Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> "Jeff Latimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> + if (ack) *ack = ERROR_SUCCESS;
>>
>>
>> ok(ret == ERROR_SUCCESS, "Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got %d\n", ret);
>> - todo_wine
>> - {
>> - ok(res == ERROR_SUCCESS, "Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got
>> %08x\n", res);
>> - }
>> + ok(res == ERROR_SUCCESS, "Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got %08x\n",
>> res);
>
> DdeClientTransaction is not supposed to return ERROR_SUCCESS in res.
> DDE_FNOTPROCESSED
> looks like a more appropriate value. Same for DdeGetLastError,
> DMLERR_NO_ERROR seems
> more reasonable in this case.
Thanks, DMLERR_NO_ERROR looks better.
MSDN does not show DdeCientTransaction as returning in res
DDE_FNOTPROCESSED. Is this the standard test to see if it is zero?
Otherwise an actual test for 0 would be just as good.
>
> Also IMO a more appropriate place to set ack to DDE_FNOTPROCESSED is
> WDML_HandleReply,
> so that all types of replies get covered.
I thought this as well when I was hunting for a place for setting ack.
It seems that handle routines all do something different. Some don't
set the ack/res and this causes tests to fail (ie. deadbeef passes
through some of them). I opted to place the setting of ack in the
routine that applies to this test.
Jeff
