Hi Alexandre, I think it make sense to have a separate file for ITextDocument. It will be used in txtsrv.c and richole.c (See patch 4). If it's WINE's convention to not have separate files for separate implementations, I can merge the txtrng.[ch] and txtsel.[ch] that introduced in patch 2 and 3 into txtdoc.[ch]
2013/7/31 Alexandre Julliard <julli...@winehq.org>: > Caibin Chen <tigerso...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Thanks Jacek for reviewing. This time I send all the changes I have in >> 4 patches to make it clear that ReTxtDoc is reused between txtsrv.c >> and richole.c >> - Suppressed Patch 97331 >> - Change log from try 2: >> - follow COM naming convention >> - move ReTxtDoc definition to header, removed >> ReTxtDoc_get_ITextDocument() function >> - remove COM aggregation test for ITextDocument, only test >> ITextService supports querying for the interface. >> >> --- >> dlls/riched20/Makefile.in | 1 + >> dlls/riched20/tests/txtsrv.c | 10 ++ >> dlls/riched20/txtdoc.c | 270 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> dlls/riched20/txtdoc.h | 51 ++++++++ >> dlls/riched20/txtsrv.c | 6 + > > Please avoid adding too many source files. In particular, if you have to > add new headers and define objects there, it's a sign that things should > be grouped in the same file. That's even more true for ITextDocument > that already exists. > > -- > Alexandre Julliard > julli...@winehq.org