[ros-diffs] [tkreuzer] 66444: [USER32_APITEST] Add some test for GetDCEx that highlight the ridiculous implementation of owned and class DCs.

[James Tabor]

Author: tkreuzer
Date: Tue Feb 24 23:15:08 2015
New Revision: 66444

[USER32_APITEST]
Add some test for GetDCEx that highlight the ridiculous implementation
of owned and class DCs.

Hello All!

What is ridiculous is the attitude of our smart A__ developers!

James

[James Tabor]

ReactOS is 11 out of 119, ~ 10%, this means it must be ridiculous?

preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
GetDCEx.c:91: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
GetDCEx.c:94: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
GetDCEx.c:97: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
GetDCEx.c:99: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
GetDCEx.c:102: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
GetDCEx.c:177: Test failed: Expected the same DC
GetDCEx.c:242: Test failed: Expected failure
GetDCEx.c:300: Test failed: Expected different DC
GetDCEx.c:324: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
GetDCEx.c:325: Test failed: Expected different DC, got own DC
GetDCEx.c:331: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
GetDCEx.c:344: Test failed: Expected different DC
GetDCEx: 119 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 12 failures), 0 skipped.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:54 PM, James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

>   Author: tkreuzer
>  Date: Tue Feb 24 23:15:08 2015
>  New Revision: 66444
>
>  [USER32_APITEST]
>  Add some test for GetDCEx that highlight the ridiculous implementation of owned and class
> DCs.
>
>  Hello All!
>
>  What is ridiculous is the attitude of our smart A__ developers!
>
>  James
>
>

[Timo Kreuzer]

In fact, what I wanted to say, was the ridiculous implementation *on 
Windows* (wrt to the screwed logic)
reactos is obviously following Windows here already pretty closely ;-)

On the other hand our code has a huge DC leak, which is almost 
impossible to track down, because the code is a mess.

Btw, 59 tests are just testing obvious stuff like CreateWindow or 
ReleaseDC doesn't fail.
So it's more like ~20% that fails.

Am 25.02.2015 um 03:25 schrieb James Tabor:
>   ReactOS is 11 out of 119, ~ 10%, this means it must be
> ridiculous?
>
>  preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
>  preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
>  GetDCEx.c:91: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:94: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:97: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:99: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:102: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:177: Test failed: Expected the same DC
>  GetDCEx.c:242: Test failed: Expected failure
>  GetDCEx.c:300: Test failed: Expected different DC
>  GetDCEx.c:324: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
>  GetDCEx.c:325: Test failed: Expected different DC, got own DC
>  GetDCEx.c:331: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
>  GetDCEx.c:344: Test failed: Expected different DC
>  GetDCEx: 119 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 12 failures), 0 skipped.
>
>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:54 PM, James Tabor 
>  &lt;jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>      Author: tkreuzer
>      Date: Tue Feb 24 23:15:08 2015
>      New Revision: 66444
>
>      [USER32_APITEST]
>      Add some test for GetDCEx that highlight the ridiculous implementation of owned and
> class DCs.
>
>      Hello All!
>
>      What is ridiculous is the attitude of our smart A__ developers!
>
>      James
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[James Tabor]

Hi,
Hopefully the last commit for the GetDCEx test helped.
James

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer(a)web.de> wrote:

>  
>  In fact, what I wanted to say, was the ridiculous implementation *on
>  Windows* (wrt to the screwed logic)
>  reactos is obviously following Windows here already pretty closely ;-)
>
>  On the other hand our code has a huge DC leak, which is almost impossible
>  to track down, because the code is a mess.
>
>  Btw, 59 tests are just testing obvious stuff like CreateWindow or
>  ReleaseDC doesn't fail.
>  So it's more like ~20% that fails.
>
>  Am 25.02.2015 um 03:25 schrieb James Tabor:
>
>  ReactOS is 11 out of 119, ~ 10%, this means it must be ridiculous?
>
>  preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
>  preloader: Warning: failed to reserve range 00010000-00110000
>  GetDCEx.c:91: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:94: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:97: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:99: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:102: Test failed: GetDCEx should fail
>  GetDCEx.c:177: Test failed: Expected the same DC
>  GetDCEx.c:242: Test failed: Expected failure
>  GetDCEx.c:300: Test failed: Expected different DC
>  GetDCEx.c:324: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
>  GetDCEx.c:325: Test failed: Expected different DC, got own DC
>  GetDCEx.c:331: Test failed: Expected different DC, got class DC
>  GetDCEx.c:344: Test failed: Expected different DC
>  GetDCEx: 119 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 12 failures), 0 skipped.
>
>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:54 PM, James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>
> >    Author: tkreuzer
> >  Date: Tue Feb 24 23:15:08 2015
> >  New Revision: 66444
> >
> >  [USER32_APITEST]
> >  Add some test for GetDCEx that highlight the ridiculous implementation of owned and class
> > DCs.
> >
> >
> >  Hello All!
> >
> >
> >  What is ridiculous is the attitude of our smart A__ developers!
> >
> >   James
> >
> >  
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing [e-mail]://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>