dsound: Avoid using the COM method implementations directly.

[Michael Stefaniuc]

On 09/05/2016 09:50 AM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
> On 5 September 2016 at 09:39, Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 09/02/2016 07:17 PM, Andrew Eikum wrote:
>>> I guess I'm not opposed to this, but are these changes useful?
>> It makes the code consistent aka one way to call the COM methods.
>>
> I'm all for consistency, but these do different things. One calls a
> method from an interface that may have different implementations, and
> the other calls a specific function/implementation. Other than taking
Right, and by using the COM macro it is always guaranteed that the
correct method implementation is used.

And by consistent I mean that we don't have IFooImpl_AddRef() paired
with IFoo_Release() like in the bulk of diff that my script generated.

> an interface pointer as the first argument, the latter doesn't have a
> lot to do with COM at all. You could make that more explicit by
> introducing a separate function that takes an implementation pointer
> instead, but in most cases I don't think that's worth it.

bye
	michael