Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Jacek Caban <ja...@codeweavers.com> writes:
I just feel that it's better to have a wrapper to avoid explicit casts
in the code and have vtbl logic separated from other code. I usually
use macros, but I know you don't like it, so I used an inline function
here.
For secondary vtbls that's definitely a good idea (as long as you are
using inline functions and not macros...) The main vtbl is a bit
different because by design its address and the object are the same
thing, so you can use a cast and ignore the fact that there even is a
vtbl involved.
That's one of things in the design that I'd like to change. This
assumption doesn't work well for object inheritance.
Though I'm not opposed to a function wrapper either, just
with a more explicit name.
I will use IXMLDOMNode_from_impl then.
Thanks,
Jacek
