From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Incorrect declarations of thread functions on w32 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:04:01 +0100 Message-ID: <456B1A81.8010402@student.lu.se> References: <456A510B.1080202@student.lu.se> <456AA968.8090609@gnu.org> <456AA9C6.1060304@student.lu.se> <456AAA5A.2010702@gnu.org> <456AACD4.1000808@student.lu.se> <456AB225.2000804@gnu.org> <456AE630.5030800@student.lu.se> <456B1949.50404@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1164648082 16431 80.91.229.2 (27 Nov 2006 17:21:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:21:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 27 18:21:16 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gok9n-0002LL-EK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:20:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gok9m-0002pf-J9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:20:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gojts-00081j-UQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:04:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gojtn-0007wd-GI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:04:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gojtm-0007wI-EL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:04:07 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.76.149.212] (helo=ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1Gojtj-0002pI-GD; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:04:03 -0500 Original-Received: from c83-254-145-24.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.145.24]:59849 helo=[192.168.123.121]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gojth-0005aY-6K; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:04:02 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) Original-To: Jason Rumney In-Reply-To: <456B1949.50404@gnu.org> X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1Gojth-0005aY-6K. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1Gojth-0005aY-6K 2c31661abab912891b9587138671b004 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:62868 Archived-At: Jason Rumney wrote: > Lennart Borgman wrote: >> Seems like reader_thread is ok, but would it not be much easier to >> understand if LPVOID was used instead of void* in the argument? > I don't think so. LPVOID is a macro, anyone who is not familiar with the > definition that Microsoft has given it would have to search for its > definition. > void * is standard C. Maybe write LPVOID to make it easier to compare and add a comment that it usually is just void* ? >> But w32_msg_worker needs some fix. > It was done this morning. Thanks.