On March 14, 2003 11:26 am, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > I don't know, I guess that depends how many need to be changed. Do you > have a list?
No, I'm afraid I don't. In particular, I noticed that the functions in loader/ne/*.c don't have the 16 prefix, even if most/all of them are 16 bit functions, AFAICS. > 16-bit functions should be split to separate > files so that we can have --disable-win16 do the right thing, and then > cross calls will be found by the linker. Right -- but how do we make sure we've split all 16-bit functions to their own files? Once they are in the 16-bit only files (do we have a consistent naming convention for those, so we know they are 16-bit?), there's not that much benefit in renaming them, I agree. I guess what I'm saying is that if we had these rules: Function names end in 16 IFF they are 16bit functions File names end in 16 IFF they get compiled out by --disable-win16 It makes it so much easier to spot problems by just scanning the code, not to speak of the simplicity that it brings to any analysis tool. -- Dimi.
