Mike McCormack wrote:
Robert Shearman wrote:
+NTSTATUS WINAPI RtlDllShutdownInProgress(void)
For undocumented functions like this, you should add a test case.
That's unreasonable. A stub isn't meant to work correctly, just stop
an application from crashing. What will a test case prove?
Robert Shearman wrote:
In this case, just that the prototype is correct and so won't crash the
program in random ways when the function is called.
Well, you're welcome to write such a test case if you think it's
necessary. I think you'll prove nothing useful.
Mike
a little test shows it returns some unknown status on my xp lap[top:0x7c927f00, so likely not STATUS_SUCCESS.diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c b/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.cindex 59871de..588e33e 100644--- a/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c+++ b/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ static RTL_HANDLE * (WINAPI
Robert Shearman wrote:
+NTSTATUS WINAPI RtlDllShutdownInProgress(void)
For undocumented functions like this, you should add a test case.
That's unreasonable. A stub isn't meant to work correctly, just stop an
application from crashing. What will a test case prove?
Mike
Mike McCormack wrote:
+NTSTATUS WINAPI RtlDllShutdownInProgress(void)
+{
+FIXME("\n");
+return STATUS_SUCCESS;
+}
For undocumented functions like this, you should add a test case.
--
Rob Shearman
