Hello,
I have no idea. I've never meet this bug by myself : i use windom which have a workaround for that kind of bug...??? That is most mysterious! Why fix a bug that is not even there?! That seems nonsense to me.
Who told about fixing a bug ???I just highligh that if this bug exist, then applications compiled against windom don't suffer from that bug,
because of the way windom computes the WORK area.I've never said that windom compute the WORK area that way and not another way because of this bug ! There are for sure other reasons (internal to windom, to have a simplier and easy-to-maintain design).
Windom can now for sure use wind_get(WF_WORKXYWH) (and it's a good thing to do), but it's not trivial, and it's not in my high priority list (we have something no so badly designed in windom, and it works fine for all AES... so why changing for something else that will do exactly the same thing ?).
best regards, Arnaud.