On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 21:03:38 +0100
Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> OTOH the MS documentation calls this DWORD* an "optional output"
> argument. If I'm reading that right, it means it should be fine to just
> pass NULL to indicate that we don't need it:
>
> inline void sendOut (HANDLE )
> {
>
Am 03.03.2020 um 01:35 schrieb Takashi Yano:
The second argument DWORD *wn of sendOut() is not used
outside sendOut(), so it can be covered up like:
inline void sendOut (HANDLE )
{
DWORD wn;
WriteConsoleA (handle, buf, ixput, , 0);
}
I doubt that will improve much, if anything. There
On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:14:00 +0100
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Btw., looking through the code with this change I wonder about ixput not
> being set to 0 in sendOut, right after calling WriteConsoleA. That
> would drop the need to call empty after calls to sendOut and thus clean
> up the code, no?
Hi Hans-Bernhard,
On Mar 3 00:07, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> Replace direct access to a pair of co-dependent variables
> by calls to methods of a class that encapsulates their relation.
>
> Also replace C #define by C++ class constant.
> ---
> winsup/cygwin/fhandler_console.cc | 135
Hi Hans,
Thanks for the patch.
On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 00:07:25 +0100
Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> + inline void sendOut(HANDLE , DWORD *wn) { WriteConsoleA
> (handle, buf, ixput, wn, 0); };
The second argument DWORD *wn of sendOut() is not used
outside sendOut(), so it can be covered up like:
Replace direct access to a pair of co-dependent variables
by calls to methods of a class that encapsulates their relation.
Also replace C #define by C++ class constant.
---
winsup/cygwin/fhandler_console.cc | 135 --
1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
