msi automation IDL parameter names
mk144210 at bcm.edu
Fri May 4 11:15:44 CDT 2007
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 09:35 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> That would be fine, anything that is required by the interface can be
> the same, so that would mean essentially everything except parameter
> names and help strings. I don't think you need to change the order of
> attributes from what oleview shows.
So I am thinking of implementing some more OLE automation functions and
just wanted to clarify one thing before I start doing this.
Specifically, parameter names can be arbitrary as far as OLE automation
in general is concerned, however for MSI in particular when you use the
incorrect parameters for a method/property (for example one instead of
two) it throws an exception whose description is
"Methodname,Param1Name,Param2Name,etc". I had to make a todo_wine in my
conformance test in this because our parameter names are currently
different (intentionally as per instructions reference above).
I doubt that any application would depend on the exact description of
such an exception, but nonetheless it might be confusing to get
different parameter names, say, for a developer who is making an MSI (on
Wine???) and is trying to debug his MSI script. In any case, I doubt it
matters much but I just wanted to make sure if we should stick with
using different parameter names or switch to the same ones (I don't know
what kind of copyright issues this really raises or avoids). Otherwise,
it would be a pain to change this later on if we already have everything
implemented and we find that it is necessary to have the same exception
string for some reason.
Thank you all for your comments and all your help with my code.
More information about the wine-devel