Method Chaining in Practice? about concordextensibilitysamples HOT 5 CLOSED

What scenario are you trying to support? I tried to clarify the documentation on the page you linked, but I don't know if that will help you without understanding the scenario better.

from concordextensibilitysamples.

@tszirr the dispatcher will take care of finding the next implementation automatically. You just call the same API again. Something like:

class MyExpressionEvaluator : public IDkmLanguageExpressionEvaluator
{
    HRESULT STDMETHODCALLTYPE EvaluateExpression(
        _In_ Evaluation::DkmInspectionContext* pInspectionContext,
        _In_ DkmWorkList* pWorkList,
        _In_ Evaluation::DkmLanguageExpression* pExpression,
        _In_ CallStack::DkmStackWalkFrame* pStackFrame,
        _In_ IDkmCompletionRoutine<Evaluation::DkmEvaluateExpressionAsyncResult>* pCompletionRoutine
        )
    {
        CComPtr<DkmLanguageExpression> pNewExpression;
        TranslateExpression(pStackFrame, pExpression, &pNewExpression); // your code translates the expression into C++

        return pInspectionContext->EvaluateExpression(pWorkList, pNewExpression, pStackFrame, pCompletionRoutine);
    }        
    ....
}

You may find that you need to create a new inspection context since the one provided for you will have the language id set to your language. But I think the C++ EE will just carry on in C++ mode anyway.

from concordextensibilitysamples.

Thank you, that is exactly the information I needed!

Could you clarify the section in the sense that the "first parameter" bit in the text usually refers to some kind of context or dispatcher object? I was very misled by matching IDkmExample and DkmExample, which led me to think that chaining only works if I explicitly get a pointer to the next implementation in the chain. (The concrete example given by Gregg is very helpful in that regard.) Thanks!

from concordextensibilitysamples.

@tszirr I tweaked the wording a bit. Let me know if that sounds more clear.

from concordextensibilitysamples.

Great, now it is more than clear. Thanks a lot!

from concordextensibilitysamples.