[me]
As I understand it, the client and server stubs use basically the same API in both IDL compilers.
[Ove Kaaven]
The IDL (input) file has the same syntax, but if you're talking about the generated (output) code, then no, they don't use the same API.
I was talking about the API between my code and the IDL stubs (the one that says "server defines foo(), client calls foo(), stub code takes care of the rest") ... not the API between the stubs and the actual backend libraries. Obviously the backend implementations will look rather different. However, this doesn't matter because...
Wine is about making existing Windows applications run, so code generated with MIDL must work. Therefore, we can't use FreeDCE's core, and without the core, integration doesn't make sense.
That's the crux of the issue, and the one point I somehow managed to overlook completely. If we were only talking about *winelib*, MIDL-generated code would not be relevant: you could just tell people to recompile with the "right" IDL compiler. It never occurred to me that you also need to replace the *backend libraries* which are called by the MIDL-generated stubs.
***** Ove 1, Peter 0. (: *****
Peter