Re: PropertyBag (?) implementation
Jason S <jmsachs@gmail.com> wrote:
(b) implement an object (is this IPropertyBag?) which has
"setprop"/"getprop" methods:
X.setprop(BSTR n,VARIANT v) ==> sets property "n" to value v
X.getprop(BSTR n) ==> returns v
If you want the object to be script-friendly, I recommend implementing
IDispatch and, for the cases where you want to be able to add arbitrary
properties at run-time, IDispatchEx.
(c) am I allowed to implement IDispatch by constructing a type library
/ type info on-the-fly?
Yes. Moreover, you are allowed not to support type info at all. Scripts
never read it anyway.
e.g. I have no static IDL methods besides
IDispatch, but when constructing my object, I give it fields X, Y, and
Z, and return type info so the fields put_X, put_Y, put_Z, get_X,
get_Y, get_Z are implemented by handling Invoke() correctly?
I'm not sure what type info has to do with implementing Invoke,
correctly or otherwise. Just implement it any way you want.
--
With best wishes,
Igor Tandetnik
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to
land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. -- RFC 1925