dsound: Avoid using the COM method implementations directly.

[Henri Verbeet]

On 5 September 2016 at 10:04, Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani at redhat.com> wrote:
> 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.
At the cost of making it less obvious what that implementation
actually is. I'll also note that for ddraw in particular it isn't
necessarily always safe to change from one variant to the other. There
are applications that modify the call tables to install their own
hooks, and picking one variant or the other would make those hooks get
called or not for internal calls.

> 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.
>
If a large part of the diff is in D3D code, I'd question whether
that's really the bulk of the diff. But sure, that's awkward. If you
have an implementation pointer I'd argue you should just use
IFooImpl_Release() as well in those cases though.