On 3/6/2011 22:34, Max TenEyck Woodbury wrote:
On 03/06/2011 10:34 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
Hi Max,
+ *
http://www.geoffchappell.com/studies/windows/win32/ntdll/history/names40.htm
Please don't link to his site. As I said in an unrelated message to
wine-patches last week, he used disassembly when performing his
analysis:
http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=notes/index.htm
I wouldn't want to endorse such an effort implicitly by linking to
him: future Wine developers could be misled.
Thanks,
--Juan
The list of entry point names and the version history is all I am
interested in and I believe that does not require disassembly, but if
you can point me at another source for that information, I will be
glad to use that instead.
What's a point to make such changes in a first place? I don't see how
it's useful to have automatically extracted partially filled function
names from sources (if it's a purpose of these documentation headers of
course). You always have sources, everything that might be useful for
development is in as code or comments for not-so-obvious parts.
What is really helpful for documenting behaviour that isn't documented
officially is writing test cases to show bugs or to prevent regressions.
Max
