2009/8/11 Owen Rudge orudge@codeweavers.com:
+static const IImageListVtbl ImageListImpl_Vtbl = {
- ImageListImpl_QueryInterface,
- ImageListImpl_AddRef,
- ImageListImpl_Release
+};
You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other methods.
You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other methods.
This is something I did in the following patch, mainly to reduce the size of the individual patches (based on the assumption all the patches would be committed at once anyway). I will recombine the patches into a single patch though if necessary.
Cheers,
2009/8/11 Owen Rudge owen@owenrudge.net:
You can't do that, you need to at least implement stubs for the other methods.
This is something I did in the following patch, mainly to reduce the size of the individual patches (based on the assumption all the patches would be committed at once anyway). I will recombine the patches into a single patch though if necessary.
Patch series aren't atomic, especially not when bisecting. A better way to split things might be separating the classfactory and IImageList implementation.
Also:
- classinfo *info;
This should probably be const.
- if (!ppv) return E_INVALIDARG;
Any special reason for this check? MSDN claims it should return E_POINTER, but most implementations don't bother checking at all.
As a personal preference, I don't think adding typedefs for structs adds much. Arguably, the only thing it does is hide that something is a structure.