Re: fusion: Explicitly check for -1 for a missing table

2008-04-16 Thread Robert Shearman
James Hawkins wrote: > It works just fine. -1 is 4294967295 in ULONG (32bit), which is > exactly the same as offset on error (because we assigned it -1, but > the representation in memory is the same). Then use ~0 so that the purpose is clearer. Adding a define for this value would probably furt

Re: fusion: Explicitly check for -1 for a missing table

2008-04-16 Thread James Hawkins
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Marcus Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:48:31AM -0500, James Hawkins wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Changelog: > > * Explicitly check for -1 for a missing table. > > > > dlls/fusion/assembly.c |4 ++-- > > 1 files changed, 2 in

Re: fusion: Explicitly check for -1 for a missing table

2008-04-16 Thread Marcus Meissner
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:48:31AM -0500, James Hawkins wrote: > Hi, > > Changelog: > * Explicitly check for -1 for a missing table. > > dlls/fusion/assembly.c |4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > -- > James Hawkins > diff --git a/dlls/fusion/assembly.c b/dlls/f