Re: dsound: Avoid using the COM method implementations directly.

[Henri Verbeet]

On 5 September 2016 at 09:39, Michael Stefaniuc  wrote:
> On 09/02/2016 07:17 PM, Andrew Eikum wrote:
> > I guess I'm not opposed to this, but are these changes useful?
>
> It makes the code consistent aka one way to call the COM methods.

I'm all for consistency, but these do different things. One calls a
method from an interface that may have different implementations, and
the other calls a specific function/implementation. Other than taking
an interface pointer as the first argument, the latter doesn't have a
lot to do with COM at all. You could make that more explicit by
introducing a separate function that takes an implementation pointer
instead, but in most cases I don't think that's worth it.