Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Before a 64bit integer was declared as 'long long'. This means both of
> these prototypes would be considered to match reset_int64(long long):
>
> WINAPI void reset_int64(INT v1, INT v2);
> WINAPI void reset_int64(LONGLONG v);
>
> And indeed there wer
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
That's from memory so it should be checked, but I believe winapi_check
had a hack to check consistency between the spec file and the function
prototypes in the C files. This patch likely breaks that hack
Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's from memory so it should be checked, but I believe winapi_check
> had a hack to check consistency between the spec file and the function
> prototypes in the C files. This patch likely breaks that hack, but more
> importantly winapi_check is g
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Robert Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wouldn't it be better to extend the spec format to allow for a longlong
type instead?
I was wondering about that too.
I considered doing that, but I decided it would just add complexity
for no real
Robert Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Wouldn't it be better to extend the spec format to allow for a longlong
> type instead?
I considered doing that, but I decided it would just add complexity
for no real reason. If we really need more detailed parameter info
then we need to retrieve t
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Log message:
Specify 64-bit integers as double instead of long long in spec files
so that we get the correct number of arguments.
Wouldn't it be better to extend the spec format to allow for a longlong
type instead?
--
Rob Shearman
