Hi Darragh,
> I am slightly disturbed by this, 2 interfaces with the same function names.
> Has any consideration being given to language-bindings that do not use
> the query-interface mechanism ? I.e pyuno where all interfaces for a
> service are returned ? How would pyuno or language_bindings that do not
> use the query-interface mechanism resolve which method to use?
There is the same problem in Basic, which long ago arose with
XTabController::getModel and XFormController::getModel, which also
clashed [1]. AFAIK, in the Basic-UNO-binding, this has been resolved by
adding an extra syntactic element to specify which interface the
to-be-called method belongs to (which of course usually is not needed by
the scripter).
I fear that this is finally the only way: Extend the UNO binding for the
language in question. Even if we would guarantee that there are no teo
methods with the same name in all UNO interfaces in the OOo source tree
(which would be difficult enough to maintain), there could be external
components with new types which still bear name clashes.
So, in practice, we can only *recommend* to not create name clashes when
defining interfaces, but we cannot technically prevent it. Which means
your language's binding needs to be prepared for it.
Ciao
Frank
[1] they even clashed in the implementation, since their signature
differs by return type only.
--
- Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
- Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice -
- OpenOffice.org Database http://dba.openoffice.org -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
