> thanks for the detailed analysis and the clear explanation. I've been looking > at the code and probably have another, even better, approach. > > The missing 'extra' parameter in the create(cls, value, extra=None) implementaition > in comtypes\safearray.py, line 62, that you retrieve from the 'value' parameter > is defined in an outer scope of this method, in line 44 in the enclosing > '_make_safearray_type' function. So it seems the easiest way to pass this parameter > to 'create(...)' is this simple patch: > > (...)
I've tried your approach and it works. You're right, your solution is better, I did not see that the extra variable was bound in the _make_safearray_type closure. > This patch also has the advantage that you not only can pass a sequence > of 'Pair' structures, in your case, as return value from your ITest_Test(...) > method, but you can also return simply a sequence of tuples like so: > > > def ITest_Test(self, in, out): > > return [(u'1', u'2'), (u'2', u'3')] Right, that's how I wanted to write the return value originally, but because I thought I needed to get a value for extra somehow, I had to return a list of Pair instances. Saludos, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ comtypes-users mailing list comtypes-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/comtypes-users
