Am 26.02.2015 15:43 schrieb "Graeme Geldenhuys" < mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk>: > > On 2015-02-26 14:34, Michael Schnell wrote: > > In fact I did understand I only am puzzled by the naming "COM" vs > > "CORBA", that in no way suggest the real (language-) functionality "ref > > counting" vs "not ref counting" > > I know COM interface come from the need to interact with Windows COM. > CORBA (in terms of FPC), I'm not to sure of. You also get XPCOM - also > supported by FPC, and I believe this is also a non-reference counted > interface.
Since XPCOM was modelled after COM and even uses things like HResult and such I'd assume they use IUnknown as well and thus they would be reference counted. > As for rather using "ref counted" vs "not ref counted" to reference the > different interface types (COM and CORBA). Not even that would be a good > solution, because you can implement a COM interface that doesn't have > reference counting. Simply implement the IInterface (aka IUnknown) > methods yourself and remove the reference counting bits. :-) But even then the compiler will insert calls to these functions. Regards, Sven
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
