Re: Comment for pgnuplot

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

Tatsuro MATSUOKA wrote:
> Does your suggestion mean that change for the function PostString should be like below?

> ************************************************************
> void PostString(HWND hwnd, char *pc)
> {
> 	while( *pc ){
> 		PostMessage( hwnd, WM_CHAR,(unsigned int) ((unsigned char) *pc), 1L );
> 		/* CRS: should add a check of return code on PostMessage. If 0, the 
> 		   message que was full and the message wasn't posted. */
> 		pc++;
> 	}
> }
> **************************************************************

No.  The secondary cast to (unsigned int) is unnecessary, and 
potentially dangerous (because the real parameter type is WPARAM, not 
unsigned int).  I've checked into a CVS a version that casts to unsigned 
char.

> According to the windows SDK page, the type of third parameter of PostMessage is UINT
> so that casting (unsigned int)  is added.

If the type were unsigned int, such a cast would be superfluous --- C 
silently applies it already.

>>>The buffer size is rather small. (80) I think it should be larger
>>>(eg.512).
>>>
>>>"#define BUFFER_SIZE 512"
>>
>>What do you think would be gained by that?  Please note that the size of
>>this buffer may very well be a critical parameter that determines how
>>well pgnuplot works in a somewhat busy Windows environment.
> 
> Sometimes I used the script which includes more than 80 character per line.

So what?  Did the existing buffer size of 80 cause you any trouble with 
those lines?