PATCH rpc server
Jean Francois Micouleau
Jean-Francois.Micouleau at dalalu.fr
Sat Jan 26 16:02:02 GMT 2002
On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Nigel Williams wrote:
> I wasn't aware of any issues. Tim would prefer not to see the silly_ptr
> members in the future but changing that now would require a wholesale
> rewrite of the share management client/server code. IMHO the ptr members
> reflect the structure seen on the wire and effectively document the NDR.
> Wouldn't removing these members force the use of pointers to most top level
> members in Q/R structures. I'm thinking of the unmarshalling of the enum
> structure. The ptrs for all enumerated shares come first followed by the
> data (strings etc) for all enumerated shares. The value of the unmarshalled
> ptr indicates whether data should be unmarshalled later. That information
> has to be stored somewhere so we either have have a pointer to say the
> UNISTR2 structure at the top level and allocate the structure if required or
> some flag (ptr variable).
you're right nigel. to remove the ptrs is more complex than it appears.
tim is right in his idea to remove the ptrs but that's like the big
rpc audit jeremy and I did before. That's long and boring.
I'm not even sure it's worse the effort to do it now or better to wait and
work on pidl. pidl is a rpc compiler tridge wrote last year.
More information about the samba-technical