spec file syntax for VARIANT parameter

[Jeremy Drake]

In order to implement OleLoadPictureFile and OleLoadPictureFileEx, it will
be necessary to change their entries in oleaut32.spec from stub to
stdcall.  The stdcall syntax wants a list of parameter types, which puts
these functions in an unususal situation: they take a VARIANT (which is a
struct, in case anyone is not familiar) by value as their first parameter.
There does not seem to be any type defined in the spec file that fits this
situation.  I have been using ptr in my last couple of patches which add
stub implementations for these functions, but when I tried to build this
on cygwin I got errors like:
undefined reference to `_OleLoadPictureFileEx(a)20'
undefined reference to `_OleLoadPictureFile(a)8'

Looking at the functions that are present in the .o file, I see they are
really _OleLoadPictureFileEx(a)32 and _OleLoadPictureFile(a)20.  Changing the
spec file to list each VARIANT as 4 longs fixes these errors.

My question is, should my next version of the patch list the VARIANT as 4
longs, or is there some better way to specify this that I'm not aware of?
If not, is there a comment syntax for the spec file where I can explain
why there are 4 long params where there should be one VARIANT?

Thanks
Jeremy

[Marcus Meissner]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 01:11:05PM -0800, Jeremy Drake wrote:
> In order to implement OleLoadPictureFile and OleLoadPictureFileEx, it will
> be necessary to change their entries in oleaut32.spec from stub to
> stdcall.  The stdcall syntax wants a list of parameter types, which puts
> these functions in an unususal situation: they take a VARIANT (which is a
> struct, in case anyone is not familiar) by value as their first parameter.
> There does not seem to be any type defined in the spec file that fits this
> situation.  I have been using ptr in my last couple of patches which add
> stub implementations for these functions, but when I tried to build this
> on cygwin I got errors like:
> undefined reference to `_OleLoadPictureFileEx(a)20'
> undefined reference to `_OleLoadPictureFile(a)8'

Hmm, use as much "long" specifiers to fit the VARIANT struct (number of bytes/4).
I think VARIANT has 16 byte, so use "long long long long".
> My question is, should my next version of the patch list the VARIANT as 4
> longs, or is there some better way to specify this that I'm not aware of?
> If not, is there a comment syntax for the spec file where I can explain
> why there are 4 long params where there should be one VARIANT?

Currently no other way.

Ciao, Marcus