On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 at 21:01, <yla...@apache.org> wrote: > Author: ylavic > Date: Mon Jun 27 18:01:27 2022 > New Revision: 1902285 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1902285&view=rev > Log: > testencode: Follow up to r1902281: Correct call convention for encdec_fn > (try 2). > > > Modified: > apr/apr/trunk/test/testencode.c > > Modified: apr/apr/trunk/test/testencode.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/test/testencode.c?rev=1902285&r1=1902284&r2=1902285&view=diff > > ============================================================================== > --- apr/apr/trunk/test/testencode.c (original) > +++ apr/apr/trunk/test/testencode.c Mon Jun 27 18:01:27 2022 > @@ -905,7 +905,11 @@ static void test_decode_base16_binary(ab > apr_pool_destroy(pool); > } > > -typedef APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) (*encdec_fn)(char*, const char*, > apr_ssize_t, int, apr_size_t*); > +#ifdef WIN32 > +typedef apr_status_t (__stdcall *encdec_fn)(char*, const char*, > apr_ssize_t, int, apr_size_t*); > +#else > +typedef apr_status_t (*encdec_fn)(char*, const char*, apr_ssize_t, int, > apr_size_t*); > +#endif > > This uses assumptions about calling convention used on the Win32 platform. I don't think it's a good thing. Do we really need an array of callbacks? May just inline all these calls?
-- Ivan Zhakov
