf3553c4071a2a6979f1df08ae75aadde94b4b/#group_XP
http://test.winehq.org/data/b4bf3553c4071a2a6979f1df08ae75aadde94b4b/xp_aenglish-xp-sp2/re
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:50:53 +0100
> From: Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Conformance tests for LoadStringW and LoadStringA
> To: Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: wine-devel@winehq.org
&
Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +ok(!memcmp(copiedstring, returnedstring, (length2 +
> 1)*sizeof(WCHAR)),
> +"LoadStringW returned a string that does not match the string
> pointed to by the pointer it returned. \
> + returnedstring = %ls, copiedstring =
On 05/02/2008, Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When I run winetest on Windows XP I get some dialog boxes asking me:
>
>Do you want to keep blocking this program?
This is because the Windows firewall is blocking the application from
connecting to the internet and/or making TCP/IP
When I run winetest on Windows XP I get some dialog boxes asking me:
Do you want to keep blocking this program?
According to the title bar, the impacted tests are:
dplayx
rpcrt4
'Microsoft DirectPlay Helper' ???
ws2_32
My understanding is that it should only prevent the test fro
On Di, 2007-08-07 at 09:43 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> My plan, and this is open for discussion of course, is to:
>
> 1. Add the main dll back as part of the IMPORTS in the Makefile.in files
Some API are defined once, but implemented many times:
The monitor in localspl and localui as examples.
Stefan Leichter wrote:
Am Tuesday 07 August 2007 09:43 schrieb Paul Vriens:
This will be a lengthy process so if there are volunteers, please step up.
Eventhough this is some considerable amount of work to be done, in the end
the code will be cleaner (and several lines shorter).
Comments/remar
Am Tuesday 07 August 2007 09:43 schrieb Paul Vriens:
>
> This will be a lengthy process so if there are volunteers, please step up.
>
> Eventhough this is some considerable amount of work to be done, in the end
> the code will be cleaner (and several lines shorter).
>
> Comments/remarks ?
>
Make su
Stefan Dösinger wrote:
Am Dienstag, 7. August 2007 10:29 schrieb H. Verbeet:
On 07/08/07, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You mean 'Direct3DCreate8' in the d3d8 tests (Oh wait, there's also
'ValidateVertexShader' and 'ValidatePixelShader') and 'Direct3DCreate9'
in the d3d9 tests?
For co
Am Dienstag, 7. August 2007 10:29 schrieb H. Verbeet:
> On 07/08/07, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You mean 'Direct3DCreate8' in the d3d8 tests (Oh wait, there's also
> > 'ValidateVertexShader' and 'ValidatePixelShader') and 'Direct3DCreate9'
> > in the d3d9 tests?
> >
> > For consiste
On 07/08/07, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You mean 'Direct3DCreate8' in the d3d8 tests (Oh wait, there's also
> 'ValidateVertexShader' and 'ValidatePixelShader') and 'Direct3DCreate9' in the
> d3d9 tests?
>
> For consistency sake we should change it there as well. Although it's just a
>
H. Verbeet wrote:
On 07/08/07, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eventhough this is some considerable amount of work to be done, in the end the
code will be cleaner (and several lines shorter).
Comments/remarks ?
For what it's worth, the d3d tests typically only need a single
export. Tha
On 07/08/07, Paul Vriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eventhough this is some considerable amount of work to be done, in the end the
> code will be cleaner (and several lines shorter).
>
> Comments/remarks ?
>
For what it's worth, the d3d tests typically only need a single
export. That should make
Hi,
With the current version of winetest, conformance tests for which the main dll
is not available will not run anymore. This will be reported on test.winehq.org.
We will be seeing the new approach as of 12:00 GMT when the new winetest.exe is
available and the first tests come in.
Several
Just wondering. It seems like I can avoid message boxes easily by using
a CHT hook, but the Beep() that this particular message box uses can
only be disabled with the ControlService/StartService combo. Can I use
this in a non-service conformance test, or is it too much to assume that
the person run
>>> Yep, you are right, it is actually "c:\wïñëtèst". I will fix it in
>>> the next try.
>>
>> That won't work. The actual unicode characters have different codes.
>> Personally
>> I don't see why you need non-acsii characters to test unicode APIs.
>>
In this case, the non-ascii characters are n
Paul Vriens wrote:
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
"Nigel Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +static const WCHAR UNICODE_PATH[] =
{'c',':','\\','w',0x00ef,0x00f1,0x00eb,
> > +'t',0x00e8,'s','t','\0','\0'}; /* "c:\winetest" */
>
> The name above is definitely not "c:\winetest", also if you need
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
"Nigel Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +static const WCHAR UNICODE_PATH[] =
{'c',':','\\','w',0x00ef,0x00f1,0x00eb,
> > +'t',0x00e8,'s','t','\0','\0'}; /* "c:\winetest" */
>
> The name above is definitely not "c:\winetest", also if you need a
double
> termin
"Nigel Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +static const WCHAR UNICODE_PATH[] = {'c',':','\\','w',0x00ef,0x00f1,0x00eb,
> > +'t',0x00e8,'s','t','\0','\0'}; /* "c:\winetest" */
>
> The name above is definitely not "c:\winetest", also if you need a double
> termination '\0' state it specific
On 6/7/07, Dmitry Timoshkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Nigel Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +static const WCHAR UNICODE_PATH[] = {'c',':','\\','w',0x00ef,0x00f1,0x00eb,
> +'t',0x00e8,'s','t','\0','\0'}; /* "c:\winetest" */
The name above is definitely not "c:\winetest", also if you ne
"Nigel Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+static const WCHAR UNICODE_PATH[] = {'c',':','\\','w',0x00ef,0x00f1,0x00eb,
+'t',0x00e8,'s','t','\0','\0'}; /* "c:\winetest" */
The name above is definitely not "c:\winetest", also if you need a double
termination '\0' state it specifically.
+sta
On Di, 2007-02-27 at 13:15 +0100, Alessandro Pignotti wrote:
> +dlls/dplayx/tests/Makefile
That is will not work since today, as the format changed.
The correct entry is created by "tools/make_makefiles"
I updated the wiki, that
autogenerated code should not be included in a Patch
--
By b
On 27/02/07, Dmitry Timoshkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +BOOL FAR PASCAL EnumConnectionsCallback(LPCGUID lpguidSP, LPVOID
lpConnection,
> + DWORD dwConnectionSize, LPCDPNAME lpName, DWORD dwFlags,
> + LPVOID lpContext)
> +{
This doesn't look like a proper type of callb ack for
IDirectPlayX_
"Alessandro Pignotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+BOOL FAR PASCAL EnumConnectionsCallback(LPCGUID lpguidSP, LPVOID lpConnection,
+ DWORD dwConnectionSize, LPCDPNAME lpName, DWORD dwFlags,
+ LPVOID lpContext)
+{
This doesn't look like a proper type of callb ack for
IDirectPlayX_EnumConnectio
On Saturday 24 February 2007 22:10, Alessandro Pignotti wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions, this version of the patch uses IsEqualGUID and
> eliminates C++ style comments and insert a proper copyright notice in the
> added file
You might want to use #include "wine/test.h" instead of #include
, a
On 24/02/07, Stefan Dösinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Use
todo_wine ok(memcmp(&sessionDesc.guidInstance,&zeroGuid,16),"Session guid not
initialized");
Afaik the proper way is to use IsEqualGUID() rather than memcmp().
Alessandro Pignotti wrote:
On Saturday 24 February 2007 19:31, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
todo_wine ok(memcmp(&sessionDesc.guidInstance,&zeroGuid,16),"Session guid
not initialized");
For tests which are known to fail
This version of the patch follows Stefan's advice.
-
Am Samstag 24 Februar 2007 17:25 schrieb Alessandro Pignotti:
> Hi everyone,
> the directx sdk says that directplay has to initialize sesison guid in
> SESSIONDESC2 struct that is passed by the application with the Open call.
> This patch adresses that issue and includes proper conformance test.
>
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 13:09 +0100, Michal Okresa wrote:
> Hello,
>
> wine developers guide says that conformance tests must pass successfully on
> all Windows platforms.
>
> I tried couple of tests in past weeks to catch wine's style of unit testing,
> but now I am c
Hello,
wine developers guide says that conformance tests must pass successfully on
all Windows platforms.
I tried couple of tests in past weeks to catch wine's style of unit testing,
but now I am confused. For example I run crosscompiled olefont test
(oleaut32) on the windows machine
hensive - well done.
--Matt
On 12/3/06, Lei Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Changelog:
> * Check the input to EM_EXSETSEL
> * Fixes bug 6814
> * Added more comprehensive conformance tests for EM_EXSETSEL
>
> editor.c | 52 +--
't tried them together yet, but your new tests do look
significantly more comprehensive - well done.
--Matt
On 12/3/06, Lei Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Changelog:
* Check the input to EM_EXSETSEL
* Fixes bug 6814
* Added more comprehensive confor
"Matt Finnicum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> Is there something wrong with this patch / a reason it's not being accepted?
>
> Sorry if this might have been answered this on IRC last night - X died
> while I was away, so I'd have missed it.
When resending a patch, especially a patch by some
Hi,
Is there something wrong with this patch / a reason it's not being accepted?
Sorry if this might have been answered this on IRC last night - X died
while I was away, so I'd have missed it.
Thanks,
--Matt Finnicum
On 8/19/06, Matt Finnicum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've cleaned up / re
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Kho) writes:
> diff --git a/dlls/kernel/tests/Makefile.in b/dlls/kernel/tests/Makefile.in
> index bfeae14..5f6c12e 100644
> --- a/dlls/kernel/tests/Makefile.in
> +++ b/dlls/kernel/tests/Makefile.in
> @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ TOPOBJDIR = ../../..
> SRCDIR= @srcdir@
> VPATH
On Mon, May 15, 2006 1:22 pm, Matt Finnicum wrote:
> Hopefully, i've managed to do this one right.
It is, but why not use STACK_SIZE_DEFAULT here as well:
+ ed->nUndoLimit = 100; /* 100 is the proper default */
--
Dimi Paun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lattica, Inc.
Yes, SoC is usually about coding new stuff rather than writing
conformance tests, but here's a situation where we badly need
more conformance tests *and* the tests are a real challenge to write.
Rob Sherman, who is one of the OLE code maintainers, remarked recently
that we could really use
On Wed, April 26, 2006 1:30 pm, Matt Finnicum said:
> I welcome your comments on the patch.
Minor nits:
-- how about 2 constants for the values 100, 1000
#define STACK_SIZE_DEFAULT 100
#define STACK_SIZE_MAX 1000
-- maybe use min(wParam, STACK_SIZE_MAX) when setting it
--
Dimi Paun
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:48:23 -0500, Matt Finnicum wrote:
> My first patch, comments are welcome.
Looks good Matt! Try leaving space between local variable declarations and
the start of statements, it just makes things easier to read. Also send
the mails as plain text only in future - AJ feeds them
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:51:56 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> Should we just mark these as FALSE or how should we deal we these
> 'errors'?
Yeah, just mark them as FALSE if the test suite is operating as intended.
Hi,
our conformance tests are (of course) also testing several things that
would be reported by the coverity checks.
Should we just mark these as FALSE or how should we deal we these
'errors'?
Cheers,
Paul.
Hi Dan,
Thanks again for the suggestions. I did indeed run the conformance tests
on Windows -- passes with no problem. The conformance tests confirm that
the return value is not the range. Good catch for the limiting of cpMax,
it simplified the return logic. I also fixed the whitespace
Indeed. Thanks for pointing that out. The modifications will be made and
posted.
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:31:40 -0800 (PST)
> Brian Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +/* get the current selection and text length */
>> +RichEditANSIWndProc(hWnd, EM_GETSEL, (WPARAM) &start, (LPARAM)
>> &
Brian wrote:
+/* FIXME: EM_GETSEL needs to return proper ending value */
+todo_wine
+{
+ok(start == 0 && end == 18, "EM_EXSETSEL: expected (0,18)
actual:(%d,%d)\n", start,end);
+}
What does EM_GETSEL return right now?
It might be worth looking at that to see if you can fix
Nice touch including the link to the bug!
Did you run the new test on Windows?
+if(range.cpMin < 0)
+{
+range.cpMin = end;
+range.cpMax = end;
+}
+ ...
+
+return (range.cpMax < textlen+1 ? range.cpMax : textlen+1) ;
MSDN says the return value is the range, not jus
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:31:40 -0800 (PST)
Brian Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +/* get the current selection and text length */
> +RichEditANSIWndProc(hWnd, EM_GETSEL, (WPARAM) &start, (LPARAM) &end);
> +textlen = RichEditANSIWndProc(hWnd, WM_GETTEXTLENGTH, 0, 0);
This looks strang
m
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/mdac/downloads/ ,
contains conformance tests for ole db data sources.
Seems like we ought to try running them.
I just verified that LTM, the test runner app, from MDAC 2.6 SDK,
runs under Wine. I haven't tried running any tests, as
it looks a bit involved (you have to ha
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
