http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3732

           Summary: Not all COM interfaces inherit from IUnknown.
           Product: D
           Version: 2.037
          Platform: x86
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody@puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: burton-radons@shaw.ca


--- Comment #0 from Burton Radons <burton-radons@shaw.ca> 2010-01-20 19:59:05 PST ---
Well this is rude. It turns out some COM interfaces - I specifically know of ID3D10Include (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee419311%28VS.85%29.aspx) - do not inherit from IUnknown. Since inheritance from IUnknown is how DMD applies its magic, it means that such interfaces cannot be implemented directly from D.

It would seem preferable to have a "pragma (COM)" or "pragma (com)" attribute to apply to an interface to cause it and its descendants to be understood to be COM participants than to inherit from IUnknown, which seems an outdated commonality, unfortunately.

The justification from Microsoft's side seems to be that ID3D10Include objects should be lightweight, so removing IUnknown allows them to be stack objects since it's impossible for anyone to retain a living reference to them after returning.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3732


Walter Bright <bugzilla@digitalmars.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bugzilla@digitalmars.com


--- Comment #1 from Walter Bright <bugzilla@digitalmars.com> 2010-01-21 15:42:45 PST ---
Does the interface not have aquire, release, and queryinterface methods?

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3732



--- Comment #2 from Burton Radons <burton-radons@shaw.ca> 2010-01-22 08:25:15 PST ---
Nope. I've since found that this is also common to most of the interfaces used in the reflection API for DirectX 10 and 11, which you're not supposed to implement. I think the intent is the same, just the opposite direction - they're trying to serve objects whose lifetimes are completely dependent on the root object.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3732


yebblies <yebblies@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |yebblies@gmail.com
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


--- Comment #3 from yebblies <yebblies@gmail.com> 2011-06-12 22:52:43 PDT ---
The correct solution would be to use extern(C++) interfaces.  The bug is really in microsoft calling something a com class which isn't.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------