Re: include: Only include winuser.h in oleidl.idl as a replacement for windows.h when compiling the Wine source.

2011-12-29 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Francois Gouget writes: > Substituting an alternative header for windows.h is an approach that is > used in a few other places, specifically in dshow.h, msctf.h, pdh.h, > rpc.h, snmp.h and winsock.h. So I think it's ok to follow the pattern > here, it should just be a bit cl

Re: include: Only include winuser.h in oleidl.idl as a replacement for windows.h when compiling the Wine source.

2011-12-28 Thread Francois Gouget
+cpp_quote("# include") > > +cpp_quote("#endif") > > > > > > /* > >* IOleTypes interface > > How about entirely removing that include? We can always include it in C files > that need it. Substituting an alternative header for win

Re: include: Only include winuser.h in oleidl.idl as a replacement for windows.h when compiling the Wine source.

2011-12-28 Thread Jacek Caban
Hi Francois, On 12/28/11 10:39, Francois Gouget wrote: -cpp_quote("#include") +cpp_quote("#ifdef __WINESRC__") +cpp_quote("# include") +cpp_quote("#endif") /* * IOleTypes interface How about entirely removing tha

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-24 Thread Francois Gouget
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Robert Shearman wrote: [...] > Is there any pattern to those that are missing it? I have not found it yet. > I would only expect to see the COM_NO_WINDOWS_H stuff in headers generated > from IDL files with at least one interface with the object keyword. Ah, you must know mo

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-19 Thread Robert Shearman
Francois Gouget wrote: On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Robert Shearman wrote: [...] Actually, in the PSDK there seems to be a correlation between COM_NO_WINDOWS_H and idl files. It's not 100% but that may be just be because they don't ship all the idl files. Also, the COM_NO_WINDOWS_H #ifdef is not pres

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-19 Thread Francois Gouget
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Robert Shearman wrote: [...] > > Actually, in the PSDK there seems to be a correlation between > > COM_NO_WINDOWS_H and idl files. It's not 100% but that may be just be > > because they don't ship all the idl files. Also, the COM_NO_WINDOWS_H #ifdef > > is not present in the id

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-18 Thread Robert Shearman
Francois Gouget wrote: On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Alexandre Julliard wrote: Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: 2) Or modify these sections so they read: #if !defined(COM_NO_WINDOWS_H) && !defined(__WINESRC__) # include # include #endif I think we want th

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-18 Thread Francois Gouget
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 2) Or modify these sections so they read: > > > > #if !defined(COM_NO_WINDOWS_H) && !defined(__WINESRC__) > > # include > > # include > > #endif > > I think we want that, otherwi

Re: oleidl.idl must include windows.h and ole2.h if COM_NO_WINDOWS_H is not defined.

2006-10-18 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2) Or modify these sections so they read: > > #if !defined(COM_NO_WINDOWS_H) && !defined(__WINESRC__) > # include > # include > #endif I think we want that, otherwise we'll end up having to add COM_NO_WINDOWS_H to pretty much every

Re: windows.h

2005-11-22 Thread Marcus Meissner
to the > point in some of the sources where we might as well just include > Windows.h becuase we already include all of the files it includes or > close enough to them. Can someone explain the reason to me we are > still manually messing with a lot of these headers? Originally done to red

windows.h

2005-11-21 Thread Steven Edwards
Hi All, I don't understand the reason we are still manually including each header in most of the sources. Its like totally incompatible with the latest PSDK unless you add a define for _X86_. We are getting to the point in some of the sources where we might as well just include Windows.h be

Re: define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h

2004-09-07 Thread Alexandre Julliard
e required for cross-compiling either. The only reason we have that ifdef is because we have one in windows.h too, to discourage its use inside Wine. So building with other headers should work just fine since windows.h won't have the __WINESRC__ check, and building other code with our head

Re: define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h

2004-09-07 Thread Mike McCormack
Alexandre Julliard wrote: Well, it causes us to have to add -DRPC_NO_WINDOWS_H all over the place, which is exactly what the __WINESRC__ ifdef was supposed to avoid. Is there a reason to remove it? (other than the fact that Windows doesn't have it of course). Well, admittedly the code works as is.

Re: define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h

2004-09-07 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Alexandre Julliard wrote: > >>>* define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h >> Why do you need this? > > Well, that's the way that the Windows SDK version and the MingW > version of rpc

Re: define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h

2004-09-07 Thread Mike McCormack
Alexandre Julliard wrote: * define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h Why do you need this? Well, that's the way that the Windows SDK version and the MingW version of rpc.h work... does it cause a problem? Mike

Re: define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h

2004-09-07 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ChangeLog: > * define RPC_NO_WINDOWS_H to prevent rpc.h from including windows.h Why do you need this? -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]