[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    Re: Does WIDL support include <xxx.idl>
From:       "Vijay Kiran Kamuju" <infyquest () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-08-30 1:20:50
Message-ID: 36bf289b0608291820o7b413026wf8a4ee9636ee6baf () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

It would be gr8 if you could check with MIDL and WIDL the output of msxml.idl

On 8/29/06, Dan Hipschman <dsh@linux.ucla.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:45:17PM -0400, Vijay Kiran Kamuju wrote:
> > But when i see the generated header file. I see that there is the
> > expansion of interfaces defined in the foo.idl if we include it in
> > foobar.idl
> > eg: foobar.idl
> > #include "foo.idl"
> >
> > For further reference see the msxml.idl in the PSDK headers.
> > it includes xmldom.idl and xmldso.idl, but in the msxml.h we see all
> > the declarations in xmldso.h and xmldom.h
> >
> > I dont know they(M$) generate msxml.h from msxml.idl
>
> I might not understand your question.  If you don't want to #include
> the idl file, you could use 'import "foo.idl";' which will process the
> IDL file but just plop a #include "foo.h" in the generated header file.
> If that's not what you're looking for, maybe consider cpp_quote to copy
> code directly to the header.  I don't have a windows machine with me
> at the moment to look at the PSDK files.  I can take a look at them
> tomorrow and see how WIDL's output differs from MIDL's.
>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]