17 May
2003
17 May
'03
10:42 p.m.
"Gregory M. Turner" <gmturner007(a)ameritech.net> writes:
I guess the first question to ask, before all of the above is: which is a worse sacrifice for wine? Requiring compiler support for this, or an extra parsing phase? Or just having a broken dummy implementation like we do now?
For Winelib apps, the solution is to add support to the compiler. For IDL-generated code, the solution is to make our IDL compiler generate code that uses the existing __TRY macros (or even generates the C code directly without using the macros if this allows more optimizations). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com