[PATCH v2 2/3] mfplat: Add IMFAttributes interface to IMFByteStream.

[Sven Baars]

On 02-11-18 22:01, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> On 11/02/2018 10:49 PM, Sven Baars wrote:
>
>>   typedef struct _mfbytestream
>>   {
>> +    mfattributes attributes;
>>       IMFByteStream IMFByteStream_iface;
>> +    IMFAttributes IMFAttributes_iface;
>>       LONG ref;
>> +
>>   } mfbytestream;
> mfattributes already has IMFAttributes and refcount members.
>
>> +static inline mfbytestream
>> *impl_from_IMFByteStream_IMFAttributes(IMFAttributes *iface)
>> +{
>> +    return CONTAINING_RECORD(iface, mfbytestream, IMFAttributes_iface);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static HRESULT WINAPI mfbytestream_mfattributes_QueryInterface(
>> +    IMFAttributes *iface, REFIID riid, void **out)
> With name like that I think it's better to move it to a separate file.
>
>
Hi Nikolay,

I removed the refcount member in the corrected patch that I sent. It
seemed to have been added back in when rebasing the patches. Sorry for
that. The IMFAttributes_iface (which uses
mfbytestream_mfattributes_vtbl) I still need, because I forward it to
attributes.IMFAttributes_iface, which is the actual implementation (uses
mfattributes_vtbl).

I was not very happy about the long name either, but found another file
in Wine where something similar was done, so I chose to do it like this.
My personal preference would be to put every interface that I add in a
separate file, since even the stubs are already 500+ lines. However, the
tendency in Wine seems to be to put as much as possible into a single
file. When is it OK to create a new one? Also, what would be the best
way to handle different implementations of the same interface? If I add
those in the same file, I would still possibly get names like
mfbytestream_file_QueryInterface and mfbytestream_stream_QueryInterface
(for MFCreateFile and MFCreateMFByteStreamOnStream).

Best,
Sven