Re: [1/4] mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest (resend)

[Jacek Caban]

On 2/14/11 10:03 AM, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> Changelog:
>     mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest

mshtml?

+    else if ( IsEqualGUID( riid,&IID_IActiveScript))
+    {
+        TRACE("(%p)->(IID_IActiveScript %p) returning NULL\n", This, 
ppvObject);
+        *ppvObject = NULL;
+        return E_NOINTERFACE;
+    }
      else
      {
          FIXME("Unsupported interface %s\n", debugstr_guid(riid));

As discussed on wine-devel, please just change the later FIXME to TRACE 
instead.

Jacek

[1/4] mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest (resend)

[Alistair Leslie-Hughes]

Hi Jacek,

On 14/02/2011 9:48 PM, Jacek Caban wrote:
> On 2/14/11 10:03 AM, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> > Changelog:
> > mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest
>
> mshtml?
> - else if ( IsEqualGUID( riid,&IID_IActiveScript))
> - {
> - TRACE("(%p)->(IID_IActiveScript %p) returning NULL\n", This, ppvObject);
> - *ppvObject = NULL;
> - return E_NOINTERFACE;
> - }
>
> else
> {
> FIXME("Unsupported interface %s\n", debugstr_guid(riid));
>
> As discussed on wine-devel, please just change the later FIXME to TRACE
> instead.

By just changing the FIXME to a TRACE would hide this fact that 
IObjectWithSite and IObjectSafety need to be implemented at some point. 
Only with msxml tracing would be see this fact, which would lead to hard 
to pin point errors.

We need to just ignore two know interfaces IActiveScript and IDispatchEx.

If we are going to stop silencing interfaces, Should be just remove the 
ones already in webbrowser(shdocvw)?  No, We do this so other developers 
can see that these interfaces are not supported and so they don't need 
to waste there time researching them.  We silence interfaces like the 
above in other places, so why no here?

Best Regards
  Alistair Leslie-Hughes

[1/4] mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest (resend)

[Jacek Caban]

On 2/15/11 9:26 AM, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> Hi Jacek,
>
> On 14/02/2011 9:48 PM, Jacek Caban wrote:
> > On 2/14/11 10:03 AM, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> > > Changelog:
> > > mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest
> >
> > mshtml?
> > - else if ( IsEqualGUID( riid,&IID_IActiveScript))
> > - {
> > - TRACE("(%p)->(IID_IActiveScript %p) returning NULL\n", This,
> >
> > ppvObject);
> > - *ppvObject = NULL;
> > - return E_NOINTERFACE;
> > - }
> >
> > else
> > {
> > FIXME("Unsupported interface %s\n", debugstr_guid(riid));
> >
> > As discussed on wine-devel, please just change the later FIXME to TRACE
> > instead.
>
> By just changing the FIXME to a TRACE would hide this fact that 
> IObjectWithSite and IObjectSafety need to be implemented at some 
> point. Only with msxml tracing would be see this fact, which would 
> lead to hard to pin point errors.
>
> We need to just ignore two know interfaces IActiveScript and IDispatchEx.

Not really. For example, you will find need for silencing 
IID_IDispatchJS pseudo-interface and its native jscript equivalent once 
it will be actually usefull for scripts. These are not interfaces apps 
query for and they are trivial to find once you know you're dealing with 
scripting. And please don't tell me that expecting enabling tracing for 
debugged DLL is something making debugging hard.
> If we are going to stop silencing interfaces, Should be just remove 
> the ones already in webbrowser(shdocvw)?  No, We do this so other 
> developers can see that these interfaces are not supported and so they 
> don't need to waste there time researching them.  We silence 
> interfaces like the above in other places, so why no here?

Each case is different and you need to consider what having this FIXME 
is gaining us. XMLHTTPRequest object has one interfaces interesting for 
apps and some more needed by stuff like scripting or security manager 
that are easy to find missing and obvious to expect. Objects like 
WebBrowser control have tons of interfaces that app may query for and in 
its case, the FIXME has proven to be useful.

Jacek

[1/4] mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for IXMLHTTPRequest (resend)

[Alistair Leslie-Hughes]

Hi Jacek,

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jacek Caban" 
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 8:44 PM
To: "Alistair Leslie-Hughes" 
Cc: "Wine Devel" 
Subject: Re: [1/4] mshtml: Ignore IActiveScript interface for 
IXMLHTTPRequest (resend)
> > We need to just ignore two know interfaces IActiveScript and IDispatchEx.
>
> Not really. For example, you will find need for silencing IID_IDispatchJS 
> pseudo-interface and its native jscript equivalent once it will be 
> actually usefull for scripts. These are not interfaces apps query for and 
> they are trivial to find once you know you're dealing with scripting. And 
> please don't tell me that expecting enabling tracing for debugged DLL is 
> something making debugging hard.

No debugging isn't that hard. I was testing with a web page and these 
interfaces
are repeated in the trace a lot, and it's easier to deal with a name instead
of a GUID.
> > If we are going to stop silencing interfaces, Should be just remove the 
> > ones already in webbrowser(shdocvw)?  No, We do this so other developers 
> > can see that these interfaces are not supported and so they don't need to 
> > waste there time researching them.  We silence interfaces like the above 
> > in other places, so why no here?
>
> Each case is different and you need to consider what having this FIXME is 
> gaining us. XMLHTTPRequest object has one interfaces interesting for apps 
> and some more needed by stuff like scripting or security manager that are 
> easy to find missing and obvious to expect. Objects like WebBrowser 
> control have tons of interfaces that app may query for and in its case, 
> the FIXME has proven to be useful.

I've sent a patch that lists the known noisy interfaces, and changes the 
FIXME
to a WARN.

Best Regards
 Alistair Leslie-Hughes