On September 4, 2003 08:37 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Actually I've been playing with my script for a bit, and I now have
> fixed pretty much all the major issues, so you probably don't want to
> work on it any more at this point. But if you have a patch for
> ntstatus.h that you could send me
"Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This works well for the three big ones: windef.h/winbase.h/winuser.h
> For other we will include a lot on unnecessary headers. For example,
> ntstatus.h is not needed in many files that include winnt.h.
Yes, ntstatus.h is a bit different, and proba
On September 4, 2003 07:08 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Anyway, just to show it can be done here's the beginning of such a
> script; you can do 'fix-includes windef.h winbase.h ' and it
> will make sure all the files listed include windef.h before winbase.h
> without making unnecessary changes.
"Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a lot more changes (cleanup of winnt.h), do you want me to drop
> them all? Fixing _all_ headers is a big task, I don't understand why
> we can't do it in distinct chunks
Because such large scale changes are a real pain for everybody who
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> In other words we need to fix all the headers at once, and apply one
> big patch that fixes all the C files that need fixing in one step.
> I know it's a lot of work, that's why I suggested writing a script...
I have a lot more changes (cleanup of w
"Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think there will still
>> be a lot of changes to make, and I'd really prefer to avoid having to
>> fix the same C files again and again.
>
> In other words? Is it OK if I fix prsht.h as well? It was a lot of
> work you know...
In other words we
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Looks like you have been reorganizing a bit too much, config.h and
> wine/port.h should always be included before anything else.
I did not realize this. We don't (or we shouldn't) test for
HAVE_* in our header files (except port.h), so I was only
aw
"Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I know, it would be nice to have an intelligent utility to
> cleanup the headers, but by the looks of it, it has to be
> rather smart. This is probably one of the more difficult
> cleanups, and I did it all by hand, which gave me a chance
> to clean
