Re: atl: Remove WINAPI on static functions where not needed.

2008-11-26 Thread Francois Gouget
Ken Thomases wrote: [...] > Could you perhaps grep the output from the preprocessor, instead? The problem would be guessing the right preprocessor command to use as it would normally issue an error if there's a missing include file. -- Francois Gouget [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: atl: Remove WINAPI on static functions where not needed.

2008-11-24 Thread Ken Thomases
Thanks for taking care of this, Francois. On Nov 23, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Francois Gouget wrote: > Astute readers will notice that this leaves one loophole: nasty macro > use like in dlls/winmm/message16.c: > > #define A(_x,_y) MMDRV_InstallMap(_x, \ > MMDRV_##_y##_Map16To32W, MMDRV_##_y##_UnMap16To

Re: atl: Remove WINAPI on static functions where not needed.

2008-11-24 Thread Francois Gouget
Chris Robinson wrote: [...] > Out of curiousity, then, does this affect static functions that are used for > COM objects? It's typical for those to be marked as static, their address put > into a (possibly static) vtable struct, which is then used as a field for an > allocated struct passed to t

Re: atl: Remove WINAPI on static functions where not needed.

2008-11-23 Thread Chris Robinson
On Sunday 23 November 2008 03:15:36 pm Francois Gouget wrote: > To quote Ken Thomases who did the research on this issue with Alexandre: > >    This is motivated by a gcc bug that we've encountered on the Mac. On >    the Mac, WINAPI (and other declspecs) include the >    force_align_arg_pointer at