Visual Studio Interop Assembly Parameter Marshaling
VSPackages that are written in managed code might have to call or be called by unmanaged COM code. Typically, method arguments are transformed, or marshaled, automatically by the interop marshaler. However, sometimes arguments cannot be transformed in a straightforward manner. In those cases, the interop assembly method prototype parameters are used to match the COM function parameters as closely as possible. For more information, see Interop Marshaling.
General Suggestions
.gif "Bb165997.collapse_all(ja-jp,VS.110).gif")
Read the reference documentation
An effective way to detect interoperability issues is to read the reference documentation for each method.
The reference documentation for each method contains three relevant sections:
The Visual C++ COM function prototype.
The interop assembly method prototype.
A list of the COM parameters and a short description of each.
Look for differences between the two prototypes
Most interoperability issues derive from mismatches between the definition of a particular type in a COM interface and the definition of the same type in the Visual Studio interop assemblies. For example, consider the difference in the ability to pass a null value in an [out] parameter. You must look for differences between the two prototypes and consider their ramifications for the data being passed.
Read the parameter definitions
Read the parameter definitions. COM is less strict than the common language runtime (CLR) about mixing different types of data in a single parameter. The Visual Studio COM interfaces take full advantage of this flexibility. Any parameter that can pass or require a non-standard value or type of data, such as a constant value in a pointer parameter, should be described as such in the documentation.
IUnknown Objects Passed as Type void**
Look for [out] parameters that are defined as type void ** in the COM interface, but that are defined as [iid_is] in the Visual Studio interop assembly method prototype.
Sometimes, a COM interface generates an IUnknown object, and the COM interface then passes it as type void **. These interfaces are especially important because if the variable is defined as [out] in the IDL, then the IUnknown object is reference-counted with the AddRef method. A memory leak occurs if the object is not handled correctly.
Note
An IUnknown object created by the COM interface and returned in an [out] variable causes a memory leak if it is not explicitly released.
Managed methods that handle such objects should treat IntPtr as a pointer to an IUnknown object, and call the GetObjectForIUnknown method to obtain the object. The caller should then cast the return value to whatever type is appropriate. When the object is no longer needed, call Release to release it.
Following is an example of calling the QueryViewInterface method and handling the IUnknown object correctly:
MyClass myclass;
Object object;
IntPtr pObj;
Guid iid = Typeof(MyClass).Guid;
int hr = windowFrame.QueryViewInterface(ref iid, out pObj);
if (NativeMethods.Succeeded(hr))
{
try
{
object = Marshal.GetObjectForIUnknown(pObj);
myclass = object;
}
finally
{
Marshal.Release(pObj);
}
}
else
{
// error calling QueryViewInterface
}
Note
The following methods are known to pass IUnknown object pointers as type IntPtr. Handle them as described in this section.
Optional [out] Parameters
Look for parameters that are defined as an [out] data type (int, object, and so on) in the COM interface, but that are defined as arrays of the same data type in the Visual Studio interop assembly method prototype.
Some COM interfaces, such as GetCfgs, treat [out] parameters as optional. If an object is not required, these COM interfaces return a null pointer as the value of that parameter instead of creating the [out] object. This is by design. For these interfaces, null pointers are assumed as part of the correct behavior of the VSPackage, and no error is returned.
Because the CLR does not allow the value of an [out] parameter to be null, part of the designed behavior of these interfaces is not directly available within managed code. The Visual Studio interop assembly methods for affected interfaces work around the issue by defining the relevant parameters as arrays because the CLR allows the passing of null arrays.
Managed implementations of these methods should put a null array into the parameter when there is nothing to be returned. Otherwise, create a one-element array of the correct type and put the return value in the array.
Managed methods that receive information from interfaces with optional [out] parameters receive the parameter as an array. Just examine the value of the first element of the array. If it is not null, treat the first element as if it were the original parameter.
Passing Constants in Pointer Parameters
Look for parameters that are defined as [in] pointers in the COM interface, but that are defined as a IntPtr type in the Visual Studio interop assembly method prototype.
A similar issue occurs when a COM interface passes a special value, such as 0, -1, or –2, instead of an object pointer. Unlike Visual C++, the CLR does not allow constants to be cast as objects. Instead, the Visual Studio interop assembly defines the parameter as a IntPtr type.
Managed implementations of these methods should take advantage of the fact that the IntPtr class has both int and void * constructors to create an IntPtr from either an object or an integer constant, as appropriate.
Managed methods that receive IntPtr parameters of this type should use the IntPtr type conversion operators to handle the results. First convert the IntPtr to int and test it against relevant integer constants. If no values match, convert it to an object of the required type and continue.
For examples of this, see OpenStandardEditor and OpenSpecificEditor.
OLE Return Values Passed as [out] Parameters
Look for methods that have a retval return value in the COM interface, but that have an int return value and an additional [out] array parameter in the Visual Studio interop assembly method prototype. It should be clear that these methods require special handling because the Visual Studio interop assembly method prototypes have one more parameter than the COM interface methods.
Many COM interfaces that deal with OLE activity send information about OLE status back to the calling program stored in the retval return value of the interface. Instead of using a return value, the corresponding Visual Studio interop assembly methods send the information back to the calling program stored in an [out] array parameter.
Managed implementations of these methods should create a single-element array of the same type as the [out] parameter and put it in the parameter. The value of the array element should be the same as the appropriate COM retval.
Managed methods that call interfaces of this type should pull the first element out of the [out] array. This element can be treated as if it were a retval return value from the corresponding COM interface.
See Also
Tasks
Troubleshooting Interoperability (Visual Basic)