On 08/11/14 16:08, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: > On 11/08/2014 08:50, Alex Peshkoff wrote: >> On 08/11/14 15:18, Jim Starkey wrote: >>> Adriano, you are arguing that you are right and the rest of the world is >>> wrong. >>> >>> COM is designed so any language can use it, but C++ can use either as >>> explicit vectors of method pointer OR as a pure virtual interface. Either >>> works, but using it as a C++ mechanism is very simple and powerful. >> Either works as long as vtable in C++ pure virtual interface has format >> exactly matching an explicit vector of method pointers. >> If some way can be proofed that it must always be so and another format >> of vtable is just a bug of compiler developers, I'll be glad to continue >> using c++ pure virtual interfaces (like it's done now). > Current method also has the problem of manually deal with exceptions and > reliable upgrade interfaces, so to make it better, you anyway should go > a slight different approach.
Yes, certainly. But (except ability to place version in vtable as a number, not a call), we can build thin layer around C++ class too. > I proposed something who fixed this and also creates a stable vtable, > which can also be accessed by both Delphi and FPC, different from current. I also do not understand what's bad in maintaining vtable ourself. > > With some small work, it seems I can even remove the necessity to suffix > the interface methods with "Impl" word. Not to say it's really critical but if can be done fine. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
