julliard at winehq.org
Sat May 17 17:42:52 CDT 2003
"Gregory M. Turner" <gmturner007 at ameritech.net> writes:
> I guess the first question to ask, before all of the above is: which is a
> worse sacrifice for wine? Requiring compiler support for this, or an extra
> parsing phase? Or just having a broken dummy implementation like we do now?
For Winelib apps, the solution is to add support to the compiler. For
IDL-generated code, the solution is to make our IDL compiler generate
code that uses the existing __TRY macros (or even generates the C code
directly without using the macros if this allows more optimizations).
julliard at winehq.com
More information about the wine-devel