abartlet at samba.org
Tue Nov 11 02:07:50 GMT 2008
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 12:31 +1100, tridge at samba.org wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> The bitfield formatting is indeed frustrating! It should be easy to
> fix though.
> Can someone from Microsoft comment on whether they think that this
> would be possible?
> > Presented apparently with the sole intention of increasing programmer
> > frustration
> I think 'intention' is a bit strong :-)
Probably, without knowing Microsoft's mind, but from the outside it
looks like a programmer was not involved (or was, but not heard) in
designing this particular aspect of documentation format.
> It certainly is done quite badly with many of the tables, but I don't
> think there was any intention to make it bad, it is just that as
> implementors we run across this poor layout more than the
> documentation writers.
I suppose - but surely even Microsoft's own testers can't find this easy
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc. http://redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/cifs-protocol/attachments/20081111/de4e3d76/attachment.bin
More information about the cifs-protocol